ML16258A188: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter: | {{#Wiki_filter:1 IPRenewal NPEmails From:Wentzel, Michael Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 11:20 AM To: Louie, Richard (rlouie@entergy.com) | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
==Dear Sir or Madam:== | ==Dear Sir or Madam:== | ||
By letter dated April 23, 2007, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., submitted an application pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) | By letter dated April 23, 2007, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., submitted an application pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 54 and 10 CFR Part 51, to renew the operating licenses for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (IP2 and IP3), for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The NRC staff documented its findings related to the environmental review of Entergy's license renewal application in Supplement 38 to NUREG-1437, "Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants" (FSEIS), issued in December 2010. The NRC staff supplemented its evaluation in two FSEIS supplements issued in June 2013 and December 2015. | ||
Part 54 and 10 CFR Part 51, to renew the operating licenses for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (IP2 and IP3), for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The NRC staff documented its findings related to the environmental review of Entergy's license renewal application in Supplement 38 to NUREG-1437, "Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants" (FSEIS), issued in December 2010. The NRC staff supplemented its evaluation in two FSEIS supplements issued in June 2013 and December 2015. | |||
On May 4, 2016, the Commission directed the NRC staff to perform additional sensitivity analyses as part of its evaluation of severe accident mitigation alternatives for IP2 and IP3. | On May 4, 2016, the Commission directed the NRC staff to perform additional sensitivity analyses as part of its evaluation of severe accident mitigation alternatives for IP2 and IP3. | ||
Accordingly, the NRC staff requests that Entergy provide additional information for consideration in the staff's review, as described in the enclosure. | Accordingly, the NRC staff requests that Entergy provide additional information for consideration in the staff's review, as described in the enclosure. | ||
| Line 52: | Line 51: | ||
This request was discussed with Mr. Richard Louie, and a mutually agreeable date for Entergy's response is within 120 days from the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please | This request was discussed with Mr. Richard Louie, and a mutually agreeable date for Entergy's response is within 120 days from the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please | ||
contact me at 301-415-6459, or by email at michael.wentzel@nrc.gov | contact me at 301-415-6459, or by email at michael.wentzel@nrc.gov. Sincerely, | ||
. Sincerely, | |||
/RA/ | /RA/ | ||
| Line 67: | Line 65: | ||
DISTRIBUTION: | DISTRIBUTION: | ||
HARD COPY | HARD COPY: DLR RF E-MAIL: PUBLIC RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRarb Resource | ||
: DLR RF E-MAIL: PUBLIC RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRarb Resource | |||
RidsNrrDlrRasb Resource | RidsNrrDlrRasb Resource | ||
| Line 78: | Line 75: | ||
------------- | ------------- | ||
MWentzel | MWentzel JParillo TGhosh, RES DPickett STurk, OGC | ||
JParillo TGhosh, RES DPickett | |||
STurk, OGC | |||
BHarris, OGC | BHarris, OGC | ||
Revision as of 04:50, 8 July 2018
| ML16258A188 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 09/14/2016 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| References | |
| Download: ML16258A188 (6) | |
Text
1 IPRenewal NPEmails From:Wentzel, Michael Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 11:20 AM To: Louie, Richard (rlouie@entergy.com)
Subject:
RAI for the Review of the IP2 and IP3, LRA - SAMA (ML16232A119).pdf Rich, Sorry for the delay. Attached is the final SAMA letter. There were no substantive changes made from what you saw with the draft.
Thanks, Mike Michael Wentzel Project Manager NRR/DLR/RERP (301) 415-6459 michael.wentzel@nrc.gov
Hearing Identifier: IndianPointUnits2and3NonPublic_EX Email Number: 7985 Mail Envelope Properties (65fa2cadbce54759889c3efdfc3412d0)
Subject:
SAMA RAIs Sent Date: 9/14/2016 11:20:23 AM Received Date: 9/14/2016 11:20:24 AM From: Wentzel, Michael Created By: Michael.Wentzel@nrc.gov Recipients: "Louie, Richard (rlouie@entergy.com)" <rlouie@entergy.com>
Tracking Status: None
Post Office: HQPWMSMRS03.nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 313 9/14/2016 11:20:24 AM
RAI for the Review of the IP2 and IP3, LRA - SAMA (ML16232A119).pdf 179025 Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received:
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001
September 12, 2016
Vice President, Operations Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center
450 Broadway, GSB P.O. Box 249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE REVIEW OF THE INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW - SEVERE ACCIDENT MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES (CAC NOS. MD5411 AND MD5412)
Dear Sir or Madam:
By letter dated April 23, 2007, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., submitted an application pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 54 and 10 CFR Part 51, to renew the operating licenses for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (IP2 and IP3), for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The NRC staff documented its findings related to the environmental review of Entergy's license renewal application in Supplement 38 to NUREG-1437, "Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants" (FSEIS), issued in December 2010. The NRC staff supplemented its evaluation in two FSEIS supplements issued in June 2013 and December 2015.
On May 4, 2016, the Commission directed the NRC staff to perform additional sensitivity analyses as part of its evaluation of severe accident mitigation alternatives for IP2 and IP3.
Accordingly, the NRC staff requests that Entergy provide additional information for consideration in the staff's review, as described in the enclosure.
This request was discussed with Mr. Richard Louie, and a mutually agreeable date for Entergy's response is within 120 days from the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please
contact me at 301-415-6459, or by email at michael.wentzel@nrc.gov. Sincerely,
/RA/
Michael Wentzel, Project Manager Environmental Review and Projects Branch Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-247 and 50-286
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/encl: Listserv
ML16232A119 *concurred via email OFFICE LA:DLR PM: DLR/RERP OGC BC: DRA/ARCB BC:DLR/RERP PM: DLR/RERP NAME IBetts MWentzel BHarris UShoop KFolk MWentzel DATE 8/26/16 9/7/16 9/8/16 9/9/16 9/9/16 9/12/16
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE REVIEW OF THE INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW - SEVERE ACCIDENT MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES (CAC NOS. MD5411 AND MD5412)
DISTRIBUTION:
HARD COPY: DLR RF E-MAIL: PUBLIC RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRarb Resource
RidsNrrDlrRasb Resource
RidsNrrDlrRerp Resource
RidsNrrDlrRsrg Resource RidsNrrDraArcb Resource RidsOgcMailCenter Resource RidsNrrPMIndianPoint Resource
MWentzel JParillo TGhosh, RES DPickett STurk, OGC
BHarris, OGC
SBurnell, OPA DMcIntyre, OPA JWeil, OCA MGray, RI GDentel, RI
DonaldJackson, RI MModes, RI NSheehan, RI OPA DScrenci, RI OPA
DTifft, RI
BHaagensen, RI GNewman, RI SRich, RI ENCLOSURE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO THE INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SEVERE ACCIDENT MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES Background On May 4, 2016, the Commission issued a decision (CLI-16-07) in the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (IP2 and IP3) license renewal proceeding, in which it directed the NRC staff to supplement the IP2 and IP3 severe accident mitigation alternatives (SAMA) analysis with additional sensitivity analyses. Specifically, the Commission held that documentation was lacking for two inputs-decontamination time (TIMDEC) and cost to decontaminate non-farmland (CDNFRM)-used in the MELCOR Accident Consequence Code (MACCS) computer analyses, and that uncertainties in those input values could potentially affect the SAMA analysis cost-benefit conclusions. The Commission therefore directed the
NRC staff to perform additional sensitivity analyses.
Request 1. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) is requested to scale up the value of non-farm wealth (VALWNF) input to the SAMA analysis' base-year dollars (see pp. 41-42 of CLI-16-07), and to re-run its base analyses using this corrected VALWNF input. Entergy is requested to evaluate how the change in VALWNF may affect its identification of potentially cost-beneficial SAMAs. 2. Using the revised baseline from Request 1, Entergy is requested to run supplemental sensitivity analyses using the input values specified in CLI-16-07. Specifically: a. Apply the maximum values specified by the Commission and allowed by the MACCS code for TIMDEC and CDNFRM values (one year (365 days) and
$100,000, respectively) for "heavy decontamination" (i.e., the decontamination/dose reduction factor of 15). b. Exercise the additional option to explain, with sufficient justification, its rationale for choosing any additional values for the TIMDEC and CDNFRM inputs for its
sensitivity analyses. Entergy at a minimum should run its sensitivity analyses for the four worst release categories, as specified in CLI-16-07. Entergy is requested to evaluate how these sensitivity analyses may affect its identification of potentially cost-beneficial SAMAs. 3. Upon completing these additional analyses, Entergy is requested to submit the input and output files for the IP2 and IP3 MACCS code. Additionally, Entergy is requested to submit the spreadsheet (or equivalent table if another method is used) that conveys the population dose and off-site economic cost for each release category and integrates the results into a Population Dose Risk and an Offsite Economic Cost Risk for IP2 and IP3.