ML092590513

2009/09/16 Indian Point Lr Hearing - Telecon Summary

ML092590513
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	09/16/2009
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Division of License Renewal
References
Download: ML092590513 (7)

Text

1 IPRenewal NPEmails From: Stuyvenberg, Andrew Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 1:34 PM To: Gray, Dara F Cc: IPRenewal NPEmails

Subject:

Telecon Summary Attachments:

8-11 and 8-18 Telecon Summary for Entergy Review.docDara - Attached is the telecon summary I mentioned when spoke around an hour ago. Please review for accuracy and respond to me with any proposed changes by COB Thursday, September 17. Please call if you have any questions or if anything is unclear.

Best, Drew

______________________________DrewStuyvenbergU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommission301 4154006Andrew.Stuyvenberg@nrc.gov Hearing Identifier: IndianPointUnits2and3NonPublic_EX Email Number: 1668 Mail Envelope Properties (AC3D8151B0831F4EAFFB2501B87BF90510E1E6B8BE)

Subject:

Telecon Summary Sent Date: 9/16/2009 1:34:05 PM Received Date: 9/16/2009 1:34:07 PM From: Stuyvenberg, Andrew Created By: Andrew.Stuyvenberg@nrc.gov Recipients: "IPRenewal NPEmails" <IPRenewal.NPEmails@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None "Gray, Dara F" <DGray@entergy.com>

Tracking Status: None Post Office: HQCLSTR02.nrc.gov

Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 425 9/16/2009 1:34:07 PM 8-11 and 8-18 Telecon Summary for Entergy Review.doc 69114 Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received:

ENCLOSURE 1 TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION LIST OF PARTICIPANTS AUGUST 11, 2009 PARTICIPANTS A FFILIATIONS Dennis Lo gan U.S. Nuclear Re g ulator y Commission (NRC)Drew Stu y venber g NRC Jef f re y Ward NRCValerie Cullinan NRC

Dara Gra y Enter gy Nuclear O p erations, Inc.

(Enter gy)Mike Stroud Enter gyMark Mattson Enter gyLawrence Barnthouse Enter gy Dou g Heimbuch Enter gySara Ward Enter gy John Youn g Enter gy

ENCLOSURE 2 TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION LIST OF PARTICIPANTS AUGUST 18, 2009 PARTICIPANTS A FFILIATIONS Dennis Lo gan U.S. Nuclear Re g ulator y Commission (NRC)Drew Stu y venber g NRCValerie Cullinan NRC

Dara Gra y Enter gy Nuclear O p erations, Inc.

(Enter gy)Dou g Heimbuch Enter gy

ENCLOSURE 3 TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION TELECONFERENCE

SUMMARY

AUGUST 11 and 18, 2009 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) and representatives of Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) held a telephone conference call on August 11, 2009 to discuss three issues related to fish data submitted by Entergy in response to the NRC staff's draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS). All three issues were of a

technical nature regarding NRC staff's understanding and use of data provided by Entergy, used by NRC staff in its draft findings, and subject of technical comments by Entergy's Biology Team. The first issue related to apparent discrepancies among impingement data sets submitted by Entergy during draft SEIS preparation (ML080080313; cover letter at ML080080205), data reported by Entergy in comments on the draft SEIS (ML091040133) and data reported in the annual reports entitled Hudson River Ecological Study in the Area of Indian Point (ML080080209, ML080080214, ML080080216, ML080080291, ML080080298, and ML080080306). Entergy had previously indicated to NRC that some data in certain Hudson River Ecological Study reports had corrections for impingement collection efficiency. Data from

1987 through 1990 in the reports and in the data sent to NRC should have matched, however, but did not. NRC staff requested a clearer explanation of why it found some differences between the originally reported data and the data submitted by Entergy to NRC. NRC staff and Entergy staff have as yet been unable to resolve this issue, though Entergy indicated it will consult with its scientists and respond to NRC as soon as practical.

Issues two and three related to the "Review of Strength of Connection Analysis Presented in 2008 NRC DSEIS for Indian Point Nuclear Plant" submitted by Entergy as Appendix C to Enclosure 6 of Entergy comments on the staff's draft SEIS (part of ML091040133). In issue two, NRC was unable to generate the same impingem ent densities as reported by Entergy in Table C-7 and in issue three was also unable to replicate entrainment densities as reported by Entergy in Table C-9.

Regarding issue two, Entergy scientists explained how they had calculated 75th percentiles among years. By applying Entergy's methodology, NRC staff was able to replicate Entergy's results and understand the difference the method made in the results.

Entergy attempted to address the third of the NRC's issues by identifying a number of methodological differences between NRC's and Entergy's approaches that may have resulted in different results, but NRC staff were not able to replicate Entergy's resu lts even after employing Entergy's suggested changes. As a result, NRC staff requested a follow-up teleconference on August 18, 2009. During this teleconference, NRC staff and Entergy biologists explained how each had allocated to species the individuals identified only to taxonomic levels above species (e.g., herring family, alosids, anchovy family, temperate basses, and others) and how each had

assigned week numbers to season across years. NRC staff and Entergy staff determined that even when accounting for differences in assumptions, NRC and Entergy estimates for entrainment densities still differed in some cases by orders of magnitude. After the teleconference, on September 1, 2009, Entergy submitted additional information (in ML[FORTHCOMING]) indicating that the diffe rences between Entergy's and NRC's estimates resulted from conversions Entergy applied to flow data. Both groups found they had made similar errors in assuming units for volume of water withdrawn in some data sets that did show units. These modifications should allow NRC staff to replicate Entergy's analysis.

ENCLOSURE 3