NRC-2018-0109, (External Sender) NRC Review of 50.59 for Use of Lead Test Assemblies at Vogtle Unit 2

(External_Sender) NRC Review of 50.59 for Use of Lead Test Assemblies at Vogtle Unit 2

ML19087A342
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	03/27/2019
From:	Richard Ennis - No Known Affiliation
To:	Craig Erlanger, Gregory Suber Division of Operating Reactor Licensing
References
NRC-2018-0109
Download: ML19087A342 (15)

Text

1 NRR-DMPS-ECapture Resource From: Rick Ennis <ennis.rick@verizon.net>

Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 7:19 PM To: Erlanger, Craig; Suber, Gregory Cc: Markley, Michael; Lamb, John; Blamey, Alan

Subject:

NRC review of 50.59 for use of LTAs at Vogtle Unit 2 Attachments:

Ennis 07-02-18 comments on NEI letter - ML18184A378.pdf; Ennis 07-13-18 comments on NEI letter - ML18199A097.pdf Craig/Gregory, ThisemailistoexpressmyopinionthattheNRCneedstoreviewSNC's50.59relatedtoinstallationofLTAsforVogtleUnit2duringthecurrentrefuelingoutage.ThisshouldbedoneASAPandbeforeplantstartupfromtheoutage.

Note,basedon:(1)thecommentsHaroldChernoffandIprovidedinour3/22/18memototheGeneralCounsel(ADAMSPackageML18078A010andspecificallyEnclosure2tothememo(ML18078A013));(2)Harold's5/4/18nonconcurrenceonthedraftNEIletter(ML18151B016);and(3)the7/2/18commentsIsubmittedonthedraftNEIletter,asamemberofthepublic,afterIretiredfromtheNRC(ML18184A378,copyattached);IbelievethelicenseeneedsanamendmentaswellasanexemptiontolegallyinstalltheLTAs.However,asnotedinJohnLamb'smemotoMikeMarkleydated3/7/19(ML19064B379),IunderstandthelicenseeisinstallingtheLTAsatVogtleUnit2undertheprovisionsof10CFR50.59.Basedonrecentconversations,Iunderstandthatthelicenseehasjustrecentlycompletedthe50.59andthattheNRChasnotreviewedit.GiventheVogtleUnit2outagehasalreadystarted,Ifindthistroublingsince,basedonpastexperience,Iwouldhaveexpectedthe50.59tohavebeencompletedlongago,incasetheevaluationresultedinaconclusionthatpriorNRCapprovalwasneededvialicenseamendment(i.e.,the50.59shouldhavebeencompletedover1yearago).Thismakesmewonderwhetheratrulyunbiased50.59wouldbeperformed.Giventhecurrentcircumstances,theleasttheNRCcandoismakesurethe50.59supportsuseoftheLTAswithoutpriorNRCapproval.Ipersonallybelievethataproperlydone50.59wouldresultinaneedforanamendment(seeSection6.0ofEnclosure2tothe3/22/18memototheGeneralCounsel(ML18078A013)).Asfurtherproofthatanamendmentwouldlikelybeneeded,seetheattached7/13/18commentsIsubmittedonthedraftNEIletter.Asnotedinmycomments,Westinghouse,incommentingontheguidanceinthedraftNEIletter,indicatedthat:

1)"Theguidancedoesnotaddressthefactthatforthesematerialconcepts,thedesignbasislimitsforfissionproductbarriersarenotyetknownandwouldbeexpectedtobedifferentthanthosealreadyestablishedfortheplant."2)"Asacknowledgedintheguidancedocument,performanceoftheLTAswillnecessitatetheuseofnotyetlicensedcodesandmethods,whichequatestoachangeinthemethodofanalysisspecifictoanalysesperformedfortheLTAs."

BasedoneitheroneofthosestatementsbyWestinghouse,aproperlydone50.59foruseofLTAswithdifferentcladdingandpelletmaterial(asisthecaseforVogtleUnit2)wouldresultintheconclusionthatpriorNRCapprovalwouldbeneededviaalicenseamendment.

Finally,inSection5ofEnclosure2tothe3/22/18,memototheGeneralCounsel(ML18078A013),Mr.ChernoffandIarguedthattheLTAguidanceprovidesnewinterpretationsofregulatoryrequirementsthathasasubstantialeffectonlicenseeactivities(i.e.,wouldeliminatetheneedforlicenseestosubmitcertainlicenseamendmentrequestsandexemptionrequests).Inaddition,theguidancewouldalsohaveasubstantialeffectonpublicstakeholders(i.e.,wouldeliminatethepublic'sabilitytorequesthearingsorprovidecommentsonlicenseeuseofLTAsifamendmentrequests

2 werenolongerrequired).Basedontheseconsiderations,theguidanceshouldbeconsideredarule.Furthermore,sincetheguidanceshouldbeconsideredarule,theguidanceshouldbeprocessedinaccordancewiththeNRC'sproceduresestablishedtomeettherequirementsoftheCongressionalReviewAct(CRA).ItismyunderstandingthattheNRCstaffisprocessingthedraftlettertoNEI,containingtheLTAguidance,inaccordancewiththeCRA.Sincetheseactivitiesarenotyetcomplete,theNRCshouldbetreatinglicenseeuseofLTAsconsistentwithlongstandingprecedent(i.e.,useofexemptionsandrevisionstoTS4.2.1).AnyattempttoimplementthenewguidancebeforeitisfinalizedwouldbeaviolationoftherequirementsoftheCRA.Ifyouwouldliketodiscussanyoftheseissuesfurther,pleasesendmeanemailandwecansetupatimetotalk.

Thanks,Rick