ML093640098

2009/12/02 Indian Point Lr Hearing - October 28 Conference Call Summary Comments

ML093640098
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	12/02/2009
From:	- No Known Affiliation
To:	Division of License Renewal
References
Download: ML093640098 (5)

Text

1 IPRenewal NPEmails From: Gray, Dara F [DGray@entergy.com]

Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 8:49 AM To: Stuyvenberg, Andrew Cc: STROUD, MICHAEL D

Subject:

RE: October 28 Conference Call Summary Comments Attachments:

DFG - KMS comments on Draft Telecon Notes.DOC Hi Drew Welcome back - I hope you had a great time.

Here it is. Please let me know if you have questions.

Also, any idea about the schedule yet?

Thanks Dara Gray , REM Chemistry/Environmental Indian Point Energy Center (914) 736-8414

DGray@Entergy.com This e-mail and any attachments thereto are intended only for the use by the addressee(s) named herein and contain proprietary and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me by telephone and permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof. From: Stuyvenberg, Andrew [1]

Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 8:43 AM To: Gray, Dara F

Subject:

October 28 Conference Call Summary Comments Dara - Kim forwarded me Entergy's comments on the 10/28 conference call regarding impingement data. It appears to show only one tracked change, but it is clear from a side-by-side comparison that additional changes have

been made in Entergy's version.

Kim indicated that either you or Donna had offered to send her a tracked-change version of the comments in a follow-up discussion a few weeks ago. Please send the tracked-changes version if it is still available. If it is not available, please let me know.

Thanks, Drew 2 ______________________________DrewStuyvenbergU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommission301 4154006Andrew.Stuyvenberg@nrc.gov Hearing Identifier: IndianPointUnits2and3NonPublic_EX Email Number: 1906 Mail Envelope Properties (DCB622189B67AD49AE39CD3ED1B4D99D05579B10)

Subject:

RE: October 28 Conference Call Summary Comments Sent Date: 12/2/2009 8:49:06 AM Received Date: 12/2/2009 8:49:09 AM From: Gray, Dara F Created By: DGray@entergy.com Recipients: "STROUD, MICHAEL D" <MSTROUD@entergy.com>

Tracking Status: None "Stuyvenberg, Andrew" <Andrew.Stuyvenberg@nrc.gov> Tracking Status: None Post Office: IPCEXETSP001.etrsouth.corp.entergy.com

Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1729 12/2/2009 8:49:09 AM DFG - KMS comments on Draft Telecon Notes.DOC 34368 Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: Yes Reply Requested: Yes Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received:

DRAFT Telephone Conference Call Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 License Renewal Application October 28, 2009 Participants:

Drew Stuyvenberg U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Valerie Cullinan NRC Dara Gray Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) Mike Stroud Entergy Mark Mattson Entergy Susan Ward Entergy

Summary: As a result of ongoing discussions between NRC staff and Entergy regarding the data used to determine fish impingement and entrainment at Indian Point, NRC staff conducted a teleconference with Entergy staff in order to to discuss the NRC staff's new request for data on fish impinged at the Indian Point site. Summaries of pAs documented in p Previous teleconference s summaries held on August 11 and 19, 2009[Dara to provide date(s)]

(are available at ML092570752. ), NRC staff had identified apparent discrepancies among data Entergy used in preparing comments on the staff draft SEIS (ML091040133) and the data Entergy initially submitted to NRC (in ML080080313, cover letter at ML080080205) that the NRC used in preparing the analysis in the draft SEIS. Summary data submitted by Entergy in response to previous teleconferences on September 24, 2009[Dara to provide date(s)]

(teleconference summary at ML092570752, response at ML092810351) with the staff were up to 50% different than data submitted by Entergy that NRC staff used in preparing the draft SEIS. Entergy had indicated that the data in ML092810351 were the best data available on impingement at the site. As a result on October 28 th , NRC staff requested that Entergy submit a new data set similar to the data Entergy submitted prior to the NRC staff's publication of the draft SEIS containing, on a seasonal basis for all years of impingement sampling, containing th isese best available data.

As previously noted, Entergy indicated has reasonably explained that the reason for over-estimates of fish impingement in data submitted to NRC prior to the NRC's publication of the draft SEIS (in ML080080313) were a result of a zero-filling error, whereby the Indian Point impingement SAS data files were designed (to save computer storage space which was limiting in the 1970s) without placeholders to indicate instances where an impingement sample had been collected but zero individuals of a given taxa were captured in that sample. Subsequent analysis of daily average catch per sample using these SAS data files must be preceded by a data processing step that adds a zero catch value for each fish species that could be present in each sample, referred to as "zero-filling". Seasonal or annual total catch derived from the average catch per sample from non-zero-filled SAS data files would result in higher numbers of impinged organisms than shown in annual reports.

Entergy indicated that correct ing ion for collection efficiency due to the effects of water temperature was also a complicating factor

, as a series of different consultants had worked forcollections had been performed for the previous plant owners in different years and the statistical programs used to produce each annual report were not included in the reports

,

rather,instead only the output of those programs was included. Therefore, the computer code specifying the analytical steps used to produce each annual impingement abundance report from the SAS data files (like zero-filling), and any computer code specifying how anomalies such as missing water temperature data were handled, were not available as part of the historical documentation. Even when Entergy attempted to correct for the zero-fill issue, inconsistencies remained. As a result, the data set Entergy submits to NRC will be based on values taken directly from the annual reports of the Hudson River Ecological Study in the Area of Indian Point. [Clarify this last sentence]

The replacement data file newly requested by the NRC staff will derive from the results provided in each annual Indian Point impingement report. Entergy has indicated that T the replacement Excel data file will be provided in the same format as the one labeled "Imp19811990.csv" (12/06/2007) and contain impingement information by Unit (Unit 2 or Unit 3), strata (four seasons), year (1981-1990), and fish taxa. It will include 16 fish taxa (species) plus blue crabs along with annual totals for all fish species combined (i.e., the 16 taxa plus all other taxa combined) and the associated standard error of the estimated number of fish impinged for the annual totals. Standard error for each stratum was not reported in the annual reports, nor was the estimated number impinged for each life stage, and will not be provided in the replacement data file. Remaining fish species (outside of the 16) will be included in a summed total of impinged fish recorded by unit, strata, and year. Entergy indicated that it would deliver the data to NRC by November 26, 2009.th. NRC staff indicated that this new data submission willmay have an effect on the schedule for final SEIS issuance. Staff will review the data when it arrives from Entergy and determine what specific effect this submission willmay have on the schedule for issuing the final SEIS at that time. Formatted: Font: Bold