Group E FOIA/PA NO: 2014-0027 RECORDS BEING ...Group E FOIA/PA NO: 2014-0027 RECORDS BEING RELEASED...

Group E

FOIA/PA NO: 2014-0027

RECORDS BEING RELEASED IN PART

The following types of information are being withheld:

Ex. 1:E-I Records properly classified pursuant to Executive Order 13526Ex. 2:D] Records regarding personnel rules and/or human capital administrationEx. 3:--1 Information about the design, manufacture, or utilization of nuclear weapons

r-qnformation about the protection or security of reactors and nuclear materialsi-]Contractor proposals not incorporated into a final contract with the NRC[Other

Ex. 4: 0.tProprietary information provided by a submitter to the NRCr-DOther

Ex. 5: • Draft documents or other pre-decisional deliberative documents (D.P. Privilege)E Records prepared by counsel in anticipation of litigation (A.W.P. Privilege)[] Privileged communications between counsel and a client (A.C. Privilege)[] Other

Ex. 6: w Agency employee PII, including SSN, contact information, birthdates, etc.MThird party PII, including names, phone numbers, or other personal information

Ex. 7(A):F]Copies of ongoing investigation case files, exhibits, notes, ROI's, etc..-- Records that reference or are related to a separate ongoing investigation(s)Ex. 7(C): -Special Agent or other law enforcement PII

FlPII of third parties referenced in records compiled for law enforcement purposesEx. 7(D):E- Witnesses' and Allegers' P11 in law enforcement records

[[]Confidential Informant or law enforcement information provided by other entityEx. 7(E): ElLaw Enforcement Technique/Procedure used for criminal investigations

ni Technique or procedure used for security or prevention of criminal activityEx. 7(F): E- Information that could aid a terrorist or compromise security

Other/Comments:

Perkins, Richard

From: Beasley, BenjaminSent: Monday, March 14, 2011 3:30 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: Suggested text for screening analysis

(b)(5)

I

Perkins, Richard

From: Philip, JacobSent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 3:41 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: FW: DRA/PRAB comments on Dam Failure IN

From: Coyne, KevinSent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 1:34 PMTo: Ferrante, Fernando; Mitman, JeffreyCc: Wood, Jeffery; Kuritzky, Alan; Sancaktar, Selim; Rodriguez, Veronica; Ott, William; Coe, Doug; Philip, JacobSubject: FW: DRA/PRAB comments on Dam Failure IN

Fernando, Jeff-

Thanks again for the opportunity to review the IN. Please see below comments from Jeff on the dam failure IN(Selim has also concurred on these comments). I think our main comments boil down to the following:

(b)(5)

Please let us know if you'd like to meet to discuss these comments - I do want to echo Jeffs appreciation for

the effort you have put into addressing our comments. It has been a very fruitful and productive effort.

Thanks!

Kevin

From: Wood, JefferySent: Monday, March 14, 2011 5:14 PMTo: Coyne, Kevin; Sancaktar, Selim

Cc: Kuritzky, AlanSubject: RE: DRA/PRAB comments on Dam Failure IN

Kevin,Below are my comments on the IN. Overall. I think the revisions have improved the IN.

(b)(5)

Overall, I appreciate the effort to address the RES comments, and I think they have been mostly addressed.

From: Coyne, KevinSent: Friday, March 11, 2011 5:47 PMTo: Sancaktar, Selim; Wood, JefferyCc: Kuritzky, AlanSubject: FW: DRA/PRAB comments on Dam Failure INImportance: High

Selim, Jeff-

NRR may be ramping up the priority level for this IN - can you take a look (if you haven't already) and get meyour comments as soon as possible? Let's target completing the review by Tuesday if possible. I think we aregoing to receive a very quick turnaround ticket for concurrence -

Kevin

From: Ferrante, FernandoSent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 11:18 AMTo: Helton, DonaldCc: Coyne, KevinSubject: FW: DRA/PRAB comments on Dam Failure IN

From: Ferrante, FernandoSent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 11:17 AMTo: Coyne, KevinCc: Wood, Jeffery; Sancaktar, Selim; Mitman, Jeffrey; Rodriguez, VeronicaSubject: RE: DRA/PRAB comments on Dam Failure IN

Kevin,

After the PSA201 1 paper effort (which Mitman will be presenting, slides will be forthcoming), I got sidetrackedon the IN. I fully agree that the issue is complex and nuanced, which is why I greatly appreciate your feedbackon this. I have attached a first attempt to answer the specific comments on the IN (see the attached file). Thesemay not be fully developed for all comments, but we can sit down together at some point and more efficientlyconverge on a final version.

I am attaching: (i) the IN with responses to comments and added text (this is the same as the version that is inADAMS, ML0905102690), and (ii) responses to comments in the e-mail.

Thank you,

Fernando Ferrante, Ph.D.Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)Division of Risk Assessment (DRA)PRA Operational Support Branch (APOB)Mail Stop. 0-1 0C15Phone: 301-415-8385Fax: 301-415-3577

From: Coyne, KevinSent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 6:58 PMTo: Ferrante, FernandoCc: Rodriguez, Veronica; Sancaktar, Selim; Wood, Jeffery; Ott, William; Philip, Jacob; Lui, Christiana; Coe, DougSubject: DRA/PRAB comments on Dam Failure IN

Fernando -

Thanks for the opportunity to review the Dam Failure information notice. I thinkl (b)(5)

(b)(6)

3

The concept of what is meant by "dam failure" probably needs to be brought up as a specific discussionitem. I know that NRR was very hesitant in the past to bring the concept of consequences of the failureinto the failure rate estimation, but the PRA needs to put the failure in the context of its impact on the plant.So, the licensee needs to do some assessment of what constitutes failure and what impact that failure hason the site to ensure that the dam failure frequency estimates lines up with the proper PRA context. Ananalogy would be trying to estimate "seismic" frequency without identifying specific ground accelerationbins (where the bins tie the initiating event with an impact to the plant). Without connecting the failuredefinition to a PRA context, the frequency has limited meaning.

(b)(5)

Kevin

4

Perkins, Richard

From: Philip, JacobSent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 3:41 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: FW: DRA/PRAB comments on Dam Failure INAttachments: ML0905102690 doc: RES E-mail Comments.docx

From: Coyne, KevinSent: Friday, March 11, 2011 5:35 PMTo: Ott, WilliamCc: Philip, Jacob; Coe, DougSubject: FW: DRA/PRAB comments on Dam Failure IN

Bill -

NRR might be ramping the priority on this item and probably will be looking for RES concurrence next weekSince both RPAB and ETB are involved, I'll coordinate with the front office, but you may want to give Jake ahead's up since he looked at an earlier version -

Kevin

From: Ferrante, FernandoSent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 11:18 AMTo: Helton, DonaldCc: Coyne, KevinSubject: FW: DRA/PRAB comments on Dam Failure IN

From: Ferrante, FernandoSent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 11:17 AMTo: Coyne, KevinCc: Wood, Jeffery; Sancaktar, Selim; Mitman, Jeffrey; Rodriguez, VeronicaSubject: RE: DRA/PRAB comments on Dam Failure IN

Kevin.

After the PSA201 1 paper effort (which Mitman will be presenting, slides will be forthcoming), I got sidetrackedon the IN. I fully agree that the issue is complex and nuanced, which is why I greatly appreciate your feedbackon this. I have attached a first attempt to answer the specific comments on the IN (see the attached file). Thesemay not be fully developed for all comments, but we can sit down together at some point and more efficientlyconverge on a final version.

I am attaching: (i) the IN with responses to comments and added text (this is the same as the version that is inADAMS, ML0905102690), and (ii) responses to comments in the e-mail.

Thank you,

Fernando Ferrante, Ph.D.Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)Division of Risk Assessment (DRA)PRA Operational Support Branch (APOB)

Mail Stop: 0-10C15Phone: 301-415-8385Fax: 301-415-3577

From: Coyne, KevinSent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 6:58 PMTo: Ferrante, FernandoCc: Rodriguez, Veronica; Sancaktar, Selim; Wood, Jeffery; Ott, William; Philip, Jacob; Lui, Christiana; Coe, DougSubject: DRA/PRAB comments on Dam Failure IN

Fernando -

Thanks for the opportunity to review the Dam Failure information notice. I think (b)(5)

(b)(6)

2

(b)(5)

Kevin

UNITED STATESNUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATIONWASHINGTON, DC 20555-0001

I

(b)(5)

IN 201 1-XXPage 2 of 4

(b)(5)

IN 2011-XXPage 3 of 4

(b)(5)


(b)(5)


(b)(5)

ADAMS A~e~i~ Number ML090510269A A_ _ _ __ N M

1OFFCE APOB:DRA TECH EDITOR BC:APOB:DRA lBC:ETBiDRA:RES D:DRA

NAMrE FFerrane LJames WOtt MCunnirgnam

DATE XJXXl1 I email

OFFICE PGCB:DPR PGCB:DPR BC:PGCB: DPR DIDPR

NAME DEsaulieu Chawes SRoseneg ITMcGin_ _

DATE I

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

6

0

6

(b)(5)

a

eP

S

I

(b)(5)

I

4

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 7:41 AMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: Edits

Follow Up Flag: Follow upFlag Status: Flagged

Please make the following edit. In the section listing dam failure statistics (p. 31): change "nearly 1200" to "over

1 100." This is more accurate.

I do not object to the changes made to the conclusion section.

Did Ben have any comments?

Shelby

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 9:39 AMTo: Philip, Jacob; Sancaktar, Selim; Bensi, MichelleSubject: Edits

The attachment shows some changes to the conclusions/closing section. The areas of change are highlightedin yellow. Compare the old and new. Note the two last mentions of FCS and ONS in the very last paragraph...the FCS sentence was moved to the crteria 3 statement on the previous page. The ONS sentence wasdeleted because it was there without a proper context.

Let me know what you think.

Richard H. Perkins, P.E.Nuclear Regulatory CommissionOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchDivision of Risk AnalysisOperating Experience and Generic Issues BranchPhone - 301/251-7479

I

(b)(5)

36

(b)(5)

37

Perkins, Richard

From:Sent:To:Cc:Subject:

Ferrante, FernandoThursday, April 07, 2011 4:48 PMBeasley, BenjaminRodriguez, Veronica; Perkins, RichardOUO-SRI - Designation for ONS

2-MAIL OQ~'TAlN~ OFFCIAL.~Qt JL SCUUT( EDT INFEOFMATIO'InP*e9,

Ben,

Thank you,

Fernando Ferrante, Ph.D.Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)Division of Risk Assessment (DRA)PRA Operational Support Branch (APOB)Mail Stop: 0-1OC15Phone: 301-415-8385Fax: 301-415-3577

-fiA- IQ J~N' T/.V IFf""" VF~H1TX IT T' ' V I

I

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Friday, May 13, 2011 3:19 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE:

(b)(5)

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Friday, May 13, 2011 3:18 PMTo: Bensi, MichelleSubject:

From wikipedia

http'//en. wikipedia.or2/wiki/Mississippi River

A series of 29 locks and dams on the upper Mississippi, most of which were built in the 1930s, is designedprimarilyto maintain a 9 feet (2.7 m) deep channel for commercial barge traffic."""" The lakes formed are alsoused for recreational boating and fishing. The dams make the river deeper and wider but do not stop it. No floodcontrol is intended. During periods of high flow, the gates, some of which are submersible, are completelyopened and the dams simply cease to function. Below St. Louis, the Mississippi is relatively free-flowing,although it is constrained by numerous levees and directed by numerous wing dams.

Richard H. Perkins, P.E.Nuclear Regulatory CommissionOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchDivision of Risk AnalysisOperating Experience and Generic Issues BranchPhone - 3011251-7479

I

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 4:48 PMTo: Beasley, Benjamin; Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: Pre-GI on dam failure - report

Ben and Richard,

With regard to Doug's concern related to referencing non-publically available documents, the NRC Style Guideprovides some rules (I copied the applicable section from the style guide below if you're interested). In shortthe Guide says to avoid predecisional/classified/proprietary information if possible. If it is not possible, the list ofreferences should indicate the document is not publically available (e.g. by including the phrase "Classifiedreport. Not publicly available" after the citation in the list of references).

Of course, many of our references are to non-publically available documents: the ONS documents, theFSARs/IPEEEs, the draft of the technical justification for revision RegGuide 1.59 (will the reference to this drafpdocument be a problem?).

Shelby

2 AvailabilityInclude sources that are publicly available in a list of references. Do not include, for example, privatecommunications, predecisional documents, technical notes, minutes of a meeting, or other sources that are notavailable in the NRC's Public Document Room. Avoid using a classified or proprietary document as areference unless it is the only source of information cited. If you must use such a document as a reference,state, as appropriate, after its citation in the list of references:

Classified report. Not publicly available.or

Proprietary information. Not publicly available.

The author of a document is responsible for ensuring that each reference is accurate and that each documentreferenced is publicly available, unless otherwise indicated. The NRC publishes an availability notice on theinside front cover of its reports (see Section 1 of the appendix to this guide). This notice directs the reader tosources for obtaining publicly available NRC documents and most codes and standards referenced in NRCreports. Therefore, the NRC does not include NRC documents as references but does include references tocodes and standards as a separate category in a reference list for these reports. The availability statementspresented in Section 1 of the appendix to this guide cover appropriate sources for most references that wouldbe included in NRC documents other than NUREG-series reports. Often these statements would be used as afootnote to a reference that is fully identified in the text.

From: Beasley, BenjaminSent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 5:11 PMTo: Perkins, Richard; Bensi, MichelleSubject: FW: Pre-GI on dam failure - report

From: Coe, DougSent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 5:02 PMTo: Beasley, Benjamin; Kauffman, JohnCc: Correia, RichardSubject: Pre-GI on dam failure - report

Ben/John,

(b)(5)

I'll stop by tomorrow morning to discuss.Thanks,Doug

2

Perkins, Richard

From: Ferrante, FernandoSent: Friday, June 10, 2011 2:56 PMTo: Rodriguez, Veronica; Beasley, Benjamin; Perkins, Richard; Bensi. MichelleSubject: RE: Update GI and INAttachments: Hydrology Draft IN.pdf

See attached a draft version of the IN just FYI. NRRIDE has ownership of this IN.

From: Rodriguez, VeronicaSent: Thursday, June 09, 2011 6:24 PMTo: Beasley, Benjamin; Perkins, Richard; Bensi, MichelleCc: Ferrante, FemandoSubject: Update GI and IN

Folks, just for your awareness, I had a quick meeting with Mike Cheok. He agrees that this should be acombined effort, that the comm plan should address both items, and that we should do joint briefings. Iexplained that although the comm. Plan will primarily focus on the GI that we will add sentences addressingaspects of the IN. He stated that it would be nice if you could add some placeholders before sending the drafttomorrow. I committed to pass that message to you but we both understand that this will be difficult toaccomplish.

I'm not sure if we should address some of the aspects of the other IN (George's) in the comm plan as well. I'llbring this up w George. I didn't get the opportunity to talk to him but I sent him an email requesting that hesends a copy of the IN to you. Mike is also going to try to bring him upto speed. I'll follow-up on it next week.

I also asked Mike his opinion regarding the briefings, specifically whether we should go up to the TAs. He saidyes, that we should plan to do that. You may want to survey your management. If there seems to be aconsensus we might as well schedule them all in advance.

I'll be out of the office tomorrow but Fernando will be here.

Have a wonderful weekend!

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDSOFFICE OF NEW REACTORS

WASHINGTON, DC 20555-00D1

NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2010-XX: HYDROLOGY STUDY AFFECTS DESIGN BASISEXTERNAL FLOODING EVALUATION

(b)(5)


(b)(5)

IN 2010--XXPage 3 of 3

(bX5)

ADAMS Accession Number ML101400109 TACOFFICE I'eTh Editor I BCiEE:B:DE IJBC:E.MCB:DE IDDE ___

NAME __ I GWilson I MKhanna I PHilandIDATE . _ _,

•NAME i._ ,r•i-L"

OFFICEILA:PGCB:NRR ]P.M!PGCB3:NRRBC:PGCB:NRR ID:NMSS:SFST ID:DCIP:NRC) D:DPR:NRRN"AME' Chawes IDBeauheu IMMurphv IVOrdaz iGTrac" -Mfýin t

FI ROICE POFFICIAL RECORD COPY

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Friday, June 24, 2011 1:54 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: FW: proposed wording for comm plan

FYI.

From: Khanna, MeenaSent: Friday, June 24, 2011 12:52 PMTo: Bensi, MichelleSubject: FW: proposed wording for comm plan

Shelby, here is some proposed wording for your comm. plan:

(bXS)

Meena Khanna, Branch ChiefMechanical and Civil Engineering BranchDivision of EngineeringOffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation(301)[email protected]

1__

Perkins, Richard

From: Kauffman, JohnSent: Friday, July 01, 2011 10:01 AMTo: Perkins, Richard; Bensi, MichelleSubject: FW: INFO: NRC request to USACE for analyses of risk of dam failure

FYI. JVK

From: Coe, DougSent: Friday, July 01, 2011 9:52 AMTo, Howe, AllenCc: Glitter, Joseph; Correia, Richard; Hiland, Patrick; Kauffman, JohnSubject: INFO: NRC request to USACE for analyses of risk of dam failure

Hi Allen,

RES/DRA is nearly at the point of sending the recommendation of the panel for the pre-Generic Issue on dam failure (BillRuland chaired the panel) to Brian Sheron for approval of putting this into the Generic Issue Program (GIP). Today Ibecame aware that Region IV is engaging USACE as stated below.

This is just to let you know that I've asked my GIP staff to contact your staff to better understand the Region IV requestand expected response, since the USACE response might aid us in accomplishing the next step in the GIP, namely asafety/risk assessment to determine whether we should pursue regulatory actions such as backfit or rulemaking.

Going forward with this issue in the GIP may require coordination with related activities such as those being taken byNRR or the Regions. No action required on your part at this time. This is just for your awareness. Please let me know ifyou have any questions, comments, or concerns.

As part of the GIP for this issue, we are developing a communication plan and NRR will be represented in that plan.John Kauffman is the acting BC for OEGIB and the GIP program manager.

Many thanks,Doug

http://www.bulletinnews.comZnrc/

(b)(4)

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 1:45 PMTo: Ruland, William; Compton, Keith; Pohida, MaheCc: Kauffman, John; Perkins, RichardSubject: revised version of GIRP memoAttachments: GIRP Recomendation Memo _ Draft for TechEdits - 07-06-1 l.docx

Bill, Marie, and Keith,

As you are aware, the processing of the Generic issue related to dam failures has been put on an expeditedschedule so that it is available in time for the release of the Task Force Report (the Task Force chartered toreview NRC processes and regulations following events in Japan). Currently, the goal is to complete theissuance of the memo with RES Director approval by July 12. As a result, we would like to move forwardrather quickly on completing the final text of the memo.

I have attached a revised version of the memo. I tried to coalesce all of your comments/requests related to thescope of the Generic Issue, but please let me know if you would like to make any additional changes. In theinterest of time, I have also sent this version of the memo to the technical editor.

Thank you,Shelby

Michelle (Shelby) Bensi, Ph.D.Reliability and Risk EngineerNuclear Regulatory CommissionOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchDivision of Risk AnalysisOperating Experience and Generic Issues BranchOffice: 301-251-7570

MEMORANDUM TO: Brian Sheron, DirectorOffice of Nuclear Regulatory Research

FROM:

SUBJECT:

William Ruland, Genenc Issue Screening Panel ChairDivision of Safety SystemsOffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

GENERIC ISSUE REVIEW PANEL RECOMMENDATION FORTHE PROPOSED GENERIC ISSUE PERTAINING-TOFLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWINGUPSTREAM DAM FAILURE

(b)(5)

CONTACT: Richard Perkins, RESIDRA301-251-7479

B. Sheron -2-

(b)(5)

B. Sheron -2-

(b)(5)

ADAMS Accession No.: ML111672131

OFFICE RES/DRA/OEGIB Tech Editor RES/DRA/OEGIBRES/DRA NRR/DSS SUNSI ReviewNAME M. Bensi 1B. Beasley R. Correia B. Ruland BensiDATE / !1 / / 11 / / /11 1 / /11 i I 1 /11

OFFICE NRO/DSRA JNMSS/DHLWRS INRR JNRO rNMSSNAME M. Pohida lK. Compton E. Leeds IM. Johnson C. Haney

DATE / /11 / /11 / /11 / / I? / /11


Perkins, Richard

From:Sent:To:Cc:Subject:Attachments:

Bensi, MichelleWednesday, July 06. 2011 1:50 PMQTE ResourceDonaldson, Leslie; Zabel, Joseph; Kauffman, John; Perkins, Richardmemo for technical editing with request for quick turnaroundGIRP Recomendation Memo Draft for TechEdits _ 07-06-11 .docx

Hello,

The attached memo (just a few paragraphs) requires technical editing before circulation for concurrence. Tomeet management requests for expedited processing of the issue described in the memo, we are requestingan exceptionally fast turnaround on editing. We would like to receive the edited document as soon as possible,ideally by the end of the day today (July 6).

Thank you for your understanding of our time constraints.

Please contact me if you have any questions. I can be reached by email or phone (301-251-7570).

Thank you again,

Michelle (Shelby) Bensi, Ph.D.Reliability and Risk EngineerNuclear Regulatory CommissionOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchDivision of Risk AnalysisOperating Experience and Generic Issues Branch


FROM: William Ruland, Generic Issue Screening Panel ChairDivision of Safety SystemsOffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

GENERIC ISSUE REVIEW PANEL RECOMMENDATION FORTHE PROPOSED GENERIC ISSUE PERTAINING TOFLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWINGUPSTREAM DAM FAILURE

SUBJECT:

(b)(5)

CONTACT: Richard Perkins, RES/DRA301-251-7479

B. Sheron -2-

(b)(5)

B. Sheron -2-

(b)(5)


[OFFICE RES/DRA/OEGIB Tech Editor RES/DRA/oEGIB RES/DRA NRR/DSS [SUNSI Review[NAME M. Bensi B. Beasley R. Correia B. Ruland M. BensiDATE I ll I /1 1 11 / /11 / /11 l /11

OFFICEINRO/DSRA [NMSS/DHLWRS NRR NRO :NMSSNAME IM. Pohida 1K. Compton E. Leeds IM. Johnson IC. HaneyDATE / /11 / /11 / /11 / /11 / /11


Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 2:23 PMTo: Coe, Doug; Correia, RichardCc: Kauffman, John; Perkins, RichardSubject: document for briefing tomorrowAttachments:, BriefingJUhle_07_07_1.1.docx

Rich and Doug,

I have attached a "POP" document in preparation for our briefing with J. Uhle tomorrow.

We have also prepared documents (one-page each) describing the following:

* the background and current status of the screening assessment• preliminary path forward for the safety/risk assessment* overview of the Generic Issues Program

We will print and bring the above documents to the meeting tomorrow.

Please let me know if you have any comments/suggestions.

Thanks,Shelby


L171

July 7, 2011

(b)(5)

Synopsis of Screening Assessment of Proposed Generic Issue Related to Flooding of

Nuclear Power Plants due to Upstream Dam Failure

(b)(5)

All,

(b)(5)

Communication Team

##•Communication TeamName Telephone Number Email

IB

Ie

.. :...-.. • nact&;in,• ,• perafing.Experienceantd•Gen rc.ss e • h

Benjamin Beasley 301-251-7676 Benjamin. [email protected]

Richard Perkins 301-251-7479 [email protected]

Michelle Bensi 301-251-7570 Michelle. [email protected]

Contacts in NRR

Fernando Ferrante 301-415-8385 [email protected]

Jeffrey Mitman 301-415-2843 [email protected]

Meena Khanna 301-415-2150 [email protected]

George Wilson 301-415-1711 [email protected]

Bill Ruland 301-415-1270 [email protected]

-CoutactsiinARO

Kenneth See f 301-415-1508 f Kenneth. [email protected]

Richard Raione 301-415-7190 Richard. Raione@'nrc.gov

Marie Pohida 1 301-415-1846 Marie.Pohida~nrcý.gov

Lynn Mrowca 301-415-0525 Lynn. Mrowca@nrc gov

II

Harr ,,le 30 ,,565 Harr. Fes.. ~ r..o

Jonnetha See an 301-492-3263 [email protected]

Jonathan Bartley (Region I) 404-997-4607 [email protected]

Dave Hills (Region 1ll) 630-829-9733 [email protected]

Vincent Gaddy (Region IV) 817-860-81 Vincent. [email protected]

OPAXMTD]

OCA ý[#TDJ

Office of Enforcement{#TEBD]

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Friday, June 24, 2011 1:54 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: FW: proposed wording for comm plan

FYI.

From: Khanna, MeenaSent: Friday, June.24, 2011 12:52 PMTo: Bensi, MichelleSubject: FW: proposed wording for comm plan

Shelby, here is some proposed wording for your comm. plan:

(b)(5)

Meena Khanna, Branch ChiefMechanical and Civil Engineering BranchDivision of EngineeringOffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation(301)[email protected]

Perkins, Richard

From:Sent:To:

Ferrante, FemandoFriday, July 01, 2011 9:13 AMMitman, Jeffrey; Circle, Jeff; Rodriguez, Veronica; Perkins, Richard; Bensi, Michelle;Sancaktar, Selim; Coyne, Kevin; Beasley, Benjamin; See, Kenneth; Jones, Henry; Nicholson,Thomas; Kanney, Joseph; Beaulieu, David; Pohida, MarieNRC News FCS/dams (w Fixed Link)Subject:

(b)(4)

Thank you,

Fernando Ferrante, Ph.D.Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)Division of Risk Assessment (DRA)PRA Operational Support Branch (APOB)Mail Stop: 0-10C15Phone: 301-415-8385Fax: 301-415-3577

I

P41-3

Perkins, Richard

From: Ferrante, FernandoSent: Friday, July 01, 2011 9:25 AMTo: Kanney, Joseph; Mitman, Jeffrey; Circle, Jeff: Rodriguez, Veronica; Perkins, Richard; Bensi,

Michelle; Sancaktar, Selim; Coyne, Kevin; Beasley, Benjamin; See, Kenneth; Jones, Henry;Nicholson, Thomas; Beaulieu, David

Subject: RE. NRC News FCS/dams

Joe,

According to the article, there is an indication that they have more recent breach analyses for some of thedams. However, I agree that the extent and quality of these (including reflection of operations) as part of a riskassessment should be looked into.

"in 2009 and 2010, the Corps of Engineers updated its breach analyses of the six dams as part of a nationwide responseto the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. Prior to that, the last analyses would have dated to the late 1980s and early1990s, said Monique Farmer, a corps spokeswoman."

Thanks,Fernando

From: Kanney, JosephSent: Friday, July 01, 2011 9:17 AMTo: Ferrante, Fernando; Mitman, Jeffrey; Circle, Jeff; Rodriguez, Veronica; Perkins, Richard; Bensi, Michelle; Sancaktar,Selim; Coyne, Kevin; Beasley, Benjamin; See, Kenneth; Jones, Henry; Nicholson, Thomas; Beaulieu, DavidSubject: RE: NRC News FCS/dams

Thanks Fernando,

Asking to look at the most recent risk analysis like a prudent thing to do. However, this isn't the sort of analysisthat one can do very quickly. On short notice like this, I expect USACE will just dust off an analysis that would Ihope we are largely familiar with.

In the short term, I would be more interested in the details of their operation plans in order to better understandpossible scenarios with regard to how much and at what rate water may be released. For example, I wouldwant to know if the current situation is a well-rehearsed part of the op plan, or an improvisation.

-- Joe

Joseph Kanney, Ph.D.HydrogeologistOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionMail Stop CSB-2A07M11555 Rockville PikeRockville, MD 20852-2738

ioseph.kannevanrc.govPhone: 301-251-7600Fax: 301-251-7422

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.But, in practice, there is.

From: Ferrante, FernandoSent: Friday, July 01, 2011 8:54 AMTo: Mitman, Jeffrey; Circle, Jeff; Rodriguez, Veronica; Perkins, Richard; Bensi, Michelle; Sancaktar, Selim; Coyne, Kevin;Beasley, Benjamin; See, Kenneth; Jones, Henry; Nicholson, Thomas; Kanney, Joseph; Beaulieu, DavidSubject: NRC News FCS/dams

(b)(4)

Thank you,

Femando Ferrante, Ph.D.Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)Division of Risk Assessment (DRA)PRA Operational Support Branch (APOB)Mail Stop: 0-10C15Phone: 301-415-8385Fax: 301-415-3577

2

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 4:43 PMTo: Kauffman, John; Perkins, RichardSubject: FW: Scope of Generic Issue related to dam failures

This is FYI. I didn't copy you on the message.I spoke with Marissa Bailey regarding the Comm Plan and she asked to see the language in the memo as itrelates to NMSS facilities. If necessary, I will revise the memo based on her feedback.

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 4:41 PMTo: Bailey, MarissaSubject: Scope of Generic Issue related to dam failures

Hello Marissa,

Per our conversation, here is the language that is currently in the Generic Issue Review Panel memo regardingthe scope of the Generic Issue as it relates to fuel cycle/storage facilities:

(b)(5)

Please let me know if you would like to make any changes. Feel free to email or give me a call (301-251-

7570).

Thanks,


Perkins, Richard


Attachments:

QTE ResourceWednesday, July 06, 2011 5:15 PMBensi, MichelleDonaldson, Leslie; Zabet, Joseph; Kauffman, John; Perkins, Richard; QTE ResourceFiles Attached. DO#428b RE: memo for technical editing with request for quick turnaround(Michelle Bensi, RES)GIRP Recomendation Memo _ Draft for TechEdits - 07-06-11_clean.docx; GIRPRecomendation Memo _ Draft for TechEdits - 07-06-1 lcompare.docx; Author Notes.docx

Michelle,

I have attached the clean and compare files for your document: GIRP Recommendation Memo(-3 double-spaced pages total) (GIRP Recomendation Memo _ Draft for TechEdits _ 07-06-11.docx) for Michelle Bensi,RES.

Please use the clean file for-future revisions. The compare file details all recommended changes. The AuthorNotes file includes additional comments.

Please consider this e-mail evidence of technical editor concurrence with the suggested changes. The authormay accept or reject any of these changes. Please feel free to contact QTE with any questions or concerns.

Thanks,

Jay Dougherty

QTE.Resource(,nrc.,ovhttp://www.intemal.nrc.qovtADM/techedit/techedit.htmlMail Stop: TWB-05-BO1M

Keith Azariah-KribbsRoom: TWB-05-A14(301) 492-3678

Jay DoughertyRoom: TWB-05-A09(301) 492-3482

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 1:50 PMTo: QTE ResourceCc: Donaldson, Leslie; Zabel, Joseph; Kauffman, John; Perkins, RichardSubject: memo for technical editing with request for quick turnaround

Hello,

The attached memo (just a few paragraphs) requires technical editing before circulation for concurrence. Tomeet management requests for expedited processing of the issue described in the memo, we are requestingan exceptionally fast turnaround on editing. We would like to receive the edited document as soon as Dossible,ideally by the end of the day today (July 6).



Thank you again,


2

Author NotesGeneric Issue Review Panel Recommendation

July 6, 2011

15 pars: The ADAMS Accession No. given does not result in any hits in public ADAMS. Includea document number for the report if there is one, and give the issue date.

Formatted: Header distnce from edge: 0.5",Footer distnm from ec*: 0.5"



SUBJECT: GENERIC ISSUE REVIEW PANEL RECOMMENDATION FORTHE PROPOSED GENERIC ISSUE PERTAINING TO THEFLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWINGUPSTREAM DAM FAILURE

(bX5)

B. Sheron -2-

(b)(5)

B. Sheron -2-

(b)(5)


OFFICE RESIDRAIOEGIB Tech Editor IRESI/DRA/OEGIB RESIDRA INRRJDSS LUNSI ReviewINAME IM. Bensi IB. Beasley JR. Correia lB. Ruland -BensiDATE I / /11 / 11 / 1 1 / /11 1/ /11 / /11OFFICE NRO/DSRA INMSSIDHLWRS NRR INRO INMSSNAME M. Pohida K. Compton E. Leeds IM. Johnson IC. Haney,

DATE I ' 111 ý / /11 .... j /11 1 i ll I / /11 1. ......




GENERIC ISSUE REVIEW PANEL RECOMMENDATION FORTHE PROPOSED GENERIC ISSUE PERTAINING TO THEFLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWINGUPSTREAM DAM FAILURE

SUBJECT:

(b)(5)


B. Sheron -2-

(bX5)

B. Sheron -2-

(b)(5)

ADAMS Accession No.: ML111672131OFFICE RES/DRA/OEGIB1Tech Editor IRES/DRA/OEGIB RES/DRA jNRRIDSS SUNSI ReviewNAME M. Bensi B. Beasley IR. Correia 1B. Ruland . BensiDATE I Il I1 Ill d IIll I I /Il 1 1 /11 1 Ill,

OFFICE NRO/DSRA NMSS/DHLWRS NRR NRO TNMSSNAME M. Pohida K. Compton E. Leeds M. Johnson JC. Haney

DATE / Ill I I11 / /11 / 11 I/ /


Perk ins, Richard


Bensi, MichelleThursday, July 07, 2011 3:09 PMVeltri, DebraKauffman, John; Perkins, Richardmaterials for briefing 718/11BriefingJUhle 07_0811 .docx; Preliminary Path Forward for Safety-Risk Assessment.docx

Attached are materials for the briefing tomorrow (July 8) with Jennifer on the forthcoming Generic Issue relatedto dam failures. Please update the calendar appointment to provide these documents to the participants in themeeting.

Thanks,


July 8, 2011

(b)(5)

Preliminary Path Forward for Safety/Risk Assessment of Generic Issue 204

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard

From: Ruland, WilliamSent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 8:28 AMTo: Bensi, Michelle; Compton, Keith; Pohida, MarieCc: Kauffman, John; Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: revised version of GIRP memo

Michelle et al,

(bX5)

Again, great work on this report and thanks for expediting the final determination.

Bill

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 1:45 PMTo: Ruland, William; Compton, Keith; Pohida, MarieCc: Kauffman, John; Perkins, RichardSubject: revised version of GIRP memo


As you are aware, the processing of the Generic Issue related to dam failures has been put on an expeditedschedule so that it is available in time for the release of the Task Force Report (the Task Force chartered toreview NRC processes. and regulations following events in Japan). Currently, the goal is to complete theissuance of the memo with RES Director approval by July 12. As a result, we would like to move forwardrather quickly on completing the final text of the memo.


Thank you,Shelby


I t

Perkins, Richard

From: Pohida, MarieSent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 10.38 AMTo: Bensi, Michelle; Ruland, William; Compton, KeithCc: Kauffman, John: Perkins, Richard; Mrowca, LynnSubject: RE: revised version of GIRP memo

Good Morning,

(b)(5)

Thank for all your superb technical work on this issue.Marie

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 1:45 PMTo: Ruland, William; Compton, Keith; Pohida, MarieCc: Kauffman, John; Perkins, RichardSubject: revised version of GIRP memo


As you are aware, the processing of the Generic Issue related to dam failures has been put on an expeditedschedule so that it is available in time for the release of the Task Force Report (the Task Force chartered toreview NRC processes and regulations following events in Japan). Currently, the goal is to complete theissuance of the memo with RES Director approval by July 12. As a result, we would like to move forwardrather quickly on completing the final text of the memo.


Thank you,Shelby


I

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 8:29 AMTo: Correia, Richard; Kauffman, JohnCc: Bensi, Michelle; Coe, DougSubject: RE: Draft Press ReleaseAttachments: image001 .gif

I'm calling Bob Tripathi in NMSS. I'll let you know if I can get new status.

From: Correia, RichardSent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 8:09 AMTo: Kauffman, JohnCc: Perkins, Richard; Bensi, Michelle; Coe, DougSubject: RE: Draft Press Release

I have received no feedback from NMSS

Richard Correia, PEDirector, Division of Risk AnalysisOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchUS NRC

richard.correia @nrc.gov

From: Kauffman, JohnSent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 7:33 AMTo: Correia, RichardCc: Perkins, Richard; Bensi, Michelle; Coe, DougSubject: RE: Draft Press Release

No, I will ask Richard/Shelby when they come in, and let you know the latest status. JVK

From: Correia, RichardSent: Monday, July 11, 2011 4:52 PMTo: Kauffman, John; Perkins, Richard; Bensi, Michelle; Coe, DougSubject: RE: Draft Press Release

Thx John.

Any word from NMSS???


[email protected]

From: Kauffman, JohnSent: Monday, July 11, 2011 4:02 PM

To: Correia, Richard; Perkins, Richard; Bensi, Michelle; Coe, DougSubject: PW: Draft Press Release

All,Please see Shelby and my noodles to Eliot's draft. JVK

From: Akstulewicz, BrendaSent: Monday, July 11, 2011 1:26 PMTo: Brenner, Eliot; Kauffman, JohnCc: Perkins, Richard; Correia, Richard; Coe, Doug; Bensi, MichelleSubject: RE: Draft Press Release

Referenced document attached.

From: Brenner, EliotSent: Monday, July 11, 2011 12:46 PMTo: Kauffman, JohnCc: Perkins, Richard; Correia, Richard; Coe, Doug; Bens!, Michelle; Akstulewicz, BrendaSubject: RE: Draft Press Release

Here's a bit of a rewrite. I'll get my staff to send it over in more formal form. Thanks for getting us started on this.

Brenda ... can you put this into a m ore formal press release form and send over to John to start the review process? Thanks.

Eliot

Draft Press Release

(b)(5)

2

(bX5)

From: Kauffman, JohnSent: Monday, July 11, 2011 12:29 PMTo: Brenner, EliotCc: Perkins, Richard; Correia, Richard; Coe, Doug; Bensi, MichelleSubject: Draft Press Release

Eliot,

As we discussed late last week, please see the draft press release below. We intend for a press release to beissued when, or shortly after, the GI is signed out (hopefully, in the next couple of days). Please provide anysuggestions so that I can incorporate them as I send the draft up my management chain. I have also attacheda brief summary of the issue as additional background. We are developing a communications plan with Q&Asthat I will be sharing with you soon. Thanks in advance.

Draft Press Release

(b)(5)

-U.S.NRC

Acting Chief, Operating Experience and Generic Issues BranchUS NRCIRES/DRA/OEGIBWashington, DC 20555 Mail Stop: C-2A07MPhone: 301-251-7465Fax: 301-251-7410

Please visit the internal GIP web page or external GIP web page.I

3

Perkins, Richard


Bensi, MichelleWednesday, July 13, 2011 11:34 AMLittlejohn, JennenePerkins, Richardedits to .memoGIRP Recomendation Memo Enclosure_ 07-13-11 .docx; GIRP Recomenrdation Memo07-13-11 .docx

Hi Jennene,Please switch the memo and enclosure contained in package ML1 1890588 with the two attached files.Also, please add Harry Felsher to distribution.Thanks,Shelby




SUBJECT:

(b)(5)


B. Sheron -2-

(b)(5)

B. Sheron -3-

MBensi, RES TMcGinty, NRR


OFFICE RES/DRAIOEGIB Tech Editor RESIDRA/OEGIB RES/DRA NRR/DSS ISUNSI ReviewNAME__ M.Bensi QTE (by email) B. Beasley R. Correia B. Ruland M. Bensi .:DATE 1 /11 / ill / /ll / /11 / /11 i 1ll

OFFICE NRO/DSRA NMSS/DHLWRS NRR NRO NMSS FSMENAME . M. Pohida K. Compton IE. Leeds M. Johnson C. Haney C. CarpenterDATE /11 /11 j / OF R /1.1 FIC1 /OR11


Perkins, Richard

From: Kauffman, JohnSent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 1:28 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: Commissioner Assistants' Note

Rich,Now that we are just about ready to start concurrence on the screening memorandum, we should get going on our draft CA note.

Here's a draft to get you started. I have been talking with Leigh Trocine in the EDO's office. Rich C.'s guidance was for us to have a

note ready to send up when Brian gets the package. My understanding is that the note needs to be OK'd by Brian...more than two

paragraphs requires an enclosure be put in ADAMS. Thanks. JVK

Draft Commissioner Assistants' Note

New Generic Issue #204, "Flooding of Nuclear Power Plant Sites Following Upstream Dam Failures"

(bX5)

1C

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 3:00 PMTo: Littlejohn, JenneneSubject: Here's the QTE concurrenceAttachments: GIRP Recomendation Memo _ Draft for TechEdits _ 07-06-11_clean.docx; GIRP

Recomendation Memo _ Draft for TechEdits _ 07-04-1 1_compare.docx; Author Notes.docx

Here's the QTE concurrence for the package.

Thanks,Richard Perkins301-251-7479

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Wednesday, July 13,.2011 2:52 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: FW: Files Attached. DO#428b RE: memo for technical editing with request for quick turnaround (Michelle Bensi,RES)

From: QTE ResourceSent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 5:15 PMTo: Bensi, MichelleCc: Donaldson, Leslie; Zabel, Joseph; Kauffman, John; Perkins, Richard; QTE ResourceSubject: Files Attached. DO#428b RE: memo for technical editing with request for quick turnaround (Michelle Bensi,RES)

Michelle,

I have attached the clean and compare files for your document: GIRP Recommendation Memo(-3 double-spaced pages total) (GIRP Recomendation Memo _ Draft for TechEdits _ 07-06-11.docx) for Michelle Bensi,RES.

Please use the clean file for future revisions. The compare file details all recommended changes. The AuthorNotes file includes additional comments.


Thanks,

Jay Dougherty

QTE. Resource( nrc.Coyhttp:/lwww.intemal.nrc.qov/ADM/techedit/techedit. htmlMail Stop: TWB-05-BOIM

Keith Azariah-KribbsRoom: TWB-05-A14(301) 492-3678

Jay DoughertyRoom: TWB-05-A09(301) 492-3482

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 1:50 PMTo: QTE ResourceCc: Donaldson, Leslie; Zabel, Joseph; Kauffmnan, John; Perkins, RichardSubject: memo for technical editing with request for quick turnaround

Hello,

The attached memo (just a few paragraphs) requires technical editing before circulation for concurrence. Tomeet management requests for expedited processing of the issue described in the memo, we are requestingan exceptionally fast turnaround on editing. We would like to receive the edited document as soon as possible,ideally by the end of the day today (July 6).



Thank you again,


2

Formatted; Header diance from edge: 0.5",Footer distance from edge: 0.5'



SUBJECT: GENERIC ISSUE REVIEW PANEL RECOMMENDATION FORTHE PROPOSED GENERIC ISSUE PERTAINING TO THEFLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWINGUPSTREAM DAM FAILURE

(bX5)

B. Sheron -2-

(b)(5)

B. Sheron -2-

(b)(5)

ADAMS Accession No.: MLl11672131RES/DRA/OEGIBec Editor__ IRES/DRA/OEGIB RESIDRA - NRR/DSS _UNSIRevie

NAME M. Bensi B. Beasley R. Correia B Ruland BensiDATE / /11 I /11 1 /11 / /11 / /11 / /11FFICE NROIDSRA NMSSIDHLWRS NRR NRO NMSS N

AME M. Pohida K. Compton E. Leeds M. Johnson C. Haney

DATE I 111 /IIl 11 /1 / ill





SUBJECT:

(b)(5)


B. Sheron -2-

(b)(5)

B. Sheron -2-

(b)(5)

ADAMS Accession No.: ML111672131OFFICE RES/DRA/OEGIB Tech Editor RES/DRA/OEGIB RES/DRA NRR/DSS SUNSI ReviewNAME M. Bensi 1B. Beasley R. Correia B. Ruland .BensiDATE / /11 / /11 1/ /11 / /11 / /11 / /11

OFFICE [NRO/DSRA NMSS/DHLWRS JNRR NRO JNMSS .....NAME IM. Pohida K. Compton IE. Leeds M. Johnson C. HaneyDATE / /11 /11 / /11 / /11 / /11


Perkins, Richard


Bensi, MichelleWednesday, July 13, 2011 4:03 PMCorreia, Richard; Coe, DougKauffman, John; Perkins, Richardrevised press releaseFlooding GI press release draft_2011_07_13,docx

I have attached a revised version of the press release.-Shelby

LJ&+

10/18/2012 5:02 PM

OPA

D R A F T PRESS RELEASE

(bX5)

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard


Bensi, MichelleWednesday, July 13, 2011 4:22 PMCorreia, Richard; Coe, DougKauffman, John; Perkins, RichardRE: revised press releaseFlooding GI press release draft_2011_07_13.docx

Please see the attached for a revised version of the press release. I will also ask the original author of theproposal from NRR to take a look at the press release.

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 4:03 PMTo: Correia, Richard; Coe, DougCc: Kauffman, John; Perkins, RichardSubject: revised press release

I have attached a revised version of the press release..-Shelby

10/2B/2012 5:02 PM

OPA


(b)(5)

(b)(8)

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 4:07 PMTo: Hayden, ElizabethCc: Kauffman, John; Perkins, Richard; Correia, Richard; Coe, DougSubject: Draft press release for forthcoming Generic IssueAttachments: Question.about facilities 2011_07_14.pdf; Flooding GI press release draft_2011_07_

14.docx

Beth,

For your review and comment, I have attached a revised draft of the press release for the forthcoming Generic Issue (GI)related to dam failures.

Please note the following:1. We are still processing the Generic Issue. It will not be officially designated as a Generic Issue until we have

received inter-office concurrence and endorsement from our Office Director, We will notify you when the

appropriate approvals have been obtained. The memo documenting the designation of the Generic Issue will bereleased publically shortly after approvals have been obtained. At that time, it would be appropriate to

announce the issue through a press release. We will, of course, be in contact with you throughout the processso that you know when it will be okay to announce the final version of the press release.

2. Elliot Brenner has received a draft of our communication plan for this Generic Issue. The communication plan is

still in draft form. and undergoing daily revisions (based on reviews from various offices). The content of the planhas not been vetted and it has not been approved by our management.

3. There are still several sensitivities remaining related to Oconee Nuclear Station. Our management is currently

working out these issues with management in other offices. We will keep you updated on the status of those

discussions.4. Elliot requested a list of plants affected by this issue. We do not have a definitive list of plants affected (that list

will likely be developed in subsequent assessment of the issue). We do have a list of plants that were mentioned

as part of the screening assessment of this issue. For more information, please refer to the draft answerincluded as an attachment, which comes from today's revision of our communication plan.

Please let me know if you have any questions. I can be reached by email or phone (301-251-7570).

Thanks for your help,


OF S

Q&As: Plant-specific questions

(b)(5)

20

10/18/2012 5:20 PM

OPA


(b)(5)

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 4:09 PMTo: Bensi, MichelleSubject: RE: SFST response on input request for Dam Failure flood proposed GIAttachments: Are Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations_scope.docx

Q&A for that question is attached.

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 8:10 AMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: SFST response on input request for Dam Failure flood proposed GI

Did you ever send this to me for inclusion in the Comm Plan?

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 9:14 AMTo: Bensi, MichelleSubject: FW: SFST response on input request for Dam Failure flood proposed GI

Shelby,I'll clean this up and send it to you shortly for inclusion in the communication plan. Will that be okay?

From: Vera, JohnSent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 8:24 AMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: SFST response on input request for Dam Failure flood proposed GI

Hi Richard:

Edits are fine. I believe you were the POC for my input (I don't know who else to FW to). Please handle asappropriate.

Glad we got this done!Regards,John A. Vera, Ph.D.NMSS/SFST/TRD/SM MBOffice: EBB 3817E-mail: John.Veraa-nrc.qovPhone: (301) 492-3372

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 5:57 PMTo: Vera, JohnCc: Kauffman, John; Bensi, MichelleSubject: RE: SFST response on input request for Dam Failure flood proposed GI

John,

Here's a few suggested changes for your consideration - see the add and strikeout well below. Pleaseforward/consider these as appropriate.

Minor editorial in #3. For #4, I recommend cutting part of it because the point I think you are trying to make isnot best reflected in that criteria. It's a bit arcane, but the criteria sort of says 'we have to be able to tell whatthe significance (or risk) is so we can know when we have succeeded.' In this case, we already know it's not aproblem, so you already have it stated in point #3.

Thanks,Richard

ISFSIs are not included in the scope of the generic issue for the following reasons:

1) Flood is a postulated and analyzed accident condition for storage cask designs per the requirements of 10CFR 72.122(b)(i), which for site specific licensees must consider the site area for the analysis in their licensingbasis, and for general licensees, analyzed conditions for the cask design must bound site conditions.

2) The potential consequences from a flood event from an upstream dam failure, such as overturning, sliding,blockage of vents, and external pressure due to water, are analyzed separately as accident conditions and arereviewed as part of the licensing process.

3) Any of the preceding events actually occurring would not immediately constitute a hazard to public healthand safety, common defense and security, or the environment. Tipover analyses are usually driven by concernfor the fuel contents, not the canister or cask strength, so such an event could occur with only ,iimm-,minimal damage to the system. If sliding of a cask occurred, there is no immediate hazard to public health andsafety, being extremely unlikely that even a flash flood scenario that could move a storage system would beable to move it past site boundaries. Thermal consequences of a potential flood, such as internal temperaturerise due to postulated vent blockage, are addressed in the licensing basis by establishing a minimum time tolimiting conditions during which the licensee can take corrective actions.

4) Pr Goncri, Issue P•ogram c.iteria, thcrc iS no well. No defined, discrete technical issue - regarding adverseimpacts the consideration of upstream dam failures effee on storage systems - is proposed in this GenericIssue. R;sk or safety signifiran.e has not been established feo stFragc system. indeed, gen.rically, a flood

..ent co .ideration or a regulatoY reqwirement for lien.sing. .a..y. a Any potential technical questionsregarding upstream dam failure effects on ISFSls can be addressed through existing processes such asinspections, stakeholder outreach, or evn-demands for information. NMSS will continue close coordination onthe issue so that potential technical issues will be identified if new or dramatically different information werepresented.

From: Vera, JohnSent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 5:14 PMTo: Perkins, Richard; Correia, RichardCc: Ordaz, Vonna; Weaver, Doug; Tripathi, Bhasker; Rahimi, Meraj; Waters, Michael; Pstrak, David; Benner, Eric; Witt,Kevin; Sampson, MicheleSubject: SFST response on input request for Dam Failure flood proposed GI

Hi Richard:

Below is our input in Q&A form. Hopefully you can incorporate this in draft form while the management teamhere concurs. I can give you a finalized version tomorrow. If you need anything else, please let me know.

2

Are Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations (ISFSIs) included in the scope of the genericissue?

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 1:37 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: next steps for comm plan

Richard,I left out a step: the comm. plan should also be reviewed by the communication specialists in the EDOs office.Shelby

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 10:54 AMTo: Perkins, Richard; Kauffman, JohnSubject: next steps for comm plan

Richard and John,

Here's what I think still needs to be done for the comm. plan:* Finish revising comm. plan and get into ADAMs (Today)0 Send out comm. plan for round #3 of the review (Today) - For your reviewicomment, I have

attached a draft of the email I will be sending• Get feedback from everyone (request by COB Tuesday, July 26?? - comments will go to Richard)0 Revise comm. plan* Create package* Circulate comm. plan and memo for concurrence - For your review/comment, I have attached a

draft of the memo (we still need to decide on who will concur from other offices.., we should contactthe comm. team)

* "Finalize" comm. plan and get it up on the appropriate websites

The timeline I sent earlier also has important milestones.

Thanks,Shelby

.Subject: Communication Plan for anticipated Generic Issue related to flooding from upstreamdam failure.

(b)(5)

(b)(5)

July XX, 2011

MEMORANDUM TO: Insert.NameAssistant for OperationsOffice of the Executive Director for Operations

FROM: Brian W. Sheron, DirectorOffice of Nuclear Regulatory Research

SUBJECT: COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR GENERIC ISSUE 204,FLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWINGUPSTREAM DAM FAILURE

(b)(5)

. ..

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 4:58 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: FW: IN Comment

FYI. This is important info for the comm. plan timeline.

From: Ferrante, FernandoSent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 4:57 PMTo: Bensi, MichelleSubject: FW: IN Comment

From: Beaulieu, DavidSent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 4:56 PMTo: Ferrante, FernandoCc: Circle, JeftSubject: RE: IN Comment

The fact that we need 5 office director signatures makes it hard to predict how long itwill take. My best guessis 1 to 4 weeks.

DAVID BEAULIEU PROJECT MANAGER NRR/DPR/PGCB(bwl-yer) 301-415-3243 1 1H17 [email protected]

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

From: Ferrante, FernandoSent; Thursday, July 21, 2011 4:53 PMTo: Beaulieu, DavidCc: Circle, JeffSubject: RE: IN Comment

Dave,

I just got back to my desk. I am ok with your decision, from a practical perspective, although your re-write alsohad some improvements on the original.

Quick question: when do you think we may have this out? I was asked by the GI-204 folks when we areanticipating the release of the IN.

Thanks,Fernando

From: Beaulieu, David

Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 4:49 PM

To: Ferrante, FernandoCc: Coyne, Kevin; Circle, JeffSubject: RE: IN Comment

I decided the original paragraph is good enough. I will move the IN forward.

DAVID BEAULIEU PROJECT MANAGER NRR/DPR/PGCB

bowl-yer) 301-415-3243 I 012H17 I David.Bea ulieu @nrc.Zov


From: Ferrante, FernandoSent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 9:47 AMTo: Beaulieu, DavidCc: Coyne, Kevin; Circle, JeffSubject: RE: IN Comment

Dave,

The intent of the original paragraph is really not that different from your re-write, although I agree the suggested firstsentence is more direct and clear than the original one.

Overall, I don't have a problem with your re-write, but I worked at length with the staff in RES to get this paragraph inshape, so I would like to have them look at this as well. If they concur with this, then I am ok with it.

Thanks,Fernando

From: Beaulieu, DavidSent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 8:59 AMTo: Ferrante, FernandoSubject: IN Comment

(b)(5)

2

(bX5)

DAVID BEAULIEU PROJECT MANAGER NRR/DPR/PGCB

bowl-yer) 301-415-3243 I O12H17 I [email protected]


3

Perkins, Richard

From: Virgilio, RosettaSent: Friday, July 22, 2011 5:43 PMTo* Perkins, Richard; Bensi, Michelle; Burnell, ScottCc: Ryan, Michelle; Turtil, Richard; Dacus, Eugene; McNamara, Nancy; Logaras, Harral;

Trojanowski, Robert; Woodruff, Gena: Tifft, Doug; Barker, Allan; Maier, Bill; Couret, Ivonne;Steger (Tucci), Christine; Felsher, Harry; Beasley, Benjamin

Subject: COMMENTS DUE 7/26 - Draft Communication Plan for Generic Issue Related to Floodingfrom Upstream Dam Failure [Comments Requested]

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the subject draft Corn Plan.

Please note Region I comments, below regarding timeline for pre-notification to States, along with keymessages for context, and whether OK to share the NPPs included in the generic issue screening report.

Also suggest adding the Regional State Liaison Officers to the Communications Team and timeline fornotification purposes:

Region I: Nancy McNamara and Doug TiftRegion I1: Robert Trojanowski and Gena WoodruffRegion IIl: Alan Barker and Harral LogarasRegion IV. Bill Maier

From: McNamara, NancySent: Friday, July 22, 2011 3:01 PMTo: Virgilio, Rosetta; Barker, Allan; Maier, Bill; Tifit, Doug; Woodruff, Gena; Logaras, Harral; Trojanowski, RobertCc: Ryan, Michelle; Turtil, Richard; Dacus, EugeneSubject: RE: Comments due 7/26 - Draft Communication Plan for Generic Issue Related to Flooding from Upstream DamFailure [Comments Requested]

Thank you, Rosetta for keeping on top of this for us. While we find the information in the communication planto be helpful, we respectfully request the communication plan have a communication initiation timelineand key messages for implementing a few hours before the press release goes public. This will ensureall the parties (Research, RSLOs, OCA) are informed for initiating the plan. This is important to RegionI because we have two highly visible plants on the list. Therefore, if it is only Region I that needs to makeearly notifications, the communication plan can state that.

Also, will the press release contain the names of the plants? If not, the first question we are going toget is what plants are being reviewed. Will the PAOs and SLOs be able to give out that information?

From: Virgilio, RosettaSent: Friday, July 22, 2011 11:05 AMTo: Barker, Allan; Maier, Bill; Tifft, Doug; Woodruff, Gena; Logaras, Harral; McNamara, Nancy; Trojanowski, RobertCc: Ryan, Michelle; Turtil, RichardSubject: Comments due 7/26 - Draft Communication Plan for Generic Issue Related to Flooding from Upstream DamFailure [Comments Requested]

Am sharing with you the subject Corn Plan for your comments to me by noon Tues, 7/26. if possible so I canfunnel my and Regional comments to Shelby Bensi, RES by COB 7/26.

From: Bensi, Michelle

Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 8:41 AM

1 ~I3D

To: Bailey, Marissa; Bamford, Peter; Bartley, Jonathan; Beasley, Benjamin; Beaulieu, David; Bellamy, Ronald; Bensi,Michelle; Bernhard, Rudolph; Boska, John; Broaddus, Doug; Burnell, Scott; Burritt, Arthur; Cahill, Christopher; Campbell,Stephen; Camper, Larry; Cheok, Michael; Chernoff, Harold; Circle, Jeff; Clark, Jeff; Coe, Doug; Compton, Keith; Cook,William; Correia, Richard; Cotton, Karen; Dudes, Laura; Emche, Danielle; Ennis, Rick; Felsher, Harry; Ferrante, Fernando;Gaddy, Vincent; Giessner, John; Gratton, Christopher; Gray, Mel; Guthrie, Eugene; Haney, Catherine; Hanna, John;Hiland, Patrick; Hills, David; Hilton, Nick; Hughey, John; Jackson, Donald; Kalyanam, Kaly; Kauffman, John; Khanna,Meena; Kim, James; Kinneman, John; Kozak, Laura; Krohn, Paul; Kulesa, Gloria; Lamb, John; Leeds, Eric; Lingam, Siva;Loveless, David; MacDonald, George; Marcano, Jonathan; Markley, Michael; McCoy, Gerald; McGinty, Tim; Meghani,Vijay; Milano, Patrick; Mitman, Jeffrey; Morgan, Nadiyah; Mozafarl, Brenda; Mrowca, Lynn; Musser, Randy; Ordaz, Vonna;Pascarelli, Robert; Passehl, Dave; Perkins, Richard; Philip, Jacob; Pohida, Marie; Raione, Richard; Replogle, George; Riley(OCA), Timothy; Rogers, Walt; Rosenberg, Stacey; Ruland, William; Runyan, Michael; Salgado, Nancy; Sancaktar, Selim;Schmidt, Wayne; See, Kenneth; Sheron, Brian; Singal, Balwant; Stang, John; Thadani, Mohan; Thompson, Jon; Valos,Nicholas; Virgilio, Rosetta; Walker, Wayne; Wengert, Thomas; Wilkins, Lynnea; Wilson, GeorgeCc: Perkins, RichardSubject: Draft Communication Plan for Generic Issue Related to Flooding from Upstream Dam Failure [CommentsRequested]

All,

The Generic Issues Program recently completed the screening analysis for a proposed Generic Issue related to externalflooding as a result of upstream dam failure. An approval officially designating this issue as a formal Generic Issue isexpected to be issued next week (pending final inter-office concurrence). The associated memo will include an enclosureproviding a synopsis of the screening analysis. The memo and synopsis can be found in ADAMS (accession #ML111890588). The screening analysis report is also available in ADAMS (accession # ML110740482). A communicationplan (accession # ML112020629) is being developed to assure all affected NRC staff are prepared for the public releaseof the documents. Once the communication plan is issued, periodic changes will be communicated to thecommunication team members via email.

The primary goal of the communication plan is to assist communications related to the forthcoming Generic Issue.However, the plan also provides information about two forthcoming NRR Information Notices (IN) related to dam failurefrequencies (accession #ML090510269) and design basis external flooding evaluation. Consequently, thiscommunication plan will aid communications related to both the Generic Issue and the INs. Interest from the public,media, industry, and other stakeholders is anticipated. A public meeting will be scheduled sometime later this summeror in early fall.

The screening analysis report contains mention of the following sites:

Arkansas Nuclear One Beaver Valley Browns Ferry ColumbiaCooper Fort Calhoun H.B. Robinson Hope CreekIndian Point McGuire Oconee Peach BottomPrairie Island Sequoyah South Texas SurryThree-Mile Island Vermont Yankee Waterford Watts Bar

2

Consideration of a site as part of the screening assessment does not necessarily imply the site may be adversely affectedby an upstream dam failure. While the screening assessment report includes this particular set of sites, the next stage ofthe evaluation is likely to include more, less, or different sites.

We have tried to include all appropriate Project Managers and Branch Chiefs in the distribution of this draftcommunication plan. If you have suggestions for additional participants in this review, please contact Richard Perkins at301-251-7479. Due to the expedited schedule for processing this Generic issue, we request your comments of thedraft communication plan by COB Tuesday, July 26. Please send your comments to Richard Perkins(richard.perkinsenrc.gov).

Thank you,


3

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Monday, August 01, 2011 12:37 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: FW: Draft press release for forthcoming Generic Issue

Richard,I believe Brian sent back comments on this already.Shelby

From: Burnell, ScottSent: Monday, August 01, 2011 9:56 AMTo: Perkins, Richard; Bensi, MichelleCc: Hayden, ElizabethSubject: RE: Draft press release for forthcoming Generic Issue

Richard;

This is what I sent back on the 20". I hadn't received any edits since then. Thanks.

Scott

Richard, Michelle;

I've attached OPA's version of what Michelle had sent over on the 14t'. If you could, please concur via e-mailand mark any suggested edits in Word's "Track Changes" feature. Please let me know who else should see itbefore I take it up to the EDO's office. Thanks.

Scott

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Monday, July 18, 2011 1:29 PMTo: Hayden, ElizabethCc,: Kauffman, John; Correia, Richard; Coe, Doug; Burnell, Scott; Brenner, Eliot; Bensi, MichelleSubject: RE: Draft press release for forthcoming Generic Issue

Beth,

We're anticipating that the press release will go out concurrent with the public declaration of the GenericIssue. The time frame should be on the order of a week or less.

Certainly not a month.

We can let you know when the memo has been signed by the panel (Bill Ruland, chair) and is being passed toBrian for approval (the GI declaration).

ThanksRichard Perkins301-251-7479

)3.--

From: Hayden, ElizabethSent: Friday, July 15, 2011 3:53 PMTo: Bensi, MichelleCc: Kauffman, John; Perkins, Richard; Correia, Richard; Coe, Doug; Burnell, Scott; Brenner, Eliot; Beasley, BenjaminSubject: RE: Draft press release for forthcoming Generic Issue

Hi Michelle,

Thanks for the response. We'll look it over. Not being knowledgeable about timelines for Generic Issues designation,can you give me a best guess when you believe the press release should go out-next week, next month, next day ortwo?

Beth HaydenSeniorAdvisorOffice of Public AffairsUS. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

- Pmlectir Peopleard//the'Eilnv/ment301-415-8202elizabeth.hayden, Dnrc.Vv

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 4:07 PMTo: Hayden, ElizabethCc: Kauffman, John; Perkins, Richard; Correia, Richard; Coe, DougSubject: Draft press release for forthcoming Generic Issue

Beth,



received inter-office concurrence and endorsement from our Office Director. We will notify you when theappropriate approvals have been obtained. The memo documenting the designation of the Generic Issue will bereleased publically shortly after approvals have been obtained. At that time, it would be appropriate to

announce the issue through a press release. We will, of course, be in contact with you throughout the processso that you know when it will be okay to announce the final version of the press release.

2. Elliot Brenner has received a draft of our communication plan for this Generic Issue. The communication plan isstill in draft form and undergoing daily revisions (based on reviews from various offices). The content of the planhas not been vetted and it has not been approved by our management.

3. There are still several sensitivities remaining related to Oconee Nuclear Station. Our management is currentlyworking out these issues with management in other offices. We will keep you updated on the status of those

discussions.4. Elliot requested a list of plants affected by this issue. We do not have a definitive list of plants affected (that list

will likely be developed in subsequent assessment of the issue). We do have a list of plants that were mentionedas part of the screening assessment of this issue. For more information, please refer to the draft answerincluded as an attachment, which comes from today's revision of our communication plan.

2



Michelle (Shelby) Bensi, Ph.D.Reliability and Risk EngineerNuclear Regulatory CommissionOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchDivision of Risk AnalysisOperating Experience and Generic issues Branch

3

Revised: 8/l/11

OPA


(b)(5)

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Monday, August 01, 2011 12:42 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: FW: handing off press releaseAttachments: Flooding_Gl.docx; FloodingGl press release 2011_07_22.docx

In case you don't have this email any longer (see below)... These are the two documents I had as of the Friday before Ileft (these however might be outdated now).Shelby

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Friday, July 22, 2011 4:39 PMTo: Perkins, Richard; Kauffman, JohnSubject: handing off press release

Richard and John,

I am sure you already know this stuff, but to facilitate a clean hand off...

" Please refer to Scott's email below. He has asked for us to provide our revision of the press release

with changes tracked. I have attached the original version of the press release as well as the version I

have sent up to Brian and Jennifer. I have asked them to provide their comments to Richard P. I sent a"clean" version of the document up to Brian and Jennifer, but a "compare docs" should suffice to

produce a document to send back to Scott. He has also asked for formal concurrence (I believe that

comes from Brian???)* You may want to consider having Fernando, et al take a quick look at the press release before it goes

out. He has been great about giving feedback.

" Rosetta (and maybe OCA) will want to see the press release before it goes out (Richard: Rosetta sent

you and email separately about this).

Thanks,Shelby

From: Burnell, ScottSent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 3:59 PMTo: Perkins, Richard; Bensi, MichelleCc: Hayden, ElizabethSubject: RE: Draft press release for forthcoming Generic Issue

Richard, Michelle;

I've attached OPA's version of what Michelle had sent over on the 1 41h. If you could, please concur via e-mailand mark any suggested edits in Word's "Track Changes" feature. Please let me know who else should see itbefore I take it up to the EDO's office. Thanks.

Scott

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Monday, July 18, 2011 1:29 PM

To: Hayden, ElizabethCc: Kauffman, John; Correia, Richard; Coe, Doug; Burnell, Scott; Brenner, Eliot; Bensi, MichelleSubject: RE: Draft press release for forthcoming Generic Issue

Beth,

We're anticipating that the press release will go out concurrent with the public declaration of the GenericIssue. The time frame should be on the order of a week or less.

Certainly not a month.

We can let you know when the memo has been signed by the panel (Bill Ruland, chair) and is being passed toBrian for approval (the GI declaration).

ThanksRichard Perkins301-251-7479

From: Hayden, ElizabethSent: Friday, July 15, 2011 3:53 PMTo: Bensi, MichelleCc: Kauffman, John; Perkins, Richard; Correia, Richard; Coe, Doug; Burnell, Scott; Brenner, Eliot; Beasley, BenjaminSubject: RE: Draft press release for forthcoming Generic Issue

Hi Michelle,

Thanks for the response. We'll look it over. Not being knowledgeable about timelines for Generic Issues designation,can you give me a best guess when you believe the press release should go out-next week, next month, next day ortwo?

Beth HaydenSenior AdvisorOffice of Public AffairsU.S. Nuclear Regulatorv Commission

- -lotect/g• Pe ad//heAEtn-wrontme/t'[email protected]

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 4:07 PMTo: Hayden, ElizabethCc: Kauffman, John; Perkins, Richard; Correia, Richard; Coe, Doug,Subject: Draft press release for forthcoming Generic Issue

Beth,



received inter-office concurrence and endorsement from our Office Director. We will notify you when the

2

appropriate approvals have been obtained. The memo documenting the designation of the Generic Issue will be

released publically shortly after approvals have been obtained. At that time, it would be appropriate to

announce the issue through a press release. We wilt, of course, be in contact with you throughout the process

so that you know when it will be okay to announce the final version of the press release.

2. Elliot Brenner has received a draft of our communication plan for this Generic Issue. The communication plan is

still in draft form and undergoing daily revisions (based on reviews from various offices). The content of the plan

has not been vetted and it has not been approved by our management.

3. There are still several sensitivities remaining related to Oconee Nuclear Station. Our management is currently

working out these issues with management in other offices. We will keep you updated on the status of those

discussions.

4. Elliot requested a list of plants affected by this issue. We do not have a definitive list of plants affected (that list

will likely be developed in subsequent assessment of the issue). We do have a list of plants that were mentioned

as part of the screening assessment of this issue. For more information, please refer to the draft answer

included as an attachment, which comes from today's revision of our communication plan.




3

SRB

G/DPR/HQDraftPRs/FloodingGI.doc 10/19/2012 2:22 PM

OPA


(b)(8)

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 10:01 AMTo: Ferrante, FernandoSubject: FW: Dam CommunicationsAttachments: ML111890588.apk; Draft DAM Failure Frequency IN August 201 1.docx

FYI

From: McGinty, TimSent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 9:59 AMTo: Ruland, William; Grobe, JackCc: Uhle, Jennifer; Perkins, Richard; Leeds, Eric; Boger, Bruce; Nelson, Robert; Rosenberg, Stacey- Coyne, Kevin; Cheok,MichaelSubject: RE: Dam Communications

Thanks Bill. The draft IN is also attached. We are at the stage of final concurrence by the 5 signatories. RESconcu rred in April (K. Coyne). I would be the final signature.

(b)(5)

Tim

From: Ruland, WilliamSent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 9:15 AMTo: Grobe, Jack; McGinty, Tim; Leeds, EricCc: Uhle, Jennifer; Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: Dam Communications

Jack,

As you know, RES has the lead on this item, not NRR. Our role, I believe, is to facilitate the communicationbetween RES, the regions, and OPA etc.

Here's how RES has outlined the steps (courtesy of Richard Perkins-any errors or misstatements are myresponsibility):

1. Eric concurs on the GI for the office. This is not on the Comm plan, just that he concurs that it should

be a GI.

2. I concur in the memo to Brian, as the panel chair. Still not on the Comm plan.

3. Memo goes to Brian, he holds it. Comm plan is circulated to the offices.

4. Once the Comm plan is ready, it goes to the offices for final concurrence. This would include theregions and NRR.

5. Once the Comm plan is complete, RES signs it out, Brian signs memo, roll out starts.

As Richard Perkins has relayed to me, the Comm plan continues under development. I have provided Eric thecurrent version of my memo to Brian and a copy of the final draft screening report. If you recall, I provided you

I

a copy of the report while you were still on the NTTF. I have included the link to the screening report and thememo.

Regarding the Comm plan, it is still being refined by RES. I recommend that we wait for RES to provide it tous.

Tim, you can provide Jack with the rest of the information, ok? I was wondering how we should integrate theroll out of the GI with the IN. Your thoughts?

BiJJ

From: Grobe, JackSent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 8:00 AMTo: Ruland, William; McGinty, TimCc: Uhle, JenniferSubject: Dam Communications

Guys,

There is intense anxiety on the dam IN and GI public notification/roll-out. Could you get me copies of the documentsthat will go public and the Comm Plans and after I read them we will likely need to talk before it all gets released.Thanks

Jack Grobe, Deputy Directorfor Engineering and Corporate SupportOffice of Nuclear Reactor RegulationU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

UNITED STATESNUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATIONOFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS

OFFICE OF FEDERAL AND STATE MATERIALS ANDENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

OFFICE OF NEW REACTORSWASHINGTON, DC 20555-0001

NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2011-16: POTENTIALLY NONCONSERVATIVESCREENING VALUE FOR DAM FAILUREFREQUENCY IN PROBABILISTIC RISKASSESSMENTS

(b)(5)

IN 2011-16Page 2 of 6

(b)(S)

IN 2011-16Page 3 of 6

(b)(5)

IN 2011-16Page 4 of 6

(b)X5)

IN 2011-16Page 5 of 6

(bX5)

IN 2011-16Page 6 of 6

Cb)(5)

IN 2011-16Page 6 of 6

(b)(5)

ADAMS Accession Number: ML090510269OFFICE APOB:NRR APOB:NRR Tech Editor BC:APOB:NRR D:DRA:NRR NRR/DENAME F Ferrante J Mitman KKribbs J Circle M Cheok G WilsonDATE 4/11/2011 4/11/2011 1/17/2011 e-mail 7114/2011 7/15/2011 05/1812011OFFICE BC:ETB:RES BC:PRAB:RES BC:RHEB:NRO BC:SPRA:NRO LA:PGCB:NRR PM:PGCB:NRRNAME W Ott K Coyne R Raione L Mrowca CHawes DBeaulieuDATE 4/04/2011 4/08/2011 4/05/2011 410812011 7/25/2011 7/21/2011OFFICE BC:PGCB:NRR D:DFCSS:NMSS D:DSFST:NMSS D:DWMEP:FSME D:DCIP:NRO D:DPR:NRRNAME SRosenberg J Kinneman V Ordaz LCamper L Dudes T McGintyOFFICE I


Perkins, Richard

From:Sent:To:Subject:Attachments:

Perkins, RichardMonday, August 08, 2011 3:31 PMSiu, Carolyn; Littlejohn, JenneneMemo for Brian's SignatureComm Plan Transmittal Memo_665.doc; G1204 Comm Plan Memo v2.docx

Jennene or Carolyn,

Could you please prepare this memo package for Brian's signature.

Thanks,


NRC FORM 665S U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION(Rev. 3-2009) ADAMS DOCUMENT SUBMISSION Single Document

Originated By Telephone Mail Stop LAN ID DateRichard Perkins 301-251-7479 C-2C07M RHP1/

Document No.Document Title or Accession No.COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR GENERIC ISSUE 204, FLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITESFOLLOWING UPSTREAM DAM FAILURE

F-Is this a brief title that can be changed by DPC according to template instruction?•XLls this an exact title formatted according to template instructions that should not be changed by DPC? -

Document AVAILABILITY (select one)

L.i PubliclyAvailabl.e._ Nn-Publicly AvailableMD 3.4 Non-Public Item Code (A.3-A.7, B1)

,(Indicate Release Date)[7Immediate Release Document SENSITIVTY (select one)__

FK1 Normal Release I I A.7l Sensitive Internal Info- 4 Sensitive-ProprietaryDelay Release Until Periodic Review

SI RequiredA.? Sensitive Internal Info- [ --["] Sensitive-.Security

No Periodic Review Related - PeriodicReview Required

Date A.6 Sensitive- Fed, State, B..7•__ Non-SensitiveForeign Govt Controlled

[v Non-Sensitive Info

Non-Sensitive Copyright r -- Senstive-PA/PIl J-I Non-sensitive-Copyright

Document SECURITY ACCESS LEVEL_X Document Processing Center = Owner

X NRC Users = Viewer -l

Limited Document Security (Defined by User) ,_I . = Viewer 1

__--_ __- _V=Viewer

ADAMS Template No. RIDS Code (if applicable) Other IdentifiersRES-006

SUNSI Review for Publicly Available Documents ONLY

COMPLETED BY ORIGINATOR:X SUNSI Review has been completed. Initials 1

, Availability and Sensitivity on this Form 665 are correct. Initials 11 SUNSI Review has NOT been completed. Initials 1(document is temporarily profiled as Non-Public) . _

COMPLETED BY PERSON ADDING THE DOCUMENT TO ADAMS:T "SUNSI Review Complete" has been entered into Profile under Keyword 1Initials-

OR_, -ORj SUNSI has NOT been completed __Initials r -

"] Non-Public Pending Review" has been entered into the Profile under Keyword - _

Special Instructions:

Submitted by:Carolyn Siu

Telephone301-251-.---

Mail StopCSB-04A07M

LAN IDI uate Submitted to DPC

Accession No!. ML020170281

August XX, 2011

MEMORANDUM TO: Nader L. MamishAssistant for OperationsOffice of the Executive Director for Operations

Brian W. Sheron, DirectorOffice of Nuclear Regulatory Research

FROM:

SUBJECT: COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR GENERIC ISSUE 204,FLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWINGUPSTREAM DAM FAILURE

(b)(5)

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 7:48 AMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: FW: proposed new generic issue on dam failure/flooding

See below regarding Nick Hilton. It appears Roy Zimmerman did the appointing.

From: Correia, RichardSent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 7:04 PMTo: Kauffman, John; Bensi, MichelleSubject: Fw: proposed new generic issue on dam failure/flooding

Richard Correia, DirectorDivision of Risk AnalysisRES

Sent from a Blackberry

From: Zimmerman, RoyTo: Correia, RichardSent: Wed Jul 13 17:39:29 2011Subject: RE: proposed new generic issue on dam failure/flooding

Rich, John Wray for the next couple days and then Nick Hilton after that .......

From: Correia, RichardSent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 4:36 PMTo: Zimmerman, Roy; Schmidt, Rebecca; Brenner, EliotSubject: IW: proposed new generic issue on dam failure/flooding

Roy. Rebecca and Eliot,

We need a POC from your office for the draft Communications Plan for the GI on dam failures/NPP flooding.Please let me or Shelby Bensi know who you name as the POC.

Many thanks,

Rich


richard.correia~cnrc.gov

From: Correia, RichardSent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 4:02 PMTo: McGinty, Tim; Giitter, Joseph; Hiland, Patrick; Ordaz, Vonna; Kinneman, John; Ader, Charles; Bergman, Thomas;

Cheok, Michael; Pruett, Troy; McDermott, Brian; Lorson, Raymond; Miller, Chris; Roberts, Darrell; Croteau, Rick; Munday,Joel; Gody, Tony; Boland, Anne; Reynolds, Steven; West, Steven; Caniano, Roy; Vegel, Anton; Kennedy, Kriss; Brenner,Eliot; Schmidt, Rebecca; Bailey, MarissaCc: Wilson, George; Ruland, William; Coe, Doug; Kauffman, John; Bensi, Michelle; Beasley, Benjamin; Uhle, JenniferSubject: proposed new generic issue on dam failure/flooding

All,

As I mentioned in my previous email, RES and the other program offices have expedited the processing of a proposedGeneric Issue pertaining to the flooding of nuclear power plant sites following upstream dam failure. During the pastweek, RES has made significant progress coordinating with other offices on this issue and we thank you for your quickresponse to our inquiries.

The memo officially designating this issue as a formal Generic Issue is expected to be issued this week pendingresolution of several remaining issues related to the scope of the Generic Issue. The memo will include an enclosureproviding a synopsis of the screening assessment of the issue instead of the screening assessment report. The completescreening assessment report is currently being reviewed/finalized and is expected to be issued soon. NSIR reviewed andevaluated the report to determine if it should be OUO or uncontrolled. Their conclusion was it could be issueduncontrolled. Their message regarding this is also attached.

In preparation for issuance of the screening assessment report, we have developed a draft communication plan toassure all affected NRC staff are prepared for the public release of the report. The primary goal of the communicationplan is to assist communications related to the forthcoming Generic Issue. However, the plan also provides informationabout two forthcoming NRR Information Notices (INs) related to dam failure frequencies (ML090S10269) and designbasis external flooding evaluation. Consequently, this communication plan will aid communications related to both theGeneric Issue and the INs. We anticipate interest from the public, media, industry, and other stakeholders. A publicmeeting will be scheduled sometime later this summer.

A draft of the communication plan is attached. This document has been sent to the communication team for thisGeneric Issue (listed below) in a separate email. We have requested that the communication team provide feedback byTuesday, July 19 (though we certainly welcome feedback before that date). To expedite the process ofreviewing/revising this communication plan, we request that, whenever possible, offices and regions coordinate theircomments with a point of contact on the communication team. Otherwise, please provide comments/suggestions toShelby Bensi (Michelle.Bensietnrc.gov) by adding comments/changes directly in the Word file (with changes tracked) orproviding a hard copy with pen/paper changes. Shelby can be reached by 301-251-7570 if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Rich

Communication Team

Name Telephone Number Email

k'o ut'sin' Eperaftm ... r"e.neand;enenc Is".es..ra.ch

Benjamin Beasley 301-251-7676 Benja [email protected]

Richard Perkins 301-251-7479 [email protected]

Michelle Bensi 301-251-7570 [email protected]

2

Contacts in NRR

Fernando Ferrante 301-415-8385 [email protected]

Jeffrey Mitman 301-415-2843 [email protected]

Meena Khanna 301-415-2150 [email protected]

George Wilson 301-415-1711 [email protected]

Bill Ruland 301-415-1270 [email protected]

C acts uiWO

Kenneth See 301-415-1508 [email protected]

Richard Raione 301-415-7190 [email protected]

Marie Pohida 301-415-1846 [email protected]

Lynn Mrowca 301-415-0525 [email protected]

Harry Felsher 301-415-6559 [email protected]

- .; -iltactiInNM5s.

Jonathan Marcano 301-492-3263 [email protected] acts gientffices

Wayne Schmidt (Region I) 610-337-5315 [email protected]

Jonathan Bartley (Region II) 404-997-4607 [email protected]

Dave Hills (Region 1i1) 630-829-9733 [email protected]

Vincent Gaddy (Region IV) 817-860-8144 [email protected]

... "" '•::. i.•:?n. --onta~•in •P•A•.O.CA,L :ThJce~ofE'lfforeemnut -. :...,....

OPA~j#TBD]

OCA j#TBD]

Office of Enforcement I[TlBD]

3



From: Correia, RichardSent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 6:59 AMTo: McGinty, Tim; Glitter, Joseph; Hiland, Patrick; Ordaz, Vonna; Kinneman, John; Ader, Charles; Bergman, Thomas;Cheok, Michael; Pruett, Troy; McDermott, Brian; Lorson, Raymond; Miller, Chris; Roberts, Darrell; Croteau, Rick; Munday,Joel; Gody, Tony; Boland, Anne; Reynolds, Steven; West, Steven; Caniano, Roy; Vegel, Anton; Kennedy, Kriss; Brenner,Eliot; Schmidt, Rebecca; Bailey, MarissaCc: Wilson, George; Ruland, William; Coe, Doug; Kauffman, John; Bensi, Michelle; Beasley, BenjaminSubject: advanced notice: proposed new generic issue

All,

RES and the other program offices are processing a proposed generic issue (GI) pertaining to the flooding of nuclearpower plant sites following upstream dam failure. We are expediting the processing of the proposed GI largely due to, 1.the recent events in Japan at the Fukushima Daiichi plant, 2., certain plants in the US that have experienced flooding, 3.the planned issuance on or about July 12 of the Task Force report (the Task Force chartered to review NRC processesand regulations following events in Japan). NMSS will monitor activities related to this GI but currently does not plan toinclude fuel cycle facilities and ISFSIs as part of the G1. We anticipate the approval of the recommendation for this GI tobe completed by July 12.

Part of the processing for this GI would be to develop a communication plan that would be used by the program offices,the regions as well as OPA, OCA and other offices as necessary. Normally RES would send the communication plan to

these offices/regions for review and comment over a 2 week period. However, given the expedited processing of thisparticular GI, we plan to forward to your office/region for use and information, the communication plan once the G6 isapproved. Should there be comments or changes needed to the communication plan once your office/region has had anopportunity to review it, RES will make changes and reissue.

Please share this information with other Divisions/organizations within your office/region.Thanks for your support regarding this issue.

Rich



4

Perkins, Richard

From: Siu, CarolynSent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 1:37 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: FW: Files Attached. DO#436b RE: Memo for concurrence (Caroline Siu, RES)Attachments: G1204 Comm Plan Memo v2_clean.docx; G1204 Comm Plan Memo v2compare.docx

Hi Rich,

This package is ready for pick-up.

CAROLYN SlU301-251-7568

From: QTE ResourceSent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 1:31 PMTo: Siu, CarolynCc: Donaldson, Leslie; Zabel, Joseph; Perkins, Richard; QTE ResourceSubject: Files Attached. DO#436b RE: Memo for concurrence (Caroline Siu, RES)

Caroline,

I have attached the clean and compare files for your document: COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR GENERIC ISSUE 204,FLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWING UPSTREAM DAM FAILURE (-2 double-spaced pages) (G1204Comm Plan Memo v2.docx) for Caroline Siu, RES.

Please use the clean file for future revisions. The compare file details all recommended changes.


Thanks,

Jay Dougherty

QTE.Resource(.nrc.Qovhttp://www.internal.nrc.-qovlADM/techedit/techedit. htmlMail Stop: TWB-05-BO2M

Keith Azariah-KribbsRoom: TWB-OS-A14(301) 492-3678

Jay. DoughertyRoom: TWB-05-A09(301) 492-3482

From: Siu, Carolyn

Sent: Monday, August 08, 2011 4:03 PM

To: QTE ResourceCc: Donaldson, Leslie; Zabel, Joseph; Perkins, RichardSubject: Memo for concurrence

Good afternoon,

Please review the attached memo and provide concurrence. Thanks!

Carolyn ýiuContract Administrative Assistant fOFFice oF Nuclear Tefgulatory ThesearClDivision of TsK ,Analysis0.5. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionCOB-4AO6division line- 3oi-252-7q3odirect line: 301-252-7568fax: 302-252-7q24Carolyn.iu@t)rC..gOV

some stories are true that never bappened.

2



FROM:

SUBJECT: COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR GENERIC ISSUE 204,"FLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWINGUPSTREAM DAM FAILURE"

(b)(5)

MEMORANDUM TO:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

Nader L. MamishAssistant for OperationsOffice of the Executive Director for Operations


COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR GENERIC ISSUE 204,FLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWINGUPSTREAM DAM FAILURE

ADAMS Accession No.: MLl12201350OFFICE RES/DRA/OEGIB ITech Editor RES/DRA/OEGIB RES/DRA RES lOPANAME R. Perkins QTE B. Beasley R. Correia B. Sheron S. Bumell

(via email) I (via email)

DATE 1 /11 / 711 1 /fll

OFFICE OCA RGN-I RGN-II RGN-II RGN-IV NRRNAME T. Riley

A via email)

DATE e /11_/_/11 ____ 1____1!/_/11____1

/FFIC NRO /NMISS SME OE EDO

NAMIEM_DATE / 11 / /11 / /1/11 1 IllI1 / 711


Memo to Nader L. Mamish from Brian Sheron dated XX Month XXXX

SUBJECT: COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR GENERIC ISSUE 204, FLOODING OFNUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWING UPSTREAM DAM FAILURE

DISTRIBUTION:FFerrante, NRRDBeaulieu, NRRKCompton, NMSSHFelsher, FSMENSheehan, RGN-IGWoodruff, RGN-IIABarker, RGN-IIIDEmche, OIP

JMitman, NRRSRosenberg, NRRKSee, NRORVirgilio, FSMENMcNamara, RGN-IDHills, RGN-111HLogaras, RGN-IIIDRA r/f

MKhanna, NRRWRuland, NRRRRaione, NROJMarcano, NMSSDTifht, RGN-IVMeghani, RGN-IIIVGaddy, RGN-IV

GWilson, NRRMPohida, NROLMrowca, NROWSchmidt, RGN-IJBartley, RGN-IIRTrojanowski, RGN-IIBMaier, RGN-IV


FROM:

SUBJECT.


COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR GENERIC ISSUE 204,"FLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWING

UPSTREAM DAM FAILURE"

(b)(5)

MEMORANDUM TO:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

Nader L. MamishAssistant for Operations.Office of the Executive Director for Operations


COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR GENERIC ISSUE 204,FLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWINGUPSTREAM DAM FAILURE

(b)(5)

ADAMS Accession No.: ML1.12201350 __

OFF ICE tRESIDRA=EGIBRTech EditoSr /DRA/OEGIB IRESIDRA IRES IOPANAME IR. Perkins CQTE B. Beasley Rorreia B. Sneron S. Burnell

(via remail) I Crv' eri•in

DATE I/OFFICE OCA IRGN-I RGN-I1 iRGill jRGN-IV JNRRNAME T. Riley

_____ va emaili I_______ 1DATE / /1I/1/1-~ 1

O N 0 INMSS JFSME IOE . EDO ........

INAME III1OIlIl RECORD COPY


Memo to Nader L. Mamish from Brian Sheron dated XX Month XXXX


DISTRIBUTION'FFerrante, NRRDBeaulieu, NRRKCompton, NMSSHFelsher, FSMENSheehan, RGN-IGWoodruff, RGN-11ABarker, RGN-IIIDEmcne, OIP

JMitman, NRRSRosenberg, NRRKSee, NRORVirgiho, FSMENMcNamara, RGN-IDHilis, RGN-111

HLogaras, RGN-IIIDRA r/f

MKhanna, NRRWRuland, NRRRRaione, NROJMarcano, NMSSDTifft, RGN-IVMeghani. RGN-IIVGaddy, RGN-IV

GWilson, NRRMPohida, NROLMrowca, NROWSchmidt, RGN.IJBardey, RGN-IrRTrojanowski, RGN-IIBMaier, RGN-IV

Perkins, Richard


Wert, LeonardTuesday, August 16, 2011 3:03 PMSiu, Carolyn: Bensi, Michelle; Perkins, RichardMiles, PatriciaRegion II Comments/Concurrence on Comm Plan for GI 204 (Upstream Dam Failures)(DAFFY 11-436E)

This is in response to your request for review/comments on the proposed Communication Plan foEIssue 204. Region 11 appreciates the opportunity to review the Proposed Communication Plan (b)(5)

(b)(5)

Leonard WertDeputy Regional Administrator for OperationsRegion II, USNRC

1

iP4

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:19 PMTo: Barker, AllanSubject: RE: Draft Press Release Text

You're welcome!

From: Barker, AllanSent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:18 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: Draft Press Release Text

Thanks for all your support!

Allan

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 2:08 PMTo: McNamara, Nancy; Tifft, Doug; Trojanowski, Robert; Woodruff, Gena; Barker, Allan; Logaras, Harral; Maier, BillSubject: Draft Press Release Text

(b)(5)

(bX5)


2

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:32 PMTo: Kauffman, John; Bensi, MichelleSubject: FW: Region II Comments/Concurrence on Comm Plan for G1 204 (Upstream Dam Failures)

(DAFFY 11-436E)

John,

FYI

Region II concurs but offers the following suggestions for a change in the key messages. I'm not sure how Ifeel about these...

Richard

From: Wert, LeonardSent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:03 PMTo: Siu, Carolyn; Bensi, Michelle; Perkins, RichardCc: Miles, PatriciaSubject: Region II Comments/Concurrence on Comm Plan for GI 204 (Upstream Dam Failures) (DAFFY 11-436E)

This is in response to your request for review/comments on the proposed Communication Plan for GenericIssue 204. Region II appreciates the opportunity to review the Proposed Communications Plan. E _(b)(5)

(b)(5)

Leonard WertDeputy Regional Administrator for OperationsRegion II, USNRC

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 4:15 PMTo: Vera, JohnSubject: RE: Dam Failure Flood Comm Plan question

Yes. It's internal and intended as a guide to help internal stakeholders communicate with externals withconsistency after the public press release. Coordination of the communication plan prior to the public pressrelease (happening now) is a way to make sure we all agree with the answers *before* we communicate withexternals.

I fixed the misspelled occurrences of "publicly".

From: Vera, JohnSent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 4:DO PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: Dam Failure Flood Comm Plan question

Ok, I just guess I don't get who the Comm plan is for. Is it just internal - not publicly released? Or releasedbefore the Memo, etc? I'd just like to know for my personal knowledge.

(b)(5)

Regards,John A. Vera, Ph.D.N MSS/SFST/TRD/SMMBOffice: EBB 3217E-mail: [email protected]: (301) 492-3372

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:25 PMTo: Vera, JohnSubject: RE: Dam Failure Flood Comm Plan question

I changed the question to:

I (b)(5)

The answer is unchanged.

From: Vera, JohnSent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:10 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: Dam Failure Flood Comm Plan question

Hi Richard:

I'm reviewing the memo/Comms Plan for NMSS, and I have a question -j

(b)(5)

Regards,John A. Vera, Ph.D.NMSS/SFST/TRD/SMMBOffice: EBB 3B17E-mail: John.VeraC,,nrc.qovPhone: (301) 492-3372

I

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Friday, August 19, 2011 9:56 AMTo: Kauffman, JohnSubject: FW: GI-204 Communication Plan question

FYI

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Friday, August 19, 2011 9:55 AMTo: Hutto, AndyCc: Bensi, MichelleSubject: FW: GI-204 Communication Plan question

Andy,Jonathan is the RIf member of the communication team for the pending Generic Issue on flooding followingupstream dam failure. Since you are acting for him, how would you like to handle communications while he isaway. (according to his out of office message, he will be away for a period of time)

Also, would you have any input regarding the message below?

Thanks,Richard Perkins301-251-7479

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 4:01 PMTo: Bartley, JonathanCc: Bensi, MichelleSubject: GI-204 Communication Plan question

Jonathan,

(bX5)

Please let me know what you think. Thanks,


Perkins, Richard

From: Hutto, AndySent: Friday, August 19, 2011 10:49 AMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: GI-204 Communication Plan question

Follow Up Flag: Follow upFlag Status: Flagged

Sorry, I was away from my office so I see Jonathan answered before I could. I'm only here three more weeks so forcontinuity I appreciate you working with Curt as already discussed. Thanks.

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Friday, August 19, 2011 10:12 AMTo: Bartley, JonathanCc: Bensi, Michelle; Rapp, Curtis; Hutto, AndySubject: RE: GI-204 Communication Plan question

Thanks. We will begin working with Curt to get the correct sentence or two.Richard Perkins301-251-7479

From: Bartley, JonathanSent: Friday, August 19, 2011 10:04 AMTo: Perkins, RichardCc: Bensi, Michelle; Rapp, Curtis; Hutto, AndySubject: Re: GI-204 Communication Plan question

(b)(5)

Please work with Curt Rapp if you need more information.

This email is being sent from an NRC mobile device.

From: Perkins, RichardTo: Bartley, JonathanCc: Bensi, MichelleSent: Thu Aug 18 16:01:06 2011Subject: GI-204 Communication Plan question

Jonathan,

(b)(5)

(bX5)



2

Perkins, Richard


Kauffman, JohnTuesday, August 30, 2011 9:31 AMBeasley, Benjamin; Stutzke, Martin; Killian, Lauren; Perkins, RichardFW: Inputs for recommendations 2.1 and 2.3NTTF Recommendation 2 1 dmal (8-30-2011).docx; NTTF Recommendation 2 3 dmal(8-30-201 1).docx

FYI, this is the latest draft of the response that the working groups on the NTTF Recommendations on thesetwo topics.

Ben, worth forwarding to Doug and Rich?

JVK

From: Marksberry, DonSent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 9:25 AMTo: Dube, Donald; Kauffman, John; Kammerer, Annie; Kanney, Joseph; See, Kenneth; Manoly, Kamal; Chokshi, Nilesh;Cook, Christopher; Munson, Clifford; Li, Yong; Jones, Henry; Karas, RebeccaCc: Dudek, Michael; Reed, Timothy; Foster, Jack; Cubbage, Amy; Collins, Timothy; Witt, KevinSubject: Inputs for recommendations 2.1 and 2.3

All

Here is the consolidation of inputs to the one pager for recommendations 2.1 and 2.3. Special thanks to theflooding folks who provided much needed supporting information on each plant.

Please provide your mark ups by COB today (Tuesday, August 30).

Thanks.

Don415-3092 (voice mail does not work)

NTTF Recommendation 2.3

(b)(5)

(b)(5)

NTTF Recommendation 2.1

(b)(5)

(b)(5)

Attachment 2.1-1A list of Regulatory Documents Associated with Seismic and Flooding Hazards

Regulations

* General Design Criteria 2, "Design Bases for Protection Against Natural Phenomena,' ofAppendix A to 10 CFR Part 50

* 10 CFR 100.23, uGeologic and Seismic Siting Criteria"

* Appendix S, "Earthquake Engineering Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to 10 CFR Part50

• 10 CFR 100.20, "Factors To Be Considered When Evaluating Sites"

* Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.29, "Seismic Design Classification," issued in 1972 andupdated in 1973, 1976, 1978, and 2007

Regulatory Guides

* RG 1.59, "Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants," issued in 1973 and updatedin 1976 and 1977

" RG 1.60, "Design Response Spectra for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants,"issued in 1973

* RG 1.102. "Flood Protection for Nuclear Power Plants," issued in 1975 and uodated in1976

" RG 1.125, "Physical Models for Design and Operation of Hydraulic Structures and

Systems for Nuclear Power Plants," issued in 1977 and updated in 1978 and 2009• RG 1.208, "A Performance-Based Approach To Define the Site-Specific Earthquake

Ground Motion," issued in 2007

Standard Review Plan and Interim Staff Guidance

" Standard Review Plan (SRP) (NUREG-0800, "Standard Review Plan for the Review of

Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition"), updated in March2007

" Interim Staff Guidance (ISG) for new reactors: DC/COL-ISG-1, "Interim Staff Guidanceon Seismic Issues of High Frequency Ground Motion," DC/COL-ISG-7, "Assessment ofNormal and Extreme Winter Precipitation Loads on the Roofs of Seismic Category IStructures," and DC/COL-ISG-20, "Seismic Margin Analysis for New Reactors Based onProbabilistic Risk Assessment"

Generic Issues

" Generic issue (GI)-199, "Implications of Updated Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Estimatesin Central and Eastern United States on Existing Plants" initiated June 9, 2005

• Proposed GI regarding flooding following upstream dam failures

Generic Communications

* Information Notice IN-2010-018, "Implications of Updated Probabilistic Seismic HazardEstimates in Central and Eastern United States on Existing Plants," dated September 2,2010

" Proposed generic letter, "Seismic Risk Evolutions for Operating Reactors," to obtaininformation needed to resolve Generic Issue (GI)-199, "Implications of UpdatedProbabilistic Seismic Hazard Estimates in Central and Eastern United States on ExistingPlants"

Inspection Procedures

* Temporary Instruction 2515/183, "Followup to the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear StationFuel Damage Event"

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 5:45 PMTo: Beasley, Benjamin; Kauffman, JohnCc: Bensi, Michelle; Philip, Jacob; Sancaktar, SelimSubject: FW: GI 204 screening

Ben,

The authors of the Pre-GI-009 screening analysis have reviewed the e-mail from Barry Westreich (NSIR) andhave the following comments:

(b)(5)

In accordance with the NSIR concern, a redacted version of the screening analysis (ML112430114) has beenadded to the ADAMS package and is available for NRR review as desired. NRR is the only NRC organizationnot to have concurred on the screening analysis, panel recommendation, or communication plan.

Richard Perkins, P.E.RESIDRA/OEGIB301-251-7479

From: Correia, RichardSent: Monday, August 29, 2011 3:03 PMTo: Beasley, Benjamin; Perkins, Richard; Kauffman, JohnSubject: FW: GI 204 screening

fyi


I

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, September 06, 2011 3:33 PMTo: Khanna, MeenaCc: Kauffman, JohnSubject: RE: just in case we need to send this to FASTAttachments: G1204 Communication Plan_2011_09_2.docx

The Q&A index title for Q1 1 is corrected in this version.Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, September 06, 2011 3:29 PMTo: Khanna, MeenaCc: Kauffman, JohnSubject: RE: just in case we need to send this to FAST

Hi Meena,

Thanks,Richard

From: Khanna, MeenaSent: Friday, September 02, 2011 5:04 PMTo: McGinty, TimCc: Hiland, Patrick; Ruland, William; Glitter, Joseph; Boger, Bruce; Roquecruz, Carla; Craver, Patti; Bahadur, Sher;Wilson, George; FAST Resource; Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: just in case we need to send this to FAST

Thanks,Tim. I just confirmed with Richard that the Comm Plan will not be issued a,therefore, we do not need an extension to Yellow Ticket #: 020110148. We provicecomments on this YT to RES, as provided below.

NRR owes RES our concurrence on the memo from Bill Ruland (Representing the Generic Issue ReviewPanel) to Brian Sheron, titled: GENERIC ISSUE REVIEW PANEL RECOMMENDATION FOR THEPROPOSED GENERIC ISSUE PERTAINING TO THE FLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITESFOLLOWING UPSTREAM DAM FAILURE (ML1 11890588), which will require DORL's recommendation ofwhat info is publically releasable.

Thanks and have a nice weekend!

Below is DE's response to Yellow Ticket No. 020110148, "Communication Plan for Generic Issue 204,

Flooding of Nuclear Power Plant Sites Following Upstream Dam Failure."

This completes DE's action on Yellow Ticket 020110148.

] 00

Response:

DE concurs with the following comments to Communication Plan For Generic Issue 204:

1. PIs revise the goal section of the Communication Plan, as follows: delete, 'Hydrology StudyAffects Design Basis Extemal Flooding Evaluation." And, pls replace with the following wording:"and Information Notice 2011 -XX: "Licensee's Responsibility in Addressing Credible Third PartyInformation."

2. On page 3, 3• paragraph, pls replace the sentences with: "Though not directly related to damfailures, NRC staff will be issuing an IN to inform addressees of their responsibility in addressingcredible third party information and data that could potentially affect the plant's licensed designbasis, such as technical papers, assessments, etc. (i.e., US Army Corps of Engineers' January2004 Upper Mississippi River System Flow Frequency Study). Although the study evaluatedflooding along the upper Mississippi, the IN will state that addressees should review their designbasis information related to external flooding to ensure that their Updated Final Safety AnalysisReport and associated design basis accurately reflects current environmental conditions."

3. On page 13, Question 11, pls revise response to read: "NRC staff will be issuing an IN to informaddressees of their responsibility in addressing credible third party information and data that couldpotentially affect the plant's licensed design basis, such as technical papers, assessments, etc.(i.e., US Army Corps of Engineers' January 2004 Upper Mississippi River System Flow FrequencyStudy). Although the study evaluated flooding along the upper Mississippi, the IN will state thataddressees should review their design basis information related to external flooding to ensure thattheir Updated Final Safety Analysis Report and associated design basis accurately reflects currentenvironmental conditions."

From: McGinty, TimSent: Friday, September 02, 2011 4:18 PMTo: Wilson, George; FAST ResourceCc: Hiland, Patrick; Ruland, William; Glitter, Joseph; Boger, Bruce; Roquecruz, Carla; Khanna, Meena; Craver, Patti;Bahadur, SherSubject: RE: just in case we need to send this to FAST

I am acting for Bruce Boger today. I approve this yellow ticket extension request. Tim McGinty

From: Wilson, GeorgeSent: Friday, September 02, 2011 3:25 PMTo: FAST ResourceCc: Hiland, Patrick; McGinty, Tim; Ruland, William; Glitter, Joseph; Correia, Richard; Beasley, BenjaminSubject: FW: just in case we need to send this to FAST

Yellow Ticket #: 020110148

Description: Communication Plan for Genedc Issue 204, "Flooding of Nuclear Power Plant Sites FollowingUpstream Dam Failure"

Current Due Date: 8/19/2011

New Due Date: 9/16/2011

2

Justification for Extension: DE concurred on this memorandum. There is still one open issue with DORL andthis extension will allow time for addressing this issue. We request an extension to September 16, 2011 tocomplete this yellow ticket.

Research is OK with the extension

From: Roquecruz, CarlaSent: Friday, September 02, 2011 3:14 PMTo: Wilson, GeorgeSubject: just in case we need to send this to FAST

/f we want an eftesin we need to send this to h ..

Yellow Ticket #: 020110148

Description: Communication Plan for Generic Issue 204, "Flooding of Nuclear Power Plant Sites FollowingUpstream Dam Failure"

Current Due Date: 8/19/2011

New Due Date: 9/16/2011

Justification for Extension: DE concurred on this memorandum. There is still one open issue with DORL andthis extension will allow time for addressing this issue. We request an extension to September 16, 2011 tocomplete this yellow ticket.

3

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:56 PMTo: Bartley, Jonathan; Rapp, CurtisCc: Bensi, Michelle; Hutto, AndySubject: RE: GI-204 Communication Plan question

Jonathan / Curt,

Shortly after this e-mail, on Aug 24, NRR conducted a meeting where the ICMs were discussed in terms ofhow they should be presented in the communication plan and follow up actions were taken (George Wilson,et.al). This meeting may have overcome the thread below, but I wanted to make sure there were no additionaldesired edits from Region 2.

We did receive Region 2 concurrence on August 16 (along with other suggested edits). This discussionoccurred after that, however. No edits specific to the discussion below (ICMs) have been made. If you dohave any additional edits, please feel free to send them to me.

The current text of the GI-204 communication plan can be found at MLI 12220477.

Thanks,Richard PerkinsRES/DRA/OEGIB301-251-7479

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Friday, August 19, 2011 10:12 AMTo: Bartley, JonathanCc: Bensi, Michelle; Rapp, Curtis; Hutto, AndySubject: RE: GI-204 Communication Plan question

Thanks. We will begin working with Curt to get the correct sentence or two.Richard Perkins301-251-7479

From: Bartley, JonathanSent: Friday, August 19, 2011 10:04 AMTo: Perkins, RichardCc: Bensi, Michelle; Rapp, Curtis; Hutto, AndySubject: Re: GI-204 Communication Plan question

(b)(5)

Please work with Curt Rapp if you need more information.

This email is being sent from an NRC mobile device.

From; Perkins, RichardTo: Bartley, JonathanCc: Bensi, Michelle

Sent: Thu Aug 18 16:01:06 2011Subject: GI-204 Communication Plan question

Jonathan,



2

Perkins, Richard

From: Correia, RichardSent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:40 AMTo: Perkins, Richard; Beasley, Benjamin: Kauffman, John, Bensi, MichelleSubject: RE: GI-204

Thx Richard


richard.correia@nrclov

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:30 AMTo: Correia, Richard; Beasley, Benjamin; Kauffman, John; Bensi, MichelleSubject: FW: GI-204

FYI

From: Khanna, MeenaSent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 6:35 PMTo: Rosenberg, StaceyCc: Ferrante, Fernando; Beaulieu, David,- Helton, Shana; Wilson, George; Kulesa, Gloria; McGinty, Tim; Nelson, Robert;Howe, Allen; Stang, John; Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: GI-204

All,

PIs note that Joe and Allen will be contacting Rich Correia to address any remaining issues associated withNRR's concurrence of GI-204.

From: Rosenberg, StaceySent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 5:27 PMTo: Khanna, Meena; Stang, John; Perkins, RichardCc: Ferrante, Fernando; Beaulieu, David; Helton, Shana; Wilson, George; Kulesa, Gloria; McGinty, Tim; Nelson, RobertSubject: RE: GI-204

Meena,

DPR is being asked about a GI-204 related document and we do not know what document is being referred toin these e-mail exchanges. What is the title and ML # of the document you are referring to?

Thanks,Stacey

From: Khanna, Meena

Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 5:03 PM

To: Stang, John; Perkins, RichardCc: Ferrante, Fernando; Beaulieu, David; Helton, Shana; Rosenberg, Stacey; Wilson, George; Kulesa, Gloria; McGinty,TimSubject: RE: GI-204

John and Rich,

Have you had an opportunity to discuss what info will be held from the public, that is what info is consideredOUO/SRI in GI-204? I know that John had identified the info that should not be released to the public. Couldyou both pls meet to close the loop on this issue, pls. and we can then provide NRR concurrence with our finaldecision as to what can be released to the public.

Thanks,Meena

From: Ferrante, FernandoSent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 4:27 PMTo: Perkins, Richard; Khanna, MeenaSubject: FW: GI-204

Meena, Richard,

Can you help Dave Beaulieu with the following question made by Joe Gitter. I am aware of the last discussionon concurrence for the pre-GI, but you may have the most up-to-date info, so if you can provide feedback Iwould greatly appreciate it.

Thanks,Fernando

From: Beaulieu, DavidSent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 2:50 PMTo: Ferrante, FernandoCc: Rosenberg, StaceySubject: FW: GI-204

Do you know what Joe Giitter is referring to?

DAVID BEAULIEU PROJECT MANAGER NRR/DPR/PGCBbow/-yer) 301-415-3243 I 01.2H17 1 [email protected]


From: Rosenberg, StaceySent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 2:32 PMTo: Beaulieu, DavidSubject: FW: GI-204

Dave,

Do you know what this is about?2

Stacey

From: Helton, ShanaSent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 1:50 PMTo: Rosenberg, StaceyCc: Nelson, Robert; Silva, PatriciaSubject: Fw: GI-204

Stacey- how should we reply?

Thanks,Shana

Sent from my NRC BlackberryShana Helton.[ (b)(6)

From: Glitter, JosephTo: Correia, Richard; McGinty, Tim; Ruland, William; Helton, Shana; Westreich, Barry; Wilson, GeorgeCc: Coe,. Doug; Nelson, Robert; Howe, Allen; Kulesa, GloriaSent: Tue Sep 13 13:22:44 2011Subject: RE: GI-204

My understanding is that DPR is checking with the licensee concerning the paragraph that links dam failure toplant consequences. The paragraph was lifted from a licensee submittal under 2.390 (OUO-SRI).

From: Correia, RichardSent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 1:19 PMTo: McGinty, Tim; Ruland, William; Glitter, Joseph; Helton, Shana; Westreich, Barry; Wilson, GeorgeCc: Coe, DougSubject: GI-204

All,

Where do we stand on NRR's concurrence on the pre-GI on upstream dam failure/NPP flooding? I know therehave been discussions between our offices but I'm not certain what remains to be done to get NRR'sconcurrence.

Thx

Rich


richard.correia @nrc..ov

3

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:43 AMTo: Bensi, MichelleSubject: FW: GI-204

FYI - for context.

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 5:11 PMTo: Khanna, Meena; Stang, JohnCc: Ferrante, Fernando; Beaulieu, David; Helton, Shana; Rosenberg, Stacey; Wilson, George; Kulesa, Gloria; McGinty,Tim; Correia, Richard; Beasley, Benjamin; Kauffman, JohnSubject: RE: GI-204

This issue has been elevated to our Division Director level. Please see Rich Correia's initial e-mail at thebottom of this thread.


From: Khanna, MeenaSent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 5:03 PMTo: Stang, John; Perkins, RichardCc: Ferrante, Fernando; Beaulieu, David; Helton, Shana; Rosenberg, Stacey; Wilson, George; Kulesa, Gloria; McGinty,TimSubject: RE: GI-204

John and Rich,

Have you had an opportunity to discuss what info will be held from the public, that is what info is consideredOUO/SRI in GI-204? I know that John had identified the info that should not be released to the public. Couldyou both pls meet to close the loop on this issue, pls. and we can then provide NRR concurrence with our finaldecision as to what can be released to the public.

Thanks,Meena

From: Ferrante, FernandoSent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 4:27 PMTo: Perkins, Richard; Khanna, MeenaSubject: FW: GI-204

Meena, Richard,

Can you help Dave Beaulieu with the following question made by Joe Gitter. I am aware of the last discussionon concurrence for the pre-GI, but you may have the most up-to-date info, so if you can provide feedback Iwould greatly appreciate it.

Thanks,Fernando

From: Beaulieu, DavidSent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 2:50 PMTo: Ferrante, FernandoCc: Rosenberg, StaceySubject: FW: GI-204

Do you know what Joe Glitter is referring to?

IDAVID BEAULIEU PROJECT MANAGER NRR/DPR/PGCB(bowl-yer) 301-415-3243 I 012H17 I David.Beaulieu~nrc.gov I

! U .S Nuclear Regulatory Commission I

From: Rosenberg, StaceySent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 2:32 PMTo: Beaulieu, DavidSubject: FW: G1-204

Dave,

Do you know what this is about?

Stacey

From: H-elton, ShanaSent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 1:50 PMTo: Rosenberg, StaceyCc: Nelson, Robert; Silva, PatriciaSubject: Fw: GI-204

Stacey- how should we reply?

Thanks,Shana

Sent from my NRC BlackberryShana Helton

J (b)(6)

From: Glitter, JosephTo: Correia, Richard; McGinty, Tim; Ruland, William; Helton, Shana; Westreich, Barry; Wilson, GeorgeCc: Coe, Doug; Nelson, Robert; Howe, Allen; Kulesa, Gloria

2

Sent: Tue Sep 13 13:22:44 2011Subject: RE: GI-204

My understanding is that DPR is checking with the licensee concerning the paragraph that links dam failure toplant consequences. The paragraph was lifted from a licensee submittal under 2.390 (OUO-SRI).

From: Correia, RichardSent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 1:19 PMTo: McGinty, Tim; Ruland, William; Giitter, Joseph; Helton, Shana; Westreich, Barry; Wilson, GeorgeCc: Coe, DougSubject: GI-204

All,

Where do we stand on NRR's concurrence on the pre-GI on upstream dam failurelNPP flooding? I know therehave been discussions between our offices but I'm not certain what remains to be done to get NRR'sconcurrence.

Thx

Rich


[email protected]

3

Perkins, Richard


Perkins, RichardFriday, September 16, 2011 10:42 AMCorreia, RichardKauffman, John; Beasley, BenjaminYou had asked about the last press release for GI-204Flooding_GI press release 2011_08_ .docx

Per your request:

This is the last text we forwarded to OPA. ['(b)(5)

tbut I'm not planning to do anything until we get closer to the declaration.


1

-E)4 9'

Revised: 8/1/11

OPA


(b)(5)

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard

From:Sent:To:

Cc:

Subject:

Attachments:

Siu, CarolynTuesday, September 20, 2011 10:21 AMPerkins, Richard; Bensi, Michelle; Kauffman, John; Beasley, Benjamin; Correia, Richard;.Ferrante, Fernando; Mitman, Jeffrey; Khanna, Meena; Wilson, George; Beaulieu, David;Rosenberg, Stacey; Ruland, William; Pohida, Marie; Compton, Keith; See, Kenneth; Raione,Richard; Mrowca, Lynn; Felsher, Harry; Virgilio, Rosetta; Marcano, Jonathan; Schmidt,Wayne; Sheehan, Neil; McNamara, Nancy; Tifft, Doug; Bartley, Jonathan; Woodruff, Gena;Hills, David; Meghani, Vijay; Trojanowski, Robert; Barker, Allan; Logaras, Harral; Gaddy,Vincent; Maier, Bill; Emche, DanielleRidsResOd Resource; RidsOpaMail Resource; RidsOcaMailCenter Resource;RidsRgnlMailCenter Resource; RidsRgn2MailCenter Resource; RidsRgn3MailCenterResource; RidsRgn4MailCenter Resource; RidsNrrOd Resource; RidsNroOd Resource;RidsNmssOd Resource; RidsFsmeOd ResourceCommunication Plan for Generic Issue 204, Flooding of Nuclear Power Plant Sites FollowingUpstream Dam FailureMemo.docx; Communication Plan.pdf; GI-204 Declaration Timelline.pdf; ADAMSDocument.APK

If you have any questions or comments, please contact Richard Perkins or Michelle Bensi at 301-251-7479 or301-251-7570, respectively.

Carolyn 'iuContract Administratlve Assistant fIOffice oF Nuclear Regulatory ResearchDivision ofPijsK AnalysisU... Nuclear Regulatory Commission

division line- 3O2-251-7930direct line:. 302-252-7568FaX: 301-252-7q2qCarolyn.9iu @nrC.gOV

some stories are true that never happened.

1 /L 0

September 19, 2011


FROM: Brian W. Sheron, Director IRA!Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

SUBJECT: COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR GENERIC ISSUE 204,"FLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWINGUPSTREAM DAM FAILURE"

The staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has developed the enclosedcommunication plan for Generic Issue 204, "Flooding of Nuclear Power Plant Sites FollowingUpstream Dam Failure" (ML1 12020629). implementation of this plan will help to achieve theNRC's strategic goal of ensuring openness in the agency's regulatory processes. In addition.this plan will facilitate the communication of accurate, consistent, and timely information tointernal and external stakeholders.

The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, Office of NewReactors, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Office of Federal and StateMaterials and Environmental Management Programs, Office of Congressional Affairs, Office ofPublic Affairs, and regional offices have reviewed this plan, in accordance with the Web-basedCommunication Plan Guidance (available athftp://www.intemal.nrc.gov/communications/comm tools/auidance.html).

Enclosure:As stated

CONTACTS: Richard Perkins, RES/DRA301-251-7479

Michelle Bensi, RES/DRA301-251-7570

September 19, 2011


Brian W. Sheron, Director /RAIOffice of Nuclear Regulatory Research

FROM:

SUBJECT: COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR GENERIC ISSUE 204,'FLOODING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES FOLLOWINGUPSTREAM DAM FAILURE"

The staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has developed the enclosedcommunication plan for Generic Issue 204, "Flooding of Nuclear Power Plant Sites FollowingUpstream Dam Failure" (ML112020629). Implementation of this plan will help to achieve theNRC's strategic goal of ensuring openness in the agency's regulatory processes. In addition,this plan will facilitate the communication of accurate, consistent, and timely information tointernal and external stakeholders.

The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, Office of NewReactors, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Office of Federal and StateMaterials and Environmental Management Programs, Office of Congressional Affairs, Office ofPublic Affairs, and regional offices have reviewed this plan, in accordance with the Web-basedCommunication Plan Guidance (available athttp://www.internal.nrc.gov/communications/comrr tools/guidance.html).

Enclosure:As stated

CONTACTS: Richard Perkins, RES/DRA301-251-7479

Michelle Bensi, RES/DRA301-251-7570

DISTRIBUTION:See next page

ADAMS Accession No.: ML112201350OFFICE RES/DRA/OEGIB ITech Editor RES/DRAIOEGIB RES/DRA OPANAME R. Perkins QTE B. Beasley R. Correia E. Brenner

DAT 1(via email) J. Kauffman for) (S. Burnell for via email)

IDATE 8/10/11 18/9/11 8/10/11 8I/10Ol1 8/24/11

OFFICE OCA IRGN-1 RGN-11 RGN-III RGN-IVNAME R. Schmidt iW. Dean V. McCree M. Satorius E. Collins

(T. Riley for via email) I(C. Miller for via (L. Wert for via email) (C. Peaerson for ' (via email)Temail.) via email)

_DATE 8/26/11 18/29/11 8/13/11 18/15/11 8/24/11OFFICE NRR INRO NMSS FSME "NAME E. Leeds M. Johnson C. Haney C. Carpenter

(M. Khanna for via email) I(C. Lauron for via (N. Jordan for via email) (R. Virgitio for via_email) email)

DATE 9/2/11 18/24/11 8/23/11 18/11/11


Memo to Nader L. Mamish from Brian Sheron dated 19 September 2011


DISTRIBUTION:FFerrante, NRRDBeaulieu, NRRKCompton, NMSSHFelsher, FSMENSheehan, RGN-IGWoodruff, RGN-IIABarker, RGN-IIIDEmche, OIP

JMitman, NRRSRosenberg, NRRKSee, NRORVirgilio, FSMENMcNamara, RGN-IDHills, RGN-IIIHLogaras, RGN-IIIDRA r/f

MKhanna, NRRWRuland, NRRRRaione, NROJMarcano, NMSSDTifft, RGN-IVMeghani, RGN-IIIVGaddy, RGN-IV

GWilson, NRRMPohida, NROLMrowca, NROWSchmidt, RGN-IJBartley, RGN-IIRTrojanowski, RGN-I1BMaier, RGN-IV

Communication Plan for Generic Issue #204 (draft dated 09/12/2011)

Flooding of Nuclear Power Plant Sites Following Upstream Dam Failures

24 pages withheld in their entirety - exemption 5

BEST COPY AVAILABLE I

r IGI-204 Declaration Timeline

Documents Required for GI Declaration:

Sirnificant Critical Path Tasks:

Cc~thmiUrlcbfl6i ýplan Ihi&rbf'c cti c "Wfhc

Status

Awaiting NRR concurrence

Final comment round is completeFormal inter-office concurrence is underway - Due 8/19/2011

Completed (not released)

Drafted - awaiting releaseSubject to continuing edits in real time

Sequence and Timellne:

--- Communication plan distributed for formal concurrence

Formal coordination of CobfiffihIlI6ktidh P~lan is complete

-3 work days RES Director: Signs out iC iiUhlctlodh ilan (noi public)

-3 work days Approved Chifihdihlcotlitf Pleh Is distributed to communication team

-3 work days RES Director: Approves 61 fl tifflrii-ehdatiti M&riib (release clock begins)

-3 work days Public release day (not Friday) and time is selected and confirmed with OPA. OPA is responsible for press release.

-3 work days 'Heads up' notification to Regional State Liaison Officers

-2 work days Communication Team is notified of release day and time POC: Richard Perkins,NRC/RES/DRA/OEGIB

-2 work days Communication Team notifies internal stakeholders [email protected]

.0 timne ConflrmlX, P13R •-l96••1

+1 hour A~coh1k1ddtlbtfl6 W~rid and' MMiii ti~y1 S. MOM becomne publicly available

Perkins, Richard


Perkins, RichardTuesday, October 04, 2011 5:28 PMBensi, MichelleNUREG 0933 entryNUREG 0933 entry.docx

Shelby,

Here's my initialization of the GI-204 entry for NUREG 0933. I'm trying to select text that is appropriate for theNUREG entry at this point. For example, I'm thinking of the requirement that new licensees will need toaddress the entry - so I wanted to tag all the important facets of the issue at least once, Feel free to take ahammer and torch to it. Thanks for any help on this.


GI-204

Flooding of Nuclear Power Plant Sites Following Upstream Dam Failures

(b)(5)

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard

From: Kauffman, JohnSent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 10:57 AMTo: Perkins, Richard; Bensi, MichelleSubject: Another Comm Plan comment

Richard, Shelby,

I (b)(5)

II (b)(5) I Thanks. JVK

I

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 3:36 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: NUREG 0933 entryAttachments: NUREG 0933 entry MBedits.docx

Attached is draft of the NUREG0933 entry with my first round of suggested edits (changes tracked). Feel freeto edit/reject any and all changes.Shelby

From; Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 5:28 PMTo: Bensi, MichelleSubject: NUREG 0933 entry

Shelby,

Here's my initialization of the GI-204 entry for NUREG 0933. I'm trying to select text that is appropriate for theNUREG entry at this point. For example, I'm thinking of the requirement that new licensees will need toaddress the entry - so ) wanted to tag all the important facets of the issue at least once. Feel free to take ahammer and torch to it. Thanks for any help on this.

Richard H. Perkins, P.E.Nuclear Regulatory CommissionOffice of Nuclear Reguiatory ResearchDivision of Risk AnalysisOperating Experience and Generic Issues BranchPhone - 301/251-7479

1

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard

From: Bensi, MichelleSent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 3:46 PMTo: Kauffman, John; Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: Dam FaiJure Comm Plan Correction

Done.

From: Kaufftman, JohnSent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 9:25 AMTo: Perkins, Richard; Bensi, MichelleSubject: Dam Failure Comm Plan Correction

Richard, Shelby,

I was readina/studvina the Comm Plan and noticed thati (b)(5)I

I was readina/studyina the Comm Plan and noticed thati(b)(5) J Please fix during the next

update of the Comm Plan. Thanks. JVK

I

Perkins, Richard

From: Ruland, WilliamSent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:11 PMTo: Perkins, RichardCc: Beasley, BenjaminSubject: RE: Any News on NRR Concurrence?

I now have it for signature. I'll likely sign it tomorrow.

Bill

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 3:20 PMTo: Ruland, WilliamCc: Beasley, BenjaminSubject: RE: Any News on NRR Concurrence?

Thanks Bill,

I spoke with Marie Pohida today; she is over here attending a flood PRA seminar at Church Street. Shediscussed her concern about inconsistency between documents. My response was that the Information Notice(a communication to industry, et.al.) is a document with a different purpose and audience from that of atechnical screening analysis. The screening analysis does not need to be consistent with the InformationNotice in terms of the type or style of language - or the choice of qualitative or quantitative statements.

It is true, however, that they will both be public.[I I

I (b)(5) IThanks,Richard

From: Ruland, WilliamSent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 10:18 AMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: Any News on NRR Concurrence?

I checked last evening. Jack Grobe is going to review this document today.

Bill

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 9:15 AMTo: Ruland, WilliamSubject: Any News on NRR Concurrence?

Bill,

Any updates on the status of the GI-204 recommendation? I'll need to send out another communicationupdate soon. Can we be hopeful? . was curious if there was anything more to Marie's e-mail yesterday.Thanks,

~45•


2

Perkins, Richard

From: Bumell, ScottSent: Friday, October 14, 2011 9:56 AMTo: Perkins, RichardCc: Beasley, BenjaminSubject: RE: GI-204 Press ReleaseAttachments: FloodingGI.docx

Richard;

I've attached the draft approved by the Chairman's office. If there are any significant changes please let meknow immediately so I can run it past them again. Thanks.

Scott

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Friday, October 14, 2011 9:50 AMTo: Burnell, ScottCc: Beasley, BenjaminSubject: GI-204 Press Release

Good Morning Scott,

We finally have the recommendation to approve Generic Issue #204 (GI-204) on flooding of nuclear powerplant sites following upstream dam failure. I expect Brian Sheron to approve the issue officially in the next fewdays. Many weeks have gone by since the original press release was coordinated approved. Could I pleasetake a look at the approved text again to double check if any tweaks need to be suggested based onprogrammatic changes. I never actually saw the very final version, so I don't have a current copy.

Thanks,


SRB

G/DPRIHQDraftPRs/FloodingGldoc 10/19/2012 4:01 PM

OPA


(b)(5)

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Friday, October 14, 2011 10:23 AMTo: Burnell, ScottCc: Beasley, BenjaminSubject: RE: GI-204 Press Release

Yes. That is highly likely. I'll immediately let you know when the GI is approved, in order for you to fix thepress release date.Richard301-251-7479

From: Burnell, ScottSent: Friday, October 14, 2011 10:18 AMTo: Perkins, RichardCc: Beasley, BenjaminSubject: RE: GI-204 Press Release

Understood, that's not a problem. So we expect the GI to go out sometime next week?

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Friday, October 14, 2011 10:17 AMTo: Burnell, ScottCc: Beasley, BenjaminSubject: RE: GI-204 Press Release

Thanks Scott,

One edit for consideration:

(b)(5)

Richard

From: Burnell, ScottSent: Friday, October 14, 2011 9:56 AMTo: Perkins, RichardCc: Beasley, BenjaminSubject: RE: GI-204 Press Release

Richard;

I've attached the draft approved by the Chairman's office. If there are any significant changes please let meknow immediately so I can run it past them again. Thanks.

Scott

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Friday, October 14, 2011 9:50 AMTo: Burnell, ScottCc: Beasley, BenjaminSubject: GI-204 Press Release

Good Morning Scott,

We finally have the recommendation to approve Generic Issue #204 (GI-204) on flooding of nuclear powerplant sites following upstream dam failure. I expect Brian Sheron to approve the issue officially in the next fewdays. Many weeks have gone by since the original press release was coordinated approved. Could I pleasetake a look at the approved text again to double check if any tweaks need to be suggested based onprogrammatic changes. I never actually saw the very final version, so I don't have a current copy.

Thanks,


2

Perkins, Richard

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Perkins, RichardMonday, October 17, 2011 2:53 PMKauffman, JohnTwo adjusted paragraphs


Perkins, Richard


Kauffman, JohnMonday, October 17, 2011 4:42 PMCorreia, Richard; Coe, DougPerkins, Richard; Beasley, BenjaminProposed edits for the 204 memoG1204 memo proposed edits.docx

Rich,

Please see the attached file for proposed edits to the two paragraphs where B1 had comments. Theredline/strikeout changes are mine. If you reject them all, you will see Rich Perkins' suggested version. JVK

1t~

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard

From:Sent:To:Attachments:

Perkins, RichardWednesday, October 19, 2011 4:16 PMBeasley, BenjaminG1204 Scope Issues Approach.docx

How's this?


I

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard


Beasley, BenjaminThursday, October 20, 2011 9:11 AMSheron, BrianCorreia, Richard; Coe, Doug; Perkins, RichardPlan for GI-204 Scope ChangeGI-204 Scope Issues Approach.docx

Brian,

Attached is the plan we are working to for the addition or exclusion of fuel facilities and downstream damfailures in GI-204. If you wish, we will be glad to meet with you to discuss the plan or our progress.

Ben

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:30 PMTo: Beasley, BenjaminSubject: Approach plan with edits

With edits


I

jLoI

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard


Perkins, RichardMonday, October 24, 2011 3:44 PMRuland, WilliamNext steps in pursuit of a Generic IssueGI-204 Scope Issues Approach.docx

Bill,

Attached is a description of the activities requested by Brian Sheron in order to approve a Generic Issue onupstream dam failure - and a notional plan to accomplish those tasks. This plan was passed up to BrianSheron, receiving edits along the way.

Please give me a ring when you can. If possible, I would like to touch base with you before I send out my nextstatus update to the GI-204 communication team.

Richard301-251-7479

(b)(5)

Perkins, Richard

From: Pohida, MarieSent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 1:27 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: GI-204 Status Update

Thank you for always keeping us informed.Marie

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 9:49 AMTo: Barker, Allan; Bartley, Jonathan; Beasley, Benjamin; Beaulieu, David; Bensi, Michelle; Burnell, Scott; Cahill,Christopher; Caverly, Jill; Chaput, Peter; Coe, Doug; Compton, Keith; Correia, Richard; Emche, Danielle; Erlanger, Craig;Felsher, Harry; Ferrante, Fernando; Gaddy, Vincent; Hills, David; Hilton, Nick; Imboden, Andy; Kauffman, John; Khanna,Meena; Logaras, Harral; Maier, Bill; Marcano, Jonathan; McNamara, Nancy; Meghani, Vijay; Miller, Chris; Mitman, Jeffrey;Mrowca, Lynn; Perkins, Richard; Philip, Jacob; Pohida, Marie; Raione, Richard; Riley (OCA), Timothy; Rosenberg, Stacey;Ruland, William; Sancaktar, Selim; Schmidt, Wayne; See, Kenneth; Sheehan, Neil; Tifft, Doug; Trojanowski, Robert;Virgllio, Rosetta; Wilson, George; Wilson, Peter; Woodruff, Gena; Wray, JohnSubject: GI-204 Status Update

GI-204 Communication Team,

Here is an update on the status of the proposed Generic Issue on Flooding of Nuclear Power Plant Sites

Following Upstream Dam Failure (PreGI-009 / GI-204). The Generic Issue Review Panel provided arecommendation memorandum to the Office of Research, on October 13, 2011, recommending the issue forapproval as a Generic Issue. The Office of Research received the recommendation memorandum and is

reviewing it.

As part of that review, RES staff has been asked to consider proposals on downstream dam failure and thepotential impact on loss of ultimate heat sink. We have also been asked to provide supplemental informationon the impact of upstream dam failure on Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations and reconsiderbroadening the scope of GI-204 to include NRC licensed fuel facilities in addition to nuclear power plants andspent fuel pools, . (b)(5) I

I /We w~ill begin working with the

recommendation panel to consider possible next steps.\ 71

F (b)(5) II will provide additional updates as

the status changes.

Regards,

Richard H. Perkins, P.E.Nuclear Regulatory CommissionOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchDivision of Risk AnalysisOperating Experience and Generic Issues BranchPhone.- 3011251-7479

Perkins, Richard

From: Virgilio, RosettaSent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 2:45 PMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: GI-204 Status Update

Thanks, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 9:49 AMTo: Barker, Allan; Bartley, Jonathan; Beasley, Benjamin; Beaulieu, David; Bensi, Michelle; Burnell, Scott; Cahill,Christopher; Cavedy, Jill; Chaput, Peter; Coe, Doug; Compton, Keith; Correia, Richard; Emche, Danielle; Erlanger, Craig;Felsher, Harry; Ferrante, Fernando; Gaddy, Vincent; Hills, David; Hilton, Nick; Imboden, Andy; Kauffman, John; Khanna,Meena; Logaras, Harral; Maier, Bill; Marcano, Jonathan; McNamara, Nancy; Meghani, Vijay; Miller, Chris; Mitrnan, Jeffrey;Mrowca, Lynn; Perkins, Richard; Philip, Jacob; Pohida, Marie; Raione, Richard; Riley (OCA), Timothy; Rosenberg, Stacey;Ruland, William; Sancaktar, Selim; Schmidt, Wayne; See, Kenneth; Sheehan, Neil; Tilft, Doug; Trojanowski, Robert;Virgilio, Rosetta; Wilson, George; Wilson, Peter; Woodruff, Gena; Wray, JohnSubject: GI-204 Status Update


Here is an update on the status of the proposed Generic Issue on Flooding of Nuclear Power Plant SitesFollowing Upstream Doam Failure (PreGI-009 / GI-204). The Generic Issue Review Panel provided arecommendation memorandum to the Office of Research, on October 13, 2011, recommending the issue for

approval as a Generic Issue. The Office of Research received the recommendation memorandum and isreviewing it.

As part of that review, RES staff has been asked to consider proposals on downstream dam failure and thepotential impact on loss of ultimate heat sink. We have also been asked to provide supplemental informationon the impact of upstream dam failure on Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations and reconsiderbroadening the scope of GI-204 to include NRC licensed fuel facilities in addition to nuclear power plants andspent fuel poos. (b)(5) I

recommendation panel to consider possible next steps. ýWe l bei\okngwt h

F (b)(5) I1 will provide additional updates as

the status changes.

Regards,


Perkins, Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 11:49 AMTo: Holian, BrianSubject: RE: GI-204 Status Update

You've been added to the distro list.Richard

From: Holian, BrianSent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 10:08 AMTo: Perkins, RichardSubject: RE: GI-204 Status Update

Yes thanks... I'd like to get these when you update

thanks

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 9:59 AMTo: Holian, BrianSubject: FW: GI-204 Status Update

Brian,

As part of our coordinated communication approach for GI-204, I send updates on status to the communicationteam. Per your request, the latest update is below. Please let me know if you would like to be included onregular distribution.

Richard

From: Perkins, RichardSent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 9:49 AMTo: Barker, Allan; Bartley, Jonathan; Beasley, Benjamin; Beaulieu, David; Bensi, Michelle; Burnell, Scott; Cahill,Christopher; Caverly, Jill; Chaput, Peter; Coe, Doug; Compton, Keith; Correia, Richard; Emche, Danielle; Erlanger, Craig;Felsher, Harry; Ferrante, Femando; Gaddy, Vincent; Hills, David; Hilton, Nick; Imboden, Andy; Kauffman, John; Khanna,Meena; Logaras, Harral; Maier, Bill; Marcano, Jonathan; McNamara, Nancy; Meghani, Vijay; Miller, Chris; Mitman, Jeffrey;Mrowca, Lynn; Perkins, Richard; Philip, Jacob; Pohida, Marie; Raione, Richard; Riley (OCA), Timothy; Rosenberg, Stacey;Ruland, William; Sancaktar, Selim; Schmidt, Wayne; See, Kenneth; Sheehan, Neil; T-fft, Doug; Trojanowski, Robert;Virgillo, Rosetta; Wilson, George; Wilson, Peter; Woodruff, Gena; Wray, JohnSubject: GI-204 Status Update


Here is an update on the status of the proposed Generic Issue on Flooding of Nuclear Power Plant Sites

Following Upstream Dam Failure (PreGl-009 / GI-204). The Generic Issue Review Panel provided a

recommendation memorandum to the Office of Research, on October 13, 2011, recommending the issue for

approval as a Generic Issue. The Office of Research received the recommendation memorandum and isreviewing it.

As part of that review, RES staff has been asked to consider proposals on downstream dam failure and thepotential impact on loss of ultimate heat sink. We have also been asked to provide supplemental informationon the impact of upstream dam failure on Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations and reconsiderbroadening the scope of GI-204 to include NRC licensed fuel facilities in addition to nuclear power plants andspent fuel pools. (b)(5) I

I:: (b)(5) We will begin working with therecommendation panel to consider possible next steps. T - (bXS)

E((I wi provide additional updates as

the status changes.

Regards,


2

(b)(5)

.1

Group E FOIA/PA NO: 2014-0027 RECORDS BEING ...Group E FOIA/PA NO: 2014-0027 RECORDS BEING RELEASED...

Documents

Transcript of Group E FOIA/PA NO: 2014-0027 RECORDS BEING ...Group E FOIA/PA NO: 2014-0027 RECORDS BEING RELEASED...