NRC Activities Related to the Fukushima Task Force Flooding and Seismic Hazard Recommendations

Christopher Cook, Ph.D. Chief, Geoscience and Geotechnical Engineering Branch Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis Office of New Reactors 21 March 2012

Outline
Background Scope Overall Approach Hazard Reevaluation Walkdowns Schedules

Background
NRC established the Near-Term Task Force (NTTF) in response to events at Fukushima Dai-ichi in March 2011 NTTF developed a set of twelve overarching recommendations Recommendation Two included: Flooding Hazard Reevaluations and Walkdowns Seismic Hazard Reevaluations and Walkdowns

Scope: NTTF Recommendation 2.1

Reevaluate hazards at all operating reactor sites Collect information to facilitate NRCs determination if there is a need for additional regulatory actions Gather information to address ongoing Generic Issues related to: Updated seismic hazards since the plant was licensed (GI-199) New information on plant safety following upstream dam failures (GI-204)
4

Scope: NTTF Recommendation 2.3

Develop seismic and flooding walkdown procedures
Perform walkdowns using NRC-endorsed walkdown methodology Identify and address degraded, non-conforming or unanalyzed conditions For flooding hazards only, identify and address any cliff-edge effects
NTTF defined Cliff-Edge effect: safety consequence of a flooding event may increase sharply with a small increase in flooding level.
5

Overall Approach: R2.1

Recommendation 2.1 will be implemented in two phases:
Phase 1: Licensees reevaluate flooding and seismic hazards using present-day regulatory guidance and methodologies If necessary, perform an integrated/risk assessment following the hazard reevaluation Phase 2:
Based on results of Phase 1, NRC will determine if further regulatory actions are necessary to protect against the updated hazard

Recommendation 2.1 Evaluation

PHASE 1
STAGE 1
Licensees Conduct Hazard Reevaluation Licensees Conduct Integrated/Risk Assessment, as needed

PHASE 2

STAGE 2

NRC & Stakeholders Interact on Integrated/Risk Assessment Guidance NRC Reviews Hazard Reevaluation and NearTerm Actions

NRC Reviews Integrated/Risk Assessment and Additional Actions

NRC to make Regulatory Decisions, as needed: * Safety Enhancements * Backfit Analysis * Modify Plant License

R 2.1: Flooding Hazard Reevaluation

Hazard reevaluation should be consistent with regulatory guidance and methodologies used for Early Site Permit (ESP) and Combined License (COL) reviews
NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan Section 2.4 NUREG/CR-7046, Design Basis Flood Estimate for Site Characterization of Nuclear Power Plants in the USA

Evaluation should discuss all flood-causing mechanisms.

Mechanisms that are not applicable at a site may be screened-out; however, a justification should be provided.
8

Compile data for site flood hazard Re-evaluate flood hazard based on present day guidance and methodology (HHA) for each flood causing mechanism (e.g. local intense precipitation)

2a

Select one flood causing mechanism for analysis

2b

Develop conservative estimate for site-related parameters using simplifying assumptions for a flood causing mechanism

Is the reevaluated flood hazard elevation greater than the current design elevation? Use site-specific data to refine analysis

No

Yes
Can parameter and/or variables in analysis be further refined? Use this elevation for this causal mechanism in Step 3

Yes

No
Have all flood causing mechanisms identified in Step 2 been addressed?

No

To Page 2

Yes

From Page 1

Compare the final flood elevations for all re-evaluated flood causing mechanisms to current design basis flood. Does the design basis flood elevation bound the reevaluated flood hazard for all mechanisms?
4

Yes

Submit hazard re-evaluation results

No
5

No further action

Submit hazard re-evaluation reports and plan for conducting an integrated assessment

Perform an integrated assessment of the plant performance

Identify vulnerabilities, if any, and actions planned or taken during the re-evaluation

Submit the final report

10

Phase 2

10

10

R2.1: Seismic Hazard Reevaluation

Determine Ground Motion Response Spectrum (GMRS) for Site
Use Probabilistic Method (PSHA)
Seismic Source Models Seismic Ground Motion Models Site Response Evaluation

Compare GMRS with Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) with Plant Spectrum
11

R2.1 Seismic Hazard Reevaluation

New seismic source models for Central and Eastern United States of America (CEUS) developed jointly by NRC, Dept of Energy, and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) www.ceus-ssc.com EPRI (2004, 2006) ground motion prediction equations for CEUS
12

R2.1: Seismic Risk Evaluation

Depending on Screening Criteria perform
Seismic Margin Analysis (SMA) or Seismic Probabilistic Risk Assessment (SPRA)

SMA method is NRC SMA (NUREG/CR4334) with enhancements. SPRA approach is Level 1 with estimate of Large Early Release Frequency (LERF) described in RG 1.200.
13

R2.1 Seismic

14

Overall Approach: R2.3 Walkdowns

Licensees and staff interact to develop walkdown methodology Procedures Training Staffing Integrate the combined effects of flooding along with other adverse weather conditions, such as high winds, hail, lightning, etc, that could simultaneously occur. Integrate insights from any new and relevant flood hazard information, as well as recent flood-related walkdowns.

Identify any changes since the original licensing (security improvements/temporary structures) and review flood protection/mitigation features.
15

Overall Approach: R2.3 (continued)

Licensees perform the walkdowns using NRCendorsed walkdown methodology Identify and address degraded, non-conforming or unanalyzed conditions addressed by licensees corrective action program Identify and address cliff-edge effects for flooding only. Addressed by licensees corrective action program.
16

Flooding Recommendations Schedules

Recommendation 2.1: hazard
Develop approach for Integrated Assessment by approximately November 2012. Complete Hazard Evaluations within 1 to 3 years. Include plans for Integrated Assessment, if necessary. Complete Integrated Assessment within 2 years following Hazard Evaluation, if necessary.

Recommendation 2.3: walkdown

Inform within 90-days of walkdown procedure. Complete and submit walkdown response by approximately November 2012. All dates are from 12 March 2012

17

Seismic Recommendations Schedules

Recommendation 2.1: hazard
Develop approach for Risk Assessment by approximately November 2012. Complete Hazard Evaluations within 1.5 years for Central and Eastern USA sites. For Western USA sites, complete within 3 years. Include plans for Risk Assessment, if necessary. Complete Risk Assessment within 3-4 years following Hazard Evaluation, if necessary.

Recommendation 2.3: walkdown

Inform within 120-days of selected walkdown procedure. Complete and submit walkdown response by approximately November 2012.
All dates are from 12 March 2012
18

Questions ?

19