ML051680188
| ML051680188 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 05/04/2005 |
| From: | Kozyra J Progress Energy Carolinas |
| To: | Guerrero C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML051680188 (3) | |
Text
-
-- - I Richard Emch - Prop9sed Addendum to BSEP SAMA RAI 8 Rep o-n'se Page 1 11 Richard~.. Emc e
Prp.e Adenu to BSE
NKozyra, Jan" <jan.kozyra@pgnmail.com>
To:
OCristina Guerrero" <CXG3 @ nrc.gov>
Date:
Wed, May 4,2005 1:25 PM
Subject:
Proposed Addendum to BSEP SAMA RAI 8 Response I spoke with Rich Emch this morning. He asked that I send you the attached file, and ask you to forward it to Bob Palla for his comment.
It is a proposed wording addendum to the BSEP SAMA RAI 8 response.
Thanks.
<<sama 8 additional.doc>>
Jan S. Kozyra Licensing Lead Progress Energy - License Renewal 843-857-1872 jan.kozyra@pgnmail.com CC:
"Richard Emch" <RLE~nrc.gov>
c:\\temp\\GWIOOOO1.TMP Page 1 Mail Envelope Properties (42790573.595: 8: 50581)
Subject:
Creation Date:
From:
Created By:
Proposed Addendum to BSEP SAMA RAI 8 Response Wed, May 4,2005 1:24 PM "Kozyra, Jan" <jan.kozyra@pgnmail.com>
jan.kozyra@pgnmail.com Recipients nrc.gov OWGWPO02.HQGWDO01 RLE CC (Richard Emch) nrc.gov owf4_po.OWFNDO CXG3 (Cristina Guerrero)
Post Office OWGWPO02.HQGWDO01 owf4_po.OWFN_DO Route nrc.gov nrc.gov Files MESSAGE TEXT.htm sama 8 additional.doc Mime.822 Options Expiration Date:
Priority:
Reply Requested:
Return Notirication:
Concealed
Subject:
Security:
Size 345 1036 28672 1
Date & Time Wednesday, May 4, 2005 1:24 PM None Standard No None No Standard
Rich ard Em ch - s ama 8 addition a l.doc Page 1 S1 Richard Emch - sama 8 additional.doc Page 1 ii DRAFT Progress Energy Carolinas (PEC) letter dated April 21, 2005, Serial: BSEP 05-0051, "Response to Request for Additional Information - License Renewal,"
provides information about PEC plans to further evaluate SAMAs that are potentially cost-beneficial. The letter states in the response to RAI SAMA 1-8 that an assessment will be performed to make recommendations based upon further evaluations of the potentially cost-beneficial SAMAs. However, the assessment would focus on Phase II SAMA 1, and those (baseline case) SAMAs (15, 25, and 29) that remain cost-beneficial if SAMA 1 were implemented.
In discussions with the NRC, it was noted that SAMAs other than those in the baseline case may become cost-beneficial when uncertainties are considered.
Specifically, these are SAMAs 6, 11, 13, 16, 18, 21, 30, 31, and 32. PEC will include these SAMAs in the assessment that will make recommendations for the further evaluations of SAMAs. Completion of the evaluations is being tracked in the BSEP action tracking system. Decisions about possible implementation of the SAMAs will not be made upon probabilistic risk benefits and cost alone.
Such decisions will also involve, in part, engineering judgment, and management judgment regarding operational and administrative burdens, practicality, and best use of scarce capital resources, etc.