ML092670347
"Draft Acceptance Review" is not in the list (Request, Draft Request, Supplement, Acceptance Review, Meeting, Withholding Request, Withholding Request Acceptance, RAI, Draft RAI, Draft Response to RAI, ...) of allowed values for the "Project stage" property.
| ML092670347 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 09/24/2009 |
| From: | Justin Poole Plant Licensing Branch III |
| To: | Hale S Point Beach |
| Poole Justin/DORL/LPL3-1/ 301-415-2048 | |
| References | |
| Download: ML092670347 (1) | |
Text
From:
Poole, Justin Sent:
Thursday, September 24, 2009 12:43 PM To:
'Hale, Steve'
Subject:
Point Beach Draft Acceptance Review Question from Balance of Plant Branch RE: EPU
- Steve, Below is a draft acceptance review question. As mentioned on the phone I will try to setup a call either today or tomorrow to discuss the question with the reviewer.
This e-mail aims solely to prepare you and others for the proposed conference call. It does not convey a formal NRC staff position, and it does not formally request for additional information.
Justin C. Poole Project Manager NRR/DORL/LPL3-1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (301)415-2048 email: Justin.Poole@nrc.gov
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DRAFT I completed the acceptance review of the Point Beach EPU. Sorry it took longer than anticipated. I found the application unacceptable with opportunity to supplement based on the information provided regarding internal flooding, In Section 2.5.1.2 of Attachment 5 to the LAR, the licensee states:
Evaluation of the effects of these plant modifications (e.g., feedwater and condensate pump capacity increases) on internal flooding will be performed as part of the modification process.
I consider this unacceptable because the feedwater and condensate flow increase is an inherent part of the EPU. If the licensee is unsure of the bounding values for peak flow, the licensee can specify the regulatory process (i.e., 10 CFR 50.59 change evaluation), the methodology for the flooding evaluation that could be used without prior NRC review and approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59, and the associated acceptance criteria. Otherwise, the licensee should provide a complete evaluation for internal flooding.
The remainder of the application was acceptable.
DRAFT