ML101610780

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Acceptance Review Regarding MPS3 RR IR-2-51 - IR-2-60
ML101610780
Person / Time
Site: Millstone Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 06/10/2010
From: Sanders C
Plant Licensing Branch 1
To: Bartron W, Craft W
Dominion Nuclear Connecticut
Sandeers, Carleen, NRR/DORL, 415-1603
References
FOIA/PA-2011-0115
Download: ML101610780 (1)


Text

From: Sanders, Carleen Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 5:28 PM To: 'William D Bartron'; 'Wanda D Craft'

Subject:

Acceptance Review Regarding MPS3 RR IR-2 IR-2-60

Dear Mr. Bartron:

By letter dated April 19, 2010, Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. submitted relief requests for Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 3s (MPS3s) second 10-year inservice inspection interval.

The proposed relief requests are for components which received less than the required examination coverage due to physical obstructions and limitations imposed by design, geometry and materials of construction. The request is submitted in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 50.55a(g)(5)(iii) on the basis that the required examination coverage is impractical. The purpose of this letter is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this relief request. The acceptance review was performed to determine if there is sufficient technical information in scope and depth to allow the NRC staff to complete its detailed technical review. The acceptance review is also intended to identify whether the application has any readily apparent information insufficiencies in its characterization of the regulatory requirements or the licensing basis of the plant.

The NRC staff has reviewed your application and concluded that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to complete its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed amendment in terms of regulatory requirements and the protection of public health and safety and the environment. Given the lesser scope and depth of the acceptance review as compared to the detailed technical review, there may be instances in which issues that impact the NRC staffs ability to complete the detailed technical review are identified despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs detailed technical review by separate correspondence.

If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1603.

Sincerely, Carleen Sanders, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-423