ML110730602
| ML110730602 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 03/18/2011 |
| From: | John Hughey Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| To: | Pacilio M Exelon Nuclear |
| Hughey J, NRR/DORL, 301-415-3204 | |
| References | |
| TAC ME5392, TAC ME5393 | |
| Download: ML110730602 (3) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 March 18, 2011 Mr. Michael J. Pacilio President and Chief Nuclear Officer Exelon Nuclear 4300 Winfield Road Warrenville, IL 60555
SUBJECT:
PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3: ACCEPTANCE FOR REVIEW OF RELIEF REQUEST 14R-51 (TAC NOS. ME5392 AND ME5393)
Dear Mr. Pacilio:
By letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) dated January 24, 2011 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML110250132), Exelon Generation Company, LLC, (Exelon) submitted Relief Request 14R-51. The relief request would provide relief from reactor vessel circumferential weld examinations as currently required by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code),
Table IWB-2500-1 through the end of the extended license period for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS), Units 2 and 3. Exelon supplemented the relief request on March 10, 2011, in response to the NRC staffs request for supplemental information dated February 28, 2011. The purpose of this letter is to provide the results of the 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.
Pursuant to Sections 50.55a(a)(3)(i) and 50.55a(a)(3)(ii) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR). the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed alternatives would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety, or that compliance with the specified reqUirements of Section 50.55a would result in hardship or unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality or safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the supplemental information, in addition to your application, and concluded that technical information has been provided 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 relief request 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
M. Pacilio
- 2 identified despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staff's detailed technical review by separate correspondence.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-3204.
po John D. Hughey, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278 cc: Distribution via Listserv
- via e-mail OFFICE LPL 1-2/PM LPL 1-2/LA SRXB/BC LPL1-2/BC LPL1-2/PM NAME JHughey ABaxter (SUttle for)
- AUlses (SMiranda for)
HChernoff JHughey DATE 03/17/2011 =
03/17/2011 03/17/2011 03/17/2011 03/18/2