ML112860714

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Ngp Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance Review of Relief Request 12 Concerning Proposed Alternative for Pump Vibration Testing
ML112860714
Person / Time
Site: Prairie Island  Xcel Energy icon.png
Issue date: 10/13/2011
From: Thomas Wengert
Plant Licensing Branch III
To: Vincent D
Northern States Power Co
Wengert T
References
TAC ME7227, TAC ME7228
Download: ML112860714 (1)


Text

From:

Wengert, Thomas Sent:

Thursday, October 13, 2011 2:56 PM To:

Vincent, Dale M.

Cc:

Fields, John S.

Subject:

Prairie Island NGP Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance Review of Relief Request 12 Concerning Proposed Alternative for Pump Vibration Testing (TAC Nos.

ME7227 and ME7228)

By letter dated September 21, 2011 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML112650095), Northern States Power Company - Minnesota, doing business as Xcel Energy, submitted a relief request concerning a proposed alternative for pump vibration testing for the Fourth Ten-Year Interval of the Inservice Testing (IST) Program for the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2. The purpose of this email is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of the LAR. 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 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 identified despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. If additional information is needed, you will be advised by separate correspondence.

If you have any questions, please contact me.

Tom Wengert Project Manager U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRR/DORL/LPLIII-1 (301) 415-4037