ML113550211
| ML113550211 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 12/21/2011 |
| From: | Sanders C Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| To: | Bartron W Dominion Nuclear Connecticut |
| References | |
| Download: ML113550211 (2) | |
Text
From:
Sanders, Carleen Sent:
Wednesday, December 21, 2011 10:45 AM To:
William D Bartron Cc:
'Wanda D Craft'
Subject:
Acceptance Review: MPS3 RR IR-3-16 Regarding Temporary Non-Code Repair of RPCCW Pumps
Dear Mr. Bartron:
By letter dated November 10, 2011 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML11325A193), Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (DNC) submitted a relief request for Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 3 (MPS3). The proposed relief request would allow temporary non-code repair of the reactor plant component cooling water system pumps M33CCP*P1A, M33CCP*P1B, and M333CCP*P1C. Specifically, DNC discovered that mechanical seal cartridges do not meet the quality assurance program requirements and that the inboard and outboard mechanical seal plates do not have a visible American Society of Mechanical Engineer (ASME) stamp. The ASME stamp gives assurance that the material properties are within specified guidelines and comply with Code requirements. DNC proposes to replace the mechanical seal cartridges and mechanical seal plates no later than December 15, 2012. 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.
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 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. 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 the me at (301) 415-1603.
Sincerely, Carleen J. Sanders, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Docket No. 50-423