ML120110017
| ML120110017 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 01/10/2012 |
| From: | Pickett D Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| To: | Furio P Constellation Energy Group |
| Pickett , D. NRR/DLPM, 415-1364 | |
| References | |
| TAC ME7672, TAC ME7673 | |
| Download: ML120110017 (1) | |
Text
From:
Pickett, Douglas Sent:
Tuesday, January 10, 2012 4:39 PM To:
'Furio, Patricia S' Cc:
Parks, Benjamin; Ward, Leonard; Clifford, Paul; Salgado, Nancy; Mendiola, Anthony; Ulses, Anthony; Gall, Jennifer; Hopkins, Ogbonna; Lingam, Siva; Boyle, Patrick
Subject:
Acceptance Review for Calvert Cliffs TAC Nos. ME7672 & ME7673 Ms. Furio:
By letter dated December 1, 2011 (TAC Nos. ME7672 & ME7673), Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, LLC submitted ANP-3043(P), Revision 0, Calvert Cliffs RLBLOCA Summary Report, for the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2. This AREVA report provides the realistic large break LOCA analysis for once and twice burnt AREVA fuel for core designs. This is in response to the current license condition that prohibits plant operation after the first operating cycle.
The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this submittal. 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 submittal and concluded that it provides technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to complete its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability 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.
Please contact me if you have any questions. A copy of this email will be made publicly available in ADAMS.
Sincerely, Douglas V. Pickett, Senior Project Manager Calvert Cliffs, R.E. Ginna U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 301-415-1364 Email: douglas.pickett@nrc.gov