ML120740020

LIC-109 Acceptance Review - Fermi 2 - Submittal of Revised Relief Request No. PRR-002 for the IST Program Third 10-Yr Interval - ME8007

ML120740020
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	03/12/2012
From:	Mahesh Chawla Plant Licensing Branch III
To:	Hassoun A Detroit Edison
chawla M
References
TAC ME8007
Download: ML120740020 (1)

Text

From: Chawla, Mahesh Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 1:00 PM To: Alan I Hassoun Cc: Billerbeck, John; McMurtray, Anthony; Williams, Shawn; Lingam, Siva; Boyle, Patrick

Subject:

LIC-109 Acceptance Review - Fermi 2 - Submittal of Revised Relief Request No. PRR-002 for the IST Program Third 10-Yr interval - ME8007 By letter dated February 20, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12052A043), Detroit Edison Company (the licensee) submitted the above relief request for Fermi 2. The purpose of this e-mail 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 (10CFR), 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 of unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality of 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 RR 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.

Mahesh Chawla, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 3-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation