ML12333A259
| ML12333A259 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 11/28/2012 |
| From: | Peter Bamford Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| To: | Tom Loomis Exelon Corp |
| Bamford P | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML12333A361 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC MF0047 | |
| Download: ML12333A259 (1) | |
Text
From:
Bamford, Peter To:
"thomas.loomis@exeloncorp.com" Cc:
"david.helker@exeloncorp.com"
Subject:
TMI-1 Fifth Interval IST Relief Request PR-02, Use of Code Case OMN-18 (TAC No. MF0047)
Date:
Wednesday, November 28, 2012 1:20:00 PM By letter dated November 7, 2012 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML12313A344), Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon, the licensee) submitted three relief requests for U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approval (PR-01, PR-02, and VR-02). These relief requests apply to the Fifth Inservice Testing Interval at Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (TMI-1). This acceptance review applies only to request PR-02, Proposed Alternative to Utilize Code Case OMN-18 In Accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i). This proposed alternative to certain requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants, would authorize the use of ASME Code Case OMN-18, Alternate Testing Requirements for Pumps Tested Quarterly within
+/- 20% of Design Flow, for certain specified pumps at TMI-1.
The purpose of this email is to provide the results of the NRC staff's acceptance review of the subject 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.
The NRC staff has reviewed your submittal and concluded that the request does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to continue with its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed 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.
Peter Bamford NRR/DORL/LPL 1-2 Beaver Valley & TMI-1 Project Manager 301-415-2833