ML13086A085
| ML13086A085 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 04/26/2013 |
| From: | Robert Pascarelli Plant Licensing Branch II |
| To: | Pierce C Southern Nuclear Operating Co |
| Pascarelli R NRR/DORL/LPL2-1 | |
| References | |
| TAC ME9555, TAC ME9556 | |
| Download: ML13086A085 (3) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 April 26, 2013 Mr. C. R Pierce Regulatory Affairs Director Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.
Post Office Box 12951 Bin038 Birmingham, AL 35201-1295
SUBJECT:
VOGTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2-ACCEPTANCE REVIEW RESULTS REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF RISK-INFORMED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (TAC NOS. ME9555 AND ME9556)
Dear Mr. Pierce:
The Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (SNC, licensee), on September 13, 2012, submitted a license amendment request (LAR), entitled "License Amendment Request to Revise Technical Specifications [TS] to Implement NEI [Nuclear Energy Institute] 06-09, Revision 0, "Risk-Informed Technical Specifications Initiative 4b, Risk-Managed Technical Specifications (RMTS) Guidelines:' The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has reviewed the NEI topical report (TR) and issued a safety evaluation on it (Reference 2). The NRC staff has also worked with an industry owners group to develop model TS for adopting Initiative 4B and NEI 06-09 in letters on Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler 505, "Provide Risk Informed Extended Completion Times-RITSTF Initiative 4b:' (Reference 3). The NRC staffs letter dated October 15,2010, in response to SNC's letter dated July 24,2010, granted pilot status for this Vogtle Electric Generating Plant LAR The purpose of this letter is to provide the results of the NRC staffs acceptance review of this LAR The acceptance review was performed to determine if there is sufficient technical information in scope and depth to allow the NRC staff to continue 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.
Consistent with Section 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code ofFederal Regulations (10 CFR), an amendment to the license (including the technical specifications) must fully describe the changes requested, and following as far as applicable, the form prescribed for original applications. Section 50.34 of 10 CFR addresses the content of technical information required.
This section stipulates that the submittal address the design and operating characteristics, unusual or novel design features, and principal safety considerations.
The guidance documentation listed above, provides a generic model for implementing Initiative 4b, as justified in NEI 06-09, that has been reviewed and approved by the NRC staff. There are provisions for alternates to the generic guidance to account for plant-specific features and other issues. However, the introduction of such alternates and deviations from the approved guidance, tend to complicate and expand the NRC staffs review of resulting LARs. This was addressed by the staff in a Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment in the Federal Register on November 29,2011 (76 FR 73737). In that Notice, the NRC staff stated that: "The proposed changes do not prevent licensees from requesting an alternate approach or proposing changes
C. Pierce
- 2 other than those proposed in TSTF-505, Revision 1. However, significant deviations from the approach recommended in this notice or the inclusion of additional changes to the license require additional NRC staff review. This may increase the time and resources needed for the review or result in NRC staff rejection of the LAR... II The NRC staff has completed its acceptance review of your application and concluded that it is acceptable for review in that it provides technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to continue its detailed technical review. During its review, the staff prepared a request for additional information (RAI) that will require the licensee's response in order for the staff to continue its review. The staff's RAls will be transimitted under separate cover. Please note that given the lesser scope and depth of the acceptance review as compared to the detailed technical review, there may be instances during the detailed technical review in which issues that impact the NRC staff's ability to complete the review are identified despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. You will be advised of any further information needed to support completion of the NRC staff's detailed technical review by separate correspondence.
Regarding SNC's request for a decision on the LAR by September 30, 2013, the NRC staff finds that considering the pilot nature of the application, the need to resolve the alternates and deviations and the general complexity of the LAR that the review period will need to exceed that time to allow for an orderly and thorough review of the LAR.
Sincerely, 11f/J~.
Robert Pascarelli, Chief Plant Licensing Branch /1-1 Division of Operating Reactor licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-425 cc: Distribution via listserv
- via email OFFICE LPL2-1/LA APLAlBC STSB/BC LPL2-1/BC NAME SFigueroa(sf)
- DHarrison RElliott RPascarelli DATE 04/26/13 04/02/13 04118113 04/26/13