ML14079A614

Acceptance Review Concerning Alternative Request RR-4-05 Alternative Weld Repair for Reactor Vessel Upper Head Penetrations R-4-04

ML14079A614
Person / Time
Site:	Summer
Issue date:	03/24/2014
From:	Shawn Williams Plant Licensing Branch II
To:	Gatlin T South Carolina Electric & Gas Co
Williams S, NRR/DORL/LPL2-1, 415-1009
References
TAC MF3546
Download: ML14079A614 (3)

Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001

~ 1 arch 24, 2014 Mr. Thomas D. Gatlin Vice President, Nuclear Operations South Carolina Electric & Gas Company Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station Post Office Box 88, Mail Code 800 Jenkinsville, SC 29065

SUBJECT:

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 -ACCEPTANCE REVIEW CONCERNING ALTERNATIVE REQUEST RR-4-05 ALTERNATIVE WELD REPAIR FOR REACTOR VESSEL UPPER HEAD PENETRATIONS (RR-4-04 (TAC NO. MF3546)

Dear Mr. Gatlin:

By letter dated February 24, 2014 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML14063A067), the South Carolina Electric & Gas Company submitted an alternative request to allow generic use of the embedded flaw repair for upper head penetration nozzle repairs at Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit 1. The application was submitted pursuant to Section 50.55a(a)(3)(i) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which requires the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed alternatives would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety.

The purpose of this correspondence is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff's acceptance review of this 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 request 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 request and concluded that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to continue 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 staff's ability to complete the detailed technical review are identified in "requests for additional information" despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staff's detailed technical review by separate correspondence.

T. Gatlin If you have any questions, please contact me on (301) 415-1009.

Sincerely, Shawn Williams, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 11-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-395 cc: Distribution via Listserv

ML14079A614 OFFICE LPLII-1/PM LPLII-1/LA LPLII-1/BC LPLII-1/PM NAME SWilliams SFigueroa RPascarelli SWilliams DATE 3/24/14 3/24/14 3/24/14 3/24/14