ML15020A229
| ML15020A229 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 01/20/2015 |
| From: | Jeffrey Whited Plant Licensing Branch II |
| To: | Wasik C Duke Energy Carolinas |
| Whited J | |
| References | |
| TAC MF5403, TAC MF5404, TAC MF5405 | |
| Download: ML15020A229 (1) | |
Text
1 Whited, Jeffrey From:
Whited, Jeffrey Sent:
Tuesday, January 20, 2015 10:40 AM To:
christopher.wasik@duke-energy.com Cc:
Newman, Stephen (Stephen.Newman@duke-energy.com)
Subject:
NRC Acceptance Review of Oconee License Amendment Request for the Adoption of TSTF-513 (TAC Nos. MF5403-MF5405)
Mr. Wasik, By letter dated September 18, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14269A078), Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy) submitted a license amendment request (LAR) to revise the Technical Specifications (TSs) for Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3. The LAR would revise TS 3.4.15, RCS Leakage Detection Instrumentation, in accordance with the provisions of TSTF-513, Revise PWR Operability Requirements and Actions for RCS Leakage Instrumentation.
The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review. 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.
Consistent with 10 CFR 50.90, 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 NRC staff has reviewed the application and concludes 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 amendment 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.
You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs detailed technical review by separate correspondence. This message will be added to ADAMS as an official agency record. If you have any questions, please contact me.
JeffreyWhited ProjectManager PlantLicensingBranchII1 DivisionofOperatingReactorLicensing OfficeofNuclearReactorRegulation U.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommission (301)4154090 jeffrey.whited@nrc.gov