ML16050A069
| ML16050A069 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 02/19/2016 |
| From: | Jeffrey Whited Plant Licensing Branch II |
| To: | Rudy L Duke Energy Carolinas |
| Whited, Jeffrey, NRR/DORL/LPLII-1 | |
| References | |
| CAC MF7265, CAC MF7266 | |
| Download: ML16050A069 (1) | |
Text
1 Whited, Jeffrey From:
Whited, Jeffrey Sent:
Friday, February 19, 2016 8:38 AM To:
'Rudy, Lawrence J'
Subject:
NRC Acceptance of Catawba License Amendment Request Re: Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program (CAC Nos. MF7265 and MF7266)
Mr. Rudy, By letter dated January 18, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16026A048), Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy) submitted a license amendment request (LAR) for the Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 (CNS). The LAR proposes to revise CNS Technical Specification Section 5.5.2, Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program, for Permanent Extension of Type A and Type C Leak Rate Test Frequencies. Specifically, the LAR proposes to increase the existing Type A Integrated Leakage Rate Test program test interval from 10 years to 15 years and to increase the existing Type C containment isolation valve leakage testing frequency from 60 months to 75 months.
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