ML16126A418

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Acceptance Review - Limerick 1 and 2 - Relief Request I4R-01
ML16126A418
Person / Time
Site: Limerick  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 05/12/2016
From: Richard Ennis
Plant Licensing Branch 1
To: Hanson S
Exelon Nuclear
Ennis R, NRR/DORL/LPLI-II, 415-1420
References
CAC MF7585, CAC MF7586
Download: ML16126A418 (1)


Text

From: Ennis. Rick To: Stephanie.Hanson@exeloncorp.com Cc: David Helker; Glenn Stewart Cglenn.stewart@exeloncorp.com)

Subject:

Acceptance Review - Limerick 1 and 2 - Relief Request I4R-01 (CAC Nos. MF7585 and MF7586)

Date: Thursday, May 12, 2016 9:35:58 AM Stephanie, By letter dated April 13, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16104A122), Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) submitted relief requests associated with the fourth 10-year inservice inspection interval for Limerick Generating Station (LGS), Units 1 and 2.

Specifically, Exelon submitted relief requests 14R-01, 14R-02, 14R-05, 14R-06, 14R-07, 14R-08, 14R-09, 14R-10, 14R-11, 14R-12, and 14R-13. By letter dated May 11, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16132A441 ), Exelon provided supplemental information pertaining to relief request 14R-01.

The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the NRC staff's acceptance review of relief request 14R-01. 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.

Pursuant to Sections 50.55a(z)(1) and 50.55a(z)(2) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed alternatives would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety, or that compliance with the specified requirements of Section 50.55a would result in hardship or unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality or safety.

The NRC staff has reviewed your application and concluded that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the staff to proceed with its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed relief 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 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.

If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1420.

Richard B. Ennis, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation