ML16243A489
| ML16243A489 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 09/01/2016 |
| From: | Haskell R Plant Licensing Branch III |
| To: | Bryan Hanson Exelon Generation Co, Exelon Nuclear |
| Haskell R | |
| References | |
| CAC MF8090, CAC MF8091 | |
| Download: ML16243A489 (3) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 September 1, 2016 Mr. Bryan C. Hanson Senior Vice President Exelon Generation Company, LLC President and Chief Nuclear Officer (CNO)
Exelon Nuclear 4300 Winfield Road Warrenville, IL 60555
SUBJECT:
DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 -
ACCEPTANCE OF REQUESTED LICENSING ACTION RE: INSERVICE INSPECTION INTERVAL PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE (15R-08)
(CAC NOS. MF8090 AND MF8091)
Dear Mr. Hanson:
By letter dated June 30, 2016 (RS-16-130) (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML16187A295), Exelon Generation Company, LLC (EGC, the licensee), submitted a proposed alternative for Dresden Nuclear Power Station (DNPS), Unit Nos. 2 and 3, that would allow DNPS to use an alternative to certain American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (B&PV Code),Section XI, for the fifth 10-year inservice inspection (ISi) interval which began on January 20, 2013, and is currently scheduled to end on January 19, 2023. Included in the submittal EGC is requesting NRC approval for the remaining term of the DNPS, Unit Nos. 2 and 3, renewed facility operating licenses, currently expiring on December 22, 2029, and January 12, 2031, respectively. By letter dated August 18, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16229A547), the NRC requested that EGC provide additional information in order for the NRC staff to complete its acceptance review. In response, EGC provided the NRC with supplemental letter dated August 22, 2016 (RS-16-166) (ADAMS Accession No. ML16236A251). The acceptance review was performed to determine if there is sufficient technical information in scope and depth to allow the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff to complete its detailed technical review. The acceptance review is also intended to identify whether the submittal has any readily apparent information insufficiencies in its characterization of the regulatory requirements or the licensing basis of the plant.
Pursuant to Title 1O of the Code of Federal Regulations (1 O CFR) 50.55a(z)(1 ), EGC requested to use the proposed alternative on the basis that the alternative provides an acceptable level of quality and safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed your application and concluded 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 staff's ability to complete the detailed technical review are identified despite completion of an adequate
B. Hanson 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) 415-1129.
Russell S. Haskell II, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 3-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249 cc: Distribution via ListServ
ML16243A489 OFFICE DORL/LPL3-2/PM DORL/LPL3-2/LA DORL/LPL3-2/BC DORL/LPL3-2/PM NAME RHaskell SRohrer GEMiller (JDion for) RHaskell DATE 08/31/16 08/31/16 09/01/16 09/01/16