ML16308A193

Acceptance Review Determination - 2016/11/03 E-Mail from R.Guzman to W.Craft Alternative Requests RR-04-24 and IR-3-30, Elimination of RPV Threads in Flange Examination (CAC Nos. MF8468/MF8469)

ML16308A193
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	11/03/2016
From:	Richard Guzman Plant Licensing Branch 1
To:	Craft W Dominion Nuclear Connecticut
Guzman R
References
CAC MF8468, CAC MF8469
Download: ML16308A193 (2)

Text

From: Guzman, Richard Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 11:09 AM To: 'wanda.d.craft@dom.com' Cc: RidsNRRLIC109 Resource

Subject:

Acceptance Review Determination - Millstone Units 2 and 3 -

Alternative Requests RR-04-24 and IR-3-30, Elimination of RPV Threads in Flange Examination (CAC Nos. MF8468/MF8469)

Wanda, The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the NRC staffs acceptance review of the subject relief requests.

By letter dated October 6, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16287A724), Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (DNC) submitted a letter requesting approval of Alternative Request RR-04-24 and IR-3-30 for Millstone Power Station, Unit 2 and Unit 3 (MPS2 and MPS3), respectively.

Specifically, in lieu of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code,Section XI requirements for a volumetric ultrasonic examination, DNC proposes eliminating the requirement for the Reactor Pressure Vessel threads in flange examinations for MPS2 and MPS3.

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.

The NRC staff has reviewed DNCs 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.

Based on the information provided in your submittal, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 200 hours8.333 days <br />1.19 weeks <br />0.274 months <br /> to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in approximately 12 months, which will be in October 2017. If there are emergent complexities or challenges in our review that would cause changes to the initial forecasted completion date (greater than a month) or significant changes in the forecasted hours (greater than 25%), the reasons for the changes, along with the new estimates, will be communicated during the routine interactions with the assigned project manager. These estimates are based on the NRC staffs initial review of the application and they could change, due to several factors including requests for additional information, unanticipated addition of scope to the review, and review by NRC advisory committees or hearing-related activities.

Additional delay may occur if the submittal is provided to the NRC in advance or in parallel with industry program initiatives or pilot applications.

Please contact me if you have any questions/concerns.

Thanks,

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Rich Guzman Sr. PM, Division Operator Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office: O8E-10 l Phone: (301) 415-1030 Richard.Guzman@nrc.gov