ML17009A293

Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Regarding Amendment-Partial Length Fuel Rod Burn-up

ML17009A293
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	01/09/2017
From:	V Sreenivas Plant Licensing Branch 1
To:	Hanson S, Stewart G Exelon Generation Co
Sreenivas V, NRR/DORL/LPLI, 415-2597
References
CAC MF8958
Download: ML17009A293 (2)

Text

From: Sreenivas, V To: Hanson, Stephanie J.:(GenCo-Nuc); Stewart, Glenn H:(GenCo-Nuc)

Cc: Helker, David P:(GenCo-Nuc); Koenick, Stephen; Krepel, Scott

Subject:

Limerick Generating Station, Unit No. 2 - Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Regarding Amendment-Partial Length Fuel Rod Burn-up (CAC No. MF8958)

Date: Monday, January 09, 2017 1:33:00 PM By letter dated December 20, 2016 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML16355A263), Exelon Generation Company, LLC submitted a license amendment request for the Limerick Generating Station (LGS), Unit 2. The proposed amendment would change would allow the use of the release fractions listed in Tables 1 and 3 of NRC Regulatory Guide 1.183, "Alternative Radiological Source Terms for Evaluating Design Basis Accidents at Nuclear Power Reactors," for partial length rods that are currently in the LGS Unit 2 Cycle 14 reactor core for the remainder of the current operating cycle. In addition, the proposed change would revise the LGS licensing basis to allow movement of irradiated fuel bundles containing partial length rods that have been in operation above the 62,000 megawatt days per metric ton of uranium (MWD/MTU) limit. The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this amendment request. 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 Section 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), an amendment to the license (including the TSs), 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 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 staffs ability to complete the detailed technical review are identified, despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. If additional information is needed, you will be advised 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 13 months, which is March 2017. If there are emergent complexities or challenges in our review that would cause

changes to the initial forecasted completion date or significant changes in the forecasted hours, 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.

If you have any questions, please contact me.

V. Sreenivas, Ph.D., CPM.,

Licensing Project Manager, LPL1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (301) 299-3937, V.Sreenivas@nrc.gov