ML17214A100

NRR E-mail Capture - Acceptance for Review - Proposed Alternative for the Use of Phased Array UT Exam - Dominion Fleet (CAC Nos. MF9923-MF9928)

ML17214A100
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone, Surry, North Anna
Issue date:	08/02/2017
From:	Randy Hall Plant Licensing Branch II
To:	Sly C Dominion Energy Co
References
MF9923, MF9924, MF9925, MF9926, MF9927, MF9928
Download: ML17214A100 (3)

Text

NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From: Hall, Randy Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 9:04 AM To: Craig D Sly (Generation - 6)

Cc: Diane Aitken (Generation - 6) (diane.aitken@dominionenergy.com); Guzman, Richard; Cotton, Karen; Sonny.Stanley@dominionenergy.com

Subject:

Acceptance for Review - Proposed Alternative for the Use of Phased Array UT Exam -

Dominion Fleet (CAC Nos. MF9923-MF9928)

August 2, 2017 Mr. Craig Sly Manager, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs Virginia Electric and Power Company

Dear Mr. Sly,

By letter dated June 29, 2017 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML17188A379), Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. and the Virginia Electric and Power Company (collectively, the licensee) submitted a proposed inservice inspection (ISI) alternative in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(z)(1), for Millstone Power Station, Units 2 and 3, North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2, and Surry Power Station, Units 1 and 2. The submittal proposed an alternative to the requirements of the applicable edition of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, governing repair and replacement activities of ferritic circumferential pipe weld joints. The requested alternative would allow the use of encoded Phased Array Ultrasonic Examination Techniques in lieu of the required radiographic examinations of the subject welds. The proposed alternative, if approved, would apply for the remainder of the respective ISI intervals for each of the six nuclear units identified above.

The purpose of this email is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of the request for alternative pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(z). 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 your application and concluded that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the staff to complete its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed alternative 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 150 hours6.25 days <br />0.893 weeks <br />0.205 months <br /> to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in approximately 8 months, by February 28, 2018. 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.

1

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, and unanticipated addition of scope to the review.

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 at (301) 415-4032.

Sincerely, Randy Hall, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation USNRC (301) 415-4032 Randy.Hall@nrc.gov 2

Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 3633 Mail Envelope Properties (Randy.Hall@nrc.gov20170802090400)

Subject:

Acceptance for Review - Proposed Alternative for the Use of Phased Array UT Exam - Dominion Fleet (CAC Nos. MF9923-MF9928)

Sent Date: 8/2/2017 9:04:19 AM Received Date: 8/2/2017 9:04:00 AM From: Hall, Randy Created By: Randy.Hall@nrc.gov Recipients:

"Diane Aitken (Generation - 6) (diane.aitken@dominionenergy.com)"

<diane.aitken@dominionenergy.com>

Tracking Status: None "Guzman, Richard" <Richard.Guzman@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None "Cotton, Karen" <Karen.Cotton@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None "Sonny.Stanley@dominionenergy.com" <Sonny.Stanley@dominionenergy.com>

Tracking Status: None "Craig D Sly (Generation - 6)" <craig.d.sly@dominionenergy.com>

Tracking Status: None Post Office:

Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 3760 8/2/2017 9:04:00 AM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:

Recipients Received: