ML19059A178
| ML19059A178 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades, Indian Point, Grand Gulf, Pilgrim, Arkansas Nuclear, River Bend, Vermont Yankee, Waterford, Big Rock Point, FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 02/28/2019 |
| From: | O'Banion M Plant Licensing Branch IV |
| To: | Halter M, Pyle S Entergy Operations |
| Watford M | |
| References | |
| EPID L-2019-LLR-0009 | |
| Download: ML19059A178 (2) | |
Text
1 O'Banion (Watford), Margaret From:
O'Banion (Watford), Margaret Sent:
Tuesday, February 26, 2019 2:35 PM To:
Halter, Mandy; Pyle, Stephenie Cc:
O'Banion (Watford), Margaret
Subject:
Acceptance Review Results for Relief Request No. EN-19-RR-1 to use ASME Code Case N-831-1 for Entergy Fleet (EPID: L-2019-LLR-0009)
Dear Ms. Halter,
By letter dated January 31, 2019 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML19031C888), Entergy Operations, Inc. submitted Relief Request Number EN-19-RR-1 for Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 and 2; Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1; Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3; Palisades Nuclear Plant; River Bend Station, Unit 1; and Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3. Specifically, the licensee requested relief from the requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code),Section XI, to perform the volumetric inspection of the piping welds in accordance with ASME Code Case N-831-1, Ultrasonic Examination in Lieu of Radiography for Welds in Ferritic or Austenitic Pipe,Section XI, Division 1.
The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this 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.
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 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 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 hours0.00174 days <br />0.0417 hours <br />2.480159e-4 weeks <br />5.7075e-5 months <br /> to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in approximately 7 months, which is September 2019. 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, 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 301-415-1233.
2 Maggie O'Banion, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch IV Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation