ML20112F212
| ML20112F212 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 04/15/2020 |
| From: | Tanya Hood Plant Licensing Branch II |
| To: | Maza K Duke Energy Progress |
| Hood T | |
| References | |
| EPID L-2020-LLA-0045 | |
| Download: ML20112F212 (2) | |
Text
From:
Hood, Tanya To:
Kim.Maza@duke-energy.com Cc:
Dennis.Earp@duke-energy.com; Zaremba, Arthur H.
Subject:
Acceptance Review: Harris - Accident Monitoring, Refueling Operations Instrumentation, and Electrical (EPID: L-2020-LLA-0045)
Date:
Wednesday, April 15, 2020 1:33:00 PM
SUBJECT:
SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT 1 - ACCEPTANCE OF REQUESTED LICENSING ACTION RE: TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS RELATED TO ACCIDENT MONITORING INSTRUMENTATION, REFUELING OPERATIONS INSTRUMENTATION, AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT PROTECTIVE DEVICES (EPID L-2020-LLA-0045 Ms. Maza, By letter dated March 12, 2020 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML20072M618), Duke Energy Progress, LLC (the licensee) submitted a license amendment request (LAR) for the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1. The proposed amendment would modify Technical Specifications (TSs) requirements to revise TS 3.3.3.6, Accident Monitoring Instrumentation, to revise the allowed outage times for inoperable post-accident monitoring (PAM) instrumentation, eliminate the shutdown requirement for inoperable PAM instruments when the minimum required channels are operable, and add a provision that allows a separate action entry for each instrument function. Revise TS 3.9.2, Instrumentation, to remove the audible indication requirement in Mode 6, as well as relocate the requirements for electrical equipment protective devices in TS 3.8.4.1, Containment Penetration Conductor Overcurrent Protective Devices, and TS 3.8.4.2, Motor-Operated Valves Thermal Overload Protection, from TS to licensee-controlled procedure PLP-106, Technical Specification Equipment List Program. Additionally, the licensee is proposing a revision to the Note in TS 3.9.2 to allow for the substitution of Wide Range Neutron Flux Monitors for both of the Source Range Neutron Flux Monitors required to be operable while in Mode 6.
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.
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 614 hours0.00711 days <br />0.171 hours <br />0.00102 weeks <br />2.33627e-4 months <br /> to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in approximately 12 months, which is April 2021. 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.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Tanya E. Hood Project Manager Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852-2738 301-415-1387 Tanya.Hood@nrc.gov