ML22087A398
| ML22087A398 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs, Byron, Braidwood, Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 03/31/2022 |
| From: | Joel Wiebe NRC/NRR/DORL/LPL3 |
| To: | Rhoades D Constellation Energy Generation, Constellation Nuclear |
| Wiebe J, NRR/DORL/LPL3, 301-415-6606 | |
| References | |
| EPID L-2022-LLA-0019 | |
| Download: ML22087A398 (4) | |
Text
March 31, 2022 Mr. David P. Rhoades Senior Vice President Constellation Energy Generation, LLC President and Chief Nuclear Officer Constellation Nuclear 4300 Winfield Road Warrenville, IL 60555
SUBJECT:
BRAIDWOOD STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2; BYRON STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2; CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2; AND R. E. GINNA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT - WITHDRAWAL OF REQUESTED LICENSING ACTION RE: LICENSE AMENDMENT SUBMITTED TO NRC FOR ACCEPTANCE REVIEW (EPID L-2022-LLA-0019)
Dear Mr. Rhoades:
By letter dated January 24, 2022 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML22025A236),, Exelon Generation Company, LLC (the licensee) submitted a license amendment request (LAR) for Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, and R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant. On February 1, 2022 (ADAMS Accession No. ML22032A333), Exelon Generation Company, LLC was renamed Constellation Energy Generation, LLC. The proposed amendment request would revise Technical Specifications 5.6.5, Core Operating Limits Report (COLR) to add references to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-Approved Topical Report SSP-14-P01/028-TR, Generic Application of the Studsvik Scandpower Core Management System to Pressurized Water Reactors, dated August 31, 2018, along with Administrative Changes. The purpose of this letter is to provide the results of the NRC staff 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 application for an amendment to a license (including the Technical Specifications) [or construction permit] 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.
By letter dated March 22, 2022 (ADAMS Accession No. ML22081A305), you requested to withdraw the application from NRC review. The NRC acknowledges your request to withdraw
the application. NRC staff activities on the review have ceased and the associated Cost Activity Code number has been closed.
The NRC staff notes that its review to date has identified that your application did not provide the following technical information in sufficient detail to enable the staff to complete its detailed review. Therefore, should you decide to resubmit the request, it must include the following information:
- 1. Completeness of Scope: SSP-14-P01/028-TR-P-A provides generic Nuclear Uncertainty Factors (NUFs) and the associated Nuclear Reliability Factors, but also provides a method to calculate plant-specific NUFs. The licensees January 24, 2022, letter, does not contain a summary of the analysis used to formulate the NUFs for each unit, including whether generic or plant-specific factors are used for any calculations used to determine the core operating limits.
- 2. Sufficiency of Information: LIC-109 states:
The information provided should support a comparison of the RLA [requested licensing action] to the licensees existing processes or programs, if applicable, with justification for the change. If significant, obvious problems are identified, the RLA should be considered unacceptable.
The LAR, as submitted, does not contain a description of how using Topical Report SSP-14-P01/028-TR-P-A impacts downstream safety analyses or if it is used to set core operating limits. Describe what quantities or parameter limits the licensee intends to calculate using the CMS5 code and explain how they are used in the determination of core operating limits. Also, explain whether SSP-14-P01/028-TR-P-A will replace or supplement the existing methods used by the licensee to generate the COLR for each facility. For each type of quantity that is associated with a regulatory requirement (e.g.,
to determine local power as input to a critical heat flux calculation), provide an analysis or evaluation demonstrating that the applicable regulatory requirements (e.g., General Design Criterion 10) are satisfied. As an example, a summary that maximum peaking factors predicted for one plant using CMS5 are reasonably comparable to those calculated using the existing methodology, could be an acceptable amount of information to provide.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-6606 or Joel.Wiebe@nrc.gov.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Joel S. Wiebe, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch III Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457, STN 50-454 and STN 50-455, 50-317 and 50-318, and 50-244 cc: Listserv
ML22087A398 OFFICE NRR/DORL/LPL3/PM NRR/DORL/LPL3/LA Tech Branch NAME JWiebe SRohrer RLukes DATE 03/23/2022 03/29/2022 03/10/2022 OFFICE NRR/DORL/LPL3/BC NRR/DORL/LPL3/PM NAME NSalgado (SWall for)
JWiebe DATE 03/30/2022 03/31/2022