ML25241A322
| ML25241A322 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 08/25/2025 |
| From: | V Sreenivas Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| To: | Hasanat A, Henry M Constellation Energy Generation |
| Kim, J | |
| References | |
| EPID L-2025-LLA-0115 | |
| Download: ML25241A322 (2) | |
Text
From:
V Sreenivas To:
Henry, Michael:(Constellation Nuclear); Hasanat, Abul M: (Constellation Nuclear)
Cc:
Hipo Gonzalez; Shivani Mehta
Subject:
R.E. Ginna: ACCEPTANCE REVIEW-License Amendment Request to Adopt TSTF-51, TSTF-471, and TSTF-571-T (EPID: L-2025-LLA-0115)
Date:
Monday, August 25, 2025 5:13:00 PM Importance:
High By letter dated July 18, 2025 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML25202A072), Constellation Energy Generation, LLC (CEG)
R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant (Ginna). requests NRC approval of a proposed partial adoption of TSTF-51, Revision 2, "Revise Containment Requirements during Handling Irradiated Fuel and Core Alterations," and full adoption of TSTF-471, Revision 1, "Eliminate us of term CORE ALTERATIONS in ACTIONS and NOTES," and TSTF-571-T, Revision 0, "Revise Actions for Inoperable Source Range Neutron Flux Monitor," into the Ginna technical specifications. proposed amendment is being requested to align more accurately, as technically practical, with the Westinghouse Standard Technical Specification (STS) in NUREG-1431, Revision 5.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 including but not limited to audit of inspection reports, you will be advised by separate correspondence.
The NRC staff has evaluated precedence related to this request and determined that, on average, the reviews have required 480 hours0.00556 days <br />0.133 hours <br />7.936508e-4 weeks <br />1.8264e-4 months <br /> and 12 months. To support a more efficient process, the NRC is setting a goal of achieving a 15% improvement. However, based on the experience of past reviews and to improve the efficiency further, the NRC plans to use the safety evaluation model to consolidate these three TSTF requests into a single review.
Therefore, by modeling similar aspects of recent safety evaluations, we estimate the review will require 150 hours0.00174 days <br />0.0417 hours <br />2.480159e-4 weeks <br />5.7075e-5 months <br /> and 6 months, which is an average of 60% reduction. The NRC staff expects to complete the review by February 28, 2026.
Please contact me if you have any questions. A copy of this email will be made publicly available in ADAMS.
V.Sreenivas, Ph.D., CPM.,
Licensing Project Manager Seabrook, Beaver Valley and Ginna Nuclear Power Plants
Dn. of Operating Reactors Licensing, LPL1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission V.Sreenivas@nrc.gov
Docket No.
50-244
cc: Listserv