ML25357A129
| ML25357A129 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 12/12/2025 |
| From: | Byrd T Plant Licensing Branch IV |
| To: | Stander B, Unruh M Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) |
| Wengert T, NRR/DORL/LPLIV, 415-4037 | |
| References | |
| EPID L-2025-LLR-0089 | |
| Download: ML25357A129 (0) | |
Text
From:
Thomas Byrd To:
Unruh, Mark E.; Stander, Brian R.
Subject:
Cooper - Acceptance Email - Relief Request RR6-02 ASME Code Case N-752-1 (EPID L-2025-LLR-0089)
Date:
Friday, December 12, 2025 10:33:00 AM Attachments:
image001.png By letter dated October 30, 2025, (Agencywide Documents and Access Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML25316A006) Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) submitted a relief request for Cooper Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1. The proposed relief request, RR6-02, would utilize a proposed alternative to the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section Xl, "Rules for lnservice lnspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components."
The purpose of this letter 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.
Pursuant to Sections 50.55a(z)(1) and 50.55a(z)(2) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed alternatives would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety, or that compliance with the specified requirements of Section 50.55a would result in hardship or unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality or safety.
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. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs detailed technical review by separate correspondence.
Applying the NRC staffs Graded Estimate Method, the NRC staffs estimate for this review is 130 hours0.0015 days <br />0.0361 hours <br />2.149471e-4 weeks <br />4.9465e-5 months <br /> (Appx. 25% reduction from historical averages). The NRC staff expects to complete the review by March 31, 2026. If there are emergent complexities or challenges in our review that would change the initial forecasted completion date or significant changes in the forecasted hours, the reasons for the changes, along with new estimates, will be communicated during our routine interactions.
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. 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.
Thomas Byrd Project Manager - Licensing Branch IV Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation OWFN 08F10