ML17066A361: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter: | {{#Wiki_filter:NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From: Kuntz, Robert Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2017 1:13 PM To: Fields, John S. | ||
Cc: Green, Kimberly; Norris, Michael | Cc: Green, Kimberly; Norris, Michael | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 | Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Re: Amendment to Revise Emergency Plan Staff Augmentation Response Times (CAC Nos. MF9345 and MF9346) | ||
- Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Re: Amendment to | Mr. Fields, By letter dated February 23, 2017, Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation (NSPM), doing business as Xcel Energy, submitted a license amendment for Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 (PINGP) to increase staff augmentation times for Emergency Response Organization response functions. 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. | ||
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 | 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 and discussions during the pre-licensing meeting on February 7, 2017, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 260 hours to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in by February 2018. 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. | |||
Based on the information provided in your submittal and discussions during the pre-licensing meeting on February 7, 2017, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 260 hours to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in by February 2018. 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. | ||
These estimates are based on the NRC | |||
If you have any questions, please contact me. | If you have any questions, please contact me. | ||
Robert F. Kuntz, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 3 | Robert F. Kuntz, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 3 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1 | ||
Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 3385 Mail Envelope Properties (Robert.Kuntz@nrc.gov20170307131200) | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Re: Amendment to Revise Emergency Plan Staff Augmentation Response Times (CAC Nos. MF9345 and MF9346) | Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Re: Amendment to Revise Emergency Plan Staff Augmentation Response Times (CAC Nos. MF9345 and MF9346) | ||
Sent Date: | Sent Date: 3/7/2017 1:12:51 PM Received Date: 3/7/2017 1:12:00 PM From: Kuntz, Robert Created By: Robert.Kuntz@nrc.gov Recipients: | ||
"Green, Kimberly" <Kimberly.Green@nrc.gov> | |||
Recipients: | Tracking Status: None "Norris, Michael" <Michael.Norris@nrc.gov> | ||
Tracking Status: None "Fields, John S." <John.Fields@xenuclear.com> | |||
Options | Tracking Status: None Post Office: | ||
Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2755 3/7/2017 1:12:00 PM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: | |||
Recipients Received:}} | |||
Revision as of 06:00, 30 October 2019
| ML17066A361 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Prairie Island  |
| Issue date: | 03/07/2017 |
| From: | Robert Kuntz Plant Licensing Branch III |
| To: | Fields J Xcel Energy |
| References | |
| MF9345, MF9346 | |
| Download: ML17066A361 (2) | |
Text
NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From: Kuntz, Robert Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2017 1:13 PM To: Fields, John S.
Cc: Green, Kimberly; Norris, Michael
Subject:
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Re: Amendment to Revise Emergency Plan Staff Augmentation Response Times (CAC Nos. MF9345 and MF9346)
Mr. Fields, By letter dated February 23, 2017, Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation (NSPM), doing business as Xcel Energy, submitted a license amendment for Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 (PINGP) to increase staff augmentation times for Emergency Response Organization response functions. 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.
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 and discussions during the pre-licensing meeting on February 7, 2017, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 260 hours0.00301 days <br />0.0722 hours <br />4.298942e-4 weeks <br />9.893e-5 months <br /> to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in by February 2018. 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.
Robert F. Kuntz, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 3 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1
Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 3385 Mail Envelope Properties (Robert.Kuntz@nrc.gov20170307131200)
Subject:
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Re: Amendment to Revise Emergency Plan Staff Augmentation Response Times (CAC Nos. MF9345 and MF9346)
Sent Date: 3/7/2017 1:12:51 PM Received Date: 3/7/2017 1:12:00 PM From: Kuntz, Robert Created By: Robert.Kuntz@nrc.gov Recipients:
"Green, Kimberly" <Kimberly.Green@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None "Norris, Michael" <Michael.Norris@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None "Fields, John S." <John.Fields@xenuclear.com>
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2755 3/7/2017 1:12:00 PM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:
Recipients Received: