ML13007A002: 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: Beltz, Terry Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 12:55 PM To: Michael.Millen@nexteraenergy.com Cc: Hennessy, William; Clark, Roger; Cumblidge, Stephen | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 - | Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 - Acceptance Review re: Relief Request 1-RR-4 (TAC No. | ||
9905) | 9905) | ||
==Dear Mr. Millen:== | ==Dear Mr. Millen:== | ||
By letter dated November 9, 2012 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML12318A125), NextEra Energy Point Beach, LLC (NextEra, the licensee) submitted a relief request for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1. The proposed relief request would grant relief from the requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (B&PV Code), Section XI, 2007 Edition with 2008 Addenda for the re-examination of the Unit 1 reactor pressure vessel | By letter dated November 9, 2012 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) | ||
Accession No. ML12318A125), NextEra Energy Point Beach, LLC (NextEra, the licensee) submitted a relief request for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1. The proposed relief request would grant relief from the requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (B&PV Code), Section XI, 2007 Edition with 2008 Addenda for the re-examination of the Unit 1 reactor pressure vessel A inlet nozzle weld RC-32-MRCL-AIII-03. Relief is requested on the basis that alternative methods would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety. | |||
NextEra supplemented its application in a letter dated December 14, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. | NextEra supplemented its application in a letter dated December 14, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. | ||
ML12349A364). The supplemental information was requested by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff in an e-mail dated November 3, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12332A354), so that an independent assessment could be made regarding acceptability of the proposed relief request. | ML12349A364). The supplemental information was requested by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff in an e-mail dated November 3, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12332A354), so that an independent assessment could be made regarding acceptability of the proposed relief request. | ||
Pursuant to Sections 50.55a(a)(3)(i) and 50.55a(a)(3)(ii) 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. | Pursuant to Sections 50.55a(a)(3)(i) and 50.55a(a)(3)(ii) 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 | 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 relief 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. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs detailed technical review by separate correspondence. | ||
Please dont hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. | |||
sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to complete its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed relief 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 | Sincerely, Terry A. Beltz, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch III-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (301) 415-3049 Terry.Beltz@nrc.gov 1 | ||
Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 569 Mail Envelope Properties (Terry.Beltz@nrc.gov20130104125500) | |||
Hearing Identifier: | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 - Acceptance Review re: Relief Request 1-RR-4 (TAC No. 9905) | Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 - Acceptance Review re: Relief Request 1-RR-4 (TAC No. 9905) | ||
Tracking Status: None | Sent Date: 1/4/2013 12:55:29 PM Received Date: 1/4/2013 12:55:00 PM From: Beltz, Terry Created By: Terry.Beltz@nrc.gov Recipients: | ||
"Hennessy, William" <William.Hennessy@nexteraenergy.com> | |||
Post Office: | Tracking Status: None "Clark, Roger" <Roger.Clark@nexteraenergy.com> | ||
Tracking Status: None "Cumblidge, Stephen" <Stephen.Cumblidge@nrc.gov> | |||
Tracking Status: None "Michael.Millen@nexteraenergy.com" <Michael.Millen@nexteraenergy.com> | |||
Tracking Status: None Post Office: | |||
Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2626 1/4/2013 12:55:00 PM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: | |||
Recipients Received:}} | |||
Revision as of 16:43, 11 November 2019
| ML13007A002 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 01/04/2013 |
| From: | Beltz T Plant Licensing Branch III |
| To: | Millen M Point Beach |
| References | |
| TAC ME9905 | |
| Download: ML13007A002 (2) | |
Text
NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From: Beltz, Terry Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 12:55 PM To: Michael.Millen@nexteraenergy.com Cc: Hennessy, William; Clark, Roger; Cumblidge, Stephen
Subject:
Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 - Acceptance Review re: Relief Request 1-RR-4 (TAC No.
9905)
Dear Mr. Millen:
By letter dated November 9, 2012 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)
Accession No. ML12318A125), NextEra Energy Point Beach, LLC (NextEra, the licensee) submitted a relief request for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1. The proposed relief request would grant relief from the requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (B&PV Code),Section XI, 2007 Edition with 2008 Addenda for the re-examination of the Unit 1 reactor pressure vessel A inlet nozzle weld RC-32-MRCL-AIII-03. Relief is requested on the basis that alternative methods would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety.
NextEra supplemented its application in a letter dated December 14, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML12349A364). The supplemental information was requested by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff in an e-mail dated November 3, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12332A354), so that an independent assessment could be made regarding acceptability of the proposed relief request.
Pursuant to Sections 50.55a(a)(3)(i) and 50.55a(a)(3)(ii) 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 relief 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. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs detailed technical review by separate correspondence.
Please dont hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely, Terry A. Beltz, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch III-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (301) 415-3049 Terry.Beltz@nrc.gov 1
Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 569 Mail Envelope Properties (Terry.Beltz@nrc.gov20130104125500)
Subject:
Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 - Acceptance Review re: Relief Request 1-RR-4 (TAC No. 9905)
Sent Date: 1/4/2013 12:55:29 PM Received Date: 1/4/2013 12:55:00 PM From: Beltz, Terry Created By: Terry.Beltz@nrc.gov Recipients:
"Hennessy, William" <William.Hennessy@nexteraenergy.com>
Tracking Status: None "Clark, Roger" <Roger.Clark@nexteraenergy.com>
Tracking Status: None "Cumblidge, Stephen" <Stephen.Cumblidge@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None "Michael.Millen@nexteraenergy.com" <Michael.Millen@nexteraenergy.com>
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2626 1/4/2013 12:55:00 PM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:
Recipients Received: