ML110190029: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| issue date = 01/19/2011 | | issue date = 01/19/2011 | ||
| title = Acceptance Review for Sequoyah-2 RR | | title = Acceptance Review for Sequoyah-2 RR | ||
| author name = Lingam S | | author name = Lingam S | ||
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DORL/LPLII-2 | | author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DORL/LPLII-2 | ||
| addressee name = Cook R | | addressee name = Cook R | ||
| addressee affiliation = Tennessee Valley Authority | | addressee affiliation = Tennessee Valley Authority | ||
| docket = 05000328 | | docket = 05000328 | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:ADAMS Accession No. ML110190029 | {{#Wiki_filter:ADAMS Accession No. ML110190029 From: Lingam, Siva Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 7:55 AM To: 'Cook, Rodney Michael' Cc: Broaddus, Doug; Thomas, George | ||
From: Lingam, Siva Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 7:55 AM To: 'Cook, Rodney Michael' Cc: Broaddus, Doug; Thomas, George | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Unit 2 - Alternative Testing to IWE-5221 Requirements in ASME Section XI (TAC No. ME5245) | Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Unit 2 - Alternative Testing to IWE-5221 Requirements in ASME Section XI (TAC No. ME5245) | ||
By letter dated December 22, 2010 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession Number ML103630044), Tennessee Valley Authority submitted a relief request for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Unit 2. The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) | By letter dated December 22, 2010 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession Number ML103630044), Tennessee Valley Authority submitted a relief request for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Unit 2. The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. | ||
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 | Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this relief 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. | ||
If you have any questions, please contact me. | 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. If additional information is needed, you will be advised by separate correspondence. | ||
If you have any questions, please contact me. | |||
Siva P. Lingam U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Project Manager (NRR/DORL/LPL2-2) | Siva P. Lingam U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Project Manager (NRR/DORL/LPL2-2) | ||
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Location: O8-D5; Mail Stop: O8-G9a Telephone: 301-415-1564; Fax: 301-415-1222 E-mail address: siva.lingam@nrc.gov}} | Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Location: O8-D5; Mail Stop: O8-G9a Telephone: 301-415-1564; Fax: 301-415-1222 E-mail address: siva.lingam@nrc.gov}} | ||
Latest revision as of 04:25, 13 November 2019
| ML110190029 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 01/19/2011 |
| From: | Siva Lingam Plant Licensing Branch II |
| To: | Cook R Tennessee Valley Authority |
| Lingam, S NRR/DORL 415-1564 | |
| References | |
| TAC ME5245 | |
| Download: ML110190029 (2) | |
Text
ADAMS Accession No. ML110190029 From: Lingam, Siva Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 7:55 AM To: 'Cook, Rodney Michael' Cc: Broaddus, Doug; Thomas, George
Subject:
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Unit 2 - Alternative Testing to IWE-5221 Requirements in ASME Section XI (TAC No. ME5245)
By letter dated December 22, 2010 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession Number ML103630044), Tennessee Valley Authority submitted a relief request for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Unit 2. The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this relief 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 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. If additional information is needed, you will be advised by separate correspondence.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Siva P. Lingam U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Project Manager (NRR/DORL/LPL2-2)
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Location: O8-D5; Mail Stop: O8-G9a Telephone: 301-415-1564; Fax: 301-415-1222 E-mail address: siva.lingam@nrc.gov