ML19022A254: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 - Acceptance for Review - Re-Submittal of Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Unit 1, ASME Code Section XI, ISI Program and Augmented Program, 2nd Ten Year Interval Request for Relief 1-ISI-27 (EPID No. L-2018-LLR-0389) | Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 - Acceptance for Review - Re-Submittal of Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Unit 1, ASME Code Section XI, ISI Program and Augmented Program, 2nd Ten Year Interval Request for Relief 1-ISI-27 (EPID No. L-2018-LLR-0389) | ||
Importance: High Gordon and Tracy, By letter dated December 27, 2018 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. | Importance: High Gordon and Tracy, By letter dated December 27, 2018 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML18177A379), the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) resubmitted Relief Request (RR) 1-ISI-27 related to the inspection of reactor vessel circumferential welds for the Brown Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 1. Specifically, the purpose of resubmittal of RR 1-ISI-27 is to correct an error in the previously submitted TVA letter dated November 18, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15338A221), "Revised Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Section XI, Inservice Inspection and Augmented Program, Second Ten Year Interval Request. The NRC approved RR 1-ISI-27 in a letter dated February 17, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16020A115). The purpose of this email is to provide you with the results of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this submittal. 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 relief request has any readily apparent information insufficiencies in its characterization of the regulatory requirements or the licensing basis of the plant. | ||
ML18177A379), the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) resubmitted Relief Request (RR) 1-ISI-27 related to the inspection of reactor vessel circumferential welds for the Brown Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 1. Specifically, the purpose of resubmittal of RR 1-ISI-27 is to correct an error in the previously submitted TVA letter dated November 18, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15338A221), "Revised Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Section XI, Inservice Inspection and Augmented Program, Second Ten Year Interval Request. The NRC approved RR 1-ISI-27 in a letter dated February 17, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16020A115). The purpose of this email is to provide you with the results of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this submittal. 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 relief request 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 request and concluded that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to proceed with its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed relief request in terms of regulatory requirements and 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. | The NRC staff has reviewed your request and concluded that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to proceed with its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed relief request in terms of regulatory requirements and 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 TVA submittal, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 200 hours to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in approximately 12 months from date of this acceptance. 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 routine interactions with the assigned project manager. | Based on the information provided in TVA submittal, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 200 hours to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in approximately 12 months from date of this acceptance. 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 routine interactions with the assigned project manager. | ||
Latest revision as of 13:10, 2 February 2020
| ML19022A254 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 01/22/2019 |
| From: | Farideh Saba Plant Licensing Branch II |
| To: | Orf T, Gerald Williams Tennessee Valley Authority |
| References | |
| L-2018-LLR-0389 | |
| Download: ML19022A254 (3) | |
Text
NRR-DMPSPEm Resource From: Saba, Farideh Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2019 9:19 AM To: Williams, Gordon Robert (grwilliams1@tva.gov); Orf, Tracy J Cc: Shoop, Undine; Schaaf, Robert; Hon, Andrew; Clayton, Beverly; Jenkins, Joel
Subject:
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 - Acceptance for Review - Re-Submittal of Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Unit 1, ASME Code Section XI, ISI Program and Augmented Program, 2nd Ten Year Interval Request for Relief 1-ISI-27 (EPID No. L-2018-LLR-0389)
Importance: High Gordon and Tracy, By letter dated December 27, 2018 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML18177A379), the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) resubmitted Relief Request (RR) 1-ISI-27 related to the inspection of reactor vessel circumferential welds for the Brown Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 1. Specifically, the purpose of resubmittal of RR 1-ISI-27 is to correct an error in the previously submitted TVA letter dated November 18, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15338A221), "Revised Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, American Society of Mechanical EngineersSection XI, Inservice Inspection and Augmented Program, Second Ten Year Interval Request. The NRC approved RR 1-ISI-27 in a letter dated February 17, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16020A115). The purpose of this email is to provide you with the results of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this submittal. 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 relief request 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 request and concluded that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to proceed with its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed relief request in terms of regulatory requirements and 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 TVA submittal, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 200 hours0.00231 days <br />0.0556 hours <br />3.306878e-4 weeks <br />7.61e-5 months <br /> to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in approximately 12 months from date of this acceptance. 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 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 at 301-415-1447.
- Thanks, Farideh 1
Farideh E. Saba, P.E.
Senior Project Manager NRC/ADRO/NRR/DORL 301-415-1447 Mail Stop O-8B01A Farideh.Saba@NRC.GOV 2
Hearing Identifier: NRR_DMPS Email Number: 766 Mail Envelope Properties (BL0PR0901MB318660B035BD49B3619434CC9F980)
Subject:
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 - Acceptance for Review - Re-Submittal of Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Unit 1, ASME Code Section XI, ISI Program and Augmented Program, 2nd Ten Year Interval Request for Relief 1-ISI-27 (EPID No. L-2018-LLR-0389)
Sent Date: 1/22/2019 9:18:42 AM Received Date: 1/22/2019 9:18:42 AM From: Saba, Farideh Created By: Farideh.Saba@nrc.gov Recipients:
"Shoop, Undine" <Undine.Shoop@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None "Schaaf, Robert" <Robert.Schaaf@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None "Hon, Andrew" <Andrew.Hon@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None "Clayton, Beverly" <Beverly.Clayton@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None "Jenkins, Joel" <Joel.Jenkins@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None "Williams, Gordon Robert (grwilliams1@tva.gov)" <grwilliams1@tva.gov>
Tracking Status: None "Orf, Tracy J" <tjorf@tva.gov>
Tracking Status: None Post Office: BL0PR0901MB3186.namprd09.prod.outlook.com Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 3273 1/22/2019 9:18:42 AM Options Priority: High Return Notification: No Reply Requested: Yes Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:
Recipients Received: