ML16333A099: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
By letter dated October 7, 2016, OPPD submitted a request for an exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(i) and 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(ii) for Fort Calhoun Station (FCS), Unit No. 1 related to the suspension of security measures in an emergency or during severe weather. The purpose of this letter is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this 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. | By letter dated October 7, 2016, OPPD submitted a request for an exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(i) and 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(ii) for Fort Calhoun Station (FCS), Unit No. 1 related to the suspension of security measures in an emergency or during severe weather. The purpose of this letter is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this 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 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. | 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 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. | ||
Based on the information provided in your submittal, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 100 hours to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in approximately 12 months, which is October 2017. 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, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately [[estimated NRC review hours::100 hours]] to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in approximately 12 months, which is October 2017. 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. Additional delay may occur if the submittal is provided to the NRC in advance or in parallel with industry program initiatives or pilot applications. | 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. | ||
1 | 1 | ||
Latest revision as of 01:48, 9 March 2020
| ML16333A099 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 11/28/2016 |
| From: | Lyon F Plant Licensing Branch IV |
| To: | Matzke E Omaha Public Power District |
| References | |
| MF8452 | |
| Download: ML16333A099 (2) | |
Text
NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From: Lyon, Fred Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:44 AM To: MATZKE, ERICK P
Subject:
Acceptance Review (CAC No. MF8452)
By letter dated October 7, 2016, OPPD submitted a request for an exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(i) and 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(ii) for Fort Calhoun Station (FCS), Unit No. 1 related to the suspension of security measures in an emergency or during severe weather. The purpose of this letter is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this 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 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.
Based on the information provided in your submittal, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 100 hours4.167 days <br />0.595 weeks <br />0.137 months <br /> to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review in approximately 12 months, which is October 2017. 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. Additional delay may occur if the submittal is provided to the NRC in advance or in parallel with industry program initiatives or pilot applications.
1
Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 3180 Mail Envelope Properties (Fred.Lyon@nrc.gov20161128084400)
Subject:
Acceptance Review (CAC No. MF8452)
Sent Date: 11/28/2016 8:44:08 AM Received Date: 11/28/2016 8:44:00 AM From: Lyon, Fred Created By: Fred.Lyon@nrc.gov Recipients:
"MATZKE, ERICK P" <ematzke@oppd.com>
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2626 11/28/2016 8:44:00 AM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:
Recipients Received: