ML16033A251: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) Created page by program invented by StriderTol |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) StriderTol Bot change |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| number = ML16033A251 | | number = ML16033A251 | ||
| issue date = 02/02/2016 | | issue date = 02/02/2016 | ||
| title = | | title = NRR E-mail Capture - Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - NRC Staff Acceptance Review Conclusion for Relief Request 1/2-RR-4-11 | ||
| author name = Kuntz R | | author name = Kuntz R | ||
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DORL/LPLIII-1 | | author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DORL/LPLIII-1 | ||
| addressee name = Pearson M | | addressee name = Pearson M | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| docket = 05000282, 05000306 | | docket = 05000282, 05000306 | ||
| license number = DPR-42, DPR-60 | | license number = DPR-42, DPR-60 | ||
| contact person = Kuntz R | | contact person = Kuntz R | ||
| case reference number = MF7120, MF7121 | | case reference number = MF7120, MF7121 | ||
| document type = E-Mail | | document type = E-Mail | ||
| page count = 2 | | page count = 2 | ||
| project = CAC:MF7120 | | project = CAC:MF7120 | ||
| stage = | | stage = Acceptance Review | ||
}} | }} | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:1 NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From: Kuntz, Robert Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 11:24 AM To:Pearson, Marc P. (Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com) | {{#Wiki_filter:1 NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From: | ||
Kuntz, Robert Sent: | |||
Tuesday, February 02, 2016 11:24 AM To: | |||
Pearson, Marc P. (Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com) | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - | Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance review for relief request for fourth ten-year interval weld examinations Mr. Pearson, By {{letter dated|date=December 21, 2015|text=letter dated December 21, 2015}}, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) | ||
Acceptance review for relief request for fourth ten-year interval weld examinations Mr. Pearson, By letter dated December 21, 2015, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML15355A253) Northern States Power Company - Minnesota (the licensee), doing business as Xcel Energy, Inc., submitted a relief request for Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant (PINGP), Units 1 and 2. The proposed relief request would grant relief for weld examinations performed during the Fourth Ten-Year Inspection Interval Units 1 and Unit 2 December 21, 2004 through December 20, 2014, where the required coverage of "essentially 100 percent" could not be obtained when examined to the extent practical. The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) | Accession No. ML15355A253) Northern States Power Company - Minnesota (the licensee), doing business as Xcel Energy, Inc., submitted a relief request for Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant (PINGP), Units 1 and | ||
: 2. The proposed relief request would grant relief for weld examinations performed during the Fourth Ten-Year Inspection Interval Units 1 and Unit 2 December 21, 2004 through December 20, 2014, where the required coverage of "essentially 100 percent" could not be obtained when examined to the extent practical. 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. | |||
plant. | 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 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. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs detailed technical review by separate correspondence. | ||
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 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 | |||
If you have any questions, please contact me. | |||
Robert Kuntz Sr. Project Manager, Monticello and Prairie Island NRR/DORL/LPL3-1 (301) 415-3733 | Robert Kuntz Sr. Project Manager, Monticello and Prairie Island NRR/DORL/LPL3-1 (301) 415-3733 | ||
Hearing Identifier: | Hearing Identifier: | ||
NRR_PMDA Email Number: | |||
2631 Mail Envelope Properties (Robert.Kuntz@nrc.gov20160202112400) | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance review for relief request for fourth ten-year interval weld examinations | Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance review for relief request for fourth ten-year interval weld examinations Sent Date: | ||
2/2/2016 11:24:19 AM Received Date: | |||
2/2/2016 11:24:00 AM From: | |||
Kuntz, Robert Created By: | |||
Robert.Kuntz@nrc.gov Recipients: | |||
"Pearson, Marc P. (Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com)" <Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com> | |||
Tracking Status: None Post Office: | |||
Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2572 2/2/2016 11:24:00 AM Options Priority: | |||
Standard Return Notification: | |||
No Reply Requested: | |||
No Sensitivity: | |||
Normal Expiration Date: | |||
Recipients Received: | |||
1 NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From: | |||
1 NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From: Kuntz, Robert Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 11:24 AM To:Pearson, Marc P. (Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com) | Kuntz, Robert Sent: | ||
Tuesday, February 02, 2016 11:24 AM To: | |||
Pearson, Marc P. (Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com) | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - | Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance review for relief request for fourth ten-year interval weld examinations Mr. Pearson, By {{letter dated|date=December 21, 2015|text=letter dated December 21, 2015}}, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) | ||
Acceptance review for relief request for fourth ten-year interval weld examinations Mr. Pearson, By letter dated December 21, 2015, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML15355A253) Northern States Power Company - Minnesota (the licensee), doing business as Xcel Energy, Inc., submitted a relief request for Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant (PINGP), Units 1 and 2. The proposed relief request would grant relief for weld examinations performed during the Fourth Ten-Year Inspection Interval Units 1 and Unit 2 December 21, 2004 through December 20, 2014, where the required coverage of "essentially 100 percent" could not be obtained when examined to the extent practical. The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) | Accession No. ML15355A253) Northern States Power Company - Minnesota (the licensee), doing business as Xcel Energy, Inc., submitted a relief request for Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant (PINGP), Units 1 and | ||
: 2. The proposed relief request would grant relief for weld examinations performed during the Fourth Ten-Year Inspection Interval Units 1 and Unit 2 December 21, 2004 through December 20, 2014, where the required coverage of "essentially 100 percent" could not be obtained when examined to the extent practical. 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. | |||
plant. | 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 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. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs detailed technical review by separate correspondence. | ||
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 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 | |||
If you have any questions, please contact me. | |||
Robert Kuntz Sr. Project Manager, Monticello and Prairie Island NRR/DORL/LPL3-1 (301) 415-3733 | Robert Kuntz Sr. Project Manager, Monticello and Prairie Island NRR/DORL/LPL3-1 (301) 415-3733 | ||
Hearing Identifier: | Hearing Identifier: | ||
NRR_PMDA Email Number: | |||
2631 Mail Envelope Properties (Robert.Kuntz@nrc.gov20160202112400) | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance review for relief request for fourth ten-year interval weld examinations | Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance review for relief request for fourth ten-year interval weld examinations Sent Date: | ||
2/2/2016 11:24:19 AM Received Date: | |||
Post Office: | 2/2/2016 11:24:00 AM From: | ||
Kuntz, Robert Created By: | |||
Robert.Kuntz@nrc.gov Recipients: | |||
"Pearson, Marc P. (Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com)" <Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com> | |||
Tracking Status: None Post Office: | |||
Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2572 2/2/2016 11:24:00 AM Options Priority: | |||
Standard Return Notification: | |||
No Reply Requested: | |||
No Sensitivity: | |||
Normal Expiration Date: | |||
Recipients Received:}} | |||
Latest revision as of 04:49, 10 January 2025
| ML16033A251 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Prairie Island  |
| Issue date: | 02/02/2016 |
| From: | Robert Kuntz Plant Licensing Branch III |
| To: | Pearson M Northern States Power Co, Xcel Energy Inc |
| Kuntz R | |
| References | |
| MF7120, MF7121 | |
| Download: ML16033A251 (2) | |
Text
1 NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From:
Kuntz, Robert Sent:
Tuesday, February 02, 2016 11:24 AM To:
Pearson, Marc P. (Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com)
Subject:
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance review for relief request for fourth ten-year interval weld examinations Mr. Pearson, By letter dated December 21, 2015, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)
Accession No. ML15355A253) Northern States Power Company - Minnesota (the licensee), doing business as Xcel Energy, Inc., submitted a relief request for Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant (PINGP), Units 1 and
- 2. The proposed relief request would grant relief for weld examinations performed during the Fourth Ten-Year Inspection Interval Units 1 and Unit 2 December 21, 2004 through December 20, 2014, where the required coverage of "essentially 100 percent" could not be obtained when examined to the extent practical. 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.
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 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. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs detailed technical review by separate correspondence.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Robert Kuntz Sr. Project Manager, Monticello and Prairie Island NRR/DORL/LPL3-1 (301) 415-3733
Hearing Identifier:
NRR_PMDA Email Number:
2631 Mail Envelope Properties (Robert.Kuntz@nrc.gov20160202112400)
Subject:
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance review for relief request for fourth ten-year interval weld examinations Sent Date:
2/2/2016 11:24:19 AM Received Date:
2/2/2016 11:24:00 AM From:
Kuntz, Robert Created By:
Robert.Kuntz@nrc.gov Recipients:
"Pearson, Marc P. (Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com)" <Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com>
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2572 2/2/2016 11:24:00 AM Options Priority:
Standard Return Notification:
No Reply Requested:
No Sensitivity:
Normal Expiration Date:
Recipients Received:
1 NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From:
Kuntz, Robert Sent:
Tuesday, February 02, 2016 11:24 AM To:
Pearson, Marc P. (Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com)
Subject:
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance review for relief request for fourth ten-year interval weld examinations Mr. Pearson, By letter dated December 21, 2015, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)
Accession No. ML15355A253) Northern States Power Company - Minnesota (the licensee), doing business as Xcel Energy, Inc., submitted a relief request for Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant (PINGP), Units 1 and
- 2. The proposed relief request would grant relief for weld examinations performed during the Fourth Ten-Year Inspection Interval Units 1 and Unit 2 December 21, 2004 through December 20, 2014, where the required coverage of "essentially 100 percent" could not be obtained when examined to the extent practical. 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.
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 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. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs detailed technical review by separate correspondence.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Robert Kuntz Sr. Project Manager, Monticello and Prairie Island NRR/DORL/LPL3-1 (301) 415-3733
Hearing Identifier:
NRR_PMDA Email Number:
2631 Mail Envelope Properties (Robert.Kuntz@nrc.gov20160202112400)
Subject:
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance review for relief request for fourth ten-year interval weld examinations Sent Date:
2/2/2016 11:24:19 AM Received Date:
2/2/2016 11:24:00 AM From:
Kuntz, Robert Created By:
Robert.Kuntz@nrc.gov Recipients:
"Pearson, Marc P. (Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com)" <Marc.Pearson@xenuclear.com>
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2572 2/2/2016 11:24:00 AM Options Priority:
Standard Return Notification:
No Reply Requested:
No Sensitivity:
Normal Expiration Date:
Recipients Received: