ML17112A038: 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:1NRR-PMDAPEm | {{#Wiki_filter:1NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From:Hon, Andrew Sent:Thursday, April 20, 2017 10:19 AM To:Hess, Thomas A (tahess@tva.gov); Schrull, Edward Dustin (edschrull@tva.gov) | ||
Cc:Beasley, Benjamin; Goel, Vijay | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Accepted for Review - Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Proposed Technical Specification Change to Revise the Note | Accepted for Review - Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Proposed Technical Specification Change to Revise the Note Modi fying SR 3.8.1.17 of TS 3.8.1 "AC Sources | ||
- Operating" CAC Nos. MF9398 and MF9399By letter dated March 13, 2017 (ADAMS NO. ML17073A018), TVA submitted the subject request for Sequoyah Units 1 and 2. The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff's 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 proposed change 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 staff's 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 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 change 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 staff's 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 is expected to spend 260 hours to complete the review within 12 months. If you have any questions, please contact me. | The NRC staff is expected to spend 260 hours to complete the review within 12 months. | ||
If you have any questions, please contact me. | |||
Andy Hon, PE Project Manager (Sequoyah Nuclear Plant) Plant Licensing Branch II-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 301-415-8480 OWFN 08H19 Mail Stop O8G-9a andrew.hon@nrc.gov | |||
Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 3454 Mail Envelope Properties (Andrew.Hon@nrc.gov20170420101900) | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Accepted for Review - Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Proposed Technical Specification Change to Revise the Note Modifying SR 3.8.1.17 of TS 3.8.1 "AC Sources - Operating" CAC Nos. MF9398 and MF9399 Sent Date: 4/20/2017 10:19:28 AM Received Date: 4/20/2017 10:19:00 AM | Accepted for Review - Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Proposed Technical Specification Change to Revise the Note Modifying SR 3.8.1.17 of TS 3.8.1 "AC Sources - Operating" CAC Nos. MF9398 and MF9399 Sent Date: 4/20/2017 10:19:28 AM Received Date: 4/20/2017 10:19:00 AM From: Hon, Andrew Created By: Andrew.Hon@nrc.gov | ||
Recipients: "Beasley, Benjamin" <Benjamin.Beasley@nrc.gov> Tracking Status: None "Goel, Vijay" <Vijay.Goel@nrc.gov> Tracking Status: None "Hess, Thomas A (tahess@tva.gov)" <tahess@tva.gov> Tracking Status: None "Schrull, Edward Dustin (edschrull@tva.gov)" <edschrull@tva.gov> Tracking Status: None Post Office: Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1915 4/20/2017 10:19:00 AM | |||
Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received:}} |
Revision as of 21:26, 29 June 2018
ML17112A038 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Sequoyah ![]() |
Issue date: | 04/20/2017 |
From: | Hon A L Plant Licensing Branch II |
To: | Hess T A, Schrull E D Tennessee Valley Authority |
References | |
MF9398, MF9399 | |
Download: ML17112A038 (2) | |
Text
1NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From:Hon, Andrew Sent:Thursday, April 20, 2017 10:19 AM To:Hess, Thomas A (tahess@tva.gov); Schrull, Edward Dustin (edschrull@tva.gov)
Cc:Beasley, Benjamin; Goel, Vijay
Subject:
Accepted for Review - Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Proposed Technical Specification Change to Revise the Note Modi fying SR 3.8.1.17 of TS 3.8.1 "AC Sources
- Operating" CAC Nos. MF9398 and MF9399By letter dated March 13, 2017 (ADAMS NO. ML17073A018), TVA submitted the subject request for Sequoyah Units 1 and 2. The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff's 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 proposed change 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 staff's 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 is expected to spend 260 hours0.00301 days <br />0.0722 hours <br />4.298942e-4 weeks <br />9.893e-5 months <br /> to complete the review within 12 months.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Andy Hon, PE Project Manager (Sequoyah Nuclear Plant) Plant Licensing Branch II-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 301-415-8480 OWFN 08H19 Mail Stop O8G-9a andrew.hon@nrc.gov
Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 3454 Mail Envelope Properties (Andrew.Hon@nrc.gov20170420101900)
Subject:
Accepted for Review - Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Proposed Technical Specification Change to Revise the Note Modifying SR 3.8.1.17 of TS 3.8.1 "AC Sources - Operating" CAC Nos. MF9398 and MF9399 Sent Date: 4/20/2017 10:19:28 AM Received Date: 4/20/2017 10:19:00 AM From: Hon, Andrew Created By: Andrew.Hon@nrc.gov
Recipients: "Beasley, Benjamin" <Benjamin.Beasley@nrc.gov> Tracking Status: None "Goel, Vijay" <Vijay.Goel@nrc.gov> Tracking Status: None "Hess, Thomas A (tahess@tva.gov)" <tahess@tva.gov> Tracking Status: None "Schrull, Edward Dustin (edschrull@tva.gov)" <edschrull@tva.gov> Tracking Status: None Post Office: Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1915 4/20/2017 10:19:00 AM
Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received: