ML12250A761: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| number = ML12250A761 | | number = ML12250A761 | ||
| issue date = 09/06/2012 | | issue date = 09/06/2012 | ||
| title = | | title = Acceptance Review E-mail, Request for Relief No. ANO1-ISI-021, from ASME Volumetric Requirements for Full Penetration Welded Nozzles in Vessels - Inspection Program B; Fourth 10-Year ISI Interval | ||
| author name = Kalyanam N | | author name = Kalyanam N | ||
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DORL/LPLIV | | author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DORL/LPLIV | ||
| addressee name = Clark R | | addressee name = Clark R | ||
| addressee affiliation = Entergy Operations, Inc | | addressee affiliation = Entergy Operations, Inc | ||
| docket = 05000313 | | docket = 05000313 | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| document type = Acceptance Review Letter, E-Mail | | document type = Acceptance Review Letter, E-Mail | ||
| page count = 2 | | page count = 2 | ||
| project = TAC: | | project = TAC:ME9147, TAC:ME9148 | ||
| stage = Acceptance Review | | stage = Acceptance Review | ||
}} | }} | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:From:Kalyanam, | {{#Wiki_filter:From: Kalyanam, Kaly To: Chen, Qiao-Lynn | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
FW: Acceptance Review Report for ANO1-ISI- | FW: Acceptance Review Report for ANO1-ISI-021 Date: Thursday, September 06, 2012 1:09:04 PM From: Kalyanam, Kaly Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 12:57 PM To: 'CLARK, ROBERT W' | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Acceptance Review Report for ANO1-ISI-021 Ms. Chen, When you get a chance, could you please include this email in ADAMS? | Acceptance Review Report for ANO1-ISI-021 Ms. Chen, When you get a chance, could you please include this email in ADAMS? | ||
Thanks Kaly The SUNSI information as follows: | |||
Thanks | |||
Kaly | |||
The SUNSI information as follows: | |||
Plant: Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 Docket No.: 50/313 | Plant: Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 Docket No.: 50/313 | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
RAI on Request for Relief No. ANO1-ISI-021 TAC NOS. ME9147 SUNSI Review Done: Yes. Not Publicly Available, Normal Release, Non-sensitive, From: | RAI on Request for Relief No. ANO1-ISI-021 TAC NOS. ME9147 SUNSI Review Done: Yes. Not Publicly Available, Normal Release, Non-sensitive, From: N. Kalyanam To: Robert Clark DATE: September 6, 2012 TO: ROBERT CLARK | ||
DATE: September 6, 2012 | |||
TO: ROBERT CLARK | |||
==SUBJECT:== | ==SUBJECT:== | ||
ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNIT 1 - ACCEPTANCE OF REQUESTED LICENSING ACTION RE: REQUEST FOR RELIEF, ANO1-ISI-021 FROM | ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNIT 1 - ACCEPTANCE OF REQUESTED LICENSING ACTION RE: REQUEST FOR RELIEF, ANO1-ISI-021 FROM ASME SECTION XI VOLUMETRIC EXAMINATION REQUIREMENTS FOURTH 10-YEAR INTERVAL, FIRST PERIOD (TAC NO. ME9148) | ||
DOCKET NO.: 50-313 | |||
By letter dated July 25, 2012, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i), Entergy Operations Inc. | |||
The purpose of this E-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) | requested relief from the requirements of the ASME, Section XI pertaining to volumetric examinations at Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 (ANO-1), since at several locations, examinations were not practical due to interference or geometry. | ||
The purpose of this E-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of the 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 | 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 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. If additional information is needed for the staff to complete its technical review, 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 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. If additional information is needed for the staff to complete its technical review, you will be advised by separate correspondence. | ||
On August 23, 2012, the NRC staff had sent the acceptance review result for ANO1-ISI-022. However, due to an oversight, it was labeled as acceptance review result for ANO1-ISI-021. The error is regretted. | On August 23, 2012, the NRC staff had sent the acceptance review result for ANO1-ISI-022. However, due to an oversight, it was labeled as acceptance review result for ANO1-ISI-021. The error is regretted. | ||
If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned, at (301) 415-1480. | If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned, at (301) 415-1480. | ||
Kaly N. Kalyanam, Project Manager ANO-1 and 2; Waterford 3 NRR/DORL/LPL4 Email: kaly.kalyanam@nrc.gov}} | |||
Kaly N. Kalyanam, Project Manager ANO-1 and 2; Waterford 3 NRR/DORL/LPL4 Email: kaly.kalyanam@nrc.gov | |||
}} | |||
Latest revision as of 23:57, 11 November 2019
| ML12250A761 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 09/06/2012 |
| From: | Kalyanam N Plant Licensing Branch IV |
| To: | Clark R Entergy Operations |
| Kalyanam N | |
| References | |
| TAC ME9147, ANO1-ISI-021, TAC ME9148 | |
| Download: ML12250A761 (2) | |
Text
From: Kalyanam, Kaly To: Chen, Qiao-Lynn
Subject:
FW: Acceptance Review Report for ANO1-ISI-021 Date: Thursday, September 06, 2012 1:09:04 PM From: Kalyanam, Kaly Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 12:57 PM To: 'CLARK, ROBERT W'
Subject:
Acceptance Review Report for ANO1-ISI-021 Ms. Chen, When you get a chance, could you please include this email in ADAMS?
Thanks Kaly The SUNSI information as follows:
Plant: Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 Docket No.: 50/313
Subject:
RAI on Request for Relief No. ANO1-ISI-021 TAC NOS. ME9147 SUNSI Review Done: Yes. Not Publicly Available, Normal Release, Non-sensitive, From: N. Kalyanam To: Robert Clark DATE: September 6, 2012 TO: ROBERT CLARK
SUBJECT:
ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNIT 1 - ACCEPTANCE OF REQUESTED LICENSING ACTION RE: REQUEST FOR RELIEF, ANO1-ISI-021 FROM ASME SECTION XI VOLUMETRIC EXAMINATION REQUIREMENTS FOURTH 10-YEAR INTERVAL, FIRST PERIOD (TAC NO. ME9148)
DOCKET NO.: 50-313
By letter dated July 25, 2012, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i), Entergy Operations Inc.
requested relief from the requirements of the ASME,Section XI pertaining to volumetric examinations at Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 (ANO-1), since at several locations, examinations were not practical due to interference or geometry.
The purpose of this E-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of the 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 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. If additional information is needed for the staff to complete its technical review, you will be advised by separate correspondence.
On August 23, 2012, the NRC staff had sent the acceptance review result for ANO1-ISI-022. However, due to an oversight, it was labeled as acceptance review result for ANO1-ISI-021. The error is regretted.
If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned, at (301) 415-1480.
Kaly N. Kalyanam, Project Manager ANO-1 and 2; Waterford 3 NRR/DORL/LPL4 Email: kaly.kalyanam@nrc.gov