ML13018A067: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 13: Line 13:
| document type = Acceptance Review Letter, E-Mail
| document type = Acceptance Review Letter, E-Mail
| page count = 1
| page count = 1
| project = TAC:MF0507
}}
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:Lent. Susan From: Singal, 8alwant Sent: Friday, January 18, 20138:53 AM To: 'Hope, Timothy' Cc: 'Jack. H icks@luminant.com' Subject: Acceptance Review Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Relief Request 8-2 (TAC No. MF0507) By letter dated January 16, 2013, Luminant Generation Company LLC (Luminant) submitted Relief Request No. B-2 for Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, for the third inservice inspection interval. Luminant requested for approval of the proposed alternative from the requirements of American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code{ASME Code) for reactor vessel hot leg nozzle weld inspection requirements. The purpose of this letter 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 staff to proceed with its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed relief in terms of regulatory requirements and the protection of public health and safety and the environment. If additional information is needed for the staff to complete its technical review, you will be advised by separate correspondence. If you have any questions! please contact me at (301) 415-3016. Balwant K. Singal Senior Project Manager (Comanche Peak and STP) Nuclear Regulatory Commission Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Balwant.Singal@nrc.gov Tel: (301) 415-3016 Fax: (301) 415-1222 1 
}}
}}

Revision as of 08:18, 28 March 2018

Comanche Peak, Unit 1 - Acceptance Review Email, Relief Request B-2, Alternative to ASME Code Requirements for Examination of Reactor Vessel Hot-Leg Nozzle Welds, the Third 10-Year Inservice Inspection Interval (TAC MF0507)
ML13018A067
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak Luminant icon.png
Issue date: 01/18/2013
From: Singal B K
Plant Licensing Branch IV
To: Hope T
Luminant Generation Co
Singal B K
References
TAC MF0507
Download: ML13018A067 (1)


Text

Lent. Susan From: Singal, 8alwant Sent: Friday, January 18, 20138:53 AM To: 'Hope, Timothy' Cc: 'Jack. H icks@luminant.com' Subject: Acceptance Review Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Relief Request 8-2 (TAC No. MF0507) By letter dated January 16, 2013, Luminant Generation Company LLC (Luminant) submitted Relief Request No. B-2 for Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, for the third inservice inspection interval. Luminant requested for approval of the proposed alternative from the requirements of American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code{ASME Code) for reactor vessel hot leg nozzle weld inspection requirements. The purpose of this letter 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 staff to proceed with its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed relief in terms of regulatory requirements and the protection of public health and safety and the environment. If additional information is needed for the staff to complete its technical review, you will be advised by separate correspondence. If you have any questions! please contact me at (301) 415-3016. Balwant K. Singal Senior Project Manager (Comanche Peak and STP) Nuclear Regulatory Commission Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Balwant.Singal@nrc.gov Tel: (301) 415-3016 Fax: (301) 415-1222 1