ML13098B073: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:1NRR-PMDAPEm ResourceFrom:Billoch, AraceliSent:Monday, April 08, 2013 8:51 AMTo:Hightower, RichardSubject:Acceptance Review for Robinson Unit 2 RR-08 Alternative Volumetric Examination of Reactor Vessel Hot and Cold Leg Nozzles (TAC No. MF1015) | {{#Wiki_filter:1NRR-PMDAPEm ResourceFrom:Billoch, AraceliSent:Monday, April 08, 2013 8:51 AMTo:Hightower, RichardSubject:Acceptance Review for Robinson Unit 2 RR-08 Alternative Volumetric Examination of Reactor Vessel Hot and Cold Leg Nozzles (TAC No. MF1015)Dear Mr. Hightower, By letter dated March 13, 2013 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML13080A258), Carolina Power and Light Company, submitted a relief request based on the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.55a for the Inservice Testing Program Plan for the Fifth-Ten Year Interval for H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (HBRSEP). | ||
By letter dated March 13, 2013 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML13080A258), Carolina Power and Light Company, submitted a relief request based on the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.55a for the Inservice Testing Program Plan for the Fifth-Ten Year Interval for H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (HBRSEP). | |||
The proposed relief requested the use of alternative volumetric examinations of the reactor vessel hot leg and cold leg nozzle-to-pipe dissimilar metal welds to support inspections scheduled during the HBRSEP fall 2013 refueling outage. | The proposed relief requested the use of alternative volumetric examinations of the reactor vessel hot leg and cold leg nozzle-to-pipe dissimilar metal welds to support inspections scheduled during the HBRSEP fall 2013 refueling outage. | ||
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 request 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 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 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 request 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 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. | |||
If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-3302. | If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-3302. | ||
Araceli T. Billoch Colón Project Manager Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Tel. 301-415-3302 Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 658 Mail Envelope Properties (Araceli.Billoch@nrc.gov20130408085000) | |||
Subject: Acceptance Review for Robinson Unit 2 RR-08 Alternative Volumetric Examination of Reactor Vessel Hot and Cold Leg Nozzles (TAC No. MF1015) Sent Date: 4/8/2013 8:50:36 AM Received Date: 4/8/2013 8:50:00 AM From: Billoch, Araceli Created By: Araceli.Billoch@nrc.gov Recipients: "Hightower, Richard" <richard.hightower@pgnmail.com> Tracking Status: None | |||
Post Office: Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2322 4/8/2013 8:50:00 AM image001.gif 1332 | |||
Post Office: Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2322 4/8/2013 8:50:00 AM image001.gif 1332 | |||
Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: Yes Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received: | Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: Yes Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received: | ||
Page 1of 14/8/2013file://c:\EMailCapture\NRR_PMDA\658\attch1.gif}} | Page 1of 14/8/2013file://c:\EMailCapture\NRR_PMDA\658\attch1.gif | ||
}} | |||
Revision as of 19:08, 22 March 2018
| ML13098B073 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Robinson  |
| Issue date: | 04/08/2013 |
| From: | Billoch-Colon A T Division of Operating Reactor Licensing |
| To: | Hightower R Progress Energy |
| References | |
| TAC MF1015 | |
| Download: ML13098B073 (3) | |
Text
1NRR-PMDAPEm ResourceFrom:Billoch, AraceliSent:Monday, April 08, 2013 8:51 AMTo:Hightower, RichardSubject:Acceptance Review for Robinson Unit 2 RR-08 Alternative Volumetric Examination of Reactor Vessel Hot and Cold Leg Nozzles (TAC No. MF1015)Dear Mr. Hightower, By letter dated March 13, 2013 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML13080A258), Carolina Power and Light Company, submitted a relief request based on the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.55a for the Inservice Testing Program Plan for the Fifth-Ten Year Interval for H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (HBRSEP).
The proposed relief requested the use of alternative volumetric examinations of the reactor vessel hot leg and cold leg nozzle-to-pipe dissimilar metal welds to support inspections scheduled during the HBRSEP fall 2013 refueling outage.
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 request 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 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.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-3302.
Araceli T. Billoch Colón Project Manager Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Tel. 301-415-3302 Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 658 Mail Envelope Properties (Araceli.Billoch@nrc.gov20130408085000)
Subject: Acceptance Review for Robinson Unit 2 RR-08 Alternative Volumetric Examination of Reactor Vessel Hot and Cold Leg Nozzles (TAC No. MF1015) Sent Date: 4/8/2013 8:50:36 AM Received Date: 4/8/2013 8:50:00 AM From: Billoch, Araceli Created By: Araceli.Billoch@nrc.gov Recipients: "Hightower, Richard" <richard.hightower@pgnmail.com> Tracking Status: None
Post Office: Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2322 4/8/2013 8:50:00 AM image001.gif 1332
Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: Yes Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received:
Page 1of 14/8/2013file://c:\EMailCapture\NRR_PMDA\658\attch1.gif