ML102310456

Acceptance Review Regarding MPS2 10-Year ISI Relief Requests

ML102310456
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	08/19/2010
From:	Sanders C Plant Licensing Branch 1
To:	Bartron W, Craft W - No Known Affiliation
Sandeers, Carleen, NRR/DORL, 415-1603
References
FOIA/PA-2011-0115
Download: ML102310456 (1)

Text

From: Sanders, Carleen Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 2:08 PM To: 'William D Bartron'; 'Wanda D Craft'

Subject:

Acceptance Review Regarding MPS2 10-Year ISI Relief Requests ADAMSAccessionNumber: ML101650173

Dear Mr. Bartron:

By letter dated July 29, 2010, Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (DNC) submitted relief requests for Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 2 associated with the fourth 10-year interval inservice inspection program. Specifically DNC submitted relief requests RR-04-04, "Use of Alternative Pressure Testing Criteria for the System Leakage Test Conducted at or Near the End of the Inspection Interval on Class 1 Piping," RR-04-05, "Use of Alternative Pressure/Flow Testing Requirements for Service Water system Buried Piping Segments," RR-04-06, "Use of PDI Qualified Procedures, Personnel, and Equipment for Non-Appendix VIII RPV Shell-to-Flange Weld," RR-04-07, " Examination Criteria for Weld Overlays," and RR-04-08, "Alternative Pressure Testing Requirements for the RPV Flange Leak-Off Piping."

The purpose of this letter is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff's acceptance review of these 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 relief requests 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. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staff's detailed technical review by separate correspondence.

If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1603.

Sincerely, Carleen Sanders, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-336