ML17055A709: 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:Williams, Shawn Sent:Friday, February 24, 2017 10:29 AM To:'gkmcelro@southernco.com' | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Joseph M. Farley, Units 1 and 2 - | Joseph M. Farley, Units 1 and 2 - Accept ance of three Inservice Testing Program Alternative Requests (CAC Nos. MF 9261, MF9262, MF9263, MF9264, MF9265, MF9266) | ||
==Dear Mr. McElroy,== | ==Dear Mr. McElroy,== | ||
By letter dated February 6, 2017 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System ( | By letter dated February 6, 2017 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADA MS) Accession No. ML17037D324), the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., submitted three alternative relief requests for the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 and Unit 2. The alternative requests are applicable to the Fifth Ten-Year lnterval lnservice Testing Program which will start on December 1, 2017. The three alternative requests are: | ||
* RR-VR-01: Establish 1st interval grace periods per Code Case OMN-20. The licensee submitted the alternative pursuant to Section 50.55a(z)(2) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10CFR), which requires the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed alternative would be acceptable on the basis that complying with the specified requirement would result in hardship or unusual difficulty, without compensating increase in the level of quality and safety. | * RR-VR-01: Establish 1st interval grace periods per Code Case OMN-20. The licensee submitted the alternative pursuant to Section 50.55a(z)(2) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10CFR), which requires the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed alternative would be acceptable on the basis that complying with the specified requirement would result in hardship or unusual difficulty, without compensating increase in the level of quality and safety. | ||
* RR-PR-02: Establish test flow reference ranges per Code Case OMN-21. The licensee submitted the request pursuant to 10 CFR Section 50.55a(z)(1), which requires the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed alternative would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety. | * RR-PR-02: Establish test flow reference ranges per Code Case OMN-21. The licensee submitted the request pursuant to 10 CFR Section 50.55a(z)(1), which requires the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed alternative would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety. | ||
* RR-PR-03: Service Water Pumps and Transfer Pumps Pressure Accuracy. The licensee submitted the request pursuant to 10 CFR Section 50.55a(z)(1) , which requires the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed alternative would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety. The purpose of this letter is to provide the results of NRC staff's acceptance review. 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 | * RR-PR-03: Service Water Pumps and Transfer Pumps Pressure Accuracy. The licensee submitted the request pursuant to 10 CFR Section 50.55a(z)(1) , which requires the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed alternative would provide an acceptable level of quality and 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 alternatives 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. Based on the information | The purpose of this letter is to provide the results of NRC staff's acceptance review | ||
2These estimates are based on the NRC staff's initial review of the application and they could change, due to several factors including requests for additional information, unanticipated addition of scope to the review, and review by NRC advisory committees or hearing-related activities. Additional delay may occur if the submittal is provided to the NRC in advance or in parallel with industry program initiatives or pilot applications. | . 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 char acterization of the regulatory requirements or the licensing basis of the plant. | ||
If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1009. | |||
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 alternatives 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. | |||
Based on the information pr ovided in your submittal | |||
, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately [[estimated NRC review hours::220 hours]] to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review by October 2017. If there are emergent complexities or challenges in our review that would cause changes to the initial forecasted completion date or significant changes in the forecasted hours, the reasons for the changes, along with the new estimates, will be communicated during the routine interactions with the assigned project manager. | |||
2These estimates are based on the NRC staff's initial review of the application and they could change, due to several factors including requests for additional information, unanticipated addition of scope to the review, and review by NRC advisory committees or hearing-related activities. Additional delay may occur if the submittal is provided to the NRC in advance or in parallel with industry program initiatives or pilot applications. | |||
If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1009. | |||
Shawn Williams, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation | Shawn Williams, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation | ||
Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364 Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA | Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364 | ||
Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 3367 Mail Envelope Properties (a1a21fd26c4f4316a92d3017a6293d67) | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Joseph M. Farley, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance of three Inservice Testing Program Alternative Requests (CAC Nos. MF9261, MF9262, MF9263, MF9264, MF9265, MF9266) Sent Date: 2/24/2017 10:28:32 AM Received Date: 2/24/2017 10:28:33 AM | Joseph M. Farley, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance of three Inservice Testing Program Alternative Requests (CAC Nos. MF9261, MF9262, MF9263, MF9264, MF9265, MF9266) Sent Date: 2/24/2017 10:28:32 AM Received Date: 2/24/2017 10:28:33 AM From: Williams, Shawn Created By: Shawn.Williams@nrc.gov Recipients: "'gkmcelro@southernco.com'" <gkmcelro@southernco.com> Tracking Status: None | ||
Post Office: HQPWMSMRS03.nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 4187 2/24/2017 10:28:33 AM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received:}} | |||
Revision as of 23:13, 29 June 2018
| ML17055A709 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 02/24/2017 |
| From: | Shawn Williams Plant Licensing Branch II |
| To: | McElroy G K Southern Nuclear Operating Co |
| References | |
| MF9261, MF9262, MF9263, MF9264, MF9265, MF9266 | |
| Download: ML17055A709 (3) | |
Text
1NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From:Williams, Shawn Sent:Friday, February 24, 2017 10:29 AM To:'gkmcelro@southernco.com'
Subject:
Joseph M. Farley, Units 1 and 2 - Accept ance of three Inservice Testing Program Alternative Requests (CAC Nos. MF 9261, MF9262, MF9263, MF9264, MF9265, MF9266)
Dear Mr. McElroy,
By letter dated February 6, 2017 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADA MS) Accession No. ML17037D324), the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., submitted three alternative relief requests for the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 and Unit 2. The alternative requests are applicable to the Fifth Ten-Year lnterval lnservice Testing Program which will start on December 1, 2017. The three alternative requests are:
- RR-VR-01: Establish 1st interval grace periods per Code Case OMN-20. The licensee submitted the alternative pursuant to Section 50.55a(z)(2) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10CFR), which requires the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed alternative would be acceptable on the basis that complying with the specified requirement would result in hardship or unusual difficulty, without compensating increase in the level of quality and safety.
- RR-PR-02: Establish test flow reference ranges per Code Case OMN-21. The licensee submitted the request pursuant to 10 CFR Section 50.55a(z)(1), which requires the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed alternative would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety.
- RR-PR-03: Service Water Pumps and Transfer Pumps Pressure Accuracy. The licensee submitted the request pursuant to 10 CFR Section 50.55a(z)(1) , which requires the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed alternative would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety.
The purpose of this letter is to provide the results of NRC staff's acceptance review
. 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 char acterization 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 alternatives 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.
Based on the information pr ovided in your submittal
, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 220 hours9.167 days <br />1.31 weeks <br />0.301 months <br /> to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review by October 2017. If there are emergent complexities or challenges in our review that would cause changes to the initial forecasted completion date or significant changes in the forecasted hours, the reasons for the changes, along with the new estimates, will be communicated during the routine interactions with the assigned project manager.
2These estimates are based on the NRC staff's initial review of the application and they could change, due to several factors including requests for additional information, unanticipated addition of scope to the review, and review by NRC advisory committees or hearing-related activities. Additional delay may occur if the submittal is provided to the NRC in advance or in parallel with industry program initiatives or pilot applications.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1009.
Shawn Williams, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364
Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 3367 Mail Envelope Properties (a1a21fd26c4f4316a92d3017a6293d67)
Subject:
Joseph M. Farley, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance of three Inservice Testing Program Alternative Requests (CAC Nos. MF9261, MF9262, MF9263, MF9264, MF9265, MF9266) Sent Date: 2/24/2017 10:28:32 AM Received Date: 2/24/2017 10:28:33 AM From: Williams, Shawn Created By: Shawn.Williams@nrc.gov Recipients: "'gkmcelro@southernco.com'" <gkmcelro@southernco.com> Tracking Status: None
Post Office: HQPWMSMRS03.nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 4187 2/24/2017 10:28:33 AM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received: