ML13329A502

From kanterella
Revision as of 10:57, 4 November 2019 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

LIC-109 Acceptance of Palisades Nuclear Plant'S 10 CFR 50 Appendix G Equivalent Margins Analysis - MF2962
ML13329A502
Person / Time
Site: Palisades Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 11/20/2013
From: Mahesh Chawla
Plant Licensing Branch III
To: Erickson J, Gustafson O
Entergy Nuclear Operations
Chawla M
References
TAC MF2962
Download: ML13329A502 (1)


Text

From: Chawla, Mahesh

  • Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 1:32 PM To: ERICKSON, JEFFREY S (JERICKS@entergy.com); GUSTAFSON, OTTO W (ogustaf@entergy.com); .MIKSA, JAMES P Umiksa@entergy.com)

Cc: Jenkins, Joel; Sheng, Simon; Rosenberg, Stacey; Carlson, Robert

Subject:

UC-109 Acceptance of Palisades Nuclear Plant's 10 CFR 50 Appendix G Equivalent Margins Analysis - MF2962 By letter dated October 21, 2013 , ADAMS Accession No. ML13295A446, ENTERGY Nuclear Operations, Inc.

submitted a 10 CFR 50 Appendix G Equivalent Margins Analysis (EMA) for Palisades Nuclear Plant. 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 the submittal 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 EMA 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 corresp~ndence.

Mahesh Chawla

. Project Manager Phone: 301-415-8371 Fax: 301-415-1222 mahesh.chawla@nrc.gov 1