ML23058A056: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:From: | {{#Wiki_filter:From: | ||
Shawn Williams To: | |||
Treadway, Ryan I Cc: | |||
Vaughan, Jordan L; Edwards, Nicole D | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Duke Energy Fleet - Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action RE: Amendment to revise surveillance frequencies for reactor coolant system pressure isolation valve operational leakage testing and reactor trip system instrumentation (EPID L-2023-LLA-0015) | Duke Energy Fleet - Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action RE: Amendment to revise surveillance frequencies for reactor coolant system pressure isolation valve operational leakage testing and reactor trip system instrumentation (EPID L-2023-LLA-0015) | ||
Date: | Date: | ||
Monday, February 27, 2023 8:12:50 AM Mr. Treadway, | |||
By {{letter dated|date=February 1, 2023|text=letter dated February 1, 2023}} (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML23032A162), Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, (the licensee, Duke Energy) submitted a request for an amendment to the technical specifications (TS) for Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 (CNS), McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 (MNS), Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 (ONS), H. B. | |||
Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (RNP), and Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 (HNP). The proposed amendment would revise the surveillance requirement (SR) frequency for reactor coolant system pressure isolation valve operational leakage testing to reflect being in accordance with the inservice testing program, as governed by 10 CFR 50.55a. Specifically, this change would update TS SR 3.4.14.1 for CNS, MNS, ONS, and RNP and TS SR 4.4.6.2.2 for HNP. In addition, for CNS and MNS TS SR 3.3.1.8, Duke Energy proposed to remove restrictive surveillance frequency content that impedes the full application of the surveillance frequency control program to establish the frequency for performance of the channel operational test of select reactor trip system instrumentation. | Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (RNP), and Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 (HNP). The proposed amendment would revise the surveillance requirement (SR) frequency for reactor coolant system pressure isolation valve operational leakage testing to reflect being in accordance with the inservice testing program, as governed by 10 CFR 50.55a. Specifically, this change would update TS SR 3.4.14.1 for CNS, MNS, ONS, and RNP and TS SR 4.4.6.2.2 for HNP. In addition, for CNS and MNS TS SR 3.3.1.8, Duke Energy proposed to remove restrictive surveillance frequency content that impedes the full application of the surveillance frequency control program to establish the frequency for performance of the channel operational test of select reactor trip system instrumentation. | ||
The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this proposed amendment request. The acceptance review was performed to determine if there is sufficient technical information in scope and depth to allow the NRC staff to begin its detailed technical review. The acceptance review is also intended to identify whether the request has any readily apparent information insufficiencies in its characterization of the regulatory requirements or the licensing basis of the plant. | The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this proposed amendment request. The acceptance review was performed to determine if there is sufficient technical information in scope and depth to allow the NRC staff to begin its detailed technical review. The acceptance review is also intended to identify whether the request has any readily apparent information insufficiencies in its characterization of the regulatory requirements or the licensing basis of the plant. | ||
Consistent with Section 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), an application for an amendment to a license (including the technical specifications) must fully describe the changes requested, and following as far as applicable, the form prescribed for original applications. Section 50.34 of 10 CFR addresses the content of technical information required. This section stipulates that the submittal address the design and operating characteristics, unusual or novel design features, and principal safety considerations. | Consistent with Section 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), an application for an amendment to a license (including the technical specifications) must fully describe the changes requested, and following as far as applicable, the form prescribed for original applications. Section 50.34 of 10 CFR addresses the content of technical information required. This section stipulates that the submittal address the design and operating characteristics, unusual or novel design features, and principal safety considerations. | ||
The NRC staff has reviewed your application and concluded that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to begin its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed request 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 staffs ability to complete the detailed technical review are identified in despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. If additional information is needed, you will be advised by separate correspondence. | The NRC staff has reviewed your application and concluded that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to begin its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed request 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 staffs ability to complete the detailed technical review are identified in despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. If additional information is needed, you will be advised by separate correspondence. | ||
Based on the information provided in your submittal, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 330 hours to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review by December 15, 2023. 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. These estimates are based on the NRC staffs 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. | Based on the information provided in your submittal, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 330 hours to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review by December 15, 2023. 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. These estimates are based on the NRC staffs 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. | ||
If you have any questions, please contact Shawn Williams at (301) 415-1009 or Shawn.Williams@nrc.gov. | |||
Shawn Williams, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. | If you have any questions, please contact Shawn Williams at (301) 415-1009 or Shawn.Williams@nrc.gov. | ||
50-413, 50-414 50-369, 50-370 50-269, 50-270, 50-287 50-261, 50-400 cc: Listserv}} | |||
Shawn Williams, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation | |||
Docket Nos. | |||
50-413, 50-414 50-369, 50-370 50-269, 50-270, 50-287 50-261, 50-400 | |||
cc: Listserv}} | |||
Latest revision as of 10:08, 27 November 2024
| ML23058A056 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee, Mcguire, Catawba, Harris, Robinson, McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 02/27/2023 |
| From: | Shawn Williams NRC/NRR/DORL/LPL2-1 |
| To: | Treadway R Duke Energy Corp |
| Jordan, N | |
| References | |
| EPID L-2023-LLA-0015 | |
| Download: ML23058A056 (2) | |
Text
From:
Shawn Williams To:
Treadway, Ryan I Cc:
Vaughan, Jordan L; Edwards, Nicole D
Subject:
Duke Energy Fleet - Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action RE: Amendment to revise surveillance frequencies for reactor coolant system pressure isolation valve operational leakage testing and reactor trip system instrumentation (EPID L-2023-LLA-0015)
Date:
Monday, February 27, 2023 8:12:50 AM Mr. Treadway,
By letter dated February 1, 2023 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML23032A162), Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, (the licensee, Duke Energy) submitted a request for an amendment to the technical specifications (TS) for Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 (CNS), McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 (MNS), Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 (ONS), H. B.
Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (RNP), and Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 (HNP). The proposed amendment would revise the surveillance requirement (SR) frequency for reactor coolant system pressure isolation valve operational leakage testing to reflect being in accordance with the inservice testing program, as governed by 10 CFR 50.55a. Specifically, this change would update TS SR 3.4.14.1 for CNS, MNS, ONS, and RNP and TS SR 4.4.6.2.2 for HNP. In addition, for CNS and MNS TS SR 3.3.1.8, Duke Energy proposed to remove restrictive surveillance frequency content that impedes the full application of the surveillance frequency control program to establish the frequency for performance of the channel operational test of select reactor trip system instrumentation.
The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs acceptance review of this proposed amendment request. The acceptance review was performed to determine if there is sufficient technical information in scope and depth to allow the NRC staff to begin its detailed technical review. The acceptance review is also intended to identify whether the request has any readily apparent information insufficiencies in its characterization of the regulatory requirements or the licensing basis of the plant.
Consistent with Section 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), an application for an amendment to a license (including the technical specifications) must fully describe the changes requested, and following as far as applicable, the form prescribed for original applications. Section 50.34 of 10 CFR addresses the content of technical information required. This section stipulates that the submittal address the design and operating characteristics, unusual or novel design features, and principal safety considerations.
The NRC staff has reviewed your application and concluded that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to begin its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed request 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 staffs ability to complete the detailed technical review are identified in despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. If additional information is needed, you will be advised by separate correspondence.
Based on the information provided in your submittal, the NRC staff has estimated that this licensing request will take approximately 330 hours0.00382 days <br />0.0917 hours <br />5.456349e-4 weeks <br />1.25565e-4 months <br /> to complete. The NRC staff expects to complete this review by December 15, 2023. 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. These estimates are based on the NRC staffs 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.
If you have any questions, please contact Shawn Williams at (301) 415-1009 or Shawn.Williams@nrc.gov.
Shawn Williams, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Docket Nos.
50-413, 50-414 50-369, 50-370 50-269, 50-270, 50-287 50-261, 50-400
cc: Listserv