ML16111B053: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 15: Line 15:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:From: Martin, Robert To: McElroy, G. Ken
{{#Wiki_filter:From:             Martin, Robert To:               McElroy, G. Ken; Joyce, Ryan M. (RMJOYCE@southernco.com)
; Joyce, Ryan M. (RMJOYCE@southernco.com)
Cc:               Williams, Shawn
Cc: Williams, Shawn


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
Acceptance for review of Optimized ZIRLO - Farly and Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 Date: Monday, April 18, 2016 12:21:00 PM By application dated March 16, 2016, the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.
Acceptance for review of Optimized ZIRLO - Farly and Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 Date:             Monday, April 18, 2016 12:21:00 PM By application dated March 16, 2016, the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.
proposes to revise Technical Specifications (TS) for the Farley and Vogtle Unit 1 and 2 plants to allow the use of Optimized ZIRLOŽ as an approved fuel rod cladding.
proposes to revise Technical Specifications (TS) for the Farley and Vogtle Unit 1 and 2 plants to allow the use of Optimized ZIRLO' as an approved fuel rod cladding.
The purpose of this correspondence is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs 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 continue its 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 amendment to the license (including the TSs ) 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 request and concludes that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to continue its 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 technical review, there may be instances in which issues that impact the NRC staffs ability to complete the technical review are identified in requests for additional information despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs technical review by separate correspondence.


The purpose of this correspondence is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
From:             Martin, Robert To:               McElroy, G. Ken; Joyce, Ryan M. (RMJOYCE@southernco.com)
 
Cc:               Williams, Shawn
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 continue its 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 amendment to the license (including the TSs ) 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 request and concludes that it does provide technical
 
information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to continue its 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 technical review, there may be instances in which issues that impact the
 
NRC staff's ability to complete the technical review are identified in "requests for additional
 
information" despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. You will be advised of
 
any further information needed to support the NRC staff's technical review by separate
 
correspondence.
 
From: Martin, Robert To: McElroy, G. Ken
; Joyce, Ryan M. (RMJOYCE@southernco.com)
Cc: Williams, Shawn


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
Acceptance for review of Optimized ZIRLO - Farly and Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 Date: Monday, April 18, 2016 12:21:00 PM By application dated March 16, 2016, the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.
Acceptance for review of Optimized ZIRLO - Farly and Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 Date:             Monday, April 18, 2016 12:21:00 PM By application dated March 16, 2016, the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.
proposes to revise Technical Specifications (TS) for the Farley and Vogtle Unit 1 and 2 plants to allow the use of Optimized ZIRLOŽ as an approved fuel rod cladding.
proposes to revise Technical Specifications (TS) for the Farley and Vogtle Unit 1 and 2 plants to allow the use of Optimized ZIRLO' as an approved fuel rod cladding.
 
The purpose of this correspondence is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs 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 continue its 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 correspondence is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Consistent with Section 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), an amendment to the license (including the TSs ) 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 request and concludes that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to continue its 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 technical review, there may be instances in which issues that impact the NRC staffs ability to complete the technical review are identified in requests for additional information despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs technical review by separate correspondence.}}
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 continue its 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 amendment to the license (including the TSs ) 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 request and concludes that it does provide technical
 
information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to continue its 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 technical review, there may be instances in which issues that impact the
 
NRC staff's ability to complete the technical review are identified in "requests for additional
 
information" despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. You will be advised of
 
any further information needed to support the NRC staff's technical review by separate
 
correspondence.}}

Revision as of 20:51, 30 October 2019

Acceptance for Review of Optimized Zirlo - Farly and Vogtle, Units 1 and 2
ML16111B053
Person / Time
Site: Vogtle, Farley  Southern Nuclear icon.png
Issue date: 04/18/2016
From: Martin R
Plant Licensing Branch II
To: Joyce R, Mcelroy K
Southern Nuclear Operating Co
Martin R
References
Download: ML16111B053 (1)


Text

From: Martin, Robert To: McElroy, G. Ken; Joyce, Ryan M. (RMJOYCE@southernco.com)

Cc: Williams, Shawn

Subject:

Acceptance for review of Optimized ZIRLO - Farly and Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 Date: Monday, April 18, 2016 12:21:00 PM By application dated March 16, 2016, the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

proposes to revise Technical Specifications (TS) for the Farley and Vogtle Unit 1 and 2 plants to allow the use of Optimized ZIRLO' as an approved fuel rod cladding.

The purpose of this correspondence is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs 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 continue its 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 amendment to the license (including the TSs ) 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 request and concludes that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to continue its 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 technical review, there may be instances in which issues that impact the NRC staffs ability to complete the technical review are identified in requests for additional information despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs technical review by separate correspondence.

From: Martin, Robert To: McElroy, G. Ken; Joyce, Ryan M. (RMJOYCE@southernco.com)

Cc: Williams, Shawn

Subject:

Acceptance for review of Optimized ZIRLO - Farly and Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 Date: Monday, April 18, 2016 12:21:00 PM By application dated March 16, 2016, the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

proposes to revise Technical Specifications (TS) for the Farley and Vogtle Unit 1 and 2 plants to allow the use of Optimized ZIRLO' as an approved fuel rod cladding.

The purpose of this correspondence is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs 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 continue its 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 amendment to the license (including the TSs ) 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 request and concludes that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to continue its 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 technical review, there may be instances in which issues that impact the NRC staffs ability to complete the technical review are identified in requests for additional information despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs technical review by separate correspondence.