ML14330A239
| ML14330A239 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 11/26/2014 |
| From: | Jeffrey Whited Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| To: | Filchner D Susquehanna |
| Whited J | |
| References | |
| TAC MF5097, TAC MF5098 | |
| Download: ML14330A239 (1) | |
Text
1 Whited, Jeffrey From:
Whited, Jeffrey Sent:
Wednesday, November 26, 2014 9:01 AM To:
Filchner, Duane L (dlfilchner@pplweb.com)
Subject:
SSES UNITS 1 AND 2 ACCEPTANCE OF REQUESTED LICENSING ACTION RE: RELIEF REQUEST 4RR-01 (TAC NOS. MF5097AND MF5098)
SUBJECT:
SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 ACCEPTANCE OF REQUESTED LICENSING ACTION RE: RELIEF REQUEST 4RR-01 (TAC NOS. MF5097AND MF5098)
Dear Mr. Filchner,
By letter dated October 29, 2014, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML14302A443) PPL Susquehanna, LLC, submitted a relief request for the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 (SSES). The request was for Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approval to use American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code) Case N-578-1, Risk-Informed Requirements for Class 1, 2, or 3 Piping, Method B Section XI, Division 1, for the Risk-Informed evaluation and inspection of Class 1 and 2 components at SSES. The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the NRC staffs acceptance review of this 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 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 despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. If additional information is needed, you will be advised by separate correspondence.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
JeffreyWhited ProjectManager PlantLicensingBranchI2 DivisionofOperatingReactorLicensing OfficeofNuclearReactorRegulation U.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommission (301)4154090 jeffrey.whited@nrc.gov