ML041690032

Facsimile Transmission, Draft Request for Additional Information (RAI) to Be Discussed in an Upcoming Conference Call

ML041690032
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	06/14/2004
From:	Nerses V NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1
To:	Clifford J NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1
Nerses V, NRR/DLPM, 415-1484
References
TAC MB6479
Download: ML041690032 (3)

Text

June 14, 2004 MEMORANDUM TO: James W. Clifford, Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Victor Nerses, Sr. Project Manager, Section 2 /RA/

Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

MILLSTONE POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 2, FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION, DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) TO BE DISCUSSED IN AN UPCOMING CONFERENCE CALL (TAC NO. MB6479)

The attached draft RAI was transmitted by facsimile on June 14, 2004, to Mr. David Dodson, Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (licensee). This draft RAI was transmitted to facilitate the technical review being conducted by NRR and to support a conference call with the licensee to discuss the RAI. The RAI was related to the licensees submittal dated September 26, 2002, as supplemented by letter dated May 7, 2004, concerning the selective implementation of the Alternate Source Term methodology. Review of the RAI would allow the licensee to determine and agree upon a schedule to respond to the RAI. This memorandum and the attachment do not convey or represent an NRC staff position regarding the licensees request.

Docket No. 50-336

Attachment:

Draft RAI

June 14, 2004 MEMORANDUM TO: James W. Clifford, Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Victor Nerses, Sr. Project Manager, Section 2 /RA/

Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

MILLSTONE POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 2, FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION, DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) TO BE DISCUSSED IN AN UPCOMING CONFERENCE CALL (TAC NO. MB6479)

The attached draft RAI was transmitted by facsimile on June 14, 2004, to Mr. David Dodson, Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (licensee). This draft RAI was transmitted to facilitate the technical review being conducted by NRR and to support a conference call with the licensee to discuss the RAI. The RAI was related to the licensees submittal dated September 26, 2002, as supplemented by letter dated May 7, 2004, concerning the selective implementation of the Alternate Source Term methodology. Review of the RAI would allow the licensee to determine and agree upon a schedule to respond to the RAI. This memorandum and the attachment do not convey or represent an NRC staff position regarding the licensees request.

Docket No. 50-336

Attachment:

Draft RAI DISTRIBUTION PUBLIC J. Clifford V. Nerses SLaVie PDI-2 Reading Accession Number: ML041690032 OFFICE PDI-2/PM SPSB/SC NAME VNerses RDennig DATE 6/14/04 6/14/04 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS SELECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ALTERNATE SOURCE METHODOLOGY FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-65 DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC MILLSTONE POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-336 (TAC NO. MB6479)

By letter dated September 26, 2002, as supplemented by letter dated May 7, 2004, Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (icensee) submitted a proposed amendment to the Technical Specifications (TS) for Millstone Unit 2. The proposed amendment would selectively implement the Alternate Source Term methodology.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has reviewed the information the licensee provided that supports the proposed changes to the TS. In order for the staff to complete its evaluation, the following additional information is requested:

The May 7, 2004 letter does not address the impact of the increases on the cask drop accident that was analyzed in the September 26, 2002 submittal. The NRC staff notes that in the cask drop analysis, the licensee assumed that only I-129 and Kr85 would be present and assumed an "other halogen" fraction of 0.05 and a Kr85 fraction of 0.1. Since both these gap fractions have increased (right column, Table 1 of May 7 letter), the NRC staff expects that the impact on dose would be discernable. In this regard, please provide an assessment of the impact on the cask drop accident of the proposed gap fractions of Table 1 in the May 7, 2004, letter.

ATTACHMENT