ML102730207

Acceptance Review: MPS2 LAR Regarding Decay Time

ML102730207
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	09/30/2010
From:	Sanders C Plant Licensing Branch 1
To:	Bartron W, Craft W Dominion Nuclear Connecticut
Sandeers, Carleen, NRR/DORL, 415-1603
References
FOIA/PA-2011-0115
Download: ML102730207 (1)

Text

From: Sanders, Carleen Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 10:47 AM To: 'William D Bartron'; 'Wanda D Craft'

Subject:

Acceptance Review: MPS2 LAR Regarding Decay Time Dear Mr. Bartron By letter dated July 21, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML102240064), Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. submitted a license amendment request for Millstone Power Station, Unit No.

2 (MPS2). The proposed license amendment request would revise the MPS2 Technical Specification (TS) 3/4.9.3.1, Decay Time, by reducing the minimum decay time for irradiated fuel prior to movement in the reactor vessel from 150 hours6.25 days <br />0.893 weeks <br />0.205 months <br /> to 100 hours4.167 days <br />0.595 weeks <br />0.137 months <br />. The purpose of this email is to provide the results of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff's acceptance review of this license 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 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.

Consistent with Section 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), an amendment to the 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 complete its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed amendment 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. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staff=s detailed technical review by separate correspondence.

If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1603.

Sincerely, Carleen Sanders, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-336