ML20087K388

Submits Details of Followup Actions on Amend 90 to License DPR-65.Adequate Justification Provided to Demonstrate Applicability of Current Large Break LOCA Evaluation for Operation W/O Thermal Shield

ML20087K388
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	03/13/1984
From:	Counsil W NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO., NORTHEAST UTILITIES
To:	John Miller Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
A03722, A3722, TAC-54199, NUDOCS 8403260145
Download: ML20087K388 (2)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

r g

General Offices

• Selden Street. Berlin, Connecticut u m ce.uv wvacana m =a=

9 P.O BOX 270

.,m c.m eacac "*'

m w,e..

.= - u - "

HARTFORD CONNECTICUT 06141-0270 J

%,3'l', C,", ".%. '."~,.

(203) 666-6911 L

L March 13,1984 Docket No. 50-336 A03722 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attn:

Mr. James R. Miller Operating Reactors Branch #3 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 1

References:

(1)

K. L. Heitner letter to W. G. Counsil, dated December 30, 1983.

(2)

W. G. Counsil letter to J. R. Miller, dated December 12, 1983.

{

Gentlemen:

t Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2 Followup Actions to Amendment No. 90 to Operating License No. DPR-65 The NRC Staff forwarded Amendment No. 90 to Facility Operating License No l

DPR-65 in Reference (1).

The amendment authorized Cycle 6 operation for l

Millstone Unit No. 2.

In the cover letter accompanying the amendment, the l

Staff reyicsted Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO) to commit to provide by the next refueling outage confirmation that the peak clad i

temperature for the limiting large break loss-cf-coolant accident did not increase by more than 200F due to the removal of the thermal shield or an analysis of the event in accordance with Section ILI.b of Appendix K to 10CFR50.

It is NNECO's position that adequate justification demonstrating the applicability of the current large break LOCA evaluation was provided in Reference (2) for operation of Millstone Unit No. 2 without a thermal shield.

T1.e results of the Reference (2) evaluation, while not quantitative, are consistent with those provided for another facility of similar design which also cecently removed the thermal shield. NNECO expects the removal of the shield would result in a net benefit with respect to the large break LOCA peak clad temperature rendering the existing analysis, which includes inputs representing the thermal shield, conservative.

8403260145 840313 PDR ADOCK 05000336 t g P

PDR l

2-l It is NNECO's intention to provide additional information which supports the i

Reference (2) conclusions regarding the impact of removing the thermal shield on the large break LOCA evaluation. This information will confirm that the peak clad temperature does not increase by more than 200F. This information i

will be docketed on or about May 25,1984.

Very truly yours, NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY i

l AV)23 W. G. Counsil Senior Vice President 1

l t

f ir l

i

...