ML24304B052

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

10-30-2024 Supplement to Maine Yankee ISFSI Exemption Request
ML24304B052
Person / Time
Site: Maine Yankee, 07201015
Issue date: 10/30/2024
From: Day S
Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co
To: Kristina Banovac
Storage and Transportation Licensing Branch
References
EPID L-2024-LLE-0015
Download: ML24304B052 (2)


Text

From:

Stan Day To:

Kristina Banovac Cc:

Daniel Laing; John Macdonald; Shae Hemingway; Joe Bourassa

Subject:

[External_Sender] RE: Question re: Maine Yankee exemption Date:

Wednesday, October 30, 2024 12:11:42 PM

Kristina,

As we discussed this morning, I conferred with our Radiation Protection Manager, reviewed the historical Amendment No. 2 NAC-UMS CoC TS against the Amendment No. 9 TS, and reviewed 10 CFR 72.13(c) and 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3). You are correct that the exemption is no longer required, because: 1) The NAC-UMS CoC TS 5.5c reference to 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3) was eliminated in a NAC-UMS CoC Amendment 3 and is not included in NAC-UMS Amendment 9; and 2) 10 CFR 72.13(c) does not stipulate that 10 CFR 72.44(d) is applicable to general licensees.

Stan

From: Kristina Banovac <Kristina.Banovac@nrc.gov>

Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2024 10:50 AM To: Stan Day <sday@3yankees.com>

Subject:

Question re: Maine Yankee exemption

Hi Stan,

As just discussed, I have a question regarding Maine Yankees 3/28/2024 exemption request (ML24094A060). I wanted to check if Maine Yankee still desires to continue exemption #3, regarding the technical specifications (TS) Appendix A, Section A.5.5, Radioactive Effluent Control Program. This exemption is from the requirement to submit an annual report pursuant to 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3).

I took a look at the design bases for the NAC-UMS CoC to understand where the 72.44(d)

(3) requirement came in. It looks like this was an explicit requirement in TS 5.5 c. in Amendment No. 2: An annual report shall be submitted pursuant to 10 CFR 72.44(d)

(3). Maine Yankee originally loaded to this amendment and requested an exemption from this specific requirement in the CoC/TS. However, this explicit requirement for the 72.44(d)

(3) report was actually removed from the TS in Amendment No. 3. Therefore, I am wondering if this exemption is needed at all, since the requirement is no longer in the CoC/TS (since Amendment No. 3).

Please let me know, and please reach out if youd like to discuss further.

Thank you, Kris

Kristina Banovac, Project Manager Storage and Transportation Licensing Branch Division of Fuel Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 301-415-7116