View source for A071168, Clarifies Util Containing Interpretation That 10CFR50.59 Would Govern Whether or Not Prior NRC Approval Required to Use Temporary Spent Fuel Racks for long-term Spent Fuel Storage

{{Adams
| number = ML20151N404
| issue date = 07/29/1988
| title = Clarifies Util Containing Interpretation That 10CFR50.59 Would Govern Whether or Not Prior NRC Approval Required to Use Temporary Spent Fuel Racks for long-term Spent Fuel Storage
| author name = Mroczka E
| author affiliation = NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO., NORTHEAST UTILITIES
| addressee name = 
| addressee affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION &amp; RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
| docket = 05000336
| license number = 
| contact person = 
| document report number = A071168, A71168, TAC-65274, NUDOCS 8808080207
| title reference date = 06-13-1988
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE, UTILITY TO NRC
| page count = 2
| project = TAC:65274
| stage = Other
}}

=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:- - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - _ - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
l NORTHEAST UTILITIES                                  cenerai orrices . scioen street, eeriin. connecticut 9           .sr5 N=$2 bsYeNc$.                                                          P.O. BOX 270                                                               l o o s . cia wa cc~.=w                                                       H ARTFORD, CONN ECTICUT 06141-0270 l
L g   j    (("'g',dyy[5 cg**,                                                          (203) 665-5000                                                             l 1
l l
July 29, 1988 1
Docket No. 50-336 A07168 Re:       10CFR50.59 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissier Attn:     Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 Gentlemen:
Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2 10CFR50.59 Reviews By letter dated March 31,                 1988,(1) the NRC Staff issued to Northeast Nuclear Energy Company                (NNECO) Amendment No. 128 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-65 for Millstone Unit No. 2.
In that letter, the Staff expressed its position that should we desire to use the temporary spent fuel storage racks for long-term spent fuel storage, that NNECO should identify the change and request approval from the NRC.                                                                               By letter dated June 13,        1988,(2) NNECO documented its interpretation that the provisions of 10CFR50.59 would govern whether or not prior NRC approval would be required if we intended to use the temporary spent fuel storage racks for long-term spent fuel storage.
During        subsequent discussions 7ith the Staff, we obtained additional background and information regarding the Staff's                                                                                                        l position.           It was agreed that we would provide this clarifying letter to document our mutual unders'tanding, which is summarized below.
First,       it     is      noted that the likelihood of this circumstance materializing is rather remote.                  In any event,                                                                                  our original       I intention with the {{letter dated|date=June 13, 1988|text=June 13, 1988 letter}} was merely to note that a well-established regulatory process is in place to identify the (1) D.      H. Jaffe letter to E. J. Mroczka,"Issuance of                                                                                          Amendment (TAC No. 65274)," dated March 31, 1988.
(2) E.      J. Mroczka letter to U.S.          Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2 - 10CFR50.59 Reviews," dated June 13, 1988.
l (P6qi 8808080207 880729                                                                                                                                      10 l
PDR        ADOCK 05000336 P                       PDC

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission A07168/Page 2 July 29, 1988 conditions during which prior NRC Staff approval of plant changes is    required.       No inference on the merits of a 10CFR50.59 review of the change from temporary to any long-term storage application was stated or intended.          In all likelihood, use of the temporary racks for long-term storage could potentially constitute an unreviewed safety question under 10CFR50.59 and as such, prior NRC approval would be required.                      Furthermore,                                      our frequent interactions with the Staff on fuel rack changes (e.g., the subject Millstone Unit No. 2 amendment, our ongoing dialogue regarding the Millstone Unit No.                   1 spent fuel reracking, the planned new fuel storage racks for Millstone Unit No. 3) serves to heighten our awareness of NRC Staff interpretations in this regard.        Specifically, our corporate philosophy is to abide by the regulations in a fashion agreeable to the Staff.
In    light of the above considerations, in the unlikely event that we    plan to      use   the temporary racks          for long-term storage,                                     we would contact the Staff to insure that the appropriate regulatory vehicle       (10CFR50.90 or    10CFR50.59)          is utilized.                                     We make this commitment        with   continued    confidence in the integrity of our e;;isting 10CFR50.59 process.
Please contact us if you have any questions.
Very truly yours, NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY M &L EI'Q( Mroczkh Senior Vice President cc:     W. T. Russell, Region I Administrator D. H. Jaffe, NRC Project Manager, Millstone Unit No. 2 W. J. Raymond,     Senior Resident Inspector, Millstone                                              Unit Nos. 1,  2,  and 3
                                                                                                                  . . .            _}}