ML20204C281

From kanterella
Revision as of 23:18, 30 December 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Suppls Util 870205 Request to Change Tech Specs Re Spent Fuel Storage Pool.Encl Tech Specs Clarify That NRC-approved Methodology Be Utilized to Qualify Fuel for Unrestricted Storage.Util 870216 NSHC & Justification Still Valid
ML20204C281
Person / Time
Site: McGuire, Mcguire  Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 03/16/1987
From: Tucker H
DUKE POWER CO.
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML20204C286 List:
References
TAC-60845, TAC-60846, NUDOCS 8703250267
Download: ML20204C281 (2)


Text

e DUKE POWER GOMPANY P.O. DOx 33189 CHARLOTTE, N.O. 28242 HALB. TUCKER .

2 PHONE m ,. . (704) ara-4aan utza.ma e.oeconow March 16, 1987

, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

NcGuire Nuclear Station .

I Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370 Technical Specification Changes for Spent Fuel Storage Pool Gentlemen:

I By letter dated February 5, 1987, as a result of discussions between our respective staffs, Duke submitted a proposed change to the Bases of McGuire Nuclear Station Technical Specifications for the spent fuel storage pool. This

  • proposed change specified, in the Bases, that spent fuel qualified for unrestricted storage in Region 2 of the spent fuel pool by analysis would be qualified using NRC approved methodology. This proposal was intended to alleviate NRC concerns regarding the type of analysis or methodology used to qualify spent fuel for unrestricted storage in Region 2. As noted in Mr. D.S. Hood's letter of February 12, 1987 to Mr. H.B. Tucker, an apparent miscommunication occurred as this proposal did not alleviate NRC concerns; consequently, a supplemental proposal is submitted.

Attached is a supplemental proposal to specify, within the Technical Specification, that NRC approved methodology be utilized to qualify fuel for unrestricted storage. As this is a clarification of the original proposal, the Technical Justification and Safety Analysis and the Analysis of Significant Hazards Considerations as presented by the February 17, 1986 letter remain fully valid and need no supplement.

As this request supplements an earlier request, no fees are required.

If you need additional information, please contact us through normal licensing channels.

Very truly yours, B u& -

Hal B. Tucker '

JBD/181/jgm Attachment 8703250267 DR 870316 ADOCK 05000369 PDR

o Document Control Desk k-March 16, 1987

-Page 2 xc: Dr. J. Nelson Grace Regional Administrator, Region IIi , , ,7 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta St. NW, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Mr. Darl Hood U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. W.T. Orders NRC Resident Inspector McGuire Nuclear Station Mr. Dayne Brown, Chief Radiation Protection Branch Division of Facility Services Department of Human Resources P.O. Box 12200 Raleigh, NC 27605 w.

i

, . - - , . _ . . . . - ., .