B13641, Revised Application for Amend to License NPF-49,changing TS Re Spent Fuel Storage During Cycle 4 Reload

Revised Application for Amend to License NPF-49,changing TS Re Spent Fuel Storage During Cycle 4 Reload

ML20062H490
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	11/30/1990
From:	Mroczka E, Sears C NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO., NORTHEAST UTILITIES
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML20062H495	List: B13641, Revised Application for Amend to License NPF-49,changing TS Re Spent Fuel Storage During Cycle 4 Reload ML20062H498
References
CON-FIN-B-13641 B13641, TAC-72997, NUDOCS 9012050016
Download: ML20062H490 (3)

Text

_ . . . . ,

oC w 4

• e General Offices

• Seldon Street. Berkn. Connecticut a vo .me..= ni n w" "*** P.O. BOX 270 m s .m w.. w . "*" H ARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 061410270 k k J 7.Z [22,$Z (203) 665 5000 November 30, 1990 t Q2cket No. 50-423 B13641 Re: 10CFR50.90 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen:

Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 Proposed Revision to Technical Specifications L. Cycle 4 Reload--Soent Fuel Storaae

References:

1. D. H. Jaffe letter to E. J. Mroczka, " Issuance of Amend-ment (TAC No. 72997)," dated August 29, 1989.

2. E. J. Hroczka letter to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 Proposed Revision to Technical Specifications," dated April 20, 1989.

In a letter dated August 29,1989 (Reference 1), the NRC Staff issued Amend-ment No. 39 to Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO) for the Hillstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit Ev. 3. This amendment was issued in response to a license amendment request submitted by NNECO on April 20,1989 (Reference

2) and included, among other things, a restriction that limited- the storage of spent fuel in the spent fuel pool to that spent fuel generated through

=

Cycle 3 operation. The reason for this restriction was that the thermal hydraulic evaluation performed on the spent fuel pool (SFP) cooling system, addressing the impact of the increased fuel enrichment utilized for Cycle 3, only considered the thermal stresses associated with spent fuel through Cycle

3. Further analysis was required to qualify the SFP cooling system beyond Cycle 3. This analysis has now been completed and the purpose of.this letter is to request a license amendment to remove the Cycle 3 restriction. This license amendment request represents a supplemental amendment request in

. support of the Cycle 4 reload. The remaining Cycle 4 reload license amendment requests have been or are being submitted under a separate cover.

Pursuant to 10CFR50.90, NNECO hereby proposes to amend its Operating License, NPF-49, by incorporating the attached proposed change into -the Technical Specifications of Millstone Unit No. 3. The proposed Technical Specification change is included as Attachment 1. Attachment 2 provides a description and the supporting evaluations for this cb nge, 9012050016 90113c 4 h g l

'DR

. ADOCK 0500 3 g,hre 1 OS34N REV 4-68 8 fh

e

o. ,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission B13641/Page 2 November 30, 1990 In accordance with 10CFR50.92, NNECO has reviewed the proposed change ano concluded that it does not involve a significant hazards consideration because the proposed change will not:

1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously analyzed. The proposed change qualifies the Millstone Unit No. 3 SFP cooling system and piping and the spent fuel pool structure out to the end of life. The analysis is bounded by the original design basis acceptance criteria and since the design SFP temperatures are not exceeded, there is no adverse impact on the results of any previously analyzed accident.

2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously analyzed. Since there is no change in the way the plant is operated or in the operation of equipment credited in any design basis accident, the potential for an unanalyzed accident is not created. In addition, no new failure modes are introduced.

3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Since there is no impact on the consequences of any accident previously analyzed, none of the safety limits are challenged. Thus, there is no reduction in the margin of safety.

The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of standards set forth in 10CFR50.92 by providing certain examples (March 6, 1986, 51FR7751) of amendments that are considered not likely to involve a significant hazards consideration. The proposed change to the Technical Specifications is not enveloped by a specific example, however, as discussed above, the proposed change will not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of any accident previously analyzed, create the possibility of a new accident, or reduce the margin of safety. A further discussion and justification for this conclusion is provided in Attachment 2.

Based upon the above and the information in this submittal, there are no significant radiological or nonradiological impacts associated with this proposed change, and the proposed change will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.

The Millstone Unit No. 3 Nuclear Review Board has reviewed and approved the proposed amendment and concurred with the above determinations.

l In accordance with 10CFR50.91(b), we are providing the State of Connecticut i

with a copy of the proposed amendment.

l The next refueling outage is scheduled to begin in February 1991. Approval i of this proposed license amendment would not be required until the reload for l Cycle 4 is to be discharged. However, if a condition arose where an emergency core off-load of Cycle 4 fuel was required prior to approval of this license amendment, then this license amendment would be required on an

0 V.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission B13641/Page 3 November 30, 1990 emergency basis. Consea'sently, NNEC0 respectfully requests NRC Staff review and approval of this licene amendment request by Marc'. 10, 1991 to support startup from the Cycle 4 refueling.

We trust you will find this information satisfactory, and we remain available to answer any questions you may have.

Very truly yours, NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENLPGY COMPANY FOR: E J. Mroczka Sonior Vice President BY: C &

C. F. Sears Vice President cc: T. T. Martin, Region I Administrator D. H. Jaffe, NRC Project Manager, Millstone Unit No. 3 W. J. Raymond, Senior Resident inspector, Millstone Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3 Mr. Kevin McCarthy Director, Radiation Control Unit Department of Environmental Protection Hartford, CT 06116 STATE OF CONNECTICUT)

) ss. Berlin COUNTY OF HARTFORD )

Then personally appeared before me, C. F. Sears, who being duly sworn, did state that he is Vice President of Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, a Licensee herein, that he is authorized to execute and file the foregoing information in the name and on behalf of the Licensee herein, and that the statements contained in said information are true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief.

%. baEQq No.ory Public l

1 l