ML15287A005
| ML15287A005 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 10/14/2015 |
| From: | Richard Guzman Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| To: | Craft W Dominion Nuclear Connecticut |
| Guzman R | |
| References | |
| TAC MF6700 | |
| Download: ML15287A005 (2) | |
Text
From: Guzman, Richard To: "wanda.d.craft@dom.com" Cc: RidsNRRLIC109 Resource
Subject:
Acceptance Review Determination - Millstone Power Station Unit 2 - License Amendment Request Small Break Loss of Coolant Accident Re-analysis for Use of M5 Fuel Rod Cladding (MF6700)
Date: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 6:17:03 AM
- Wanda, The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the results of the NRC staffs acceptance review of the subject license amendment request (LAR).
By letter dated September 1, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15253A205), Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (DNC) submitted an LAR proposing to revise the Millstone Power Station, Unit 2 (MPS2) Technical Specifications. The proposed amendment would add Supplement 1 to the Framatome-ANP (AREVA) topical report for Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) Small Break Loss of Coolant Accident (SBLOCA) Evaluation Model (EMF-2328(P)(A)) and Generic Mechanical Design Criteria for PWR Fuel Designs (EMF 116(P)(A)) to TS 6.9.1.8.b, Core Operating Limits Report, which lists the analytical methods used to determine core operating limits. Supplement 1 to EMF-2328(P)(A) is used in the MPS2 SBLOCA reanalysis related to the use of M5 fuel rod cladding, which DNC plans to introduce beginning with the fresh fuel for MPS2 Cycle 25 in the spring of 2017. Supplement 1 to EMF-92-116(P)(A) describes correction factors to be applied to the RODEX2 predictions to account for fuel pellet thermal conductivity degradation with increasing fuel burnup. Fuel conditions from RODEX2 are used in the SBLOCA S-RELAP5 analysis.
The acceptance review was performed to determine if there is sufficient technical information in scope and depth to allow the NRC staff to complete its detailed technical review. The acceptance review is also intended to identify whether the application has any readily apparent information insufficiencies in its characterization of the regulatory requirements or the licensing basis of the plant.
The NRC staff has reviewed DNCs application and concludes that it does provide technical information in sufficient detail to enable the NRC staff to complete its detailed technical review and make an independent assessment regarding the acceptability of the proposed amendment in terms of regulatory requirements and the protection of public health and safety and the environment. Given the lesser scope and depth of the acceptance review as compared to the detailed technical review, there may be instances in which issues that impact the NRC staffs ability to complete the detailed technical review are identified despite completion of an adequate acceptance review. You will be advised of any further information needed to support the NRC staffs detailed technical review by separate correspondence.
- Thanks,
~~~~~~~~~~~
Rich Guzman Sr. Project Manager NRR/DORL
US NRC 301-415-1030