ML17319B084
| ML17319B084 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 11/02/1981 |
| From: | Miller W NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Dolan J INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8111160417 | |
| Download: ML17319B084 (6) | |
Text
Docket Nos. 50-315~
and 50-316 Indiana and Michigan Electric ATTN:
Nr. John Dolan Vice President Post Office Box 18 Bowling Green Station New York, New York 10004 Gentlemen:
gOY 2
)981.
DISTRIBUTION:w/encl osure PDR LPDR ocket File < ~
- SHiner, ORB-1
- CParrish, ORB-1 tQI I
- RMDiggs, LFMB LFMB Reactor File LFMB Pending Ck. File Company 5,
g
~
LFMB R/F (2)
~OV03 tSel~
M9E9 Nuance amS~g OWSRQB We have completed a review of the applications for license amendments and other approvals which are on record in our office for Unit Nos.
1 and 2 of the D.C, Cook Nuclear Plant.
The purpose of this review was to determine what fees pursuant to 10 CFR 170.22, if any, are due the USNRC, and what refunds might be due your Company for these license amendments and other approvals.
In this connection, enclosed is a list which shows the application dates.
fees paid, fees that are applicable, and the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation's (ONRR) fee determination on each of the applications.
Based on the amounts your Company paid and the ONRR staff's fee determinations, a total of $8,300 is due the USNRC.
Therefore, it is requested that this amount be remitted to our office.
In those cases where final reviews of your appli-cation have not been completed by the ONRR staff, if the final fee determinations reveal that any of these fees are not correct, your Company will be notified and any necessary adjustments wi'll be made.
Sincerely,
Enclosure:
List of Applications and Fees 8iiiih04i7 Biii02 PDR'DOCK 050003i5 P
PDR 0<@D01 Sisaed gy
+~.0. Miuer William 0. Miller, Chief License Fee Management Branch Office of Administration OFFICEI SURNAME/
DATE$
0
~ ~
H iggs:vml 10/+/81 LFMB'ADM C
oway 10/f f81,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ORB-1
~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~
SHiner
~ 0
~ ~ ~
~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0
~ ~ 0 ~ ~
1 0/py/81 LFMB:ADM WOMi. ler
~i~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~
~ I'
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
10 L81 NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USOPO: 1981~r960
-)
C
(
'll V
lt J
p f<
'1
, ~
g'I ~
lt Ifl A% ~ p,'"'." O',5
'u ~ i~i<
g 1P
~ 'I I 8'4 I-
LIST OF APPLICATIONS AND FEES D. C.
COOK UNIT NOS.
1 and 2
DOCKET NOS.
50-315 316 NOV 2
l981 A lication 1.
11/27/78 (AEP:NRC:00086),
Rev. 2/16/79 (AEP:NRC:00130)
(Cook 2 - Load Rejection Tests)
Fees Paid
$4,000 Fees A
licable None+
ONRR's Basis For Fees Application withdrawn ll/30/79; no review started.
2.
12/22/78 (AEP:NRC:00109)
(Changes 1 thru'6 for Cook 1) 2/13/79 (AEP:NRC:00111)
(Changes 1 thru 22 for Cook 2)
$ 1,200
$ 1,200 312,300/
1,20M2 400~2 g3 g4w 3.
8/25/78 (AEP:NRC:00062) and 10/29/79 (AEP:NRC:000259)
(Cook 2 ISI/IST Program) 9/22/78 (AEP:NRC:00070)
(Cook 1 ISI/IST Program)
None
$4,000 None None>
Supplement to 9/29/77 J2 None-/
application.
None Supplement to 9/29/77 2/
application.
4.
3/19/79 (AEP: NRC: 00145)
(RPI System for Cook 1
and 2)
$4,400 94,400k Although withdrawn by letter 6/17/80 (00271C);
ONRR review had started.Ii Issue closed by ONRR letter dated 8/18/80.
I 5.
12/17/79 (AEP:NRC:00268)
(Report on adequacy of Cook 1 and 2 electrical distribution system voltages).
(Review completed 6/Ol/81 and SER/TER issued).
None
$ 14,800
$4,400 Single safety issue and i
-1/
more than one unit.
Although response to NRC written request, it is not for purpose of simplifying and clarifying license or TS for convenience of
- NRC, so it is not exempt from fees under footnotel 2 of 170.22.
23,100 Total Fees Applicable.........$ 23,100 Total Fees Paid...............-14,800 Total Fees Due USNRC..........$
8,300
FOOTNOTES
+1 Final fee determination.
g2 preliminary fee determination because most or all, items are still pending completion of review.
g3 Changes 2, 4, 7, and 14 listed in Attachment A to Cook 1
application and Changes 2, 4, 9, 11, 17 and 20 listed in Attachment A to the Cook 2 application are similar between the two units, but will involve consideration of six separate safety issues; therefore, a Class IV fee is applicable to one of the units and a Class I to the other (see Footnote 5 below).
Change No.
1 is an old fire protection item for which fees are not being assessed.
g4 A significant number of the remaining changes in each Attachment are similar between the two units and require a Class II fee for one of the units and a Class I for the other.
g5 Although Cook 1 and 2 applications were filed at different times, they are being reviewed together because changes for one unit are in most instances the same for the other unit.
Therefore, two Class I duplicate fees are applicable for one unit.
- l
,e ~~~ ~
OO pr