ML20053E425
| ML20053E425 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 05/25/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20053E424 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-10142, TAC-10143, TAC-11300, TAC-11321, NUDOCS 8206080031 | |
| Download: ML20053E425 (2) | |
Text
.
ccn UNITED STATES 8*
NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCMM!OSION
- 5. )
); o,E WASHINGTON,0. C. 20555
. DESIGNATED ORIGINAL Certified By Ltu
/
o.
h SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 59 TO FACILITY CPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-24 AND AMENDMENT NO. 64 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NC. DPR-27 WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY, POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-266 AND 50-301 Introduction To reflect accumulated experience obtained from operating plants in the past several years, NRC issued Revision 1 of the Standard Tech-nical Specifications on the surveillance requirements for safety-related snubbers. On November 20, 1980, this document was transmitted to operating plants excluding those under SEP along with a request for submittal of appropriate license amendments to incorporate the requirements of this revision within 120 days. The same request was extended to SEP plants on March 23, 1981.
Wisconsin Electric Power Company responded to our request with submittals dated September 1, 1981, January 15,1982 and February 12, 1982 for Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.
Description and Discussion The revised Standard Technical Specifications for snubber surveillance requirements incorporate the following major changes:
1.
Mechanical snubbers are now included in the surveillance program.
2.
No arbitrary snubber capacity is used as a. limit to the inservice
-test requirements.
3.
Seal material no longer requires NRC approval. A monitoring program shall be implemented to assure that snubbers are functioning within their service life.
4.
Clearly defined inservice test requirements for snubbers shall be impl emented.
5.
In-place inservice testing is now permitted.
Wisconsin Electric Power Company has responded in the following manner:
1.
Point Beach units do not employ mechanical snubbers.
2.
Point Beach units have removed the arbitrary limit to future inservice test requirements.
e
?
P
2-3.
A service record will be kept for all snubbers.
4.
A quantitive testing procedure is prepared and will be used for future tests.
5.
Point Beach units do not intend to test snubbers in-place in the near future, and therefore will not incorporate this option in the revision.
Evaluation The proposed license amendment submitted by Wisconsin Electric Power Company for operating license DPR-24 and DPR-27 for Point Beach Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 has incorporated the necessary requirements in Revision 1 of the Standard Technical Specifications for the surveillance of safety-related snubbers and is therefore acceptable. The licensee has requested that the amendments not be effective until the testing equipment has been installed at the Point Beach Nuclear Plant which the licensee envisions will be prior to the Unit 1 Fall 1982 refueling outage. This is acceptable to the staff.
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendments do not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement or negative. declaration and environ-mental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendments do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and do not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendments do not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date:
May 25, 1982 Frincipal Contributors:
T. G. Colburn H. Shaw
>++y-&--
+
=*--o-..*.w
-.~.
eye.,,,.%
.g,,,
_