ML20054E187
| ML20054E187 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 04/05/1982 |
| From: | Fay C WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8204260228 | |
| Download: ML20054E187 (2) | |
Text
(
~
,a h
N 6
4 3
% k'4
~
HQSCORSin Electnc mia come 231 W. MICHIGAN, P.O. BOX 2046, MILWAUKEE, WI 53201 9
V April 5, 1982 N
g Mr. H.
R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Washington, D. C.
20555 Attention:
Mr. R. A. Clark, Chief
,s Operating Reactors, Branch 3 j
g
. c@c ;N Gentlemen:
~
9
~
~
q' ' T,Dg$%~
DOCKET NOS. 50-266 AND 50-301 INSERVICE INSPECTION RELIEF REQUESTS T
N POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 r,*
s As requested in your February 26, 1982 letter ey ve conducted a review of the submittals and responses in rega inservice inspection relief requests.
We believe the following two additional items should be included in your review program:
1.
October 25, 1979 Schwencer (NRC) to Burstein (WE) letter with enclosure, " Granting of Relief from ASME Section XI Inservice Inspection (Testing) Requirements",
Unit 2.
(Attached.)
2.
February 23, 1982 Fay (WE) to Denton (NRC) letter with enclosure, " Completion of First Ten-Year Inservice Inspection Interval", Unit 1.
(This item has been received by your staff.)
In addition, we also believe that the item dated December 6, 1979, Burstein (WE) to Schwencer (NRC), found in your review document record should be dated February 6, 1979.
In your letter you indicated that the review of the third, Unit 2, 40-month inspection interval will be conducted against the 1977 Edition of Section XI of the ASME Code, up to and including the Summer 1978 Addenda.
According to NRC guidelines, an inservice inspection plan is to comply with the requirements of the edition / addenda of ASME Section XI referenced in 10 CFR 50.55(a) no more than six months before the start of the period for an updated program.
The inspection interval for Unit 2 commenced on June 1, 1979.
The Unit 2 inservice inspection plan was developedfoy7 8204260 #88 3
[
(- -
Mr. II. R. Denton April 5, 1982 according to the 1979 revision of 10 CFR 50.55(a), paragraph b(2),
in which the 1974 Edition and addenda only through the Summer 1975 Addenda were in effect for Section XI of the ASME Code.
Therefore, the review of our June 1979 through September 1932 Unit 2 inservice inspection program should be conducted against the 1974 Edition of Section XI of the ASME Code, up to and including the Summer 1975 Addenda.
In keeping with your request to expedite the review, Mr. Tim Colburn of your staff has been advised verbally of the contents of this letter.
Very truly yours,
[
Y Assistant Vice President C. W. Fay Attachment Copy to NRC Resident Inspector i
i I
l
?
p[
b 2......... I UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N wAsHmcTow. D. c.2osas
\\
/
October 25, 1979 Docket No. 50-301 Mr. Sol Burstein Executive Vice President Wisconsin Ele:'.-ic Power Company 231 West Michigan Street
~
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201 l
Dear Mr. Burstein:
t RE:
POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLAhT UNIT NO. 2 I
.By letter dated February 26, 1979, you submitted a proposed inservice
-inspection and testing program description and a request for relief from selected ASME Code requirements pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g).
j
. Although we have not completed our detailed review of your submittal, our preliminary review makes clear to us that your proposed program to implement those ASME Code requirecents that you have found to be practical would increase the scope of inservice inspection and testing for your facility beyond that currently required by your Technical Speci-fications. We have concluded that this upgrading of your inservice inspection and testing program will further enhance safety.
Based on our preliminary review, we agree with your detennination that it is impractical within the limitations of design, geometry and materials of construction of components, for you to meet certain of the specified ASME Code requirements and that imposition of those requirements would result in hardships or unusual difficulties without a compensating increase in the level of quality or safety. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)
(6)(1), we hereby grant relief, on an interim basis, pending completion of our detailed review, from those inservice inspection and testing requirements of the ASME Code that you have requested. Moreover, since l
the scope of the inservice inspection and testing will be increased by your proposed program, and the granting of this relief is based only l
on the impracticality of selected AS".E Code requirements, we have deter-mined that the relief granted neither increases the probability or con-i l
sequences of accidents previously considered nor decreases safety margins l
and that, therefore, it does not involve a significant hazards considera-I tion. Therefore, you are authorized to, and should proceed to' implement l
your proposed program (except where your current Technical Specifications are more restrictive).
MCENG
'g y %!
g GM l
/
NOV 5 1979 PolNT EEACH
tir. Sol Burstein Wisconsin Electric Power Company 2tober 25,1979
.During the period between now and the date we complete our detailed review of your submittal, you must comply with both your existing Technical Specifications and your proposed inservice inspection and 1esting program.
In the event conflicting requirements arise for some
. components, you must comply with the more restrictive requirements (e.g., shorter inspection intervals, increased number of parameters
.. measured). In uther words, the granting of this relief from A.SME Code requirements should not be interpreted to give you relief from any of
-the requirements in your existing Tei:hnical Specifications.
-# hen our detailed review of your February 26, 1979 submittal is complete we will:
(1) issue final approval of your program (which may contain modifications resulting from the staff's review), (2) grant relief from any ASME Code requirements that are detersnined to be impractical for your facility for the duration of the inspection interval and (3) issue appropriate changes to your Technical Specifications.
l A copy of1;he Federal Register Notice related to this action is enclosed.
$1ncerely.,
JK Y G i
L A. Schwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #1
. Division of Operating Reactors
~
Enclosure:
Weral Register Notice
-cc: -w/ enclosure l
See next page
-e-w
~
Mr.' Sol Eurste.in 3-October 25, 1979 Wisconsin Electric Power Company cc: Mr. Bruce Churchill, Esquire Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 1300.M Street, N.W.
Washington, D. C.
20036 Document Department University of Wisconsin Stevens Point Library Stevens Point, Wisconsin 54481 Mr. Glenn A. Reed, Manager Nuclear. Operations i.'
Wisconsin Electric Power Company Point Beach Nuclear Plant 6610 !!uclear Road Two P,ivers, Wisconsin 54241 g
l N
e
~
3 7590-01 UNITED' STATES NUCLEAR' REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET NO. 50-301 WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY
-NOTICE OF' GRANTING OF RELIEF'FROM ASME 'SECTION XI IN5ERVICE IN3PECTION (TESTING) REQUIREMENTS The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Connission) has granted relief from certain requirements of the ASME Code,Section XI, " Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components' to Wisconsin Electric Power Company. The relief relates to the inservice inspection (testing)
. program for the Point Beach Unit No. 2 (the facility) located in Two Creeks,
' Wisconsin. The ASME Code requirements are incorporated by reference into the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Part 50. The relief is effective as of its date of issuance.
The relief consists of exemption from the requirements for measuring certain parameters in the Pump and Yalve Testing Program and from performing certain pressure vessel weld inspections in the Inservice Inspection Testing Program.
The request for relief complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Cosmission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropr.f ate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the letter granting relief. Prior public notice of this action was not required since the granting of this relief from ASME Code requirements does not involve a signfficant hazards consideration.
---_-___-______m._
~
7590-01
.2 -
The Commission has determined that the granting of this relief will not result in hny significant environmental impact and that pursuant to 10 CFR {51.5(d)(4) an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with this action..
For further details with respect to this action, see (1) the request for relief dated February 26, 1979, (2) the Commission's letter to the licensee dated October 25,1979.
The items are available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D. C. and at the University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point Library, Stevens Point, Wisconsin 54481. A copy of item (2) may be obtained upon request addressed to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C.
- 20555, Attention: Director, Division of Operating Reactors.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 25th day of October,1979.
FM THE NUCLEAR REGULATR Y COMMISSION
[42 A. Schwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #1 Division of Operating Reactors
_ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _