ML20083F621
| ML20083F621 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 12/23/1983 |
| From: | Fay C WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton, John Miller Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20083F622 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-53400, TAC-53401, NUDOCS 8401030208 | |
| Download: ML20083F621 (2) | |
Text
-
i l
v WISCONSIN Electnc eaara couraur 231 W. MICHIGAN P.O. BOX 2046. MitWAUKEE, WI 53201 December 23, 1983 CERTIFIED MAIL Mr.
H.
R.
Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.
S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Washington, D.
C.
20555 Attention:
Mr. J.
R. Miller, Chief Operating Reactor, Branch 3 Gentlemen:
DOCKET NOS. 50-266 AND 50-301 SURVEILLANCE TESTS FOR INTEGRITY OF RECOVERY SYSTEMS TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST NO. 95 POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 In accordance with Sections 50.59 and 59.90 of 10 CFR 50, Wisconsin Electric Power Company (Licensee) hereby requests amend-ments to Facility Operating Licenses DPR-24 and DPR-27 for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, respectively.
The purpose of these amendments is to incorporate changes into the Point Beach Technical Specifications which revise the surveillance interval for evaluating the integrity of post-accident recovery systems outside containment.
Presently, the surveillance interval for this evaluation, as specified in item 24 of Table 15.4.1-2 of the Technical Specification, is yearly.
It is requested that this interval be changed to "each refueling cycle".
This change would make this specification consistent with the license condition proposed by the NRC in Mr. Eisenhut's generic letter to all PWR licensees dated July 2, 1980.
This change would also accommodate the extended refueling and repair outage for Point Beach Unit 1 which precludes a complete evaluation of the post-accident recovery systems leakage on an annual basis because of the operational considerations involving several of these systems.
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a) (1), we have determined that this proposed change does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
The NRC has previously determined in its July 2, 1980 letter that a post-accident recovery system leakage evaluation on a refueling interval basis is acceptable.
Accordingly, this 8401030208 831223 l
PDR ADOCK 05000266 I
P PDR l
&chepGif***
Mr. H. R.
Denton December 23, 1983 proposed change may be considered an administrative change to establish consistency with NRC regulatory guidance.
The NRC guidelines as published in 48 Federal Register 14870 provide examples of changes which are considered not likely to involve a significant hazards consideration.
One such example is admini-strative changes to achieve consistency in the Technical Specifica-tions.
Therefore, we conclude this change does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
The schedule of fees for reactor facility license amendments provided in 10 CFR 170.22 specifies a fee of $1200 for an administrative or Class II amendment approval.
A duplicate approval for a second identical unit at the same site requires a fee of $400.
Accordingly, we have provided herewith a check in the amount of $1600 for these license amendment approvals.
As further specified in the Commission's regulations, we are enclosing herewith three signed originals and 40 copies of this application.
Please contact us if you have any questions.
Very truly yours, l
Y
!gJ. g,,7 G
j r
Vice President-Nuclear Power C. W. Fay Enclosures (Check No. 762567)
Copies to NRC Resident Inspector C. F.
Riederer, PSCW i
l l
{
,