ML20137L865
| ML20137L865 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 01/20/1986 |
| From: | Fay C WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton, Lear G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-NRC-86-004, CON-NRC-86-4 TAC-60633, TAC-60634, VPNPD-86-022, VPNPD-86-22, NUDOCS 8601280117 | |
| Download: ML20137L865 (2) | |
Text
e Msconsin Electnc eom couem 231 W. MICHtGAN, P.O. BOX 2046. MILWAUKEE, WI 53201 VPNPD-86-022 NRC-86-004 January 20, 1986 Mr. H. R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Washington, D.
C.
20555 Attention:
Mr. G. Lear, Project Ditector PWR Project Directorate No. 1 Gentlemen:
DOCKET NOS. 50-266 AND 50-301 DEADLINE EXTENSION REQUEST FOR SUBMISSION OF CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW
SUMMARY
REPORT POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 On July 31, 1984 we submitted a program plan describing our methodology for conducting a control room design review (CRDR) of the Point Beach Nuclear Plant control room.
Your letter of January 22, 1985 indicated the general acceptability of the plan and indicated that the NRC staff planned an in-process audit of our CRDR.
In our letter to you dated May 21, 1985 we provided a methodology for resolving the NRC's concern with our initial program plan and requested that, for several reasons, the deadline for submitting the required summary report be extended to March 31, 1986.
Your letter to us dated October 16, 1985 granted this deadline extension request.
The in-process audit was conducted by NRC staff and consultants at Point Beach during the week of December 2 through'6, 1985.
We believe the results of the audit were very positive and beneficial to the project.
During the audit we learned that in order for the summary report to be an acceptable basis for the NRC to issue a Safety Evaluation Report (SER) it should include detailed corrective action plans and schedules for resolution of the identified human engineering deficiencies (HED's) that 0601280117 060120
, y,,
PDR ADOCK 05000266 p
PDH
...,,(i.,_i,,
ig
,. (. A <m..
ticss (NosA)
P58 (GAM 4tLL)
PSB (BENLINGER)
Fns (nFNApoVA)
r*
Mr. H. R. Denton January 20, 1986 Page 2 4
need to be corrected.
This interpretation is significantly beyond the scope we envisioned for the summary report.
Although we find this interpretation acceptable, particularly since it will avoid a piecemeal resolution of the issue by providing for one complete submittal which should answer all the questions we now know will be asked, we cannot accommodate preparation of a summary report of this scope within the presently approved schedule.
As you know, there is significant effort involved in developing detailed engineering corrections for HED's and integrated implementation schedules, especially where changes require unit outages for installation.
The Point Beach modification process j
itself requires in-depth reviews prior to approval of a plant i
change.
Besides this normal review and approval process, any modifications to the control room will have to be validated on the Point Beach control room photographic mockup to ensure the modification corrects the HED and does not introduce another HED.
Because of this thorough and lengthy review and approval process, we find it necessary to request that the deadline for submitting the Point Beach Nuclear Plant CRDR summary report be extended to March 31, 1987.
This should provide adequate time to develop details in sufficient depth to provide an adequate basis in the summary report to permit.the NRC to issue the final SER on the Point Beach CRDR.
{
If there are any questions or concerns in this matter, we i
will be pleased to address them.
Very truly yours, J
/9 huQ C. W. Fay Vice Pres dont i
Nuclear Power Copy to NRC Resident Inspector 4
I
.