ML20155J002
| ML20155J002 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 06/16/1986 |
| From: | Carey J DUQUESNE LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| GL-83-28, TAC-62946, TAC-62953, NUDOCS 8810250068 | |
| Download: ML20155J002 (2) | |
Text
~
)
l
/h>%
\\
B 2NRC-6-063 y'*rgeyer 4. 2 Unit Project Organtrattoa 8.0. Box 32l (412) 643 5200 Telecopy (410 5
Shippingport. PA 15017 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 0
M Unites States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
,, 9 % v(
Washington, DC 20555 N
ATTENTION:
Mr. Peter Tam, Project Manager Division of PWR Licensing - A
(
Ciiice of Nuclear Reactor Regulations
SUBJECT:
Beaver Valley Power Stition - Unit No. 2 Docket No. 50-412 Request for additional information Items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of Generic Letter 83-28
REFERENCES:
1)
NRC letter, Request for additonal information, dated April 3, 1986.
2)
DLC letter, dated November 4, 1983 from Mr. J. J. Carey to CN Mr. Eisenhut.
I 1
Gentlemen:
Attached is the response to the Request for Additional Information on Generic Letter 83-28 transmitted per Reference 1.
Since the Beaver Valley Unit No. 2 Technical Specifications are being modeled after the Beaver Valley Unit No. 1 Technical Specifications, the responses to Items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of Generic Letter 83-28 for Beaver Valley Unit No. 2 are consequently similiar to the responses previously provided by Beaver Valley Unit No.1 per Reference No.
2.
If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. R.
Fedin at (412) 643-5200, extension 215.
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY By J."J. War ey Vice President RWF/kam Attachment cc:
Mr. P. Tam, eroject Manager (w/a)
(Q Mr. L. Priv Wy NRC Resident Inspector (w/a)
"/
INP0 Records Center (w/a)
NRC Document Control Desk (w/a)
//t' &
snt0:50068 860616
/0f /./2 k/u N i
gm Aoock oucom i:
- [/
e 3.1 Post maintenance Testing (Reactor Trip System Components) 3.
Licensees and applicants shall identify, if applicable, any post main *,enance test requirements in existing Technical Specifications which can be demonstrated to degrade rather than enhance safety.
Appropriate changes to these test requirements, with supporting just-ification, shall be submitted for staff approval.
3.2 Post Maintenance Testing (All Other Safety-Related Components 3.
Licensees and applicants shall iden t.i fy, if applicable, any post-maintenance test requirements in existing Technical Specifications which are perceived to degrade rather than enhance safety.
Ap-l propriate changes to these test requirements, with supporting just-ification, shall be submitted for staff approval.
Beaver Valley Unit No. 2 Response to both of the above:
No post maintenance tests required by existing Technical Specifications, l
have been identified which degrade rather than enhance safety.
4 I
i l
4