|
---|
Category:INTERVENTION PETITIONS
MONTHYEARML20027E3171982-11-0505 November 1982 Contentions Re Steam Generator Replacement,Supplementing 820810 Petition to Intervene ML20065G3861982-09-28028 September 1982 Amend to Wi Environ Decade 820810 Petition to Intervene Including Affidavits Requesting Wi Environ Decade to Intervene on Affiant Behalf.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20063C8901982-08-24024 August 1982 Answer Opposing Wi Environ Decade 820810 Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.Standing Not Demonstrated & Aspects as to Which Intervention Sought Not Specified. Notices of Appearance & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20062F7151982-08-10010 August 1982 Petition for Leave to Intervene in Steam Generator Replacement Proceeding & Petition for Hearing.Wi Environ Decade Has Recognized Life,Property & Financial Interests. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20011A3971981-10-0505 October 1981 Response Opposing Wi Environ Decade 810924 Statement of Bases for Proposed Contentions 3-7.No Specific Basis for Contentions Set Forth.Petition for Leave to Intervene Should Be Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20010F3521981-08-31031 August 1981 Amend to Wi Environ Decade,Inc 810720 Petition to Intervene ML20010E5831981-08-31031 August 1981 Amended Petition to Intervene in Proceeding ML20010B1491981-08-0606 August 1981 Answer Opposing Wi Environ Decade 810720 Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.Commission Should Defer Consideration of Petition Pending NRC Review of Util License Amend Application.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20009D9531981-07-20020 July 1981 Petition for Admission as Party,Hearing & EIS Re Steam Generator Tube Sleeving Program.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19327A4611980-07-30030 July 1980 Petition for Participation as Interested State.Requests Institution of Hearing to Address Intervenor 800715 Contentions ML19321A5521980-07-15015 July 1980 Preliminary Contentions Alleging Possibility of Steam Generator Tube Rupture During Severe Loca.Contends That Continued Operation W/Significant Tube Degradation Poses Threat to Public.Certificate of Svc Encl 1982-09-28
[Table view] Category:RESPONSES & CONTENTIONS
MONTHYEARML20027E3171982-11-0505 November 1982 Contentions Re Steam Generator Replacement,Supplementing 820810 Petition to Intervene ML20065G3861982-09-28028 September 1982 Amend to Wi Environ Decade 820810 Petition to Intervene Including Affidavits Requesting Wi Environ Decade to Intervene on Affiant Behalf.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20063C8901982-08-24024 August 1982 Answer Opposing Wi Environ Decade 820810 Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.Standing Not Demonstrated & Aspects as to Which Intervention Sought Not Specified. Notices of Appearance & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20062F7151982-08-10010 August 1982 Petition for Leave to Intervene in Steam Generator Replacement Proceeding & Petition for Hearing.Wi Environ Decade Has Recognized Life,Property & Financial Interests. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20011A3971981-10-0505 October 1981 Response Opposing Wi Environ Decade 810924 Statement of Bases for Proposed Contentions 3-7.No Specific Basis for Contentions Set Forth.Petition for Leave to Intervene Should Be Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20010F3521981-08-31031 August 1981 Amend to Wi Environ Decade,Inc 810720 Petition to Intervene ML20010E5831981-08-31031 August 1981 Amended Petition to Intervene in Proceeding ML20010B1491981-08-0606 August 1981 Answer Opposing Wi Environ Decade 810720 Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.Commission Should Defer Consideration of Petition Pending NRC Review of Util License Amend Application.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20009D9531981-07-20020 July 1981 Petition for Admission as Party,Hearing & EIS Re Steam Generator Tube Sleeving Program.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19327A4611980-07-30030 July 1980 Petition for Participation as Interested State.Requests Institution of Hearing to Address Intervenor 800715 Contentions ML19321A5521980-07-15015 July 1980 Preliminary Contentions Alleging Possibility of Steam Generator Tube Rupture During Severe Loca.Contends That Continued Operation W/Significant Tube Degradation Poses Threat to Public.Certificate of Svc Encl 1982-09-28
[Table view] Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARNPL-97-0357, Comment Opposing Proposed NRC Bulletin 96-001,suppl 1, CR Insertion Problems1997-06-19019 June 1997 Comment Opposing Proposed NRC Bulletin 96-001,suppl 1, CR Insertion Problems DD-97-15, Director'S Decision DD-97-15 Re Petitioners Request That NRC Prohibit Loading of VSC-24 Until Coc,Sar & SER Amended Following Independent third-party Review of VSC-24 Design. No Adequate Basis Exists for Granting Petitioners Request1997-06-18018 June 1997 Director'S Decision DD-97-15 Re Petitioners Request That NRC Prohibit Loading of VSC-24 Until Coc,Sar & SER Amended Following Independent third-party Review of VSC-24 Design. No Adequate Basis Exists for Granting Petitioners Request ML20141B0451997-06-0909 June 1997 Requests Extension of Comment Period for NRC Bulletin 96-001,suppl 1 Re Control Rod Insertion Problems ML20198R1511997-03-0505 March 1997 Transcript of 970305 OI Interview of Aj Cayia in Two Rivers, Wi Re NRC Investigation Case 3-97-008.Pp 1-70 ML20198R1361997-03-0404 March 1997 Transcript of 970304 OI Interview of DF Johnson in Two Rivers,Wi Re NRC Investigation Case 3-97-008.Pp 1-37 ML20198R0931997-03-0404 March 1997 Transcript of 970304 OI Interview of Rj Harvey in Two Rivers,Wi Re NRC Investigation Case 3-97-008.Pp 1-28. Supporting Documentation Encl ML20198R1111997-03-0404 March 1997 Transcript of 970304 OI Interview of E Ziller in Two Rivers, Wi Re NRC Investigation Case 3-97-008.Pp 1-33.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20198R1281997-03-0404 March 1997 Transcript of 970304 OI Interview of T Malanowski in Two Rivers,Wi Re NRC Investigation Case 3-97-008.Pp 1-28 ML20134B7371997-01-27027 January 1997 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50.60 to Determine That Setpoint for LTOP Events Will Not Present Undue Risk to Public & Safety.Exemption Granted NPL-95-0321, Comment on Proposed 10CFR50.54(p) Re Process for Changes to Security Plans W/O Prior NRC Approval.Supports Proposed Clarification of Language in 10CFR50.54(p)1995-07-11011 July 1995 Comment on Proposed 10CFR50.54(p) Re Process for Changes to Security Plans W/O Prior NRC Approval.Supports Proposed Clarification of Language in 10CFR50.54(p) ML20085E6541995-06-13013 June 1995 Comment Re Draft NUREG/BR-0199, Responsiveness to Public. Expresses Concern on Dry Cask Storage W/Exemption Given to VSC-24 Cask & Procedures for Unloading & Transport at Plant ML20078F4831994-12-20020 December 1994 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Shutdown & low-power Operations for Np Reactors.Informs That Util of Belief That NRC Already Has Appropriate Regulatory Authority Over Shutdown & low-power Operations,As Provided in Maint Rule ML20077E8361994-12-0101 December 1994 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Shutdown & Low- Power Operations for Nuclear Power Reactors ML20059E9331993-10-27027 October 1993 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR171 Re Restoration of Generic Exemption from Annual Fees for Nonprofit Educational Institutions ML20045D7331993-06-13013 June 1993 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Mods to fitness-for-duty Program Requirements.Recommends That NRC re-evaluate Proposed Testing Frequency Due to Random Testing Rate of 50% Sufficient to Provide Continued Detection Effectiveness ML20127D7191992-09-0606 September 1992 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR72 Re Approval of Two Addl Dry Cask Storage Designs.Opposes Rule ML20127D6371992-09-0303 September 1992 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR72 Re Approval of Two Addl Dry Cask Storage Designs.Opposes Rule & Urges NRC to Extend Comment Period in Order for Concerned Citizens to Prepare Thorough List of Objections ML20114D2591992-08-24024 August 1992 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR72 Re Proposal to Store Spent Nuclear Fuel in VSC-24 Storage Casks at Plant in State of Wi ML20073N1141991-05-10010 May 1991 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR71,170 & 171, Rev of Fee Schedules;100% Fee Recovery ML20058D4831990-10-15015 October 1990 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal ML20235S8381989-02-22022 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Degree Requirement for Senior Reactor Operator (Sro).Unless Grandfathered in Next 4-5 Yrs Author to Be Locked Out of Job & Does Not Intend Spending 20 Plus Yrs as Reactor Operator ML20235N8341989-02-17017 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20148K5591988-03-18018 March 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50,App J Re Mass Point Method of Data Analysis.Recommends Test Duration Criteria in ANSI/ANS-56.8-1987,Section 5.4 Be Accepted in Revised Regulations ML20236Q7991987-11-0909 November 1987 Comments on Proposed Rev 2 to Reg Guide 1.100 Re Seismic Qualification of Electrical & Mechanical Equipment for Nuclear Power Plants ML20235V8231987-10-13013 October 1987 Order Imposing Civil Monetary Penalty in Amount of $50,000 Based on Violations Noted During Special Physical Security Insp on 860718-0807 ML20136E0511985-11-20020 November 1985 Memorandum & Order Granting Licensee 850826 Request for Extension of Deadline for Environ Qualification of Electrical Equipment to 860525 for Unit 1 & 851231 for Unit 2.Served on 851120 ML20137C8601985-11-19019 November 1985 Transcript of Commission 851119 Affirmation/Discussion & Vote in Washington,Dc Re SECY-330(a) on Point Beach & SECY-225(a) on Sequoyah.Pp 1-5 ML20138M8711985-10-25025 October 1985 Transcript of 851025 Meeting in Washington,Dc Re Util Requests for Exemption from Environ Qualification.Pp 1-76 ML20078L1661983-10-17017 October 1983 Response Opposing Wisconsin Environ Decade 830923 Petition for Review of ALAB-739 Re Steam Generator Tubes Repaired by Sleeving.Nexus Between Sleeving & Tube Failure Shown. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20078C8801983-09-23023 September 1983 Petition for Review of Aslab 830907 Decision on Sleeving Degraded Steam Generator Tubes.Aslab Erroneously Denied Nexus Shown Between Sleeving & Tube Failure.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20076E1581983-08-22022 August 1983 Response Opposing Wisconsin Environ Decade 830811 Request to Respond to Hf Conrad Affidavit.Aslab Affirmed Dismissal of Decade Petition to Intervene.Decade Thus Lacks Party Standing.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20204G3481983-04-29029 April 1983 Brief Opposing Wisconsin Environ Decade Exceptions to ASLB 830204 Initial Decision Authorizing full-scale Sleeving. Exceptions Waived for Failure to Brief or Arguments W/O Merits ML20069K5951983-04-22022 April 1983 Answer Opposing Wisconsin Environ Decade 820407 Petition for Review of ALAB-719 Which Affirmed ASLB 821210 Special Prehearing Conference Order Dismissing Petition to Intervene.Matter Raised Not Reviewable.W/Certificate of Svc ML20073D6991983-04-11011 April 1983 Request for Extension Until 830427 to File Opposition to Wisconsin Environ Decade Brief on Exceptions.Counsel Has Numerous Obligations Before ASLB & Aslab.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20073B9701983-04-0707 April 1983 Petition for Review of Aslab 830322 Decision Denying Wisconsin Environ Decade 821220 Appeal of ASLB 821210 Prehearing Conference Order.Hearing on Steam Generator Tube Degradation Issue Should Be Held.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20069F6491983-03-16016 March 1983 Brief Supporting Wi Environ Decade 830211 Exceptions to ASLB Initial Decision.Aslb Refused to Make Prerequisite Findings on Degree of Assurance Necessary to Protect Public Safety. Affidavit of Mailing Encl ML20071A1311983-02-14014 February 1983 Exceptions to ASLB 830204 Initial Decision.Affidavit of Mailing Encl ML20064H4191983-01-10010 January 1983 Replacement P 2 of 821220 Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law in Form of Proposed Initial Decision. Svc List Encl ML20070M0571983-01-0707 January 1983 Comments on Wi Environ Decade Statement of Inadequate Record.Statement Is Inconsistent W/Commission Regulations, Erroneous in Statement of Law,Untimely,Devoid of New Factual Info & Should Not Be Considered.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20028C3031983-01-0404 January 1983 Brief Opposing Wi Environ Decade 821220 Appeal of ASLB 821210 Special Prehearing Conference Order Denying Decade 820810 Petition to Intervene.Decade Willfully Failed to Attend Special Prehearing Conference.W/Certificate of Svc ML20028C3091983-01-0404 January 1983 Proposed Evidentiary Hearings Transcript Changes.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20070M0141982-12-30030 December 1982 Statement of Inadequate Record.Eddy Current Testing Not Proved Adequate for Sleeving Steam Generator Tubes.Record Must Be Reopened.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20070J0141982-12-20020 December 1982 Notice of Appeal from 821210 Special Prehearing Conference Order Dismissing Decade 820810 & 1105 Petitions to Intervene.Affidavit of Mailing Encl ML20070J0341982-12-20020 December 1982 Brief Supporting Appeal from 821210 Special Prehearing Conference Order Denying 820810 Petition to Intervene & Request for Extension of Time to Complete Brief.Dismissal of Petition on Stated Grounds Contrary to Law ML20070H4011982-12-20020 December 1982 Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law in Form of Proposed Initial Decision Re Repair of Corroded Steam Generator Tubes by Inserting Sleeves.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20027E3171982-11-0505 November 1982 Contentions Re Steam Generator Replacement,Supplementing 820810 Petition to Intervene ML20027D4691982-11-0202 November 1982 Testimony of Wd Fletcher Re Adequacy of Eddy Current Testing.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20069J3451982-10-20020 October 1982 Notice of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20065G3861982-09-28028 September 1982 Amend to Wi Environ Decade 820810 Petition to Intervene Including Affidavits Requesting Wi Environ Decade to Intervene on Affiant Behalf.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20063J4521982-08-31031 August 1982 Reply Brief Supporting Wi Environ Decade 820721 Motion Concerning Litigable Issues & in Response to Licensee 820809 & 24 & NRC 820812 Responses.Contentions Timely & Relevant. Certificate of Svc Encl 1997-06-09
[Table view] |
Text
.
s W ~
~4 ._
4 8/ n..
'e D o
/. O 5
October 5, 19EE OCT g ;ggg j IL/, DEfEi8@
manch i
m' UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY , COMMISSION M~U ]. >r/
Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in the Matter of )
)
WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-266 (Point Beach Nuclear Plant, ) (OL Amen b //
Units 1 and 2) ) %
S LICENSEE'S RESPONSE TO ON g PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF BASES t7 # % OIA -
FOR PROPOSED CONTENTIONS 3 - 7 #%IEM%, //
4 s
/p Ah By letter to the Board dated September 24 Q 981,9 \
Wisconsin's Environmental Decade (" Decade") responded to the Board's directive that it provide the bases for its proposed Contentions 3 - 7. Licensee herein responds to Cacade's state-ments of basis, and submits that Decade failed to provide a basis for any of Contentions 3 - 7, and that its petition for leave to intervene should therefore be denied.
A petition for leave to intervene filed pursuant to 10 C.F.R. S 2.714 must be denied in the absence of at least one con-tention which meets the requirements of section 2.714(b). None a
of petitioners' contentions meets the requirements of section 2.714(b) which states that a petitioner must set forth with reasonable specificity.the bases for each contention it seeks to have litigated. h 3II '(
8110090390 811003 PDR ADOCK 05000266 G PDR
. a Decade erroneously asserts that it is entitled to await "a full application, the Staff's Safety Evaluation Report, the Licensee's Environmental Report under 10 C.F.R. 51-and complete discovery" before it is required to " finalize its contentions."- The regulations, in fact, provide just the oppo-t site. The current NRC regulatory procedure for commencing and conducting hearings is fashioned and based on two fundamental procedural principles: first, that intervenors have both the opportunity and responsibility to become involved in the licensing process at the earliest possible time, and second, that inter-venors must have some colorable reason for their allegations, not just a guess or an allegation for which they hope to search for 3/
a basis after being admitted as parties.-- Thus, Decade has no right to claim that it does not now have to back up its allegations to some minimal degree, or that the bases it now provides are
" preliminary" and that, if these " preliminary" bases fail, it is
_1/ An Environmental Report is not required by 10 C.F.R. Part 51 for the license mmendment request which is the subject of this hearing.
_2/ Decade's reliance on 10 C.F.R. 5 2.705 as support for its position that it need not now supply the bases for its con- ,
tentions is misplaced. Section 2.705 specifies the time within which an answer to a notice of hearing may be filed, and bears no relationship to the requirements for the filing ,of conten-tions, specified in section 2.714.
_3/ The Commission's Rules of Practice ccatemplate that admission of contentions is to precede discovery, and specifies that discovery is to be limited to the subject matter of the con-tentions. 10 C.F.R. S 2.740(b).
a entitled to a second opportunity. Neither Commission regulations nor the Board's directive in this matter support such a position by Decade.. If Decade wants to precipitate a hearing in this case it must, in essence, now show a basis for its unlikely claim that operation of Point Beach with steam generator tubes repaired by sleeving is not only worse than continued operation of Point Beach under existing conditions, but also that sleeving presents unacceptable safety consequences. Licensee finds such allegations incredible, and asserts its right to have Decade be required to make the threshold showings required by law to avoid an unnecessary and time consuming hearing which may jeopardize Licensce's ability to timely conduct both its sleeving demonstration program and its full-scale sleeving programs.
Contention 3-As a basis for this contention, Decade relies on a statement in the testimony of David K. Porter, an employee of Licensee, during the recent steam generator hearings before the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin ("PSCW"). The quoted statement, on its face, does not support Decade's allegation a
_4/ Although Decade has addressed Contentions 1, 2 and 10 in its September 24 basis letter, the Board asked only that Decade provide bases-for Contentions 3 - 7, Tr. 59, 62. Contentions 1, 2 and 10 are outside the scope of this proceeding, as dis-cussed by Licensee and the Staff in their briefs dated Sep-tomber 25, 1981. In any event, the materials cited by Decade I as bases for these contentions bear no relationship whatsoever to sleeving steam generator tubes at the Point Beach Nuclear .
Plant.
l
.y
_4_
that the braze.or. weld may " fatally compromise [the tube's]
~
integriky."2/ '
Mr. Porter's testimony, in fact, states just the opposite; any reduction of the ultimate strength of the tube resulting from brazing of the sleeve joint is insignificant and "well within the design factors of safety that are used in the material selection of tubing." At the conclusion of that proceeding, in which Decade was an active participant, the PSCW rejected Decade's efforts to prohibit sleeving at Point Beach. By no stretch of the imagination can testimony that weakening will be insignificant and within the applicable safety boundaries be turned around and used as a basis for the allegation that the integrity of the repaired tube will be " fatally compromised." The contention must therefore be rejected for lack of basis.
Contention 4 Decade here contends that the annulus between the original tube and the sleeve may "give rise to an unexpectedly corrosive environment." Even if that were to be the case, the real issue would have to be whether such an " unexpectedly corrosive
--5/ Decade suggests that the braze.or weld is at the upper rim of the sleeve. In fact, the upper joint is set below the sleeve rim, thus precluding a shearing rupture even if the tube were to be significantly weakened by the. joint. See Affidavit of David K. Porter, Attachment 1 to Licensee's Motion For Authorization For Interim Operation of Unit 1 With Steam . Generator Tubes Sleeved Rather Than Plugged (9/28/81)
(" Porter Affidavit") , 1 8; Point Beach Steam Generator Sleeving Report For Wisconsin Electric Power Company (Proprietary),
(" Westinghouse Report"), S 3.2.
-i-.w= m vt
~
environment" would lead to a leak by virtue of degrading the primary-to-secondary pressure boundary, which in the cited in-stance would be the sleeve.
Decade cites as its basis for this allegation a September 22, 1980 Staff memorandum. The only statement in that memorandum remotely related to' Contention 4 is the Staff's notation that its meeting with Southern California Edison Company regarding their sleeving program for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1, included a discussion of the " effects of stagnation of secondary water between the sleeve and the tube." There is no indication that the Staff considered this to be a problem at the conclusion of that meeting; in fact, the Staff subsequently authoriva4 a full-scale sleeving program at San Onofre. Thus, Decade has presented no basis whatsoever for the specific allega-tion that an " unexpectedly corrosive environment" will occur in the annulus, or the implicit allegation that this, if present, would unacceptably degrade the pressure boundary.
In contrast, Licensee has shown that the sleeve is fabricated from thermally treated Inconel 600 which resists corrosion in steam generator environments better than the material of the original tubes. Porter Affidavit, t 6; Westing-house Report, S 3.2.
Contention 5 ,
This contention alleges that eddy current testing will be impaired by sleeving,.and that the probability of tube failure
- 2; ,
c .
will be increased. Again, Decade relies only on the same September 22, 1980 Staff memorandum. Again, the only reference in the memorandum to the subject is a notation that the Staff discussed the "inspectability of sleeved tubes" at the meeting, with no indication of adverse determinations by the Staff. And again, we note that San Onofre was subsequently authorized by the Staff for full-scale sleeving. Decade has provided no basis for its allegations, and the contention should therefore be rejected.
What Decade failed to mention is that, while eddy current inspection of that portion of the tube adjacent to the sleeve may be more difficult, inspectability of the Fleeve, which is the real primary-to-secondary pressure boundary, is equal to or better than the inspectability of the original unsleeved tube. Porter Affidavit, 1 7; Westinghouse Report, S 7.2.
Contention 6 Decade here alleges that sleeving at Point Beach will o
3 1
" reduce the flow of primary core cooling water and the cooling capacity of the core under various accident scenarios to an extent not bounded in previous safety analyses." That cannot be the case. If Licensee should sleeve ~so many tubes that the cooling flow will be reduced below the minimum thermal design flow, which is the basis for the core cooling safety analysis and which is a Technical Specification requirement, Licensee would be in violation of its license. Decade's vague reference to the
San Onofre Technical Specification Change Request cannot possibly provide the basis for Decade's allegation that Licensee will violate its own license conditions. 1/ The contention must there-fore be rejected for lack of basis.
Contention 7 A newspaper article alleging shoddy repairs at a plant in California cannot possibly provide the basis for Decade's allegation that Licensee will use untrained workers, and that the quality of the work at Point Beach will therefore deteriorate.
This contention should summarily be dismissed for lack of basis.
CONCLUSION Decade has failed to provide the required bases for its proposed Contentions 3 through 7. Further, as discussed in the September 25, 1981 briefs of the Licensee and the Staff, Decade's proposed Contentions 1, 2 and 10 are beyond the scope of the pro-ceeding. Finally, Decade's proposed Contentions 8 and 9 are not truly contentions. Decade has thus failed to meet the "one good
_y/ Licensee's requested authorization to allow sleeving in lieu of plugging would not, if granted, allow Licensee to violate other requirements of its Technical Specifications. If Licensee were later to determine that it wished to sleeve a sufficient number of tubes to so. minimize the reactor, coolant flow-as to be outside the bounds of the safety analyses, it would have to first request a change in the Technical Speci-fications to allow operation under such conditions. This would entail a revision of the present safevaluation, as was done for San Onofre Unit 1, but Licensee has not made such a request.
contention" requirement of 10 C.F.R. S 2.714 (b) and accordingly, its petition for a hearing on Licensee's proposed operating license amendment should be denied. -
Respectfully submitted,
,SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE By _ __
j Buu6e W. thuft! hill Delissa A. Ridgway Counsel for Licensec 1800 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 822-1000 Dated: October 5, 1981 l
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )
)
WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-266
) 50-301 (Point Beach Nuclear Plant, ) (OL Amendment)
Units 1 and 2) )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that copies of the foregoing " Licensee's Response to Petitioner's Statement of Bases for Proposed Con-tentions 3 - 7" were served, by deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class, postage prepaid, this 5th day of October, 1981, to all -
those on the attached service list.
T
-.- f W (jBgMce W'. Churchill Dated: October 5, 1981 l
1
. . 1
.. i
)
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )
)
WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-266
) 50-301 (Point Beach Nuclear Plant, ) (<0L Amendment)
Units 1 and 2) )
SERVICE LIST Peter B. Bloch, Chairman; Charles A. Barth, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Office of the Executive Board Panel Legal Director l
. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C.' 20555 .
Dr. Hugh C. Paxton Kathleen M. Falk, Esquire' 1229 - 41st Street Wisconsin's Environmental Los Alamos, New Mexico 87544 Decade 114 North Carroll Street' Dr. Jerry R. Kline Suite 208 Atomic Safety and Licensing Madison, Wisconsin 53703 Board Panel -
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U .' S . Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.. 20555 Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555