ML19347C786
| ML19347C786 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 05/06/1975 |
| From: | Sewell R CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8102170129 | |
| Download: ML19347C786 (2) | |
Text
.:
)
[q m
Consumcis t
Power Company General Offices: 212 West MicNgan Avenue. Jackson MicNgan 49201. Area Code 517788 0550 r
\\
May 6, 1975
/.
p i
. 3 bl
.c.
Division of Reactor Licensing Re: Docket 50-155 US Nuclear Regulatory Commission V
License DPR-6 Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen:
On May 6,197h Consumers Power Company reported (AO-10-74) ex-cessive leakage during the integrated containment leak rate test. This excessive leakage resulted from the failure to tighten sufficiently the flange bolting on a ventilation valve that had been installed just prior to conducting the containment leak rate test. The valve was installed at that time so that the installation could be properly tested prior to re-turning the plant to service.
I After the leakage was detected, the flange bolting was properly tightened and the containment leak rate test reperformed with acceptable results. These results were reported in Special Report No 17 dated August 2, 1974 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, Paragraph III.a.6, requires that if any periodic Type A test fails to meet the applicable acceptance criteria, the test schedule applicable to subsequent Type A tests be reviewed and approved by the Commission. Neither the May 6, 1974 Abnormal Occurrence Report nor Special Report 17 stated explicitly Consumers Power Company's intention with regard to scheduling of subsequent Type A tests.
)
Consumers Power Company intends to perform the next periodic test and future periodic tests, assuming acceptable results, in accord-ance with the requirements of the Technical Specifications. The Technical Specifications presently require testing at not greater than two-year in-tervals. Draft Technical Specifications have been submitted which would require the periodic Type A tests to be performed at three-year intervals.
The testing vill be performed in a time manner based on whichever specifi-cation requirement is in effect at that time.
4 We believe that this is a reasonable course of action because all previous Type A tests hcVe had acceptable results. In addition, the exces-sive leakage experienced during the 1974 tests was due to a component in-stallation error rather than long-term degradation of the containment
(
boundary. The test was conducted following installation of this component in order to detect any deficiencies in installation that might have occurred.
7-cpY 8/69/96A27
_ = _.
Division of Reacter Licencing 2
Dockst 50-155 License DPR-6 Nhy 6, 1975 Subsequent test results following correction of this error showed an accept-able leakage rate. Therefore, we have concluded it is acceptable to continue testing on the frequency defined in the Technical Specifications.
If we receive no response, we will assume you are in agreement with this course of action.
Yours very truly,
- y N
RBS/ce Ralph B. Sewell Nuclear Licensing Administrator I
e
!