ML20112H132
| ML20112H132 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 03/28/1985 |
| From: | Silberg J CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO., SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE |
| To: | Bright G, Gleason J, Kline J Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#285-342 OL, NUDOCS 8504020143 | |
| Download: ML20112H132 (2) | |
Text
fN RELATED CORRESPOND %
SHAW, PITTMAN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE A pamTNteswer or amortss60NAL CCaponATION.
NC~ $
1600 M STR E ET, N. W.
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036 TEttcopics 25 'Y**;?*1)*"j$*
TELEX March 28, 1985
- *Er"'*L r
3cEey/4Lgj;,
Of Yaott saa-noea James P. Gleason, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 513 Gilmoure Drive Silver Spring, Maryland 20901 Dr. Jerry R. Kline Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Mr. Glenn O. Bright Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and)2)
Docket Nos. 50-440 and 50-441 C-Q Gentlemen:
During the March 22, 1985 conference call, Applicants were asked for a written statement concerning an inadvertent draining of water from a containment spray ring in Unit 1 (Tr.
2132).
Cleveland Electric has provided the following information on this event.
On March 4, 1985, interlock testing of valves in the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) system was being performed.
A valve in the Condensate Transfer and Storage system which links that system to the RHR system was inadvertently left 30% open.
As a part of the interlock testing, a valve on the RHR system was opened.
This permitted demineralized water from the condensate Transfer and Storage system to enter a containment spray ring and drain into containment.
P o.
~ o~
)
)
SHAw, PITTMAN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE
.r~c
~,.or.. ore...o~.tco m..rio~.
I
)
It is estimated that the RHR system valve was open for five to ten minutes.
Given the 330 gpm pump capacity of the Condensate Transfer and Storage system, a conservative estimate of the water discharged from the containment spray ring is 3000 gallons.
(For comparison, the operating capacity of the containment spray system is 5250 gpm.)
Extensive inspections of the entire containment outside of the drywell have been performed (no water entered the drywell area).
No need for equipment replacement has been identified.
Nor have any impacts on the fuel loading schedule been identified.
Nonconformance reports which have been initiated as a result of this event will be dispositioned in accord with normal plant procedures.
Ve truly
- urs,
)
Cd ec J
. S LBERG C
se for Appli ants cc:
Service List JES:L
,