ML20198A944

Forwards Safety Evaluation & Technical Evaluation Rept Re Request for Relief from Inservice Insp Requirements.Relief Granted for Exam Requirements Impractical to Perform & Denied Where Necessary Findings Could Not Be Made

ML20198A944
Person / Time
Site:	Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date:	11/01/1985
From:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Berry K CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
Shared Package
ML20151K400	List: ML20151K395 ML20198A944 ML20198A962
References
LSO5-85-11-002, LSO5-85-11-2, NUDOCS 8511060260
Download: ML20198A944 (4)

Text

_ _ _ -_

Nov:mb:r 1,1985

_ pDocket No. 50-155 LS05-85-ll-002 L , Mr. Kenneth W. Berry Director, Nuclear Licensing Consumers Power Company 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201

SUBJECT:

PELIEF FROM INSERVICE INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS Re: Big Rock Point Plant By letter dated December 19, 1983, titled "Clarifiertion of Inservice Inspection Interval Start Date and Interval Update Requirements and Relief Requests," Consumers Power Company (CPC) requested relief from the rule set forth in 10 CFR 50.55a(g) Inservice Inspection Pequirements. By letter dated April 13, 1984, +he staff requested additional information from CPC regarding the Big Rock Point (facility) Inservice Inspection Program. On May 14, 1984, CPC submitted their response to the request for additional information.

The facility plan for Inservice Inspection was reviewed and evaluated by the staff with technical assistance provided by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). We have enclosed a Safety Evaluation Peport including conclusions and recomendations based on your request for relief.- Also enclosed, as Attachment 1 is the supporting Technical Evaluation Report (TER) which was prepared by SAIC. Relief has been granted for those examination requirements found to be impractical to perform and,' by granting relief, would not compromise the safety of the facility. Pelief has been granted for certain examination requirements found in Attachment 1 for which substitute requirements (provisions) must be performed. Relief for these examination requirements is subject to such performance. Relief has been denied in the case where the necessary findings could not be made. \

Sincerely, OJ %

8511060260 e51101 M D f Am ogg5 HaroYR.bbnton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 9((

Enclosure:

.. DISTRIBUTION Safety Evaluation LDocket File; EJordan SECY NRC PDR CMiles, OPA w/ attachment 1 ORB #5 RDG " BGrimes JPartlow LPDP CJamerson ACRS(10) BTurovlin OELD cc: See next page TRotella GJohnson DEisenhut TBarnhart (4)

J7wolinski OPAB HDenton RDiggs (w/ fee form)

SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE:

DL:0PB#5* DL:0RB!5* OELD* DL:0PB#5 L  ;/d CJamerson RGoddard JZwolinski D chfield 09/11/85 TRotella: tmh 9/17/85 09/11/85 10/tt/85 10/p/E5 DL I NR \Y NRRgIR son D ut HDev)on HTMor@/85 10/ 10$/85 14/g/85 w __ _ _ - _ _-_- _ _-__-___- _ _---_-- _ -- ---___ _ _ _ _ - _ _

hockd ce4h

,-Docket No. 50-155 Mr. David J. VandeWalle Director, Nuclear Licensing Consumers Power Company 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201

SUBJECT:

RELIEF FPOM INSERVICE INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS Re: Big Rock Point Plant By letter dated December 19, 1983, titled " Clarification of Insp vice Inspection Interval Start Date and Interval Update Requiremenps and Relief Peouests", Consumers Power Company (CPC) requested relief frAn the rule set forth in 10 CFR 50.55a(g), Inservice Inspection Requiremenfs. By letter dated April 13,1984, the staff requested additional informatipri from CPC regarding the Big Rock Point (facility) Inservice Inspection Program. On May 14, 1984, CPC submitted their response to the request for addi nal information.

The facility plan for Inservice Inspection was reviewed and evaluated by the staff with technical assistance provided by Spfence Applications International Corporation (SAIC). Ve have encloyed a Safety Evaluation Report including conclusions and recommendatio ( based on your request for relief. Also enclosed, as Attachment 1 is th supporting Technical Evaluation Report (TER) which was prepared b, SAIC. Relief has been granted for those examination requirements ound to be impractical to perform and, by granting relief, would no compromise the safety of the facility. Relief has been denied in the ase where the necessary findings could not be made.

S cerely, John A. Zwolinski, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 Division of Licensing

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation w/ attachment 1 cc: See next page b G M Geld b' /hyss D_IST_R_IBUTION / /fr / df Docket File EJoe an SECY ORB #5 Readina~ PCdmes JPartlow -

CJamerson Af-RS(10) i3 70 r o v %

ObS/MM ON"N%

TRotella GJohnson Disedut f / pf // 8f JZwolinski ORAR H, A 6 NRC PDR CMiles, OPA LPDR TBarnhart (4)

OELD RDiggs (w/ fee form)

DL:0RB#5 8 PL:0RB#5 DL:0RBf5 kCJamerson TRotella:3 tm g\M, Og DM JZwolinski V 09/b/85 09/ // /85 09// 7/85 09/ /85

1. %o UNITED STATES

/ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y* I WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

%,...../ November 1,1985 Docket No. 50-155 LS05-85-11-002 Mr. Kenneth W. Perry Director, Nuclear Licensing Consumers Power Company 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201

SUBJECT:

RELIEF FROM INSERVICE INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS Re: Big Rock Point Plant By letter dated December 19, 1983, titled " Clarification of Inservice Inspection Interval Start Date and Interval Update Requirements and Relief Reque:ts," Consumers Power Company (CPC) requested relief from the rule set forth in 10 CFR 50.55a(g) Inservice Inspection Requirements. By letter dated April 13, 1984, the staff requested additional information from CPC regarding theBigRockPoint(facility)InserviceInspectionProgram. On May 14, 1984 CPC submitted their response to the request for additional information.

The facility plan for Inservice Inspection was reviewed and evaluated by the staff with technical assistance provided by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). We have enclosed a Safety Evaluation Report including conclusions and recommendations based on your request for relief. Also enclosed, as Attachment 1 is the supporting Technical Evaluation Report (TER) which was prepared by SAIC. Relief has been granted for those examination requirements found to be impractical to perfom and, by granting relief, would not compromise the safety of the facility. Relief has been granted for certain examination requirements found in Attachment 1 for which substitute requirements (provisions) must be perfomed. Relief for these examination requirements is subject to such performance. Relief has been denied in the case where the necessary findings could not be made.

Sincerely,

/

• Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation w/ attachment I cc: See next page

T' O

Fr. Kenneth W. Ferry

• Consumers Power Company Big Rock Point Plant CC:

Mr. Theres A. McNish, Secretary Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Averue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Judd L. Bacon Esquire Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Big Rock Point Plant ATTN: Mr. David P. Hoffman

'. Route 3 Plant Superintendent -

Post Office Box 591 .

Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Mr. I. Lee Moerland Chairman, Board of Commissioners P. O. Box 218 Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Office of the Governor Room 1 - Capitol Building Lansing, Michigan 48913 Regional Administrator Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section Office Division of Radiological Health P. O. Pcx 30035 Lansing, Michigan 48909 Resident Inspector Big Rock Point Plant c/o U.S. PPC RR #3, Box 600 Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 l

i l

_,