ML18283A526

Interrogatories to NRC Staff Relative to Supplement No. 1 to the Safety Evaluation

ML18283A526
Person / Time
Site:	Browns Ferry
Issue date:	07/09/1976
From:	Garner W - No Known Affiliation
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
Download: ML18283A526 (5)

Text

RBl <'LXD GOlUKSPONDENGB

'UNITED STATES OF AHKHXCA.

NUCLEAR iiGULATORY COKHSSXON g ~gqO>

p<6<~

i 0~ sa~~ca Xn the Natter of pc,gko~ cg~o

/p

)

Tennessee Valley Authority ) Docket,Nos. 50-259

)'

I

.Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant 50-260 (Units 1 a'nd 2) )

~P Pursuant to 10 CFR Sec. 2.740 (b), the Order of the Board, and the agreement of t,he Parties, Intervenor serves the following interrogatories on the. NRC Staff:

t~ e ~

References are to Section Nos. and Paragraph Nos.:

h

. 2.,4.1.

1. (1) Explain in detail your evalua ion of the additional met,allographic and surface replication test results provided by TVA. Attach a copy of your evaluation.

2. (1) Explain in detail how the results confirmed your findings.

3. (1) >ho conducted the evaluation?

4. (1) 'cIho concluded that the results confirmed your findings?

, 5. (2) Define "stress corrosion."

'- - 6. (2), Define !'indications of the initiation phase of stress corrosion cracking. "

1

7. (2) Is your term "small instrument lines" synonomous with your term "thin-wailed instrument tubing>>?

~

8. (2) >Rat leads you to believe that 'the samples had "indications of the initiation phase of stress corrosion cracking"":

9.(3). @>plain in detail how"and why the three other panels were selected for retubing.

~ 10. (4) Explain in detail why you find TVA s instrument line sampling, test,ing, replace-ment, and surveillance programs to be satisfactory.

ll. (5) Did you conclude there was a need for an increased scope? 1'hy or why not?

12. (5) Did you conclude there was a neei for a longer period of surveillance?

Why or why not?

13. (5) i4y did you conclude that, the program would provide adequate assurance?

2.4.2:

14. (3) 'siby would the PUC cables themselves be unaffected by any chlorides present?

15. (3 } How and to what degree would the Flameastic coating limit the moisture ingress".

16. (3). How and to what degree would the corrosion or rusting be'inhibited by the chemical neutralizing action of the calcium carbonate content of the Flameasti.c?

6.2:

17. (1) Define and identify "transient fire loads."

-. 18. (1) Define and identify "critical areas of the P lant."

19. (1) Explain in detail and list the developmei~t of procedures for assessing transient fire loads in critical areas of the plant.

20. (1) List transient fire loads in critical areas where, due to obstruction, the installed fire protection system may not be effective foi the transient fire load; In each instance listed, explain why the installed fire protection system may not be P

adequate.

21. (2) Explain in detail why your concerns are removed.

~

22. (2) Define "low loads," "medium loads" and "high loads."

6.4:

23. (1) Set forth, in detail your discussions with 'i',VA personnel referred to.

24. (6) Does the QA staff supervisor have the authority to report directly to the NPC?

,25. (4)'oes the QA ~fanager have the authority to report direct'y to the iXRC?

'st the acceptable exceptions. '6.,(8)

27. (8) List the, requirements and controls not previously addressed. Nhy was"each one not previously addressed?

28. (12) (1).. Explain in deta'il h'ow the: Qyl organi:zation of the TVA 'is provided sufficient independence from cost and"s'chedule as apposed'o safety 'considerations.

7.5.2 and 3'9.

(7) 'Define "less flammable.<<

8.0:

30.(2) Nhen will these technical qpecifications be complete?

31.(5) How can you reach a conclusion prior to the completion of the specifications?

32.(3) M)en do you plan to furnish 'ntervenor a copy of the new specifications?

,1.1.2:

33 . Nhy did you rely solely on the results of a test performed by a laboratory selected

, by the supplier?

34. ~hat happens to the cable during a fire after the flamcastic is reduced to a dense char?

13:

35. 'richen will the cooling towers be fully operational?

'6. Bn-3ain your permitting Units 1 and 2 to operate in the past in violation of

, Alabama Uater Quality Standards.

14.0:

37. Nhy did you omit page 28?

38. (2) Define "substantially completed.<<

39.'2) Define <<substantially completed in conformity with."

40.(2), %hen will 'restoration and construction be completely complete in conformity with the Plan.

41.(4) Define "reasonable assurance."

42.(5) define <<technically'qualified.<<

43 .(6) Define <<not be inimical to..<<

44. (Appendix D, page 3, paragraph 1) 'define <<fire retardant."

45. (Appendix D, page 5, paragraph 4 ) Explain in dct ail why there is 'no practical way .

46. (Appendix D, page 5, paragraph 6,. Li. t "and locate obstructions. List.and locate

air poci.ets.

47. (Appendix 0, page 6, paragraphs 5 and 6) Reconcile the recommendation and the response ~rith H. J. Green's attitude that he would handle the fire again the same way.

48. (Appendix D, page 14) Define "upgrade."

49. (Appendix 0, 16, paragraphs 5 and 6). When?

50. (Appendix D, page 18, paragraphs 4 and 5). ustify recommending further censorship. Give details of the passing on to TVA and= its response.

Respectfully submitted, William E. Garner

'Intervenor Pro- se Dated at Bellefonte, Alabama, this 9th day of July, 1976.

UNITED ST.TES OF Ai~L~2iICA NUCLE)R PI.GULA'IORY CObMSSION Xn. the 1>atter of

)

Tennessee Valley Authority ) Docket Nos. 50-259 2),

)

Brown -Ferry Nuclear Plant ) 50-260 (Units and1 )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served copies of the following on tne following by deposit,ing them"in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid:

Secretary General Counsel U. S. Nuclear Regu"atory Commission Tennessee Valley Authority Nashington, D. C. 20555 629 New Sprankle Building Knoxville, Tennessee 37919 Thomas ~1 Reil ly, Kso ., Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Executive Legal Director U: S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissicn U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nash'ington, D. C. 20555 'rlashington, 0. C. 20555 Or. Frederick P. Cowan Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board.

22 Browns Lane U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Bellport, New York 11713 Washington, D. C. 20555 Qr. kiugh C. Paxton Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory P. 0. Box 1663 Los Alamos, New Mexico 87544 This 9th day of July, 1976.

William E;. Garner Intervenor Pro-Se