ML20002A789
| ML20002A789 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 11/14/1980 |
| From: | Mills L TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| References | |
| 10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, NCR-SQN-CEB-803, NUDOCS 8011210580 | |
| Download: ML20002A789 (2) | |
Text
i TENNESSZZ V \\LL:"r A UT uC = "'
csu accm.
rr :::
2-400 Chestnut Street Tower II November 14, 1980'
'.!O SC'! w El 2 !^
Mr. James O'Reilly, Director
.ERV.CE3 Office of Inhpection and Enforcement
- 'd U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Region II - Suib 3100 101 Marietta Str t Atlanta, Georgia 0303
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 2 - NONREi.NFORCED CONCRETE BLOCK WALLS -
NCH SQN CEB 8031 - FIRST I!n'ERIM REPORT The subject deficiency ws initially reported to NRC-OIE Inspector R. W. Wright en October 16, 1980, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e).
Enclosed is our first interim report. We expect to submit our next report by January 20, 1981.
If you have any questions, please get in touch with D. L. Lambert at FTS 857-2581.
Very truly yours, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY L. M. Mills, Manager Nuclear Regulation and Safety Enclosure
/
Mr. Victor Stello, Director (Enclosure),V cc:
Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 10/7 s
I n
~
5 amuw ssa
~
.c s
. ENCLOSURE.
SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 2 NONREINFORCED CONCRETE MASONRY BLOCK WALLS.
NCR SQN CEB B031 10 CFR 50.55(e)
FIRST INTERIM REPORT.
4 Description of Deficiency The ability of certain nonreinforced concrete masonry walls at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN) unit 2 to resist.the. design' seismic event is questionable.in that the walls were not initially designed for a seismic event. The failure of-these nonreinforced walls could damage safety-related equipment in the vicinity"of the walls.
Corrective Action 1.
A' field survey.to identify and locatd all.nonreinforced concrete masonry walls'in~the category _I structures at SQN has been l
conducted.
2.
A' design criteria has-been -developed for usage in the structural analysis of these nonreinforced walls to determine if they can i
-withstand a seismic event.
3.
A safety review and' evaluation of the effect of wall failure on
-safety-related equipment or: systems-in the vicinity of-these nonreinforced walls will be' conducted.
4~.. All-nonreinforced walls whose structural analysis indicates potential 1 failure of the walls in a seismic event and whose
' failure will jeopardize safety-related equipment will have structural ~ restraints designed and installed to prevent damage of safety-related equipment.
+
9 5
,r
. m
,