ML20010H298
| ML20010H298 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 08/07/1981 |
| From: | Mills L TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| References | |
| IEB-80-08, IEB-80-8, NUDOCS 8109240314 | |
| Download: ML20010H298 (2) | |
Text
r TENNESSEE VALLEY AugORITYgg CH ATTANOOGA. TENNESSEE 374oli. bcit 400 Chestnut Street Tower II 0 '. Y
^
- r. \\ \\
August 7, 1981; g
^
rs s,
Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director bY c%
'\\
Y I 4 Office of Inspection und Enforcement D
N I
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission iM
,N O Region II - Suite 3100 d g. '
j.:/
101 Marietta Street g
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
.q,'g>X /7 r :.1 t$
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
x!a
-0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 80 RII:JPO 50-259,
-260, -296 - BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT - SUPPLEMENT TO FINAL RESPONSE In response to your letter dated April 7, 1980 which transmitted OIE Bulletin 80-08, we submitted the results of our investigations for the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant on July 7, 1980. In OIE Inspection Report 50-259, -260, -296/81-13. for the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, NRC indicated that TVA committed to provide a supplemental response for OIE Bulletin 80-08. Enclosed is our supplemental response to the final report which constitutes satisfaction of that commitment, identified as Inspector Followup Item (IFI) 50-259, -260, -296/81-13-19 If you have any questions regarding this subject please call Jim Domer at FTS 857-2584.
To the best of my knowledge, I declare the statements contained herein are complete and true.
2 Very truly yours, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY L. M. Mills, Manager Nuclear Regulation and Safety Enclosure cc:
Mr. Victor Stello, Director (Enclosure)
Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conunission g6l[
Washington, DC 20555 s
/[I 8109240314Sg7 DR ADOCK 05 5
p An Equal Oppm tunity Employer a.
ENCLOSURB SUPPLEMENT TO FINAL RISPONSE TO NRC OIE BULLETIN 80-08
-BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT In our July 7,1980 response to OIE Bulletin 80-08, we stated that backing rings were not used in the manufacturing or installation of the primary piping, containment penetration flued head to outer sleeve welda. This information was based on review of the manufacturers specifications for the penetrations and conversations with TVA employees who were responsible for the installation of the unit 2 penetrations. However, recent recirculation and examination of the radiographs have shown that backing rings were occasionally used to accommodate mismatch during fitup. General Electric Company (GE) installation instructions for erection of primary steam and feedwater piping, specifications 22A21BSAB and 22A2185AA, respectively, permit the use of backing rings to accommodate fitup provided that the designer approves the use of the backing rings. The backing rings were authorized in an as-needed basis for installation. Final acceptance of the containment penetration flued head to outer sleeve welds was based on radiography.
As requested by A. Hirt, NRC OIE Region II, in a telephone call to J. A. Domer on July 23, 1981, we have investigated what NRC considered a breakdown in communications within the TVA organization regarding whether backing rings were utilized. The response from the BFNP site did not address the subject of backing rings or indicate whether backing rings were utilized or not. The statement that no backing rings were utilized was obtained in a telephone conversation from personnel that had worked on unit 2 penetrations. This was a best-faith effort by us to reconstruct events that occurred years ago during construction. We believe that a breakdown in communication between the BFNP site and the Chattanooga office did not occur.