ML20040F003
| ML20040F003 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 02/01/1982 |
| From: | Mills L TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | Vassallo D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8202080192 | |
| Download: ML20040F003 (2) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:I l s o-TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY CH ATTANOOGA. TENNESSEC 374ot N/gM/, g 400 Chestnut Street Tower II X'/ February 1, 1982 S 'g .;.gy6PM g#g%g"g,$3 y5 Director of Licensing Attention: Mr. Domenic B. Vassallo, Chief tr ti Operating Reactors Branch No. 2 g t yp, f 'f U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 /b G
Dear Mr. Ippolito:
In the Matter of the ) Docket Nos. 50-259 Tennessee Valley Authority ) 50-260 50-296 By letter from T. A. Ippolito to H. G. Parris dated November 19, 1981, TVA was requested to provide additional information regarding planned WAlfications to the feedwater and control rod drive systems at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant. Enclosed is our response to that request. The November 19, 1981 letter from T. A. Ippolito requested procedures and frequency of performance to ensure no CRD degradation from corrosion products. Detailed procedures have been transmitted under separate cover to R. J. Clark of your staff. A brief summary of these procedures is provided in the enclosure to this letter. This has been discussed with Mr. Clark in advance of this letter. Very truly yours, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY L. M. Mills, Ma ager Nuclear Regulation and Safety Subscrited nd sworn to be me t is / day of 4dA4 1982. ) O Notary Public MyCommissionExpires9-5 Enclosure t o! /'e .s / / 8202000192 820201 PDR ADOCK 05000259 P PDR An Equal Opportunity Employer
r / ENCLOSURE RESPONSE TO T. A. IPPOLITO'S LETTER TO H. G. PARRIS DATED NOVEMBER 19, 1981 BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 (DOCKET NOS. 50-259, -260, -296) With regard to the control rod drive (CRD) hydraulic system modifications, we believe that the equalizing valves called for in section 8.1(4)(a') of NUREG-0619 are not required for eepressurization of the exhaust header until such time that the existing exhaust water riser is disconnected from the system. In the current configuration at Browns
- Ferry, i.e., with the CRD return line rerouted and valved out, the exhaust water riser provides a flow path via the V-100 orificed check valve for repressurization of the exhaust header following a scram. Our proposed plan of action, as described in M. R. Wisenburg's October 13, 1981 letter to H. R. Denton calls for the concurrent removal of the exhaust water riser and installation of the equalizing valves when warranted by periodic system inspection results. We believe there is no technical justification for revising that plan.
The procedures and methods which are being used to evaluate CRD performance and ensure early detection of any development of corrosion products within the hydraulic system are as follows: DPM No. BF81M2: This procedure delineates the removal and inspection of at least 15 percent of the insert and exhaust line filters every 18 months per unit. It calls for the evaluation of inspection results by TVA Division of Nuclear Power central office staff. Mechanical Maintenance Instruction 7: This plant instruction delineates the removal and maintenance of selected CRDs, including the inspection of the inner and outer CRD filters. Surveillance Instruction 4.3.A.2: This surveillance instruction calls for weekly functional testing of selected CRDs. In regard to the inservice inspection requirements of NUREG-0619, our proposed program to implement section 8.2(3)(a) was transmitted by L. M. Mills' letter to T. A. Ippolito dated March 26, 1981. The proposed program was accepted by NRC as documented in a letter from T. A. Ippolito to H. G. Parris dated July 2, 1981. Section 8.2(3)(b) of NUREG-0619 states that the stagnant portion of the CRD return line be inspected in accordance with the recommendations of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1. NUREG-0313 applies to ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 pressure boundary piping and safe ends. The stagnant portion of the CRD return line at Browns Ferry is not part of the equivalent ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 piping and is taken to be exempt from the raquirements of NUREG-0313 =}}