ML20050C425
| ML20050C425 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Bellefonte  |
| Issue date: | 03/26/1982 |
| 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, NUDOCS 8204080489 | |
| Download: ML20050C425 (2) | |
Text
w i
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY cH ATTANOOGA. TENNESSEE 374o1 r
n 400 Chestnut Street Tower II r
~
1:d 48 March 26, 198 8
G, co co.
~
q m
~
BLRD-50-438/82-21 n*m o
iE%.
a.
BLRD-50-439/82-19
- s App 7 1982a m
y U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission oQ' c e:n.fjgM74r nyg j
m r
d-Region II Q
re Attn:
Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administratoc6>
101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 m
^'
- Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
BELLEFONTE NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 - SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF THE AUXILIARY-CONTROL BUILDING - BLRD-50-438/82-21, BLRD-50-439/82 FIRST INTERIM REPORT The subject deficiency was initially reported to NRC-0IE Inspector Ross Butcher on February 26, 1982 in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e) as NCR BLN CEB 8201. Enclosed is our first interim report. We expect to submit our next report by July 22, 1982.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please get in touch with R. H. Shell at FTS 858-2688.
Very truly yours, TENNESSEE -VALLEY AUTHORITY k.
L. M. Mills, Han ger Nuclear Regulation and Safety Enclosure oc:
Mr. Richard C. DeYoung, Director (Enclosure)
Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 s,
r N
% 'O?
C
- ICD amo4oso4e9 e2o326
-Id S W
~
PDR ADOCK 0500043e S
pop An Ecua! Opporturntv ;mployer
v ENCLOSURE BELLEFONTE NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 '
SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF THE. AUXILIARY-CONTROL BUILDING NCR BLN CEB 8201 BLRD-50-438/82-21, BLRD-50-439/82-19 10 CFR 50.55(e)
FIRST INTERIM REPORT Description of Deficiency The original seismic analysis of the Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Auxiliary-Control Building was performed in 1973 and was based on issued concrete general outline feature drawings that were not intended for use by the Division of. Construction (CONST). Subsequently, outline drawings for use by CONST were issued and, in portions of the building, significant changes in the structural configuration were made. However, the seismic analysis personnel were unaware of the changes made by the later drawings. While assessing the potential changes in the original seismic analysis, that the location of the postaccident sampling facility in this structure wottld make, the discrepancy between the original and later outline drawings was noted. Preliminary investigations indicate potentia) significant changes in the structural responses. Consequently, the results of the preaent ~
seismic analysis do not adequately reflect those of the current geometry.
A revised seismic analysis is requit 1 The cause of the deficiency was a failure to coordinate design changes with appropriate organizations in accordance with the Division of Engineering Design Procedure EP 4.01.
Interim Progress TVA personnel are performing a revised seismic analysis based upon the present day structural configuration.- The results of this analysis will be issued as a revision to the present seismic report and will be used by TVA design personnel to assess the effects of these changes on the structure and equipment. Also existing procedures are under review and, where necessary, revisions will be made to ensure that proposed structural modifications are evaluated for their effect on the seismic analyses.
Studies will be made to determine if other TVA nuclear plants are a ffec ted.
4 i
l
/