ML20063J810
| ML20063J810 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 08/04/1982 |
| From: | Mills L TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20063J762 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8209020536 | |
| Download: ML20063J810 (3) | |
Text
_. _
.=.
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY i
CH ATTANOOGA. TENNESSEE 37401 1
s 400' Chestnut Street Tower II i
[2 "", 9 August 4, 1982 All. qzs I
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
Region II ATTN: James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 j
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
In response to discussions with your staff, we are enclosing a revised response to Browns Ferry Inspection Report 50-259/82-11,
-260/82-11, and -296/82-11. Our initial response was transmitted to you by D. S. Kammer's letter dated July 16, 1982. If you have any questions, please call Jim Domer at FTS 858-2725.
To the best of my knowlege, I declare the statements contained herein are complete and true.
Very truly yours, l
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY h
. M. kills, Manager Nuclear Licensing Enclosure l
8209020536 820816 PDR ADOCK 05000259 An Equal Oppor+ unity Employer G
=. -,. -, - _. -.... _, -.. -,.
r e
7 *.
- ENCLOSURE SUPPLDIENTAL RESPONSE - NRC INSPECTION REPORT N05, 50-259/82-11, 50-260/82-11, AND 50-296/82 R. C. LEUIS' LETTER TO H. G. PARRIS DATED JUNE 16, 1982 s
APPENDIX A - (259/82-11-01) 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, es implemented by TVA Topical Report TR-75-1, paragraph 17.2.5, requires activities ;af fecting quality to be!
prescribed by documented instructions, procedures or drawings of he type appropriate to the circumstances.
y contrary to the above, Drawing No. 47W406-1, a documented drawing pre-scribed for installation of the local leak rate test line on the unit 1 Reactor Water Cleanup system, was inappropriate to operational circum-stances in that it did not specify support for a two-foot horizontal i
segment of t the test line on which there were mounted two 13 lb. valves.
On March 20, 1982, the vent line fractured due to detrimental loading that occurred because of the lack of support.
This is a Severity Level V Violation (Supplement I).
Response
1.
Admission or Denial of the Alleged Violation s
TVA admits the violation occurred as stated.
2.
Reasons for the Violation if Admitted The test line and its associated manual isolation valves were inadequately supported which led to high-frequency fatigue and subsequent cracking of the line. During tho' inspection to locate the leak, it was noted that the vent connection had previously t
been provided with a vibration support.' Support requirements for this vent connection were not shown on TVA drawings. The support had apparently been removed at some time for maintenance or modifi-cation work. Reinstallation had not been performed because vibration l
support requirements were not shown on design drawings.
3.
Corrective Steps Which Have Been Taken and Results Achieved The broken test'line was repaired using a properly-approved and
-administered design change request and ' engineering change notice.
l 4.
Corrective Steps Which Will Be Taken to Avoid Further Violations l
An evaluation of any suspect units 1 and 2' safety-related piping systems will be conducted to verify that similar problems do not exist on other test, vent, or drain connections.
If any discrepancies i
' are found, appropriate corrective action will be taken. This inspection will be performed during time unit I cycle 5 and unit 2 cycle 4 refueling outages presently scheduled for completion July 17, 1983, and January 30, 1983, respectively. We will provide you with results of this evaluation by January 17, 1984.
If any needed modifications are identified as a result of this evaluation, we will provide you with a schedule of implementation in this supple-mental response.
5.
Date When Full Compliance Will Be Achieved Full compliance was achieved on March 26, 1982 when work on unit I was completed and drawings revised.
D a
..