ML20072Q762
| ML20072Q762 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Bellefonte  |
| Issue date: | 03/29/1983 |
| 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 8304050313 | |
| Download: ML20072Q762 (2) | |
Text
.. _.
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
$0 3 Etnut 39 EEYo*weEfl
~hI{.
'c s?
v'.
March 29, 1983
=
he 4 BLRD-50-438/82-47 My, 0f BLRD-50-439/82-42
-k 9
T,..f.
Y U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission p G Region II 1
Attn:.Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator 101 Marietta Street, NW, Suite 2900 Atlanta,~ Georgia 30303
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
BELLEFONTE NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 - EMBEDDED PIPING WIIH CRUSHABLE
[
INSULATION - BLRD-50-438/82-47, BLRD-50-439/82 THIRD INTERIM REPORT The subject deficiency was initially reported to NRC-0IE Inspector J. D. Wilcox on June 29, 1982 in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e) as NCR BLN CEB 8209 This was followed by our interim reports dated July 29, 1982 and January 13, 1983 Enclosed is our third interim report. We expect to submit our next report by October 28, 1983 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 O.%.
L.- M. Mills, Ma er
~
Nuclear Licensing Enclosure cc: Mr. Richard C. DeYoung, Director (Enclosure)
Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comi:ssion Washington, D.C.
20555 kNyjgjg copy 7
~
m Ik~gN
/-
B304050313 830329,4
~
'4 PDR ADOCK 05000438: ~<
k_ [_
_ P D R,:2,
> An Equal Opportunity Employer '
... s
-ENCLOSURE BELLEFONTE NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 3'1 AND 2 EMBEDDED PIPING WITH CRUSHABLE INSULATION NCR BLN.CEB 8209 BLRD-50-438/82-47, BLRD-50-439/82-42 10 CFR 50.55(e)
, THIRD INTERIM REPORT Description of Deficiency Essential Raw Cooling Water piping analysis problems N4-0KE-P, N4-1KE-F, e.nd N4-2KE-F were analyzed assuming the 36-inch pipe to be embedded in concrete at four locations. Therefore, the analysis assumption was that the pipe was " anchored" at the four locations. Actually, the 36-inch pipe has 3 inches of insulation covering in the area of embedmont and, since the insulation may c.ush, the pipe is not truly " anchored" at the four locations. Therefore, the analysis is unconservative and must be redone assuming only " limited restraint" rather than " anchors" at the four locations.
Interim Progress The final analysis on problem N4-OKE-P has been performed using limited restraints at the two locations where the pipe extends into the yard.. No
~
rerouting of piping was required, but one support was added to the problem..
On problem N4-1KE-F, the analysis assumptions were reviewed independently and found to be satisfactory. On problem N4-2KE-F, the Civil Engineering _
Support Branch has recommended a new model (replacing the anchor) that will be used for reanalysis. The results of this reanalysis will be discussed in the final report.
' ' ' ~
" ~
~" ~ ' ~~ ' ~" - - -~ ~~
~
- - - ~ - - -
)
i i
r,,
7
^q
, +
b 0
r.%.,l C,
^
- ^
4 4~ ls s
t
.+
. ; :"L r
_