ML20115D244
| ML20115D244 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 10/16/1992 |
| From: | Joshua Wilson TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| TAC-M76941, TAC-M76942, TAC-M76944, NUDOCS 9210200305 | |
| Download: ML20115D244 (3) | |
Text
?(
y A
knessee VWey Aommty Pac Ohm Wn M0 Sxt4Damy. kms*e 37379 J L Wilson Vse hestdent. Smpeyah Nuclear Plant
)
October 16, 1992 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 Gentlemen:
In the Matter of
-)
Docket Nos. 50-327 Tennessee Valley Authority
)
50-328 SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT (SQN)-UNITS ~1 AND 2 - CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (CAP)
CORRECTIVE ACTION TRACKING DOCUMENT (CATD) 223.03-SQN-01
Reference:
1.
Letter from M. O. Medford to NRC dated February 26, 1990, "Sequoyah Nuclear Plant-(SQN) - Employee-Concerns Task Group (ECTG) - Significant Deviation to Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for Corrective Action Tracking Document-(CATD) 223.03-SQN-01" i
2.
Letter-from E. G. Wallace to NRC dated June 8,_.1990, y
" Employee Concerns Task Group" 2
3.
Letter from Frederick J. Hebdon to'Mr. Den A. Nauman dated-April 15, 1991, " Safety Evaluation on the TVA-Corrective Action Plan Deviation Process and Supplement to Safety Evaluations on the Tennessee Valley-Authority Employee Concerns Subcategory Reports -- Browns Ferry -
Nuclear Plant, Units-1,:2, and'3 and Sequoyah Nuglear-Plant, Unita 1 and 2 (TAC Nos t^76941;M76942 and 76944)"-
8 4.-
Letter from E. G. F 11 ace to'NRC dated November 25, 1991
" Safety Evaluation on the-TVA Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Deviation Process and_ Supplement =to Safety-Evaluations on the Tennessee Valley Authority Employee-Concerns Subcategory Reports --Browns' Ferry-Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, and 3'and Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2'(TAC Nos. 76941',~76942, and 76944)"
190081
-9210200305'921016 R
PDR ADOCK 0500032-7 00 p _-
PDrt -
4 l
.)
6-1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2 October 16, 1992 The purpose _of this letter is to provide' additional information to address NRC questions concerning the CAP deviation for the subject CATD.
By Reference 3, NRC indicated that insufficient information had been provided to justify the deviation.- The additional information in this letter provides further clarification to the information_provided in-References 1 and 4 supporting the CAP deviation for the subject CATD and is contained in the enclosure.
On the basis of discussions held with D. E. Labarge and J. R. Fair, it is expected
.at this letter completes all TVA actions needed for NRC to complete youc review of the CAP deviction for CATD 223.03-SQN-01.
4 If you have any questions concerning this submittal, please telephone J. W. Proffitt at (615) 813-6651.
Sincerely, G[.
J./L. Wilson j
0 Enclosure cc:
IN J Records Center Institute of Nuclear Power Operations' 1100 circle 75 Parkway Suite 1500 Atlanta, Georgia 30339 Mr. D. E. LaBarge, Project Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint, North 11555 Rockville Pike.
Rockville, Maryland'20852 NRC Resident Inspector.
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant 2600 Igou Ferry Road Soddy-Daisy, Tennessee 37379 Mr. B. A. Wilson, Project _ Chief U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II' 101 Marietta Street, NW,l Suite'2900' Atlanta, Georgia 30323
ENCLOSURE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE CORRECTIVE-ACTION PLAN (CAP) DEVIATION FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION TRACKING DOCUMENT (CATD) 223.03-SQN-01 TVA established the seismic adequacy of the field-mounted instruments for Units 1 and 2 restart boundary prior to restart of each unit in accordance with the original-CAP and Phase 1 implementation of the instrument pr-ice..
IVA has-retrieved approximately 93 percent of the seismic qualiti stion documentation for all safety-related instruments, both restart and postrestart instruments. There are only 114 instruments (none required for safe shutdown or accident mitigation) for which the seismic documentation has not been retrieved; these instruments are similar to instrurcents for which the seismic ' documentation has been retrieved and determined to be adequate. As a result of this review, there have been no instruments identified for which the seismic adequacy i
was determined to be deficient.
As noted in Ref erence 4, IVA has established and implemented Engineering Requirements Specification ER-SQN-EEB-01. As part of this specification, the program requires seismic qualification documentation for modifications that alter existing configuration. Additionally, as maintenance is performed on these instruments, and the instrument is removed and remounted, the mounting must be performed in accordance with.
the as-configured drawings..If the configuration-is not-in accordance with the drawings or a drawing does not exist, an evaluation of the component operability, including seismic qualification, is performed.
In conclusion, with the majority of the seistc' qualification docurnentation retrieved, no operability en-Ocions identified, and the process established to ensure continued seismic adequacy, actions needed to address the subject CATD are considered complete.
I 9
.l l
l