ML20151H688
| ML20151H688 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Bellefonte  |
| Issue date: | 04/27/1983 |
| 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 8305050120 | |
| Download: ML20151H688 (2) | |
Text
e L
w-TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
~
r CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE 37401
/..
400 Chestnut Street Tower II
^ Tr 0
/
.o April 27, 1983 b
io r.P cW t
9,.
'N]
BLRD-50-438/83-13 i
BLRD-50-439/83-09 g
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 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 - IMPROPERLY QUALIFIED N0ZZLE LOADS
- BLRD-50-438/83-13, BLRD-50-439/83 SECOND INTERIM REPORT The subject deficiency was initially reported to NRC-0IE Inspector D. Verreli on January 24, 1983 in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e) as NCR BLN CEB 8220. This-was followed by our first interim report dated February 16, 1983 Enclosed is our second interim report. We expect to submit our next report by October '7, 1984.
If you have any questions, please get in touch with R. H. Shell at FTS 858-2688.
Very truly yours, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY L. M. Mills, nager Nuclear Licensing Enclosure ec:
Mr. Richard C. DeYoung, Director (Enclosure)
Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Records Center (Enclosure)
Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 1100 Circle 75 Parkway, Suite 1500 Atlanta, Georgia 30339
'p 4,Cgt '}
8305050120 830427 d'
PDR ADOCK 05000438
'f['- '
S PDR gg g An Equal Opportunity Employer
- 9 2
ENCLOSURE BELLEFONTE NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 IMPROPERLY QUALIFIED N0ZZLE LOADS BLRD-50-438/83-13, BLRD-50-439/83-09 NCR BLN CEB 8220 10 CFR 50.55(e)
SECOND INTERIM REPORT Description of Deficiency Piping analysis problems Nu-1ND-A, N4-2ND-A, N4-1ND-B, N4-2ND-B, N4-1(2)NV-A, and N4-1(2)NV-M were issued using improperly qualified nozzle loads. The manufacturer's equipment specifications for nozzle qualifica-tion was not followed. Typically, evaluations are made for normal, upset, and faulted conditions. However, in the subject piping analysis problems, only a faulted evaluation using incorrect allowables was performed. This improper evaluation could result in unqualified nozzles in the normal or upset condition. The decay heat removal (DHR) and the makeup and purification (MU/P) pump nozzles are the ones affected. Additionally, further evaluation to qualify the flange bolts required by the manufacturer's equipment specifications was not performed.
Interim Progress TVA's Civil Engineering Support Branch has reviewed most of the rigorous analysis calculation packages to make sure that all of the nozzle qualifications performed were in accordance with the manufacturer's equipment specifications. To date, 55 problems have been identified as having the subject deficiency. There are 62 problems remaining to be investigated.
.