ML20214J040

Rev 0 to TVA Employee Concerns Special Program Rationale for non-inclusion as Restart Item Rept 215.1, Seismic Criteria

ML20214J040
Person / Time
Site:	Sequoyah
Issue date:	11/13/1986
From:	Mcnutt G, Russell J, Stewart D TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
To:
Shared Package
ML20214H850	List: ML20214H848 ML20214H865 ML20214H879 ML20214H927 ML20214H956 ML20214H976 ML20214J008 ML20214J040 ML20214J053 ML20214J064 ML20214J083 ML20214J093 ML20214J101 ML20214J126 ML20214J135 ML20214J144 ML20214J161 ML20214J169 ML20214J180 ML20214J199 ML20214J206 ML20214J212 ML20214J220 ML20214J224 ML20214J231 ML20214J243 ML20214J251 ML20214J261
References
215.1, 215.1-R, 215.1-R00, NUDOCS 8612010127
Download: ML20214J040 (3)

Text

-- . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - _ _ _ _

b

', TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.1 SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT TYPE: Rationale For Non-Inclusion REVISION NUMBER: 0

( as Restart Item TITLE: Seismic Criteria PAGE 1 0F 3 REASON FOR REVISION:

PREPa** TION PREPARED BY: _

J. W. Benkert (see Sheet 2 for signature) 9-11-86 SIGNATURE DATE kd C. W. Jordan (see Sheet 2 for signature) 9-11-86 REVIEWS PEER:

SIGNATURE DATE TAS*

6 MAa-/ -

SIGNATURE niizl>6 DATE CONCURRENCES

^

/M(W CEG-H: G. R. McNutt 9-11-86 SRP: m //-12 86 SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE

• DATE APPROVED BY*

h fjjf ~

/f-l$-((p N/A ECSP RKilRGER DATE MANAGER OF NUCLEAR POWER DATE CONCURRENCE (FINAL REPORT ONLY) 2085T *SRP Secretary's signature denotes SRP concurrences are in files.

8612010127 861117 PDR ADOCK 05000327 p PDR -

. .. ____ _ . . . )

', 1 SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT ENGINEERING RELATED EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM RATIONALE FOR NON-INCLUSION AS RESTART ITEM SUBCATEGORY / ELEMENT 215.1 (b)

Seismic Criteria These issues are not SQN restart issues based on TVA geological and seismicity investigations presented in FSAR Section 2.5 and NRC review and acceptance given in SER Section 2.5. Both documents indicate that although the site is adjacent to the Kingston thrust fault and a major overturned anticline, no geologic evidence indicates that any of these features are active (earthquake) faults. Furthermore, TVA Investigation Report I-86-110-SQN dated March 5, 1986 concludes that:

1. "The SQN is not located directly on the earthquake fault.

2. The seismic analysis performed by TVA and accepted by the NRC concluded that adequate design margins exist for all critical components and structures to withstand the anticipated earthquake loads without losing their capability to perform their required safety functions."

ATTACHENT: List of Issues for Civil ELEE NT N0. 250.0 (b)

Date: 09/08/86 Evaluator b e % A d Date  % d% C.

Resp. Mgr.

vate Uzwu ECEG-H Date 9 M -M 0976d O

_ . - .. _g . - - .. - n ~ - ~ - .

-, ,, + g,- w_ w ,,_. +., . .w

~ .-

SON REST ELEENT NUER 215.1 -

.' SEISMIC CRITERIA 95# 'E;,

ELEENT .

WHERE RESPON-CONCERN NUMBER (S) ISSUES ADDRESSED SIBLE GENERAL APPROACH /ETH000 LOGY FOR ELEENT REPORT 00-85-005-009 1. SQN is on an earthquake fault that 215.1 JWB NOTE: 'These issues are not SQN restart issues "Sequoyah Nuclear Plant is runs from Chattanooga to Knoxville. based on TVA investigations presented in FSAR sited on an earthquake fault Section 2.5 and NRC review given in SER that runs from around 2. Plant structures could fall in an 215.1 JW8 Section 2.5.

Chattanooga to north of earthquake.

Knoxville. If trere were an 1. Review Section 2.5 of both the FSAR and SER (by earthquake power plant geologist).

structures could fail."

2. Compare geological settings of SQN and WBN for which a detail review has been congleted and note significant differences, if any (by geologist).

3. Reconcile any significant differences.

4 Review TVA report I-86-110-SQN.

Items 1, 2 and 3 may be deleted if Bechtel does not take a technical position on these issues.

~~

9 0966d-1 (09/08/86) i ___ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .