ML20236L695
| ML20236L695 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 11/04/1987 |
| From: | Shell R TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8711110026 | |
| Download: ML20236L695 (4) | |
Text
_. __
.1
'j},
()
\\-
8 re >
.f 4,
- 0 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
')?
CHATTANOOGA. TENNESSEE 37,4o1 SN 157B Lookout Place s
NOV 041987 o
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm1ssion ATTN: Document Control Desk-1 Washington, D.C.
20555 Gentlemen:
.j
.In theLMatter of.
)
Docket Nos. 50-327 g
i Tennessee Valley Authority
)
50-328 SEQUOYAH-NUCLEAR PLANT (SQN) -- NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-327/87-44 AND
.'50-328/87-44 -' RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
-Enclosed,is'our response to'S. D. Ebneter's' October 6, 1987 letter to S. ; A' White that transmitted the subject Inspection Roport.
If you have any questions, please telephone M. R. Harding at 615/870-6422.
Tothebestofmyknowledge,kdeclarethestatementscontainedhereinare complete and true.
I Very truly yours, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY f
R. H. Shell, Manager Regulatory Affairs i
Enclosure cc:
See,page 2 i
B71ill0026 871104 PDR ADOCK 05000327 G
PDR s
u______--____________
.__-____a
b o.
l j
3 a
'. Nuclear Regulatory Commission u
I' cc-(Enclosure):-
Mr.. G. G.7Zech,' Assistant Director for. Inspection Programs Officeauf Special Projects' U.S.' Nuclear Regulatory Commission j
-101.Marietta Street, NW,: Suite 2900 j
Atlanta, Georgia 30323-l Mr. J. A.:Zwolinski.. Assistant Director for Projects Division,of1TVA Projects Office of Special Projects
.U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4350 East-West Highway EWW 322;
~$
Bethesda.. Maryland -20814
.Sequoyah Resident Inspector Sequoyah Nuclear Plant' i
t i-2600 Igou Ferry Road Soddy Daisy, Tennesseo.37379 1
l f
n i
i 1
\\
l I
f I
- z= __ _ _ - _ -
f
sk s
,4 4J i
s.
b
' y ' j,y.
,5 l
i l },
ENCLOSURE I' '
RESPONSE TO NRCl INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-327, -328/87-44 REQUEST.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION I.
l Item'4.3.2~(1) 9
'"Ther$viewofthe' supporting'pipecalculationsidentifiedthatTVAhas.
l
, +
not' performed minimum wall calculations for pipe schedules otherEthan je
. schedule 1160.. lTVA needsito perform those calculations to' ascertain that
,O
'a pressure ' problem is not present."
~
m
- q
.\\
TVA's Response to 4.3.2 (1) i TVA has reviewed theLsupporting calculations and has determined that all' 1-inch 1-1/2-inch, and 2-inch,'TVA-installed,' Class A piping is schedule-160.- 'The schedule 80-piping contained inLthe calculations was determined
,to be a nozzle, which is part of the reactor coolant pump. TheLeeactor-coolant' pump and. associated. nozzles were designed and furnished by b
Westinghouse and.are not.part of.the heaticode traceability issue. The
. calculations have been revised-to' reflect-this.'
g y-II.. : Item 4.'3.2-(2) j "The acceptance of 2-1/2 percent of nodal points for'small-bore piping.
- b'ased upon:the use of actual material properties and thicknesses is not' acceptable., TVA needs to review those nodal points again and' upgrade them, either.by: performing the additional NDE. or by adding more supports-3 to reduce the loads, or by replacing the piping."
-i TVA's Response to 4.3.2 (2)'
i
.TVA' reviewed'the analysis and identified an additional 20 nodes that were in the category of' exceeding 60 percent of the American Society ofL Mechanical Engineers (ASME)'Section III code allowable stress.
A review of pipe'and fittings in the additional 20 nodes identified one' installed pipe fitting that did not have evidence or certification of the required
-nondestructive examination (NDE)..This condition.was documented on Condition Adverse To Quality Report (CAQR) SQP871290, and the material I
was upgraded in accordance with American Nuclear Standards Institute l
(ANSI) B31.7 - 1069, paragraph 1-724.1(b)4.
The review of the additional 20 nodes brought the total nodes investigated to 65.
A second review was
~ performed on the initial 45 nodes. This second review looked at pipe fittings with' respect to meeting ANSI B31.7 Class 1 requirements in lieu of the calculation justification by thickness (this justification by-thickness has been deleted'from the calculation).
No additional material was identified that did not have the required NDE.
Review of all nodec is documented.in Quality Information Release SQP-87-437.
l 1
k
.:.I
' l?
n
'e
_p_
III; Item 4.3.2(3)
"TVA Design Criteria for Detailed Analysis of Category I Piping Systems, SQN-DC-V-13.3, Revs 3 providts the loading conditions and stress' limits ~
3 for Category I piping systems in' Table 3.1-l.'.
Footnote 3 of this, table'
'f states:that the allowable stress; levels are given in ANSI B3141-1967.-
TVA's calculations of the allowable stresses for small-bore piping used' ASME Section III Appendix I allowables which do not meet the criteria in 1
'SQN-DC-V-13.3."
TVA Response to 4.3.2(3)
TVA has revised the design criteria for detailed. analysis.of Category I piping' systems, SQN DCV-13.3; to comply with section 3.9.2.5.2 of the Final' Safety Analysis Report by DIM-SQN-DC-V-13.3-6-dated March.20,
.1987.
This revision requires the use'of ASME section III piping criteria o
and allowables.
.-l k
i 4
. - - _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _