ML20206G374

SER Supporting Employee Concern Element Rept 22110 (B), Use of Snubbers

ML20206G374
Person / Time
Site:	Sequoyah
Issue date:	11/04/1988
From:	NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To:
Shared Package
ML20206G037	List: ML20206G034 ML20206G298 ML20206G302 ML20206G306 ML20206G315 ML20206G319 ML20206G325 ML20206G330 ML20206G337 ML20206G344 ML20206G348 ML20206G352 ML20206G358 ML20206G363 ML20206G366 ML20206G370 ML20206G374 ML20206G380 ML20206G385 ML20206G392 ML20206G396 ML20206G404 ML20206G408 ML20206G410 ML20206G416 ML20206G419 ML20206G426 ML20206G429 ML20206G435 ML20206G438 ML20206G447 ML20206G453 ML20206G457 ML20206G459 ML20206G462 ML20206G466 ML20206G472 ML20206G480 ML20206G486 ML20206G497 ML20206G502 ML20206G509 ML20206G519 ML20206G524 ML20206G529 ML20206G534 ML20206G539 ML20206G543 ML20206G550 ML20206G559 ... further results
References
NUDOCS 8811220253
Download: ML20206G374 (2)

Text

_ - - -

i

,s. ' ' - c t.,'c.

UNITED STATES

/

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

! if, /b,f" i.

i wasmNotoN, o. c. 20sss a

k/

SAFET) EVALUATION REPORT BY THE OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS EMPLOYEE C0' CERN ELEMENT REPORT 22110 (B)

I i

USE OF SNUBBERS i

TENSESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY SECUOVAH NUCLEAR POWER PLAET. UNIT 1 DOCKET NO.: 50-327 1.

STATEMENT Or EP:LOYEE C0' ctRN The basis for Element Repert 22110 (B), Rev.1. Dated December.'s0,1956 is enleyee cencern SQN.F.6-001-02 which states that the Upper 'ead d

injection Systen vertical riser requires a rigid support where a snubber a

was usec.

i

!!. SUw?M Y OF ISSUE

[

A rigid type sup; ort is specified in the piping analysis for a specific location on the vertical riser of the Upper Head Injectica (VHI) system, but the detail drawings and as-built condition show use of a snubber at this location.

UH! has a plant safety-related function.

!!!. EVALLATION l

In Merch 1986, this discrepancy was identified by TVA in a significant ccrdition report SCR SQN CEB 8615. Elernent report 22110 (B), Rev.1.

recognizec the empic In a subsequent letter J.A. McEenald (TVA) yee concern as valid.to B.J. Youngblood (NRC), Dated l

i i

responding to an NRC request for additional inforr.ation, the root cause of this disparity between thk pipe support analysih and the al built 2

1 concition was given as a lack of attention to detail, specifically, that Jn engineering judgeFent w3s made regarding support orientation and design I

without proper documentation and comunication to in erfacing groups.

t The letter also identified a 100t (nginee-ing revies of all snubbers in the plant against the piping analyses, and confirme this instance to be a single, isolatec case. The T'.A re-analysis (060v104 15 01) of the UH!

3 pipe restraint at this location utilizirig a snubber demonstrated the use of the snubber to be an adequate design, able to sustain required seismic j

and therr.al stress levels. TVA has identified this as an acceptable

)

resciution to the issue. Tre st:ff believes the depth and extent of the review tc be adecuate and concurs that installation of the snubber is j

acceptatie, and the rt;iace ant of the snutbet' is not necessary.

[

l i

)

8011220253 88;104 PDR AfOCK 05000327 P

FDL l

I i

7 2

L The corrective action has been tracked under terrective Action Track.ng (CATD) 2211~ SON 01, and was reported as completed and verified Docurer:

for Secucyah Unit 1 on July 11, 1988.

The proble-described in the CATD has also been tracxed by SCR SON CEB FE15.

The piping analysis 0600104-15-01 was r',norted as completed and verified in the Tracking and Reporting of Open Items (TROI) document dated September 12, 1958.

IV.

CONCL US10'.

i The issue conc 3rning ER 22110 (B), Use of Snubbers, has been substantiated.

The staff finds the licensee's corrective action to be adequate and acceptable for SON, Unit I restart.

k i

l i

i

,