ML20062L535
| ML20062L535 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hartsville, Phipps Bend  |
| Issue date: | 01/28/1981 |
| From: | Mills L TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8102030269 | |
| Download: ML20062L535 (2) | |
Text
_
4
~
b p
y TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
'fr C
456TEhm 34 Nil 698F#w&Pdf1 m
w l
r,
N January 28, 1981 i
E$
l 73 1
Y D
Mr. Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director l
Division of Licensing U.S. Nuolear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
Dear Mr. Tedesco:
In the Matter of the Applications
)
Docket Nos. STN 50-518 of Tennessee Valley Authority 1
STN 50-519 STN 50-520 STN 50-521 STN 50-553 STN 50-554 In response to your letter to H. O. Parris dated December 19, 1980, we are enclosing the schedule by which TVA anticipates submitting the results of our Ultimate Capacity Analyses for Mark III Containments. As discussed with l
Susie Kebiusek of your staff, although we did not receive a similar letter for Hartsville Nuclear Plant, our response will apply to Hartsville and Phipps Bend.
Very truly yours.
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY l
8
. M. Mills,, Manager Nuclear Regulation and Safety I
Subscribe a sworn t before me this ff
ay of 1981.
U lLuhY R6tary Public My Commission Expires Enclosure 02 0 t cJQ An Equal Opportunity Employer
4 ENCLOSURE I!ARTSVILLE AllD PiiIPPS BEf!D NUCLEAR PLANTS ULTIMATE. CAPACITY Af!ALYSES OF MARK III CONTAIf!MENTS SCHEDULE OF SUBMITTALS We received your request to !I. G. Parris dated December 10, 1080, for our schedule of an analysis of the ultimate capacity of the Phipps Bond Nuclear Plant containment. Although we did not receive a similar letter pertaining to our Hartsville Nuclear Plant, our response below will apply to both plants.
We estimate that a complete analysis of our Mark III plants could not be
- accomplished before August 1082. However, in order to facilitate your general review on hydrogen effects on containment, we plan to provide an interim.
response to you by August 1981 as described below.
The requested analyses are extensive and will require careful evaluation of the containment shell and a variety of containment penetrations and features.
Some aspects of the llartsville and Phipps Bend containment design.are not complete at this time. Furthermore, a rigorous treatment of the containment will demand manpover with specialized training which is being used to respond to similar requests on TVA plants scheduled for startup before Hartsville and Phipps Bend.
We believe, however, that a less complete but satisfactory evaluation of the containment can be achieved by August of this year and provided as an interim response. This interin response will consist of:
(1)
- a. static analysis of the containment and membrane ultimate strengths; (2) identification'of containment penetrations and features; and (3) a qualitative conparison of the preceding items to static and dynamic loads with similar penetrations and features at TVA's Sequoyah !!uclear Plant (for which we have performed analyses similar to those you have requested). While this approach will not define the ultinate capacity of the containment, we expect to damonstrate that the ultimate capacity of the Hartsville and Phipps Bend fluelear Plant containments exceeds the capabilities of the Sequoyah fluclear Plant containment.
.