TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY CHATTANOOGA. TENNESSEE 37401

'j11 eS5~ 7 BLookout Place

WSRD-50-.390/82-04JN268 WBRD-50-391/82-O4

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II

- Attn: Dr. J. Nelson Grace, Regional Administrator 101 Marietta Street, NW, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323

Dear Dr. Grace:

WATTS BAR NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 - FOAM SEALS in MECHANICAL PIPS SLEEVE - WDRD-50--390/82-04, WBRD-50-391/82-04 - SUPPLEMENTAL I"VOEMATION

The subject deficiency was initially reported to NRC-Region II inspector R. V. Crilenjak on December 4, 1981 in accordance with 10 CYR 50.55(e) &a NCR WDN CB S 118. A f inal report was submitted on January 3, 1984 for unit 1 and on October 29, 1985 for-unit 2. A supplemental final report for unit 2 was submaitted on March 5, 1986. Enclosed is supplemen~tal information clarifying and ^.orrecting information provided in our previous reports.

if you have any questions, please get in touch with R. H. Shell at ITS 858-2688.

Very truly yours,

TEXNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY

R. L.Gil,,Dizector Nuclear Safety and Licensing

Enclosure ac: Hr. James Taylor, Diavector (Enclosure)

Office of Inspection and Enforcemen 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

AI)6K 05 PDR

An Equal O9portunitY Employer

*ICLOSURK

WATTS MAR NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 FOAM SEALS IN MECHANICAL PIPE SLEEVES WIRD-50-390/82...4, WBRD-50-391/82..04

NCRw WIN Csi811 10 CFR 50.55(e)

SUPPLMhghALT ZNVORATI-09

Clarification for Units 1 and 2

41* corrective action for the NCR states that foam seal stiffness was found to have an insignificant effect on piping analysis except where pipe movements exceed 1 inch. The corrective action should have stated that foam seal stiffness was fowr~d to have an insignificant effect on piping analysis except where Lik~r&L pipe movement, exceeded 1 inch.

Neither analysis of movements inor boot seals were required on the besis of aimal pipe movements at *leave locations. Testing performed as part of the corrective action and other documentation for this NCR indicated that axial pipe movements would cause debonding from the silicone foam and that slippage would occur before significant forces were generated. Debonding of sleave seals at locations with large axiail pipe movements does not prevent the searant from performing its intended funation.

Unit IuteLf Le In the description of the deficiency in our previous final report. on unit 1, TVA inadvertently omitted that the maximuam pipe movements at the sleeves could cause failure of the sealant to perform its intended design function as a water seal. The water seal function is required in tMe crane wall.* Due to his r'evision, two boot seals have been installed for sleeves with mark Nos. 515 and 516 in accordance with engineering change notice 4433. These boot. seals "ar required for a pressure seal at the containment instrument room. PlWCs note that the sleeve identified in our previous report as 1542 should be mark Wo. 1544.