L-81-443, Final Deficiency Rept Re Linear Indication Observed in Reactor Coolant 3/4-inch Schedule 160,304 SS Pipe,Initially Reported on 810909.Linear Indication Determined to Be Hot Mill Seam.Pipe Replaced.Incident Determined Not Reportable
| ML20031E643 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 10/08/1981 |
| From: | Robert E. Uhrig FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| References | |
| 10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, L-81-443, NUDOCS 8110160263 | |
| Download: ML20031E643 (2) | |
Text
8 P.O. BOM 5291CD MIA %I,FL 33152 FLORIDA POWER *: LIGHT COMPANY October 8,.1981 L-81-443 Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director, Region II Office of Inspection and Enforcement s $J'^rf U
S. Nuclear Regulatory Comissten.
g/
k c #. \\/ 7
((L g,,V g ?
101 Marietta Street,. Suite 3100 C/
Atlanta,. Georgia. 30303
/
J Ic_. -
,s,
OCT151981* T
Dear Mr.. O'Reilly:
Q u.s.gb**S" $
Re:
RII:JP0 J'
50-389 (j,T G'
Linear Indicacions In-Reactor Coolant Instrument Line - 10 CFR 50.55(e)
Report 50-389/81-004 Florida; Power &- Light Company > an September 9,.1981', notified the Region II Office,0f Inspection and Enforcement (FPL to Mr. Kerry Landis), in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55(e) of a potential deficiency regarding a linear indication observed in the reactor coolant 3/4 inch schedule 160,.304 SS. pipe. We have completed our evaluation and conclude that this incident is non-reportable..
The concern of this potential 10 CFR 50.55(e) report was related to a linear indication found on a certain 3/4 inch schedule 160, 304 SS pipe.
It was not known, at the time FPL notified the NRC of the potential deficiency, what had caused this linear indication.
FPL removed a portion of the subject pipe and proceeded to have the pipe examined.to determine the exact cause of this indication. A representative sample was supplied. A visual examination of the sample revealet' a longitudinal crack on the outside diameter surface.
Upon closer examinatior. of this pipe, it was detennined that this imperfection
~
was actually a hot. nill seam which is a common place occurrence in steel mills.
Any subsequent cold work? 'g operation which may have been perfonned on the pipe would have no relatkaship to the origin of the seam. A hot-mill seam is allowed for in the ASME code, but only up to certain limits.
For this type of line, 3/4 incn schedule 110, 304 SS pipe, ASME SA-530, General Requirements for Soecialized Carbon and Alloy Steel Pipe, specifies that the minimum wall ttickness of any point shall not be more than 12h percent under the nominal wall thickness specified.
In this instance, the 3/4 inch schedule 160, 304 SS pipe has a specified nominal wall thickness of.219 inches and 12h percent of this is.027 inches.
~
Our justification for considering this incident as non-reportable is based on the fact that the maximum seam depth present in our sample is.020 inches.p h s
D 8110160263 811008 PDR ADOCK 05000389 S
- - ~ ~
v
- ' ^ ^ ' ' =
/
Office of Znsp@ction and Enforcement Page Two and this value is well within specified tolerances called for in the ASME J
code. Therefore, we have concluded. that this particular her.t number is not suspect. If this situation was; left uncorrected,. it would. not have adversely-affected. the safety of operation of the plant. Nonetheless, the questionabTe portiorr of pipe containing. the linear indication was replaced.
AIT pertinent documentatiom regarding this concern; wiTT: be maintained.
at the site-andiwiT11 be avaiTahre fbr your inspection.
Very-trulye yours, 7
MA$ W-N.,
Robert E Uhrig-V. ice President Advanced; Systems & TechnoTogy REU/TCG'/ah-ccr. Director of" rnspectiorr. & Enforcement U. S NucTear ReguTatory Comissiotr Washingtorr,. D'. C 2055E HaroTd. F. Reis Esquire s
e 1
I l
=
2
-