ML19305D695

Suppl to Final Deficiency Rept Re Unacceptable QA Documentation for Glazer Steel Matl.All Questionable Matl Has Been Tested.Slightly Excessive Sulfur Content Is Caused by Chemical Differences & Not QA Sys Defects

ML19305D695
Person / Time
Site:	Hartsville
Issue date:	04/03/1980
From:	TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
To:
Shared Package
ML19305D692	List: ML19305D691 ML19305D695
References
NUDOCS 8004150417
Download: ML19305D695 (1)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ ._- - . _ . _ _

k

.J . . . . . . - . . - - - . . - - . ~ .

,u% .

ENCLOSURE l r

HARTSVILLE NUCLEAR PLANT, ALL UNITS UNACCEPTABLE QA DOCUMENTATION FOR GLAZER STEEL MATERIAL .

10CFR50.55(e) SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL REPORT i NCR HNP-A-058 On July 17, 1979, TVA informed NRC-0IE Inspector, W. B. Swan, of a potentially reportable conditiin under 10CFR50.55(e) regarding l questionable QA documentation on steel received from Glazer Steal and Aluminum (Glazer), Knoxville,' Tennessee. This report supplements the final report sent to you February 14, 1980, as per the request

• made by NRC-OIE Inspector R. W. Wright in his call with J. F. Cox '

and S. R. Stout on February 26, 1980. t Generic Implications TVA has investigated the situation regarding material supplied by .

Glazer for TVA nuclear use and has determined that there is no basis  !

for a generic concern about the material previously supplied by Glazer to other (than Hartsville) TVA nuclear plants. This position is based i primarily on the fact that the Glazer material supplied to the other '

, sites has either had sufficient documentation provided upon arrival i l at each site such that it has been approved for use at the site or i it has been rejected because of insufficient documentation.

Furthermore, Glazer does not manufacture the material they supply i to TVA and over 90 percent of all material supplied by Glazer has i been via direct shipment from the steel mill to the TVA plantaites. i TVA tested all questionable material (i.e., all material for which  !

, documentation was questionable) at Hartsville-which had been shipped l from the Glazer Knoxville warehouse, of which all but one hundle came  !

from Florida Steel Corporation, Charlotte, North Carolina (Florida l Steel). The questionable material amounted to less than seven percent of l all the Glazer material on hand. This testing was discussed on February 14, ,

1980, report. The tests showed some of the Florida Steel material l (7/8- and 1-inch rods) to have a sulfur content slightly higher than l allowed in ASTM A.36 although the CMIR's showed the sulfur levels to be acceptable. All other material properties checked, including chemical analyses, yield stress, ultimate stress, and elongation fell ~

within the limits of ASTM A.36. Our position is that this slightly excessive sulfur content is caused by chemical differences within heats at the Florida Steel Charlotte Mill, not from problems  ;

identified with the Glazer QA system. The slightly higher sulfur levels in rod of this type would not affect the structural integrity or safety of operations of any of the TVA nuclear plants because this type rod is not used in welded QA applications. This type rod is used in

!* threaded form supports and threaded hanger attachments (wherein the i increased sulfur will improve the machinability for threading).

TVA' had one other problem with chemistry of material (in this case

, rebar) produced at the Charlotte Mill of Florida Steel. ' This deficiency was reported to OIE Inspector R. W. Wright on October 17,

.1979, which was after the date that the high-sulfur rod was produced 8004150 1 - __ . - _ - - - - -