ML20003B836

Final Deficiency Rept Re Us Steel Pipe W/Linear Indications, Initially Reported 801003.Process Spec 3.M.5.1,Paragraph 5 in Const Spec G29M Will Be Clarified to Enable Site Personnel to Determine Linear Defects

ML20003B836
Person / Time
Site:	Phipps Bend
Issue date:	01/30/1981
From:	Mills L TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
To:	James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
References
10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, NCR-PBNP-154, NUDOCS 8102250658
Download: ML20003B836 (3)

Text

- , - .- - --

e 0 e i

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHOR!?2 ~ r -

CH ATT ANCCG A, TENNESSEE 3740!

400 Chestnut Street Tcwer II r . .

"3l January 30, 1981 86- tap -6.%

Mr. Ja=es P. O'Reilly, Directer Office of Inspecticn and Enforce =ent U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cc==issien Region II - Suite 3100 101 Marietta Street Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Oear Mr. O'Reilly:

PHIPPS BEND NUCLEAR PLANT - REPORTA3LE IEFICIENCY - U.S. STEEL PIPE WITH L LIAR INDICATION 3 (NCR PBNP 154)

Initial notificatien of the subject deficiency was made to NCR-0IE Regien II Inspector R. W. Wright en October 3, 1980. TVA submitted the first interim report en Nevester 3, 1980. In ec=pliance with paragraph 50.55(e) of 10 CFR Part 50, we are enclosing the final report en the subject deficiency. We consider 10 CFR Part 21 applicable to this noncenfermance. If you have any questiens, please call Jim De=er at FTS 857-2014 Very truly yours, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY f $. V L. M. Mills, Manager Nuclear Regulation and Safety Enclosure cc: Mr. Victor Stello, Director (Enclosure)

/(.

/ v k

Office of Inepection and Enforcement f h f31 l- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmissien IES2*gg Washington, DC 20555 u.a. g

/

/ig g l

f)0 e i 8102 250 fgg, FricrAL copy 6 .

4m = c=cm.may a-- ,

t i

ENCLCSURE PHIPPS c2ND NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 U.S. STEEL .1PE WITH LINEAR INDICATICNS 10CFR50.55(e) NCR PBNP-154 REPORT NO. 2 (FINAL)

Description of Deficiency Three heats of seamless eignt-inch Schedule 80 SA106B (heat Nos.

L62448, L63651, and L63647) purchased from Guyen Alloys under contract to TVA had displayed linear surface defects and possible cracks. The largest linear indicatien was 10 feet in length; there was one crack which penetrated 30 percent of the pipe wall thickness.

Safety Imolications Cracked piping such as the one mentioned above could not reliably perfers to meet design requirements, and therefore could possibly affect the safety of operation. Other linear indicatiens previously referred to as " cracks" have been identified as external surface laps. The depth of these laps is actually less than 5 percent of the wall thickness. The laps could not affect normal operation or degrade the safety of plant operations.

Corrective Action The material purchased under the provisions of contract No.

78KA3-822825 included ASME III Class 2 -8.675" o.d. Schedule 80 seamless SA106B pipe. The heat numbers in question were L62448 (575 '-0"), L63651 (1852 '-11"), and L63647 (626 '-7") . The vendor responsible for supplying this material is Guyon Alloys, Incorporated, located in Harrison, New Jersey. The piping was fabricated by U. S.

Steel, located in Loraine, Ohio.

l Since the crack which had penetrated 80 percent of the wall thickness

! had been remcved by grinding, TVA, Guyon, and U.S. Steel were unable I to determine its cause. The pipe containing this track has since been

( rejected. Inspection of the several other indications of concern l revealed that th!re were no other cracks. The defe9ts examined were l actually laps which fell into _the acceptable rangs in the context of l SA106B.

I A T7A review of piping of this size, class, and of the particular material in question reveals that surface linear defects such as laps and seams are i both ccamon and, in most cases, insignificant. However, in' order to assure that the subject pipe meets the requirements for' ASPE SA-106 pipe, TVA will l

take the following steps:

l l.

I b

1. These surface imperfections (laps, seams) which intersect the weld must be removed to a distance of approximately four inches from the weld so ;tst they do not interfere with subsequent inspection.

2. Those imperfections in 1. above which exceed one foot in length should be explored at two additional randomly selected locations.

3 Surface imperf-ctiens that penetrate more than 12 1/2 percent of the nominal wall thickness will result in the rejection of ;he pipe.

4 Any surface imperfection which is deeper than 5 percent of the nominal wall thickness shall be explored for its entire length and evaluated to 3. above.

5 All cracked pipin6 will be rejected.

6. If at any time greater than 55 of a representative sample of a heat of pipe is rejectable, EN DES will be notified for further disposition.

TVA Constructicn Specification G29M was revised to clarify this area of concern. Process Specification 3.M.5.1, paragraph 5.0, in G29M will be clarified in a future revision to enable site persennel to more readily deal with similar defects in both this and other-materials.

s l

i i

I