ML20031H266
| ML20031H266 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 10/13/1981 |
| From: | Papay L SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. |
| To: | Engelken R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| References | |
| 10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, NUDOCS 8110270309 | |
| Download: ML20031H266 (3) | |
Text
1.
Docket No. 50-362 50 55(e) Iboort
.c Southern Calibrnia Edison Company g6 R O. BOX 800 2244 WALNUT GROVE AVENUE ROSEM EAD, CALIFORNIA 91770 LT. PAPM vtCE..CSIDENT 283 572 5474 '
October 13, 1981
-Mr. R. H Eugelken, Director f[:[Sgg[fp((h k
Office of Inspection and Enforcement 7
yf U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- l Q jY (
h Region V Suite 202, Walnut Creek Plaza E
Og7 '6 gg O
6 1990 North California Boulevard J
i - u,#"!2ggg
'g Walnut Creek, California 94596
Dear Mr. Engelken:
k p[
Subj ect:
Docket No. 50-362 San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 3 In a letter to your office dated September 15, 1981 we identified a condition which we considered reportable in accordance with 10CFR50.55(e).
The condition involves pipe support material certified by a material supplier to be 304 stainless steel but determined actually after receipt at the jobsite to be Inconel 718 alloy.
Enclosed in accordance with 10CFR50.55(e) are twenty-five (2.5) copies of a Final Report entitled " FINAL l
REPORT ON THE DETERMINATION OF PIPE SUPPORT MATERIAL CONTENT, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 3."
If you have any questions regarding this report, we would be pleased to discuss this matter with you at your con-venience.
t Very truly yours, l
/
&. L. E Afy M U G 3 7
Enclosures l
ce:
Victor SMllo (NRC, Director I&E)
T I
A.E.Chaffee(NRC,SanOnofre,Uniti))2&3)
> s d til jg]
I (
- .w; G3A!303U 8110270309 811013" PDR ADOCK 05000362 S
PDR g_g
'O s
9.)
4 FINAL REPORT ON THE DETERMINATION OF PIPE SUPPORT MATERIAL CONTENT San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 3 j
INTRODUCTION This report is submitted pursuant -to 10CFR50.55(e)(3).
It describes a condition discovered during construction inspec-tion.
This report includes a description of the condition, an analysis of the safety implications and a summary of corrective i
action taken.
By a letter dated September 15, 1981, Southern California Edison confirmed notification to the NRC of the report-able condition.
BACKGROUND During visual examination of welds on wrapper plates it was noted that there were linear indications in the base metal and
.teld material.
The chemical analysis of a sample wrapper plate revealed that the material was Inconel 718 Alloy.
This material was certified by the material manufacturer as austenitic stain-less steel.
A stainless steel to stainless steel welding procedure I
was used.
J DISCUSSION The following discussion is responsive to 10CFR50.55(e)(3).
DESCRIPTION OF THE DEFICIENCY An unknown quantity of Inconel 718 Alloy (1/4" THK Plate) was supplied and installed in lieu of the required 304 Stainless Steel.
All material of Heat No. 25950 was considered suspect and an analysis of installed pipe lugs and wrapper plates was necessary.
ANALYSIS OF SAFETY IMPLICATIONS The pipe support is a primary supporting structure.
It transmits loads directly from pressure retaining boundary to the supporting
(
structure.
Failure of wrapper plate / support during a seismic event could potentially have adversely affected the safe shut-down of the plant.
i I
l i
e.
I,j FINAL REPORT ON THE DETERMINATION Page Two-0F PIPE SUPPORT MATERIAL CONTENT San Onofre Unit 3 CORRECTIVE ACTION The following is - a summary of corrective action taken:
1.
Identification of material used in ASEE Section III applications was assured as follows:
a.
Reviewed all Unit 2 N-5 Code Data Reports and all Unit 3 WR-5A weld papers for pressure boundary attachments zith the suspect Heat No. 25950.
b.
The supplier (AMETEK-STRAZA) provided a listing of all tag numbers and bulk material purchased by San Onofre Units 2&3 with the suspect Heat No. 25950.
All data obtained from la and b above was compiled into a master list by support tag number.
2.
Determinati.n of material content was made utilizing the Texas Nuclear Alloy Analyzer.
3.
Results of Testing a.
All wrapper plates which were accessible to the Alloy Analyzer Probe in Units 2&3 were tested (95% and 91%
i respectively) - No Inconel 718 Alloy was identified in Unit 2 and seven wrapper plates were identified in Unit 3 as Inconel 718 Alloy.
b.
All lugs which were accessible to the Alloy Analyzer Probe in U-3 were tested (58%) - No Inconel 718 Alloy was identified.
Approximately 15% of all lugs were tested in Unit 2 -
c.
No Inconel 718 Alloy was identified.
d.
All bulk material in storage (wrapper plates and lugs) was checked - No Inconel 718 Alloy was identified.
We have concluded that no Inconel material was supplied as tagged pieces.
The Inconel was limited tc two - 5 foot by 10 foot sheets.
4.
The wrapper plates of Inconel will be cut out and replaced with 304 Stainless Steel.
L k