ML20069J607

Final Deficiency Rept Re Stainless Steel Piping SA 312TP316 & SA 312TP316HF Installed in Lieu of Required SA 312TP316L. Initially Reported on 820317.Deviation Disposition Requests Written.No Instrument Sample Lines Affected

ML20069J607
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	10/12/1982
From:	Wells D DETROIT EDISON CO.
To:	James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
References
10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, EF2-59400, NUDOCS 8210250191
Download: ML20069J607 (2)

Text

4 Donald A. Wells

( h$$3Nd7 2000 Second Avenue 33 3-October 12, 1982 EF2-59400 Mr. James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator Region III U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137

Subject:

Final Report of 10CFR50.55 (e) Item on Stainless Steel Piping (SA 312TP316 and TP316HF) (#62)

This is Detroit Edison's final report on the potential stain-less steel piping problem No. 62. This item was originally reported to Mr. P. Pelke of NRC Region III by Project Quality Assurance's Mr. E. L. Thompson, Acting Supervisor-Construction Quality Assurance, on March 17, 1982.

It was previously reported that Stainless Steel Piping SA 312TP316 and SA 312TP316H had been found installed in lieu of the required SA 312TP316L. This is partially incorrect in that, to the best of our knowledge, TP316H pipe material has not been used on site. The actual discrepancy is that SA 312TP316 and SA 312TP316HF (Hot Finish) had been found installed in lieu of the required SA 312TP316L.

Deviation Disposition Requests (DDRs) have been written on i piping where this problem was identified. Based on Engineering's evaluation, each of these DDRs has been dispositioned to use as is.

The problem with utilizing type 316 in place of type 316L is that the carbon content maximum for type 316 is 0.08% versus 0.035% maximum for type 316L. In evaluating this condition, Edison Engineering took a conservative approach and evaluated the potential and consequences of using type 316H (carbon maxi-mum 0.04 to 0.10%) in place of type 316L. Edison Engineering determined that the only potential problem would be in cases where type 316H was used in instrument sample lines. Those lines are highly susceptible to developing Intergranular Stress Corrosion or Cracking (IGSCC) and the type 316H should be replaced.

Further evaluation by Edison Engineering revealed that no instru-ment sample lines were affected. Therefore, this is no longer considered to be a condition that would create a substantial safety hazard and no further corrective action is required.

~

B210250191 821012 PDR ADOCK 05000341 8 PDR QGT 18 1982-

r  ;

4 James G. Keppler October 12, 1982 Page 2 EF2-59400 If you have any questions concerning this matter, please con-tact Mr. G. M. Trahey, Assistant Director-Project _ Quality Assurance.

Very truly your f

g/ bh)2 DAW /WRW/mb cc: Richard DeYoung, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement Division of Reactor Inspection Programs U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Bruce Little, Senior Resident Inspector D. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6450 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 i