ML20082R638
| ML20082R638 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 11/23/1983 |
| From: | Brons J POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK |
| To: | Murley T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| References | |
| REF-SSINS-6820 IEB-83-06, IEB-83-6, NUDOCS 8312130246 | |
| Download: ML20082R638 (2) | |
Text
. --
indien Point 3 Nuclear Power Plant P.O. Boa 215 Buchanan, NewWrk 10511 914 739.82o0
- > NewWrkPbwer 4ff Authority November 23, 1983 IP-JAS-3722 Dr. Thomas E. Murley Regional Administrator Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406
Subject:
1.E.Bulletin 83-06 Nonconforming Materials Supplied by Tube-Line Corporation Facilities at Long Island City, New York; Houston, Texas; and Carol Stream, Illinois
Dear Dr. Murley:
Please be advised that the Authority has not purchased for use in the Indian Point 3 nuclear power facility any ASME Code materials from the Tube-Line Corporation. The Authority has purchased and received nuclear grade Category I pipe fittings and flanges manufactured by the Tube-Line Corporation. The results of the Authority's review of the general concerns raised in the subject bulletin are provided in Attachment I to this letter.
A total of 256 manhours were expended in the preparation of this response; 216 manhours in audits and inspections and 40 manhours in evaluation and preparation of written responses. Laboratory fees totaled $4,018.
Should you or your staff have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. J. Schivera of my stsff.
Very truly yours.
John C. Brons JAS:jmd Resident Manager Attachment I CUCSC.TUED AND SY!ORN TO cc:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission BEFORE ME TiliS -_Ak_ - DAY Document Control Desk OF
_____.., 2 /$..
Washington, D. C.
20555 IP3 Resident Inspector's Office 4
^#
h RUTHANNE D COWMAN Notary Public, State of Hsw York 0312130246 831123 N. 95W, Westchuw Cwg PDR ADOCK 05000286 C mmissi n Expires March 30, 1935 G
4 ATTACHMENT I The specific requirements for piping system materials to be manufactured in full compliance with ASME Code Section III is not a requirement for the Indian Point 3 facility. Because the Authority shares the general concerns expressed in Bulletin 83-06, en in-depth evaluation was performed to assure that received materials comply with the applicable procurement specifications that are required and that such materials are suitable for intended service.
An audit was performed to identify anJ materials supplied by Tube-Line Corporation for safety related systems at the Indian Point No. 3 facility for the period January 1, 1981 through September, 1983.
During this period the Authority received 235 pieces of Tube-Line sup-plied materials from two venders (R. Burack Associates and Almor Steel) nn 16 separate purchase orders. Forty eight flanges were supplied by Almor Steel and 121 flanges and 66 pipe fittings were supplied by Burack Associates.
Twenty-three separate mill heat lots were identified for the 235 items.
Drillings, filings or sample items were obtained for 21 of the 23 heats and sent to an independent testing laboratory for analysis.
Items from the remaining two heats were not analyzed. One item was cut up to fabricate an encapsulation missile shield and one item was installed in a city water plant fire hydrant line which is buried and paved over. This system is a plant designated Category M non-safety related system.
The results of the independent test laboratory analyses were compared to those documented on the mill test reports received with the items supplied by Tube-Line. The results of this review have established that the received materials comply with applicable procurement specifications except for one mill heat lot (six lis" carbon steel flanges certified to be ASTM A-105 material) which did not meet the chemical requirements for the material specification. The Manganese composition specified to be within the range of 0.60 to 1.05 was 0.41 percent. The six flanges were not installed in any plant systems and have been placed on " hold" pending disposition. The remaining items have been determined to be suitable for their intended service. The laboratory analysis report is available for review upon request.
- _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _