1CAN041105, Request for Use of Non-ASME Code Repair to Service Water Piping in Accordance with Generic Letter 90-05 Relief Request ANO1-R&R-016

Request for Use of Non-ASME Code Repair to Service Water Piping in Accordance with Generic Letter 90-05 Relief Request ANO1-R&R-016

ML11111A195
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	04/20/2011
From:	Pyle S Entergy Operations
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
1CAN041105, ANO1-R&R-016, GL 90-005
Download: ML11111A195 (24)

Text

Entergy Entergy Operations, Inc.

1448 S.R. 333 Russellville, AR 72802 Tel 479-858-4710 Stephanie L. Pyle Acting Manager, Licensing Arkansas Nudlear One 1CAN041105 April 20, 2011 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

SUBJECT:

Request for Use of Non-ASME Code Repair to Service Water Piping in Accordance with Generic Letter 90-05 Relief Request ANO1-R&R-016 Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 Docket No. 50-313 License No. DPR-51

REFERENCE:

Entergy Letter dated March 29, 2011, "Request for Use of Non-ASME Code Repair to Service Water Piping in Accordance with Generic Letter 90-05 Relief Request ANO1 -R&R-01 5," (1 CAN031103)

Dear Sir or Madam:

In the reference letter, Entergy Operations, Inc. (Entergy) requested relief in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i) for a temporary non-code repair to the Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 (ANO-1) Service Water (SW) system. Justification for a temporary repair of this piping in accordance with GL 90-05 is provided in the referenced submittal. The NRC provided their verbal approval of this request on April 1, 2011.

As ANO-1 was preparing to perform the repair, an ultrasonic examination of the area of the proposed attachment weld identified an additional pit. This pit is approximately 2.7 inches away from the leaking pit. This new pit is in the area to be welded and the wall thickness was measured to be 0.089 inches. At that time, the repair process was stopped and the plan was re-evaluated.

As a result of the re-evaluation, it was determined that the reference relief request needed to be revised and submitted to the NRC for approval. The revised request (ANO1-R&R-016) is presented in Attachment 1. Relief Request ANO1-R&R-016 supersedes Relief Request ANO1-R&R-015 that was transmitted in the reference submittal in its entirety. Relief Request ANO1-R&R-016 was discussed with the NRC Staff on April 19, 2011. provides the revised weld pad thickness calculation. The revised reinforcing plate sketch is provided in Attachment 3. The latest non-destructive examination report is provided in .

'4OW4f)

1CAN041105 Page 2 of 2 Entergy requests an expedited review of this relief request to support efforts for a prompt installation of the repair because an increase in leak rate could preclude the proposed repair approach. To avoid an unnecessary challenge to the SW system should degradation continue and the loop subsequently be declared inoperable, Entergy believes it is prudent to be prepared to install the temporary non-code repair within the next several days. The repair is currently scheduled to be performed during the week of April 25, 2011.

There are no new commitments being made in this submittal.

If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me.

Sincerely, SLP/rwc Attachments:

1. Relief Request ANO1 -R&R-01 6

2. Minimum Weld Pad Thickness Calculation, Revision 1

3. HBD-45 Reinforcing Plate Sketch, Revision 1

4. NDE Report cc: Mr. Elmo Collins Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region IV 612 E. Lamar Blvd., Suite 400 Arlington, TX 76011-4125 NRC Senior Resident Inspector Arkansas Nuclear One P.O. Box 310 London, AR 72847 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Mr. Kaly Kalyanam MS 0-8 B1 One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Mr. Bernard R. Bevill Arkansas Department of Health Radiation Control Section 4815 West Markham Street Slot #30 Little Rock, AR 72205

ATTACHMENT 1 TO I CAN041 105 RELIEF REQUEST ANOI -R&R-016 to 1 CAN041105 Page 1 of 7 RELIEF REQUEST ANOI-R&R-016 Component / Number: HBD-45-10" Piping Code Class: ANSI B31.1 Treated as Class 3 for the purpose of ASME Section Xl Inservice Inspection, Repair/Replacement and Pressure Testing

References:

ASME Code, Section Xl, 2001 Edition with the 2003 Addenda (ISI Code of Record)

Piping Construction Code USAS B31.1, 1967 and Summer Addenda of B31.1.b 1973 (Original Construction Code)

ASME Code, B31.1, 1989 Edition (Installation Code of Record)

ASME Code Section III, 1992 Edition / No Addenda (NDE)

ASME Code Case N-661-1, "Alternative Requirements for Wall Thickness Restoration of Class 2 and 3 Carbon Steel Piping for Raw Water Service," Section Xl, Division 1

Description:

Service Water (SW) supply line to the Reactor Building Cooling Coils VCC-2C/D Unit / Inspection Interval Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 (ANO-1) / Fourth (4th) 10-year Applicability: Interval I. CODE REQUIREMENTS The following American Society of Mechanical Engineering (ASME) Code Section Xl requirements are applicable to this relief request.

IWA-4411 states:

Welding, brazing, and installation shall be performed in accordance with the Owner's Requirements and.. in accordancewith Construction Code of the item.

IWA-4412 states:

Defect removal shall be accomplishedin accordance with IWA-4420.

IWA-4422.1 states, in part:

A defect is considered removed when it has been reduced to an acceptable size.

to 1CAN041105 Page 2 of 7 II. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE

Background

On June 23, 2010, with ANO-1 in operation at 100% power, a through-wall leak was identified in a section of SW system piping with leakage of approximately 2 - 4 drops per minute (dpm). The leak rate has not changed appreciably since that time.

The leak was identified along a horizontal section of a 10" SW pipe, HBD-45-1 0". The leak, when first identified in June 2010, was addressed under Generic Letter (GL) 90-05. ANO obtained a generic relief request (0CNA039919) on April 6, 1999, that allows application of GL 90-05 without a specific relief request on certain SW lines, including ANO-1 HBD-45-10". As a result of this leak, an ultrasonic examination (UT) for thickness examination of the surrounding area was performed and the results were evaluated (reference Condition Report (CR) CR-ANO-1-2010-2622, CA-01) with reference to the requirements of the "Through Wall Flaw" approach of GL 90-05 as part of the operability evaluation. An expanded scope inspection of 5 additional locations was performed in accordance with GL 90-05 with no unacceptable degradation at those locations identified. Ninety-day re-inspections were implemented (CR-ANO-1-2010-2622, CA-07) as required by GL 90-05. During the third 90-day re-inspection (CR-ANO-1-2010-2622, CA-23), a smaller grid and a 0.2" diameter transducer were used and a noted change in the data pertaining to the thickness of the flawed area was observed. ANO CR-ANO-1 -2011-0368 demonstrated continued system operability and established compensatory measures consisting of enhanced monitoring of the affected area. Refer to Attachment 4 for the results of the April 2011 UT measurements.

The SW system for ANO-1 consists of two independent full capacity 100 percent redundant loops. Each SW loop is capable of supplying cooling water to the required components during normal and emergency conditions. This redundancy allows continued plant operation when a single component failure occurs. ANO-1 Technical Specification (TS) 3.7.7 requires that two SW loops be operable and powered from independent essential buses to provide redundant and independent flow paths.

Implementing an ASME code repair would require removing this section of piping from service, which is not desired because it does not result in a compensating increase in the level of quality or safety. The affected piping section would require the entire SW loop to be secured and drained. While the ANO-1 TS provides 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> to effect repairs to the system, doing so would result in the loss of an entire train of emergency core cooling components during the repair window. In addition, isolation and draining of a SW loop during power operation is complex and would expend a significant portion of the 72-hour allowed outage period.

Proposed Alternative Entergy Operations, Inc. (Entergy) considered several options for correcting this condition including replacement of the affected piping segment in accordance with IWA-441 1, defect removal in accordance with IWA-4420, and installation of a weld overlay repair in accordance with ASME Section XI Code Case N-661-1. However, none of these repair/replacement options were desired for various reasons such as limited TS repair time, the risk of "burn-through" in small areas where the remaining pipe thickness is insufficient to deposit weld metal, and water leakage through the isolation valves which limits welding options.

Attachment I to 1CAN041105 Page 3 of 7 Pursuant to 10CFR50.55a(g)(6)(i), Entergy proposes to install a welded reinforcing plate over the degraded area with an attachment weld or weld overlay located in an area where the minimum wall thickness is 0.280" or greater (refer to Attachment 3). The attachment weld will be installed using the methodology of Code Case N-661-1 as described herein. Minor surface conditioning will be required on an original construction code weld in order to obtain as near as practical metal to metal contact between the reinforcing plate and existing base material. To keep the weld area dry and moisture from encroaching near the reinforcing plate weld, sealant will be utilized around and/or over the leakage location to form a leakage barrier.

Ill. BASIS FOR ALTERNATIVE As discussed above, IWA-4422.1 requires that a defect be removed prior to implementing an IWA-4000 repair. However, this is not desired for the reason described regarding securing the entire SW loop resulting in the loss of an entire train of emergency core cooling components.

The alternative proposed under this relief request would install a plate over the degraded area to allow the attachment welding to be located in an area with minimal degradation, ensuring a structurally sound load path while minimizing the risk of "burn-through" and increased leakage.

The design will also ensure that the configuration of the repair will allow continued wall thickness monitoring of the region by volumetric examination (UT) to ensure that future degradation will not adversely impact the structural capability of the repaired section.

ANO historical data collected for Microbiologically Induced Corrosion (MIC) rates in SW piping indicates that the maximum corrosion pit rate is 0.012"/yr. For conservatism, a total material loss of 0.011" has been assumed for the period prior to when replacement activities can be implemented (approximately 6 months). This value of 0.011" has been applied globally (depth) to determine the extent of degradation and to predict the area which will be less than the minimum wall thickness required by Code Case N-661 -1 (refer to Attachment 4 for a detailed mapping of this area).

Materials and Installation The degraded pipe is 10", Schedule 40 (0.365" Wall), Seamless, A-53 Grade B. The repair plate will be constructed from a section of seamless pipe; either A-1 06 Grade B, or A-53 Grade B. These materials are P-No. 1 carbon steels and have an allowable stress of 15,000 psi up to 650 OF. The pipe material may be either A or SA designation, as long as the material is safety related traceable material.

The installation of the attachment weld will comply with Code Case N-661-1. In addition, welding and inspection requirements specified for fabrication, installation, and repair of ANO-1 USAS B31.1 piping system identified as inservice inspection (ISI) Class 3 will be in accordance with ASME B31.1 1989 Edition with the exception of Nondestructive Examination (NDE). NDE methods and acceptance criteria will comply with ASME Section III, Division 1, 1992 Edition, Subsection ND (Class 3), and, therefore, comply with 10 CFR 50.55a(b)(2)(xx)(B).

All welders and welding procedure specifications will be qualified for groove welding in accordance with ASME Section Xl Code. The new pressure boundary will be located at the reinforcing plate attaching weld. The welding process to be used for attaching the reinforcing plate will be the shielded: metal arc welding (SMAW) process utilizing low hydrogen E7018-covered electrodes. If rejectable indications are identified during performance of NDE, the indications will be removed and the attachment weld repaired in accordance with applicable provisions of N-661-1, ASME Section XI, and ASME B31.1.

to 1CAN041105 Page 4 of 7 Design Parameters The welded plate repair option will be designed consistent with the original USAS B31.1.0, 1967 Edition of the Power Piping Code with the entire Summer Addenda to ANSI B31.1, 1973. The attachment weld will be designed using the methodology of Code Case N-661 -1. , "Minimum Weld Pad Thickness Calculation," Revision 1, has been prepared to determine the minimum allowed wall thickness, size and thickness of the repair plate, and determine required attachment weld thickness and width. The piping stress inputs were obtained from Pipe Stress Qualification CALC-91-E-0016-70, Revision 2. The pressure and temperature inputs were obtained from SW PT CALC-88-E-0100-23, Revision 2. The calculation included the effects on piping stresses due to a globally applied minimum pipe wall thickness. ANO historical data collected for MIC rates in SW piping indicates that the maximum corrosion pit rate is 0.012"/yr. The minimum required wall thickness conservatively included a corrosion allowance of 0.011" prior to replacement activities. Further, a stress multiplier of 1.7 times the increased elbow stress intensity factor (SIF) has been applied to ratio up the stresses because the overlay is applied to straight pipe, the adjacent weld, and the 45 degree elbow as directed by Code Case N-661-1, Section 3.2(c) (the stress multiplier of 1.7 times the elbow SIF is the most conservative number). The required thickness was determined by iteratively selecting a required minimum wall thickness (0.280"), which satisfied ANSI B31.1-73 code of record equations 11, 12, and 13. Once the minimum wall thickness was determined, the plate was sized to cover the entire thinned area, which would be thinner than the required wall thickness. The plate size was then conservatively increased by 1/2" in length and width to provide a +1/4" tolerance in covering the affected area. Attachment 3, Revision 1, includes a depiction of the area which is less than 0.280" thick and shows the placement of the repair plate in relation to the thinned area. Revision 1 shows the original thinned area and the thinned area on the adjacent elbow.

The projected growth of the degradation is bounded by the welded plate and attachment weld as noted above.

Non-Destructive Examination The area to be repaired has been characterized by performing straight beam UT mapping (Attachment 4) of the region to bound the degraded area and to ensure that the welds for the reinforcing plate are located in areas of sound base metal. The weld for attaching the reinforcing plate to the pipe will be performed in an area where wall thickness is 0.280" or greater to ensure a structurally sound load path around the perimeter of the repair area.

The attachment weld surrounding the reinforcing plate will be nondestructively examined by the magnetic particle (MT) or liquid penetrant (PT) method in accordance with Code Case N-661-1 as summarized below:

" Prior to welding, the entire surface upon which the attachment weld will be deposited will be examined by the MT or PT method.

• The first weld layer and final surface of the completed attachment weld shall be examined by the MT or PT method.

to 1CAN041105 Page 5 of 7

• NDE acceptance criteria will comply with ND-2500 for base material and ND-5300 for welds of ASME Section II1. The final MT or PT examination will be performed no sooner than 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> after completion of welding.

• According to IWA-4520(a)(1) of ASME Section Xl, "base metal repairs on Class 3 items are not required to be volumetrically examined when the Construction Code does not require that full penetration butt welds in the same location be volumetrically examined." Since butt welds in the subject piping, HBD-45-10", do not have to be volumetrically examined according to ND-5000 of the 1992 Edition of ASME Section III, then it follows that the attachment weld does not have to be volumetrically examined.

A system leakage test will be performed in accordance with IWA-5000.

Post-Repair Monitoring Plan In-service monitoring of the repair will be accomplished by applying a maximum 2" by 2" grid over the area, which will cover the reinforcing plate and the flat portion of the attaching weld (refer to Attachment 3). The intersection points in the grid will be inspected using straight beam UT. An initial baseline UT will be performed after installing the repair. Subsequent UTs will then be performed to verify that the structural requirements of the original construction code are maintained through the remainder of the current operating cycle. The UTs will be performed monthly over the first 3 months and, if no unexpected degradation is identified, UTs will then be performed at least once every 3 months for the balance of the duration of this relief request.

This UT monitoring plan complies with the Inservice Examination requirement of Code Case N-661-1 and the monitoring requirements of GL 90-05. To determine unexpected degradation, UT of the repair plate, attaching weld, and surrounding base material will be performed and an average corrosion rate will be calculated based on the point-to-point comparison between the current and the previous inspections. If this average corrosion rate exceeds the predicted corrosion rate (i.e., 0.011," prior to replacement activities), the location will be considered unexpected.

The March 2011 UT data obtained for CR-ANO-1-2011-0368 was collected with improved techniques and higher resolution equipment which resulted in a conservative material loss rate when compared to the previous data. However, ANO used this conservative material loss rate in all evaluations regarding the present condition. The evaluation for the repair uses a predicted corrosion rate, mentioned above, that is more realistic and consistent with historic trends and the best available information.

The inspection results discussed above will be evaluated to ensure that the structural margins required by the Code Case N-661-1 are maintained through the remainder of the current operating cycle. If the results of the monitoring program indicate that the structural margins required by Code Case N-661-1 will be exceeded prior to the end of the current fuel cycle or in the event of an unacceptable weld anomaly during reinforcing plate installation, Entergy will implement additional repair and/or replacement activities prior to reaching the limits of the Code Case. These repair and/or replacement activities will be consistent either with (1) the requirements of this relief request, or (2) the requirements of the ASME Section Xl, Sub-Section IWA- 4000. NRC approval will be requested prior to the performance of any additional non-code repair.

Routine walk downs are performed by Nuclear Plant Operators at least daily. This piping is not insulated and is accessible for visual inspection.

Attachment I to 1CAN041105 Page 6 of 7 Degradation Mechanism Based on the location of the defect and based on the UT inspections of the degraded area, Entergy has concluded that the flaw is likely caused by MIC. MIC is not a form of corrosion per se, but rather is a process that can influence the type and rate of corrosion present in a local area and even initiate consumption of the metal. MIC can accelerate most forms of corrosion; including uniform corrosion, pitting corrosion, crevice corrosion, galvanic corrosion, inter-granular corrosion, de-alloying, and stress corrosion cracking. Based on the localized conditions and the accelerated growth compared to the general corrosion, it is reasonable to assume that the degradation is MIC.

The application of a conservative corrosion rate used for ANO MIC locations (0.011" prior to replacement activities) ensures that the growth of the flawed area will not encroach on the edges of the repair pad. Additionally, MIC is typically a pitting corrosion mechanism that grows outward (vertically) and not in the circumferential direction. UT thickness of the plate will also ensure no advanced degradation adversely affects the plate during the six months the repair will be in-service. If any degradation is found that is predicted to affect the structural integrity of the repaired area, associated monitoring requirements will be increased.

Applicable Loads The repair will be designed to accommodate all appropriate deadweight, pressure, thermal and seismic loads in accordance with the piping code of record. Because the system is a moderate energy system which operates at a low temperature, differential thermal expansion between the repair plate and the repaired component is not a concern.

Duration of Proposed Alternative The duration of the temporary repair is limited in accordance with GL 90-05 until the next scheduled outage exceeding 30 days, but no later than the next refueling outage, which is currently scheduled for the fall of 2011.

References This request is similar to relief granted for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3:

NRC Safety Evaluation Report dated February 22, 2008, "Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3 - Relief Request (RR) No. RR-3-43 for Temporary Non-code Repair of Service Water Pipe" (TAC No. MD6831)

IV. CONCLUSION Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i), Entergy is requesting the NRC staffs evaluation of this relief request. Entergy believes that to comply with the requirements of ASME Section Xl for performing an online code repair of the subject piping is impractical as demonstrated by this request for relief.

to 1CAN041105 Page 7 of 7 GL 90-05 states:

For the purpose of this generic letter, impracticalityis defined to exist if the flaw detected during plant operation is in a section of Class 3 piping that cannot be isolated for completing a code repairwithin the time period permitted by the limiting condition for operation (LCO) of the affected system as specified in the plant Technical Specifications, and performance of code repairnecessitatesa plant shutdown. Pursuantto 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i), the Commission may grant relief for temporary non-code repairof code Class 3 piping, where impracticalityexists in performing an ASME Code repairwhile the facility is operating, based on a staff evaluation consideringthe guidance in this generic letter.

As discussed previously, isolation of an entire SW loop during power operations is quite complex and requires a significant portion of the TS allowable outage time to be expended.

Given this complexity, the time to install the non-code repair following dry-out of the applicable section of SW pipe, and recovery of the SW loop thereafter, it is unlikely that the evolution can be completed within the 72-hour time frame provided by the TSs. In addition, the nuclear safety benefit of establishing the proposed non-code repair in lieu of challenging nearly an entire train of safety related equipment and/or continued plant operation outweighs the benefit of establishing a code repair at this time. Finally, the flaw will be repaired in accordance with code requirements no later than the next refueling outage in the fall of 2011. Therefore, Entergy believes that code repair of the flaw area is impractical from a nuclear safety perspective.

ATTACHMENT 2 TO I CAN041 105 MINIMUM WELD PAD THICKNESS CALCULATION, REVISION 1

, Rev. 1 13-SW-1 19 Item 13 & 48 Weld Overlay EC-285694-19-2011-Weld Pad Thickness Determination This Mathead Calculation determines the minimum required weld overlay thickness and overlap distance "s", for HBD-45-10" pipe, and 45 degree elbow. Code Case N-661-1 is used for the basis in determining thickness and overlap requirements. A stress multiplier of 1.7 times the elbow stress intensification factor, has been used to ratio up the stresses because this is the maximum impact for all SIF increases for an elbow, pipe and weld (N-661-1, Section 3.2(c)). The piping stress inputs for this Mathcad Calculation are taken from Pipe Stress Qualification CALC-9 1-E-00 16-70, Revision 2. The pressure and temperature inputs are taken from Service Water PT CALC-88-E-0100-23, Revision 2.

The Code of record used was USAS-B331.1.0-1967 & Summer Addenda to ANSI B31 .lb-1973.

This Mathcad Calculation is a sizing calculation for determining required weld thickness assuming a conservative loss of 0.01 1" during the operating cycle. Thus, the actual required thickness is 0.011" less than the tq determined in the Mathcad Calculation: e.g. if the Mathcad Calculation indicates 0.280" astte (See page 2), then the actual allowable thickness ftctuat) to meet all code equations is 0.280" - 0.011" = 0.269".

Input Section P:= 120psi Internal design pressure (Ref CALC-88-E-0100-23)

Temp:= 130deg Design Temperature (Ref. CALC-88-E-0100-23)

Do:= 10.75in Outside Diameter of pipe (Reference Crane Technical Paper 410, 1991) tn := 0.365in Nominal Thickness of Sch. 40 pipe (Reference Crane Technical Paper 410, 1991)

Sh:= 15000psi Maximum allowable stress (Ref. B31.1, Table A-2, for seamless Sc:= 15 O0psi A-53, Grade B, for temperature 650F and below. Design Temp = 130F Ref.

CALC-88-E-0100-23)

SA:= 1.25.Sc + 0. 2 5 .Sh= 22500.psi Reference B31.1, Section 102.3.2 E := I Longitudinal Welded Joint Efficiency Factor seamless Pipe (B31.1, Table 104.1.2(a)1) y:= 0.4 Coefficient for Ferritic and Austinitic Steel below 900 deg F, B31.1, Table 104.1.2(a)

A := 0.0 11 in Additional Thickness required (Ref. B31.1, 104.1.2(a)1). MIC Loss Per Cycle Value provided by Engineering Programs (0.012"/yr @ 95th Percentile, or 0.018"/Cycle). This calculation conservatively uses 0.011". The plate will be installed within a few months instead of a year. Also, the pipe will be replaced during the next refueling outage in approx. 6 months.

P.Do tm := ( + + A =0.054.in Equation 3, B31.1 By: David E. Torgerson Chk: Keith Butler Page 1 of 4

, Rev. 1 13-SW-1 19 Item 13 & 48 Weld Overlay EC-28569 4- 19-2011 Weld Pad Thickness Determination The required thickness is determined by iteratively selecting tr which satisfies code equations 11, 12 and 13 of B3 1.lb-1973, Section 104.8. The required overlap region is based upon the outer radius of the component and the nominal wall thickness as described in Code Case N-661 -1, Section 3.1.

& 13 Itreq := 0.280i This is the required minimum wall thickness to meet the B31.1 Equations 11, 12 equations below - it is derived as an iterative solution.

tactual := treq - A = 0.269-in Actual Wall thickness of pipe projected by end of cycle P.Do a press .- 4taua 4

1199-psi Pressure term based on Equation 11, ANSI B31.1-1973, 104.8.1

-tactual Section Modulus Effect Determination Reference ANSI B31.1 b-1 973, Section 104.8.4

r. Do2 i ý2tn = 30.9 7-in Zori:=

3 Zne  := 7.D 0 - tactual 2 t 23.209*in 3 Zratio - Znewg _=1.332 OTE: This is a generic Mathcad Calculation which may be used for Pipe, Tee, Weld or Elbow. For the case f Pipe, Weld, or Tee, Code Case N-661-1 requires an SIF of 2.1 be applied. For the case of an Elbow, a Stress multiplier of 1.7 x Elbow SIF is applied. Thus, by setting the variable TYPE=l, an elbow shape is

• elected and the 1.7 x Elbow SIF is used. Otherwise, an SIF of 2.1 is used.

Code Case N-661-1, Required SIF Required SIF = 2.1 for Pipe and Adiacent Welds, Section 3.2(c) FType := 1 Use Stress Multiplier of 1.7 x SIF on Elbows Required SIF = 2.1 for Tees and Branch Connections overlay toe > 2.5(Rtnom)1/2 FEnter I for Type if Elbow)  !

Elbow SIF Effect Determination - Reference Appendix D, ANSI B31.1 - 1973 (This Section Active only for Elbows)

Do - tn DO - tactual R1:= 1.5 x IOin = 15.in r2-orig := 2 5.193-in r2 -actual "= 2 - 5.2405. in tactual. R I tn-R1 hactual.- - 0.147 horig -0.203 2 r2 orig r2 _actual 0.9 0.9 SIForig 2.605 SiFactual "- 2 3.232 SIFactual  :

SIFratio := - 1.2408 SIForig horig hactual3 Codemultiplier:= (1.7.SlFratio) if Type= I = 2.109 1 2.1 otherwise

. This is the End of the Elbow SIF Determination Section. This Section only used for Elbows By: David E. Torgerson Chk: Keith Butler Page 2 of 4

, Rev. 1 13-SW-1l19 Item 13 & 48 Weld Overlay EC-28569 4-19-2011 Weld Pad Thickness Determination StressMultiplier := Codemultiplier(Zratio) = 2.8099 Upress = 1198.9.psi OStress inputs taken from CALC-91-E-0016-70, Att A. Pages 1382, 1399 Enveloped nodes 935, 941 558 adwt:= psi aobe := 5964psi rdbe := 8895psi crthrm := 2950psi Sh = 15000.psi 1.2 .Sh = 18000-psi SA = 2 2500.psi 2.4.Sh = 36000-psi Based upon Equation 11, B31.1-1973 DWTstress := Ipress + adwt-StressMultiplier = 2767-psi DWTstress IRDWT .- - 0.1845 Sh Based upon Equation 12, B31.1-1973 OBEstress OBEstress:= o'press + %obe.StressMultiplier= 17957.psi IROBE= - = 0.9976 1.2 .Sh Based upon Equation 12, B31.1-1 973 DBEstress DBEstress := Crpress + O-dbe StressMultiplier = 26193.psi IRDBE - = 0.728 2.4 -S Based upon Equation 13, B31.1-1 973 Thrmstress - 0.3684 Thrmstress:= cthrm.StressMultiplier = 8289-psi IRThrm .- SA Result "=PASSED" if IRDWT <1.0 A IROBE < 1.0 A 1 mR<1.0O A IRDBE <1.0 = "PASSED" "FAILED" otherwise By: David E. Torgerson Chk: Keith Butler Page 3 of 4

, Rev. 1 13-SW-1i19 Item 13 & 48 Weld Overlay EC-28569 4-19-2011 Weld Pad Thickness Determination branch reinforcement X>Ž 21/2 lRt-.rn FIG. 1 BRANCH REINFORCEMENT Do S:=

W 1.4 j 2 t n = 1.05-iin s - Minimum overlap of weld beyond predicted degraded area.

(Reference Code Case N-661-1, Section 3.1)

By: David E. Torgerson Chk: Keith Butler Page 4 of 4

ATTACHMENT 3 TO I CAN041 105 HBD-45 REINFORCING PLATE SKETCH, REVISION 1

HBD-45-10" Reinforcing Plate Sketch Notes:

EC-28569 13-SW-119, Item 13 & 48 1) Minimum radius must be greater than or equal to actual pad thickness.

2) Critical Minimum Dimension for Weld Overlay Provided for ease of measurement)

/ 3) Original Flaw Size per 1-BOP-UT- 11-008.

E-2 Pit Size per 1-BOP-UT-1 1-011 page 2 & 5.

4) Weld Width "s" must be applied over base metal having thickness 0.280" or greater. See Minimum Weld Pad Thickness Determination Calc for details.

5) Per field measured NDE Data, minimum base metal thickness of 0.282" is 3.3" from Original Flaw Center.

LEGEND Li 10" Sch. 40 (0.365" Wall) Pipe Weld Overlay (0.365", Min 0.280")

1/4" Wide Buffer Zone Flawed Area: < 0.280" Thick L" I Existing Butt Weld 1.26 "

(Note 2) Li1 Weld Taper Region

~Nx~

(?4 A\\t\\\,Y Rev. I Sketch By: David E. Torgerson!/ 4-19-201 Checked By. Keith Butler / 4-19-2011 PIPE WALL

-0 1/4 in (Design Buffer Allowance - Non Critical Dimension)

SECTION A-A

ATTACHMENT 4 TO ICAN041105 NDE REPORT

• Entergy UT Erosion/Corrosion Examination Site/Unit: ANO-1 / 1 Procedure: CEP-NDE-0505 Outage No.: N/A Summary No.: HBD-45 10" Leak Procedure Rev.: 004 Report No.: 1-BOP-UT-11-011 Workscope: BOP\Non-Outage Work Order No.: 242416 Page: 1 of 6 Code: INFO ONLY Cat./item: N/A Location: UNIT 1 AUX LNPPR Drawing No.: 13-SW-119

Description:

SERVICE WATER System ID: SERVICE WATER Component ID: HBD-45 10" LEAK Size/Length: 10.75" OD Thickness/Diameter: .365" NOM.

Limitations: Painted Surface Component File No.: H45 Start Time: 1104 Finish Time: 1211 Calibration Information Partitioning Information Component Information Calibration Thickness (In) Calibration Times / Initials Component Begin/Col/Row Ending/Col/Row Component Geometry: 45" ELBOW-PIPE

.500" .501" Start: 1104 MWT M. UPST Ext. A-01 K-10 Outside Diameter: 10.75" Grid Size: 1"

.400" .400" Verify: 1125 MWT Main UPST. Max. Thickness: .399 Min. Thickness: .089

.300" .300" Verify: 1153 MWT Main Nominal Thickness: .331 Tmin.:

.200" .201" Verify: _ Main DNST. Min. Thickness Location: E-02

.100" .101" Final: 1211 MWT M. DNST Ext. Max. Thickness Location: B-02 Branch Max._ThicknessLocation:_B-02 Branch Ext.

Instrument: Transducer: Reference/Simulator Block: Temp. Tool:

Manufacturer: PANAMETRICS Manufacturer: PANAMETRICS Serial No.: 17571 Manufacturer: PTC Model: 37DL PLUS Serial No.: 100101 Type: CS 5 STEP Serial No.: 22953 Serial No.: 051324510 Size: 0.20" Freq.: 5.0 MHz Couplant:

Gain: 53 Model: D795 Type: ULTRAGEL II Range: .5" # of Elements: 2 Material/Component Temp.: 75 OF Batch No.: 09225 Comments/Obstructions: See attached Supplemental Reports for grid readings and pit area readings.

Results: Accept [] Reject J ,Inf o'v Lo-TDC@ 9.0625", Wo-Toe of Weld 1 @11.6875" to leak location Examiner LevelI"-* Date Reviewer* /,.* Signature Date Taylor, Michael W.

Examiner Level N/A ,i--nature A/

4/142011 N/A Date Site Review

/ A Signature Date N/A V - Panther, Ken 4/5/2011 Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date N/A UT Erosion/Corrosion Examination

Enlrgy Supplemental Report Report No.: 1-BOP-UT-11-011 Page: 2 of 6 Summary No.: HBD-45 10" Leak Examiner: Taylor, Michael W. Level: II Reviewer: N/A Date:

Examiner: N/A Level: N/A Site Review: Panther, Ken Date: 415/2011 Other: N/A Level: N/A ANII Review: Date:

Comments: These are the grid point readings taken in the base metal region where the weld repair area as to establish a base line thickness of area to be weld overlaid. At grid point E-02 a .089" reading was obtained and more data was collected around this area to determine the size of the low area. See Supplemental Report 4 for readings taken in this area.

Sketch or Photo: \\jdcnsetspOO1\IDDEAL\Iddeal Ver 8\lddealServer\lddealANO\Documents\ANO BOP 2011\PHOTOS\U1HBD-45\gridO4O411 .jpg A J J C ID JE F I ) l3 J Min Ims" IA~q CabCLe 0Il 0.3 %5 03 4S 0.3 44 0.3.4 0.342 0.367 0331 03 21 O 0.03 o " O3 0.308 0 0*"S 0.*30 02 0.394 0391 0.303 0.314 0,00 0330 0.3 033 364 UM 03U 0.

UP 0 .. " 0. 0.313 03 000 0.000 0.000 0 .M0M0 40 0.000 000 0.0 00 0.0 0 0.00 0.000 00 .

04 0.325 035 0320 0.306 0.000 O 0.0 0000 0333 0.365 0.3s5 0.3f3 0.3% 0. 0.3365 05 0332 0331 0.307 0.272 0.000 0.000 0000 0200 0.310 0.367 0.306 O2 0.336 0.333 2

0 .324 0.31 . 0.33m 0.304 0M 0.00 0.0 0.32 0.37 0.3 0.30 0.04 0.35 0323 '*

07 0.335 0333 0301 0.3 0.200 0.302 0.37 0.36 0.332 0.3S2 0.360 0.20 0.365 0.324 I."

00 0.334 0.319 03. 0.32 0.0-00 0274 0.321 0335 0324 0.339 0.35 0.274 0.30 03, 1'. F-.' .

03 0.330 0.327 0331 0203 0.30 0,290 0.30S 0331 0332 0.36 0.346 0-.03 03*6 0.322 20 0.303 0.33 0.33 0.*30 0.319 0302 0.337 0337 0.324 0.350 0.300 0.30? 0.300 0.331 Mi. 0.300 0.31 0.301 0.272 0.00 0274 0305 0.2 0.317 0.330 0.34 Max 0.01 0.33 0369 0.364 0.3. 0367 0353 0.006 0.60 0.30 0.36 r Avg 0.342 0.340 0.332 0.3*3 0.270 0.314 0330 0.325 0.332 0.00 0.*30 TMO, 0.001 TMax 0.313 TAro 0.331 ROWps 14AAe k L,,a -I-,, P/,4A ArRpA.

Supplemental Report

~Entergy Supplemental Report Report No.: 1-BOP-UT-11-011 Page: 3 of 6 Summary No.: HBD-45 10" Leak Examiner: Taylor, Michael W. Level: II Reviewer: N/A Date:

Examiner: N/A Level: N/A Site Review: Panther, Ken g Date: 4/5/2011 Other: WA Level: N/A ANII Review: Date:

Comments: These readings were taken with a .2' size transducer around original pit/leak location at 450increments and every .25" away from leak location.

Sketch or Photo: \\jdcnsetspOOl\IDDEAL\tddeal Ver 8\lddealServer\lddeat_ANO\Documents\ANO BOP 201 1\PHOTOS\UIHBD-45\2origpit.jpg 4D & 161N~ 4l'. plr- - R,*,c- 6:k4,-AA 2- :IeA~atm 1/ ; Ae.I%

ob :LO7

. -79

.-X qq 1 q30 16b .1,5 o 047 0-76

.3/3 2-7!!ý 1i(Oo5i Sý . o3G .00. 139. ;Z/?. 942-, X-7(,ý 0 00, , 07 8~12 I ',31 . /i/

jcl- a /4I9 2,q 2

• Z2.

,5.0 I ~'$ . 2-7-7

~.lI Supplemental Report

.Mk Entegy Supplemental Report Report No.: 1-BOP-UT-11-011 Page: 4 of 6 Summary No.: HBD-45 10" Leak

"----Jr Examiner

Taylor, Michael W. Level: II Reviewer: N/A Date:

Examiner: N/A Level: N/A Site Review: Panther, Ken Date: 4/5/2011 Other: N/A Level: N/A ANI1 Review: Date:

Comments: These readings were taken with a .312" size transducer around original pit/leak location at 45" increments and every .25" away from leak location.

Sketch or Photo: \\jdcnsetspO01\lDDEAL\Iddeat Ver 8\lddealServerlddealANO\Documents\ANO BOP 201 1\PHOTOS\U1HBD-45\312origpit.jpg I;; 12- ,, Oz.,-. P* eaý-<

• l2q<

, I-is III

• 06 7 06( 01S

.0,-,/

, 3o I . Z(08 . 17t '07Y "0" , . o!5-3 V, - -o . ZS'? ~-Gý-; 7

• 0'77'

. /to

, I iV 17o S/7Z. , 2-1 ,

Supplemental Report

• Enterg Supplemental Report Report No.: 1-BOP-UT-11-011 Page: 5 of 6 Summary No.: HBD-45 10" Leak .

Examiner: Taylor, Michael W. Level: II Reviewer: N/A Date:

Examiner: N/A Level: N/A Site Review: Panther, Ken Date: 4/5/2011 Other: WA Level: N/A ANII Review: Date:

Comments: Readings taken around grid point E-02 due to low reading caused by pit. These readings were taken at

.125" increments out in 450 increments around low reading. Lowest reading at pit was .089" Sketch or Photo: \\jdcnsetspOO1\IDDEAL\lddeal Ver 8\lddealServer\IddealANO\Documents\ANO BOP 2011\PHOTOS\U1HBD-45\E2pit.jpg

-T

,7,-7 Lif *2~12~

• (1," . 14*8 A-~Z t2.0 I~dL

. wi!>, a 10-1 12.4 1z!;" It10 .10.

2 23. /77.i / -i 115' a1 . i. T7 Its 130 Ii.

. /V1 24.i 2.10 231

'1eport Suplemnta Supplemental Report

ftnter Supplemental Report Report No.: 1-BOP-UT-11-011 Page: 6 of 6 Summary No.: HBD-45 10" Leak Examiner: Taylor, Michael W. Level: II Reviewer: N/A Date:

Examiner: N/A Level: N/A Site Review: Panther, Ken Date: 4/5/2011 Other: N/A Level: N/A ANII Review: Date:

Comments: Picture of grid points and location of E-02 in relation to original pit.

Sketch or Photo: \\jdcnsetspOOl\IDDEAL\lddeal Ver 8\lddealServer~lddealANO\Documents\ANO BOP 201 1\PHOTOS\U1HBD-45\hbd45e-1 with gridla.jpg I.

Supplemental Report