L-2012-214, License Renewal Commitment, Submittal of Pressurizer Surge Line Welds Inspection Program

License Renewal Commitment, Submittal of Pressurizer Surge Line Welds Inspection Program

ML12152A156
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	05/16/2012
From:	Kiley M Florida Power & Light Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L-2012-214
Download: ML12152A156 (29)

Text

MAY 16 2012 L-2012-214 FPL. 10 CFR 54 POWERING TODAY.

EMPOWERING TOMORROW.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 2055-0001 Re: Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251 License Renewal Commitment Submittal of Pressurizer Surge Line Welds Inspection Program Turkey Point Nuclear Plant has a license renewal commitment to address the concern of environmentally assisted fatigue for the pressurizer surge line welds during the period of extended operation using one or more of the following approaches:

1. Further refinement of the fatigue analysis to lower the cumulative usage factor (CUF) to below 1.0, or

2. Repair of the affected locations, or

3. Replacement of the affected locations, or

4. Management of the effects of fatigue by an inspection program that has been reviewed and approved by the NRC.

The commitment was documented in Section 4.3.2 of the Safety Evaluation Report Related to the License Renewal of Turkey Point Nuclear Plant, NUREG 1759, dated April 2002.

The purpose of this letter is to notify the NRC Staff that FPL has selected the approach to manage the effects of environmentally assisted fatigue of the pressurizer surge line welds for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 by inspection, i.e., option 4 above. Accordingly, prior to entering the period of extended operation, FPL submits herein in Attachment 1 details of the inspection program for NRC Staff review and approval. The technical basis of the inspection program is presented in Attachment 2.

Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Robert J. Tomonto, Licensing Manager, at 305-246-7327.

Very truly yours Michael Kiley Vice President Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Attachments cc: USNRC Regional Administrator, Region II USNRC Project Manager, Turkey Point Nuclear Plant USNRC Senior Resident Inspector, Turkey Point Nuclear Plant A cB an FPL Group company

FPL Letter L-2012-214 ATTACHMENT 1 Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Description of the Proposed Agin2 Management Program For Pressurizer Surge Line Welds Inspection Proeram

L-2012-214, Attachment 1 1.0 Background Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) has a license renewal commitment for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4, to address the effects of environmentally assisted fatigue for the pressurizer surge line welds during the period of extended operation using one or more of the following approaches:

1. Further refinement of the fatigue analysis to lower the cumulative usage factor (CUF) to below 1.0, or

2. Repair of the affected locations, or

3. Replacement of the affected locations, or

4. Management of the effects of fatigue by an inspection program that has been reviewed and approved by the NRC.

At Turkey Point Units. 3 and 4, there are twelve pressurizer surge line weld locations subject to the effects of environmentally assisted fatigue (i.e., five welds in Unit 3, and seven welds in Unit 4). The critical weld locations of concern are the pressurizer surge nozzle-to-safe-end weld and the hot leg surge nozzle-to-pipe weld, where the calculated CUF was determined to exceed the ASME Code allowable usage factor of 1.0, when environmentally assisted fatigue (EAF) is considered during the period of extended operation.

By letter L-2001-075, dated April 19, 2001, (Reference 1), FPL committed to provide the NRC with inspection program details prior to entering the period of extended operation, should FPL select option 4 (i.e., inspection) to manage environmentally assisted fatigue during the period of extended operation.

FPL has selected to age manage the effects of the environmentally assisted fatigue on the pressurizer surge line welds by an inspection program and flaw tolerance evaluation. As noted in the Safety Evaluation Report Related to the License Renewal of Turkey Point Units 3 and 4, NUREG 1759, Section 4.3.2, pages 4-16, and 4-17, the use of an Aging Management Program to manage fatigue will require prior staff review and approval. Accordingly, Sections 2, 3 and 4 of this attachment provide the Proposed Aging Management Program Basis for the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Pressurizer Surge Line Welds Inspection Program, the Aging Management Program Attributes, and the Implementation of the Inspection Program, respectively, for NRC review and approval.

2.0 Proposed Aging Management Program Basis for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Pressurizer Surge Line Welds Inspection Program The proposed Aging Management Program (AMP) for fatigue assessment is based on the approach documented in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI - Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components, Non-Mandatory Appendix L Operating Plant Fatigue Assessment.

A flaw tolerance evaluation was performed specifically for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 in order to assess the operability of the surge line by using ASME Section XI Appendix L methodology I

L-2012-214, Attachment 1 and to determine the successive inspection schedule for the surge line welds with a postulated surface flaw. Two bounding weld locations were evaluated in detail. The two bounding weld locations of concern are the pressurizer surge nozzle-to-safe-end weld and the hot leg surge nozzle-to-pipe weld. Based on a comparison of geometry, material properties and applicable loads, the results of the detailed evaluation of the two bounding locations are also applicable to all other in-between pipe weld locations on the surge line. The results of the crack growth for the pressurizer surge nozzle welds and hot leg surge nozzle welds are presented in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. The technical analysis of the postulated flaw tolerance evaluation is provided in of this submittal.

Table 1 Pressurizer Surge Nozzle Crack Growth Results Final Final Allowable Successive Max. Flaw Length*3 ) Allowable Flaw Flaw Operating Inspection Flaw Type ( (2) Flaw Depth Depth Length (2) Period Schedule (5) 1/rD (Deg.) (in.) a/t (in.) (in.) (in.) (months) (years)

Circumferential 0.1 36 3.91 0.75 0.96 0.650 3.900 > 564(4) 10 Axial NA NA 2.96 0.70 0.90 0.492 2.952 324(4) 10 Table 2 Hot Leg Surge Nozzle Crack Growth Results Final Final Allowable Successive Max. Flaw Length(3 ) Allowable Flaw Flaw Operating Inspection Flaw Type ( (2) Flaw Depth Depth Length (2) Period Schedule (5)

//irD (Deg.) (in.) a/t (in.) (in.) (in.) (months) (years)

Circumferential 0.1 36 3.37 0.42 0.422 0.386 2.316 > 720 10 Axial NA NA 1.94 0.75 0.76 0.323 1.938 624(4) 10 Notes for Tables 1 and 2:

1. The postulated initial flaw depth is 20% of the weld thickness (i.e., 0.201 inches) and the initial flaw length is 6 times its depth (i.e., 1.206 inches) per Appendix L guidelines.

2. A constant aspect ratio (a/l) of 1/6 is used in the crack growth analysis.

3. Flaw length based on Inner Diameter (ID)

4. Maximum flaw length is reached before the allowable flaw depth.

5. Per Appendix L, if allowable operating period is equal or greater than 10 years, the successive inspection schedule shall be equal to the examination interval listed in the Turkey Point ASME Section XI schedule of Inservice Inspection (ISI) program of the component.

2

L-2012-214, Attachment 1 Per the guidelines of Appendix L, Table L-3420-1, for the allowable operating periods listed in Tables 1 and 2, the successive inspection schedule for pressurizer surge line welds is determined to be ten years for either an axial or a circumferential postulated flaw. This inspection interval will be used for all pressurizer surge line welds as noted in Table 3.

3.0 Aging Management Program Attributes The key attributes of the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Pressurizer Surge Line Weld Inspection Program that are used to describe the aging management program, are discussed below:

1. Scope of the Program All pressurizer surge line welds listed in Table 3 will be examined in accordance with Risk Informed In-service Inspection (RI-ISI) Programs for Class 1 piping welds. This alternative to the requirements of ASME Section XI was approved by the NRC during the fourth 10-year interval as Relief Request 3 and 4 for Units 3 and 4 respectively (Safety Evaluation dated December 9, 2008 TAC Nos. MD7740. MD8875). The aging effect managed with these inspections is cracking due to environmentally assisted fatigue. In each 10-year ISI interval during the period of extended operation, all surge line welds in scope will be inspected in accordance with the Turkey Point ISI Program.

Based on postulated flaw tolerance analysis (Attachment 2), and per the guidelines of ASME Code,Section XI, Appendix L, Table L-3420-1, the successive inspection schedule is determined to be ten years. This inspection interval will be used for all surge line piping welds in scope.

Examination methods are determined in accordance with the requirements of the Risk Informed In-service Inspection (RI-ISI) Programs for Class 1 piping welds. The examination method for this Class 1 piping welds are found within the ASME Code Case N-577-1, Category R-A, Item Ri. 11 as volumetric only. The Risk Informed Program does not require a surface examination to be performed for these category welds. Examination results are evaluated by qualified individuals in accordance with ASME Section XI acceptance criteria.

Components with indications that do not exceed the acceptance criteria are considered acceptable for continued service.

2. Preventive Actions There are no specific preventive actions under this program to prevent the effects of aging.

3. Parameter(s) Monitored or Inspected Inservice examinations for the surge line welds will be volumetrfic examinations as indicated in Table 3.

4. Detection of Aging Effects The degradation of surge line welds is determined by volumetric examination in accordance with the requirements of Turkey Point ISI Program. The frequency and scope of examination are sufficient to ensure that the aging effects are detected before the integrity of the surge line welds would be compromised.

3

L-2012-214, Attachment 1

5. Monitoring and Trending The frequency and scope of the examinations are sufficient to ensure that the environmentally assisted fatigue aging effect is detected before the intended function of these welds would be compromised. Examinations will be performed in accordance with the inspection intervals based on the results of the postulated flaw evaluation performed in accordance to the ASME Code Section XI, Appendix L methodology.

If flaws are identified in the pressurizer surge line welds, they will be evaluated by engineering to assess the effect of environmentally assisted fatigue (EAF), and to determine its impact on the EAF analysis (Attachment 2).

Records of the examination procedures, results of activities, examination datasheets, and corrective actions taken or recommended will be maintained in accordance with the requirements of Turkey Point Unit 3 and 4 ISI Program for ASME Section XI requirements.

6. Acceptance Criteria Acceptance standards for the inservice inspections are identified in Subsection IWB for Class 1 components. Table IWB-2500-1 identifies references to acceptance standards listed in IWB-3500. Relevant indications found in the surge line welds that are revealed by the inservice inspections, may require additional evaluation per the requirements of ASME Section XI, Appendix L.

Indications that exceed the acceptance criteria are documented and evaluated in accordance with the Turkey Point Corrective Action Program. Operability of the surge line welds will require an IWB-3600 evaluation for acceptance based on engineering evaluation, repair, replacement or analytical evaluation. Repairs or replacements will be performed in accordance with ASME Section XI, Subsection IWA-4000 and IWA-6000, as described by administrative procedure 0-ADM-532, ASME Section XI Repair/Replacement Program.

7. Corrective Actions Action Requests (ARs) are generated in accordance with the Turkey Point Corrective Action Program for any relevant indications of degradation. Items with examination results that do not meet the acceptance criteria are subject to acceptance by evaluation and/or acceptance by repair or replacement in accordance with Subsection IWB-3600.

8. Confirmation Process When degradation is identified in the pressurizer surge line welds, an engineering evaluation is performed to determine if the weld is acceptable for continued service or if repair or replacement is required. The engineering evaluation includes probable cause, the extent of degradation, the nature and frequency of additional examinations, and, whether repair or replacement is required.

Repair and/or replacement are performed in accordance with the requirements of ASME Section XI, Subsections IWA-4000 and IWA- 6000, and as implemented by the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 ISI Program and by the associated administrative procedure 0-ADM-532, ASME Section XI Repair/Replacement Program.

4

L-2012-214, Attachment 1

9. Administrative Controls Turkey Point ISI Program will document the EAF inspection requirements for the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 pressurizer surge line welds.

10. Operating Experience A sample of the surge line welds have been examined ultrasonically during the first three inservice inspection intervals in accordance with the requirements of the ASME Section XI, Subsection IWB. All surge line welds were volumetrically inspected during the fourth ISI interval and prior to entering period of extended operation. To date, no reportable indications have been found in the subject pressurizer surge line welds.

The proposed aging management program will examine all pressurizer surge line welds listed in Table 3, every 10 years (every ISI interval), provide reasonable assurance that potential environmental effects of fatigue will be managed such that all the pressurizer surge line welds within the scope of license renewal will continue to perform their intended functions for the extended period of operation.

4.0 Implementation of Pressurizer Surge Line Welds Inspection Program Upon approval of the proposed inspection program, related aging management program basis and implementing documents and the associated Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) sections will be updated accordingly.

5.0 References

1. Florida Power and Light letter to the NRC, L-2001-075, Response to Request for Additional Information for the Review of the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 License Renewal Application, dated April 19, 2001.

2. Structural Integrity Associates Engineering Report No. 1100756.401, Rev. 1, "Flaw Tolerance Evaluation of Turkey Point Surge Line Welds Using ASME Code Section XI, Appendix L," dated May 2012.

5

L-2012-214, Attachment 1 TABLE 3 Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Pressurizer Surge Line Welds Subject to Environmental Assisted Fatigue Inspection Program Last Allowable Operating Proposed Unit Weld Number Examination Period per ASME AMP Inspections Performed Appendix L Analysis Type & Frequency and Results (See Note 1)

I 12"-.RC-1301-1 2004 Greater than 10 Yrs Volumnetric RCS Hot Leg Nozzle Satisfactory Once in 10-Year 2 12"1-RC-1301-5 2012 Greater than 10 Yrs Volumetric Surge Pipe to pipe weld Satisfactory Once in 10-Year 3 12"1-RC-1301-8 2006 Greater than 10 Yrs Volumetric Unit 3 Pipe to reducer at Pressurizer Satisfactory Once in 10-Year 4 14"-RC-1301-8A 2006 Volumetric reducer to safe end at Satisfactory Greater than 10 Yrs Once in 10-Year pressurizer Surge Nozzle 5 14"- RC-1301-9 2010 Greater than 10 Yrs Volumetric Safe End to Nozzle Satisfactory Once in 10-Year 1 12"-RC- 1401 -1 2008 Volumetric At RCS Hot Leg Nozzle to Satisfactory Greater than 10 Yrs Once in 10-Year pipe 2 12"-RC-1401-2 2008 Greater than 10 Yrs Volumetric Surge Pipe to pipe weld Satisfactory Once in 10-Year 3 12"-RC- 1401-4 2008 Greater than 10 Yrs Volumetric Surge Pipe to pipe weld Satisfactory Once in 10 Year Unit 4 12"-RC- 1401-7 2006 Greater than 10 Yrs Volumetric Surge Pipe to pipe weld Satisfactory Once in 10-Year 5 12"-RC-1401-8 2006 Greater than 10 Yrs Volumetric Pipe to nozzle at Pressurizer Satisfactory Once in 10-Year 6 14"-RC- 1401-8A 2006 Volumetric Reducer to safe end at Satisfactory Greater than 10 Yrs Once in 10-Year Pressurizer Surge Nozzle 7 14"- RC-1401-9 2009 Greater than 10 Yrs Volumetric Safe End to Nozzle Satisfactory Once in 10-Year Note 1: The inspection frequency as determined by ASME Code Section XI, Appendix L analysis is more than 10 years. In accordance to the requirements of Appendix L Table L-3420-1, the surge line welds will be examined once per 10 years, at the frequency of the Turkey Point Inservice Inspection Interval.

6

FPL Letter L-2012-214 ATTACHMENT 2 Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Units 3 and 4 Structural Integrity Associates Engineering Report No. 1100756.401, Rev. 1, "Flaw Tolerance Evaluation of Turkey Point Surge Line Welds Using ASME Code Section XI, Appendix L"

Report No. 1100756.401 Revision 1 Project No. 1100756 May 2012 Flaw Tolerance Evaluation of Turkey Point Surge Line Welds Using ASME Code Section XI, Appendix L Preparedfor:

Turkey Point Nuclear Station, Units 3 & 4 Florida Power & Light Florida City, FL Contract Number 02293658 Preparedby:

Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.

San Jose, California Preparedby: Date: 5/10/2012 G. Angah Miessi Reviewed by: Date: 5/10/2012 eAl.ýed Timothy J. Griesbach Approved by: Date: 5/10/2012 Norman Eng Vftmcbw Afwd1Y Auocbftw ft

Table of Contents Section Page 1.0 IN TRO D U C TION .......................................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 TEC H N IC AL A PPR O AC H .......................................................................................... 2-1 3.0 EV A LU A TION .............................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1 Stress Analysis .............................................. 3-1 3.2 A llow able Flaw Evaluation .......................................................................................... 3-1 3.3 Fatigue Crack G rowth A nalyses .................................................................................. 3-2 3.4 Successive Inspection Schedule Requirem ents ........................................................... 3-4 4.0 C O N C LU SIO NS ............................................................................................................ 4-1 5.0 REFER EN C ES ............................................................................................................... 5-1 Report No. 1100756.401.R1 .o.

can" h#** A16941M WO

List of Tables Table Page Table 1: Bounding Transients for the Pressurizer Surge Nozzle ................................................ 3-5 Table 2: Bounding Transients for Hot Leg Surge Nozzle .......................................................... 3-5 Table 3: Insurge/Outsurge Transients for Hot Leg Surge Nozzle .............................................. 3-6 Table 4: Piping Interface Loads for Pressurizer Surge Nozzle ................................................... 3-7 Table 5: Piping Interface Loads for Hot Leg Surge Nozzle ....................................................... 3-7 Table 6: Allowable Part Through-Wall Circumferential Flaw Size for Pressurizer Surge N ozzle Weld ....................................................................................................... 3-8 Table 7: Allowable Part Through-Wall Circumferential Flaw Size for Hot Leg Surge N ozzle W eld ....................................................................................................... 3-8 Table 8: Pressurizer Surge Nozzle Crack Growth Results ......................................................... 3-9 Table 9: Hot Leg Surge Nozzle Crack Growth Results .............................................................. 3-9 List of Figures Figur Page Figure 1: Pressurizer Surge Nozzle Dimensions ...................................................................... 3-10 Figure 2: Hot Leg Surge Nozzle Dimensions ........................................................................... 3-10 Figure 3: Finite Element Model of Pressurizer Surge Nozzle .................................................. 3-11 Figure 4: Finite Element Model of Hot Leg Surge Nozzle ....................................................... 3-11 ReportNo. 1100756.401.R1 iv

• kzc¢

1.0 INTRODUCTION

A flaw tolerance evaluation in accordance with ASME Code,Section XI, Appendix L [1] has been performed to manage fatigue at critical locations of the Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 pressurizer surge line locations by inspection and flaw tolerance evaluations. Specifically, the critical locations of concern are the nozzle-to-piping welds at the pressurizer surge nozzle and hot leg surge nozzle at the other end of the surge line where the calculated fatigue cumulative usage factor was determined to exceed the ASME Code allowable usage factor when environmentally assisted fatigue (EAF) is considered. When this occurs, an alternative ASME Section XI Appendix L flaw tolerance evaluation can be performed. The ultimate objective of the evaluation was to determine the required successive examination interval for the pressurizer surge and hot leg surge nozzle welds.

The flaw tolerance evaluation was performed to assess the operability of all the welds on the entire surge line from the pressurizer surge nozzle-to-safe-end weld to the hot leg surge nozzle-to-pipe weld. Based on a comparison of geometry, material properties and applicable loads, the results of the detailed evaluation of the two bounding locations are applicable to the other weld locations on the surge line (3 additional welds on Unit 3 and 5 additional welds on Unit 4).

Report No. 1100756.401.Rl 1-1 V leuWdlY Asf*/Ists IW[

2.0 TECHNICAL APPROACH The evaluation was performed in accordance with the requirements of ASME Code,Section XI, Appendix L. The methodology used to determine the successive inspection schedule consists of the following principal tasks:

• Determine the stresses at the critical locations of the surge line

• Postulate hypothetical axial and circumferential flaws at the critical location of the nozzle welds. Select appropriate crack models to use to simulate the postulated flaws.

" Use the stresses determined at the critical locations and the selected crack models to compute stress intensity factors for all the applicable normal and upset condition loads.

• Perform fatigue crack growth analyses with the resulting stress intensity factors to determine the end-of-evaluation-period flaw size and, determine the time (allowable operating period) necessary for the postulated initial flaw to grow to the maximum allowable flaw depth.

• Determine the required successive inspection schedule in accordance with the procedures of Appendix L based on the calculated allowable operating period.

Report No. 1100756.401.R1 2-1 IiftogillyAssocvabftuu, b

3.0 EVALUATION 3.1 Stress Analysis Finite element stress analyses were performed using ANSYS [2] to determine the stresses at the welds of the 14" pressurizer surge nozzle and 12" hot leg surge nozzle at Turkey Point Nuclear Plant (PTN) Units 3 and 4. The dimensions of each nozzle assembly used in developing the representative finite element models were obtained from Reference 3 and 4, and are presented in Figure 1 and Figure 2 for the pressurizer surge and hot leg surge nozzles, respectively. The detailed finite element models of the nozzle assemblies are shown in Figure 3 for the pressurizer surge nozzle and Figure 4 for the hot leg surge nozzle.

Loads due to internal pressure, applicable thermal transients and piping interface loads such as deadweight and seismic loads were included in the finite element analyses of the nozzle welds.

The bounding thermal transients and piping interface loads applied to the pressurizer surge nozzle, which were derived from References 5 and 6, are listed in Table I and Table 4, respectively. Similarly, the bounding thermal transients, insurge/outsurge transients and, piping interface loads applied to the hot leg surge nozzle, which were derived from References 5 and 7, are listed in Table 2, Table 3 and Table 5, respectively.

Through-wall hoop and axial stresses were extracted from the finite element stress analyses at the critical locations of the surge nozzle welds for use in the fatigue crack growth.

3.2 Allowable Flaw Evaluation Per the recommendations of Appendix L of Section XI of the ASME Code, the analytical procedures of Appendix C of the Code are used to determine the critical flaw sizes for the postulated axial and circumferential flaws in the pressurizer surge and hot leg surge nozzle welds. The allowable surface flaws were then determined based on the critical size with consideration of structural margins for different plant operating conditions.

Report No. 1100756.401.Rl 3-1 Astgottes, Inc.

The results of the allowable flaw evaluation are summarized in Table 6 and Table 7 for the pressurizer surge and hot leg surge nozzle welds, respectively.

Circumferential Flaw: For all service levels, for a postulated flaw length of 360(10% of the total pipe circumference), the bounding allowable flaw depth at the pressurizer nozzle weld is 75%

(0.96 inch) of the original wall thickness for the surge nozzle and 42% (0.422 inch) of the original wall thickness for the hot leg surge nozzle.

Axial Flaw: For all service levels, the bounding allowable flaw depth was calculated to be 75%

of the weld thickness for an axial flaw with a postulated length up to 2.96" for the pressurizer surge nozzle weld and 1.94" for the hot leg surge nozzle weld.

3.3 Fatigue Crack Growth Analyses For crack growth prediction, representative fracture mechanics models of internal surface flaws in a cylinder were used to determine stress intensity factors (K) due to cyclic loading. The stress intensity factors for each type of load are computed as a function of postulated crack depth in the weld and superimposed for the various operating states. These stress intensity factors were computed for primary loads such as internal pressure and external piping loads, and secondary loads such as thermal gradient stresses (due to thermal transient events), and weld residual stresses.

Crack growth in the Type 316 and Type 304 stainless steel welds was calculated using the austenitic steel fatigue crack growth law in pressurized water reactor (PWR) environment from Reference 8, expressed as follows:

da/dN = CO(AK)", units of in/cycle where:

CO C SR ST SENV Report No. 1100756.401.R1 3-2 C OW"

C = 3.54x10-7 for Type 316 (hot leg surge nozzle weld)

= 4.43xl 0-7 for Type 304 (pressurizer surge nozzle weld) n = 2.25 SR = 1+e802(R-0748)

= parameter defining the effect of R ratio on crack growth rate, ST = e'2516/ K 300 °F:< T:<650 OF ST = 3.39 x 105 e(' 25 16 /TrK00301TK) 70 OF < T < 300 OF

= parameter defining the effect of temperature on crack growth rate, 03 SENV = TR

= parameter defining the environmental effects on crack growth rate da/dN = growth rate AK = stress intensity factor range, ksi in V2 TK = [(T-32)/1.8+273.15], °K T = metal temperature, OF TR = rise time, secs AKth = 1.0 ksi in V Initial axial and circumferential flaws of depths equal to 20% of the weld thickness and a 1/6 aspect ratio (depth/length) were postulated per Appendix L guidelines. The times it takes the postulated initial flaw to reach the allowable flaw depths were determined with the crack growth analyses and reported as the allowable operating periods for each of the nozzle welds.

The crack growth results for the pressurizer surge nozzle weld and hot leg surge nozzle weld are shown in Table 8 and Table 9, respectively.

Circumferential Flaws: For a circumferential flaw with a postulated initial flaw depth of 20% of the weld thickness at the critical section, it takes 720 months (60 years) for the pressurizer surge nozzle to reach the allowable flaw depth calculated using a 360 maximum flaw length in the circumferential direction, and more than 720 months for the hot leg surge nozzle to reach the ReportNo. 1100756.401.R1 3-3 kft* ACA,

allowable flaw depth calculated using a 360 maximum flaw length in the circumferential direction. However, based on the 1/6 aspect ratio, the flaw length reaches the maximum postulated flaw length (3.91 ") in 564 months (47 years) for the pressurizer surge nozzle.

Axial Flaws: For a postulated axial flaw with a postulated initial flaw depth of 20% of the weld thickness at the critical section, it takes more than 720 months to reach the allowable flaw depth for both surge nozzles. However, based on the 1/6 aspect ratio, the flaw length reaches the maximum postulated flaw length (2.96") in 324 months (27 years) for the pressurizer surge nozzle. Similarly, for the hot leg surge nozzle, based on the 1/6 aspect ratio, the flaw length reaches the maximum postulated flaw length (1.94") in 624 months (52 years).

3.4 Successive Inspection Schedule Requirements The allowable operating periods reported above were used to calculate the required successive inspection schedule, based on the ASME Code,Section XI, Appendix L procedures. Table 8 and Table 9 show the successive inspection intervals applicable to the pressurizer surge nozzle and hot leg surge nozzle, respectively. For a postulated circumferential flaw with a depth of 20%

wall thickness, the required examination interval is ten years for both the pressurizer surge and hot leg surge nozzles if a maximum flaw length of 36' is postulated. Similarly, for an axial flaw, the successive inspection schedule is 10 years for the pressurizer surge and hot leg surge nozzles.

ReportNo. 1100756.401.R1 3-4 jF IIIUI1

Table 1: Bounding Transients for the Pressurizer Surge Nozzle Description Min T, IF Max T, IF Max P, psia Cycles Plant Heatup 333 653 2250 600 Plant Cooldown 333 653 2250 600 Plant Loading 551 653 2250 14500 Unit Unloading 605 653 2250 14500 Step Load Increase 602 653 2250 2000 Step Load Decrease 601 653 2250 2000 Large Step Load Decrease 605 653 2250 200 Steady State Fluctuations, Initial 553 653 2250 150000 Steady State Fluctuations, Random 555 653 2250 3000000 Feedwater Cycling 520 653 2250 2000 Loss of Load 605 653 2250 80 Loss of Power 571 653 2250 40 Partial Loss of Flow 547 653 2250 80 Reactor Trip from Full Power 555 653 2250 400 Inadvertent Auxiliary Spray 549 653 2250 20 Primary Side Hydro Test 44 282 3122 6 Primary Side Leak Test, Up 44 282 2450 165 Primary Side Leak Test, Down 44 282 2450 165 Table 2: Bounding Transients for Hot Leg Surge Nozzle THL OF)(') TNo... (OF)(') Max P, Transient Min Max MMin Max psia'l) Cycles Plant Heatup 70 547 70 70 2250 200 Plant Cooldown 70 547 70 547 2250 200 Plant Loading 547 617 547 617 2288 14500 Plant Unloading 545 617 549 652 2287 14500 Large Load Rejection Large Step Load w. Steam Dump 564 625 617 647 2355 200 Loss of Load 567 657 567 657 2600 80 Loss of Power 565 627 565 654 2450 40 Loss of Flow 544 622 544 619 2280 80 Reactor Trip 517 617 598 621 2250 400 Primary Side Leak Test Up 44 282 44 282 2332 165 Primary Side Leak Test Down 44 282 44 282 2332 165 Primary Side Hydro Test 44 282 44 282 3122 6 Report No. 1100756.401.R1 3-5 vshvehMWW AQWK W

Table 3: Insurge/Outsurge Transients for Hot Leg Surge Nozzle Transient Time, sec THL(OF) TNOZ(°F) P (psia) QsL, gpm Cycles 0 225 225 1003 0 43 P10320H 960 225 545 1003 200 1960 225. 545 1003 200 2920 225 225 1003 0 0 245 245 1003 0 69 PIO300H 900 245 545 1003 200 1900 245 545 1003 200 2800 245 245 1003 0 0 275 275 1003 0 73 P10270H 810 275 545 1003 200 1810 275 545 1003 200 2620 275 275 1003 0 0 295 295 1003 0 19 PIO250H 750 295 545 1003 200 1750 295 545 1003 200 2500 295 295 1003 0 0 125 125 402 0 29 P10320 960 125 445 402 200 1960 125 445 402 200 2920 125 125 402 0 0 145 145 402 0 67 P10300 900 145 445 402 200 1900 145 445 402 200 2800 145 145 402 0 0 175 175 402 0 67 P10270 810 175 445 402 200 1810 175 445 402 200 2620 175 175 402 0 0 195 195 402 0 41 P10250 750 195 445 402 200 1750 195 445 402 200 2500 195 195 402 0 R

Report No. 1100756.401.R1 3-6 VaIM&W WM* AOIRM

Table 4: Piping Interface Loads for Pressurizer Surge Nozzle Forces, lb Moments, lb-in Load Case Fx [ Fy Fz Mx My Mz Deadweight -14 -2510 28 38004 -540 1500 Thermal -95 2204 -14293 -1538170 1078440 175702 OBE 215 365 346 55536 8376 15108 SSE 560 1171 922 174732 22056 41436 AT=36 0 F -907 1960 -13974 -1509860 820395 144860 AT=700 F -457 3709 -8628 -732911 103940 98284 0

AT=103 F -2132 2223 -13367 -1411870 322741 101056 AT=150 0 F 2196 3905 -8260 -665993 -330990 -598876 AT=250°F 5511 4150 -7799 -582345 -874652 -1470327 AT=304°F 7302 4282 -7551 -537175 -1168230 -1940910 AT=320°F 9607 -126 -8733 -570539 -1104820 -2507480 Table 5: Piping Interface Loads for Hot Leg Surge Nozzle Load Forces, lb Moments, lb-in Case 2 Fx(2) Fy I Fz [ Mx(2) myT Mz Deadweight -19 -2300 25 21830 -5400 98030 Thermal 14176 95 2858 -18284 393181 -81723 OBE 285 368 -28 37511 13656 39762 SSE 749 1179 -95 120062 39156 127305 AT=36 0F 13759 907 2964 -67203 344917 -529660 AT=70OF 9378 457 -508 -5013 649850 -743009 AT=1030 F 13314 2132 2521 -132813 382369 -1320742 AT-150°F 9100 6446 -819 -754856 676986 -2100962 AT=250°F (I) 8752 13934 -1207 -1692158 710907 -3798403 AT=304°F 8564 17977 -1417 -2198302 729224 -4715021 0

AT=320 F 4311 18860 -5176 -2351685 750839 -5057570 Notes: (1) Based on interpolation between the AT=70°F and AT=304 0F. The number of cycles are 972 (8 1%) for AT=150OF and 228 (19%) for AT=250°F (2) Fx is axial to the hot leg surge nozzle and Mx is torsion.

Report No. 1100756.401.R1 3-7 i lfwwl i ttlyktO 1 I

Table 6: Allowable Part Through-Wall Circumferential Flaw Size for Pressurizer Surge Nozzle Weld Ratio of Flaw Length to Pipe Circumference, l/nD Service 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Level(') Flaw Length, /(degree) 0 36 72 108 I 144 180 A 1 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.60 0.49 0.43 B 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.64 0.52 0.45 C 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.66 0.52 0.46 D 0.75 00.75 0.75 0.70 0.58 0.50 Notes:

1) Service Level A = Normal Condition; Service Level B = Upset Condition; Service Level C = Emergency Condition; and Service Level D = Faulted Condition.

Table 7: Allowable Part Through-Wall Circumferential Flaw Size for Hot Leg Surge Nozzle Weld Ratio of Flaw Length to Pipe Circumference, /7rd Service 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Level(') Flaw Length, (degree)

(

0 36 72 108 144 180 A 0.75 0.42 0.22 0.16 0.13 0.12 B 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.69 C 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.73 0.67 D 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.70 Notes:

1) Service Level A = Normal Condition; Service Level B = Upset Condition; Service Level C = Emergency Condition; and Service Level D = Faulted Condition.

Report No. 1100756.401.R1 3-8

Table 8: Pressurizer Surge Nozzle Crack Growth Results Final Final Allowable Successive Max. Flaw Length Allowable Flaw Flaw Operating Inspection Flaw Type (1) (2) Flaw Depth Depth Length (2) Period Schedule (5) 0 1/7D (Deg.) (in.) a/t (in.) (in.) (in.) (months) (years)

Circumferential 0.1 36 3.91 0.75 0.96 0.650 3.900 > 564(4) 10 Axial NA NA 2.96 0.70 0.90 0.492 2.952 324(4) 10 Notes:

1) The postulated initial flaw depth is 20% of the weld thickness (i.e., 0.256") and the initial flaw length is 6 times its depth (i.e., 1.536") per Appendix L guidelines.

2) A constant aspect ratio (a/l) of 1/6 is used in the crack growth analysis.

3) Flaw length based on ID

4) Maximum flaw length is reached before the allowable flaw depth.

5) Per Appendix L, if allowable operating period is equal or greater than 20 years, the successive inspection schedule shall be equal to the examination interval listed in the PTN Section XI schedule of Inservice Inspection (ISI) program of the component.

Table 9: Hot Leg Surge Nozzle Crack Growth Results Final Final Allowable Successive Max. Flaw Length Allowable Flaw Flaw Operating Inspection Flaw Type (1)(2) Flaw Depth Depth Length (2) Period Schedule (5)

/120D (Deg.) (in.) a/t (in.) (in.) (in.) (months) (years)

Circumferential 0.1 36 3.37 0.42 0.422 0.386 2.316 > 720 10 Axial NA NA 1.94 0.75 0.76 0.323 1.938 624(4) 10 Notes:

1) The postulated initial flaw depth is 20% of the weld thickness (i.e., 0.201") and the initial flaw length is 6 times its depth (i.e., 1.206") per Appendix L guidelines.

2) A constant aspect ratio (a/l) of 1/6 is used in the crack growth analysis.

3) Flaw length based on ID

4) Maximum flaw length is reached before the allowable flaw depth.

5) Per Appendix L, if allowable operating period is equal or greater than 20 years, the successive inspection schedule shall be equal to the examination interval listed in the PTN Section XI schedule of Inservice Inspection (ISI) program of the component.

Report No. 1100756.401.R1 3-9 raw" hdW* ASBDMWM WO

Figure 1: Pressurizer Surge Nozzle Dimensions 6.375" 5.250*

Figure 2: Hot Leg Surge Nozzle Dimensions Report No. 1100756.401.R1 3-10 C &WdiW kft* Aaadft 1=

EUM42 AN MD!' No. 1 HAT NMM J

Turkey Poiut Psi Nozzle m SurgS orizer Figure 3: Finite Element Model of Pressurizer Surge Nozzle 1 AN PLwr NO. I PAT NUM TurkeV Point Hot Leq Surqe Nozzle Figure 4: Finite Element Model of Hot Leg Surge Nozzle Report No. 1100756.401 .R1 3-11  ! ,ft ~ MOPE) AM &bW.

4.0 CONCLUSION

S The flaw tolerance of the pressurizer surge and hot leg surge nozzle welds at Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 has been evaluated and the required successive inspection schedule has been determined for a postulated 20% deep flaw with a 1/6 aspect ratio per the requirements of ASME Code,Section XI, Appendix L. The required examination interval for both surge nozzle welds is ten (10) years for either an axial or a circumferential postulated flaw. Therefore, the 10-year examination interval of the PTN ISI program for both surge nozzles remains unchanged. Based on a comparison of geometry, material properties and applicable loads, the results of the detailed evaluation of the two bounding locations are applicable to the other weld locations on the surge line (3 additional welds on Unit 3 and 5 additional welds on Unit 4). Hence, the 10-year examination interval of the PTN ISI program remains unchanged for the all the surge line welds considered in this evaluation.

ReportNo. 1100756.401.R1 4-1 &ftfl y AoitI

5.0 REFERENCES

1. ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, 2001 Edition, with Addenda through 2003.

2. ANSYS Mechanical APDL and PrePost, Release 12.1 x64, ANSYS, Inc., November 2009.

3. Geometry Data for Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 Pressurizer Surge Nozzle 3a. Westinghouse Electric Co., Dwg. No. SK-10003631, Sheets 1 and 2, Rev. 0, "Series 84 Pressurizer."

3b. Pressurizer Drawings:

i. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Dwg. No. 681 J252, "Pressurizer Lower Head Assy. & Details."

ii. Florida Power and Light Co., Dwg. No. CIS-A-10, "Codes & Inspections Section Turkey Point Unit 3."

iii. Florida Power and Light Co., Dwg. No. MCI-A-10, "Codes & Inspections Section Turkey Point Unit 4."

3c. FPL Dissimilar Metal Weld Checklist, PTN Unit 3, Pressurizer Surge Line Nozzle (12"-RC-1301-9).

3c. Westinghouse Electric Corp., Technical Manual for Pressurizer (JPE), VTM No.

Z313, JPN Issue No. 004.

3d. Teledyne Engineering Services, Technical Report TR-5322-135, Rev. 1, "USNRC I&E Bulletin 79-14 Analysis, Turkey Point Unit 3 & 4 Nuclear Power Plant, Pressurizer Surge Line (Inside Containment) Stress Problem 041."

3e. Crane Company, Technical Paper No. 410, "Flow of Fluids through Valves, Fittings and Pipe," 1976.

3f. FPL official transmittal letter FPL-1 1-276 for the Westinghouse letter report number LTR-PAFM- 11-138, "Surge Line Pressurizer Nozzle Reducer Information."

4. Geometry Data for Turkey Point Units 3 & 4Hot Leg Surge Nozzle 4a. Westinghouse Document No. LTR-PAFM- 11-94, "Surge and Spray Nozzle Design Drawing Transmittal for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 to Support SIA License Renewal Evaluations,"

4b. Florida Power and Light Co., Drawing 5613-P-766-S, Sheet 1 of 3, Rev. 5, "Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant Unit 3 Reactor Coolant System No. 41 Inside Containment Stress Problem RCL - 3/041.

4c. Florida Power and Light Co., Drawing 5614-P-766-S, Sheet 1 of 3, Rev. 3, "Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant Unit 4 Reactor Coolant System No. 41 Inside Containment Stress Problem RCL - 3/041 Report No. 1100756.401.R1 5-1 V OWi I W *V* Aswclft t

4d. Crane Company, Technical Paper No. 410, "Flow of Fluids through Valves, Fittings and Pipe," 1976.

5. Loads Data for Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 Pressurizer Surge Nozzle and Hot Leg Surge Nozzle 5a. Westinghouse Document No. LTR-PCSA-1 1-71, "Westinghouse Data on NSSS Design Transients for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 as Requested by FPL",

PROPRIETARY SI File No. 1100756.216P.

5b. Westinghouse Document No. CN-SGDA-08-55, Revision 1, "Evaluation of Pressurizer for EPU at Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 (NSSS Power 2652 MWt)",

PROPRIETARY SI File No. 1100756.214P.

5c. Westinghouse Document No. WCAP-14950, Mitigation and Evaluation of PressurizerInsurge/OutsurgeTransients, February 1998, PROPRIETARY SI File No. 1100756.220P.

5d. Westinghouse Document No. WCAP-12959, StructuralEvaluation of the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 PressurizerSurge Lines, Consideringthe Effects of Thermal Stratification,May 1991, PROPRIETARY SI File No. 1100756.208P.

5e. Westinghouse Document No. LTR-PAFM- 11-94, "Surge and Spray Nozzle Design Drawing Transmittal for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 to Support SIA License Renewal Evaluations," PROPRIETARY SI File No. 1100756.21 1P.

5f. Florida Power & Light Document No. PTN-ENG- 11-0031, Revision 1, "Turkey Point Units 3&4 Surge Line Thermal Stratification Data Transmittal for Structural Integrity Associates for License Renewal Evaluations", SI File No.

1100756.219P.

5g. Teledyne Report TR-5322-135, Book-2, Revision 1, "USNRC I & E Bulletin 79-14 Analysis, for Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 Nuclear Power plant Pressurizer Surge Line (Inside Containment), April 3, 1984" SI File No. 1100756.203.

5h. Heatup and Cooldown Data for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4, SI File No.

1100756.223.

5i. E-mail from Satyan-Sharma, Tirumani (FPL) to Norman Eng (SI), dated November 30, 2011, "

Subject:

FW: Pressurizer Surge Nozzle Design Loads Calculation," SI File No. 1100756.201.

6. Loads Data for Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 Pressurizer Surge Nozzle 6a. Westinghouse Document No. LTR-SGMP-1 1-66, Revision 2, "Turkey Point Units'3 and 4 Data Package for Pressurizer Spray and Surge Nozzle Analysis",

October 2011, PROPRIETARY SI File No. 1100756.206P.

6b. Westinghouse Electric Co., Dwg. No. SK-10003631, Sheets 1 and 2, Rev. 0, "Series 84 Pressurizer," PROPRIETARY SI File No. 1 100756.205P.

Report No. 1100756.401.R1 5-2 ;v sknbmbi

6c. Florida Power & Light official transmittal letter FPL-1 1-276 for the Westinghouse letter report number LTR-PAFM-I 1- 138, "Surge Line Pressurizer Nozzle Reducer Information," PROPRIETARY SI File No. 1100756.216P.

7. Loads Data for Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 Hot Leg Surge Nozzle 7a. Florida Power and Light Co. Drawing No. 5613-P-766-S, Sheet 2 of 3, Rev. 4, "Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant Unit 3 Reactor Coolant System No. 41 Inside Containment Stress Problem RCL - 3/041," SI File No. 1100756.207.

7b. Florida Power and Light Co. Drawing No. 5613-P-766-S, Sheet 1 of 3, Rev. 5, "Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant Unit 3 Reactor Coolant System No. 41 Inside Containment Stress Problem RCL - 3/041," SI File No. 1100756.207.

8. W. J. Mills, "Critical Review of Fatigue Crack Growth Rates for Stainless Steel in Deaerated Water - Parts 1 and 2," EPRI MRP-2010 Conference and Exhibition:

Materials Reliability in PWR Nuclear Power Plants, Colorado Springs, CO, June 28 -

July 01, 2010.

Report No. 1100756.401.R1 5-3 c an" bft* AnCbi? W