L-87-373, Forwards Response to NRC Bulletin 87-001, Thinning of Pipe Walls in Nuclear Power Plants. All Piping Inspected for Wall Thinning Designed & Fabricated in Accordance W/Ansi B31.1
| ML17342A899 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 09/10/1987 |
| From: | Woody C FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| References | |
| IEB-87-001, IEB-87-1, L-87-373, NUDOCS 8709150197 | |
| Download: ML17342A899 (40) | |
Text
T REGULATORY r ORMATION DISTRIBUTION SY:M (RIDS)
ACCESSiON NBR: 870'7150197 DOC. DATE: 87/09/10 NOTARIZED:
YES
. DOCKET ¹ FACIL: 50-250 Turkey Point Plant.
Un'it 3I Florida Poujer and Light C 05000250 50-251 Turkey Point Planti Unit 41 Florida Poujer and Light C
05000251 AUTH. NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION WOODY'. O.
Florida Power 5 Light Co.
RECIP. NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION Document Control Branch (Document Control Desk)
SUBJECT:
Foreards response to NRC Bulletin 87-001.
"Thinning of Pipe Walls in Nuclear Poeer Plants. " *11 piping inspected for eall thinning designed 5 fabricated in accordance e/ANSI B31. i.
DISTRIBUTION CODE:
IE11D COFIES RECEIVED: LTR J.
ENCL 5 SIZE: -Q 0 TITLE: Bulletin Response (50 DKT)
NOTES:
RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME PD2-2 LA McDONALDID INTERNAL: AEOD/DOA AEOD/DSP/TP*B NRR/DEST/ADS NRR/DOEA/EAB N
VDREP/KP B G Fl ~
02 RGN2 FILE 01 COP IES LTTR ENCL 1
0 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME PD2-2 PD AEOD/DSP NRR/DEST/ADE NRR/DEST/MEB NRR/DOEA/GCB NRR/PMAS/ILRB RES/DE/EIB COPIES LTTR ENCL 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
EXTERNAL:
1 1
1 NRC PDR 1
1 TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:
LTTR 19 ENCL 18
P. O. BOX 0, JUNO BEACH, FL 33408.0420
!+
SEPTEMBER 1 0
$987 L-87-373 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20SSS Gent lemen:
Re:
Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251 NRC Bulletin 87-01 Res onse Florida Power 8 Light has reviewed NRC Bulletin 87-1, Thinning of Pipe Walls in Nuclear Power Plants.
The answer to the information requests and the results of the inspections performed on Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 is attached.
Should there be any questions on this information, please contact us.
Very truly yours, C. O. Wood Group Vi esident Nuclear ergy COW/SDF/gp Attachrnents cc:
J. Nelson Grace, Regional Administrator, Region 11, USNRC Senior Resident inspector, USNRC, Turkey Point Plant 8709150a97 8>700900250 PDR ADOCK 0 PDR 8
II P
P LP 1/053/l an FPL Group company
E n
STATE OF FLORIDA
)
)
ss.'OUNTY OF PALM BEACH
)
~C.Q.
That he is a Grou Vice President of Florida Power 6 Light Company, the Licensee herein; That he has executed the foregoing document; that the statements made in this document are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information, and
- belief, and that he is authorized to execute the document on behalf of said Licensee.
C.O. W Subscribed and worn to before me this
- doyof, 19'OTARY PUBLIC, in and for the County of Palm Beach, State of Florida
~>LIc STA'fE Or fgffyPP c" Hjssggf rgy s p(
My Commission expire&o<o >au Gfff"
NRC BULLETIN87-01 THINNING OF PIPE WALLS IN NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS Information Re uest I Identify the codes or standards to which the piping was designed and fabricated.
~Res onse 1
s All piping that has been inspected for wall thinning was designed and fabricated in accordance with ANSI B31.1.
Information Re uest 2 Describe the scope and extent of your programs for ensuring that pipe wall thicknesses are not reduced below the minimum allowable thickness.
Include in the description the criteria that you have established for:
as b.
Cs d.
Selecting, points at which to make thickness measurements Determining how frequently to make thickness measurements Selecting the methods used to make thickness measurements Making replacement/repair decisions
~Res ense 2 2a.
Locations for thickness measurements for two-phase flow systems were selected using the guidelines of EPRI Report No. NP-3900.
Configurations with the greatest susceptibility for thinning based on geometry, system temperature and piping material were investigated.
Inspection was done on a sampling basis - not every susceptible configuration was examined.
Priority was based on susceptibility.
Sampling was used when similar configurations expressed equivalent susceptibility, i.e., parallel lines in the same system.
When wall thinning is discovered, the number of items inspected is increased for the particular population and configurations with equal susceptibility.
2b.
Thickness measurements are scheduled for planned refueling outages.
Particular circumstances may dictate monitoring an existing condition on a more frequent basis such as every three (3) months.
2c.
Thickness measurements are made using an'ltrasonic technique with a longitudinal wave.
2d.
Thickness measurements are compared against minimum allowable wall thicknesses.
Corrosion rates and existing wall thicknesses are evaluated as in EPRI NP-3900.
Configurations with wall thicknesses less than minimums or those where wall thickness would be reduced below minimum before the next refueling outage are considered for repair or replacement.
0
Information Re uest 3 P g.2 For liquid-phase systems, state specifically whether the following factors have been considered in establishing your criteria for selecting points at which to monitor piping thickness (Item 2a):
a.
piping material (e.g., chromium content) b.
piping configuration (e.g., fittings less than 10 pipe diameteis apart) c.
pH of water in the system (e.g., pH less than 10) d.
system temperature (e.g., between 190 and 500oF) e.
fluid bulk velocity (e.g., greater than 10 ft/s) f.
oxygen content in the system (e.g., oxygen content Jess than 50ppb)
~Ree nee 3 3a.
AJJ the piping which has been inspected is carbon steel, with no required chromium content.
Chromium content of individual pieces was not determined prior to selecting inspection points.
3b Piping configuration was the primary determinant in selecting points for inspection.
Configurations were evaluated based on rankings in EPRI NP-3900 and VEPCO report "Surry Unit 2 Reactor Trip and Feedwater Pipe Failure Report" Rev. 0, dated 3anuary 10, 1987.
3c Inspection points were not selected based on pH of water in the system since pH was considered essentially the same throughout the systems inspected.
The pH is normally in the range of 9.3 to 9.6.
3d System temperature was a major consideration in selecting inspection points.
Priority for inspection was based on the rating scheme in the VEPCO report concerning the Surry accident.
3e Bulk fluid velocity was not considered when selecting inspection points.
3f Inspection points were not selected based on oxygen content in the'ystem since oxygen content was considered essentially the same throughout the systems inspected.
Oxygen content is normally in the range of 5 to 10 PPB.
Information Re uest 0 Chronologically list and summarize the results of all inspections that have been performed, which were specifically conducted for the purpose of identifying pipe wall thinning, whether or not pipe wall thinning was discovered, and any other inspections where pipe wall thinning was discovered even though that was not the purpose of that inspection.
a.
Briefly describe the inspection program and indicate whether it was specifically intended to measure wall thickness or whether wall thickness measurements were an incidental determination.
b.
Describe what piping was examined and how (e.g., describe the inspection instrument(s)),
test method, reference thickness, locations
- examined, means for locating measurement point(s) in subsequent inspections).
MCI1:5
Information Re uest 0 (cont'd)
Pg. 3 C.
d.
Report thickness measurement results and note those that were identified as unacceptable and why.
Describe actions already taken or planned for piping that has been found to have a nonconforming wall thickness. If you have performed a failure analysis, include the results of that analysis.
Indicate whether the actions involve repair or replacement, including any change of materials.
~Res nse e Oa.
Main steam reheat cross-under piping was inspected at Units 3 2 0 during the 1983 R 1980 outage.
The results are in Attachment A.
In addition, two separate series of inspections were performed at Turkey Point to measure pipe wall thinning. The first inspection was performed on Unit 0 in December 1986.
This inspection was an immediate response to the feedwater piping failure at Surry 2.
The details of this inspection follow immediately.
A second inspection for wall thinning was "performed on Unit 3 during the Spring 87'efueling outage.
The details of this second inspection also follow.
Ob.
The examination method utilized throughout was the ultrasonic nondestructive test method.
The ultrasonic instrumentation was of the pulse-echo type with cathode ray tube display.
Carbon steel incremental step blocks were utilized to provide reference thicknesses to calibrate the instrumentation.
Thickness readings were obtained by performing line scans along a two (2) inch grid pattern.
Readings were recorded by strip chart continuous recording where such information" was deemed to be beneficial.
Where consistent readings indicated no apparent
- erosion, only representative readings were recorded.
Details of December '86 Ins ections on Unit 0 Oc.
Piping in the following systems was examined for wall thickness using an ultrasonic technique:
Condensate Bypass Condensate to Feedwater Pump OB Condensate to Feedwater Suction Condensate to Feedwater Pump OA Condensate Pump Discharge Heater Drain Pump Discharge Heater Drain Pump Discharge Recirculation Each fitting was examined by obtaining a series of thickness readings along the extrados and intrados of elbows and reducers and along the backside of tees.
Readings were also taken in bands extending circumferentially around each fitting for 30 degrees on each side of the center line.
In each case, ten to twenty readings were taken, but only the lowest and highest readings were recorded.
Piping was also examined downstream of the circumferential welds between the fitting and the piping.
MCIlr5
Oc (cont'd)
PgA Seventy fittings were examined.
The acceptance criteria for this inspection was the minimum wall thickness allowed by the piping material specification.
The results of this inspection are shown in Attachment B.
Three items were found which had a wall thickness below the acceptance criteria.
These are Items 58,61 and 67.
Items 68, 69 and 70 are on Unit 3 and represent the same items on Unit 0 where thinning was discovered.
One item, 69, was found to also have a
reduced wall thickness.
Therefore, this inspection discovered a total of four locations where wall thickness had been reduced.
The four elbows found to have reduced wall thickness have been replaced.
The elbow on Unit 3 was replaced during the Unit 3 Spring '87 outage.
Deatails of Ins ections Performed Durin Unit 3 S nn
'87 Re ue m Outa e
Piping in the following systems was examined for wall thickness using an ultrasonic technique:
MSR Crossunder HP Turbine Extraction Steam LP Turbine Extraction Steam Steam Generator Feed Pump Suction Heater Drain Pump Discharge Heater Drain Pump Recirculation Steam Generator Feed Pump Discharge Each identified fitting and downstream piping, for a length equal to two pipe diameters, was scanned circumferentially.
The outline of areas less than the acceptance criteria was plotted and the location of the thinnest spot was recorded.
The average thickness was also recorded.
Eighty-eight fittings were examined.
The acceptance criteria for this inspection was the calculated minimum piping wall thickness plus 0.075".
For drawings prefixed by 5610 only, the acceptance criteria was the minimum wall thickness allowed by the piping material specification plus 0.075".
The value of 0.075" represents a severe corrosion loss which could occur during the next fuel cycle-based on corrosion which occurred at Surry 2.
The results of this inspection are shown in Attachment C.
c.
This inspe'ction identified 30 items with a
wall thickness less than the acceptance criteria. These items are identified in Attchment C by an entry in the column titled "Lowest Thickness Below Acceptance".
'CIl:5
c, (cont'd)
Pg. 5 The items identified as having reduced wall thickness were dispositioned as follows (also shown in Attachment C):
~Dis osition Weld Buildup Replace Continue in Use Number of Items 3
13 10 TOTAL 30 The items dispositioned "Weld Build Up" had the wall thickness in low areas restored to the original dimensions by weld deposited metal of the same composition as the base metal.
The items dispositioned as "Replace" were replaced with fittings made of the same type of material as the original fittings.
The items dispositioned "Continue in Use" were evaluated as being suitable for further service.
These items will be monitored at future outages to determine any further reduction in wall thickness.
Information Re uest 5 Describe any plans either for revising the present or for developing new or additional programs for monitoring pipe wall thickness.
~Res nse 5 The next scheduled inspection for monitoring pipe wall thickness will be done on Unit 05 during its Fall '33 refueling outage.
The inspection will use the same methodology as was used previously.
The efforts of this program will be directed to:
1)
Inspect potential problem areas identified on Unit 3 2)
Inspect selected areas done on Unit 3 to verify parallel conditions between units 3)
Reinspect selected areas previously done to establish corrosion rates for a known operating period 0)
Inspect systems not previously done but which have a potential for wall thinning
.0
ATTACHMENTA MSR CROSS-UNDER PIPING INSPECTION REPORT 1983 R 1980 OUTAGES
I. UNIT 80 1983 SCHEDULED OUTAGE During the scheduled outage, the plant requested Power Plant Engineering to inspect the %SR, crossunder piping. The system was inspected utilizing ultrasonic methods to obtain Pipe thickness readings.
Several areas were found to be badly eroded and since time was a factor, it was decided to repair all areas with 0.5" and below wall thickness.
Of the 75 welds inspected, 23 had wall thickness of 0.5" and below. Fifteen drawings were prepared and issued to Construction for weld repairs.
The following welding plans were recommended:
1)
Power Plant Engineering a)
Use E7018 (carbon steel) rod to build up eroded areas b)
Alternate - use 309 stainless steel rod 2)
Westinghouse - use 309 stainless steel rod 3)
EBASCO - use E7018 carbon steel rod 0)
Plant - has used 309 rods A design and installation package was issued to the plant by Power Plant Engineering.
Included in this package were the Power Plant Engineering welding recommendations as indicated above.
Because of the limited time> a letter was issued by Plant Maintenance to Construction with a change to the welding procedure as follows:
Build-up all eroded areas to within 3/16"; flush and finish building up with 309 rod.
This procedure was used by Bechtel> Code ~elders and Q.C. inspection was vaived.
Observations Several areas in the MSR crossunder piping system were examined.
The majority of the welds examined were found to be eroded.
This condition was more severe at the backing rings (some backing rings were completely washed out),
Backing rings projection from I/O" to 1/2" were also observed.
It appears that when the steam strikes the backing ring or any other high spots, the steam flow pattern changes and reverses.
Erosion was also observed adjacent to existing 309 welds.
(previous repairs made with 309 rods were Westinghouse recommendation.)
These weld repairs had high and low spots which created turbulence.
In addition, several damaged turning vanes were replaced.
H. UNITf3 1983 SCHEDULED OUTAGE The following is a brief summary of inspection and repair work done to the V!SR crossunder, MSR extraction, inlet lines to safety relief valves and WtSR internals. "All of the inspection and repair methods used were similar to those used on Unit 0 1983 outage.
The following welding recommendation was used to repair the MSR crossunder piping and was performed in accordance with Bechtel welding procedures and ANSI B31.1:
T20:2
Veld Recommendation Use E7018 to fill all eroded areas to within 1/8" of flush with inner wall; complete this buildup with E309 and grind flush (similar to Unit 0 1983 outage).
Additional engineering support was required to complete the scope of work..
The additional support included two (2) piping designers and two (2) ISI inspectors.
The following drawings were prepared and issued for construction:
1) 2)
3)
Twenty drawings with U.T. results Twenty drawings with repair details Two isometric drawings indicating weld locations Inspection and repairs of the specific systems were conducted as follows:
h.
MSR Crossunder Pl i All welds were tested ultrasonically and all pipes with eroded areas of 0.5" and below were repaired using the weld procedure listed above.
In addition, some pipes with eroded areas above 0.5" were filled.
B MSR Extraction A total of six (6) fittings were replaced and three (3) fittings were temporarily repaired with patches welded to the outside wall of pipe. It should be noted that because of the limited time, the extraction lines were not completely inspected during this outage.
C.
MSR Inlet Valves to Safe Relief Valves All inlet lines were inspected up to the welded tees with U.T. and all four (0) branch connections were inspected using angle beam projection.
Repairs to these lines included partial replacement of one (1) branch connection and the repair of pinhole leak in the weld seam.
D.
MSR Internals Repairs were made to all four (0) %lSRs.
The repairs included replacement of C.S pipe supports with stainless steel pipe, replacement of damaged stainless steel baffle plates and numerous washed out carbon steel areas requiring repairs.
III UNIT00 1980 SCHEDULED OUThGE U.T. Insoection of approximately 300 weld joints, random U.T. inspection of pipe, liquid penetrant/magnetic particle examinations of weld and end preps, angle beam projection data and visual examination results of approximately 120 MSR crossunder welds..
T20:2
e There were fifty-nine (59) weld reoair drawings prepared and issued for construction, four (0) 'NSR internal repair drawings, eight (8) isometrics indicating weld locations and six (6) insulation reinstallation drawings.
i Inspection and repairs of the specific systems were conducted as follows:
A.
hlSR Crossunder Pi 1)
I~Is iection r
As mentioned previously, 75 wclds were insoected during the 1983 outage and pipe wall thicknesses close to minimum wall were repaired.
The entire system was insoected and the remaining ultrasonic testing results were obtained.
Two short vertical runs of pipe with no access from inside were oartially inspected from the outside.
An on-site material analysis of the 'MSR crossunder piping and turning vanes was conducted by Florida Power and Light's Power Resources Central Laboratory using a portable X-ray alloy analyzer.
The identification of the alloys was based upon an X-ray spectralmeter.
2)
Rc~rs One hundred and twenty-two welds requiring grinding and filling,from 1/16" to 3/8" deep, were repaired'n addition, all eroded areas between welds requiring grinding and filling werc repaired using the new FPL welding procedures.
Two (2) turning vanes were damaged at weld 087.
One vane was completely broken free from support ring and was replaced with a new vane using Florida Power and Light welding Procedure WPS-06.
The turning vane directly'below had a hairline crack on thc north side and was repaired using Florida Power and Light welding procedure WPS-06 (no post weld heat treatment).
Two (2) diaphram hinge-type expansion joints had sufficient wear on thc internal carbon steel sleeve to require a completely new sleeve in one and a partial replacement of the other.
Replacement material used was ASTI)
A200 type 316L (FPL WPS-9 and WPS-10 were used).
Seven (7) access openings were made in the pipe to permit necessary repairs to the inner pipe walls.
Upon completion of repairs, access plates were reinstalled using Florida Power and Light welding procedure WPS-20.
The final repairs made to the MSR cross-under piping were to grind smooth.
all internal weld repairs.
MSR 16" Extraction Stcam Lines 1)
Inseam on All welded fittings were Inspected for reductions in wall thickness by U.T.
method upstream and downstream of thc weld, and 10096 along the outside radius. T20:2
2)
Straight runs of pipe were randomly inspected by U.T. on the outside wall of pipe and visually, whenever a fitting was removed from'the line.
Re~lrs Repairs to the lines included replacement of thirteen (13) 16" Schedule 00 fittings and approximately 28 feet of 16" Schedule 30 pipe and two (2) fabricated spool pieces.
The new spool pieces developed cracks in the weld prep area after completing the first root pass.
The cause may have been as a result of numerous laminations found in the new pipe.
The two (2) new pipe spool pieces were cut and removed.
New piping was ordered, a 10096 U.T. was performed and released for fabrication.
Replacement fittings used were Schedule 00 instead of 30 and minor counterboring was required to match existing pipe wall thickness.
Both extraction branch connections of the '@SR,cross-under piping required major grinding of existing weld repairs and some fittings.
Other branch connections required building-up around the weld prep area to match the heavier walls of the new replacement elbows.
C.
MSR Crossunder Pi habet Pi to Safe Valves All pipe adjacent to welds upstream and downstream, as well as the outside radius of all elbows were inspected by U.T. h addition> all bottom portions of the welded tees at relief valves were inspected and all welds up to the first tee were insoected with angle beam projection.
All four (0) 20" branch connections were ground smooth internally and examined, using the angle beam method.
2)
Repairs Some erosion was observed; repairs are not required at this time.
D.
MSR Heater Drain Lines 2)
Same U.T. procedure was used as explained above.
Re~irs Total repairs to the lines Included the replacement of eight (8) fittings and five (5) feet of pipe. Allreplacement fittings were heavier wail.
The replacement of two (2) elbows adjacent to heater drain tank OT6B required protecting the liftcheck valves in the lines.
However, when bonnet caps from valves were removed, it was noted that the internals of both valves had been completely removed at some earlier date, therefore no protection was needed.
T20:2
I
E.
MSR Cross-Under Vents and Drain Lines 1)
Inspection All piping adjacent to fittings plus pipe bends were inspected for erosion of inner walls by U.T.
A visual inspection indicated out of specification material used in previous repairs.
2)
Refers Some erosion was observed; repairs arc not required at this time.
F.
%SR fnternals 1)
I~hs ction Allinspection work performed on the %SR internals was made visually.
2)
~Re airs
%ISR OA required additional 1/8" thick stainless steel plate (welded) to prevent further erosion of the carbon steel support base plates.
In addition, minor fill and grinding were required at all four (0) corners of the deck plate.
%SR OB stainless steel plates previously installed to prevent further erosion of the carbon steel baffle plate were partially replaced due to cracks in the plates.
One (1) 0" pipe support was partially replaced between the deck plate and the base plate.
Numerous eroded areas below the deck plate required filland grinding and a new grid plate (access plate) was fabricated and installed.
WISR OC internal repairs consisted of partial replacement of both 0" carbon steel pipe supports with stainless steel pipe..
Also, fabrication and installation of a new grid plate, as well as minor filland grinding to areas below the deck plate.
%SR OD internal repairs consisted of removing carbon steel angle, installed during a previous outage>
and installing carbon steel plate in its place.
Partial replacement of onc (1) 0" carbon steel pipe support with stainless steel and the fabrication and installation of a new access plate (grid plate).
IV RECOMMENDATIONS Unit 3, 198f Planned Outage:
')
Consider thc replacement of the majority of the 16" extraction pipe and fittings from the MSR crossunder line to the first block valve.
2)
Expand the inspection program to include h4SR drain piping and the hASR crossundcr vent and drain lines.
3)
Reinsoect MSR crossundcr piping and filland grind any eroded areas.
Inspect the diaphram hinge type expansion joints and repair ifnecessary.
0)
Continue to inspect and repair %tSR internals.
5w
5)
Estimate and purchase all materials necessary to complete the repairs prior to the schedule.
Unit 4 1986 Phmned Outage:
I)
ReinsPect all crossunder Piping as part of a continuous maintenance program (this should be performed at all subsequent outages).
2)
Analyze and determine possible replacement of erroded extraction steam piping.
3)
Inspect all vent and drain lines, from %SR corss-under, extraction and heater drain lines. T20:2
ATTACHMENTB PIPING WALLTHICKNESS MEASUREMENTS TURKEY POINT UNIT 4 JANUARY 1986 MCII:5
ATTACHMENT 3 PIPING O'ALLTHICKNESS MEASUREMENTS MADEAT TURKEY POINT, UNIT 0 DURING DECEMBER 1986 Item Fittin /T e
Size Thickness Measured At Extrados Thickness Measured At Intrados Disposition Of Reduced Wall Thickness Condensate Bypass - Drawing E-2389-IC-11A A - Elbow B-Tee C - Elbow D - Elbow E - Conc. Red.
F-Tee G - Elbow H - Elbow I - Elbow 1 6II 16" x16x 1
I 2ll 1 21 I 20" x 12" 2 Qll 1 8II 18II 18"
.000 2"
.600
.000
.000
.590 1.000
.520
.530
.520
.060
.890
.090
.000 Condensate to FW Pump 0 PIB Suction - Drawing: E-2389-IC-12 10 11 12 13 10 15 16 A - Elbow B - Elbow C - Elbow D - Elbow E - Elbow F - Conc. Red.
C - Elbow 20" 20II 20 2PII 2PII 20" x 10" I0II
.500
.520
.500
.560
.510
.580
.010
.510
.560
.520
.550
.500 Condensate to FW Suction - Drawing: E-2389-IC-12A 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A - Elbow B - Elbow C - Elbow D - Elbow E - Elbow F - Elbow G - Elbow I8II 18" 2 QlI 2 Qll 12" I2ll 1 2ll
.510
.520
.500
.500
.010
.380
.000
.010
.020
.020 Condensate to FW Pump 0P1A Suction - Drawing: E-2389-IC-13 20 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34.
A'- Elbow B - Elbow C - Elbow D - Elbow E - Pipe Spool F - Elbow G - Elbow H - Elbow I - Elbow 3-Conc. Red.
K - Elbow 20II 2PII 2PII 2PII 20 2PII 20" 2PII 20" 20" x 10" 10"
.500
.500
.520
.500
.500
.520
- 060
.500
.060
.000 (10!'ide)
.000
.500
.520
.500
.500
.500
.580
.520
.500
I"
\\..,:~
P Ai iAL ANC l1 i D \\LAllLQl~)
PI~G %ALLTHICKNESS MEhSURE S MhDE hT
'I%KEYPOINT, UNIT 4 DURING DE MBER 1986 Item Fittin /T e
Size Thickness Measured At Extrados Thickness Measured At Intrados Disposition Of Reduced Wall Thickness Condensate Bypass - Drawing E-2389-IC-10 35 36 37 38 39 00 01 02 03 00 A - Pipe-to-Cap B - Elbow C - Elbow D - Elbow E - Elbow F - Elbow G - Elbow H - Elbow I - Tee 3 - Elbow 16" 1 6tl 12" 16" 16" 16" 16" 1 6tl 16" x 16" 1 0ll AOO A00
.020
.000
.000
.020
.020
.010 x 10"
.620 A20 A00
.500
.030 A60
.060 A20
.820
.820 05 06 07 09 50 51
'52 53 50 Heater Drain Pump Discharge - Drawing E-2389-IC-30 A - Elbow I2lI
.000 B - Elbow I2ll
.380 C - Elbow 12"
.000 D - Conc. Red.
16" x 12"
.000 E - Red. Tee 16" x 16" x 12"
.600 F - Elbow I6II ASO G - Red. Tee 16" x 16" x 12"
.600 H - Elbow 16"
.080 I - Elbow 16"
.380 3 - Pipe-to-Cap 1 6ll
.380 A60
.030
.060
.820
.520
.800
.520
.020 Heater Drain Pump Discharge (Mini Recirc. Line) - Drawing E-2389-IC-51 (To Heater Drain Tank 0T6B) 55 56 B - Elbow A - Elbow 0ll 0tl
.280
.200
.290
.250 Heater Drain Pump Discharge (Mini Recirc Line) - E-23S9-IC-51B (To Heater Drain Tank 0T6B) 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 60 65 66 67 A - Elbow B - Elbow C - Elbo'w D - Elbow E - Elbow F - Conc. Red.
G - Red. Tee H - Elbow I - Elbow J - Elbow K - Elbow 3I5 3ll 3ll 3II 3ll 0" x 3" 0ll x 3ll 01l 0lt 0ll 0lt
.220
.120
.220
.220
.100
.300
.300
.200
.200
.250
.180
.360
.300
.360
.320
.360
.300
.320 Replace Replace Replace Heater Drain Pump Discharge (Mini Recirc Line ) - Drawing: E-2387-IC-51B (To Heater Drain Tank 3T6B) 68 69 70 A - Elbow B - Elbow C - Elbow 3I1 31l 0ll
.200
.180
.270
.320 Replace
ATTACHMENTC PIPING WALLTHICKNESS MEASUREMENTS TURKEY POINT UNIT 3 SPRING I987 MCII:5
ATTACHMENT C PIPING %ALLTHICKNESS MEASUREMENTS MADEAT TURKEY POINT, UNIT 3 DURING SPRING '87 OUTAGE Item Average
~l MSR Crossunder, Dwg. FSK-M-2080 Sht.
1 Lowest Thickness Below Disposition of Reduced Wall Thickness 101 102 103 100 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 115 116 Elbow Pipe Elbow Elbow Tee Pipe Elbow Tee Elbow Elbow Tee Pipe Pipe Pipe Pipe 32 32 32 05 05x 05x 32 32 32-05 x 05x 20 32 32 05 x 05x 20 32 05 05 20 0.76 0.8 0.8 1.0 1.1 0.75 0.76 1.O/.07 0.75 0.70 1.O/0.5 0.75 0.600 0.9 0.50 0.0 0.000 0.52 Weld Build Up Weld Build Up Continue In Use MSR Crossunder, Dwg. FSK-M-2085 Sht.
1 201 202 203
~205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 Elbow Tee Elbow Elbow Elbow Elbow Tee Reducer Pipe Pipe Pipe Tee 32 05 x 05 x 32 05 32 32 32 05 x 05x 20 05 x 32 05 05 05 05x 05x 20 0.75 0.96/0.7 0.98 0.56 0.58 0.76 1.0/.08 0.95/.72 0.66 0.99 0.98 0.95/08 0.0 0.3 Weld Build Up Continue In Use HP Turbine Extraction to FW Heater, 5A, Dwg. FSK-M-2087 Sht.
1 301 302 303 300 305 Steam Trap Elbow Elbow Elbow Elbow 16 16 16 16 16 0.30 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.37 0.18 Continue In Use
0 lk
ATTACHMENTC (Continued)
PIPING O'A THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS M, AT TURKEY POINT~ UNIT 3 DURING SPRING '87 OUTAGE Item Average
~l Thickness (in.)
Lowest Thickness Below Disposition of Reduced Wall Thickness HP Turbine Extraction to FW Heater 5B, Dwg. FSK-M-2086 Sht.
1 OOI 002 003 000 005 006 Elbow Elbow Steam Trap Elbow Elbow Elbow 16 16 16 16 16 16 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.00 0.08 0.17 Continue In Use LP Turbine Extraction to FW Heater OA, Dwg. E-2387-IC-90 502 503 Elbow Tee 18 18 0.00 0.79 LP Turbine Extraction to FW Heater OB, Dwg. E-2387-IC-55 602 603 Elbow Elbow 18 18 0.00 0.39 Steam Generator Feed Pump Suction, Dwg. 5610-P-208 701 702 Tee Reducer 20 20x 18 0.65 0.5 0.07 0.5 Continue In Use Continue In Use Steam Generator Feed Pump Suction, DWG. 5610-P-209 703 Elbow 10 0.01 Steam Generator Feed Pump Suction, Dwg. 5610-P-207 801 802 Elbow Elbow 20 10 0,52 OAI OA6 Continue In Use Heater Drain Pump Discharge, Dwg. 5610-P-206 901 902 903 Elbow Elbow Tee 16 01 16 0.39 16 x 16 x 12 0.6 0.36 0.30 0.36 Continue In Use Continue In Use Continue In Use Heater Drain Pump Recirculation, Dwg. E-2387-IC-51B 1001 1002 1003-1000 1005 1006 1007 Pipe Elbow Elbow Tee Elbow Pipe Elbow 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.2 0.22 0.23
0 ATTACHMENTC(Continued)
PIPING %ALLTHICKNESS QEASUREMENTS MADE AT TURKEY POINT, UNIT 3 DURING SPRING '87 OUTAGE Item Fittin T
e Size (in.)
Average Thickness (in.)
Lowest Thickness Below~l.)
'isposi tion of Reduced
'Wall Thickness Steam Cenerator Feed Pump Discharge, Dwg. 5610-P-210 1101 1102 1103 JJOO 1105 1106 Elbow E Jbow Elbow Tee Elbow/Pipe Elbow 12 18 20 18 x 18x JO JO 12 0.70 1.06 1.16 0.90/0.80 0.83/0.60 0.81 0.60 Continue In Use HP Turbine Extraction to FW Heater 6B, Dwg. E-2387-IC-52 1201 1202 1203 1200 1205 1206 1207 1208 EJbow Elbow Elbow Elbow Elbow EJbow Elbow Elbow 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 0.35 0.12 0.36 0.12 0.36 0.28 0.36 0.22 0.36 0.25 0.38 0.18 0.35 0.28 0.35 0.28 Replace Replace Replace Replace Replace Replace Continue In Use Continue In Use HP Turbine Extraction to FW Heater 6A, Dwg. E-2387-IC-20 1301 1302 1303 1300 1305 1306 1307.
1308 1309 1310 1311 Elbow E Jbow Elbow Elbow Elbow Elbow Elbow Elbow Elbow Elbow Elbow 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 0.35 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.38 0.00 0.38 0.22 0.20 0.22 0.20 0.27 0.20 0.18 0.20 Replace Replace Replace Replace Continue In Use Replace Replace Replace LP Turbine Extraction to F W Heater 3A, Dwg. E-2387-IC-92 JOOJ 1003 JOOJ 1005 Steam Trap Elbow Elbow Elbow 18 18 18 18 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.0I LP Turbine Extraction to FW Heater 3B, Dwg. E-2387-IC-81 1503 1 500 Elbow Elbow 18 18 0.39 0.02 WP/DISCj/B0020/RESPONSE NRC 87-01/0887/LC
0