L-88-001, Request for Approval of Pipe Flaw Evaluation
| ML093210142 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 11/16/2009 |
| From: | Hansen J Exelon Generation Co, Exelon Nuclear |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| GL-88-001, RS-09-158 | |
| Download: ML093210142 (30) | |
Text
Nuclear November 16,2009 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2 Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-19 NRC Docket No. 50-237
Subject:
Request for Approval of Pipe Flaw Evaluation
References:
(1) NRC Generic Letter 88-01, "NRC Position on IGSCC in BWR Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping," dated January 25, 1988 (2) Letter from B. Rybak (Commonwealth Edison Company) to U.S. NRC, "Dresden Nuclear Power Station Unit 2 Recirculation System and Reactor Head Flaw Indication Evaluations," dated October 16, 1995 (3) Letter.from J. Stang (U.S. NRC) to D. Farrar (Commonwealth Edison Company), "Dresden, Unit 2, Flaw Evaluations (TAC No. M93862),"
dated February 15, 1996 In accordance with Generic Letter (GL) 88-01, "NRC Position on IGSCC in BWR Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping," dated January 25, 1988 (i.e., Reference I), Exelon Generation Company, LLC (EGC) requests NRC approval of a pipe flaw evaluation for a weld in the Reactor Recirculation (RR) system piping at Dresden Nuclear Power Station (DNPS), Unit 2 that EGC proposes to leave as-is without repair. The flaw indication does not meet the acceptance standards of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (Code)Section XI, 1995 Edition with 1996 Addenda, which is the DNPS Unit 2 Section XI code of record for the current fourth inspection interval, for continued operation without repairlreplacement or flaw evaluation.
On November 08, 2009, during the current DNPS Unit 2 refueling outage (i.e., D2R21), EGC identified a change in depth of a previously known circumferential flaw indication. The inspections were conducted in accordance with Reference 1 and Boiling Water Reactor Vessel and lnternals Project (BWRVIP) Report 75-A, "Technical Basis for Revisions to Generic Letter 88-01 Inspection Schedules," dated October 2005. The UT examination used Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI) qualified personnel, equipment, and procedures.
The circumferential flaw indication is in weld PD1A-D14, which is a Category "F" weld, and is located on the pipeldownstream side of a 28-inch diameter "A" Recirculation Pump discharge
November 16,2009 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2 elbow-to-pipe weld. There are no axial flaw indications detected in this weld. The pipe material is SA358-304; the elbow material is SA403-WP304, with a nominal pipe wall thickness of 1.375 inches. The length of the flaw indication is 1.OO inch and the through-wall depth, measured from the inside diameter, is 0.32 inches. The last examination of this weld was performed in November 2007, also using PDI qualified personnel, equipment, and procedures, and the recorded measurements were 1.OO inch in length and the through-wall depth was measured as 0.25 inches.
The circumferential flaw indication has been observed on this weld since 1986. Reference 2 provided the original flaw evaluation, which was performed when it was determined at the time (i.e., 1995) that the flaw indication was deeper than the previously measured depth.
The original flaw evaluation was subsequently approved as documented in Reference 3.
DNPS Unit 2 has a total of three (3) Category "F' welds and all three Category "F' welds have been inspected in D2R21, therefore, sample inspection expansion is not necessary.
An evaluation of the circumferential flaw indication assuming conservative crack growth rates has been performed by Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. and is attached to this letter. The evaluation was performed using the methodology and acceptance criteria specified in ASME Code,Section XI, 1995 Edition with 1996 Addenda, subarticle IWB-3640, "Evaluation Procedures and Acceptance Criteria for Austenitic Piping," and the guidance of NUREG-0313, Revision 2, "Technical Report on Material Selection and Process Guidelines for BWR Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping." This flaw evaluation considered a conservative flaw size, expected growth rates assuming hydrogen water chemistry and plant chemistry parameters. It demonstrates that substantial structural margin exists for more than one operating cycle considering water chemistry, since the acceptance criteria of subarticle IWB-3640 are met.
In accordance with the ultrasonic examination report, included as Appendix B to the attached flaw evaluation, the flaw indication is located on the pipeldownstream side at 32.5 inches clockwise azimuthally. The axial scan on the elbow/upstream side is limited from 26 inches to 70 inches clockwise azimuthally due to a whip restraint, which resulted in 51% axial scan coverage on the elbowlupstream side. The axial scan on the pipeldownstream side, where the flaw indication is located, and the circumferential scans on both sides of the weld achieved 100% coverage. The total cumulative examination coverage for the weld is 87.75%. Sizing of the flaw indication was not impeded by the presence of the whip restraint because the sizing procedure used is qualified for sizing from the side where the flaw indication is located. Given that at the end of the evaluation period, a 360 degree flaw would still be below the IWB-3641 allowable flaw depth of about 60%, the small percent of unexamined volume does not materially impact the conclusions of the Structural Integrity Associates evaluation.
Therefore, EGC has concluded that the flaw indication is acceptable as-is for continued operation through the next operating cycle. Weld PD1A-Dl4 classification will remain as category "F" (i.e., cracked weld with inadequate or no repair) and will require inspection each subsequent refueling outage.
November 16,2009 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 3 EGC requests NRC review and approval of the attached flaw evaluation report by November 25, 2009, in support of unit startup.
Should you have questions concerning this submittal, please contact Mr. Timothy Byam at (630) 657-2804.
Manager - Licensing
Attachment:
Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. Report, "Crack Growth Analysis for Weld PD1A-Dl 4," File No.: 0901309.302
ATTACHMENT Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. Report, "Crack Growth Analysis for Weld PDI A-Dl 4,"
File No.: 0901309.302
CALCULATION PACKAGE Project NO.: 0901309 Quality Program: Nuclear Commercial Requisition 1094921 Exelon GSA 44 1728 CALCULATION TITLE:
Revision Description H. L. Gustin Daniel V. Sommerville Page 1 of 7 F0306-01RO
@, Sfruefural lnfegrify Associates. Inc.
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION
IOBJECTIVE .................................................................................. 3 2.0 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................ 3 3.0 DESIGN INPUTS .......................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Materials and Geometry .................................................................................... 4 3.2 Loading ..............................................................................................................4 4.0 ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................................5 5.0 CRACK GROWTH CALCULATIONS .......................................................................5 5.1 Fatigue Crack Growth (FCG) ............................................................................5 5.2 Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking (IGSCC) ............................................ 6 6.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ...............................................................................6
7.0 REFERENCES
.............................................................................................................. 6 APPENDIX A FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH PC-CRACK OUTPUT FILES ................. A-1 APPENDIX B GE-Hitachi Inspection Report D2R2 1-027 ...............B-1 APPENDIX C Dresden Transmittal of Design Input (TODI) 09.045. "Hydrogen Water Chemistry Data". ..............................................................C-1 File No ..0901309.302 Page 2 of 7 Revision: 0
@ Structural lniegrily Associates, Inc.
The purpose of this calculation is to update the evaluation of a flaw indication observed in Weld PD1A-D 14, located in the Dresden Generating Station Unit 2 Reactor Recirculation System piping, to account for changes in its input data that have occurred since it was originally performed in 1995 [2]. An ultrasonic examination of the weld was performed during outage D2R2 1, which identified one indication requiring evaluation. This indication was also identified during the previous inspection. Also, Dresden's committed Edition of ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Section XI, which governs the evaluation has changed, and the piping analysis of the Reactor Recirculation System has been revised. The evaluation that follows incorporates these changes to the input data. The evaluation applies linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM) establish a conservative estimate of the growth of the flaw. Both fatigue crack growth (FCG) and Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking (IGSCC) are considered.
2.0 METHODOLOGY The allowable end-of-evaluation period flaw depth to thickness ratio (ah) was taken from Table IWB-364 1- 1, which is derived by the methodology of Appendix C of ASME Code,Section XI [3].
The geometry and design pressure for Weld PDl A-Dl4 is summarized below.
A conservative estimate of crack growth is computed using linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM) techniques. Both fatigue crack growth (FCG) and Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking (IGSCC) are considered. The time for the observed flaw to grow to the Section XI IWB-3641-1 allowable depth is determined.
The fatigue crack growth (FCG) analysis was performed using the LEFM analysis option in pc-CRACK for WindowsTMsoftware [4]. This software includes options for the evaluation of FCG, and allows for defining load cases, material properties, crack models, and the selection of the applicable crack growth law. FCG results are summarized in Section 5.1. The IGSCC growth calculation follows in Section 5.2.
Appendix A contains pc-CRACK output of the FCG growth analysis.
File No.:0901309.302 Page 3 of 7 Revision: 0
@ Structu~allntegrify Associates, Inc.
3.0 DESIGN INPUTS 3.1 Materials and Geometry The dimensions of Weld PDIA-Dl4 are described below. These are taken from the Inspection Report
[51.
Material: SA358 Type 304 Austenitic Stainless Steel Outside diameter: OD = 28 inches Wall Thickness: t = 1.375 inch A copy of the examination report is enclosed in Appendix B. The NDE inspection report [5] identifies one reportable indication, circumferentially oriented on the pipe side of the weld. Reported dimensions are: Length = I .O inch, depth = 0.32 inch, at the ID surface.
Flaw Length to Pipe Circumference Ratio: 0.01 Table IWB 3641.1 Allowable Depth to Wall Thickness (aft) Ratio: 0.75 Measured Flaw Depth to Wall Thickness (alt) Ratio: 0.24 Per the inspection report [5], the flaw is located at 32.5 inches clockwise azimuthally. One axial scan achieved limited coverage (from 26.0 inches to 70.0 inches azimuthally) due to the welded restraint.
The other axial scan and both circumferential scans achieved 100% coverage. Inspection of the flaw location was not limited.
3.2 Loading Loads considered in this evaluation are taken from [I] and [2]. These affect only the fatigue crack growth portion of the present calculation, since a constant (K-independent) IGSCC crack growth correlation is used as described below. Stresses considered in the fatigue crack growth calculation include pressure, deadweight (not cyclic, but conservatively included with pressure in equation 8 calculations in [I]), and thermal cycling, taken from [2]. Appendix D of [I] reports stresses at the top ten locations for each load combination (equation). The highest value reported for equation 8 (design pressure plus dead weight) is 8970 psi. This value will conservatively used in the fatigue crack growth calculation. The thermal transient stress is reported in [2] as 7864.6 psi. The sum of these two values
(=8970+7864.6= 16834.6 psi) will be used as the maximum of the stress cycle for fatigue crack growth calculation.
Weld residual stresses are steady state secondary stresses. Since a K-independent crack growth correlation is used in the IGSCC crack growth calculation as described below, residual stresses do not affect the IGSCC growth calculation in this evaluation. Because they are steady state stresses, residual stresses only affect fatigue crack growth as a mean stress. Therefore, in lieu of using a residual stress File No.:0901309.302 Page 4 of 7 Revision: 0 F0306-01
@ StructufaI lntegrify Associates, Inc.
distribution, a constant stress of 30 ksi (comparable to material yield stress) will conservatively be used as a mean stress in the fatigue crack growth calculation.
Seismic stresses, either OBE or SSE are not generally included in fatigue crack growth calculations, because the number of expected cycles is so small over the life of the plant. Also, there is an extremely low probability of an operating basis earthquake (OBE) seismic event occurring in the two year evaluation period, and the number of fatigue cycles per event is small. Therefore, the use of the primary stress values from [2] as described above is appropriate.
4.0 ASSUMPTIONS Basic assumptions for the analysis are listed below:
- 1. Weld PDl A-Dl4 in the Dresden recirculation system does not experience a large number of cycles. Most stress cycles in this system are due to plant start-uplshutdown cycles
- 2. Residual stress is modeled as a constant tensile stress of 30 ksi (comparable to material yield stress) for the purpose of fatigue crack growth. Residual stresses are steady state secondary stresses and therefore only act as a mean stress in regards to fatigue crack growth.
- 3. The flaw indication is assumed to extend 360 degrees circumferentially around the pipe in LEFM crack growth calculations.
5.0 CRACK GROWTH CALCULATIONS 5.1 Fatigue Crack Growth (FCG)
FCG is calculated using the loading described in Section 3.2 of this calculation. In order to eliminate flaw length changes from consideration, the initial flaw was conservatively assumed to extend 360 degrees around the circumference. The minimum stress is taken as a constant value of 30 ksi, representing weld residual stress, which is present when the plant is shutdown. The maximum stress intensity Kmaxis the combination of the pressure, thermal, and deadweight stresses and the (constant) residual stress. &in corresponds to residual stress only. This stress intensity range represents the range seen from shutdown to startup. The FCG after 1000 applied cycles is calculated using pc-CRACK software using the crack growth law for austenitic material in air, as described by Figure C-32 10-1 in Section XI Appendix C of the ASME Code [3]. 1000 cycles was chosen as a conservative estimate that more than doubles the total number of startup and shutdown cycles the plant will likely experience over its lifetime Appendix A contains output files for the fatigue crack growth calculation. Over 1000 cycles including primary and thermal stresses as described above, the flaw is predicted to grow from 0.32 inch deep to 0.3259 inch deep, or a growth of 0.0059 inch.
File No.:0901309.302 Page 5 of 7 Revision: 0
@ Structural lnfegrify Associates, Inc.
5.2 Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking (IGSCC)
PVP2007-26618 [6] provides stress corrosion crack growth laws for austenitic stainless steel materials in the BWR environment, considering both normal water chemistry and hydrogen water chemistry. This paper provides the technical basis of crack growth correlations used in BWRVIP-14A. Appendix C of this calculation presents a historical summary of hydrogen water chemistry present in the Dresden Unit Reactor Recirculation System. Based on the data in Appendix C, weld PDlA-Dl4 is mitigated by effective hydrogen water chemistry. On that basis, the SCC crack growth law for hydrogen water chemistry provided by Reference [6] equation 6 is justified.
The SCC growth law is, taken from Reference [6], equation 6:
Note that this correlation is K-independent (stress independent as well). Using this correlation, the observed indication, which is reported as 0.32 inch deep, would grow by 0.193 inch in two years (17520 hours). The flaw depth would increase from 0.32 inch to 0.513 inch, which is 37% of the wall thickness reported in the inspection report, as compared to the allowable depth of 75% for the actual reported flaw length of I inch, or about 60% assuming the flaw extends 360 degrees circumferentially. Extending the IGSCC crack growth prediction, the reported flaw would be predicted require about 5.2 years to grow to the 60% depth. Using the same IGSCC growth correlation along with the FCG results above, a flaw depth of about 0.6 inch would just grow to the 360 degree allowable depth (60%) over the next two year inspection interval. The current indication could have been approximately double the current size and still not grow beyond the IWB-3641 allowable depth over the next operating cycle.
6.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS The present analysis shows that over the next operating cycle, the observed indication would conservatively be expected to grow from the current 0.32 inch depth to a maximum depth of 0.52 inch due to the combination of IGSCC and fatigue crack growth. This end of evaluation period depth represents 38% of the wall thickness, as compared to and allowable depth per IWB-3641 of about 60%
for a 360 degree flaw, or 75% for the as-measured flaw length. Thus, the final flaw size remains acceptable by the criteria of ASME Section XI IWB 3640 through well beyond (5.2 years) the end of the next two year inspection interval. This prediction is quite conservative, because of the very conservative treatment of residual stress, flaw shape and length modeled, applied stresses considered, and crack growth correlation used [5].
7.0 REFERENCES
File No.:0901309.302 Page 6 of 7 Revision: 0
@ Structural integrity Associates, Inc.
- 1. Exelon Analysis DRE-98-0017, Reactor Recirculation Piping Stress Analysis, Revision 001A, May, 2004
- 2. Commonwealth Edison Calculation NED-P-MSD-085, Flaw Evaluation for PDl A-Dl4 and PS2-TEEl202-4B Welds in Dresden Unit 2 Recirculation System, Revision 0, 10i1995.
- 3. ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, 1995 Edition, with 1996 Addenda
- 4. pc-CRACK for Windows, Version 3.1-98348, Structural Integrity Associates, 1998.
- 5. GE-Hitachi Inspection Report D2R21-027 Dated 11ilOi09. Included as Appendix B to this calculation.
- 6. ASME Paper PVP2007-26618, Technical Basis for BWRVIP Stainless Steel Crack Growth Correlations in BWRs, 2007
dated November 14,2009. Included as Appendix C to this calculation.
File No.:0901309.302 Page 7 of 7 Revision: 0
@ Structural lnfegrilyAssociates, lnc.
APPENDIX A FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH PC-CRACK OUTPUT FILES 0901309.302 Page A- 1 of A-7 Rev. 0
@ Stru~:turalIntegrity Associates, Inc.
pc-CRACK for Windows Version 3.1-98348 (C) Copyright '84 - '98 Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.
Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics Date: Sun Nov 15 12:03:5 1 2009 Input Data and Results File: FCGD14.LFM
Title:
090 1309.302 Fatigue crack growth for weld PD 1A-Dl4 Load Cases:
Stress Coefficients Case ID CO C1 C2 C3 Type Unit 10 0 0 0 Coeff
Through Wall Stresses for Load Cases With Stress Coeff-------
Wall Case Depth Unit Crack Model: Circumferential Crack in Cylinder (t/R=O.1)
Crack Parameters:
Wall thickness: 1.3700 Max. crack size: 0.8000 0901309.302 Page A-2 of A-7 Rev. 0
@ StrucfuraI lnt~grifyAssociates, Inc.
.................... Stress Intensity Factor....................
Crack Case Size Unit 0901309.302 Page A-3 of A-7 Rev. 0
@ structural lnlegrify Associates, lnc.
Crack Growth Laws:
Law ID: XI-Air Model: ASME Section XI - austenitic stainless steel in air environment da/dN = C
- 10°F
- S
- dKA3.3 where S = 1.0 for R < 0
=l.O+1.8*R forO<R<0.79
= -43.5 + 57.97
- R for 0.79 < R < 1 F = code specified fbnction of temperature dK = Kmax - Kmin R = Kmin 1 Kmax where:
C
- 10°F = 1.1017e-010 is for the currently selected units of:
force: kip length: inch temperature: 70.0000 Fahrenheit Material Fracture Toughness KIc:
Material ID: K 200 Depth KIc 0.0000 200.0000 0.5000 200.0000 0901309.302 Page A-4 of A-7 Rev. 0
@ Slrucfurai lnfegrity Associates, Inc.
Initial crack size= 0.3200 Max. crack size= 0.8000 Number of blocks= I Print increment of block= I Cycles Calc. Print Crk. Grw. Mat.
Subblock /Time incre. incre. Law Klc operating 1000 10 10 XI-Air K 200 Kmax Krnin Subblock Case ID Scale Factor Case ID Scale Factor operating Unit 3.0000 Unit 3.0000 Unit 1.6850 Crack growth results:
Total Subblock Cycles Cycles DaDn
/Time /Time Kmax Kmin DeltaK R DaDt Da a althk Block:
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 0901309.302 Page A-5 of A-7 Rev. 0
@ Sfrucfural lntegrily Associates, lnc.
0901309.302 Page A-6 of A-7 Rev. 0
@ Structural lntegrily Associates, Inc.
End of pc-CRACK Output 0901309.302 Page A-7 of A-7 Rev. 0
@ Strilctural lnfegrify Associates, Inc.
APPENDIX B GE-Hitachi Inspection Report D2R2 1-027 Dated 1 1110109 0901309.302 Rev. 0 Page B- 1 of B-9
Report No EMMINATION
SUMMARY
SHEET DZRZI-027 SZe: Dresden Component ID: 21V0201A-28/P01A-D14 Outage: RFO 2 1 EL-P / 28" sptern. &3 ASME C o t N/A ASME @em N/A AugReq IGSCC / Cat. F Exams Performed Dato Cal Sheet Procedure Sheet Personnel 022 - - ---
WSheor 1 NIA GEPDI-IIT-3 Ver/Rev 2 CAL-DPTH-068 Chad Olson I1 j 11/642009 45'Shwr 1 0-023 N/A 1 GE-PDI-UT-2Ver/Rev4* 1 ORE-POI-304-01 TroyHuhe II 111/6/2009 6~ Long 1 0-024 N/A I GE-PDI-UT-2 Ver/Rev4* 1 ORE-POI-304-01 Troy H d e 1 II 1 11/6/2009 I Ultrasonic examinm'ons were performed using both detection and sizing techniques with a combination of 45" shear and a 60° longitudinal wave search units.
Detectiontechniques using the 45" shear and 60" RL search units detectedthe previouslyrecorded Inear indication with no significantchange noted. No new indicution were detected. See 02R14 data for indication plots.
Sizing exams were performed on the previously recorded linear indication with the following parameters:
I Ind. No. L start Length Thru-wall Location 1 32.0" Lo' .32' Pipe Side I No significant change was observed hamthe previouslyrecorded dimensionsfor this indicakn.
I I 87.75% of the required examination volume was examined.
I I This examination meets the requirements of ASME Section XI 1995 Ediiion. 1996Addenda.
I DRR 07-04/07-29 Examination results were compared to Duta Report 0-020,021.022 from: 02R20 a Chonge I ~ h e r euaminaiinr were performed under Work Order 0109669146 @NO Change I This Summary and the follow~ngdata sheets have been reviewed and accepted by the following penonnei Page - 1 0901309.302 Page B-2 of B-9 Rev. 0
r
(@I 1 I - i ~ ~ t i ~
Ultrasonic Calibration and Examination Record Manual Piping and Components Report Number: 02m-027 Data Sheet Number: DQ23 LinearitySheet -
1-003 Calibration Data for Block QRE-PDI-30401 Procedure: GE-POI-Uf-2 Ver/ Rev: 2 DRR: 07-WO7-29
/I -
SS -
Flat 0.5-20' 1 Calibration 1 Cal Time /
Size Thkk Initial C ~ I : Search Unit Data 1015 5-Cou~lant Cou~lantbatch Cal Check a 8 -KBA Manufacturer:
Ol H2MD Serial Number
.37F/Round SizelShape:
/I Thermometer SIN Cal Temp. I Final Cal: I Q3/n Incident Point:
Q5" NominalAngle:
911 MeasuredAngle:
DAC Construction 15 M M comPG s!!Ea 1 Scan Direction h Frequenq Style: Mode: Elements:
Cal Reflector J.F ~ o t c & Search Unit Cable B!&
Signal Amplitude:
Signal Sweep:
-RG-174 Cable Type:
-6 Length:
0 Connectors:
Signal dB:
Sweep 0- 10 = 4.000 petal fbth Instrument Settinas Calibration Verification Panametrlc$/ Ewch 4 031526704 ManufacturwlModd: Serial Number:
Field Simulator Block SIN: CAL-RHOM092 Reflector -
FSDH Zero:
91246 inhsec.
Velwiy as-so M@
NarrowbandFilter:
Amplitude 2046 Gain (dB) && 4& Fullwave 4 ~ 1 n x9dmi sweep (SD) i4.4 Rep Rate: Rectification: Range: Pulser/Energy Acceptable Linearity performed: &V28/2009 400Ohmq Damping:
0%
Reject 20 MHz Frequency.
a Mode:
Exam Data for Weld: uuomu\-zsvpotAw4 -
EL-p/zr Exam Comments / Limitations:
Configuration: See sMng data sheet fos recorded l n d W o n Exam perfonnod to maintain 5% to 20% ID roll
!u 89F 264882 Circ exams performed on both sides of base material and Exam Surface: Exam Temp. Exam Thermometer weM cmwfi ID geometry obssnred below re&& lewk No upstrwm I#kd smn perfDmed between 26.0' to 70.P due to welded restraint Axial UPST / Scan dB Recordable Exom No new indications were detected Circ DMST tndications Angle Axial -UPST la2 -NRI a
&id m 182 -RI 3z CIrc l!8T -
242 -NRI -
4Y Exam Start k?z Exam End: -15013 Circ BClSI m -
450 Initials: Examinec Level: / GEReviewedBy Level: Date:
See Summary Sheet for Signature Michoel Jenniaes -If Utility Review: Date:
Level:
See SummarySheet for Signature Initial CalIExam Date: iu!aB AMtl Review: Date:
0901309.302 Page B-3 of B-9 Rev. 0
Uftrasonic Calibration and Examination Record Manual Piping and Components Report Number: 02"AZ1-021 Sitelunit Dresden/ 2 Dato Sheet Number: 0-024 Outage: RFO 21 Linearity Sheet &&&?
Calibration Data for Block: DRE-POI-304-a Procedure: GE-POkU7-2
-SS -
Flat ~ S ' - 2 W Calibration Caf Tme Ver/ Rev: ,b ORR: 07-04/07-29 Material Size Thick Search Unit Data lnitiol ~ a k O=
Uhouel I1 -
07225 CalCheck 1504 -
RTD L?E.Z?Q Zt1Wlmm/Red Couplant Couplant batch Cal Check Manufacturer: Serial Number Sirelshape:
is!?#B m &b Thermometer SIN Cal Temp. Final Cal:
ll&Zirk Incident Point.
60' Nominal Angle:
60' Measured Angle:
DAC Construction IOMHz Frequency:
TRl.2-Aust Sge:
!a%
Mode:
2 Elernents:
Scan Direction &
Gal Reflector u Seorch Unit Cable 804b Signal Amplitude:
Signal Sweep: 5.8~
-RG174 Cable Type:
-6 Length.
0 Connectors:
Signal dB: -
352 dB Sweep 0-10= 5000 in MotuI mh InstrumentSettinas Calibration Verification ~ a n m a t r i c s /~ p o c h4 032526704 ManufadurerlModel: Serial Number:
Field Simulator BIock SIN: CAL- RHOM-092 Reflector &m 22.3 us 92373 inJus& -
fl8 3.0 MQ Zero: Velocity: NarrowbandFitter:
Amplitude -
3696 a Gain (dB) -
352 && !?& Fullwavq z?%Liu s¶d&i!
Sweep (SO) JJ a Rep Rote: Rectification: Range: PulserlEnergy Acceptable Linearity performed : 1W2W2009 4Qw!?W % 2 0 MHz Damping: Reject Frequency: Mode:
Exam Data for Weld i W Q ~ 2 8 / ~ I A - D 1 ~
EL- P / 2 F Exam Comments / Limitations:
Configuration. See sMng data sheet br rmrded indicotlm Emm pehrmed to maintain 5% to 20% noise l m l a -89' F &B&
Supplemental 6CT RL examination pehrmed due to welded Exam Surface: Exam Temp. Exam Thermometer restmint from 2hQ to 70.0' on downstreurn side d weM No new indications were detected Axial UPST Scan dB Recwdable Exam Circ DNST Indications Angle
!% & I -
DNST -
4.2 -
RI 60" Exam Start -
1505 Exom End:
I Initials: Examiner Level: Ode:
I See Summory Sheet for Signatme Michael Jennlaes -I/
Utility Review: Date:
Initials: Examiner 2: Level:
See Summory Sheet for Signature Initial ColIExam Date: u§!aB ANll Review Date:
0901309.302 Page B-4 of B-9 Rev. 0
Ultrasonic Calibration and Examination Record Manual Piping and Components i
Report Number: !2a?&2a Site/Unit: Dresden/ 2 Data Sheet Number: 0022 Outage: RFO 21 Linearii Sheet. a Calibration Data for Block CAL-DPTn-068 1 Procedure: GE-PDI-UT-.! I Ver/ Rev: 2 DRR:
Material Search Unit Doto UItrasei I1 -
/
07225 CalCheck 1309 Couplant: Couplant botch KBA OIDXNY .375/Round CalCheck: ~ a n z r e r : Serial Number Sie/Shope:
264795 78.F Thermometer S/N Cal Temp. Final Cak a251n, -
60.
Incident Point: Nominal Angle: Measured Angle:
DAC Construction Frequency:
CmpG Style:
Shwr Mode: Elements:
k a n Direction h Cai Reflector SignolAmplitude:
&iz.s@i
-80%
Search Unit Cable
-6 -
0 i
Signal Sweep: 5.80 D& Cable Type: Length: Connectors:
Signal dB: -
33.8 dB Sweep 0-10 = 4.Win Metal Pqth Calibrotion Verification Instrument Settinas Ponometrics/ Emch 4 031533W5 I
ManufacturerlModel: Serial Number:
I Field Simulator EUock S/N: CAL-RHOMOSJ I I Reflector I H
= 1 &Q 1 i%imk!s Q.aab&& $$-loMHz Zero: Velocny: Narrowband Filter:
/ Amplitude 1 8056 1
&#Q &lb?!e ROOQ.in ScGjMW 2JmQG?
Rep Rate: Rectification: Range: Pulser/Energy Acceptable Linear* performed : $a/Z&/W 4QO Ohms Damping:
0%
Reject 20 M M Frequency:
4%
Mode:
Exam Dota for Weld 2/1/~2924-ZWPLW-M4 EL-P/.?6" Exam Comments / Limitations:
Configuration: Exam performed to through wall size previous& recorded flaw.
QQ Exam Surface:
$2' F ExamTemp.
2647%
Exam Thermometer No significant changes Axial Circ Axial I
I I I Exam Start a 0 Exam End: 1330 I I CD Chad Olson -I1 Initials: Examinec Level: GE ReviewedBy: Level: Date:
See Summary Sheet for Signature a Ya Utility Review Date:
Initials: Examiner 2: Level:
See Summary Sheet for Sinuture Initial Cal/Exm Date: ANll Review Date:
0901309.302 Page B-5 of B-9
I Ultrasonic Examination Indication Report Data Report Number:
Cok / Dota Sheet Number
.02W1-027 Site Dresden Procedure. GE-POI-UT-2/ 4 /07-#/07-29 --
weld ID: ~OM14-28/PO1ADlq Drawing: a 2 Size: Thickness: Exam Start: &g Lo Locorion OSR of Rhr# Wo Location: &e/d Centerline Weld Width: 1.8" Weld Height. ExamEnd:
Ind Angle %of Indication Length I W Distonce Metal Path AxiCuc Upst, No. Used OAC ~1 I LMox L2 f W1 f WMox f W2 MP 1 MPMox 1 MP 2 Dnst Comments:
1 60 NJA N/A 1 32.5' N/A ( NIA I N/A I N/A N/A I HIA I NIA arc ~ l s t tertgtt~,no & m e from pr&ous data Sketch See Sumrriury Sheet for S ~ n o t u r e I See S u m o r y Sheet for Sgnature 4 0 GE Rev~ewedBy: Level. Dote: Util~tyRevew: DO&: ANN Review. Date.
Exomner Levek Date: Pose 5 of p 0901309.302 Page B - 6 of B - 9 Rev. 0
Dato Report Number Ultrasonic Exomination lndication Report Cal / Doto Sheet Number.
Site Dresden Procedure. GE-POI-UT-3 / Z / N/A Wekl ID: ~I/O201A-2d/PDlffD14 Drawing: Size: a Thickness: ExomStart: JJ.JQ Lo Locaiom OSR offlbow Wo Location: weid Centerling weld Width: &g Weldtieight: ;L* Exam End:
indkotion Length I W Distance Metal Path L1 I LMox I L 2 I W1 I WMax I W2 M P 1 1 MPMax] MP2 Comments:
N/A / 3 2 9 1 N/A I N/A ] WA 1 WA N/A I N/A I N/A / DNt kdicotionOSPthrOUQhW#. NO dp@Contch0nqesfW pieviOV6 wW.
I See Summary Sheet for Signature 3e&
See Sumarysheet for Signature e" ZhadOlson -/I &l/6/ZtX)B GE Reviewed By. Level: Date: Utility Review: mte: ANll Review: Date:
Examiner Level: Dote:
0901309.302 Page B - 7 of B-9 Rev. 0
- L Walt Thickness Site: Dresden Unrt: 2 Report No :
Profile Sheet faa i~!m%z System:
ftsitlon 0' 90' lW 270' Component ID Number: ~ Q a l A - 2 ~ P ~ R 2 4 Project I.511 4 I* 1.5 ={
mi-lg
\L, 1 LW N/A MA MA Crown Height: &'
2 1.40" N/A N/A N/A
. Crown Wdlh: -1.4" 3 1.4F' N/A WA N/A ELBOW El%
UPST Component DNST Componenk Nominol Diometer 18.4 I 4 141" N/A WA WA I Weld Length: a!zd 4 5 1-43 pri~ w WA FLOWe
- S E E C A L . SUTS h e Er*M P * ~ W A ~
- oS u Ta ~ G C S G O L~are(r\~ 6M t J P ~ ~ a b 4 -a&&. s r
I Drown by:
11 Level:
&4&@2!
Dote:
G&
I GE Reviewed B< Level:
- /,,
Dote:
1 I
See Summary Sheet far stpnoture Utility Review Date:
I See Surnmry Sheet for Signature I ANII Review Dote: 1 0901309.302 Page B - 8 of B Rev. 6 t9 --.
Coverage Calculations:
Upstream Scan (Elbow Side) limited by Whip Restraint located approximately 2.1" upstream of weld. Whip restraiot is not centered mund pipe, with distance fiom pipe to whip restraint ranging from 0.8"to 2.8". Due to this condition, the area from 26.0" cw to 70.0" cw could not be examined.
Axial Upstream Scan: 46.0" of 90.0" of circumference scanned = 51%
Axial Downstream Scan: 90.0" of 90.0" of circumference scanned = 1Wh Clockwise Scan (U/S and D/S): 90.0"of 90.0"of circumference scanned = 100%
Counter-Clockwise Scan (U/S and D/S): 90.0"of 90.0" of circumference scanned = 1W!
Axial Upstream Scan: 51% of 25% = 12.75%
Axial Downstream Scan: 1 W ? of 25%= 25.00%
Clockwise Scan: 100%of 25% = 25.00%
Counter-Clockwise Scan: 100%of 25%= 25.Wh Total coverage achieved = 87.75%
-- 70 "
5.a 14/4/69
+ It-ro9
/tw ll-o-oq I -
&R&&
ott Ericksort &II/Q/MQS Qrwn by: Lwei. Date:
I page 0 of 7 0901309.302 Page B-9 of B-9 Rev. 0
APPENDIX C Dresden Transmittal of Design Input (TODI)09-045, "Hydrogen Water Chemistry Data," dated November 14,2009 0901309.302 Page C-1 of C-3 Rev. 0
Exelan.
SAFETY-RELATED Originating Organization NON-SAFETY-RELATED Station-Unit(s)
System Designation: Dresden Unit g
, Subject Hvdroaen Water Chemisttv Data I h
i d D C R -0 l
Preparer l a &
- Date- I Reviewer Date 1
SrrnCC, Approver f I Status of Information: a ~ ~ ~ r o for v eUse d
Method and Schedule of VeMication for Unverified TODls:
nunverified II Description of Information:
Purpose of Issuance:
Source Documents: 1 Distribution:
0901309.302 Page C-2 of C-3 Rev. 0
EXELON TOMNO.09-04s TRANSMllTAL OF DESIGN INFORMATION r
Page 2 of 2.
Dresden Unit 2 has been operating under Hydrogen Water Chemistry (HWC) since 1983.
NobleChemm was implemented during the fall outage in 1999, and reapplication of NobleChemm was performed in the fall of 2003.
Hydrogen availability over the last two cycles has been between 98.3% and 99.5% at temperatures above 2 0 0 O F . Barring major transients, it is expected that hydrogen availability will be above 98% with a goal of at least 90% during the coming cycle.
The other parameters over the last two cycles were as follows:
ElectrochemicalCorrosion Potential (ECP) was between 491 and -476 mV (SHE), with an inspection relief goal of <-230mV Measured hydrogen to oxygen molar ratio was between 495 and 289, with an inspection relief goal of 4: 1 Reactor dissolved oxygen at 0.3 ppb, with an inspection relief goal of < 5 ppb Average Reactor conductivity between 0.074 and 0.095 pWcm, with an inspection relief goal of
< 0.3 pS/cm Trend of Pt/Rh loading is projected to have sufficient noble chemicals for cycle 22, meeting the inspection relief goal of d.15 pg/cmz. On-Line Noble Chem ( O M )is planned for application to Dresden Unit-:! in 2010 to maintain the Pt/Rh loading.
It is currently expected that Cycle 21 chemistry can be routinely achieved, barring major transients.
Provided the reactor water chemistry can be maintained in Cycle 22 at comparable values to those in Cycle 21, the Hydrogen Water Chemistry & Noble Chemistry (HWCMoble~hem~~) crack growth from BWRVIP-14 are valid and can be utilized.
0901309.302 Page C-3 of C - 3 Rev. 0