ML023600484

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Submittal of Analytical Evaluation of Reactor Pressure Vessel Closure Head Indications
ML023600484
Person / Time
Site: Peach Bottom Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 12/09/2002
From: Gallagher M
Exelon Nuclear
To:
Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML023600484 (59)
v • d • e


Text

Exelkn.

Exelon Nuclear www exeloncorp corn Nuclear 2o0 Exelon Way Kennett Square, PA 19348 December 9, 2002 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington DC 20555 Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 2 Facility Operating License No. DPR- 44 NRC Docket No. 50-277

Subject:

Submittal of Analytical Evaluation of Reactor Pressure Vessel Closure Head Indications

Dear Sir/Madam:

In accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, IWB-3134(b), Exelon Generation Company, LLC, is submitting an analytical evaluation of indications identified in the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS), Unit 2 reactor pressure vessel (RPV) closure head.

As a result of Ultrasonic Testing (UT) examinations conducted during the recently concluded refueling outage at PBAPS, Unit 2, ASME Section Xl reportable indications were identified in a meridional weld of the reactor pressure vessel closure head. The meridional weld is an Examination Category B-A, Item No. B1.22 weld, as identified in ASME Section XI, 1989 Edition (no addenda). The UT examinations were performed in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VIII, 1995 Edition with the 1996 Addenda, using approved Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI) procedures. Analytical evaluation of the reported indications was conducted in accordance with IWB-3600, as allowed by IWB-3132.4.

Periodic Inservice Inspection (ISI) examinations were initially conducted on six (6) meridional welds and one (1) circumferential weld on the vessel closure head and on two (2) meridional welds on the bottom head. As a result of the reportable indications identified in one (1) meridional closure head weld, additional examinations were performed in accordance with ASME Section XI, IWB-2430(a). This additional scope included manual UT examination on four (4) additional meridional welds in the reactor vessel bottom head.

The results of all RPV head weld examinations identified sixteen (16) reportable indications in one (1) weld in the closure head (weld CH-MB). These indications did not meet the ASME Section XI acceptance standards as specified in Table IWB-3510-1. No reportable indications were identified in the other RPV head welds. Based on the analytical evaluation provided in the - Iq-7

PBAPS, Unit 2 - Submittal of Analytical Evaluation of Reactor Pressure Vessel Closure Head Indications Analytical Evaluation December 9, 2002 Page 2 attachment, it is concluded that the indications found in the PBAPS, Unit 2 vessel closure head, during the most recently concluded refueling outage, are acceptable by the flaw acceptance criteria of IWB-3600 of the ASME Section XI Code.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerey Michael P. Gallagher Director, Ucensing and Regulatory Affairs Mid-Atlantic Regional Operating Group Attachment cc: H. J. Miller, Administrator, Region I, USNRC A. C. McMurtray, USNRC Senior Resident Inspector, PBAPS J. Boska, Senior Project Manager, USNRC

GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1 THE EVALUATION OF INDICATIONS IN PEACH BOTTOM UNIT 2 VESSEL CLOSURE HEAD FOR CONTINUED OPERATION September 2002 Prepared by: 5 * /A S. Kleinsmitl, E Structural Mechanics & Materials Verified by: 4 1 .Nb~ Oonnorf H.S. Mehta, Engineering Fellow Structural Mechanics & Materials Approved by: 6z-)7 /,/,

R.M. Horn, Manager Structural Mechanics & Materials i

GENE 0000-0007-9 74 7, Rev. 1 DISCLAIMER OF RESPONSIBILITY Important Notice Regarding the Contents of this Report Please Read Carefully The only undertakings of the General Electric Company (GE) respecting information in this document are contained in the contract between Exelon Corporation and GE, Purchase Order 01026357 Revision 5, effective 8/28/02, as amended to the date of transmittal of this document, and nothing contained in this document shall be construed as changing the contract. The use of this information by anyone other than Exelon Corporation, or for any purpose other than that for which it is furnished by GE, is not authorized; and with respect to any unauthorized use, GE makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, and assumes no liability as to the completeness, accuracy, or usefulness of the information contained in this document, or that its use may not infringe privately owned rights.

Copyright, General Electric Company, 2002.

ii

GENE 0000-0007-9747,Rev. I Table of Contents Subiect Pa2e No.

1. EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

....................................................................................... 1 1.1. R EFEREN CE .................................................................................................................................. 1

2. INTRODUCTION AND REPORT OUTLINE ................................................... 2 2.1. REFERENCE .................................................................................................................................. 2
3. UT INSPECTION RESULTS & FLAW GEOMETRY FOR EVALUATION ........ 4 3.1. UT INSPECTION RESULTS ................................................................................................... 4 3.2. FLAW GEOMETRIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION .................................................... 4 3.3. FABRICATION REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 5 3.4. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 5
4. FRACTURE MECHANICS EVALUATION ..................................................... 12 4.1. ASSUMPTIONS ........................................................................................................................... 12 4.2. APPLIED AND WELD RESIDUAL STRESSES .................................................................. 12 4.3. K CALCULATION METHODOLOGY ................................................................................... 13 4.4. FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH ............................................ 14 4.5. ALLOWABLE K VALUES .............................................. 14 4.6. DISPOSITION OF INDICATIONS .......................................................................................... 15 4.7. REFERENCES .................... ................................... 16
5.

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................. 20 APPEND IX A ..................................................................................................................... A APPENDIX B ............................................................................................................ B iii

I GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I

1. EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

The reactor pressure vessel closure head at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 2 (PBAPS-2) was ultrasonically examined during refueling outage fourteen (2R-14).

Each of the six meridional welds was examined. Several indications were noted at these welds. Other than the CH-MB weld, the detected indications at the other meridional welds were acceptable as-is by the acceptance standards IWB-35 10 of ASME Section XI (1989 Edition without Addenda). At the CH-MB weld numerous recordable indications were noted out of which eighteen (18) indications/flaws displayed tip signals and possessed a through-wall dimension. Sixteen (16) of these flaws did not meet the acceptance standards. The Section XI Code allows for the acceptance of such flaws for continued service if they meet the requirements of Paragraph IWB-3600, Analytical Evaluation of Flaws. The analysis involves the use of fracture mechanics procedures in accordance with Appendix A of Section XI. The objective of this report is to document the results of such evaluation.

The use of surface proximity rules of Section XI indicated that all sixteen (16) indications need to be characterized as surface flaws for the purposes of fracture mechanics evaluation. Two conditions were determined to be governing: bolt-up and system pressure test. The bounding membrane and bending stress values for the fracture mechanics evaluation for the two conditions were obtained through a review of previous stress analyses of the closure heads. The bolt-up temperature was assumed as 70'F [1-1

& 1-2] at a pressure of 0 psi and the pressure test temperature was assumed as 169°F [1 1] with a pressure of 1050 psi [1-1]. The stress intensity factors for the characterized surface flaws were calculated for various flaw depth (a) to flaw length (0) ratios (or, aspect ratios). It was determined that the pressure-test condition was governing. The limiting flaw was found to be acceptable per ASME Section XI Code even after accounting for projected crack growth fori the life of the plant including license renewal (60 total years).

Based on this evaluation it is concluded that all of the indications found in PBAPS-2 vessel closure head during Refueling Outage (2R-14) are acceptable by the flaw acceptance criteria of the ASME Section XI Code.

1.1. REFERENCE

[1-1] Exelon Nuclear, Peach Bottom Unit 2, Surveillance Test Specification ST-O-080 680-2, Rev. 6: Reactor Pressure Vessel (Class 1) Hydrostatic Pressure Test.

[1-2] PECO Energy Company, Peach Bottom Unit 2, Surveillance Test Specification ST-O-080-500-2, Rev. 7: Recording and Monitoring Reactor Vessel Temperature and Pressure.

I

GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I

2. INTRODUCTION AND REPORT OUTLINE The reactor pressure vessel closure head at Peach Bottom, Unit 2 (PBAPS-2) was ultrasonically examined during the 2R14 refueling outage. Figure 2-1 shows the geometry of the vessel head. The inside radius of the head is 125.69 inches and the minimum specified thickness is 4.00 inches [2-1]. However, the measured thickness reported during the UT examination is 4.25 inches, the value used in the evaluations conducted for this report [2-2]. The inside surface of the closure head is unclad.

Meridional welds were examined. Several flaws were noted in the meridional weld CH MB. All of the flaws are not ID connected (i.e. sub surface) as confirmed by surface examination conducted at the ID surface. However, portions of the flaws are less than 0.4d from the ID surface, thus they were classified as surface flaws for fracture mechanics analysis. The observed flaws were first characterized and compared with the acceptance standards provided in Table IWB-3500-1 of Section XI, ASME Code [2-3].

Some of the flaws did not meet the acceptance standards.Section XI, subparagraph IWB-3132.4 allows for the acceptance of such flaws for continued service if they meet the requirements of Paragraph IWB-3600, Analytical Evaluation of Flaws. The analysis involves the use of fracture mechanics procedures in accordance with Appendix A of Reference 2-3. The objective of this report is to document the results of such evaluation.

Section 3 of this report summarizes UT inspection results and describes the flaw geometries considered in the evaluation. The results of the fracture mechanics evaluation are presented in Section 4. A comparison with the allowable flaw values is presented.

Finally, summary and conclusions are presented in Section 5.

2.1. REFERENCE

[2-1] Babcock & Wilcox CO. Pressure Boundary Drawing, "Closure Head Assembly" for Peach Bottom Unit 2, Drawing # 129392 E R7, GE VPF# 1896-67-8.

[2-2] GE Nuclear Energy, Peach Bottom Unit 2 - 2R14 UT Examination Report #

008900 for Weld ID - CH-MB Meridional Weld @ 60 Degrees. September 27, 2002.

[2-3] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, Rules for In-Service Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components, ASME, 1989 Edition without Addenda.

2

q6) 14 0

cn V

Cl Cl V

I-1,

GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I

3. UT INSPECTION RESULTS & FLAW GEOMETRY FOR EVALUATION This section discusses the UT results and the flaw geometries considered in the subsequent fracture mechanics evaluation. Appendix B shows the evaluation sheets for the limiting/bounding case flaws that were found to exceed acceptance standards and required fracture mechanics evaluation. A brief discussion on the origin of the indications is also provided.

3.1. UTINSPECTIONRESULTS Automated 00 L, 2.25 MHz, 45*S, 1.0 MHz, 60'L, 2.0 MHz, 70'L, 2.0 MHz scans were performed on the closure head meridional weld CH-MB. The scans and calibrations were performed in accordance with procedure GE-UT-704 Version 4 DRR#

P3-001, that is qualified to the Performance Demolition Initiative (PDI). All of the detected flaws were sub-surface but in close proximity to the surface, thus they were classified as surface flaws for the analysis [Appendix A & B].

There were sixty-five (65) recordable indications detected in the CH-MB weld.

Eighteen (18) indications displayed tip signals and possessed a through wall dimension.

Forty-seven (47) indications without through wall dimension have been evaluated as being acceptable to the requirements of Table IWB-3510-1 [2-3]. Of the eighteen (18) remaining separate flaws, two (2) of the recorded flaws have been evaluated as being acceptable to the requirements of Table IWB-3510-1 [2-3]. Sixteen (16) of flaws have been evaluated as being rejectable to the requirements of Table IWB-3510-1. These Sixteen (16) flaws are characterized in Table 3-2. The GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheets for each indication can be found in the Appendix A. The GERIS 2000 Indication Evaluation Data Sheets for each flaw can be found in the Appendix B.

Figures 3-1-1 thru 3-1-3 shows the approximate locations of the indications relative to the CH-MB weld centerline.

3.2. FLAW GEOMETRIES CONSIDERED INEVALUATION Table 3-2 shows the criteria used to determine if the indications that are to be evaluated need to be characterized as surface or sub-surface type flaws for the purpose of fracture mechanics analysis. The guidance for this characterization is provided in Article IWA-3000 [2-3]. Figure 3-2 shows the parameters used for surface proximity evaluation.

It is seen in Table 3-2 that all of the indications are to be characterized as surface. In view of the varying aspect ratio (a/), the-stress intensity factors in the next section were calculated for different a/l values: 0.0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, .0.4, and 0.5.

4

GENE 0000-0007-9 74 7, Rev. 1 3.3. FABRICATION REVIEW All the indications in question-are sub surface, in close proximity to the surface and are not service induced, but were 'considered as surface flaws for the fracture mechanics evaluation. A fabrication review (Reference 3-1) concluded the following:

"* The flaws detected during 2R14 have existed since the closure head was fabricated.

"* These flaws do not indicate "abnormal degradation of the pressure boundary" as defined by the USNRC.

"* These flaws should be considered newly discovered flaws, rather than newly developed flaws.

Indications at vessel welds of the type seen in the Peach Bottom Unit 2 top head welds are not uncommon and have been found in other reactor pressure vessel welds in other plants. In most cases, the new finding is attributed to the ability of current UT techniques to detect flaws that would have been undetectable using inspection techniques available during the time of fabrication of the Peach Bottom vessel. Thus, as long as the required fracture margins are demonstrated, the indications are judged to be benign and have no impact on structural integrity.

3.4. REFERENCES

[3-1] Miller, W.F., "Investigation into the Origin of Ultrasonic Indications in RPV Closure Head Welds for the Peach Bottom 2R14 Outage," GE Report No. GENE 955-004-0902 Rev. 1, September 2002.

5

GENE 0000-0007-9747,Rev. I Table 3-1 Listing of Ultrasonic Indications in RPV Closure Head Weld CH MB at Peach Bottom Unit 2 Number of Number of Acceptable per Location Recordable Indications / flaws Table IWB-3510-1 Weld ID Indications with through wall dimension CH-MB 600 Azimuth 65 18 2 (See description (#10 & #39) below)

CH-MB S = 0" IND # 5 Flaw length = 0.75" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" S = 0" IND # 6 Flaw length = 1.00" Flaw depth (a) = 0.20" IND# 10 Flaw length = 0.75" Flaw depth (a) = 0.10" S 00" IND # 14 Flaw length = 1.75" Flaw depth (a) = 0.16" S =0" IND# 16 Flaw length = 3.75" Flaw depth (a) = 0.25" S = 0" IND # 20 Flaw length = 1.25" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" S =0" IND # 24 Flaw length = 1.00" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" S Oi0" IND # 34 Flaw length = 0.75" Flaw depth (a) = 0.16" S = 0" IND #38 Flaw length = 0.75" Flaw depth (a) = 0.19" S =0",

IND #39 Flaw length = 0.40" Flaw depth (a) = 0.16" S = 0" IND #42 Flaw length = 1.75" Flaw depth (a) = 0.19" S = 0" IND # 44 Flaw length = 0.75" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" S =0" IND # 50 Flaw length = 1.00" Flaw depth (a) = 0.12" S =0" IND # 53 Flaw length = 0.75" Flaw depth (a) = 0.14" S = 0"l IND # 56 Flaw length = 1.00" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" S = 0"l IND # 57 Flaw length = 1.00" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" S = 0"l IND #61 Flaw length = 1.00" Flaw depth (a) = 0.12" S = 0"l IND # 63 Flaw length = 1.50" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" S = 0" Note: Values reported are taken directly from Appendix A & B.

6

GENE 0000-0007-974 7, Rev. 1 Table 3-2 Characterization of Flaws Weld ID IND # I (in.) a (in.) S (in.) S<0.4a* all CH-MB 5 0.75 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.2267 CH-MB 6 1.00 0.20 0.0 Yes 0.2 CH-MB 10 0.75 0.10 0.0 Yes 0.1334 CH-MB 14 1.75 0.16 0.0 Yes 0.0914 CH-MB 16 3.75 0.25 0.0 Yes 0.0667 CH-MB 20 1.25 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.136 CH-MB 24 1.00 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.17 CH-MB 34 0.75 0.16 0.0 Yes 0.2133 CH-MB 38 0.75 0.19 0.0 Yes 0.2534 CH-MB 39 0.40 0.16 0.0 Yes 0.4 CH-MB 42 1.75 0.19 0.0 Yes 0.1086 CH-MB 44 0.75 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.2267 CH-MB 50 1.00 0.12 0.0 Yes 0.12 CH-MB 53 0.75 0.14 0.0 Yes 0.1867 CH-MB 56 1.00 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.17 CH-MB 57 1.00 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.17 CH-MB 61 1.00 0.12 0.0 Yes 0.12 CH-MB 63 1.50 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.1134

  • Flaw characterized as surface flaw if S < 0.4a.

7

GENE 0000-0007-974 7, Rev. 1

-..m WELD CENTERLINE I,

Ii UT INDICATIONS WITH NO THROUGH WALL DIMENSION Figure 3-1-1 Plot displaying Approx. Location of Indications with No Throughwall Dimension 8

GENE 0000-0007-9747,Rev. 1

-. WELD CENTERLINE ACCEPTABLE UT INDICATIONS Figure 3-1-2 Plot displaying Approx. Location of Acceptable Indications with Throughwall Dimension 9

I'-PNIT 1fnlfn Mfn7 0747 DV,,

-. u-- WELD CENTERLINE UNA CCEPTABLE UT INDICATIONS Figure 3-1-3 Plot displaying Approx. Location of Unacceptable UT Indications with Throughwall Dimension 10

GENE 0000-0007-9 74 7, Rev. 1 Figure 3-2 Parameters for Surface Proximity Evaluation 11

GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I

4. FRACTURE MECHANICS EVALUATION The fracture mechanics evaluation was conducted for several surface flaw shape geometries using the procedures outlined in Appendix A of Section XI [4-1]. Two conditions were found to be limiting for the determination of allowable flaw sizes: (1) bolt-up, and (2) system pressure test.

4.1. ASSUMPTIONS The following values were used for the pressure and temperature conditions during the bolt-up and system pressure test conditions. These values remain unchanged for power uprate conditions, but can change when new PT curves are licensed.

  • The bolt-up temperature is 70'F [4-2 & 4-3].
  • The pressure test pressure and temperature are 1050 psi and 169°F [4-4].
  • The limiting RTNDT value for the closure head side plate (torus) region is 10'F.

[4-3]

The number of bolt-up, pressure test and start up-shut down events assumed in the fatigue crack growth calculation was based on [Reference 4-5], and is discussed in Subsection 4.4.

4.2. APPLIEDAND WELD RESIDUAL STRESSES The applied stresses in the vessel closure head to flange region are primarily from the following sources: bolt preload, internal pressure and weld residual stress. The internal pressure is zero during the bolt-up. Since all of the flaws are in the meridional direction welds, the circumferential or hoop stress is of interest for the purpose of this evaluation. Due to the complex geometry of the flange region, only a detailed finite element analysis of PBAPS Unit 2 closure head geometry can provide a complete picture of the stress distribution due to bolt-up and internal pressure. Since such an analysis was unavailable, the results from finite element analyses conducted for other BWR vessels of similar size on file with GENE were reviewed to conservatively determine a set of membrane and bending stresses. The determination took into account the differences in the R/t ratios between the available finite element model geometry and the PBAPS, Unit 2 closure head geometry.

During bolt-up large hoop bending stresses are introduced in the head near the flange junction but they attenuate rapidly as one moves away from the flange meridionally. These bending stresses are compressive at the ID surface near the flange junction. The hoop membrane stress is tensile but attenuates less rapidly. The longest 12

GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1 flaw extends 3.75 inches in the meridional direction beginning approximately 41 inches above the top surface of the flange. Therefore, the hoop membrane and bending stress distributions corresponding to the meridional length of this indication were reviewed to determine the following conservative values for hoop membrane and bending stresses:

am= 14.0 ksi 9b = -8.0 ksi During the pressure test, the internal pressure stresses are superimposed over those induced by the bolt-up condition. Since some of the discontinuity related internal pressure stresses cancel those due to bolt-up, the overall stress level is lower than the simple addition of the bolt-up and the nominal pressure stresses in the vessel head. The same approach as that used for bolt-up case was also used to determine the following set of conservative membrane and bending stress values for the pressure test case:

am = 25.0 ksi Ub = 0 ksi It should be noted that the nominal value of hoop or meridional stress from an internal pressure of 1050 psi is 15.5 ksi. Thus, the difference between this value and the 25.0 ksi reported above represents the discontinuity effects from bolt-up and pressurization.

After the torus section plates are welded together, residual stresses remain due to thermal expansion and contraction. The post-weld heat treatment effectively reduces these residual stresses. A bending stress of 8.0 ksi was assumed in this analysis to model the remaining residual stresses. This bending stress closely approximates the measured cosine stress distribution for welds with PWHT reported in [Reference 4-6]. The 8 ksi magnitude was added algebraically to the calculated bending stresses due to bolt-up and pressure. Figures 4-1 and 4-2 graphically show the stress distributions used for the bolt up and pressure test cases, respectively.

4.3. K CALCULA TIONMETHODOLOGY Since all of the analyzed indications have been characterized as surface flaws (Table 3-2), the stress intensity factor (K) calculation procedures specified for surface flaws in Appendix A of Section XI [4-1] were used. Table 4-1 shows the calculated values of K as a function of 'a' values for the pressure test cases for an assumed aspect ratio of 0.0. Similar calculations were also conducted for aspect ratios of 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5.

13

GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I 4.4. FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH Since all the flaws are characterized as surface flaws, they are assumed as being exposed to the reactor water environment. Thus, the crack growth analysis was performed using the Section XI fatigue crack growth rates for water environment.

The current analyzed reactor pressure vessel cycles for the 40-year design life are listed in [Reference 4-5]. Only the bolt-up (66), hydrostatic test (130) and heatup cooldown (161) events are significant from the perspective of fatigue crack growth in the vessel closure head. The stress range for the heatup-cooldown cycle is bounded by that for the pressure test, and therefore, the cycles for the two events were lumped together for the fatigue crack growth calculation purposes. The number of cycles for these events were increased by 50% to account for operation during the license renewal period. Thus, the number of events assumed for the bolt-up were 66xl.5 or 100. The number of events assumed for the pressure test were {(130+161)xl.5} or - 440. This approach is conservative since it does not take any credit for the number of cycles already used so far. The highest applied K values listed in Tables 4-2 and 4-3 were used for the fatigue crack growth calculations. The predicted crack growth was calculated as 56.2 micro inches per cycle. Which results in a crack growth of 0.025" for 440 cycles.

4.5. ALLOWABLE K VALUES The first step in the allowable flaw calculation is to determine the Kia value at the temperature appropriate for the operating condition being analyzed. The 1989 version of Section XI [4-1] does not provide an explicit mathematical equation for the calculation of Kia at a given temperature and RTNDT. However, Reference 4-7 gives the following equation that was used to calculate the KIa curve given in Figure A-4200-1[4-1]:

Kia = 26.78 + 1.233

  • Exp ( 0.0145 * ( T - RTNDT + 160))

where, T and RTNDT are in 'F and Kia is in ksi4in.

Paragraph IWB-3613 of Section XI [4-1] also indicates that for flange region a safety factor of 42 can be used for bolt-up condition. Thus, a safety factor of 42 was used for the bolt-up condition to obtain KIa allowable. For the pressure test condition, a safety factor of 410 was used as specified in IWB-3613[4-1]. The following summarizes the numerical values:

14

GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1 Bolt-up Applied K = 14.3 (ksi 4lin ) at 0 (psi) and 70 ('F)

Allowable K = 40.1 (ksi qin )

Pressure test Applied K = 34.8 (ksi 'uin) at 1050 (psi) and 169 ('F)

Allowable K = 48.3 (ksi 4 in) at 1050 (psi) and 169 ('F) 4.6. DISPOSITIONOFINDICATIONS Tables 4-2 and 4-3 show comparisons of the K values for the limiting flaw being evaluated and the allowable values for bolt-up and pressure test conditions, respectively.

It is seen that the calculated K values for all of the indications are less than the allowable values.

The calculated primary stresses after subtracting the area lost to indications, satisfied the primary stress limits specified in the original Code of construction for the reactor vessel.

Based on the preceding, it is concluded that the subject flaws are acceptable for continued operation in as-is condition.

15

GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I 4.7. REFERENCES

[4-1] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, Rules for In-Service Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components, ASME, 1989 Edition without Addenda.

[4-2] PECO Energy Company, Peach Bottom Unit 2, Surveillance Test Specification ST-O-080-500-2, Rev. 7: Recording and Monitoring Reactor Vessel Temperature and Pressure.

[4-3] L. Tilly, "Pressure-Temperature Curves for Exelon Peach Bottom Unit 2" GE Nuclear Energy, San Jose, CA, GE-NE-B13-02118-00-01 Rev. 0, September 2002.

[4-4] Exelon Nuclear, Peach Bottom Unit 2, Surveillance Test Specification ST-O-080 680-2, Rev. 6: Reactor Pressure Vessel (Class 1) Hydrostatic Pressure Test.

[4-5] PECO Energy Company, Peach Bottom Unit 2, Surveillance Test Specification ST-O-080-940-2, Rev. 6: Reactor Pressure Vessel Transients Cycles Record.

[4-6] D.A. Ferrill, et al, "Measurement of Residual Stresses in Heavy Weldment,"

Welding Journal Research Supplement, Vol 45, Nov. 1966.

[4-7] EPRI Report No. NP-719-SR, "Flaw Evaluation Procedures: ASME Section XI,"

August 1978.

16

GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I Table 4-1 Calculated K values for Pressure test Cases Calculation of Stress Intensities (ksi-sqrt[in])

0.25 (in) 4.25 (in)

I= 3.75 (in) UYS = 45.0 (ksi) am = 25.0 (ksi) *b = 8.0 (ksi)

Ap a/i Q Mm Mb Km Kb KToTAL AK (psi) (ksi) (ksi) (ksi) (ksi) 1050 0.0 0.879 1.147 1.057 27.100 7.991 35.091 27.100 1050 0.1 0.989 1.117 1.016 24.889 7.242 32.131 24.889 1050 0.2 1.212 1.105 0.985 22.236 6.340 28.577 22.236 1050 0.3 1.521 1.10 0.963 19.740 5.538 25.277 19.740 1050 0.4 1.904 1.10 0.953 17.660 4.896 22.556 17.660 1050 0.5 2.356 1.10 0.937 15.880 4.329 20.209 15.880 17

GENE 0000-0007-9747,Rev. I Table 4-2 Comparison of Calculated and Allowable K values for bolt-up Weld ID: CH MB IND #: 16 a (initial) = 0.25 (in) 4.25 (in) 1= 3.75 (in) Gy5 = 45.0 (ksi) am = 14.0 (ksi) Yb= 0.0 (ksi)

TEMP = 70 (OF) Ap = 0 (psi) a/l= 0.067 Applied K = 13.6 (ksi q/in) Assumes no crack growth Applied K = 14.3 (ksi 4in) Includes an increase of 5%

to account for fatigue crack growth Allowable K = 40.1 (ksi-qin)

Table 4-3 Comparison of Calculated and Allowable K values for pressure tests Weld ID: CH-MB IND#: 16 A (initial) = 0.25 (in) 4.25 (in)

I= 3.75 (in) 'ys = 45.0 (ksi)

CYm = 25.0 (ksi) Gb = 8.0 (ksi)

TEMP= 169 (OF) 1050 (psi) a/l= 0.067 Applied K = 33.2 (ksi 4in ) Assumes no crack growth Applied K = 34.8 (ksi 'lin ) Includes an increase of 5%

to account for fatigue crack growth Allowable K = 48.3 (ksihin) 18

GENE 0000-000 7-9 74 7, Rev. I BE]LTUP LOAD CONDITION WELD RESIDUAL STRESS, 80 KSI MEMBRANE STRESS, 14.0 KSI BENDING STRESS, 80 KSI-0I ID OlD t

Figure 4-1 Through-Wall Stress Distribution Assumed for Bolt-up Condition PRESSURE TEST LOAD CONDITION WELD RESIDUAL STRESS, 80 KSI MEMBRANE STRESS, 250 KSI (PRESSURE TEST AND B!LTUP)-ý, V U

ID O]D t

Figure 4-2 Through-Wall Stress Distribution Assumed for Pressure Test Condition 19

GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1

5.

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS The reactor pressure vessel closure head at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 2 (PBAPS-2) was ultrasonically examined during refueling outage fourteen (2R-14).

Each of the six meridional welds was examined. Several indications were noted at these welds. Other than the CH-MB weld, the detected indications at the other meridional welds were acceptable as-is by the acceptance standards IWB-3510 of ASME Section XI (1989 Edition without Addenda). At the CH-MB weld numerous recordable indications were noted out of which eighteen (18) indications/flaws displayed tip signals and possessed a through-wall dimension. Sixteen (16) of these flaws did not meet the acceptance standards. The Section XI Code allows for the acceptance of such flaws for continued service if they meet the requirements of Paragraph IWB-3600, Analytical Evaluation of Flaws. The analysis involves the use of fracture mechanics procedures in accordance with Appendix A of Section XI. The objective of this report is to document the results of such evaluation.

The use of surface proximity rules of Section XI indicated that all sixteen (16) indications need to be characterized as surface flaws for the purposes of fracture mechanics evaluation. Two conditions were determined to be governing: bolt-up and system pressure test. The bounding membrane and bending stress values for the fracture mechanics evaluation for the two conditions were obtained through a review of previous stress analyses of the closure heads. The bolt-up temperature was assumed as 701F at a pressure of 0 psi and the pressure test temperature was assumed as 169°F with a pressure of 1050 psi. The stress intensity factors for the characterized surface flaws were calculated for various flaw depth (a) to flaw length (0)ratios (or, aspect ratios). It was determined that the pressure-test condition was governing. The limiting flaw was found to be acceptable per ASME Section XI Code even after accounting for projected crack growth for the life of the plant including license renewal (60 total years).

Based on this evaluation it is concluded that all of the indications found in PBAPS-2 vessel closure head during Refueling Outage (2R-14) are acceptable by the flaw acceptance criteria of the ASME Section XI Code.

20

GENE 0000-0007-9747,Rev. 1 APPENDIX A GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheets Rev 1 September 2002 (Includes 2 Appended Pages September 27, 2002)

A

2 Keck 717 456 4151 P.

Sep 27 02 11:31a Richard GE NUCLEAR ENERGY UTEXAMINATION

SUMMARY

SHEET Report No:008900 PROJECT Peach Bottom Unit 2 - 2R14 WELD ID: CH-MB Meridional Weld @ 60 Degrees SYSTEM: RPV- Closure Head INITIAL CALIBRATION: VES.IN.1 FINAL CALIBRATION: VES.OUT.1 GERIS DATA: mbl.1, mbl.2, mbl.3. mbl.4, mbr.1, mbr.2 EXAMINERS: CE Frakes Lv II, Shane Gauthier Lv II, Mark Hilbom Lv II MANUAL DATA: RPV-024. RPV-026 EXAMINERS: C. Minor Lv. Ill.

MAGNETIC PARTICLE: MT-016 EXAMINERS: Steve Woodward Lv II Section XI, 1989 Edition No Ultrasonic examination results were unacceptable to the requirements of ASME B&PVC Addenda, Category B-A Welds.

with procedure GE-UT Automated O0L, 45"S, 60"RL. and 70"RL scans and calibrations were performed in accordance 704 Version 4.

weld H9 for a Automated scanning was performed from the OD surface, examining the top and bottom sides of along the weld length and are There were sixty five (65) recordable indications. The indications are located intermittently aligned with the fusion line.

(16) of the recorded Eighteen (18) indications displayed tip signals and possessed a through wall dimension. Sixteen evaluated as being unacceptable to the requirements of Table IWB-3510-1. Two (2) of the Indications have been to the requirements of Table IWB-3510-1.

recorded indications have been evaluated as being acceptable as being acceptable to The remaining forty seven (47) indications without through wall dimension have been evaluated the requirements of Table IWB-351 0-1.

the location did not.

Baseline examination results were reviewed, the number and lengths of indications changed but with GE-MT-1 00 Magnetic particle examinations were performed on the weld CH-MB Inside surface in accordance Revision V3. No recordable indications were found.

Rev. 7. No A visual V17-3 examination was performed on the weld CH-MB inside surface in accordance with MAG-CG-407 recordable Indications were found.

was performed In Supplemental manual ultrasonic examination of selected areas of the internal surface of weld CH-MB for ID detection or accordance with PDI-UT-7 Rev. E Addenda-01. PDI-UT-7 used for Information only, not qualified sizing. No near surface indications were found.

Due to scan limitations it not possible to examine 100% of the ASME code required area.

Auto UT composite coverage = 93.1%

RL=AEWED BY UTLIITY REVIEW INil REVIEW PREPARED BY PEACH BOTTOM PACE OF

3 456 4151 P.

Richard Keck 717 Sep 25 02 O5:O8P E GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Data Sheet Exam Data Sheet: b.

Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 PatchID: mbl.3 Weld ID: CH-M_.B Direction : 270 Channel: 2 Angle : 45 Search Unit J J Jm i. M Uf.11W~I I nrwth R Comments In d P A M P. A F - u - - . .. . .

9.64 12% 135.28 9.89 NIA 0.50 0.00 1

10.14 11.64 2 15% 13553 12.14 N/A 1.00 0.00 12.64 12.39 3 13% 137.28 12.39 N/A 025 0.00 12.64 12.64 12.64 N/A -025 0.00 4 13% 137.03 12.89 1889 64% 136.78 19.14 0.17 0.75 000 5

It 1964 20.39 35 20% 137.03 2089 N/A 0.75 0.00 21.14

. 9 comments::

Comments Analyst:-L,3K*).', - Reviewed By: 4_*--A-' L*

Level: Z Date: *-,2 Level: V Date: - \2-! jj "

P82-CH-MB-Data 2R14.xds

4 Keck 717 456 4151 p.

Sep 25 02 05:08p Richard (fin) GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Data Sheet Exam Data Sheet: mbl I Project: Peach Boltom 2 - 2R14 PatchID: mbl.1 Weld ID: :H-M Channel: 2 Angle: 45 Direction: 270 Search Unit

,..s s

  • V V ThnWIl 1 nnlh S Comments MIu it 11111. . ________

20.39 6 84% 137.28 2089 020 1.00 0.00 21.39 22.39 ..

7 13% 137.53 2290 N/A 0.75 0100 23.14 24.14 8 26% 137.28 24.14 NIA 0.75 000 24.89 2814 9 18% 136-28 28.29 N/A 0.75 000 28.89 29.14 10 12% 137.53 29.64 0.10 0.75 0.00 ..

29.89 ._

30.14 11 12% 139.29 30.14 N/A 0.50 000 30.64 ..

32.14 12 11% 138.29 32.14 NIA 050 0.00 ..

32.64 Comments:

Analyst -0 X .* -"...-- Reviewed By.- . 0 3

L. t-!'L ._

Level: Date: 9-.1 1 o' Level: L Date: I 1~ o.

PB2-CH-MB-Data 2R14 xAs

PB2-CH-MB-Data 2R14 xAs 0

GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Exam Data Sheet:

Patch rnbU.

ID: mbl.1 Project: Peach Bottom 2-2R14 Weld ID: CH-MB Direcion: 27M Channel: 2 Angle : 45 Search Unit X Y Len S Comments Ind 0 Am.

3489 0.00 17% 13603 35.14 N/A 0.75 13 3564 36.64 0.00 136.53 37.64 0.16 1.75 14 24%

3839 40.14 0.00

--15 __14'%/ 137.78 40.64 NIA 0.75 4089 41.64 0.25 3.75 0.00 16 76% 137.28 44.4 45.39 4-5.14 NIA 0.75 0.00

-- 17 13% 133 03 45.39 45 89 t48.14 0.75 0O00 34% 137.53 48.39 NIA 18 48.89 50.64 137.78 52.14 N/A 2.50 19 187%A 53.14 Reviewed By:

- Date; "'1

.1-2 0 '-"

Level: _

Level:

  • Date. c-,l -

PB2.CH-MB-Data 2R14 xis

717 456 4151 p. 5 Sep 25 02 05:08p Richard Keck GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Exam Data Sheet:

Patch mbt I ID: mb:

Project: Peach Bottom 2- 2R14 Weld ID : C B Direction: M Channel: 2 Angle : 45 Search Unit X y ThruWall Len 117 S Comments Ind # ArT .

52.39 20 22 135.78 53.39 0.17 1 25 5364 0.007 55.14 31 56.14 N/A 1.50 000i 21 137.28

- N56 64 55.14 17% 135.78 55.30 N/A 0.50 Goo I 22 55.64 57.89 23 31% 13553 58.39 N/A 1.00 58.89 58.39 0.00 24 41% 13707 58.89 017 1.00 5939 58.89 1.75 0.00 137.28 60.14 NA 6064 I

Reviewed By:

Level: I_%_%,__ Date:-~ 2 oZ pBz-CH-MS-Data 2R14 x13

9 Keck 717 456 4151 P.

Sep 25 02 05:O9p Richard E GERIS 2000 Indication SGE Nuclear Energy Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Exam Data Sheet: mbl2 Weld ID: CH-MB Patch ID : mbl 2 Channel: 2 Angle : 45 Direction : 270 Search Unit Ind# Ae X Y ThruWaf1 Length S Comments 1 63.64 28 20%1O 137.78 63.89 NIA 0.25 00 63.89 67.89 27 12% 139.04 68.39 N/A 0.75 000 6864 73.14 28 15% 138.04 73.39 N/A 0.75 000 73.89 74.89 29 76% 138 04 75.14 N/A 0.75 0.00 7564 76.89 30 143% 138.04 77.39 NIA 1.25 0.00 78.14 7- - -- K 82.64 31 91% 138.54 83.14 N/A 2.25 0.00 84.89 87.14 32 156% 138.79 87.89 NIA 1 00 0.00

.0 88.14 0, mi rl ommonts.:

Analyst."L , , Reviewed By:

Level. . Date: 1/4' 2- Level: I Date: "1 -

PB2-CH-MB-D2t2 2R14 xkr

717 456 4151 p. 10 25 02 05:09p Richard Keck Sep GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2- 2R14 Exam Data Sheet:

Patch mb__22 ID: mbl Weld ID; CH-MB Direction: 27.0 Channel: 2 Angle: 45 Search Unit V Thru Wa II Length_ v Comments Ind # Amp. X S 8989 0.00 139.29 90.14 NIA 2.05 33 64%

91.94 91.89 92.14 0.16 0.75 0.00 34 53% 139.0 I i Reviewed By: ý- _ *-, *e*

Level: -__U - D.te. --J__

PB2-CH-MB-Oata 2R14 xAs

1 1 Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.

Sep 25 02 05:09pd GENuclearEnergy GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Exam Data Sheet:

PatchID : mbt.4 Weld lD: CH-MB Channel: 2 Angle: 45 Direction : 270 Search Unit IndU m x Y ThruWafl Lenoth S Comments 5.39 35 18% 137.03 564 N/A 0.50 000 5 89 Comments" Analyst: at -r%-- R Levtewed By: te * '

Level 77~Z--.. Date: '~-!F-- Level: ----- Date: 'I e~RI -

PB2-CH-M B-Data 2R14 xts

12 717 456 4151 p.

Sep 25 02 05:lOp Richard Keck GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R1 4 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.2 Weld ID: CH-MB PatchID: mbr2 Channel: 2 Angle: 45 Direction : 270 Search Unit l A,,.ri V V ThniWnII Leneith S Comments

_______ ~~~~11.11 ____ ____ _____________________

37 15% 125.90 11.36 N/A 0.50 0.00 11.61 18.36 38 45% 127.96 18.61 0.19 0.75 D.00 19.11 21.86 39 31% 127.46 22.11 0.16 0.40 0.00 22.26 25.36 40 31% 12571 2561 NIA 0.50 000 2586 31.61 41 31% 126.21 32.61 N/A 1.50 000 33.11 3461 42 29% 12596 35.11 0.19 1.75 0.00 3636 39.11 43 20% 127.21 39 11 N/A 0.25 0.00 39.36 PB7-CH-MR-1)ata 2R14 xs

Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.6 Sep 25 02 05:08p GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Exam Data Sheet:

Patch ID: mbr.2 Project: Peach Bottom 2--2B14 Weld ID::-MB Direction: 27.0 Channel: 2 Angle: 45 Search Unit ThruWall Len th S Comments Ind # X Y 40.36 0.17 075 0.o0__

44 45% T128.22 40.61 41.11 41.36 1.00 0.00 45 414 128.22 41.86 NIA 42.36 4286 0.50 0.00 46 20% 128.47 42.86 N/A 43.36 45.86 0.75 0.00 47 34% 28.22 46.11 NIA 4661 Reviewed By:

Level: A Date: 5 ! 7 .-- ci..

PB2-CH-MB-Datm 2R14 A5

1 3 717 456 4151 p.

25 02 05:1Op Richard Keck Sep GENularEeryGERIS 2000 Indication GE Ncler EnrgyData Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.1 PatchID : mbr.1 Weld ID :

Channel: 2 Angle: 45 Direction : 27M Search UnitV Thri WA*l len l-JJ A.....

S Comments l48.11 9w Am.__81 48 131% 128.97 48.61 N/A 0.75 0.00 48.86 49.36 49 143% 128.72 4961 N/A 1.00 000 5036 49.86 50 37% 126.96 50.61 0.12 1.00 0,00 50.86 53.61 51 143% 128.47 53.86 N/A 0.75 0 00 54.36 56.11 52 45% 127.21 56.61 NIA 075 000 56.86 56.36 63 37% 128.97 5661 0.14 0.75 0.00 57.11 60.11 54 18% 127.46 6086 N/A 1.00 000 61.11 L*O nlrr/nLb*

Commenw f=

Analyst;ov 1 - Reviewed By: ,

Level.~ Date- 13A Level .AL~ Date: '-(z o2.

P82-CH-MB-Data 2R14 x~s

Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.3 Sep 27 02 11:31a GENcerEeg GERIS 2000 Indication GE Ncler EnrgyData Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Exam Data Sheet:

Patch ID: mbr.1 mbr.1 Weld ID: CH-MB Channel: g Angle: 45 Direction: 270 Search Unit n--JJ%, V T'hr,,WdI nnl t S Comments 61.10 55 22% 129.47 61.36 NIA 0.51 0.00 61.61 72.61 56 100%'/ 129.71 73.10 0.17 1.00 000 73.61 74.61 57 109% 129.47 75.11 0.17 1.00 000 75.61 80.11 58 70% 129.22 80.61 N/A 1.25 0.00 81.36 81.61 59 45% 129.72 82.11 N/A 0.75 0.00 82.36 8411 45% 12947 84.11 NIA 0.50 0.00 60 84.61 84.61 61 171% 128.97 85.11 0.12 1.00 000 85.61 Comments: None R By: t' By:eved 1 "-14 Analyst:

Level: -7 Date, Level. _ Date: Cl l PB2-CH-MO-Data 2R14 xis z PEACH R 1. BOTTOM .

PAGE .J.Q..O - F .OF .....

717 456 4151 p.8 Sep 25 02 05:0Sp Richard Keck E GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Data Sheet Exam Data Sheet: mbr.1 Project: Peach gottom 2- 2R14 Patch ID: mbr I Weld ID::IM8 Channel: 2 Angle: 45 Direction : 270 Search Unit 'p

  • j4ffJ m-U I

,.*h h CCm Comments et Mna .4 . A ."! y 0 . I ,,,9U 62 84% 129.22 87.86 N/A 0.50 0.00 88.11 88.61 63 26% 128.72 8936 0.17 -150 000 90.11

_9286 64 24% 127.46 9336 NWA 0.75 000 9361 I I I I I I_ _ _ _ I - I-__ - iI I I____

______ I I ____II___I Comments:

Level: " Date: 'I 1-2'"-- /11Y2-Level.-,,a Date- ___k__k__

PB2-CH-MB-Data 2R14 As

717 456 4151 p. 14 Sep 25 02 05:10p Richard Keck SGE NuclearEnergy GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Proaint- Pe~ne~h Rnltnrm 9..9*14 - .... ..

Weld ID: CH-MB ,xam vata Sheet: nbr.1 Patch ID: mbr.1 Channel: 4 Angle: 45 Direction : 270 Search Unit Ind # Am. X Y ThA ru Wall Lenath 127.51 65 26% 12802 9225 NIA 1.00 000 128 52

,CO'mments:

2 -Analysta_2R_4 _s Reviewed By:

Leel~Date. ______Level: Date. II2 ~

PB-CH-M B-Data 2R14 AiS

I-GENE 0000-0007-9747,Rev. I APPENDIX B GERIS 2000 Indication Evaluation Data Sheets Rev 1 September 2002 (Includes 2 New Pages September 27, 2002)

B

717 456 4151 p.15 Sep 25 02 05:lOp Richard Keck 1*

GERIS 2000 Indication (aGE NuclearEnerav EvaluationData Sheet I

Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbl.3 Sizing Data Sheet: nla Weld ID: CH-MB Indication: 5 7r nominal = 4.25 Flaw Throughwall Dimension= 0-170 "T" measured 4 30 Flaw Length "1/= 0.75 Clad '"Tnominal N/A Surface Separation 'S" = 0 00 ASME Section XI, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" all Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

000 1.9 20 0.05 20 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5 015 2-5 2.9 020 2.8 3.3 3.07 3 57

0.25 3.3 3.8 030 38 - 44 035 44 5.1 040 5.0 5.8 045 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.6 Allowed Allowed 3.07 000 0.170 a/l value = 0.227 y= 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed alt = 3.07%

at = 3.95%

Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.

Comments: None Data Review By:'  ?'.j4 / ',.-L-d-" Reviewed By:

Level:

  • Date: f.,,..Z -0Z...

, Level: "7'- Date-EIXMOSAV776tO

Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.111 Sep 25 02 05:10p GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Eneray EvaluationData Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet; mbl.1 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing DataSheet: n/a Indication: 6 Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0 200 "T" nominal = 4.25 FlawLength "I"= 1.00 "T" measured= 4.30 Surface Separation"S' - 0.00 Clad " nominal= NIA ASME Section Xl, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" a/[ Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

0.00 1.9 20 -

005 2.0 22 -

0.10 2.2 2.5 -

0.15 25 29 -

0.20 2.8 3.3 280 3.30 Y 025 3.3 38 -

030 38 44 -

035 4.4 5.1 -

040 50 58 -

045 5.1 6.7 -

050 52 7.6 -

Allowed Allowed 2.80 000 al= 0.200 a/1 value 0200 Y= 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed aft = 2.80%

alt = 4.65%

Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-351 0-1.

Comments: None Data Review By"La 49iO A-,,,.,- Reviewed By I

Level: . Date: 9F-2.L-OA L. Level ________ Date: '~

LXWO,4 V 7 7SIM -a-d

17 Keck 717 456 4151 p.

Sep 25 02 05:11p Richard GERIS 2000 Indication Evaluation Data Sheet S GE Nuclear Enemy

_______________________________________________ .1_________________________________________________________________________________

Exam DataSheet: mbl.1 Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Sizing DataSheet: n/a Weld ID: CH-MB Indication: 14 "T"nominal = 4.25 Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0.160 "T" measured= 4.30 "FlawLength l'1 1.75 Clad "T- nominal = NIA Surface Separation"S' - 0.00 ASME Section XI, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE iWB-351 0-1 for 4" to 12" a= 0.160 a/l value - 0091 Y= 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed alt = 2.17%

at = 3.72%

,- 4 Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.

Comments: None.

Reviewed By: Date: '

Data Review By Level: -2..Z7--.. Date: 7-22Level. ~ ~~ Date: 917 r-> Z...

1XAWS4 'V7 7.W

717 456 4151 p.18 Sep 25 02 05:11p Richard Keck Y

GERIS 2000 Indication Evaluation Data Sheet 0 GE NuclearEnergy

_____________________________________ I Exam Data Sheet: mbl.1 Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Weld ID: CH-MB Indication: 10 "T- nominal = 4.25 Flaw ThroughwallDimension = 0.100 "T"measured= 4.30 Flaw Length "I = 0.75 Clad "T" nominal - N/A Surface Separation "S" - 0 00 ASME Section XI, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" a/l Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

000 1.9 20 005 2.0 22 2.5 2.40 2.77 Y 0.10 2.2 0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 33 025 33 38 -

030 38 44 -

0.35 4.4 5.1 -

0.40 5.0 5.8 -

0.45 51 67 050 52 7.6 -

Allowed Allowed 2.40 0c00 a 0.100 a/l value = 0.133 y= 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t = 2A0%

ai = 2.33%

Flaw is acceptable by Table IWB-351 0-1.

Comments: None.

Data Review By. Date *- , 6 - R Reviewed By:

Level: Date: 9  ;? Level: ______ Date: ~ V~

ECAM-S4V7?Z5=,

1 9 Richard Keck 717 45G 4151 p.

Sep 25 02 05:11p GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Enery Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbl.1 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: Na Indication: 16 Flaw ThroughwaliDimension = 0.250 "T" nominal = 4.25 FlawLength "J"= 3.75 "" measured = 4.30 Surface Separation S' = 0.00 Clad -T" nominal= NIA ASME Section Xl, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-35t0-1 for4" to 12" a/l Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

0.00 1.9 2.0 -

0.05 2.0 2.2 2.07 2.30 Y 0.10 2.2 2.5 -

0.15 2.5 29 -

020 2.8 33 -

025 3.3 38 -

0.30 3.8 4.4 -

035 44 51 -

0.40 50 5.8 -

0.45 5.1 6.7 -

050 5.2 7.6 -

Allowed Allowed 207 000 a= 0250 a/I value = 0.067 Y = 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed aft = 2.07%

aft= 5.81%

3 e*

Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-351 0-1.

Comments: None.

Data Review By:"77T

'.-, Date: Reviewed By:- 4te x -

Level: - 7 Date: V?-.x -0 A-- Level: Date: cI -2J-%Z cýZ_

IMIIN4ff*

I *L*I EXAU-DSG4V.7 7,*o

717 456 4151 p. 20 Sep 25 02 05:11p Richard Keck GERIS 2000 Indication Evaluation Data Sheet GE NuclearEnerv_

Exam Data Sheet: mbl.1 Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Weld ID : CH-MB Indication: 20 "T" nominal - 4.25 Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0.170 "T-measured 4.30 FlawLength "1"= 1.25 Clad T" nominal = N/A Surface Separation "S"- 0.00 ASME Section XI, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-t for 4" to 12" 0.170 0.136 a/1 value =

y= 0000 Flaw IsSurface Allowed a/t = 2.42%

att - 3.95%

Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.

Comments: None.

/'- , Reviewed By: * ,£ V---_

Data Review By:* *-

Date. P',2 o,--Level: Date:

Level: _.* ---

Keck 717 456 4151 p.l21 Sep 25 02 05:11p Richard GERIS 2000 Indication GE NuclearEnergy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 - Exam Data Sheet: mbl.1 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication : 24 Flaw ThroughwallDimension = 0.170 "T" nominal= 4 25 FlawLength "1'= 1.00 "T" measured= 4.30 Surface Separation "S"= 0.00 Clad "" nominal= N/A ASME Section XI, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE WVB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" al Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

000 19 2.0 -

005 20 2.2 - ~

0.10 2.2 2.5 -

015 25 2.9 262 3 06 Y 0.20 2.8 3.3 -

025 33 38 -

030 38 4.4 -

035 44 5.1 -

040 50 5.8 -

045 5.1 6.7 -

050 52 7.6 -

Allowed Allowed 2.62 000 al 0.170 a/n value= 0.170 y= 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed aft = 2.62%

a/t 3.95%

Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.

Comments: None.

',.,.,_. ,..-- Reviewed By. ., ,, '

Data Review By:

Level:

  • Date. ?- ;t --.... Level: - Date: '1. a'L(Z

2 Rzchard Keck 717 456 4151 p.22 Sep 25 02 05:1 p GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy EvaluationData Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbL.2 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 34 Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0.160 "T" nominal= 4.25 FlawLength '1"- 0.75 "T measured= 4.30 Surface Separation "S"= 0.00 Clad "Tnominal= NIA ASME Section Xl, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" all Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

0.00 19 20 -

0.05 2.0 2.2 -

010 22 25 -

0.15 2.5 2.9 -

020 2.8 33 2.93 343Y 025 3.3 3.8 -

030 3.8 44 -

035 4.4 5.1 -

0.40 5.0 5.8 -

0.45 5.1 6.7 -

0.50 52 7.6 -

Allowed Allowed 293 000 a ,0.160 a/l value = 0.213 Y= 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t 2.93%

a24 3.72%

. . p Flaw is unacceptabte by Table IWB-3510-1.

Comments: None.

Data Review By Reviewed By.

Level: -.. 2--- Date: '--7-~. Level._____ Date: i-ŽO  ?

- 75=

-yO4V

2 3 2 717 456 4151 p.

Sep 25 02 05:1 p Richard Keck

_ _ _ _ GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy EvaluationData Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.2 Weld ID : CH-MB Sizing DataSheet: n/a Indication : 38 Flaw Throughwall Dimension= 0.190 "T" nominal= 4.25 Flaw Length "I"= 0 75 "T-measured= 4.30 Surfaco Saparation 'S" = 0 00 Clad " nominal = N/A ASME Section X1, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4- to 12" afl Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

000 1.9 2.0 -

0.05 2.0 2.2 -

0.10 2.2 2.5 -

015 25 29 -

0.20 2.8 33 -

025 3.3 38 333 384Y 030 38 44 -

035 44 51 -

0.40 50 58 -

0.45 5.1 6.7 -

050 5.2 7.6 -

Mowed Mowed 333 000 Wy- ale 0190 a/A value= 0253 Y= 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t = 3.33%

aM = 442%

Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.

Comments: None.

Data Review By. dY - Reviewed By: O r-'&-- ' -.

Level Date: '-)/ - Level:

  • Date: q1.--1cj 'Z T-AOS4 W~

7 7-

2 4 717 456 4151 p.

Sep 25 02 O5:12p Richard Kock GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.2 Weld ID: CH-MA Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 39 FlawThroughwallDimension = 0.160 "TO nominal = 4.25 FlawLength "I'= 0.40 'TO measured= 4.30 Surface Separation "S - 0.00 Clad "T' nominal = N/A ASME Section X1, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for4" to 12" all Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

0.00 1.9 2.0 -

0.05 2.0 2.2 -

0.10 2.2 2.5 -

0.15 2.5 2.9 -

0.20 2.8 33 -

0.25 3.3 38 -

0.30 3.8 4.4 -

0.35 4.4 5.1 -

0.40 5.0 5.8 5.00 580Y 0.45 5.1 6.7 -

0.50 5.2 7.6 -

Allowed Allowed 5.00 000 a= 0.160 a/I value = 0.400 Y= 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed alt = 5.00%

aAt = 3.72%

Flaw is acceptable by Table IWB-351 0-1.

Comments: None.

Data Review BT.Y /Al: , Reviewed By: -)A .C Level-: '"1 Date: ~/' ~Level: 4 L. Date: li s/Y...

' S.k=,l exAO "V1 7rn

2 5 Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.

Sep 25 02 05:12p GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy EvaluationData Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.2 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: nla Indication: 42 Flaw Throughwafl Dimension = 0 190 "T nominal = 4.25 FlawLength "/"= 1.75 "T-measured= 4.30 Surface Separation "S" 0 000 Clad T nominal = N/A ASME Section XI, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" an Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

0.00 1.9 20 - ~

0.05 2.0 2.2 -

0.10 2.2 25 2.25 2.57 Y 0.15 2.5 '29 -

0.20 2.8 3.3 -

0.25 33 38 -

030 38 4.4 A -

035 44 5.1 -

0.40 5.0 58 -

0.45 5.1 67 - ~

0.50 5.2 7.6 -

Allowed Allowed 225 000 a -0190 e/A value 0.109 Y= 0000 Flaw is Surface Allowed aft = 2.25%

a/t = 4.42%

Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-351 0-1 Comments: None.

Data Review ByCP /'. Reviewed By. t"c,.... -Lr--..

Level: - Date: " Level:

  • Date: " /

26 Sep 25 02 05:12p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.

GE NuclearEnery I GERIS 2000 Indication Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom. Unit-2 Eram Data Shoot: mbr.2 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication : 44 Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0.170 "T' nominal= 4.25 Flaw Length "I'=0 75 "T" measured = 4.30 Surface Separation "S" = 000 Clad *T" nominal - N/A ASME Section Xl, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" all Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

0.00 1.9 2.0 -

005 2.0 2.2 -

010 2.2 2.5 -

0.15 2.5 2.9 -

020 2.8 3.3 307 357Y 025 3.3 3.8 -

030 3.8 44 -

035 44 51 -

0.40 5.0 58 -

045 51 6.7 -

0.50 5,2 7.6 -

Allowed Allowed 307 000 I or a= 0170 ail value = 0.227 Y= 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed alt = 3 07/6 at = 395%

Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.

Comments: None.

Data ReviewBy(P /ByF" Reviewed By:

Level..D/(OZ Date: Level:

Level: J Date: i . 5-2_ .Z.

U ,mGmlL

2 7 Sep 25 02 05:13p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.

GERIS 2000 Indication GE NuclearEnergy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom. Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.1 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 50 Flaw Throughwali Dimension = 0 120 "TI nominal = 425 Flaw Length 1" = 1.00 "T" measured= 4.30 Surfaco Separation"S"= 0.00 Clad "T- nominal - N/A ASME Section Xl, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" a2/ Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

0.00 1.9 2.0 -

0.05 2.0 22 -

0.10 2.2 2.5 2.32 2.66 Y 0.15 2.5 2.9 -

0.20 2.8 3.3 -

0.25 33 3.8 -

0.30 3.8 44 -

0.35 44 5.1 -

0.40 5.0 58 -

0.45 51 67 -

0.50 5.2 7.6 -

Allowed Allowed 232 000 a = 0.120 aA value= 0.120 Y= 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t = 2.32%

/it = 2.79%

Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.

Comments: None.

Data Review By: O /P at Reviewed By.

Level: ~i7Date: ?f'(rLevel. ______ Dale: 1(2.C/Z.

IJuMOVY ý

28 Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.

Sep 25 02 05:13p GERIS 2000 Indication GE NuclearEnergv Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, UNit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.1 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 53 Flaw Throughwall Dimension= 0 140 "T7nominal 4 25 FlawLength "1"= 0.75 "T" measured = 4.30 Surface Separation "S"- 0 00 Clad "T- nominal= N/A ASME Section X1, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" all Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

000 19 20 -

005 2.0 2.2 -

0.10 2.2 2.5 -

0.15 2.5 29 2.72 3.19 Y 020 2.8 33 -

0.25 33 38 -

0.30 3.8 44 -

0.35 4.4 5.1 -

0.40 50 5.8 -

0.45 5.1 67 -

050 52 7.6 -

Allowed Allowed 2.72 000 alu 0.140 all value= 0.187 Y= 0.000 Flaw Is Surface Allowed alt = 2.72%

a/t = 3.26%

Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-351 0-1.

Comments: None.

Data Review By: C / Reviewed By:

Level: -7ae /ell I :D (1AJ8547 115

4 Keck 717 456 4151 p.

Sep 27 02 11:31a Richard 0

GE NuclearEnergy GERIS Evaluation 2000Data Indication Sheet Project: Peach Bottom. Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.1 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet : n/a Indication : 56 Flaw ThroughwallDimension = 0 170 "T-nominal = 4.25 Flaw Length "/= 1 00 "T measured= 4.30 Surface Separation "S"= 000 Clad '7- nominal = NIA ASME Section Xi, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for A" to 12" a/I Surface % Subsurface % Surface . Subsurface %

000 19 2.0 - ~

005 2.0 2.2 -

0.10 2.2 2.5 -

0.15 2.5 2.9 2.62 3.06 Y 0.20 2.8 3.3 -

0.25 3.3 3.8 -

0.30 38 4.4 -

0.35 4.4 5.1 -

0.40 50 5.8 -

0.45 51 6.7 -

0.50 52 7.6 -

Aowed Alowed 2.62 000 a 0.170 all value 0.170 Y= 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed aft = 2.62%

att = 3.95%

Comments: None.

Data Review By - Reviewed By:. t Level: 7 Date: 9/t zLevel: 3-x-Alý Date:c 1 PEArAH .OTT,..

ffxO".V? ?ý PACE(.--- -- I)F.. _

Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.5 Sep 27 02 11:32a GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Eneroy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.1 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: nia Indication : 57 Flaw Throughwall Dimension 0 170 'T nominal = 4.25 FlawLength '"1= 1.00 " measured - 4.30 Surface Separation"S' 0.00 Clad "r nominal = N/A ASME Section XA. 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-351 0-1 for 4" to 12" a/[ Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

000 1.9 2.0 - ~

005 2.0 2.2 -

0.10 2.2 2.5 -

0.15 2.5 2.9 2.62 3.06 Y 0.20 2.8 3.3 -

0.25 3.3 3.8 -

0.30 3.8 4.4 -

0.35 44 5.1 -

0.40 5.0 5.8 -

045 5.1 6.7 -

0.50 5.2 7.6 -

Allowed Allowed 2.62 0.00 a W 0.170 afi value = 0.170 Y= 0.000 Flaw Is Surface Allowed a/t = 2.02%

at = 3.95%

Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-351 0-1.

Comments: None Data Review By. LJ KReviewed By:

Level: Date: i Level:

  • Date: zcI _

CxC.

bUY7 76

+/-4="F

. 3,. 0.:.'i ....

2 9 Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.

Sep 25 02 05:13p I

GERIS 2000 Indication GE NuclearEnergy EvaluationData Sheet I

Project: Peach Bottom. Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet : mbr.1 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Theet: n/a Indic,ation: 61 Flaw Thrnoughwafl Dimension = 0.120 "r noniinal= 4.25 Flaw Length 1 = 1.00 "T" measiured= 4.30 Su face Separation"S"a 0 00 Clad -T- noiriinal = N/A ASME Section X), 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" all Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %

0.00 1.9 20 -

005 2.0 2.2 -

0.10 22 2.5 2.32 2.66 Y 0.15 2.5 29 -

020 2.8 3.3 -

025 3.3 38 -

0.30 38 4.4 -

0.35 44 5.1 -

0.40 50 58 -

045 6.1 6.7 -

0.50 5.2 7.6 -

Allowed Allowed 232 000 ae 0.120 a/l value= 0.120 Y=

0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t = 2.32%

a/t= 2.79%

Flaw Is unacceptable by Table IWB-351 0-1.

Comments: None.

Data Review By~ 9 /11T Reviewed By: Tb Q Level. Date: Level Date.

ta-OS-Vl ly

30 3 Richard Kock 717 456 4151 p.

Sep 25 02 05:1 p Q GERI8 2000 Indication GE NuclearEnergy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom. Unit-2 Exam DataSheet: mbr.1 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 63 Flaw ThroughwallDimension = 0 170 "T' nominal = 4 25 FlawLength "T = 1.50 "T" measured= 4 30 Surface Separation "S"= 0 00 Clad "T" nominal = N/A ASME Section XA, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510.1 for 4" to 12" a/I Surface % Subsurfave % Surface % Subsurface %

0.00 1.9 20 -

005 2.0 22 -

0.10 2.2 2.5 228 2.61 Y 0.15 25 2.9 -

0.20 2.8 3.3 -

0.25 3.3 35 -

030 3.8 4.4 -

035 44 5.1 -

0.40 5.0 58 -

0.45 51 67 -

0,50 5.2 76 -

Allowed Allowed 2.28 000 a= 0.170 a/l value - 0.113 Y = 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t = 2.28%

a/t - 395%

Flaw is unacceptable by Table INB-351 0-1.

Comments: None.

Data Review By: 0 AD  : / RevlewedlBy: te.lir Dc-J 2 -- -.

Level. -77e--, Dale: 9/1___/07 Level. _____ Date:*~

FMAflM-UVY MW5

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML023600484&oldid=2698187"