ML023600503

Request for Additional Information and Relief Request 01-007 for McGuire Nuclear Station, Unit 1

ML023600503
Person / Time
Site:	McGuire, Mcguire
Issue date:	12/05/2002
From:	Jamil D Duke Power Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML023600503 (174)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:Duke Power Company DukeA Duke Energy Company Power. McGuire Nuclear Station A mNkeE-W C-p--y 12700 Hagers Ferry Road Huntersville, NC 28078-9340 (704) 875-4100 D.M. Jamil Vice-President December 5, 2002 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 ATTENTION: Document Control Desk

SUBJECT:

Relief Request 01-007 Request for Additional Information McGuire Nuclear Station Unit 1 Docket Nos. 50-369, 50-370

REFERENCE:

Duke Relief Request, 01-007, dated April 18, 2002 This letter provides additional information that was requested by the NRC staff in a teleconference call on September 18, 2002. The NRC staff's request for information and Duke's response are stated below. Request for Information No. 1 The licensee's submittal does not clearly identify the extent of relief that is being requested. Each part of the licensee's relief request states that relief from one of the Code requirements is needed: (1)either the requirement to perform an ultrasonic examination from two-beam directions, or (2) the requirement to examine essentially 100% of the Code required volume. Often, the relief request implies, but does not specifically state, that relief is needed from both Code requirements. The licensee should revise all parts of the request to include all Code requirements for which relief is being requested. Duke's Response Relief Request 01-007 was revised to clearly define all Code requirements for which relief is being requested. Revision 1 of the relief request is provided as an attachment to this letter.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission December 5, 2002 Page 2 Request for Information No. 2 Request for Relief 01-007 Code Class 1 Examination Category B-F, Weld No. IC Steam Generator NPS 4 inches or Larger Nozzle-to-Safe End Welds The licensee should address the following issues:

i. The licensee should indicate whether the nozzle-to-safe end welds in question are part of steam generators that have been replaced and whether the welds in question have any surface preparation that would allow alternative technology such as eddy current inspection to be applied on the inner surface.

2. Indicate what the buttering material is for this nozzle-to safe end weld.

Indicate what degradation mechanism(s) is most likely to occur in this weld and a technical basis for whether the achieved examination coverage could reasonably be expected to detect this degradation.

3. In the basis for relief, the licensee claims that acoustic theory indicates that reflection of a longitudinal sound beam from the inside surface of the pipe will mode convert and that most of the sound energy will be reflected as a transverse wave.

However, the licensee has provided no actual data, i.e., from the ultrasonic calibration block, that shows the reflected longitudinal sound beam having insufficient intensity to perform an adequate examination from two-beam path (extended path) directions. Please provide this information.

4. The licensee should address the issue of whether alternative technologies such as the use of phased arrays could offer any improvement in inspection coverage and reliability.

5. What was the refueling outage lEOC-14 start date / end date?

Duke's Response

1. The nozzle-to-safe end welds are new welds that were made during the 1997 steam generator replacement project.

The welds have a machined I.D. surface such that an alternative technology like eddy current inspection could possibly be applied to the surface. However, there is no plan to perform such an examination.

2. The buttering material for the replacement steam generator nozzle-to-safe end weld is Inconel 152.

The degradation

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission December 5, 2002 Page 3 mechanism in the weld is thermal fatigue. Detection of flaws that result from this type of degradation mechanism has been demonstrated using a nozzle mockup during the preservice examination.

3. The basis for relief was rewritten within the relief request to clarify the ultrasonic method issue.

4. Alternative technology, such as phased array, is being developed by the EPRI NDE Center.

The capability for application of this technology to dissimilar metal weld examination is not yet known. The inspection reliability issue is being addressed by the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI).

5. March 9, 2001 to April 12, 2001 Please direct questions related to this matter to Norman T.

Simms of Regulatory Compliance at (704) 875-4685. Very truly yours, D.M. Jamil Attachment cc: L.A. Reyes Regional Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, GA. 30323 - 3415 R.E. Martin, Project Manager (addressee only) Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North, M ail Stop O-8G9 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 S.M. Shaeffer NRC Senior Resident Inspector (MNS)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission December 5, 2002 Page 4 bxc: N.T. Simms G.J. Underwood (EC07J) R.K. Rhyne (EC07J) R.D. Klein (MG01MM) R. Branch (MG0IMM) ELL (EC050) Kay Crane McGuire Master File 1.3.2.13

ATTACHMENT

Serial No.01-007 Page 1 of 55 Duke Energy Corporation McGuire Nuclear Station - Unit I SECOND 10-YEAR INTERVAL REQUEST FOR RELIEF NO. 01-007 Revision 1 Duke Energy Corporation has determined that conformance with certain ASME Section XI Code requirements is impractical. Therefore, pursuant to 10CFR50.55a (g) (5) (iii), Duke Energy requests relief from applicable portions of the code. I Included in this request are sixteen welds: one Examination Category B-D weld, two Examination Category B-F Welds, one Examination Category B-H weld, seven Examination Category B-J welds, one Examination C-B weld and four Examination Category C-F-I welds. The McGuire Unit-i Inservice Inspection Plan was written to the requirements of the 1989 Edition of ASME Section XI, no addenda. The items in this Request for Relief is associated with refueling outage EOC-14, which is during the second ten-year interval. The examination dates for this outage are as follows: Start Date November 6, 1999, End Date April 17, 2001. Code Case N-460 applies to the examinations performed during this outage. I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category B-D: Pressurizer Nozzle-to-Vessel Weld for Safety Nozzle to Upper Head. ID Number Item Number 1PZR-14 B03.110.004 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWB-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below:

Serial No.01-007 Page 2 of 55 Figure IWB-2500-7(b). ASME Section V, Article 4, T-424.1, Examination Coverage, 1989 Edition with no Addenda. "The volume shall be examined by moving the search unit over the examination surface so as to scan the entire examination volume." Due to part geometry and actual physical barriers, obtaining 100% coverage of the required volume is not possible with the existing limitations. III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is sought from the requirement to scan 100% of the examination volume. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 1, (Pages 1-9) due to single sided access, the examination coverage was limited to 69.07%. In order to achieve more coverage the weld would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both sides. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld.

Serial No.01-007 Page 3 of 55 VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Examination Category B-D: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB 2500-7(b) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined using procedures, personnel and equipment qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In addition, this weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. Ultrasonic examination of this weld was conducted using personnel, equipment and procedures qualified through the PDI Program for ferritic pressure vessel welds. The qualifications were conducted on samples with access to both sides of the weld. Therefore, Duke Energy Corporation does not claim credit for a single sided examination. This weld is located on the NC system line from the pressurizer upper head to one of the NC relief valves. This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to negative material property changes (i.e., embrittlement) associated with neutron bombardment. If a leak were to occur at the weld in question, there are methods by which the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in the following: a) Increased containment humidity. This parameter is indicated in the control room and is monitored periodically by Operations and also the Containment Ventilation System Engineer. b) Increased Pressurizer enclosure temperature. This parameter is continuously monitored by the Operations via an OAC alarm, and is periodically monitored by the System Engineer. c) Increased input into the Ventilation Unit Condensate Drain Tank (VUCDT). This parameter is monitored continuously by Operations via an OAC alarm and also periodically by the Liquid Radwaste System Engineer and Reactor Coolant System Engineer.

Serial No.01-007 Page 4 of 55 d) Increase in unidentified reactor coolant leakage. This parameter would be exhibited during performance of the reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours (McGuire normally performs this calculation every 24 Hrs). The unidentified leakage specification in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm. e) Other indicators such as containment radiation monitors EMF-38, 39, and 40, the containment floor and equipment sump levels. Note: The above parameters would be used to identify a leak in the pressurizer enclosure or containment, but could not specifically identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. VIII. References. Information for Examination Category B-D affected weld: Pages 1-9 cover this weld. B03.110.004

Serial No.01-007 Page 5 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category B-F: IC Steam Generator NPS 4" or Larger Nozzle-to-Safe End Butt Weld. ID Number Item Number 1SGC-Inlet-W5SE B05.070.005 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWB-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: ASME Section XI, Appendix III, Paragraph 111-4420, 1989 Edition with no addenda. "The examination shall be performed using a sufficiently long examination beam path to provide coverage of the required examination volume in two-beam path directions. The examination shall be performed from two sides of the weld where practicable, or from one side of the weld, as a minimum." III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is sought from the requirement to cover the required examination volume from two beam-path directions. Reference Figure IWB-2500-8 (c). IV. Basis for Relief: As shown in Attachment 2 (Pages 1-4), due to single sided access, the scanning was limited to coverage of the examination volume from one axial and two circumferential directions. In order to achieve two beam path direction coverage, the weld would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both sides.

Serial No.01-007 Page 6 of 55 V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective NDE methods available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB 2500-8(c) could not be covered from two beam path directions, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. The examination of Category B-F dissimilar metal welds was conducted in accordance with the requirements of ASME Section XI, Appendix III to the maximum extent practical. Refracted longitudinal wave search units were used in accordance with NRC Information Notice No. 90-30: Ultrasonic Inspection Techniques for Dissimilar Metal Welds, May 1, 1990. The refracted longitudinal wave transducers have a simulated focus effect which produces high sensitivity at a specific sound path distance. However, the sound beam diverges beyond this focal point and the sensitivity decreases by a factor of two at twice the focal sound path distance. The transducers used in this examination have focal distances from % to T where "T" is the nominal thickness of the main run of pipe. As a result, there is not enough sensitivity to calibrate the ultrasonic system for extended sound path distances beyond the pipe inside surface. This weld is located on the safe end inlet (Hot Leg) nozzle on the IC Steam Generator. The weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to negative material property changes (i.e., embrittlement) associated with neutron bombardment.

Serial No.01-007 Page 7 of 55 If a leak were to occur at the weld in question, there are methods by which the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in the following: a) Increased containment humidity. This parameter is indicated in the control room and is monitored periodically by Operations and also the Containment Ventilation System Engineer. b) Increased Steam Generator enclosure temperature. This parameter is continuously monitored by the Operations via an OAC alarm, and is periodically monitored by the System Engineer. c) Increased input into the VUCDT. This parameter is monitored continuously by Operations via an OAC alarm and also periodically by the Liquid Radwaste System Engineer and Reactor Coolant System Engineer. d) Increase in unidentified reactor coolant leakage. This parameter would be exhibited during performance of the reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours (McGuire normally performs this calculation every 24 Hrs). The unidentified leakage specification in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm. e) Other indicators such as containment radiation monitors EMF-38, 39, and 40, the containment floor and equipment sump levels. Note: The above parameters would be used to identify a leak in the Steam Generator enclosure or containment, but could not specifically identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question.

Serial No.01-007 Page 8 of 55 VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category B-F affected welds: Pages 1-4 cover this weld. B05.070.005

Serial No.01-007 Page 9 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category B-F: IC Steam Generator NPS 4" or Larger Nozzle-to-Safe End Butt Weld. ID Number Item Number 1SGC-Outlet-W6SE B05.070.006 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWB-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: ASME Section XI, Appendix III, Paragraph 111-4420, 1989 Edition with no addenda. "The examination shall be performed using a sufficiently long examination beam path to provide coverage of the required examination volume in two-beam path directions. The examination shall be performed from two sides of the weld where practicable, or from one side of the weld, as a minimum." III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is sought from the requirement to cover the required examination volume from two beam-path directions. Reference Figure IWB-2500-8 (c). IV. Basis for Relief: As shown in Attachment 2 (Pages 5-8), due to single sided access, the scanning was limited to coverage of the examination volume from one axial and two circumferential directions. In order to scan the volume from two beam path directions, the weld would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both sides.

Serial No.01-007 Page 10 of 55 V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective NDE methods available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB 2500-8(c) could not be covered from two beam path directions the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. The examination of Category B-F dissimilar metal welds was conducted in accordance with the requirements of ASME Section XI, Appendix III to the maximum extent practical. Refracted longitudinal wave search units were used in accordance with NRC Information Notice No. 90-30: Ultrasonic Inspection Techniques for Dissimilar Metal Welds, May 1, 1990. The refracted longitudinal wave transducers have a simulated focus effect which produces high sensitivity at a specific sound path distance. However, the sound beam diverges beyond this focal point and the sensitivity decreases by a factor of two at twice the focal sound path distance. The transducers used in this examination have focal distances from / to T where "T" is the nominal thickness of the main run of pipe. As a result, there is not enough sensitivity to calibrate the ultrasonic system for extended sound path distances beyond the pipe inside surface. This weld is located on the safe end outlet (Cold Leg) nozzle on the IC Steam Generator. The weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to negative material property changes (i.e., embrittlement) associated with neutron bombardment.

Serial No.01-007 Page 11 of 55 If a leak were to occur at the weld in question, there are methods by which the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in the following: a) Increased containment humidity. This parameter is indicated in the control room and is monitored periodically by Operations and also the Containment Ventilation System Engineer. b) Increased Steam Generator enclosure temperature. This parameter is continuously monitored by the Operations via an OAC alarm, and is periodically monitored by the System Engineer. c) Increased input into the VUCDT. This parameter is monitored continuously by Operations via an OAC alarm and also periodically by the Liquid Radwaste System Engineer and Reactor Coolant System Engineer. d) Increase in unidentified reactor coolant leakage. This parameter would be exhibited during performance of the reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours (McGuire normally performs this calculation every 24 Hrs). The unidentified leakage specification in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm. e) Other indicators such as containment radiation monitors EMF-38, 39, and 40, the containment floor and equipment sump levels. Note: The above parameters would be used to identify a leak in the Steam Generator enclosure or containment, but could not specifically identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question.

Serial No.01-007 Page 12 of 55 VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. Viii.

References:

Information for Examination Category B-F affected welds: Pages 5-8 cover this weld. B05.070.006

Serial No.01-007 Page 13 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category B-H: Pressurizer Integrally Welded Attachment for Support Skirt to Lower Head. ID Number Item Number 1PZR-SKIRT B08.020.001A II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWB-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: Figure IWB-2500-13. This weld was examined using the ,ultrasonic method. See Request for Alternative 00 001, and NRC Safety Evaluation Report dated 08/23/01 in Attachment 7 (Pages 1-13) for a full explanation of the weld configuration issue. III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: This weld was examined to the maximum extent practical per the requirements of Request for Alternative 00-001. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 3 (Pages 1-10) the examination coverage was limited to 75.16%. The entire examination volume was covered 100% from at least one direction.

Serial No.01-007 Page 14 of 55 V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB 2500-13 could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined during installation using surface NDE methods. There is inadequate accessibility of the inside surface (surface C-D) of the Pressurizer Support Skirt Weld to perform the required surface examination. Therefore, an ultrasonic examination will be used to inspect the inner examination surface from the skirt's exterior surface. The ultrasonic procedure and the basic calibration block will conform to the requirements of ASME Section XI, Appendix I, 1989 Edition, and ASME Section V, Article 5, 1989 Edition. This is the weld joining the pressurizer support skirt to the pressurizer lower head. This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to negative material property changes (i.e., embrittlement) associated with neutron bombardment. This weld joins the pressurizer support skirt, a non pressure boundary component, to the lower pressurizer head. Therefore, the weld serves no pressure boundary function. However, if a leak were to occur at the weld in question, there are methods by which the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in the following:

Serial No.01-007 Page 15 of 55 a) Increased containment humidity. This parameter is indicated in the control room and is monitored periodically by Operations and also the Containment Ventilation System Engineer. b) Increased Pressurizer enclosure temperature. This parameter is continuously monitored by the Operations via an OAC alarm, and is periodically monitored by the System Engineer. c) Increased input into the VUCDT. This parameter is monitored continuously by Operations via an OAC alarm and also periodically by the Liquid Radwaste System Engineer and Reactor Coolant System Engineer. d) Increase in unidentified reactor coolant leakage. This parameter would be exhibited during performance of the reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours (McGuire normally performs this calculation every 24 Hrs). The unidentified leakage specification in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm. e) Other indicators such as containment radiation monitors EMF-38, 39, and 40, the containment floor and equipment sump levels. Note: The above parameters would be used to identify a leak in the pressurizer enclosure or containment, but could not specifically identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld.

Serial No.01-007 Page 16 of 55 VIII.

References:

Attachments 3 & 7 Information for Examination Category B-H affected welds: Pages 1-10 & 1-13, respectively, cover this weld. B08.020.001A

Serial No.01-007 Page 17 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category B-J: NPS 4" or Larger Piping Circumferential Weld for Reactor Coolant System. ID Number Item Number lNC1F-1-7 B09.011.007 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWB-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: ASME Section XI, Figure IWB-2500-8 (c), Examination Volume C-D-E-F. For welds joining cast austenitic materials: ASME Section XI, Appendix III, Paragraph 111-4420, 1989 Edition with no addenda. "The examination shall be performed using a sufficiently long examination beam path to provide coverage of the required examination volume in two-beam path directions. The examination shall be performed from two sides of the weld where practicable, or from one side of the weld, as a minimum." III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is sought from the requirement to examine 100% of volume C-D-E-F of cast stainless steel welds from two beam path directions. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 4 (Pages 1-4), while 100% of the volume was covered in one axial and two circumferential directions, the examination coverage was reported as 33.20%. Due to single sided access and weld crown taper the examination coverage was limited. Duke Energy Corporation does not take

Serial No.01-007 Page 18 of 55 credit for covering the far side of austenitic welds where single sided access prevents scanning from both sides of the weld. In the case of the above listed pipe to pump weld, austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the component geometry prevents two sided coverage of the examination volume. The welded component configuration would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both sides of the weld over the required examination volume. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB 2500-8 (c) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. This is a weld on the "A" cold leg of the reactor coolant system to the "A" Reactor Coolant Pump Outlet Nozzle. This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to negative material property changes (i.e., embrittlement) associated with neutron bombardment. If a leak were to occur at the weld in question, there are methods by which the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in the following: a) Increased containment humidity. This parameter is indicated in the control room and is monitored

Serial No.01-007 Page 19 of 55 periodically by Operations and also the Containment Ventilation System Engineer. b) Increased input into the V`UCDT. This parameter is monitored continuously by Operations via an OAC alarm and also periodically by the Liquid Radwaste System Engineer and Reactor Coolant System Engineer. c) Increase in unidentified reactor coolant leakage. This parameter would be exhibited during performance of the reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours (McGuire normally performs this calculation every 24 Hrs). The unidentified leakage specification in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm. d) Other indicators such as containment radiation monitors EMF-38, 39, and 40, the containment floor and equipment sump levels. Note: The above parameters would be used to identify a leak in containment, but could not specifically identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category B-J affected welds: Pages 1-4 cover this weld. B09.011.007

Serial No.01-007 Page 20 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category B-J: NPS 4" or Larger Piping Circumferential Weld for Reactor Coolant System. ID Number Item Number 1NC-3087-Wl B09.011.008 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWB-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: ASME Section XI, Figure IWB-2500-8(c), Examination Volume C-D-E-F. For welds joining cast austenitic materials: ASME Section XI, Appendix III, Paragraph 111-4420, 1989 Edition with no addenda. "The examination shall be performed using a sufficiently long examination beam path to provide coverage of the required examination volume in two-beam path directions. The examination shall be performed from two sides of the weld where practicable, or from one side of the weld, as a minimum." III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is only being sought from the requirement to examine 100% of volume C-D-E-F of cast stainless steel welds from two beam path directions. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 4 (Pages 5-8), while 100% of the volume was covered in one axial and two circumferential directions, the examination coverage was reported as 85.50%. Due to the proximity of a pipe restraint, the examination coverage was limited. Duke Energy Corporation does

Serial No.01-007 Page 21 of 55 not take credit for covering the far side of austenitic welds where single sided access prevents scanning from both sides of the weld. In the case of the above listed piping weld, austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the pipe restraint prevents two sided coverage of the examination volume. The welded component configuration would have to be re designed to allow scanning from both sides of the weld over the required examination volume. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB 2500-8(c) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. This weld is located on the "A" cold leg of the reactor coolant system near the reactor vessel nozzle. If a leak were to occur at the weld in question, there are methods by which the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in the following: a) Increased containment humidity. This parameter is indicated in the control room and is monitored periodically by Operations and also the Containment Ventilation System Engineer. b) Increased input into the VUCDT. This parameter is monitored continuously by Operations via an OAC alarm

Serial No.01-007 Page 22 of 55 and also periodically by the Liquid Radwaste System Engineer and Reactor Coolant System Engineer. c) Increase in unidentified reactor coolant leakage. This parameter would be exhibited during performance of the reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours (McGuire normally performs this calculation every 24 Hrs). The unidentified leakage specification in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm. d) Other indicators such as containment radiation monitors EMF-38, 39, and 40, the containment floor and equipment sump levels. Note: The above parameters would be used to identify a leak in containment, but could not specifically identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category B-J affected welds: Pages 5-8 cover this weld. B09.011.008

Serial No.01-007 Page 23 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category B-J: NPS 4" or Larger Piping Circumferential Weld for Reactor Coolant System. ID Number Item Number INCIF-107 B09.011.061 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWB-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: ASME Section XI, Figure IWB-2500-8(c), Examination Volume C-D-E-F. III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is only being sought from the requirement to examine 100% of volume C-D-E-F. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 4, (Page 9-15) while 100% of the volume was covered in one axial and two circumferential directions, the examination coverage was reported as 60.85%. This is an elbow to nozzle weld where access is limited to the elbow side only. Duke Energy Corporation does not take credit for covering the far side of austenitic welds where single sided access prevents scanning from both sides of the weld. In the case of the above listed elbow to nozzle weld, austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the component geometry prevents two sided coverage of the examination volume. The welded component configuration would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both

Serial No.01-007 Page 24 of 55 sides of the weld over the required examination volume. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB 2500-8(c) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. Current ultrasonic technology is not capable of consistently detecting and sizing flaws on the far side of an austenitic weld for configurations common to U.S. nuclear applications. To demonstrate that the best available technology was applied, PDI provides a best effort qualification instead of a complete single side demonstration. PDI Performance Demonstration Qualification Summary (PDQS) for austenitic piping shows that single sided examination is performed as a best effort. Therefore, the far side of the austenitic weld, which can only be accessed from one side, will be listed as an area of no coverage. This weld is located on the "A" cold leg of the reactor coolant system at the nozzle from the NI system, downstream of INI-60. This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to negative material property changes (i.e., embrittlement) associated with neutron bombardment. If a leak were to occur at the weld in question, there are methods by which the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in the following:

Serial No.01-007 Page 25 of 55 a) Increased containment humidity. This parameter is indicated in the control room and is monitored periodically by Operations and also the Containment Ventilation System Engineer. b) Increased input into the VUCDT. This parameter is monitored continuously by Operations via an OAC alarm and also periodically by the Liquid Radwaste System Engineer and Reactor Coolant System Engineer. c) Increase in unidentified reactor coolant leakage. This parameter would be exhibited during performance of the reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours (McGuire normally performs this calculation every 24 Hrs). The unidentified leakage specification in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm. d) Other indicators such as containment radiation monitors EMF-38, 39, and 40, the containment floor and equipment sump levels. Note: The above parameters would be used to identify a leak in containment, but could not specifically identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of-the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld.

Serial No.01-007 Page 26 of 55 VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category B-J affected welds: Pages 9-15 cover this weld. B09.011.061

Serial No.01-007 Page 27 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category B-J: NPS 4" or Larger Piping Circumferential Welds for Reactor Coolant System. ID Number Item Number 1NClF-3613-3092 B09.011.069 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWB-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: ASME Section XI, Figure IWB-2500-8 (c), Examination Volume C-D-E-F. III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is only being sought from the requirement to examine 100% of volume C-D-E-F. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 4 (Pages 16-22), while 100% of the volume was covered in one axial and two circumferential directions, the examination coverage was limited to 60.11%. This is a pipe to nozzle weld where access is limited to the pipe side only. Duke Energy Corporation does not take credit for covering the far side of austenitic welds where single sided access prevents scanning from both sides of the weld. In the case of the above listed nozzle to pipe weld, austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the component geometry prevents two sided coverage of the examination volume. The welded component configuration would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both

Serial No.01-007 Page 28 of 55 sides of the weld over the required examination volume. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB 2500-8(c) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined using procedures, personnel and equipment qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In addition, this weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. Current ultrasonic technology is not capable of consistently detecting and sizing flaws on the far side of an austenitic weld for configurations common to U.S. nuclear applications. To demonstrate that the best available technology was applied, PDI provides a best effort qualification instead of a complete single side demonstration. PDI Performance Demonstration Qualification Summary (PDQS) for austenitic piping shows that single sided examination is performed as a best effort. Therefore, the far side of the austenitic weld, which can only be accessed from one side, will be listed as an area of no coverage. This weld is located at the nozzle from the pressurizer surge line to the "B" loop reactor coolant hot leg. This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to negative material property changes (i.e., embrittlement) associated with neutron bombardment. If a leak were to occur at the weld in question,

Serial No.01-007 Page 29 of 55 there are methods by which the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in the following: a) Increased containment humidity. This parameter is indicated in the control room and is monitored periodically by Operations and also the Containment Ventilation System Engineer. b) Increased input into the VUCDT. This parameter is monitored continuously by Operations via an OAC alarm and also periodically by the Liquid Radwaste System Engineer and Reactor Coolant System Engineer. c) Increase in unidentified reactor coolant leakage. This parameter would be exhibited during performance of the reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours (McGuire normally performs this calculation every 24 Hrs). The unidentified leakage specification in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm. d) Other indicators such as containment radiation monitors EMF-38, 39, and 40, the containment floor and equipment sump levels. Note: The above parameters would be used to identify a leak in containment, but could not specifically identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld.

Serial No.01-007 Page 30 of 55 VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category B-J affected welds: Pages 16-22 cover this weld. B09.011.069

Serial No.01-007 Page 31 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category B-J: NPS 4" or Larger Piping Circumferential Weld for Safety Injection System. ID Number Item Number INIIF-643 B09.011.207 1I. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWB-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: ASME Section XI, Figure IWB-2500-8(c), Examination Volume C-D-E-F. III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is only requested from the requirement to examine 100% of volume C-D-E-F. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 4, (Pages 23-26) while 100% of the volume was covered in one axial and two circumferential directions, the examination coverage was reported as 60.34%. This is a pipe to valve weld where access is limited to the pipe side only. Duke Energy Corporation does not take credit for covering the far side of austenitic welds where single sided access prevents scanning from both sides of the weld. In the case of the above listed pipe to valve weld, austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the component geometry prevents two sided coverage of the examination volume. The welded component configuration would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both

Serial No.01-007 Page 32 of 55 sides of the weld over the required examination volume. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB 2500-8(c) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined using procedures, personnel and equipment qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In addition, this weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. Current ultrasonic technology is not capable of consistently detecting and sizing flaws on the far side of an austenitic weld for configurations common to U.S. nuclear applications. To demonstrate that the best available technology was applied, PDI provides a best effort qualification instead of a complete single side demonstration. PDI Performance Demonstration Qualification Summary (PDQS) for austenitic piping shows that single sided examination is performed as a best effort. Therefore, the far side of the austenitic weld, which can only be accessed from one side, will be listed as an area of no coverage. This is a pipe to valve (1N170) weld located on the outlet side of the valve on the Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) Cold Leg Injection line. This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to embrittlement associated with neutron bombardment. If a leak were to occur at the weld in question, there are methods by which the leak

Serial No.01-007 Page 33 of 55 could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in one or more of the following: a) Increase in outleakage from the associated Cold Leg Accumulator (CLA) tanks. Level in these tanks is continuously monitored and alarmed in the control room and is maintained within limits established in Technical Specification 3.5.1.2. The fill frequency for these tanks is also trended by the Safety Injection System Engineer. b) Increased Steam Generator enclosure temperature. This parameter is continuously monitored by the Operations via an OAC alarm, and is periodically monitored by the System Engineer. Note: The above parameters would be used to identify a leak in the containment, but could not specifically identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category B-J affected welds: Pages 23-26 cover this weld. B09.011.207

Serial No.01-007 Page 34 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category B-J: NPS 4" or Larger Piping Circumferential Weld for Safety Injection System. ID Number Item Number INIIF-645 B09.011.219 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWB-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: ASME Section XI, Figure IWB-2500-8 (c), Examination Volume C-D-E-F. III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is requested from the requirement to examine 100% of volume C-D-E-F. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 4, (Pages 27-30) while 100% of the volume was covered in one axial and two circumferential directions, the examination coverage was reported as 60.34%. This is a pipe to valve weld where access is limited to the pipe side only. Duke Energy Corporation does not take credit for covering the far side of austenitic welds where single sided access prevents scanning from both sides of the weld. In the case of the above listed pipe to valve weld, austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the component geometry prevents two sided coverage of the examination volume. The welded component configuration would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both

Serial No.01-007 Page 35 of 55 sides of the weld over the required examination volume. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB 2500-8(c) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined using procedures, personnel and equipment qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In addition, this weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. Current ultrasonic technology is not capable of consistently detecting and sizing flaws on the far side of an austenitic weld for configurations common to U.S. nuclear applications. To demonstrate that the best available technology was applied, PDI provides a best effort qualification instead of a complete single side demonstration. PDI Performance Demonstration Qualification Summary (PDQS) for austenitic piping shows that single sided examination is performed as a best effort. Therefore, the far side of the austenitic weld, which can only be accessed from one side, will be listed as an area of no coverage. This is a pipe to valve (1N170) weld located on the inlet side of the valve on the ECCS Cold Leg Injection line. This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to embrittlement associated with neutron bombardment. If a leak were to occur at the weld in question, there are methods by which the leak could be

Serial No.01-007 Page 36 of 55 identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in one or more of the following: a) Increase in outleakage from the associated CLA tanks. Level in these tanks is continuously monitored and alarmed in the control room and is maintained within limits established in Technical Specification 3.5.1.2. The fill frequency for these -tanks is also trended by the Safety Injection System Engineer. b) Increased inputs to the containment floor and equipment sumps. Note: The above parameters would be used to identify a leak in the containment, but could not specifically identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category B-J affected welds: Pages 27-30 cover this weld. B09.011.219

Serial No.01-007 Page 37 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category B-J: NPS 4" or Larger Piping Circumferential Weld for Safety Injection System. ID Number Item Number 1NIIF-280 B09.011.228 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWB-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: ASME Section XI, Figure IWB-2500-8(c), Examination Volume C-D-E-F. III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is only requested from the requirement to examine 100% of volume C-D-E-F. IV. Basis for 'Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 4, (Pages 31-38) while 100% of the volume was covered in one axial and two circumferential directions, the examination coverage was limited to 60.50%. This is a pipe to valve weld where access is limited to the pipe side only. Duke Energy Corporation does not take credit for covering the far side of austenitic welds where single sided access prevents scanning from both sides of the weld. In the case of the above listed pipe to valve weld, austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the component geometry prevents two sided coverage of the examination volume. The welded component configuration would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both

Serial No.01-007 Page 38 of 55 sides of the weld over the required examination volume. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB 2500-8(c) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined using procedures, personnel and equipment qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In addition, this weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. Current ultrasonic technology is not capable of consistently detecting and sizing flaws on the far side of an austenitic weld for configurations common to U.S. nuclear applications. To demonstrate that the best available technology was applied, PDI provides a best effort qualification instead of a complete single side demonstration. PDI Performance Demonstration Qualification Summary (PDQS) for austenitic piping shows that single sided examination is performed as a best effort. Therefore, the far side of the austenitic weld, which can only be accessed from one side, will be listed as an area of no coverage. This is a pipe to valve (1N188B) weld located on the outlet side of the valve located on a 10" line connected to the "ID" Safety Injection Accumulator Tank on the ECCS Cold Leg Injection line. This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to embrittlement associated with neutron bombardment. If a leak were to occur at the weld in

Serial No.01-007 Page 39 of 55 question, there are methods by which the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in the following: "a) Increase in outleakage from the associated CLA tanks. Level in these tanks is continuously monitored and alarmed in the control room and is maintained within limits established in Technical Specification 3.5.1.2. The fill frequency for these tanks is also trended by the Safety Injection System Engineer. b) Increased inputs to the containment floor and equipment sumps. Note: The above parameters would be used to identify a leak in the containment, but could not specifically identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category B-J affected welds: Pages 31-38 cover this weld. B09.011.228

Serial No.01-007 Page 40 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category C-B: Nozzle-to-Shell (or Head) Weld for ID Steam Generator Auxilliary Feedwater Nozzle to Steam Drum. ID Number Item Number 1SGD-W259 C02.021.008 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWC-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: Figure IWC-2500-4 (a). ASME Section V, Article 4, Paragraph T-424.1 states: "The volume shall be examined by moving the search unit over the examination surface so as to scan the entire examination volume." III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is only being sought from the requirement to scan the entire examination volume. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 5 (Pages 1-4), the examination coverage was limited to 75.00%. This is a ferritic nozzle to shell weld where access is limited to the vessel shell side only. In order to achieve more coverage the welded component configuration would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both sides. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number

Serial No.01-007 Page 41 of 55 referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWC 2500-4(a) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined using procedures, personnel and equipment qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). The qualifications were conducted on samples with access to both sides of the weld. Therefore Duke Energy Corporation does not claim credit for the full volume when a single sided examination is performed. In addition, this weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. This weld is located on the Auxiliary Feedwater nozzle on the ID Steam Generator. This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to embrittlement associated with neutron bombardment. If a leak were to occur at the weld in question [Steam Generator (CA) Nozzle], there are methods by which the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at a CA nozzle would result in the following: a) Increased containment humidity. This parameter is indicated in the control room and is monitored periodically by Operations and also the Containment Ventilation System Engineer. b) Increased S/G enclosure temperature. This parameter is continuously monitored by the Operations via an OAC alarm, and is periodically monitored by the System Engineer. c) Increased input into the VUCDT. This parameter is monitored continuously by Operations via an OAC alarm and also periodically by the Liquid Radwaste System Engineer and Reactor Coolant System Engineer. Note: The above parameters would be used to identify a leak in the steam generator enclosure, but could not specifically identify the CA nozzle as the source

Serial No.01-007 Page 42 of 55 of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question. Concerning the consequences of a leak at the CA nozzle (affects on CA system operation): Any leakage would result in a portion of the CA flow bypassing the steam generator, and therefore being unavailable to maintain steam generator levels. Very small leaks (< 1 gpm) would have no discernible effect on CA system operation. Leaks that approach 5 gpm would need to be evaluated for system operability effects. McGuire has specific Safety Analysis for accidents where minor and major main feedwater system pipe breaks are postulated. These Safety Analyses demonstrate compliance with requirements of 10CFR50. Replacement or re-design of any of these Class 1 or Class 2 nozzles is not a viable alternative. Duke Energy believes the amount of coverage obtained for these examinations provides reasonable assurance of the continued structural integrity of the subject welds. Also the CA nozzles are equipped with thermal sleeves to limit thermal shock due to auxiliary feedwater injections. McGuire operates the CA nozzles consistent with the stress and fatigue qualifications provided by the Manufacturer (BWI). VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage-to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld.

Serial No.01-007 Page 43 of 55 VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category C-B affected weld: Pages 1-4 cover this weld. C02.021.008

Serial No.01-007 Page 44 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category C-F-I: Piping Circumferential Welds for Safety Injection System. ID Number Item Number 1NIIF-167 C05.011.113 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWC-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: Figure IWC-2500-7 (a) requires 100% of examination volume. III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is only requested from the requirement to examine 100% of volume C-D-E-F. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 6, (Pages 1-6) while 100% of the volume was covered in one axial and two circumferential directions, the examination coverage was reported as 59.82%. This is a stainless steel elbow to penetration weld where access is limited to the elbow side only. Duke Energy Corporation does not take credit for covering the far side of austenitic welds where single sided access prevents scanning from both sides of the weld. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage.

Serial No.01-007 Page 45 of 55 Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Examination Category C-F-I: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWC 2500-7(a) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined using procedures, personnel and equipment qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In addition, this weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. Current ultrasonic technology is not capable of consistently detecting and sizing flaws on the far side of an austenitic weld for configurations common to U.S. nuclear applications. To demonstrate that the best available technology was applied, PDI provides a best effort qualification instead of a complete single side demonstration. PDI Performance Demonstration Qualification Summary (PDQS) for austenitic piping shows that single sided examination is performed as a best effort. Therefore, the far side of the austenitic weld, which can only be accessed from one side, will be listed as an area of no coverage. This weld is located on the "A" Train ECCS Cold Leg Injection supply from the ND system. This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to embrittlement associated with neutron bombardment. If a leak were to occur at the weld in question, the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in external leakage from this weld and would be exhibited on the floor of the Aux. Building pipe chase. Operations perform surveillance in this area monthly for ECCS venting and would notice any leakage exhibited from this weld. Also, a walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. The

Serial No.01-007 Page 46 of 55 following additional walkdowns are performed on this piping each refueling outage: a) An inservice inspection walkdown is performed which verifies that no external leakage exists on the piping including this weld. b) A leakage walkdown is performed on ND system piping outside containment. These walkdowns should identify any leak at the weld in question. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category C-F-i affected welds: Pages 1-6 cover this weld. C05.011.113

Serial No.01-007 Page 47 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category C-F-i: Piping Circumferential Weld for Safety Injection System. ID Number Item Number 1NI1F-293 C05.011.120 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWC-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: Figure IWC-2500-7 (a) requires 100% of examination volume. III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is only requested from the requirement to examine 100% of volume C-D-E-F. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 6, (Pages 7-16) while 100% of the volume was covered in one axial and two circumferential directions, the examination coverage was reported as 61.30%. This is a stainless steel pipe to valve weld where access is limited to the pipe side only. Duke Energy Corporation does not take credit for covering the far side of austenitic welds where single sided access prevents scanning from both sides of the weld. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage.

Serial No.01-007 Page 48 of 55 Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Examination Category C-F-i: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWC 2500-7(a) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined using procedures, personnel and equipment qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In addition, this weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. Current ultrasonic technology is not capable of consistently detecting and sizing flaws on the far side of an austenitic weld for configurations common to U.S. nuclear applications. To demonstrate that the best available technology was applied, PDI provides a best effort qualification instead of a complete single side demonstration. PDI Performance Demonstration Qualification Summary (PDQS) for austenitic piping shows that single sided examination is performed as a best effort. Therefore, the far side of the austenitic weld, which can only be accessed from one side, will be listed as an area of no coverage. This weld is located on the "A" Train ECCS Cold Leg Injection supply from the ND system. This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to embrittlement associated with neutron bombardment. If a leak were to occur at the weld in question, the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in increased inputs to the containment floor and equipment sumps. The inputs to this sump are also trended by the WL system engineer and an upward trend or significant influent increase would prompt Operations and Engineering evaluation. Note: The above parameter would be used to identify a leak in the containment, but could not specifically

Serial No.01-007 Page 49 of 55 identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question. a) An inservice inspection walkdown is performed which verifies that no external leakage exists on the piping including this weld. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category C-F-I affected welds: Pages 7-16 cover this weld. C05.011.120

Serial No.01-007 Page 50 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category C-F-i: Piping Circumferential Weld for Safety Injection System. ID Number Item Number 1NI169-4 C05.011.129 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWC-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: Figure IWC-2500-7 (a) requires 100% of examination volume. iII. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is only requested from the requirement to examine 100% of volume C-D-E-F. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 6, (Pages 17-22) the examination coverage was limited to 88.50%. This is a stainless steel pipe to elbow weld where access is limited due to the proximity of a cable tray and an identification tag. The weld was scanned from both sides except in the areas of the cable tray and identification tag. Duke Energy Corporation does not take credit for covering the far side of austenitic welds where single sided access prevents scanning from both sides of the weld. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the

Serial No.01-007 Page 51 of 55 configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWC 2500-7(a) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined using procedures, personnel and equipment qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In addition, this weld was examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. Currefit ultrasonic technology is not capable of consistently detecting and sizing flaws on the far side of an austenitic weld for configurations common to U.S. nuclear applications. To demonstrate that the best available technology was applied, PDI provides a best effort qualification instead of a complete single side demonstration. PDI Performance Demonstration Qualification Summary (PDQS) for austenitic piping shows that single sided examination is performed as a best effort. Therefore, the far side of the austenitic weld, which can only be accessed from one side, will be listed as an area of no coverage. This weld is located on the "B" Train ECCS Cold Leg Injection supply from the ND system. This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to embrittlement associated with neutron bombardment. If a leak were to occur at the weld in question, the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at this weld would result in increased inputs to the containment floor and equipment sumps. The inputs to this sump are also trended by the WL system engineer and an upward trend or significant influent increase would prompt Operations and Engineering evaluation. Note: The above parameter would be used to identify a leak in the containment, but could not specifically

Serial No.01-007 Page 52 of 55 identify this weld as the source of leakage. A containment entry would be required to identify the exact source of the leakage. Also, a containment walkdown is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature / pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question. a) An inservice inspection walkdown is performed which verifies that no external leakage exists on the piping including this weld. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to obtain maximum coverage to the extent practical of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category C-F-I affected welds: Pages 17-22 cover this weld. C05.011.129

Serial No.01-007 Page 53 of 55 I. System / Component(s) for Which Relief is Requested: Examination Category C-F-i: Piping Circumferential Weld for Chemical and Volume Control System. ID Number Item Number 1NVlFW175-29 C05.021.085 II. Code Requirement: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition Table IWC-2500-1, lists the following requirements for the Examination Category as shown below: Figure IWC-2500-7 (a) requires 100% of examination volume. III. Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Requested: Relief is only requested from the requirement to examine 100% of volume C-D-E-F. IV. Basis for Relief: During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be achieved. As shown in Attachment 6, (Pages 23-32) while 100% of the volume was covered in one axial and two circumferential directions, the examination coverage was limited to 85.61%. This is a stainless steel pipe to tee weld where access is limited to one side of the weld only. Duke Energy Corporation does not take credit for covering the far side of austenitic welds where single sided access prevents scanning from both sides of the weld. V. Alternate Examinations or Testing: No additional examinations are planned during the current interval for this weld. Because of the

Serial No.01-007 Page 54 of 55 configuration, Radiography would not provide any additional coverage. Duke Energy Corporation will use the most effective ultrasonic techniques available to obtain maximum coverage for future examinations of this weld. VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWC 2500-7(a) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was examined using procedures, personnel and equipment qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In addition, this weld was'examined during installation using volumetric and surface NDE methods. Current ultrasonic technology is not capable of consistently detecting and sizing flaws on the far side of an austenitic weld for configurations common to U.S. nuclear applications. To demonstrate that the best available technology was applied, PDI provides a best effort qualification instead of a complete single side demonstration. PDI Performance Demonstration Qualification Summary (PDQS) for austenitic piping shows that single sided examination is performed as a best effort. Therefore, the far side of the austenitic weld, which can only be accessed from one side, will be listed as an area of no coverage. This is a weld on the inlet tee that branches to the Seal Injection Filter inlet isolation valves (INV-491 and 1NV-493). This weld is not exposed to significant neutron fluence and is not prone to embrittlement associated with neutron bombardment. Operators survey the area around this weld once per shift (twice per day) during rounds to obtain differential pressure across the filter in service. They would notice any leakage exhibited from this weld. Also, if a leak were to occur at this weld there would be an increase in unidentified reactor coolant leakage. This parameter would be exhibited during performance of the reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical

Serial No.01-007 Page 55 of 55 Specifications to be performed every 72 hours. The unidentified leakage specification in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm. VII. Implementation Schedule: Duke Energy Corporation will continue to use ultrasonic examination procedures to the extent practical to obtain maximum coverage of the item number referenced in Section I of this Request for Relief. No additional ultrasonic examination is planned during the current interval for this weld. VIII.

References:

Information for Examination Category C-F-i affected welds: Pages 23-32 cover this weld. C05.021.085 The following individuals were involved in the development of this request for relief. Edward Hyland, Bob Kirk, Bryan Meyer, Larry Kunka, and Phil Roberson(McGuire Primary Systems Engineering), and Terry Penderson (McGuire Balance of Plant Engineering) provided input to the engineering justification (Section VI) for granting relief. Jim McArdle (NDE Level III) provided Sections II,

III, IV, V and VI.

Gary Underwood (McGuire ISI Plan Manager) compiled and completed the request. Sponsored By: IWXX,4 Date Approved By: ,,Date / D

Form NDi-,-62O Revision 0 DUKE POWER COMPANY ULTRASONIC DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS IN FERRITIC PRESSURE VESSELS Istatiofl:1')C(ýuQI U-n it-I f o pnn/ edID.- 1 - ) (4 1 Date: ?. 7 0 -el Weld Leng-th (in.): So3 Surface Condition: A-(2 -Lo q - 4 t,. 3 Examn Sturt.- ma--] FE-Ei"Finsah: 73 z z Procedute No-ScAna Conriguraiton Calibration Sheet No 706,d35 Zone 1 60' 7?*d3 Zone 11 67ae ep .L 60' '775 d&B Zone III Axial Pyrometer /:A k.?/ ( //OY ReV$SCC Scan Surface: OD -n /0 1I3 V9 CC-C-7 6O`71-.dB Zone III Circ. Cal. Due Date: (2-2-6t6 Indication su B EAM SCAN __M~ %W, LOCATIbON DIRECTION AR A/v,/ 70~~z 'Z > 9O0 /o Covcrigc obtatined: ycs D no [0 (see NDE-UT-4) Limitation report is required Item No: -Z- ( -1 //,'0. 9 Q56 ________________Leel A~LDate: Jn7' C/I Examiner:',w '-.C-L.evel: --a Date: /c' _______________________Level: I Date: _____Authorized Inspector: D~ate:.Ž V Rc-k\\se-rlý RWtF 61-667 K-N-1 ATfhr-tAhýýi FAQS L-9

R 6-6O7 AT-. I h,?' ?- KiN k DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM NDE-UT-4 ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld iD 1PZR-14 Item No: B03.110.004 Remarks: SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION DUE TO NOZZLE CONFIGURATION E0 NO SCAN SLIMITEDSCAN 102 0l 1 0 2 cw 0 ccw FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO 1.4" . to BEYOND ANGLE. 03 0 El 45 0D 60 03 Other 700 FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION o] NO SCAN 0 IITDSCNC 1 11 2 13 1 D 2 13 cw [] ccw O]LIMITED SCAN01 20 O0W CC FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO... to ANGLE 0] 0 0] 45 01 60 01 Other FROM DEGto DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0l NO SCAN 0] LIMITEDSCAN1 1 2 0 1 0 2 0 cw 11 ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO. to ANGLE. 0 0 03 45 0l 60 0l Other FROM DEG to DEG 03 NO SCAN 0 LIMITED SCAN to L SURFACE 01 02 INCHES FROM WO BEAM DIRECTION El 1 0 2 0cw 0 ccw to FROM DEGto ANGLE' 0l 0 E0 45 01 60 01 Ot ,4 FROM L FROM DEG to her

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined 13 Base Metal 0 Weld El Near Surface 11 Boltina 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation ZONE 2 & 3 2.1 / 2 x (4.8 + 4.4) = 9.7 SQ. IN. 9.7 SQ. IN. x 50.3 (CIRC.) = 487.91 CU. IN. -J R-I- I Coverage Calculations Beam Scan # Angle Direction 1 2 3 4 600 600 600 600 S1 S2 Cw CCw Area Examined (sq.in.) 9.7 .7 6.9 6.9 Length Examined (in.) 50.3 50.3 50.3 50.3 Volume Examined (cu.in.) 487.91 35.21 347.07 347.07 1217.26 Volume Required Percent Coverage (cu.in.) 487.91 487.94 487.91 487 94 1951.64 100.00 7.22 71.13 71.13 62.37 c4 -10 I-. 0 ) -7 LL

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined 0 Base Metal 01 Weld 0 Near Surface [] Boltino 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation ZONE 1 = 1.0/2 x (5.0 + 4.8) = 4.9 SQ. IN. 4.9 x 50.3" (CIRC.) = 246.47 CU. IN. Coverage Calculations Scan # Angle 1 2 3 4 700 700 700 70° Beam Direction S1 S2 Cw CCw Area Examined (sq in.) 4.7 2.55 3.8 3.8 Length Examined (in.) 50.3 50.3 50.3 50.3 Volume Examined (cu.in.) 236.41 128.27 191.14 191.14 746 96 Volume Require (cu.in.) 246.47 246 47 24647 246 47 985 88 Percent Coverage 95.92 52.04 77.55 77.55 75.77 4J" 40 0. rt

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined 0 Base Metal 0 Weld 0 Near Surface 01 Boltinq 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation LI 0 0 0 LL Scan # Angle Beam Direction Area Examined (sq.in.) Length Examined (in.) Vol Exan (cu ume Volume lined Required Percent Coverage .in.) (cu.in.) ZONE 1 ZONE 2 & 3 75.77 62.37 138.14 / 2 = 69.07 (AGGREGATE COVERAGE) Coverage Calculations ( "kA) ' A t, -, (

lz i .3 fill u V. -4 - C

C~, <ZC---

0. 731--(

52 j 2-, p iS P 2 1" 7 oý 1RFPaZb-6b7 AIT-I PRczZ 7 0)

ro~ u pVA6* __LtZ. 14ý 2Z*.5 Am 600 17S?60-IA L C-A 'l PCP /:f p p 1o P\\.I 1t Ai R~sv -)

H ion~1.213 @O-OLVAC-6-Cic anx I I A ' 1o y ' ~ ~'f( o 'C C o* ~ u 7Ac FG L, I ( 3.q + 3.8 2 5 '- 3.8 t%. m 7-RFIZbk-667 AIN PRGý- '3 gfzýj -ý

AAvczFAit VJ1F1 61-607 AtTfiei4tNEI1T  IL' "..CJI I L.5W.  DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start: 0956 Form NDE-UT-2A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish: 1010 Revision 4 Station: McGuire Unit: 1 Component/Weld ID: ISGC-INLET-W5SE Date: 3/30/01 Weld Length (in.): 119.4' Surface Condition: AS MFG. Lo: 9.2.3 Surface Temoerature: 81 0 F Examiner, Larry Mauldinyj,1,,* Level: II Scans: Pyrometer S/N: MCNDE 27010

• Cal Due:

8/20/01 Exam James L. Panel Level: II 45 73.5 dB 70 E dB SConfiguration: CIRC. WELD Procedure. NDE-930 Rev: 1 FC: 45T 73.5 dB 70T [] dB S2 Flow S1 N/A 60 El dB SE to NOZZLE Scan Surface: OD Calibrat0on Sheet No. 1 0 0 052 dB Applies to NDE-680 only 0101051 0101052 Other: 330 -63.S dB Skew Angle: N/A IMax Mp w L LL2 W p W2p Beam Exam Sa ap IND - Max Max Max Li i2 W1 Mpl W2 Mp2 Surf. Scan Damps !~ Ref t~aO 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac WRA D0 T WI ITE HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA NOT I50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac IN THIS SPACý "IN T 1IS SP CE 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac -II NRI 33 -j NPI e.50 I 1 1 1 1 t J ______ J _______ J I I _______ . J _______ i ______

Z-£IR 0 \\.- 0o 7 ,TT, 2.

• E*J'
• FORM NDE-UT-4 DUKE POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID 1SGC-INLET-W5SE Item No: B05.070.005 Remarks:

SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION DUE TO NOZZLE CONFIGURATION [] NO SCAN 03 LIMITED SCAN E1 02 1 020 cwO ccw FROM L _ _N/A to L _N/A INCHES FROM WO 2.0"_ to BEYOND ANGLE C3 0 R 45 0 60 03 Other 330 FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN 0 LIMITEDSCAN 01 2 1 2 0 cw ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE. 0D 0 0] 45 03 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0l NO SCAN 10 LIMITED SCAN 01 02 0 1C 20 cwO ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE-03 0 0l 45 0l 60 01 Other FROM DEG to DEG 0 NO SCAN 0 LIMITED SCAN SURFACE 0'1 0 2 BEAM DIRECTION El 10 2 0 cwrO ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WU ----- to ANGLE: 0l 0 0] 45 0l 60 01 Other FROM DEG to 0 no Sheetof CL Date: LAoJ Date: ;ý*'a S.......... A

• J I A m*

A* Sheet__,o LL

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined 0D Base Metal 0 Weld 01 Near Surface 01 Boltinq 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 1.17 IN. x 2.55 IN. = 2.98 SQ. IN. 2.98 SQ. IN. x 119.4 IN. = 355 81 CU. IN. Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Scan 1 Angle Direction (sq.in.) (in.) (cu.in.) (cu.in.) 1 2 3 4 330 450 450 450 1 2 Cw CCw 2.98 0 2.98 2.98 119.4 119.4 119.4 119.4 A ttJ4 C.?C(.A  35b.81 0 355.81 355.81 1067.43 355.81 355.81 355.81 355.81 14232.4 IV .W 000 100.00 100.00 75.00 '9 0 () C) Vlý ý- 2 , 1ý

)LIUJII

7A(~.I Z

a a a I a K.LL 2J  PiV4A I  a iij - I 4 a 'I KLF7Kia a j7 I -] -V I I - I 1 A.L)2/AJa a I I a 4 I I a I la 4 I 4 I

IiIa a

I IlaIjIl: a I liii ii a I J.a a 1 4 I I a 4 a a I I I i a I I a I a 4 a 7j42 I a I I B y/~ j Date.3,?01f Prob No..2-0SI 0-7d.9 Checked by ~Date (Azf k -166' 4T A G P,. r .v -A4 I I ~ ~ ~ JI a -M .aa -3. IA I

}.cix'FSf ic:, R 1 o-ooT /7T/',*}-tACHMET72 P rs5 5*- DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start: 1015 Form NDE-UT-2A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish: 1036 Revision 4

Station, McGuire Unit:

1 Component/Weld ID: 1SGC-OUTLET-W6SE Date: 3/30/01 Weld Length (in.). 119.4" Surface Condition: AS MFG.Lo: 9.2.3 Surface Temoerature: 81 ° F Examiner: Larry Mauldin t].*,/6ZA Level: II Scans: Pyrometer S/N: MONDE 27010 SCal Due: 8/20/01 Examiner: James L Panel A z _*_Level: II 45 El 73.5 dB 70 E dB Configuration: CIRC, WELD Procedure: NDE-930 Rev. 1 FC: 45T E 73.5 dB 70T 1 dB S2 Flow S1 N/A 60 0 dB SE to NOZZLE Scan Surface: OD Calibraton Sheet No1 60T' dB Applies to NDE-680 only 0101051. 0101052 Other: 330- 63.S dB Skew Angle: N/A Max Mp W L Beam Exam IND t Max Max Max Li L2 W1 Mpl W2 Mp2 Dir. Surf. Scan Damps _ _Ref 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dacD DO NOT WAITE HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA D NOT WRIT IN T AIS SPXCE 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac IN THIS SPACI* 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac NR1 33Y N 4 R I e.5 0° Remarks: Limitations: (see NDE-UT-4) 0 90% or greater coverage obtained: yes C no 0 Sheet.*j. of iL I--i L'A~- f

• ,*Pl Reviewed E/

vel: Date: Autnorizea inspector: LA IZ zjot_ Iit:II I us.,. 805.070.006 Le' L.; d L t:ý.

RFR1~o-cc7 Alr-2 PPASE DUKE POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Item No: B05.070.006 E NO SCAN 03 LIMITED SCAN FROM L N/A to L SURFAC N/A ANGLE-0 0 M 45 0 60 El Other C3 NO SCAN 0] LIMITED SCAN FROM L to L ANGLE. 00 0 -,5 AS 60 Cl C3 NO SCAN 0 LIMITED SCAN FROM L to L ANGLE. 0 0 0] 45 01 60 0 Other SUR II NO SCAN 0 LIMITED SCAN FROM L to L ANGLE 0 0 03 45 0 60 0 Other

• fthmt BEAM DIRECTION ED 1 i 2 0l cw 0 Ccw INCHES FROM WO to BEYOND FROM 0

DEG to 360 DEG SURFACE 0102 BEAM DIRECTION 0 1 O ] 2 [] cw 13 ccw INCHES FROM WO FROM SURFACE 0 1 012 FORM NDE-UT-4 Revision 1 I Remarks: 330 to DEG to DEG BEAM DIRECTION ] 1 O 2 13 cw 13 ccw INCHES FROM WO FROM FACE 0 2 to DEG to DEG BEAM DIRECTION 0 1 0 2 El cw [] ccw INCHES FROM WO FROM to DEG to DUi ONZL OFGRTO Li no 'I Sheet L 0?  Date: Sheet _. of '-t [] no ther Date: /1 L,. fk-E.s, -\\ I Rema~rks: ,^^t ql in- ' QG,"-C-I ITI ET-W6iSE ,,,Of i lyul ic" u DUE TO NOZZLE CONFIGURATION ,q,'4 o

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined 0D Base Metal 09 Weld D Near Surface C0 Boltinq C0 Inner Radi4s Area Calculation Volume Calculation 1.17 IN. x 2.55 IN. = 2.98 SQ. IN. 2.98 SQ. IN. x 119.4 IN. = 355.81 CU. IN. Coverage Calculations Area Beam Examined Direction (sq.in.) 2.98 0 Length Examined (in.) 11.IJbW 119.4 119.4 Volume Examined (cu.in.) 0 2.98 119.4 35581 2.98 1194 35581 Auk &A"-t

• • ,~r_

1067.43 Volume Required Percent Coverage (cu.in.) 355.81 100.00 35581 0.00 35581 100.00 35581 100.00 142324 75.00 1 330 2 2 45* 1 3 450 CW 4 450 CCW \\ Q

17 0 0 V co cc !jl ZZ)

DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start: 0850 NDE-UT-3A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR LAMINAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish: 0915 Revision 2 Station McGuire Unit. 1 Component/Weld ID: 1PZR-SKIRT Date: 4/1/01 Nominal Material Thickness (in): 1.5 Weld Length (in.): 274" Surface Temperature: 81° Deg F Measured Maenal Thickness (in) 1 49-5.8 Lo" 9.2.1 Pyrometer S/N: MCNDE 27205 Surface Condition AS GROUND Calibration Sheet No: Cal Due: 7/18101 E i 0101060 Configuration: CIRC. WELD Examiner Larry. Mauldin/*.,/ J -# Level: Ill Examiner Gary J Moss j S2 Flow SI Procedure NDE-640 /Rtv I FC: SKIRT to LOWER HEAD Ampl L1 WI Mpl W2 Mp2 L2 WI Mpl W2 Mp2 INa ren a rem a rem rem z rem z rem rem >rem a rem z rem 2 rem Exam Damps NO 2,1 BW BW BW BW BW BW BW BW BW BW BW Surf. LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB NI 00 'A I ?'1'1ý N Jý ý2

080FrID-T2 + 0938 DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start: IULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish: Station McGuire Unit: 1nn/W l ID PR-K Weld Length (n ) 274" Surface Condition: AS GROUND Lo: 9.2.1 Su Examiner Larry Mauldin,**. Level. III Examiner Gary J Moss Level-I1 Procedure NDE-952 hv 0 !FC' N/A Calibration Sheet No 0101061 0101062 Max Mp W L IND --- I % Max Max Max Li Ref 20%c DO LOT WRITE HM 50%( IN T IS SPXCE 100 10000 NRIL3 0

Scans, 45

___dB 45T ___dB 3', ..6"X 64 dB 60Tt dB Other: 70 E 70T l0 dB dB 0°-30 dB Py Ca Date: 4/1/01 rface Tern rometer SI I Due: Configuration: Revision 4 perature: 81 6 F N: MCNDE 27205 7/18/01 CIRC. WELD $2 Flow S1 SKIRT to LOWER HEAI Scan Surface: OD Applies to NDE-680 only Skew Angle: N/A J j _____ r I.

f.

Beam Exam Scan Damps L2 W1 Mpl W2 Mp2 Beam Dir. Exam Surf. - i I. 1 20%dac iac A Jac ,dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac I 00%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac I 00%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac I 00%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac Dd NOT IN THIS 1 4 1 + 4 t t WRITE SPACý -4 1 i 4 1 1V TI ND. 2 1 rv 0° INT II I _ I I I I IND. VP At-AA A V. I R 0 E P-CIRC. WVELD Form NDE-UT-2A 0850 Damps Scan NV 2 I AX I

PR c-L7 ATI'3 P1Z 1 3 DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start: ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS 1 Exam Finish: Station McGuire Unit: 1 Component/Weld ID: IPZR-SKIRT Weld Lenath (in.): Surface Condition: Examiner David Zmmerman/) l.evel: 11 Examiner Level: Procedure NDE-952 Rev 0 FC: Calibration Sheet No 0101063 INM-- ax Mp W IND* 4 Max Max Re'. DO rOT WI IN T IS SP NRI ,A5° N/A I I L Max Li AS GROUND Scans: 45 52.5 dB 70 45T CE 52.5 dB 70T El 60 0 dB 60T C3 dB Other: L2 W1 Lo: 9.2.1 dB dB dB Sur Pyr Ca[ 0856 0929 ___________________I_ Dae Form NDE-UT-2A Revision 4 Date: 4/1/01 rface Temperature: 81 a F ometer S/N: MCNDE 27205 [Due: 7/18/01 Configuration: CIRC.NELD S2 Flow S1 SKIRT to LOWER HEAD Scan Surface: OD Applies to NDE-680 only Skew Angle: j ________ Mpl W2 Mp2 _~ea Exam Beam Dir. Exam Surf. Scan I. 1 I I 1 1 1 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac Do I4 )NOT THIS I 1 I WRITI SPACE ____________ J ____________ 2 _____________ 1 ____________.1 __________________________ Damps 274" ITE KCE YZt-R 61-667 ATT--5 ?Rrzý'b 3 n 4/1/01

DUKE POWER COMPA ULTRASONIC INDICATION RESOLUT Acceptance Standard: INDICATION "1 WAS DETERMINED TO BE A GEOMETRIC REFLE( WOULD NOT HOLD UP TO SKEWING. PLOTTING OF THE INDICA" Item No B08 020 001A Acceptable Indications

1. 1 Rejectable Indications, These indications have been compared with previous ultrasonic data Examiner Level:

Date: Larry Mauldin 111 4/1/01 Reviewer. Level: Date: Revewe. / } '*

• /alIjo I%I V\\

  erI' S TOv' FormN067T NY P nF"- 4 Revision 1 "ION SHEET "'TOR DUE TO THE RADIUS OF THE I.D. WELD CAP. INDICATION TION SUPPORTS THE DETERMINATION. 0 Yes ED No previous data available "Sheet of t Authorized Inspector: I SI V'*i Date: V" le q ý I Form NDE-UT-8

ZF1Z 01-607 hTE.3 PFQZJ5  (j&) 7 cn / Till / / 7 A 3 ot'. ot02zM ?A'X.~~

.2 -r 1+/- N 2.751? \\ '-'C \\ / ) / / / 'I-- A'  / / y 7 RFR OV 667 A1TK MýF-r BC A re Tr x2.75 s/- C?5~.

,60 4

c5 x k 7-r *c~ 2.75 -.7tr) S, 6 95t,5' 7.s .5r~ 4P4 5. 7- 'R~OE Ore) 0(01p4 rThj PJ A' -A 7 7,

R~FR bI-bO 7 A73 P E7 -1 D.___ 4,5 4Cl W 115 CC"cc w nrrr A.~5 8' /.77 A' D- ~ qj~f v2>1-~1 38 !I - A -D 1, 0- - 1 2 1,05/ o ' (y~s 17Y) 0/.75'- 108.s~ 11) .5xi/i 5 so A/or L 3o4~Ajucb Kcyi~c f4? 6fl 7s u 7 6 6-, LS+(PL0lkf I JC8n ?A Vý-7 0;5~ k/o "-t ýS ý r) z '-9 (ýlfF-S-SO - ý.SU6)pa ti, T'I'Em "' /. o ý + -s ý /. -78.-,2 /"/ o vL-v4 2 -s c:A 601),QNETý5 6 In s T /Y/, qs, (Q a1w v D ON ýGýu

Y/

L /Y/ G T- = -c- -ý -,? - 9 DANVO oq t0afu -d

? ct

ý9*(F-564

1) co

-a) 4 L0,4d L 2 z ýj Y'LL -V L ?ý X LL 09/ QZ -0 9 U Q V T 77711 ýz Fri,\\ N tj vjvv v-.ev ýV(ýJ_ I I ý f\\-a ýj -Aiv ý99 A 0 )IAý

Ju Ppo er ý3 k / t< /,4 1,- -R o D-Zý z IL ) /Y 5 p ac <ýrh A 2f:- A P12cf- -5 s ci P, I L r-- f- ?M)E ID JQ" JUdAeL- 'lz 1ý Y.2 ý. C I) 5 2 Apt5A P3CANýjc-bt /8 7y -:. /9 z 0 /,v . oq -ý-. ) q -z.2 8 s 6.7 S ý, /,V - ( ýe E-A A Ir ts COU A] 2 6 q6f (3cnkur-j--) RFR 6ý-607 AIT-3

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined 19 Base Metal 0 Weld 0 Near Surface 01 Bolting 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation SEE DRWG 6.7 IN. 6.7 IN. X 274 IN.= 1835.8 CU.IN. Coverage Calculations

lume Volume an #

Angle Direction (sq.in.) (in.) (cu.in ) (cu in.) 1 0 NIA 5.12 274 1402.88 18358 2 45 1 34 274 931.6 18358 3 30 2 6.42 274 175908 18358 4 45 CW 5.12 274 1402.88 1835.8 5 45 CCw 512 274 1402.88 18358 TOTAL AGGREGATE COVERAGE 6899 32 9179 75 16 "?A,, to "( k0 1 I-(,

VASFFr? PL1SYAb67 /11TA(I4MPIJT II P1IGES \\-\\ DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start: 1005 Form NDE-UT-2A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish: 1020 Revision 4 Station McGuire Unit: 1 Component/Weld ID: 1NCIF-1-7 Date: 3/28/01 Weld Length (in,), 86 4" Surface Condition: AS GROUND Lo: 9.1.1.1 Surface Temperature: 80 ° F Examiner David Zimmerman/? ,(L, Level: II Scans: Pyrometer S/N: MCNDE 27205 Cal Due: 7/18/01 Examiner Gary J MOSS Level. II 45 GI 68.0 dB 70 -1 dB Configuration: CIRC. WELD Procedure NDE-610 k'ev 4 FC: 45T 7 76.5 dB 70T C3 dB S2 Flow Si 60 I-1 dB Pump RCP1A to PIPE Scan Surface: OD Calibatio Shet No60T~ dB Cahbrat4o Sheet N6Applies to NDE-680 only O101045 000/Other: dB Skew Angle: N/A Max Mp W L Beam Exam IND 2 I Max Max Max LI-, L2 Wi Mpl W2 Mp2 Dir. Surf. Scan Damps Ref I 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac N. DO T WRITE HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA Ni50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac IN THIS SPACE IN T IS SP CE 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac NRI 45-

R FR o01-7 ATjq IPR6E a DUKE POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Component/Weld ID 1NC1F-1-7 El NO SCAN C3 LIMITED SCAN FROM L to L A,, /'- = C1 45 C3 60 C3 Other SURFACE C1 NO SCAN El LIMITED SCAN FROM L to L O I2 11 INCHES FROM WO ANGLE 0 0 0 45 C3 60 C3 Other SURFACE EC NO SCAN Cl LIMITED SCAN FROM L to L 0102 El INCHES FROM WO ANGLE CD 0 Cl 45 C3 60 C Other SURFACE C1 NO SCAN fi-0 q2 C LIMITED SCAN FROML toL t ANGLE Cl 0 C 45 C 60 C3 Other I .i Item No: B09.011.007 SURFACE 1 l 2 0D INCHES FROM WO BEAM DIRECTION 1 i 2 El cw El ccw CL to BEYOND FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG 4 SEE NOTE ABOVE BEAM DIRECTION 1 01 2 0 cw El cow CL to .5" FROM 0 DEG to 360 DE=G BEAM DIRECTION 1 i 2 0] cw C ccw FROM FROM DEGto 30 DE to DEG to DEG BEAM DIRECTION 1 1 EC 2 03 cw Cl ccw ICHES FROM WO FROM to DEG to FORM NDE-UT-4 Revision 1 Remarks: NOE BOHN CN IIE NOTE: BOTH NO SCAN & LIMITED SCAN ARE DUE TO WELD CROWN AND PUMP CONFIGURATION. It ayes /no Sheet - of '- C3 yes no, Da ke: I Date: ]ý? Remarks: SEE NOTE AB3OVE 2 Sheet e-_ of l u_- q l"

PnGF-3 DUKE POWER COMPANY UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET RlVi NDE-UT-5 Revision 1 EXAMINATION SURFACE 1 4 I Ii I 3 WELD 2 1 ETVFFFFFFFBTFFFFB1ThThIIH EXAMINAT'ION SURFACE 2 1 II liii 111111 Compcrient ID/Weld No. ldc 0 -)- Remarks: pe t ~ (tLA-g,) t~z r jpr fIL 4 '?&~t;;iI AItem No: cl nil, Dw?_ -x a m in e r fijJ Level: - Date: 031 lQAwri Rv 1.1  ILeveLZZU I Date: 5,-S-ýot 'Qn'j~jniR .I eve I Authorized InsbcctOrL 1 ~ ~ ~ 7 Auhoze -nhctr 270 90 1 80 Sheet k..of ' Date: L41-j11ol S 2 111 3 III'. 4 '1'11 RFR 6)-607 AV-1 T "I F4 r t-ý -3

o.

2 t 2.5 I III I II -i-n -. ji t 0 R 4ý4 n t'- < d-'> f "ý riýFl ý

1 450 S2 1.1 86.4 95 95 100.00 2 450 Si 0 0 0 95 000 3 450 CW 0.18 86.4 156 95 1642 4 450 CCW 0.18 864 156 95 16.42 U 1 -1 0.0 0 TOTAL AGGREGATE COVERAGE = 132.8 /4 = 33.2 Prepared By V'/ Reviewed By I, -1/

DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start: 0347 Form NDE-UT-2A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish: 0418 Revision 4

Station, McGuire Unit:

1 Component/Weld ID: 1NC-3087-Wl Date: 3/13/01 Weld Length (in) 101 0' Surface Condition: AS GROUND Lo: 9.1.1.1 Surface Temperature: 119 F Examiner James L Panel -Level, II Scans-Pyrometer S/N: MCNDE 27205 Cal Due: 7/18/01 Examiner Gayle E Hous / Level' If 45 ED 59.5 dB 70 C3 dB 7rConfiguration: PC.PI TO PC.A =-ocedure NDE-610 Rev 4 FC: 45T E0 75 dB 70T 13 dB S2 Flow S1 6 0 0 dB ELBOW to PIPE Scan Surface: OD Calibration Sheet No, 60T I--] dB A n Sa N D I Applies to NDE-680 only 010,017 0101018 Other: dB Skew Angle: N/A Max Mp W L L Mpi Beam Exam INDC

4.

Max Max Max Li L2 Wi 1 W2 Mp2 Dir. Surf. Scan Damps Ref DO I IN TA OT Is W1 SPD ZITE \\CE 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac 1 00%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac 20%dac HMA 50%dac 100%dac D( IN ) NOT THIS WRITI SPACE R, 4.5°C Remarks 01, 98-20 Limitations (see NDE-UT-4) 0 Reviewed By I I N'

RFR 61-667 F\\1T'A \\RQ--Z Cc FRM N 1E-UT-4 Revision I ,',AAI,J-4 In isJC'.Afl7-W1 I IfriUI II 'U V VI%.4 0 NO SCAN 0 LIMITED SCAN FROM L 16 25" to L 34.25 ANGLE 03 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other El NO SCAN 0D LIMITED SCAN FROM L 44 5" to L 56 51 ANGLE 0 0 0 45 0 60 07 Other 02 NO SCAN 01 , I MIT D SCAN Item No: B09.01 1.008 SURFAC 010E E 2 BEAM DIRECTION E0 1 0 2 0 cw El ccw INCHES FROM WO 2.75" to BEYOND FROM N/A DEG to NIA DEG SURFACE 011 101 2 INCHES FROM SL 0 FROM L 69 75' to L 81 75" ANGLE 0 0 0 45 0 60 03 Other St E) NO SCAN 0] LIMITED SCAN FROM L 98 0" to L 3.0" ANGLE E0 0 E) d5 C0 60 0 Other Prepared By Larry Mauldin Reviewed Byv JRFACE 1 0 2 12 INCHES FROM WO FR( JRFACE 1URDA2 BEAM DIRECTION 1 1 0D 1 0 2 0 cw [] ccw WO 2.75" to BEYOND FROM N/A DEG to N/A DEG BEAM DIRECTION 1 0 2 03 Cw 0 ccw 2.75" to BEYOND DM N/A DEG to N/A DEG BEAM DIRECTION E0 1 0 2 03 cw E] ccw INCHES FROM WO 2.75" to BEYOND FROM N/A DEG to N/A T.RT LTI ATRemRErks: -DUE 1T4 8.0 iIPi _tin97NWI DUE TO 8.0" PIPE RESTRAINT Cýzb, lo'II Date-3/13/01 ISketch(s) attached C yes DU O80 IP ETAN DU TO10 IE EiRI DUE TO 8.0" PIPE RESTRAINT Sheet Z_. of /L Authorized Inspector: a Date.w,-L,--c4 V DUKE POWER COMPANY T'RT T.TMTTATTON REPORT I DUE TO 12.0" PIPE RESTRAINT1 R ra NJ. I Remarks: DUE TO 8.0" PIPE5 RE-S I RAIN I DUE TO 8.0" PIPE RESTRAINT

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination VolumelArea Defined l] Base Metal ID Weld 11 Near Surface 0 Bolting I] Inner Radius "Area Calculation Volume Calculation ,4.5 IN X.73 IN 3 29SQ IN 3.29 SQ IN. X 101 IN 332 29 CU IN Coverage Calculations LL Area Length Volume Volume S Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Scan # Angle Direction (sq in.) (in.) (cu in.) (cu in.) 1 45 2 3.29 101 332.29 332.29 2 45 1 329 47 15463 15463 2 45 1 .82 54 4428 177.66 3 45 CW 3.29 47 15463 15463 3 45 CW 274 54 14796 17766 4 45 CCw 329 47 154.63 15463 4 45 CCW 2.74 54 14796 17766 45 L AGGREGATE COVERAGE 1136.38 1329 16 85.50 -I ) bi

wi, Lc~oo W\\M L t, t UV6:/-O.AC~lAd 's YL ýS a. Qv--r6ý- C~JCkrW-o 2v 7V S b'1 3 9 /&. 0"/ /a /8'0" TA* Z,19 0~6./-z (9( .2/-Ofg RFIZ 01-607 ATV.'-\\ Lv k " I ? Sr-Li 3 .7 3, ? <;- n s ý ý- .i73" A - 37' Z 7 <;s -M ý L,,u i Q-,5- -(-'Oo K.-7 3 it ::. -?, 2-6 ý' = -3. Z 9 -s ý./t/. 1-73 /f 2- (L

P~k~SY~. ~J~c~V6c~ R~~N~kTq PAGES <3-1 FORM NDE-UT-4 DUKE POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revision 1 ComDor'ent/Weld ID INC1F-107 Item No: B09.011.061 Remarks: SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION NOZZLE CONGIFURATION [] NO SCAN 0 LIMITEDSCAN 3 02 01 1 I 2 0] cw 11 ccw FROM L - - to-L INCHES FROM WO __ 1.4"--. to BEYOND ANGLE: 0 0 0] 45 1' 60 0 Other FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG "SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0] NO SCAN LIMITED SCAN 0102 O1O2O cw0ccw =ROM L to L INCHES FROM WO. .to ANGLE. 0 0 0 45 03 60 03 Other FROM DEG to. . DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0-' NO SCAN NOSANC 1 11 2 [] 1 [] 2 E] cw [] ccw 0 LIMITED SCAN FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO. to ANGLE 0] 0 0 45 03 60 03 Other FROM DEGto... DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0] NO SCAN 0] LIMITED SCAN 0i 2 0 1C 20 cwO ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE. 01 0 0l 45 0 60 0l Other FROM DEGto____ Prepared By Level-Date: 3 Sketch(s) attached 0 yes 0 no Sheet ( of i '/ ( .., /IL{-- Date z1..-,J--, J'Authorized Inspector: A kV L. - Date: I',,I

V)CA2AL.tIN7 tW.t=A P,,ee.  Js j 1 I - DUKE POWER COMPANY ULTRASONIC INDICATION RECORD FOR PIPING

Station, McGuire Unit:

Surface Condition' AS (RHUUNU 1 ComnonentiWeld ID: 1NC1 F-107 FORM NDE-UT-10 Revision 0 Date: 3/23/01

1.

.1 __________ ID:_I___F-__0 Rev: 13: B0 .0 1.0A II Item No: B09.01 1.061 Procedure: NDE-600 r -x a i n e Q,'.... a A.-J & ' ' I ! / (.* &...... Examiner: James L Panel j evel: 11 Calibration Sheet No: 0101030 Lo: 9.1.1.3 Configuration: S2-NOZZLE to Si-ELBOW Scan Surface: OD Remarks C ý te-,-7 h7T. t4 'P-I I is -NQJ CIRC. SDate: 3/23/01 FC: N/A Rev: 13

JDUKE POWER COMPANY UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET V,.-,,NATION SURFACE 1 A 3 2 WELD 11111II1I ItI IIII 'RzvJ, t, NDE-LJT-5 Revision I EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 1 1111 II 2 I'll I II 3 4 I'lll 1Component ID/Weld No. 1, C 1-/ 7 Re*,2rKs. Item No: 00.0// Iae.,)Level:

• Date: 3.23.0 Reviewed By:

Level: a Date: 3 c I.,uthorized Inspector Date: 270 I' -cI 90 180 Sheet.3.__of 7 III I - I I ?\\FTZ 6k-66-7 ?P\\GF-lk I I I V

DUKE POWER COMPANY ULTRASONIC INDICATION RESOLUTION SHEET C~n,A rH6 INDICATIONS #1 & 02 ARE BOTH SHEAR WAVES REDIRECTING OFF WELD INTERFACE INTO WELD ROOT. INDICATION DID NOT HOLD UP TO SKEWING OF TRANSDUCERS. 700 ANGLE LESS THAN HALF OF 600. WSY-70 SHOWED NO SIGNAL. Item No. B09.011.061 E] Yes 0 No previous data available Sheet of: Date: Authorized inspector:

siz c-cc7 NWL\\  DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-UT-5 UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET Revision 1 EXAMINATION SURFACE 1 4 III 3 2 1_LtJl!IMlI WELD I I II11.11 lIIIl EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 1, 2 IlIII 3 4 ,Dli,li I,II I 11111111 C0o/t4.AGr*-. I.5 7 ,g' C P/pM , n-* ,4-*-._ O.3 0 -,a:3 0 )L 3 Component ID/Weld No. Remarks: cu,,zoTb-.S 603.ooi.ooa Z Item No: -3(. o 0 I1.CI P-minor//., Z-ILevel: I Date: s 5L_51c Reviewed By: Authorized Inspector 0 ILveI:  270 I Date:,T'.r29. ) 90 180 SheetSof2--. Date: ~&-- 7 Level: ýff-III 44 v I1

-or DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination VolumelArea Defined 0 Base Metal 09 Weld 01 Near Surface 11 Bolting C3 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation AREA = B12 (H1 + H2) = 15'72(0.33" + 0.37") =.75"(0.7") = 0.53 SQ. IN. VOLUME = AREA x LENGTH = 0.53 SQ. IN. x 33.8 IN. = 17.9 CU IN-Coverage Calculations Area Beam Examined Direction (sq in.) 00 0.23 0 53 0 53 AGGREGATE Lengt Examin (in) 33.8 33 8 33 8 33 8 COVER) h Volume Volume ied Examined Required Percent Coverage (cu.in) (cu.in.) 0 17.9 7.77 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 AGE 43 57 71.6 60.85 2 60°RL S1 0 30 33-8 10.14 17.9 SUPPLEMENTAL COVERAGE 56 65% OF 25% (1 SCAN) = 14 16% OF TOTAL WELD '2

4:-

I. ý-. I 0 0 62 n Stan # 1 2 3 4 Angle 60° 60'

45.

45.

SHEAR S2 S1 CW CCW WAVE 5665

URcA-ocl T. 1 PIC \\5 McGuire Unit #1 EOC14 Item # ___ o_ _o_,_ W eld# _1_C -7" No Data Recorded. Reference Calibration Sheet #'s 0 o 0 o51 D 3 L45": C~l0 10:5 (p 0 ?-PA._ 7 oi 7

1 450 2 450 3 600 4 600 SHEAR 3 600L ow oCW S2 S1 WAVE S2 0.94 0.94 0.38 0 44 44 44 44 AGG. COVERAGE 0.59 44 41.36 41.36 16.72 0 99.44 25.96 41.36 41.36 41.36 16544 41.36 DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined t] Base Metal 0 Weld D Near Surface 01 Boltina D Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 2.0" x 0.47" = 0.94 SQ. IN. 0.94 SQ. IN. x 44" = 41.36 CU. IN. -i Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.) (in.) (cu.in.) (cu.in.) Percent Coverage L/.V 100.00 40.43 0.00 60.11 62.77 RL WAVE COVERAGE 62.77% x 25% (1 SCAN) = 15.69% V A L-ý ( I- (

~~~AAVS ~ ~ ~ OR NDE~7 \\~\\~~MN'~ -UT-1 DUKE POWER COMPANY.FORM NDE-UT-10 ULTRASONIC INDICATION RECORD FOR PIPING Revision 0 Station:

McGuire, Unit:

1 Component/Weld ID: 1 NC1 F-3613-3092 Date: 3/25/01 Surface Conditior: Examiner: Jay A. Eaton Examiner-Gayle E. Houser Calibration Shee! No' Item No: B09.011.069 Procedure: NDE-600 Rev: 13 FC: N/A Lo: 9.1.1.1 Configuration: S1-PIPE to S2-NOZZLE Scan Surface: OD Remarks 0101037 I Examiner: Jay A. Eaton CIRC.

DUKE POWER COMPANY UT PROFILEIPLOT SHEET

Y.,.INAT I0 SURFACE I WELD S3 2

1 QoZZ-:LZ - Ccmponent ID/Weld No. 1K*.CGI * - 3(. I. Remarks: "Item No: *O .o\\.C),D( Examiner. _Level: al: I Date: 3Z.51o 1 Reviewed BY: /4 1 Level:. Date:.,,2*, I Authorized Inspector Date: 3-#J 270 EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 3 4 1I1II liii 'lil Itl1 90 180 Sheet-Z of, 7 L

1J? ci4c7 A1T.9 PA6E I DUKE POWER COMPANY Form NDE-UT-8 ULTRASONIC INDICATION RESOLUTION SHEET Revision 1 Acceptance Standard: IND. -"1 - 600 IS A GEO* A 70c SHEAR WAVE O0 Item No' B09.011.069 Acceptable Indications: Rejectable Indications: viETRIC REFLECTOR FROM THE WELD ROOT CONFIGURATION. THIS REFLECTOR WAS NOT SEEN WITH qJ THE 60' CALIBRATION, A 600 L WAVE, OR A WSY-70 BI-MODAL TRANSDUCER. IND. #1 - 600 These indications have been com 1ared with previous ultrasonic data 0 Yes 11 No previous data available Examiner' Level: Date: Sheet of 7 "Jay A. Eaton I 3/25/01 nn6 Auithoelred tnnwctcor: Date: Reviewer. /V/

vt,.

?--e-4 I J.29a/ IND. 60

(I DUKE POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Component/Weld ID. 1NC1 F-3613-3092 SURFACE 0 NO SCAN C3 LIMITED SCAN 2 FROM L -,-0" to L + 44" IN ANGLE-0 EC 45 3 60 C Other SURFACE C3 NO SCAN E) LIMITED SCAN 2 FROM L 0" to L + 44" IN ANGLE. C[ 0 Cl 45 El 60 C3 Other SURFACE C NO SCAN C LIMITED SCAN FROM L to L IN ANGLE C1 0 C 45 C 60 Cl Other SURFACE Cl NO SCAN C[ LIMITED SCAN 1 FROM L toL _1_ ANGLE: C0 C 45 C 60 tl Other Item No: B09.0 1.069 RVR 0 A- 067 A-L PGF 17 FORM NDE-UT-4 Revision 1 Remrks NOZZLE CONFIGURATION SHEAR WAVE LIMITED DUE TO SS WELD METAL BEAM DIRECTION 0 1 0 2 13 ew O ccw CHES FROM WO CL + 1" to BEYOND FROM DEG to DEG BEAM DIRECTION 0 103 2 cw 13 ccw CHES FROM WO -CL - 0.7" to WELD CL FROM DEG to DEG BEAM DIRECTION 0 1 13 2 0 cwr 0 ICHES FROM 2 -I -i cow WO to FROM DEG to DEG BEAM DIRECTION C 1 El 2 0 cw 0 ccw 4CHES FROM WO to FROM DEG to -4 IJ Date: Sketch(s) attached 0 yes 03 no Sheet jof I7 AutoriedInsectr:.uT >A Date3... z f 6) J* Remarks: NOZZLE CONFIGURATION I 2 I Authorized lnspector:'lqýý

gRER1o6-c~c7 ATh91 P)?6E21 DUKE POWER COMPANY UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET EXAMINATION SURFACE 1 - 'Pi?- 4 ItI rn)1A-U 3 millm lii ll1 A jL,:!A 0 - II 2 1111i II111 1q~L4 T 1i l WE IIj444 NDE-UT-5 Revision I LDlo1_.ZZLz - EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 1 2 3 4 444Lia 4-~H i-` 1lii111 111111111 1111 -li-_ C) C, IA - u 0 .k Component ID/Weld No. Remarks: i Item No: C0\\. OC.D Examiner Level: T Date: 31' lReviewed By: L el:.2 Date: 3-.27*Ot /Authorized lnspeftbr. Date: 3.*- -0 270 90 180 Sheet_..of 7

RFR, 61-6M7 ATiFf '22-Z McGuire Unit #1 EOC14 Item # . 0_,09 W eld# I__s - _o_ No Data Recorded. Reference Calibration Sheet #'s oi~o3o,e,-* ° (p 1 0,-- 3_4 l ?A ( 1Oý 7 D:-

x'sT1Q  M-co7 'AtThC\\\\'tWV&T '4 FABE5 23-2(G Item No: B09.011.207 Remarks: or.pI 1 ai l'nI I-6-43 VAV CONFIGUA I IO SURFACE 0] 1 0l 2 El NO SCAN 03 LIMITED SCAN ANGLE 03 0 0] 45 E 60 E0 Other BEAM DIRECTION 0l 1 i 2 03 cw 0 ccw INCHES FROM WO CL + 0.5" to BEYOND FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG SURFACE C 1 11 2 03 NO SCAN 0l LIMITED SCAN ANGLE-0] 0 0l 15 01 60 [] Other 0 NO SCAN 0] LIMITED SCAN ANGLE 0 0 03 45 03 60 01 Other 01 NO SCAN 0 LIMITED SCAN PFROM L to L BEAM DIRECTION C[ 1 13 2 00 cw [] ccw INCHES FROM WO FROM SURFACE 0l 1 0 2 to DEG to DEG BEAM DIRECTION C3 1 iC 2 03 cw E3 ccw INCHES FROM WO FROM SURFACE 0 1[ 2 to DEG to DEG BEAM DIRECTION C 1 0 2 01 cw 0 ccw INCHES FROM WO to DEGto ____________________________________ I ono Sheet I Date: lok I )~ Sketch(s) attached 0 yes I Authorized Inspector: DUKE POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT FROM L to L FORM NDE-UT-4 Revision 1 FROM L to L FROM L to L -I Date: She te o.,,-,Z []no / RawS-T FK RýL%ý.F q m Remarks: VALVE CONFIGURATION

rZFR 6)-6o7 ATP,, q PA6E 2q DUKE POWER COMPANY-- NDE-UT-5 UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET Revision 1 EXAMINATION SURFACE I - "1 1r', WELD -A,/ý_r EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 4 3 2 1 c 1 0 I1 ll't1 iiiI 1111111 ii Th-ryl AA c II Z II liI!! ES___._ 2.S H

e. Zq

( .3 4 3 1 _____________________________________________ Component ID/Weld No. lKAA -5L

emarms:

270 Item No: -5 .o,. 0 0-7 Examiner. A

• -'Y*V
• Level: r :I Date: 5I3\\Icn Reviewed By:

4 ý Level: ZV Date: /-/,0/ Authorized Inspector: --Date: '.V,, o\\ 0ý .j_ 90 !.ie taSen 180 SheetLZofiLL I I I I / 7' L 3 I I I Q.T' I J-__ - t, a :2ý

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined n0 Base Metal L] Weld D Near Surface D Boltinq C0 Inner Radius N Area Calculation Volume Calculation ID 5z 1.7 IN. x 0.34 IN. = 0.58 SQ. IN. 0.58 SQ IN. x 34 IN. = 19.72 CU. IN. Q zr-S*-Coverage Calculations OW Area Length Volume Volume (X; Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.) (in.) (cu.in.) (cu.in.) .nn n' 1 450 2 450 3 60* 4 600 SHEAR 3 600L CW CCW S2 S1 WAVE S2 0.58 0.58 0.24 34 34 34 0 34 AGGREGATE COVERAGE 0.34 34 lu.Ile 19.72 8.16 0 47.6 11.56 19.72 19.72 19.72 19.72 78.88 19.72 100.00 41.38 0.00 60.34 58.62 RL WAVE COVERAGE 58.62 x 25% (1 SCAN) = 14.66% 0 'J3 C) I

RrR 01-b7 RV--, I yATT.Lq PAGE 26 McGuire Unit #1 EOC14 Item # Weld H No Data Recorded. "-,0 c\\. o Z. 07 -A ý- -(~ Reference Calibration Sheet #'s L< q 4 ci o\\~ ~ L So* (0" -D

1791) W1-T FbR P9II 61-607 A'.,"- PP?-E5 27-36

REV, I

FORM NDE-UT-4 DUKE POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revision 1 Component.AVeld ID' NIlF-645 Item No: B09.011.219 Remarks: SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION VALVE CONFIGURATION [] NO SCa\\N E O C4 1 [] 2 [] 1 [] 2 0] cw 1:1 ccw El LIMITED SCAN FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO. CL +_0.5"_. to -BEYOND ANGLE: -1 0 El 45 M 6o 03 Other FROM. 0 - DEG to 360 DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0- NO SCAN 0 OSC NC 1 [] 2 11 1 0] 2 [] cw 13 ccw Ol LIMITED SCAN FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO - to ANGLE: "3 0 45 03 60 0 Other FROM.--- DEGto ---- DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION [] NO SCAN 0 OSCNC 1 [] 2 13 1 [] 2 [] cw [] ccw 0 LIMITED SCAN FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE-0 0 d5 03 60 0l Other FROM.-- DEGto ___ DEG 0 NO SCAN E0 LIMITED SCAN to L SURFACE 0 1 0 2 INCHES FROM WO BEAM DIRECTION 0] 1 i 2 0] cw 13 Ccw to DEG to U I 0 no Sheet I Date: 0 FROM L Sheet I ~of LL 11 no

DUKE POWER COMPANY UT PROFILE/PLOT sir IFROI-607 ATJ' P~,zr7 - NDE-U`T-5 UT PROFILEPL T S EE VAL\\J/C 2 WELD I frAu k'ZA &  1111 I I I [ 1 [  III ?i1 FL EXAMINAT1ON SURFACE 2 1 2 I I 3 4 1111I11 1.5. It~u 24 / Y_- r i __11-')_ 2 v C__ s L C.H.i 2.3 c~ 4 ~ 3 4 Component ID/Weld No.

Remarks:

270 HItem NO: \\ , 1 Examiner. ILevel: -.r (Date: -3131)01 RevlewedBy:_ ,.V ý iLevel:_5 Date: <4/-cu le taken le ta ke90 180 Sheet _Zof 4L 3 4 1II11 11I1 1 1 I lii X% t CA'AAMIN I lufq Z)uKrl'lLkut I III II II I II I A td S_' I Tý: - to 4s I AUT-honzed Inspector u Date., Lvi, ýoi

DUKE POWER COMPANY Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Examination Volume/Area Defined ED Base Metal 0 Weld 0 Near Surface 01 Boltina 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 1.71N. x 0.34 IN. = 0.58 SQ. IN. 0.58 SQ. IN. x 34 IN. = 19.72 CU. IN. Beam Scan # Angle Directio 1 450 CW 2 450 CCW 3 60° S1 4 60° S2 SHEAR WAVE 3 60°L S1 Coverage Calculations Area Examined (sq.in.) 0.58 0.58 0.24 0 AGGREGATE 0.34 Length Examined (in.) 34 34 34 34 COVERAGE 34 Volume Examined (cu.in.) 19.72 19.72 8.16 0 47.6 11 56 Volume Required (cu.in.) 19.72 19.72 19.72 19.72 78.88 19.72 Percent Coverage 100.00 100.00 41.38 0.00 60.34 58.62 RL WAVE COVERAGE 58 62 x 25% (1 SCAN) = 14.66% Ni (A 0 -I' -f NDE-91-1 Revision 0 Li 0. 0 .0 n t'-

RFR 61-607 ATh,

• FZ, McGuire Unit #1 EOC14 Item 0__

_t __I._. q Weld # U_: Ir_- (_0,__5 No Data Recorded. Reference Calibration Sheet #'s Oc)\\ o-LO -oPL

• O 's o

Sf -- 14 ?*o ?A &-- A or-4

DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start: 0940 NDE-UT-3A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR LAMINAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish: 0947 Revision 2 Station McGuire Unit: 1 Component/Weld ID: 1NIIF-280 Date: 3/25/01 Nominal Material Thickness (in). 1.05" Weld Length (in.): 34" Surface Temperature: 710 Deg F Measureo Material Thickness (in) 1.00" Lo: 9,1,1.1 Pyrometer S/N: MCNDE 27010 Surface Condition AS GR UND Calibration Sheet No: Cal Due: 8/20/01 Ean Jy Et. Le0101035 Configuration: PIPE TO VALVE Examiner Jay A Eaton ",I. !,r_._Level, if Examiner. Gayle E. Houser Level II S1 Flow S2 Procedure. NDE-640 Rev: 1 FC: PIPE to VALVE Ampl Li W1 Mpl W2 Mp2 L2 Wl Mpl W2 Mp2 ND rem a rem rem rem

rem z rem

? rem ? rem ? rem rem rem Exam NO BW BW BW BW BW BW BW BW BW BW BW Surf. Damps LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB NRI 0. ii71i  £ 0 0* 0 0 Remarks

• C 95-18 & 95-19 Limitations:

see NDE-UT-4 03 None: 0 Sheet _ of Reviewed By

Level, Date, Authorized In to N

Date. Item No: / 7.3jj' _S. 0,/. 1 M3 --tL \\ B09.011.228 .I

DUKE POWER COMPANY UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET RZ-\\tc i NDE-UT-5 Revision 1 EXAMINATION SURFACE 1 4 (IIl 3 Ilii

FE 2 WELD 1 0 0 1I11I VA L-.C - 1 EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 2 1,5N, .4 2 _r_ Component ID/Weld No. Remarks: Item No: " \\, .o Examiner. 1Level: Iý Date: 3 z.1 o, Reviewed By: LA,,., "lLevel: d2§J Date: -T-.?9.0i Authorized Inspector ( Date:2*,- -- / 270 90 180 Sheet I3 of "o K 0. 3 4 I111 l111 U TFIZ 61-b67 ATTq PAGF- '3a 111l 11111 !IIIIIII I -zBO

RFR 61-667 ATFI. Ph6E 31 DUKE POWER COMPANY I Form NDE-UT-8 ULTRASONIC INDICATION RESOLUTION SHEET Revision 1 Acceptance Standard: IND. #1 - 60 0L IS A GEOMETRIC REFLECTOR FROM THE WELD ROOT CONFIGURATION. THE REFLECTOR WAS NOT SEEN WITH A 600 SHEAR WAVE OR A WSY-70 BI-MODAL TRANSDUCER. Item No: B09.01 1 228 Acceptable Indications: IND. #1 - 60°L Rejectable Indications. These indications have been compared with previous ultrasonic data evel: II Date: 3/25/01 Date: '?.* C 13 Yes E) No previous data available Sheet q of Autnorizea inspector: Lý, k I Date: Level: 1,7T

PP~1 bl-bb7 ATfI9 PAF(-1 35 FORM NDE UT-4 DUKE, POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION RE PORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID: 1N11F-280 Item No: B09.011.228 Remarks: SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION VALVE CONFIGURATION 0 NO SCAN SLIMITEDSCAN 0 0 2D 1 2 cw 0 ccw FROM L 0" to L + 34" INCHES FROM WO CL + 0.5" to BEYOND

ANGLE, 0 0 0 45 E1 60 C3 Other FROM DEGto DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION SHEAR WAVE LIMITED DUE TO SS 0

NO SCAN WELD METAL SLIMITESCAN 01 2 lD2 cw 1 ccw FROM L + 0"- to L +.34" INCHES FROM WO CL - 0.5" to WELD CL ANGLE: 0 0 0 45 ] 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN 0 LIMITED SCAN 2 0 1020 cwO ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 0l 0 0l 45 0l 60 [0 Other FRFROM DEGto DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN 0 LIMITED SCAN 01 02 01020 Cwo ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 03 0 0] 45 Ff60g, Other FROM DEG to Prepared By' Level: i-n. Date: Sketch(s) attached 023 yes 0 no Sheet Of Reviewed By: Date: j,.2 9*. ) t Authorized Inspector: Date ".).AJo Li

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined 0 Base Metal ED Weld 0 Near Surface 01 Bolting 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation LU 1.5' x 0.33 = 0.5 SQ. IN. 0.5 SQ. IN. x 34* = 17 CU. IN. 3"-. Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume SBeam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage -.. Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.) (in.) (cu.in.) (cu.in.) 1 450 CW 0.5 34 17 17 100.00 2 450 CCW 0.5 34 17 17 100.00 3 600 S2 0.21 34 7.14 17 42.00 4 600 S1 0 34 0 17 0.00 SHEAR WAVE AGG. COVERAGE 41.14 68 60.50 3 600L S2 028 34 952 17 56.00 RL WAVE COVERAGE 56% x 25% (1 SCAN) = 14% SItem No-B09 011.228 Prepared By Level: T Date /. 0:) Reviewed By ,.'((ii' Level ,17 Date a 2 e 1) &V -V CA YA t< ý'- (v V r, 'I

RFIZ 61-b07 AITV-PAGE37 DUKE POWER COMPANY UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET NDE-UT-5 Revision 1 EyX4MINATION SURFACE 1 4 Ml1111 3 llii 2 I III-I-WELD q-I V/A UL/2 - 2 'III 1I iiiI EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 3 ,1111 4 'IIl IIII1 2.5 CGt oo~ ')v.* (Do° t--)% .33 -. (6 1,^,. 12 Component ID/Weld No.

Remarks:

Item No: ~~c "Examiner. Level: = Date: 31Z. iol Reviewed By: Level: 77 1 Date: J.,29.Q/ Authorized lnspýctor L) Date: n'-2_-'d 180 Sheet __of 'b S 270 90 -1 - 71 FIE-- IIII %,2 I~~~~ I,- T-

RFAl 61-607 McGuire Unit #1 EOC14 ?\\Z3S Item # Weld # No Data Recorded. Reference Calibration Sheet #'s 01010 "5q - Lks f, 5-r- -5oý. ot 1. -Z-ZE I i-A I j:- - z ec>

Form NDIh-620 Revision 0 Rinis)T PbtR RXi\\b I-0cS7 A~h00XW-VkT 7 N V '-3 DUK KP OWEIR COMPANY ULTRASONIC DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS IN FERRITIC PRESSU-RE VESSELS Staton:~C unit: Component/Weld ID: I s c -\\,j~.~ Dre .7 \\VWeld I cng-th (in.): 7p FT Surface Condition: q Lo 9.mo I.

3.

Exam Start, 111* Ex.m Finish: .*3 2. Procedure No: Scans Conriguration Calibettion Sheet No: 700 ___ - d-B Zone 1 608 851 dB Zone 11AII41ý sturfiacTemnp. 6;ý 6 /0 OI 600 91 dB Zone III Axdal ScnSrie DPyrometer s/n:The00J 127.7~r C/oli 600 85 1 dB Zone III Circ. C21. Due Date: 7-/C -0/ indication s RM SA I Z~~ %/ S- ~ Wn, LOCATION DIRECTIONREAK I -J_ > 901/o Coverage obtained: yes E no 2 (see NDE-UT-4) Limitation report is required Itcm No: COZ. 07-1. 008 Level: ZZ7 Date: 3-270/ Examiner: 4~,ýtf L vel: jr Date: -A/z7/o Levcl! JB1 Date: 4J9LAuthorized Inspector: Date:____ page I of 4? Z,1

7fl7 cA-c 1c57 AT]. ?I\\QE Z.

• _*.°I FORM NDE-UT-4 DUKE POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID: 1SGD-W259 Item No: C02.021.008 Remarks:

SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION DUE TO NOZZLE CONFIGURATION 3 NO SCAN 0 LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 02 0 2 0 cw ccw FROM L N/A to L _N/A INCHES FROM WO - 2.7 to BEYOND ANGLE: 0 0 0 45 0l 60 0I Other FROM 0 DEG to 360 -DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN 0 LIMITEDSCAN 01 0 2 0 1 0 2 01 cw ID ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO -- to ANGLE: 0] 0 03 45 03 60 01 Other FROM DEGto ---- DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0] NO SCAN SLIMITEDSCAN 01 0 2 0]1 03 2 01 cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO.... . to ANGLE 0 0 0l 45 03 60 0 Other FROM.--- DEGto DEG 03 NO SCAN 0 LIMITED SCAN to L SURFACE 03 1 0 2 INCHES FROM WO 0 1 0 2 0 cw O ccw to ANGLE 0 0 0 45 03 60 03 Other FROM DEG to Sheet Z of DIe FROM L Date: 3 z -q BEAM DIRECTION Sheet 7Z of

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined 0 Base Metal 0 Weld 0 Near Surface 0 Boltina 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 1.375 IN. x 1.75 IN. = 2.4 SQ. IN. 2.4 SQ. IN. x 70 IN. = 168 CU. IN. i_ Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.) (in.) (cu.in.) (cu.in.) Percent Coverage 1 60 0L 2 2 60 0 L 1 3 600 L Cw 4 600 L CCw 2.4 0 2.4 2.4 70 70 70 70 168 0 168 168 504 1I68 168 168 168 672 75.00 f J

~ 4 HLL V t>WY f(-bk 2 d6 J 2-Le 0(77 KT 3/4 FA( (o'L S+/- <  z  3: - .34 (oO 6(rv I <Uu C-V? AC-15 <<c. L os 5 rULL 0 CVol pA o A. 4. 6w VL \\ /, V C, D.ý 7 i~ni'04 A T~ll / "%f = 7- /.76

DUKE POWER COMPANY RENV i Exam Start: 1105 NDE-UT-3A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR LAMINAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish: 1109 Revision 2 Station. McGuire Unit: 1 Component/Weld ID: 1NI1F-167 Date: 4/2/01 Nominal Material Thickness (in) 0.906 Weld Length (in.): 28" Surface Temperature: 82' Deg F Measured Material Thickness (in)' 1.2 Lo: 9.1.1.1 Pyrometer S/N: MCNDE 27205 Surface Condition. AS GROUND Calibration Sheet No: Cal Due: 7/18/01 Examiner Larr Mauldin /

Level, 111 0101066 Configuration:

Elbow to Type III Series 2 Pen Level: 11 S2 Flow Si Examiner Gary J Moss

• qELBOW to PEN.

Procedure NDE-640 Rev. 1 FC: ELBOWtoPEN. Ampl Li Wl Mpl W2 Mp2 L2 W1 Mpl W2 Mp2 IND Ž.rem rem P rem a rem z rem a rem t rem ? rem a rem a rem z rem Exam Damps NO .e* BW BW BW BW BW BW BW BW BW BW BW Surf. LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB 0R 0°___ Remarks FC 95-18, 95-19 Limitations: see NDE-UT-4 0 None: - Sheet I of Reviewed By Level: Date: Authorized Inspector: Date: Item No: % q qllo I c05.011.113

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-UT-5 UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET Revision 1 EXAMINATION SURFA 4 f II i 1 1 3 fi lI LCF 1 WELD -,MI~I* 2 1 1 2 3 e Mq II iii !11111 I'T -tILLL liil ii !1 I 1 IIIII Ik. i i ii _ 2.5 3. Component ID/Weld No. J IV-7F -/1Z7

Remarks:

I 1/,--. TION SURFACE 2 4 0 I IItem No: c*c/l./11_ 1 Examiner.~~\\)b~~,- I ILevel: f I Date: ~q.z.o I lReviewed By: Level: --T Date: 270 90 180 SheetZ-_of C,_* I 7-17*'Y7 t*l -/*tx'-/' h rV. /- p A r-t: -2 tCVA I ll" 11 IIII I II IIII /AUUI1UH I/t*U 1ll:pt-tULWl uate:,.--..* m

RTR M-06c7 P7T.(O D \\~ DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM NDE-UT-4 ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID 1NI1F-167 Item No: C05.011.113 Remarks: SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION DUE TO TYPE III SERIES 2 0 NO SCAN PENETRATION CONFIGURATION LIMITEDSCAN El 02 1 2 cw ccw FROM L - - to L - - INCHES FROM WO 2.0" to 2oyEPNeq... f-3 ANGLE. 0 0 03 45 E1 60 0 Other FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION C NO SCAN SLIMITEDSCAN 0 2 1]2 cw [ ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE C 0 C3 45 C 60 C] Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION CNO SCAN C3 LIMITED SCAN 1 02 C102O cw ecW FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO.. to ANGLE 0 0 C3 45 0 60 0J Other FROM. DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN 0 LIMITED SCAN 0102 Ol02O cw0ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE C3 0 01 45 03 60 0 Other FROM DEG to Prepared By, Larry Mauldr Level: III Date: 4/2/01 Sketch(s) attached

0) yes 0 no Sheet 3 of L.

SIL Reviewed By (*

• • l_=.--Date:

Ll 151o\\ Authorized Inspector: Date: -'/

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-UT-5 UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET Revision 1 EXAMINATION SURFACE 1 4 3 1I11 1 Ill I11 1 111 2 1 iii 11111 WELD 1 I.111 EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 2 3 liii iiilIiIi I lII1 4 III1 lii1 4-- 4-RL/i k///,c 11 2 Cc V-II e 2-A ~ ~ ____Lw~Cj~j Component ID/Weld No. U 1: Remarks: 270 lAuthorized Inspecton (I Date:  2 %Item No: C0,DS. C) 1) '.) ILevel:JZYT Date: c-2-_ Reviewed By : 4Level: Date: 3l Cl L I N I I F- -I(.o A'W, ( VN('-.Z-LA IAuthorized Inspector V I K*k Date: tpý-O f

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination VolumelArea Defined [ Base Metal 1] Weld [E Near Surface [] Bolting LI Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 1 .4 IN. X 2.1 IN. =.84 SQ.IN. .84 SQ.IN X 28 IN = 23.52 CU.IN ,.9 Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Beam Examined Examined Examined Required u.-1 Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.) (in.) (cu.in.) (cu.in.) Percent Coverage 1 60 1 .33 28 9.24 2352 2 60 2 0 28 0 23.52 3 45 CW .84 28 23.52 23.52 4 45 CCW .84 28 23.52 23.52 SHEAR WAVE AGGREGATE COVERAGE 5628 94.08 5982 2 60L 1 .51 28 14.28 2352 6071 RL WAVE SUPPLEMENTAL COVERAGE, 60.71% X 25% (1 SCAN) = 15.18% OF TOTAL WELD IItem No C05 011 113 Prepared By Larry Mauldin Date 412/01 Reviewed By /tj Level I Date 4V'*0 i Ilk K (p U

RFR 6 1-607I* REV?. o1C7PTiC McGuire Unit #1 EOC14 ?N* G Item # Weld # No Data Recorded. Reference Calibration Sheet #'s O\\ O~ (el CO ý5-- aý k. I ý 3 I K )J: I f--' - I ý9ý

F6! ¶U1F tA-cc7 AlT WWFT . ~ ~

i'14-Remarks

FC 95-18, 95-19 Limitations: see NDE-UT-4 0 None: 03 Sheet of Reviewed By. Level: Date: Authorized Inspe Date: Item No: C0o5.011.120 DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start: 0946 NDE-UT-3A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR LAMINAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish: 0953 Revision 2 Station: McGuire Unit: 1 Component/Weld ID: 1NI11F-293 Date: 3/17/01 Nominal Material Thickness (in): 0.719 Weld Length (in.): 20.8 Surface Temperature: 80.9° Deg F Measured Material Thickness (in)? .725 Lo: 9.1.1.1 Pyrometer S/N: MCNDE 27205 Surface Condition: AS GROUND Calibration Sheet No: Cal Due: 7/18/01 Examiner: Gayle E Houser Level: II Configuration: CIRC. Examiner: Gary J. Moss ZJ "//'A //,J>evel: II S2 Flow S1 'IPIPE to VALVE Procedure: NDE-640 Rev. 1 FC: AmpI Li W1 Mpl W2 Mp2 L2 W1 Mpl W2 Mp2 ND it rem t rem > rem > rem i rem > rem > rem > trem > rem

• trem

> rem Exam N 8W BW BW BW BW BW BW BW 8W BW BW Surf. LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB NRI 0°

Ii CA-6C)7 DUKE POWER COMPANY UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET EXAýIINATION SURFACE 1 WELD RrE\\t' I NDE-UT-5 Revision 1 EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 1 C !11111 I. + 4 1 2.3_ Component ID/Weld No. Remarks: W1:. /ROF/L; Item No: C6o5. 6i. izo .Examinerw By: ILevel: zr Date: 3./7.U. ýReviewed By: L1evel: -i Date: 317ol I lAuthorized Inspector. V  Date: £.J)%-O1 270 90 180 Sheet_.Z of -o 4 Ilii 3 I Il IIIII 2 I'll I 1 1 1 1 11111 2 4I ll Iii I i 3

liili, I 'I I I 4

Illl IIII III1

10p, RFR Ok-6(ý7 7)kcE P, "Vf*,&[=-_ 9, I

l !/RL V* V Date: -A,3-o) - I Authorized Inspector.

.ZFU 61-OO7 AT-6n, PAGE> DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM NDE-UT-10 ULTRASONIC INDICATION RECORD FOR PIPING Revision 0 Station. McGuire Unit: 1 Component/Weld ID: 1 NIl F-293 Date: 3/17/01 Surface Condition, AS GROUND Item No: C05.011.120 Examiner: Gary J. Moss Level: II Procedure: NDE-600 Rev: 13 FC: N/A Examiner: Gayle E. House Level: I1 Lo: 9.1.1.1 Configuration: CIRC. Calibration Sheet No: 0101022 S2-PIPE to Si-VALVE Scan Surface: OD Mp W L Li L2 Beam Exam IND 9 FSH Max Max Max 20 % FSH 20 % FSH Dir. Surf. Scan Damps Remarks 1 600 75 1 34 1.25 11.75 INT. 360 1 2 AXIAL NO

RFiZ 61-607ATo DUKE POWER COMPANY LIT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET NDE-UT-5 Revision 1 EXAMINATION SURFACE 1 .4 3 IIIl1 2 I'll 1 1lli' WELD q-IH I~rlll[I1ll1 I I I1 III IlIl EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 2 3 4 ,l,, ,ll, ll,, 11111 111ll P~pL,. Component ID/Weld No. U-IIVI 2q-273 Remarks: &D/.o 7-'o. 6 Item No: C05^.6//. IZO ,Examninen Jar j-1_ L-evel: -r I Date: 3-17,.o Reviewed By: Level: I Date: 3-7,-t 270 ' I I Authorized Inspector. Date:  \\ 90 180 Sheet._.4 of io 2 I]. W.T(o y---- i I Date: "3.40,5 --O IAuthorized Inspector.

9R~gt-Ob7 AITF'& [Form NDE-UT -.9 DUKE POWER COMPANY ULTRASONIC BEAM ANGLE MEASUREMENT RECORD Revision 3

1. Take thickness measurements between.

wedge locations.

2. Place search unit on straight turn of pipe, and peak the signal.

3. Measure distance (d) between exit points.

4. Calculate beam angle with formula as shown using measured wall thickness.

5. Use the measured beam angle to determine coverage and when plotting any indications.

Pipe Size:- 611 For thin wall pipe use 2nd Vee path tan o = (d/2) 2t Pipe Schedule: 160 Nominal 45 deg: d= Nominal 60 deg: d= Nominal 70 deg: d= 0 2.5 0 O_

t=_

0

measured angle=

0.00 deg t= 0.719_; measured angle= 60.09 deg t= _.0

measured angle=

0.00 deg Item No. C05.011.120 Examiner LeeIDt Examiner -Level Date Gayle E. Houser I3/1/01 Winfred C. Leeper 1I 3/21/01 Reviewed By Level Date Authorized Inspector Date -317 3~(,, ko6ý j FA 5 0 r I tan o = (d/2) t dk

DUKE POWER COMPANY Form NDE-UT-8 ULTRASONIC INDICATION RESOLUTION SHEET Revision 1 Acceptance Standard: INDICATION #1: DETERMINED TO BE A GEOMETRIC REFLECTOR OFF THE WELD ROOT. INDICATION AMPLITUDE WOULD NOT HOLD UP TO SKEWING OF TRANSDUCER, LESS THAN 35% AMPLITUDE WHEN 700 WEDGE USED AND COULD NOT GET ANY SIGNAL WITH WSY TRANSDUCER. Item No. C05.011.120 Acceptable Indications: IND #1 Rejectable Indications: NONE These indications have been compared with previous ultrasonic data 0 Yes 0 No previous data available Sheet (o of 10 Autnorizea inspector: Examiner: Level: Date: Gary J. Moss.,II 3/17/01 OniiJwt* V I -~NLevel: Date: Date: I -7, 1 -'-c' 1 0 1, Date:

RFE 61-b67 AIf PAE IS DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM NDE-UT-4 ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID 1NI1F-293 Item No: C05.011.120 Remarks: SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION NO SCAN DUE TO VALVE E) NO SCAN 0 LIMITEDSCAN 01 0 2 0l 1 0 2 0 0 cw O3 ccw FROM L 0 to L 20.80 INCHES FROM WO -_.550 - S1 to .550 - S2 ANGLE-03 0 0] 45 0l 60 0l Other FROM 0 DEGto 360 DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION LIMITED SCAN DUE TO STAINLESS 0 NO SCAN WELD METAL [D LIMITED SCAN 0 02 01 0 20 cwO ccw FROM L 0 to L 20.8 INCHES FROM WO .100 - 82 to .575 - S1 ANGLE-0 0 0l 45 E0 60 03 Other FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0E NO SCAN 01 LIMITED SCAN 01 02 0 il 20 cwO ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 0 0 07 45 0 60 03 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 01 NO SCAN [] LIMITED SCAN 0102 0 20cwlccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO . to ANGLE: 0 0 0 45 0 60 0] Other FROM DEG to Prepared By-I Level: Date: )// 2/O Sketch(s) attached M yes 0-no Sheet 7 of lo Reviewed By: k/ Date: S.L Authorized Inspector: Date.-f-) ofI b 3hlok

DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination VolumelArea Defined 0I Base Metal 0l Weld El Near Surface El Bolting 0 Inner Radius Ili 0 Area Calculation Volume Calculation P-- 1.1 x.259= 285 SQ IN. .285 SQ IN. x 20.8 IN. 5 93 ..9 Coverage Calculations SArea Length Volume Volume Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage ,,,q Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.) (in.) (cu.in) (cu.in) 1 45° 2 45" 3 600 4 60° SHEAR 3 60°L CW CCW S1 S2 WAVE Si .285 .285 129 0 AGGREGATE .159 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 COVERAGE 208 RL WAVE COVERAGE 56% x 25% (1 SCAN) = 14% 0b () 5 93 5.93 2.68 0 14.54 33 5 93 5 93 5.93 5.93 2372 593 10000 10000 45.19 0 00 61 30 5565 ,'[Iter-NO C05 Oil 120 Prepared By

• /*
• Level Date 12t Reviewed By iz!.

-/* e Level Z.*Date o.t

1RF9 b)-60O7 DUKE POWER COMPAN4K\\#I UT PROFILE./PLOT SHEET A LI o PA6 E 15-NDE-UT-5 Revision 1 I V CY t A r~~t(1t~ 4 \\'ý, uVL 3 I1[11 1I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 2 11I11 liii 1 III WELD ] I II liii 1 2 Ill' I I1 EXAMINAMiON SURFACE 2 3?' III I lilt, ELuI 111i 4 Il111 L~Le rN( %ýC~J CR 4 2 ~ I ~ ~ ). Q 7 z_ 2 -.s 2- )A 35 Component ID! Weld No. INZI1F-293 U 1:Re marks: Item No: C65. 611.126z Examiner. \\j' ILevel:~ I-r Date:. Reviewed By lLevel: TD Date: c'- Z6/10 -Authorized Inspector~) &KýDate:3.V 5 270 (Z. 11111 Mil'i I lulli 3UKrA(_t I 1111

TtA\\-607 ATF, McGuire Unit #1 EOC14 Item #C,- s t 0 I1z'-0 Weld # No Data Recorded. lAi Reference Calibration Sheet #'s  7 _. i ( t C) --- It :o FAG-E I G

Kb~lST F6/2 121LJIFN-66-7 0-6,( -FA,E5 17-22 'l. rtN1 FORM NDE-UT-4 DUKE POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID: 1NI169-4 Item No: C05.011.129 Remarks: SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION NO SCAN DUE TO ELECTRICAL TRAY. [" NO SCAN SLIMITEDSCAN E 2 0 1 0 2 1 cwO ccw FROM L 24.08 to L 3" INCHES FROM WO C LINE to BEYOND ANGLE: C 0 C3 45 E) 60 0 Other FROM N/A DEG to N/A DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION LIMITED DUE TO ID TAG PLATE 13 NO SCAN El LIMITED SCAN 0102 0122Ocw0ccw FROM L 19.08 to L 21.08 INCHES FROM WO C LINE 1.5 to BEYOND ANGLE: 03 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM N/A DEG to N/A DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION C-NO SCAN C LIMITED SCAN 0102 O1O2Ocw ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO. to ANGLE 03 0 03 45 0l 60 01 Other FROM DEG to DEG 13 NO SCAN C3 LIMITED SCAN FROM L ANGLE: 00 0 El 4 to L SURFACE 0r 1 02 INCHES FROM WO BEAM DIRECTION 0 1 11 2 O] cw E] ccw to DEG to FROM Date: " o

1 45" 2 45" 3 60° 3

• 60° 3

60' 4 60' 4 60° 4 60° SHEAR 3 60°L CW .405 27.08 CCW .405 27.08 S2 00 60 S2 0.0 2.0 _2 _,_A05 19.08 S 1 .405 ,_1908 9,08 "S1 18 6.0,% S1 18 2.0 4, WAVE AGGREGATE COVERAGE S1 .217 60 10.96 10.96 1096 10.96 0 2.43 0 0.81 7.72 7.72 7.72 -7:72 1.08 243 036 081 388 4384 1302 1096 RL WAVE SUPPLEMENTAL COVERAGE 7.92 % x 25 % (1 SCAN) = 1 98% C05 011 129 Date 3/21 i/Z tNl 0 .1 ,-1 DUKE POWER-COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined 0D Base Metal [] Weld 01 Near Surface 03 Bolting E0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 1 35 x.300 = 405 SQ. IN. .405 SQ IN x 27.08 = 10.96 CU. IN

• -Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Sn Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.)

(in.) (cu.in.) (cu.in.) Percent Coverage 0 0 8850

",9

• 0 3

60°L Si .217 2.0 0.434 1.736 RL WAVE SUPPLEMENTAL COVERAGE 7.92 % x 25 % (1 SCAN) = 1.98% C"ý DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined 0D Base Metal 0 Weld 13 Near Surface LI Bolting LI Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 1.35 x.300 = 405 SQ IN. .405 SQ. IN. x 27.08 = 10.96 CU. IN. Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume ca Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.) (in) (cu.in.) (cu.in.) S.... 1u.A 10.92 21.92 7.92

JR?.Z 01-007 ATV.(o PAGE z6 DUKE POWER COMPANY 1~\\INDE-UJT-5 UJT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET Rev-in I1 EXAMINATION SURFACE 1IXMNTO UFC el WELDEXMNTOSUFC 4 ,1 - 3 2 1 c 1 1111 [I* I liII 1i11ii I'll liii 4 III LL~L4U-lIf III f,'Ill III 'Ill1 - AI,...- .  - , XA

2.

I_________ 2.s S-o Al)-7OSk.A Gr~b +I A-v 7 2tZL 3+

• Remarks: lit.S s(\\?o 0~

ScJl.: *4c Item No: (o6,) 2 Lxmnrevel: -c Date: 0~21t, IReviewed By ILevel: 2F-Date:,?~2.t Authorized Inspector Date: 3.-So u 270 90 180 Sheet.+/-Lof Coý .5 ,q I I Component lul Weld No. I ty I I I.,q -,t4

1 1 1 11 I~FY oi.e~7PAGE Z1 DUKE POWER COMPANYP EXAMINATION SURFACE 1 EXAMINATION SURFACE 3 4,*' 3 I I I1iiiil NDE-UT-5 Revision 1 UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET 2 1 WELD I I I LI4UL S1 2 EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 II 1.55 2 2i Component ID/Weld No. 3&*~, 4 U Remarks: N0 S ,o~ R(?* p_'e.sd. Item No: CoQl6,c). ) .29 Examiner. Le**ve:* Date:3 2z1,* Reviewed By: ý; -V Level: 7ZT Date:,.29.'c, Authorized lns*ector,*- _' X Date:._ ool 270 90 180 Sheet of_.ý__ / Ill1 I,111 RER 01-607 PAGE 21 IIII IIIII IIII

gpb.-667 AThT6, (ý \\j 'I PAGE 22. McGuire Unit #1 EOC14 Item # Weld # No Data Recorded. Reference Calibration Sheet #'s fi oz(, - &° oL 0 ( I o oZI - ** I ý-Az I o9- - ?A ("ýc (, C? ý- (,

7N(:A3 23-3Z Remarks FC 95-18 95-19 Limitations: see NDE-UT-4 C None: ED Sheet \\ of o___ Reviewed By 4.. Level: Date: Authorized Inspect, Date: Item No: 51P IL I Iý C05.021.085 (/p DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start: 1015 NDE-UT-3A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR LAMINAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish: 1017 Revision 2 Station: McGuire Unit: 1 Component/Weld ID: 1NVIFW175-29 Date: 3/6/01 Nominal Material Thickness (in): 0.438 Weld Length (In.): 11.0" Surface Temperature: 95° Deg F Measured Material Thickness (in); .439 Lo: 9.1.1.1 Pyrometer S/N: MCNDE 27205 Surface Condition: AS GROUND Calibration Sheet No: Cal Due: 7/18/01 Examiner: GaryJ Moss J Level: II 0101003 Configuration: CIAC. WELD Examiner: Gayle E. Houser II/t._ Si Flow S2 Procedure: NDE-640 Rev: 1 FC: TEE to PIPE Ampl Li Wi Mpl W2 Mp2 L2 WI Mpl W2 Mp2 IND i rem > rem > rem trem > rem > rem > rem

rem

> rem > rem > rem Exam Damps NB. B W BW BW BW 8W 2W BW BW BW BW BW Surf. LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB NRI 07 ViWST P6 P 2RKF 6 k-667 AT (o

tA--T67 6o Fh~f 2 DUKE POWER COMPANY UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET NDE-UT-5 Revision 1 EXAMINATION SURFACE 1 4 'ilI 3 IIIl IIIll 2 !11111 WELD 1 1-11 1 2 Ia t I I II III III 2.5 iii Component ID/Weld No. !/1///IF'"/75"-.2 EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 3 lIIiIII II U Remarks: Item No: a05 OLAA 0,1' Examiner.,,Level: = ý Date: Reviewed By: .Level: I Date: .5 4 I111 270 S..... ,t I I MF bt-667 1111 Date: ?-_ i ,I 01 Auhrzed Inspector:.

lZV1 -OO7 ATh(I, 'ME ZS DUKE POWER COMPANY .,_L.I FORM NDE-UT-10 ULTRASONIC INDICATION RECORD FOR PIPING Revision 0 Station: McGuire Unit: 1 Component/Weld ID: 1 NV1 FW175-29 Date: 3/6/01 Surface Condition: AS GROUND Item No: C05.021.085 Examiner: Gary J. moss Level: II Procedure: NDE-600 Rev: 13 FC: N/A Examiner: Gayle E. Houser Level: Calibration Sheet No: II 0101001 Lo: 9.1.1.1 Configuration: PIPE to TEE CIRC. WELD Scan Surface: OD Remarks

RF) bl-607 AJT,h( PAGE"2c6 DUKE POWER COMPANY IRV. NDE-UT-5 LIT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET Revision 1 EXAMINATION SURFACE 1 4 3 I'lll II II 2 Ili I I I I II WELD q-III L EXAMINATION SURFACE 2 1 2 3 Component ID/Weld No. Remarks: 270 Ite m N o: )5-Q;z /. 0 8y Examiner. -Level.f* "- Date:3 ,/p Reviewed By: -Level: 1-Date:3'7!ok Authorized Inspector. 0

j.

Date:-'3.*--es \\ 5 2 3 Il IIIIIII II.~llrlrlil 4 llii I I I I I III I I I i I I I I I I U

• FR 6[l-667 NT-,o PAgE 2-1 DUKE POWER COMPANY Rla,- \\

Form NDE-UT-8 ULTRASONIC INDICATION RESOLUTION SHEET Revision 1 Acceptance Standard: INDICATION #1 WAS DETERMINED TO BE AN I1D. GEOMETRIC REFLECTOR DUE TO WELD ROOT GEOMETRY. THIS WAS VERIFIED BY THE USE OF A 700 SHEAR WAVE (AMPLITUDE LESS THAN 50% OF 60- SHEAR WAVE). ALSO A 60- R.L. WAVE WAS USED, INDICATION WAS NOT SEEN WITH THIS TRANSDUCER. A WSY 70 WAS USED WITH NO RESPONSE. A REVIEW OF THE RT FILM VERIFIED THESE FINDINGS. Item No: C05.021.085 Acceptable Indications: IND. #1 Rejectable Indications: These indications have been compared with previous ultrasonic data 0 Yes 0 No previous data available Examiner: Level: Date: Sheet of I c Gary J. Moss II 3/6/01 Reviewer: Level: Date: Authorized Inspector: Date:

RFR 6t- 067 ['z~v..',.-

• FORM NDE-UT-4 DUKE POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID 1NV1FW175-29 Item No: C05.021.085 Remarks:

SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION DUE TO TEE CONFIGURATION (4.0" 0] NO SCAN LIMITED) El LIMITED SCAN El 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 03 cw O: ccw FROM L 9 0' to L __2.0"- INCHES FROM WO 1.2 to BEYOND ANGLE. 0 0 0 45 0D 60 03 Other FROM N/A DEG to N/A DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0] NO SCAN C3 LIMITED SCAN [] 1 0] 2 0 1 0 2 0] cw 0 ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to

ANGLE, 0 0 0] 45 E0 60 03 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0]

NO SCAN O1 LIMITED SCAN 0 1 03 2 O 1 O3 2 O1 cw 0 ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 0l 0 0] 45 0] 60 0] Other FROM DEGto DEG O NO SCAN E0 LIMITED SCAN to L ANGLE-0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other SURFACE 0-1 02 INCHES FROM WO FROM BEAM DIRECTION 0] 1 0] 2 01 cw O3 ccw to DEG to no Sheet (e,_ of I o Date: -3 1 f I Authorized l U FROM L Dateýý"ý_t 'e3 ( I

0N f <1 3) DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined / 0 Base Metal 0 Weld 0 Near Surface D Boltinq 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation .15 IN. x.8 IN. =.12 SQ. IN. .12 SO. IN. x 11.0 IN. = 1.32 CU. IN. Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.) (in.) (cu.in.) (cu.in.) Percent Coverage 1 600 1 .12 7 0.84 0.84 1 600 1 .05 4 0.2 0.48 2 600 2 .12 7 0.84 0.84 2 600 2 0 4 0 0.48 3 450 CW .12 11 1.32 1.32 4 450 CCW .12 11 1.32 1.32 SHEAR -WAVE AGGREGATE COVERAGE 4.52 5.28 85.61 60 RL -UPPLEMENTAG COVERAGE 2 6ORL 1 .07 4 028 048 58.33 58.3% OF 25% (1 SCAN) = 14.6% 14.6% OF TOTAL WELD [Item No C05.021.085 Prepared By. Level Date.-31--/IO i Reviewed By: Level ji Date: _?7. -20 ..19 I`_ 40 Li_

YUFn Cb4-t67 AllT*o P'v( 3Cý> DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-UT-5 UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET Revision 1 CY A WI KMA -rfn CI DAC' A t-JA I, ~~*~ L.../VILiI Nt'. i RuN Uf\\VM'....L. I 4 3 21 WE I1111 ELD 1 2 CAAMIN"A I IUf )=-~Ak~ 4 3 4 11111 IAP% -1 ,0 1 .NVS" q '

• 1 VYYZA4.

7] ?. LE~ \\ "tu n V E V Ccc A 2A C L ~~~-o\\~*____ 11J~<LY~JL~~~AJ~LL~ 0 Component ID/Weld No.

Remarks:

.270 Authorized 9nptr 7-- Dae4-C 90 1 80 She - ofL Item No: (65 pj?-, 0'* Examiner. L1evel: 11, Date: ZI, o0 lReviewed By: ILevel: ýY Dates'ý; k. I 11111 . j ý) L) / N //-- V / 74;-, 2 ? ý Authorized lnspec'to-r 6) Date:-?--?--fi- )

R FR, b1-607 ATl-e F MAl. Z1 DUKE POWER COMPANY REV'I Form NDE-UT-9 ULTRASONIC BEAM ANGLE MEASUREMENT RECORD Revision 3

1. Take thickness measurements between.

dwedge locations.

2. Place search unit on straight turn of pipe, and peak the signal.

t

3. Measure distance (d) between exit points.

tan o =(d/2)

4. Calculate beam angle with formula t

as shown using measured wall thickness.

5. Use the measured beam angle to

7)

'--determine coverage and when plotting any indications. Pipe Size: 3" For thin wall pipe use 2nd Vee path (d/2)Pipe Schedule: ___ 160. tan o = (d/2) 2t Nominal 45 deg: d= 0

t=

0

measured angle=

_ 0.00 _deg Nominal 60 deg: d= 1.4

t=

0.439_; measured angle= 57.91_deg Item No. Nominal 70 deg: d= 0

t= _0 0

measured angle=

0.00_ deg C05.021.085 Examiner Level Date Examiner Level Date Gary J. MOSS 'l 3/6/01 Gayle E. Houser II 3/6/01 Reviewed By Level Date Atrz n oo Date nI

ART, (D FA-E 3Z7 McGuire Unit #1 EOC14 Item # Weld # CoS.oZs - . o*

1) v I

-I\\Is -..Zeq No Data Recorded. Reference Calibration Sheet #'s Ot1\\ool 4s, QI OI ooz. - c.oo' FAL;ý- I > r (I C, R~RFY 0 1- 07 g.,T',,I.- I

.-.'Lf-- S%-.II*IIL-U I %..J [ IIV I 100K1 U 1 -q WASHINGTON, 0 C 20555-0001 August 23, 2001 Mr. H. B. Barron Vice President, McGuire Site Duke Energy Corporation 12700 Hagers Ferry Road Huntersville, NC 28078-8985

SUBJECT:

MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2, RE: RELIEF REQUEST NO. 00-001 (TAC NOS. MB2325 AND MB2326)

Dear Mr. Barron:

By letter dated April 5, 2000, as supplemented on August 8, 2001, Duke Energy Corporation (the licensee), requested that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff grant relief from certain requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, for the examination of pressurizer skirt welds at McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2. The staff has reviewed the information provided for this relief request. The staff's evaluation and conclusion are provided in the Enclosure. Based on the information provided in the relief request, the staff concludes that your proposed alternative will provide an acceptable level of quality and safety. Therefore, the proposed alternative is authorized pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.55a(a)(3)(i) for the second inspection interval for inservice inspection at McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2. Sincerely, "-{-t5 t Richard L. Emch, Jr., Chief, Section 1 Project Directorate II Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos 50-369 and 50-370 Enclosure As stated cc wlencl See next paqe 7'IW:._ "'AEM*T -1 PRG&ES I1-1

McGuire Nuclear Station cc: Ms. Lisa F. Vaughn Legal Department (PBO5E) Duke Energy Corporation 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006 County Manager of Mecklenburg County 720 East Fourth Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Michael T. Cash Regulatory Compliance Manager Duke Energy Corporation McGuire Nuclear Site 12700 Hagers Ferry Road Huntersville, North Carolina 28078 Anne Cottingham, Esquire Winston and Strawn 1400 L Street, NW. Washington, DC 20005 Senior Resident Inspector do U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 12700 Hagers Ferry Road Huntersville, North Carolina 28078 Dr. John M. Barry Mecklenburg County Department of Environmental Protection 700 N. Tryon Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Mr. Peter R. Harden, IV VP-Customer Relations and Sales Westinshouse Electric Company 5929 Carnegie Blvd. Suite 500 Charlotte, North Carolina 28209 Ms. Karen E. Long Assistant Attorney General North Carolina Department of Justice P. 0. Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Mr. C. Jeffrey Thomas Manager - Nuclear Regulatory Licensing Duke Energy Corporation 526 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006 Elaine Wathen, Lead REP Planner Division of Emergency Management 116 West Jones Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-1335 Mr. Richard M. Fry, Director Division of Radiation Protection North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources 3825 Barrett Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-7721 Mr. T. Richard Puryear Owners Group (NCEMC) Duke Energy Corporation 4800 Concord Road York, South Carolina 29745 RFP ol-0o7 REV!I

1o UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D C 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION REQUEST FOR RELIEF 00-001 FROM ASME SECTION XI REQUIREMENTS DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-369, 50-370

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.55a, requires that inservice inspection (ISI) of certain American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code Class 1, 2, and 3 components be performed in accordance with Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code) applicable Edition and Addenda, except where specific written relief has been granted by the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i). In 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3), it states that alternatives to the requirements of paragraph (g) may be used, when authorized by the NRC, if (i) the proposed alternatives would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety, or (ii) compliance with the specified requirements would result in hardship or unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4), ASME Code Class 1, 2 and 3 components (including supports) shall meet the requirements, except the design and access provisions and the preservice examination requirements, set forth in the ASME Code, Section XI, "Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components," to the extent practical within the limitations of design, geometry, and materials of construction of the components. The regulations require that inservice examination of components and system pressure tests conducted during the first 10-year interval and subsequent intervals comply with the requirements in the latest edition and addenda of Section XI of the ASME Code incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a(b) 12 months prior to the start of the 120-month interval, subject to the limitations and modifications listed therein For McGuire Units 1 and 2, the applicable edition of Section XI of the ASME Code for the second ten-year ISI interval is the 1989 Edition with no addenda. The NRC staff's findings with respect to Duke Energy Corporation's (DEC's or licensee's) proposed alternative submitted on April 5, 2000, as supplemented on August 8, 2001, is contained in this safety evaluation ?,FYZC)Ic-0 7 ,--,V'l 'AT) -q7 'p,4 6E -3 "A,,.,, pA6¢ 2.0 EVALUATION 2.1 LICENSEE'S EVALUATION The Comoonents for Which Relief is Reouested: Safety-related ASME Section XI Code Class 1 pressurizer integrally welded attachments (pressurizer support skirt to lower head, Item B08.020.001 for McGuire 1 and Item B08.020.001 for McGuire 2) Requirement From Which Relief is Recuested: The ASME Code, Section XI, 1989 Edition, Table IWB-2500-1 Examination Category B-H, Item No. B8-20, Figure No. IWB-2500-13, requires a surface examination to the inside and outside areas of the skirt-to-pressurizer weld. The inside and outside areas of the weld are denoted as areas C-D and A-B, respectively, in DEC's request. Note 2 states "The extent of the examination includes essentially 100% of the length of the attachment weld at each attachment subject to examination." By letter dated August 8, 2001, DEC provided clarification that the Code required surface examination of the outside (area A-B) surface of the weld will continue to be performed and that no relief is being requested from examination of the outside weld surface area. Licensee's Basis for Reauestina Relief and Justification for Grantina Relief: The licensee requests relief from the surface examination required on the inside surface area of the support skirt-to-pressurizer weld (area C-D). Surface area C-D is inaccessible for examination for the following reasons* 1 The pressurizer heater cables must be disconnected for access which, in the past, has caused a number of the termination joints and ceramic insulators to fail. 2 The maximum clearance between the inside surface of the support skirt and the outside row of the pressurizer heaters is 14 inches. This is insufficient clearance for performing the required surface examination. 3 The inside diameter of the pressurizer support skirt is a high radiation area. Personnel performing the required examination would receive a significant dose The general area dose rate is 400 mr/hr and the contact dose rates range from 1000 to 3000 mr/hr. Alternative Examination, The licensee proposed, as an alternative to the surface examination required by Table IWB-2500-1 Examination Category B-H, Item No B8-20, Figure No. IWB-2500-13, to conduct ultrasonic examination of the inner examination surface (surface aica C-D) hom tlhe skirt's exterior surface. The support skirt weld surface will be scanned with two angle beams in two opposing axial directions and two opposing circumferenlial directions These angle beam scans will cover the inner weld and base metal surfaces from points "C" to "D" A straight beam scanl will aiso be performed ftom point "C'" towardi tIto vessel !,hell to ihe maximium extent All-7 73LO e 4ý -Qs? 1-7 2.2 STAFF EVALUATION The Request for Relief No.00-001 pertains to Table IWB-2500-1 Examination Category B-H, Item No. B8-20, that requires a 100% volumetric or surface examination, for integrally welded attachments to the pressurizer as defined by Figure No. IWB-2500-13. The licensee requested relief from the Code-required surface examination for Weld 1PZR-SKIRT for Unit 1 and Weld 2PZR-SKIRT for Unit 2. The licensee has proposed an alternative to the surface examinations required by Figure IWA-2500-13 for the support skirt-to-pressurizer circumferential welds. Instead of performing the surface examinations on both inside and outside surfaces of the weld, the licensee will perform a surface examination on the outside (accessible) surface and UT examinations of the volume adjacent to the inside surface. The alternative is necessitated by the narrow access through the skirt openings and the obstructions in the confined area inside the skirt under the bottom head. The working area inside the skirt limits maneuverability and exposes examiners to high radiation doses. The proposed alternative is the same as the Code requirement for the attachment weld depicted in Figure IWA-2500-14. Figure IWA-2500-14 has an ideal weld profile for UT examinations. The difference between Figures IWA-2500-14 and IWA-2500-13 is the weld profile. Figure IWA-2500-13 has a non-ideal weld profile for UT examinations performed from the outside surface in search for flaws on the inside surface. The inside weld surface farthest from the outside surface cannot be directly examined with UT. However, if a flaw existed, it would have depth. The depth would be detected with a UT examination of the volume performed from the outside surface. The proposed UT examination on the volume near the inside surface of the support skirt weld provides reasonable assurance of its structural integrity. Therefore, the staff has determined that the surface examination on the outside surface and a UT examination of the volume adjacent to the inside surface will provide an acceptable level of quality and safety.

3.0 CONCLUSION

Based on the NRC staff's review of the information provided in the request for relief (Relief Request 00-001), the staff concludes that the combination of the Code-required surface examination of the outside weld surface area and the alternate ultrasonic examination of the weld from the outside surface area of the pressurizer-to-skirt weld at McGuire Units 1 and 2 will provide an acceptable level of quality and safety. Therefore, the proposed alternative is authorized for the second inservice inspection interval pursuant to 10 CFR 50 55a(a)(3)(i). Principal Contributor D. Naujock R E Martin Date: ^At,,,isA 2 ',, ;'.(001 p,11Z "7-oQ7 A717-i

Serial No. 00-001 Page 1 of 4 Duke Energy Corporation Station McGuire Unit 1 & 2 SECOND 10-YEAR INTERVAL REQUEST FOR ALTERNATIVE NO. 00-001 Pursuant to 10CFR50.55a(a)(3)(i), Duke Energy Corporation requests the use of an alternative to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI for McGuire Units 1 and 2. Specifically, Duke Energy requests approval to perform ultrasonic examination of ar6a C-D on Attachment 1, the ID surface area of the Pressurizer Skirt. The ultrasonic examination is proposed as an alternative to the required surface examination of the support skirt weld area C-D. There is insufficient clearance to permit the required surface examination. I. System / Component(s) for Which the Alternative is Requested: Safety-related ASME Section XI Code Class 1 Pressurizer Integrally Welded Attachments (Pressurizer Support Skirt to Lower Head.) McGuire 1 Item Number ID Number Description B08.020.001 1PZR-SKIRT Pressurizer Support Skirt to Lower Head McGuire 2 Item Number ID Number Description B08.020.001 2PZR-SKIRT Pressurizer Support Skirt to Lower Head II. Code Requirement: It is required by the 1989 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Section XI Code (no addenda) that the surface of Class A Pressurizer Integrally Welded Attachments, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-H, Item Number B8.20 be examined per Examination Requirements IWB 2500-13, 14 and 15. 6tVe ' '7 e-6 &~

Serial No. 00-001 Page 2 of 4 III. Code Requirement for which the Alternative is Requested: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section XI, 1989 Edition (no addenda), Table IWB-250071 Examination Category B-H, Item No. B8.20, Figure No. IWB-2500-13. Examination Requirements Figure Number IWB-2500-13 requires a surface examination to areas (A-B) and (C-D). Note 2 states "The extent of the examination includes essentially 100% of the length of the attachment weld at each attachment subject to examination." (See Attachment 1) IV. Basis for Alternative Examination Duke Energy requests relief from the surface examination required on surface area C-D as shown on. Surface area C-D is inaccessible for examination for the following reasons:

1.

The Pressurizer heater cables must be disconnected for access which, in the past, has caused a number of the termination joints and ceramic insulators to fail. (See Attachment 2)

2.

The maximum clearance between the inside surface of the support skirt and the outside row of the Pressurizer heaters is 14 inches. This is insufficient clearance for performing the required surface examination. (See Attachment 3)

3.

The ID of the Pressurizer Support Skirt is a high radiation area. Personnel performing the required examination would receive a significant dose. The general area dose rate is 400mr/hr and the contact dose rates range from 1000 to 3000mr/hr. e 7

Serial No. 00-001 Page 3 of 4 V. Alternate Examination or Testing: The ID surface (surface area C-D) of the weld will be examined by ultrasonic testing. The support skirt weld surface will be scanned with two angle beams in two opposing axial directions and two opposing circumferential directions. These angle beam scans will cover the inner weld and base metal surfaces from points "C" to "D". A straight beam scan will also be performed from point "C" toward the vessel shell to the maximum extent practical. (See Attachment 4) VI. Justification for the Granting of Relief: There is inadequate accessibility of the inside surface (surface C-D) of the Pressurizer Support Skirt Weld to perform the required surface examination. Therefore, an ultrasonic examination will be used to inspect the inner examination surface from the skirt's exterior surface. The ultrasonic method has been shown capable of detecting surface connected flaws in pressure vessel welds when a properly designed technique is used. The ultrasonic procedure and the basic calibration block will conform to the requirements of ASME Section XI, Appendix I, 1989 Edition. jRvf 6

Serial No. 00-001 Page 4 of 4 VII. Implementation Schedule: The weld will be scheduled in accordance with ASME Section XI requirements as shown in the McGuire Nuclear Station Inservice Inspection Plan Second Ten Year Interval for Unit I & Unit 2. The following individuals contributed to the development of this RFA. Gary Underwood (Plan Manager McGuire) sections I-VII, Jim McArdle (Level III NDE) sections V and VI, Ken Pitser (Engineer Primary Systems) section V, Mark Pyne (Nuclear G.O. Engineering) review and Kevin Rhyne (Nuclear G.O. Supervising Engineer) final review. S;pol,;or(-(1 By: Apll),oe]d By: ~~Da te k7/dM So 7 -7, pA(,F-9

U- :R P,-

SEE DETAIL "A" I/ CCR~AHIC IlUSIJATOR\\ YPI CIAI HCATEfl ASS ATh-7 / I I I

SUPPORT SKIRT SUPPORT SKIRT ATTACHMENT WELD z." HEAT SUPPORT SKIRT OETAIL "'A" RTZ)Z 6 1 07 (ZeO~ AI I

7.,

})., ,]'l, + I l,, l ] II I ItJ, I,

D Prcssui izcr Suppori Skiit Weld UT Scan Pl1an AR' N aj}}