ML042330480
| ML042330480 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 08/09/2004 |
| From: | Gordon Peterson Duke Energy Corp |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| RR 04-MN-02, RR 04-MN-03, RR 04-MN-04 | |
| Download: ML042330480 (122) | |
Text
Duke GARY R. PETERSON okPowere Vice President A Duke Energy Company McGuire Nuclear Station Duke Power MGOI VP / 12700 Hagers Ferry Road Huntersville, NC 28078-9340 704 875 5333 704 875 4809 fax grpeters@duke-energy. corn August 9, 2004 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.
20555-0001
Subject:
Duke Energy Corporation (Duke)
McGuire Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370 Relief Requests (RR) 04-MN-02, 04-MN-03, and 04-MN-04 Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3), Duke requests approval to use alternatives to Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (Code).
Compliance with the specified requirements of this section would result in hardship or unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety.
However, the proposed alternatives will provide an acceptable level of quality and safety.
Specific details are described in the attached relief requests.
Questions on this matter should be directed to Norman T.
Simms, McGuire Regulatory Compliance, at (704) 875-4685.
Sincerely, G.R. Peterson Attachments
.. 2 www. duke-energy. corn
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission August 9, 2004 Page 2 cc w/attachments:
Mr. W.D. Travers Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mr. J.J. Shea, Project Manager (addressee only)
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North, Mail Stop 08 H12 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Mr. J.B. Brady Senior NRC Resident Inspector McGuire Nuclear Station
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission August 9, 2004 Page 3 bxc w/o attachments:
N.T. Simms R. Branch (MGO1WC)
G.J. Underwood (EC05A)
D.E. Caldwell (MGO1WC)
R.K. Rhyne (EC05A)
J.J. Mc Ardle(EC05A)
J.F. Swan (MGOlWC)
K.L. Crane bxc w/attachments:
NRIA File/ELL Master File # 1.3.2.13
ATTACHMENT 1 Relief Request 04-MN-002
Request Relief 04-MN-002 Page 1 of 4 Proposed Relief' in Accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(iii)
Inservice Inspection Impracticality Duke Energy Corporation McGuire Nuclear Station - Unit 1 (EOC-15), Examination Dates April 18,2001 To October 10, 2002 Third 10-Year Interval - Inservice Inspection Plan Interval Start Date December 1, 2001. Interval End Date December 1, 2011 ASME Section XI Code - 1995 Edition with 1996 Addenda and
- Westinghouse Owner's Group (WCAP-14572)
IL. & III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VIi.
Limitation 1.D.
System /
Code Requirement from Which Relief is Basis for Relief Alternate Justilficatlon for the Implementation Schedule Number Component for Requested: 100% Exam Volume Coverage Examinatlons Granting of Relief Which Relief is Exam Category or Testing Requested:
Item No.
Area or Weld to be Fig. No.
Examined Limitation Percentage ICCPUMP-IA-IA Centrifugal Exam Category C-C See Paragraph "A" None See Paragraph "C' The examination requirements LEG Charging Pump Item No. C03.030.001 also also for this interval were met: no Support Legs Fig. IWC-2500-5 (a)
(See Attachment I (See Attachment I additional exams are planned.
(Integrally Welded 77.74% Surface Area Coverage Pages 1-5)
Pages 1-5)
Attachment)
IRPVI-462C-NI Safety Injection Exam Category R-A (Ri-ISI Program)
See Paragraph "B" None See Paragraph "D" The examination requirements SE System Item No.R01.01 1.026 also also for this interval were met; no Reactor Vessel Fig. IWB-2500-8(c)
(See Attachment 2 (See Attachment 2 additional exams are planned.
Head to Upper Appendix 111111-4420 and 111-4430 Pages 1-5)
Pages 1-5)
Head Injection 74.62% Volume Coverage Tube Weld
- Piping welds examined under the RI-ISI program developed in accordance with methodology contained in the Westinghouse Owner's Group (WOG) Topical Report, WCAP-14572, Revision 1-NPA and Request for Relief 01-005 approved by SER dated June 12,2002.
Note: Item Number C03.030.001 was examined on 09/10/2002 and R01.011.026 was examined on 09/23/2002.
Request Relief 04-MN-002 Page 2 of 4 Basis for Relief Paragraph: A (The 1A Centrifugal Charging Pump Support Leg material is stainless steel.)
During the liquid penetrant examination of the welds, 100% coverage of the required surface examination area could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 77.74%. The limitations were caused by the geometric configuration of the support legs restricting access for complete examination coverage. No recordable indications were found during the surface examination of this weld.
Paragraph: B (The Upper Head Injection Tube Weld material is carbon steel and inconel. The weld has a diameter of 6.250" and a wall thickness of.625".)
During the ultrasonic examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 74.62%. This percentage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans. A 45 degree longitudinal wave axial scan from the pipe side covered 92.31% of the examination volume from one direction.
Two opposing circumferential scans using 45 degree shear waves covered 73.85% and a 45 degree longitudinal wave axial scan from the vessel side covered 58.46% of the required volume from one direction. In order to achieve greater than 90% coverage from two beam path directions, axially and circumferentially, the weld would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both sides which is impractical. No recordable indications were found during the volumetric examination of this weld.
Justification for Relief Paragraph: C Although the examination surface area as defined in ASME Section XI 1995 Edition with 1996 Addenda, Figure IWC-2500-5 (a) could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. The code required surface (PT) examination was the only examination performed for this item. The liquid penetrant examination was performed in accordance with ASME Section V Article 6, 1989 Edition with no addenda. No additional C3.30 (Pump Integrally Welded Attachments) welds were scheduled during this outage.
This is an Integrally Welded Attachment located on the IA Centrifugal Charging Pump Support Legs ICCPUMP-IA-LEG. 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 likely result in abnormal Volume Control Tank (VCT) level trends and/or unexpected auto make-ups.
A leak at this weld would likely result in an increase in unidentified reactor coolant leakage.
Such a leak would be discovered during performance of the reactor coolant leakage calculation,
Request Relief 04-MN-002 Page 3 of 4 which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. The unidentified leakage specification in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm. Any increased reactor coolant leakage identified by the calculation would make Duke suspect either the operating or idle CCP, especially if a recent train swap has occurred (normally biweekly). To evaluate either of these indicators an operator would be dispatched to the pump rooms, which would identify any leakage from this weld.
Also, operators perform surveillance once per shift during daily rounds of the room containing the 1A CCP. This surveillance should identify any leak at the weld in question.
Paragraph: D Although the examination volume as defined in the Risk Informed program and WCAP-14572 Revision 1, Figure IWB-2500-8(c), Table 4.1.1 (Examination Category R-A, Risk Informed Piping Examinations) 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 in accordance with Section XI, Appendix III 1995 Edition with the 1996 Addenda.
This is a Dissimilar Metal Weld limited due to material characteristics and single sided access caused by component geometry which prevents two-beam path direction coverage of the examination volume. In order to obtain greater than 90% coverage, this weld would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both sides. Replacement or re-design of this Class 1 weld is not a viable alternative and would create an undue burden on Duke Energy Corporation. During the examination of this weld, techniques were utilized to obtain the maximum possible coverage.
Beginning in 1990 Duke Energy Corporation changed to refracted longitudinal wave search units to examine DissimilarM welds based upon NRC Information Notice 90-30, "Ultrasonic Inspection Techniques for Dissimilar Metal Welds". The procedure used complied with the requirements of ASME Section XI, Appendix III. The procedure required the use of refracted longitudinal waves to examine the weld and buttered material and shear waves to examine the wrought nozzle and safe base materials. The code required volumetric (UT) examination was the only examination performed for this item. No additional RO 1.011. (RPV Head to UHI Tube) welds were scheduled during this outage. However three additional (RPV Head to UHI Tube) welds were examined by volumetric (UT) under the station augmented program (G04.001). No recordable conditions were found during the examination of these welds.
The reactor coolant system weld listed above is located on the reactor vessel closure 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 was rigorously inspected by radiography and dye penetrant during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. If a leak were to occur at this weld, the reactor coolant leakage calculation which is normally performed daily (and required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />) would provide an early indication of leakage. The unidentified leakage specification in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm. Several other indicators, such as, containment radiation monitors EMF-38, 39 and 40; the containment floor and equipment sump levels; containment humidity instruments; and the ventilation unit condensate drain tank
Request Relief 04-MN.002 Page 4 of 4 level would provide an early indication of weld leakage for prompt Operations and Engineering evaluation.
Jim McArdle and Tim Tucker (NDE Level m's) provided Sections II through V and part of Section VI Ed Hyland, (MNS Systems Engineer) provided part of Section VI Gary Underwood (Sponsor) compiled the remaining sections PT Examination Data C03.030.001 UT Examination Data R01.01 1.026 Sponsored By:
Date G 7-.
Approved By: -4, A^
Date C/Jzi/ol-
I Form NDE-35A Revision 3 DUKE POWER COMPANY STATION McGuire UNIT I
LIQUID PENETRANT EXAMINATION REPORT WeldID No. ICCPUMP-IA4-EG Material Type: 0 SS 0 CS El Inconel Diameter 0
Schedule[Thickness-,
/0 0D ISI 0 PSI O Other Procedure Rev. No.
19 Field Change No.(s) N/A W/O No.
98438548-28 SKETCH OF ITEM EXAMINED Surface Temperature 86-F M&TE S/N MCNDE 27220 Penetrant Materials Category.
A [0 A(SE) 0 B E C E D E A(SE) Approved Penetrant Materials Data:
Batch Numbers Cleaner OIG12K Penetrant 97A10K Developer 02B03K Emulsifier Fluorescent El Nonfluorescent 0__
Black Light Intensity Verified Acceptance Standard:
A O]
D l G O K El Time Date Other B El E El H 09 L E Light Meter S/N:
C El F E J O M 1 Ind.
Indication Reference Documents Recordable Reportable No.
Type/Dimensions D
NRI PIP S/N:
hl Rejectabl 0l Acceptable 0 Exam Limitations:
0 Yes 77.74
% Examined O No (100% Examined)
Comments:
Examiner: David Zimmerman Level:
II Date:
9/10/2002 Examiner: James L. Panel Level:
II Date:
9/10/2002 Reviewed By:
Level:
1 Date:
cI L
R I a!Review Date ANII Re Date Item No.
99 i
-1 C03.030.001 Vg QL\\-
PA kir I o155 I
DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination VolumelArea Defined ED Base Metal 0
Weld n Near Surface 0 Boltina 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 138.5 In. of weld length X 2.4 in. wide Inspection area =
332.4 sq. in. total weld area.
Coverage Calculations WJ I-r A"
A 9CA
-43Y Length
-Vele Beam Examined Examined Examined R3equired Scan Angle Direction (sq (in.)
s5
,).r) rcent Coverage N/A N/A NWA 2.4 107.5 258 332.5 NIA N/A NrA 1.9 14.0 26.6 33.6 284.6 366.1 77.74 Item No:
C03.030.001 Prepared By: David K. Zimmerman Level:
II Date: 9/10/2002 Reviewed By:
Level:
Date: 9 l z
I PA4I~Z.
zog
- 6) oq-6,rAz or z
atson__rfDd- ___
Unit-SPubject p 0 i_
I I Prob No.o
.1 Ch Rev.
Filc No.
Sheet By. -sD Date -9S/lo/&jo z ecked By //Lz dK.g3 Date 94tOJ-zQCl Z 0: r,
V
-Q t
I A tI%
lu 0 J I
I. -
-J I-Td~
1 A.n i v 0
I.
.r F-6-"-
V CxyfCw,4;S zzS0 i-r A ".
-A, r ~
o~s I1 kl a9o
- J J
I I-_ _ _ _ _ _
PAL 3oV3
'NOT
- 11)
SC AIM" I
FA CoULtuee
-cs r.s s
Ts c IS 1.0.2 *Fs AL.AUCfD.
SPACCL t GU^"D.
FS Au-Ltic - Kz-rcS F AII S OCL8 WO. 3 J tLC.t
- a.
vihro...
ccARD
(
Utc 0TC I i (fOA
`
AP AWNUSAVY %uat 0G.L P"'.
SG.W4S. SNArPE IOCL*
3S, PIA.Tacg WW4 TY) 2 40 CvCtS*. 3 r;Stc Sn sOLTS. SWAiE MT of.WuU vvcbUY EC LWf? 1.
WC - 4 eAES :J Z VG,. VOLL.
D.0e CSTmrpG.
oc OiL COOLER - AM Sf40.L ocos3 SSCS--C_
. 4sster stc:c CLASS S.
co*LINC EWf Av (orr COKSIS. A40MOA Dw(8W sub 7
-QA C4 3PT 1¶ffdv 71 SeC coupling da-shects.
IWTVS :- a. f'S OSIp4 04A5 LrCTED tr FUi&t (.".3 im rREvWNT *TOG. PU4ST ?InUrT C&lJJ.A rR044
-vosActow. S, bAmA4N$. &CrO SLECC eEARSIG:.
6.'#H-6 dS
,nl~qcqgr tpo.0 OF
oq -nm-60-z 14v-8g r:N-1 6
DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start:
0510 Form NDE-UT-2A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish:
0553 Revision 4 Station:
McGuire Unit:
1 l Component/Weld ID: IRPVI-462C-SE Date:
09/2312002 Weld Length (in.):
19.6 Surface Condition:
AS GROUND Lo:
N/A Surface Temnerature:
75
° F Examiner: James L. Panel Level: II Scans:
Pyrometer S/N:
MCNDE 27221 8Cal Due:
01/2212003 Examiner: Gary J. Moss, Level:
II 45 E 595 dB 70 ° dB
] sn:/
_Configuration:
CIRC. WELD Procedure: NDE-310 v: 0 FC:
45T 0 48.0 dB 70T ° dB S2 Flow Si N/A 60 ° dB UHI TUBE to HEAD Calibration Sheet No:
60T El dB Scan Surface: OD 0201036, 0201038 Appies to NDE-680 only Other:
dB Skew Angle:
N/A Max MP W
L Beam Exam IND Ma Max Max Max LI L2 WI MpI W2 Mp2
- Dir, Surf.
Scan Damps R ef 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac DO OT W ITE HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA D
NOT WRIT 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac IN THIS SPAC IN T -IS SP sCE 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac NRI 45*
I.
=
=
=
=
=
Remarks:
Limitations: (see NDE-UT-4) 1 90% or greater coverage obtained: yes,E no s Sheet 1
of 4 Reviewed Bv:
Level: Date:
Authorized Insoector Date:
Item No:
/
R01.011.026 (I'
L oq -?jo -doz 1mk\\CtA ec.2
DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM NDET-4 ISI LMITATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID: IRPVI-462C-SE Item No: RI.011.028 Remarks:
SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION RPV HEAD CONFIGURATON 0 NO SCAN 0
LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 0 2
2 cw O ccw FROM L 0 + o" to L 0+20" INCHES FROM WO CtL +0.7" to BEYOND ANGLE: 0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0
NO SCAN O LIMITED SCAN 0 1 0 2
2 cw a ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0
NO SCAN O LIMITED SCAN 0 1 0 2
2 cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 0 0 0 45 0 60 0 -Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION ONO SCAN
° LIMITED SCAN 13 I 00 2
2 cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 00 0 45 0 600 Other FROM DEG to
, ~0t%
Prepared By: Gary J. Mos A M
.,.Level:
11 Date: 9/23/2002 l Sketch(s) attached 2 yes )eno Sheet Z of L4 Reviewed By:
-rrj Date:
1 o
i l
Authorized Inspectors Date____
V'-
0,q-PJN-00o Ad~cH-l
.%T lo-et r
okq -t-2 h-2 DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Rvso Examination Volume/Area Defined El Base Metal ED Weld
° Near Surface
° Boltinj 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 3.1" x 0.21" = 0.65 sq. in.
0.65 sq. in. x 20" = 13 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
45 Si 0.60 20 12 13 92.31 2
45' S2 0.38 20 7.6 13 58.46 3
45' CW 0.48 20 9.6 13 73.85 4
45*
CCW.
0.48 20 9.6 13 73.85 Total Aggregate Coverage 38.8 52 74.62 A
Item No:
R01.011.026 Prepared By: Jay Eaton Level:
IlIl Date: 10/3/2002 %r
- Reviewed Byq-,
(.
,A/I 'll, Level:
Date:,0/C 3 -o L I U
(I I
E
DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-UT-5
.UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET Revision 1 EXAMINATION SURFACE,) z.
U 4 WELD
-R p A
EXAMINATION SURFACE Z I 1
2 3
4 4
3 c )j107 2
1 314Ji III.I IIII 111IIII 1111IIIII-1111 1111 II m liiii1.
4 ILH~ltriIIII II1111111111111 S
4 aoTrrl oa&
A Y
- 7%
4
.5 Al
% % VI 1V
-A\\ I ILX I
1.
2 Z t 4
7 q
2.5 e,44 3
- 1 5CAJ.
ZI c
I x
9
=
=\\
7..
Component ID/Weld No.
V l IZ?7 -IL427 C. - S2:
Remarks:
-zp.
AD 0
cr P %PE" I
I n I IItem No: Zo1.l.O(
270 i-c n
%tn-r I1 into.i-rr I nnto.. 11 RevCiewed. B Level Date:
Reviewed By: 9bg
/) -
7 &,&.
Level: 2ZZI Dat-e: /o-3 -0
.. _G......
k I
fo. 'A -
,2 j Autnonzed Inspector.-
,,_A~,
uate: K~V vt-lo -;.
%d S-E%
ReEFF
- UeIAIL-e 5
1 I
(N.
la
-WaLD BUIL)-LIP IN HEOD'
' To BE OF.SLJzFFICIENT DC5'TH TO PREV/I'T LA.4MINAIJR T-RINC
--9N l.
-Z =C,
>u C) 40La UV
l
~. 1Ot/T. I ip£ l..
1 vM
-O4-SST OR
' CA J ?rD1 Ur'E L-T Wl5-DWG.'T BE 1 FOR SIDOING PURF 60i.ooz
)IA%
.."n 11 I
,,.7.
EISTIFICATI V.~
i1 AUXILIR E2A~S 1,,
1 kA)F4LM
- nig4 9
~
l*
"***.,,s ?-.'- b.. x.
*
Li 3:
5*
- **.
- '.p,.
ATTACHMENT 2 Relief Request 04-MN-O03
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 1 of 19 Proposed Relief in Accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(iii)
Inservice Inspection Impracticality Duke Energy Corporation McGuire Nuclear Station - Unit 2 (EOC-14), Examination Dates October 14, 2000 To March 27, 2002 Second 10-Year Interval - Inservice Inspection Plan ASME Section XI Code - 1989 Edition with No Addenda Interval Start Date 03/01/1994 Interval End Date 03/01/2004 Code Case N.460 is applicable.
.1.
I & Ill.
IV.
V.
VI.
VIi.
Limitation I.D.
System
/
Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Basis for Relief Alternate Justification for the Implementation Schedule Number Component for Requested: 100% Exam Volume Coverage Examinations Granting of Relief Which Relief Is Exam Category or Testing Requested:
Item No.
Area or Weld to be Fig. No.
Examined Limitation Percentage 2SGA INLET-NC System Exam Category B-F See Paragraph "A" None See Paragraph "J" The examination requirements W5SE 2A Steam Generator Item No. B05.070.001 See Attachment I See Attachment I for this interval were met: no Inlet Nozzle to Safe Fig. IWB-2500-8 Pages 1-4 Pages 1-4 additional exams are planned.
End 75.00% Volume Coverage 2SGA-NC System Exam Category B-F See Paragraph -A" None See Paragraph "J" The examination requirements OUTLET-2A Steam Generator Item No. B05.070.002 See Attachment IA See Attachment IA for this interval were met; no W6SE Outlet Nozzle to Fig. IWB-2500-8 Pages 1-4 Pages 1-4 additional exams are planned.
Safe End 75.00% Volume Coverage 2SGD-INLFT-NC System Exam Category B-F See Paragraph "A" None See Paragraph "J" The examination requirements W5SE 2D Steam Generator Item No. B05.070.007 See Attachment I B See Attachment I B for this interval were met; no Inlet Nozzle to Safe Fig. IWB-2500-8 Pages 1-4 Pages 1-4 additional exams are planned.
End 75.00% Volume Coverage Inspection Dates for Item Numbers B05.070.001' B05.070.002 B05.070.007 B05.070.008 B08.020.001 A B09.011.009 B09.01 1.011 B09.01 1.01 IA B09.011.012 03/09/2002 03/09/2002 03/08/2002 03/08/2002 03/05/2002 02/26/2002 03/13/2002 03/03/2002 03/14/2002 B09.011.013 B09.011.018 B09.011.169 C03.030.001 03/14/2002 03/14/2002 03/14/2002 02/19/2002
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 2 of 19 Proposed Relief in Accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(iii)
Inservice Inspection Impracticality Duke Energy Corporation McGuire Nuclear Station - Unit 2 (EOC-14)
Second 10-Year Interval - Inservice Inspection Plan ASME Section XI Code - 1989 Edition with No Addenda
- l. H. & Ill.
IV.
V.
Vi.
vil.
Limitation I.D.
System/
Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Basis for Relief Alternate Justiication for the Implementation Schedule Number Component for Requested: 100% Exam Volume Coverage Examinations Granting of Relief Which Relief Is Exam Category or Testing Requested:
Item No.
Area or Weld to be Fig. No.
Examined Limitation Percentage 2SGD-NC System Exam Category B-F See Paragraph "A" None See Paragraph "J" The examination requirements OUTLET-2D Steam Generator Item No. B05.070.008 See Attachment IC See Attachment IC for this interval were met: no W6SE Outlet Nozzle to Fig. IWB-2500-8 Pages 1-4 Pages 1-4 additional exams are planned.
Safe End 75.00% Volume Coverage 2PZR-SKIRT NC System Exam Category B-H See Paragraph "B" None See Paragraph "K" The examination requirements Pressurizer Support Item No. B08.020.001 A See Attachment 2 See Attachment 2 for this interval were met; no Skirt to Lower Head Fig. iWB-2500-13 Pages 1-9 Pages 1-9 additional exams are planned.
(integral 75.16% Volume Coverage Attachment) 2NCW-3673.1 NC System Exam Category B-J See Paragraph "C" None See Paragraph "L-The examination requirements B Loop Cold Leg Item No. B09.011.009 See Attachment 3 See Attachment 3 for this interval were met: no (Pipe to Elbow near Fig. iWB-2500-8 Pages 1-4 Pages 1-4 additional exams are planned.
RV Inlet Nozzle) 79.01% Volume Coverage 2NC2FW2-1 NC System Exam Category B-i See Paragraph "D" None See Paragraph "M" The examination requirements 14" Pipe to Pipe Item No. B09.01 1.011 See Attachment 4 See Attachment 4 for this interval were met: no Weld on Pressurizer Fig. IWB-2500-8 Pages 1-3 Pages 1-3 additional exams are planned.
Surge Line 72.73% Volume Coverage (Stress Weld) 2NC2FW2-1 NC System Exam Category B-i See Paragraph "D" None See Paragraph "M" The examination requirements 14" Pipe to Pipe Item No. B09.01 1.01 IA See Attachment 4A See Attachment 4A for this interval were met; no Weld on Pressurizer Fig. IWB-2500-8 Pages 1-2 Pages 1-2 additional exams are planned.
Surge Line 81.82% Surface Area Coverage (Stress Weld) 2NC2FW22-6 NC System Exam Category B-i See Paragraph "E" None See Paragraph "N" The examination requirements B Loop Cold Leg Item No. B09.011.012 See Attachment 5 See Attachment S for this interval were met; no 10" Elbow to Fig. iWB-2500-8 Pages 1-5 Pages l-S additional exams are planned.
Nozzle Weld 61.09% Volume Coverage
Relief Request 04.MN.003 Page 3 of 19 Proposed Relief in Accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(iii)
Inservice Inspection Impracticality Duke Energy Corporation McGuire Nuclear Station - Unit 2 (EOC-14)
Second 10-Year Interval - Inservice Inspection Plan ASME Section XI Code - 1989 Edition with No Addenda I. & III.
IV.
V.
VI.
Vil.
Limitation I.D.
System
/
Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Basis for Relief Alternate Justification for the Implementation Schedule Number Component for Requested: 100% Exam Volume Coverage Examinations Granting of Rellef Which Relief Is Exam Category or Testing Requested:
Item No.
Area or Weld to be Fig. No.
Examined ULmitation Percentage 2NC2FW22-9 NC System Exam Category B1J See Paragraph "F' None See Paragraph "O" The examination requirements C Loop Cold Leg Item No. B09.0 11.013 See Attachment 6 See Attachment 6 for this interval were met; no 10" Pipe to Nozzle Fig. IWB-2500-8 Pages 1-5 Pages i-S additional exams are planned.
Weld 61.09% Volume Coverage 2NC2FW16-6 NC System Exam Category B-J See Paragraph "C" None See Paragraph P"
The examination requirements A Loop Hot Leg Item No. B09.0 11.018 See Attachment 7 See Attachment 7 for this interval were met; no 6" Elbow to Nozzle Fig. IWB-2500-8 Pages 1-4 Pages 1-4 additional exams are planned.
Weld 59.09% Volume Coverage 2N12F87I NI System Exam Category B-J See Paragraph "H" None See Paragraph "Q" The examination requirements 6" Elbow to Pipe Item No. B09.0 11.169 See Attachment 8 See Attachment 8 for this interval were met; no Weld Fig. IWB-2500-8 Pages 1-4 Pages 1.4 additional exams are planned.
59.09% Volume Coverage 2CCPUMP-2A-2A Centrifugal Exam Category C-C See Paragraph "r" None See Paragraph "R" The examination requirements LEG Charging Pump Item No. C03.030.001 See Attachment 9 See Attachment 9 for this interval were met; no Support Legs Fig. IWC-2500-5 Pages 1-4 Pages 1-4 additional exams are planned.
(Integrally Welded 82.65% Surface Area coverage Attachment)
Relief Request 04-MN.003 Page 4 of 19 IV. Basis for Relief Paragraph: A (The Steam Generator Inlet and Outlet Nozzle to SE material is stainless steel to carbon steel.
The weld has a diameter of 31.00" with a wall thickness of 2.500".)
During the ultrasonic examination of the welds, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 75.00% for all four welds. The percentage of coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage obtained by each scan. A 45 degree scan was performed from the safe end side of the weld achieving 100%
coverage from one axial direction, and a 45 degree scan in two opposing circumferential directions achieved 100% coverage. The nozzle configuration allows scanning from only the safe end side of the weld. Obtaining coverage greater than 90% of the weld volume as defined in Code Case N460 is not possible. In order to achieve more coverage, the nozzles would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both sides of the weld.
The Steam Generator Nozzle-to-Safe End welds were examined to the maximum extent practical using ultrasonic techniques in accordance with the requirements of ASME Section XI, Appendix mII of the 1989 Edition. No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examinations of these welds.
Paragraph: B (The Pressurizer Support Skirt material is carbon steel. The weld diameter is 87.00" with a wall thickness of 1.500".)
During the ultrasonic examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume in four orthogonal directions could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 75.16%. The percentage of coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage obtained by each scan. The entire examination volume was covered 100% from at least one axial and one circumferential direction. Obtaining coverage greater than 90% of the weld volume as defined in Code Case N-460 is not possible. The examination procedure and calibration block was in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix I and ASME Section V, Article 5 1989 Edition.
A recordable indication was found during the volumetric examination of this weld. The recordable indication was determined to be a Geometric Reflector. This weld was determined to be acceptable after NDE evaluation.
Paragraph: C (The B Loop Cold Leg material is stainless steel. The weld diameter is 27.500" and the wall thickness is 2.000".)
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 5 of 19 During the ultrasonic examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 79.01%. Limitations are caused by cast austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the location of pipe restraints preventing two-beam path direction coverage of the examination volume. The percentage of coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage obtained by each scan. A 45 degree scan was performed from one side of the weld achieving 100% coverage from one axial direction, and a 45 degree scan in two opposing circumferential directions achieved 100% coverage. An additional 4% was achieved from the restraint side of the weld. The proximity of the restraint limits scanning from two opposing axial directions. Obtaining coverage greater than 90% of the weld volume as defined in Code Case N-460 is not possible.
No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examination of this weld.
The most effective ultrasonic technique for the examination of welds in cast austenitic piping uses refracted longitudinal waves. The longitudinal wave is preferred as the austenitic weld metal and buttering create highly attenuative barriers to shear wave ultrasound. The longitudinal wave is less affected by these difficulties. However, the longitudinal wave is affected by mode conversion when it strikes the inside surface of the safe end or pipe at any angle other than a right angle to the surface.
The calculations below show that a 450 refracted longitudinal wave striking the inside surface of a pipe will produce a 22.90 refracted shear wave in addition to the normally expected 450 reflected longitudinal wave.
Sin-'
= (sin 450x Vs)
VL
= (0.707 x 0.123) - 0.223 Where: sin' is the shear wave angle V, is the shear wave velocity of the stainless steel safe end/pipe material in inches /psec.
VL is the longitudinal wave velocity of the stainless steel safe/pipe end material in inches/lisec.
As shown in the graph below, the mode conversion process creates two sound beams of differing intensities reflecting off the inside surface'. At incident angles greater than 30 degrees, the shear wave will predominate. However, the shear wave is attenuated and scattered by the cast austenitic material. The examination sensitivity is degraded to such an extent that any examination using the second sound path leg is meaningless. Therefore, the two-beam path direction coverage requirement is impractical.
In order to obtain the required two-beam path direction coverage, the pipe restraints would have to be re-located to allow scanning from both sides.
'Firestone, F.A.: Tricks with the Supersonic Reflectoscope, J. Soc. Nondestructive Testing, vol. 7, no. 2 Fall 1948.
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 6 of 19 Reflected Sound Beam Energy In Steel on A Free Face p
C*1 S
1.000 0.900 0.700 0.600 0.500 O.
M
-W -
-.'0, 0 20
.40 0,-'
'20 t /-, - -
- 0
- -Y -;
0.100'_
0.000 0.00o 15.20-30.00o 50.00o 60.00o 70.00-80.00o 8920-90.0
--+-L-wave DwW I --ft-Stwar wave D*W I 00 L-Wave Incident Angle
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 7 of 19 Paragraph: D (The Pressurizer Surge Line material is stainless steel. The weld diameter is 14.00" and the wall thickness is 1.406".)
During the ultrasonic examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 72.73%. Limitations are caused by austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the location of rigid restraints which prevents scanning of the weld from two opposing sides. The percentage of coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage obtained by each scan. A 60 degree scan was performed from one side of the weld achieving 100% coverage from one axial direction, and a 45 degree scan in two opposing circumferential directions achieved 100% coverage. An additional 4% was achieved from the restraint side of the weld. The proximity of the restraint limits scanning from two opposing axial directions. Obtaining coverage greater than 90% of the weld volume as defined in Code Case N-460 is not possible. In order to achieve more coverage, the restraint would have to be moved to allow scanning from both sides of the weld.
Duke Energy Corporation does not claim credit for coverage of the far side of austenitic welds.
The characteristics of austenitic weld metal attenuate and distort the sound beam when shear waves pass through the weld. Refracted longitudinal waves provide better penetration but cannot be used beyond the first sound path leg. Duke Energy Corporation uses a combination of shear waves and longitudinal waves to examine single sided austenitic welds.
The procedures, personnel and equipment have been qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). However, although longitudinal wave search units were used in the qualification and cracks were detected through the weld metal, PDI does not provide a qualification for single sided examinations of austenitic welds.
During the Liquid Penetrant examination for this same weld the required surface examination area could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 81.82%. The Liquid Penetrant exam limitations were caused by the close proximity of a pipe support/restraint that obstructed a portion of the weld and adjacent base metal in two locations.
No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examination of this weld.
Paragraph: E (The Elbow to Nozzle material is stainless steel. The weld diameter is 10.00" and the wall thickness is 1.000".)
During the ultrasonic examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 61.09%. The reported percent of coverage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld. A 60 degree shear wave scan was performed from the elbow side of the weld achieving 44.3%
coverage of the examination volume from one axial direction and a 45 shear wave degree scan in
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 8 of 19 two opposing circumferential directions achieved 100% coverage. A supplemental axial scan from the elbow side using a 60 degree refracted longitudinal wave search unit covered 100% of the weld metal and far side base material. Limitations are caused by austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access due to the proximity of the nozzle which prevents scanning of the weld from two opposing sides. Obtaining coverage greater than 90% of the weld volume as defined in Code Case N-460 is not possible.
Duke Energy Corporation does not claim credit for coverage of the far side of austenitic welds.
The characteristics of austenitic weld metal attenuate and distort the sound beam when shear waves pass through the weld. Refracted longitudinal waves provide better penetration but cannot be used beyond the first sound path leg. Duke Energy Corporation uses a combination of shear waves and longitudinal waves to examine single sided austenitic welds.
The procedures, personnel and equipment have been qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). However, although longitudinal wave search units were used in the qualification and cracks were detected through the weld metal, PDI does not provide a qualification for single sided examinations of austenitic welds.
No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examination of this weld.
Paragraph: F (The pipe to nozzle material is stainless steel. The weld diameter is 10.000" and the wall thickness is 1.000".)
During the ultrasonic examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 61.09%. The reported percent of coverage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld. A 60 degree shear wave scan was performed from the elbow side of the weld achieving 44.3%
coverage of the examination volume from one axial direction and a 45 degree shear wave scan in two opposing circumferential directions achieved 100% coverage of the weld base material. A supplemental axial scan from the elbow side using a 60 degree refracted longitudinal wave search unit covered 100% of the weld metal and far side base material.
Limitations are caused by austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access due to the proximity of the nozzle which prevents scanning of the weld from two opposing sides. Obtaining coverage greater than 90% of the weld volume as defined in Code Case N-460 is not possible.
Duke Energy Corporation does not claim credit for coverage of the far side of austenitic welds.
The characteristics of austenitic weld metal attenuate and distort the sound beam when shear waves pass through the weld. Refracted longitudinal waves provide better penetration but cannot be used beyond the first sound path leg. Duke Energy Corporation uses a combination of shear waves and longitudinal waves to examine single sided austenitic welds.
The procedures, personnel and equipment have been qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). However, although longitudinal wave search units were used in
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 9 of 19 the qualification and cracks were detected through the weld metal, PDI does not provide a qualification for single sided examinations of austenitic welds.
No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examination of this weld.
Paragraph: G (The elbow to nozzle material is stainless steel. The weld diameter is 6.000" and the wall thickness is.719".)
During the ultrasonic examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 59.09%. The reported percent of coverage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld. A 60 degree shear wave scan was performed from the elbow side of the weld achieving 36.36%
coverage of the examination volume from one axial direction and a 45 degree shear wave scan in two opposing circumferential directions achieved 100% coverage of the weld and base material.
A supplemental axial scan from the elbow side using a 60 degree refracted longitudinal wave search unit covered 100% of the weld metal and far side base material. Limitations are caused by austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access due to the proximity of the nozzle which prevents scanning of the weld from two opposing sides. Obtaining coverage greater than 90% of the weld volume as defined in Code Case N-460 is not possible.
Duke Energy Corporation does not claim credit for coverage of the far side of austenitic welds.
The characteristics of austenitic weld metal attenuate and distort the sound beam when shear waves pass through the weld. Refracted longitudinal waves provide better penetration but cannot be used beyond the first sound path leg. Duke Energy Corporation uses a combination of shear waves and longitudinal waves to examine single sided austenitic welds.
The procedures, personnel and equipment have been qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). However, although longitudinal wave search units were used in the qualification and cracks were detected through the weld metal, PDI does not provide a qualification for single sided examinations of austenitic welds.
No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examination of this weld.
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 10 of 19 Paragraph: H (The elbow to pipe material is stainless steel. The weld diameter is 6.000" and the wall thickness is.719".)
During the ultrasonic examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 59.09%. The reported percent of coverage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld. A 60 degree shear wave scan was performed from the elbow side of the weld achieving 36.36%
coverage of the examination volume from one axial direction and a 45 degree shear wave scan in two opposing circumferential directions achieved 100% coverage of the weld and base material.
A supplemental axial scan from the elbow side using 60 degree refracted longitudinal wave search unit covered 100% of the weld metal and far side base material. Limitations are caused by austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access due to the elbow configuration and the proximity of an adjacent weld which prevents scanning of the weld from two opposing sides.
Obtaining coverage greater than 90% of the weld volume as defined in Code Case N460 is not possible.
Duke Energy Corporation does not claim credit for coverage of the far side of austenitic welds.
The characteristics of austenitic weld metal attenuate and distort the sound beam when shear waves pass through the weld. Refracted longitudinal waves provide better penetration but cannot be used beyond the second sound path leg. Duke Energy Corporation uses a combination of shear waves and longitudinal waves to examine single sided austenitic welds.
The procedures, personnel and equipment have been qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). However, although longitudinal wave search units were used in the qualification and cracks were detected through the weld metal, PDI does not provide a qualification for single sided examinations of austenitic welds.
No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examination of this weld.
Paragraph: I (The support leg material is stainless steel.)
During the Liquid Penetrant examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required surface examination area could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 82.65%. The limitations were caused by the geometric configuration of the support legs restricting access for complete examination coverage.
No recordable indications were found during the surface examination of this weld.
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 11 of 19 VI. justification for Relief Paragraph: J Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB-2500-8 could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. These welds were examined using procedures in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix III. Ultrasonic examination personnel are qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII 1989 Edition.
No additional B05.070 welds were scheduled during this outage.
The 2A Steam Generator Inlet and Outlet Nozzle to Safe End Welds (2SGA-Inlet-W5SE and 2SGA-Outlet-W6SE) and the 2D Steam Generator Inlet and Outlet Nozzle to Safe End Welds (2SGD-Inlet-W5SE and 2SGD-Outlet-W6SE) are part of the NC (Reactor Coolant System) boundary. These welds are not exposed to significant neutron fluence and are not prone to negative material property changes (i.e., embrittlement) associated with neutron bombardment.
If a leak were to occur at the welds in question, there are methods by which the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at one of these welds 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 monitored by the Containment Ventilation System Engineer.
b) Increased Steam Generator enclosure temperature. This parameter is continuously monitored by the Operations via an Operator Aid Computer (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.
d) Increase in unidentified reactor coolant leakage. This parameter would be exhibited during performance of reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. The unidentified leakage limit 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.
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 12 of 19 Also, a containment walk-down is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature
/ pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walk down should identify any leak at the weld in question Paragraph: K 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.
There is inadequate accessibility to the inside surface (surface C-D) of the Pressurizer Support Skirt Weld to perform the required surface examination. Therefore, an ultrasonic examination was used to inspect the inner examination surface from the skirt's exterior surface per Relief Request 00-001. For additional information reference NRC letter dated August 23, 2001, Docket Numbers 50-369, 50-370 and Tac Numbers MB 2325 and MB 2326. The ultrasonic procedure and the basic calibration block conformed to the requirements of ASME Section XI, Appendix 1, 1989 Edition, and ASME Section V, Article 5, 1989 Edition. Ultrasonic examination personnel were qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI Appendix VII, 1989 Edition.
No additional B08.020 welds were scheduled during this outage.
This weld 2PZR-SKIRT joins 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:
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 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> (McGuire normally performs this calculation every 24 Hrs). The unidentified leakage limit in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm.
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 13 of 19 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 walk down is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature /
pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walk down should identify any leak at the weld in question.
Paragraph: L Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB-2500-8 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 in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix m. Ultrasonic examination personnel are qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI Appendix VII, 1989 Edition.
No additional B09.01 I cold leg welds were scheduled during this outage.
This is a Pipe to Elbow Weld 2NCW-3673-1 located on the NC (Reactor Coolant System) B Loop Cold Leg near the Reactor Vessel Inlet 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 monitored by 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 reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. The unidentified leakage limit 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 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.
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 14 of 19 Also, a containment walk down is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature
/ pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walk down should identify any leak at the weld in question.
Paragraph: M Although the examination volume and surface area as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB-2500-8 could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. This weld was ultrasonically examined using procedures, personnel and equipment qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). Liquid penetrant examination was performed in accordance with ASME Section V, Article 6 1989 Edition with no addenda.
No additional B09.0l1 Pressurizer Surge Line welds were scheduled during this outage.
This is a 14" Pipe to Pipe Weld 2NC2FW2-1 located on the NC (Reactor Coolant System)
Pressurizer Surge Line. 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 monitored by 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 reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. The unidentified leakage limit 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 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.
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 15 of 19 Paragraph: N Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB-2500-8 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).
One additional B09.01 1, 10.00" weld on the NC System was scheduled during this outage. No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examination of this weld.
This is a 10" Elbow to Nozzle Weld 2NC2FW22-6 located on the NC (Reactor Coolant System)
B Loop Cold 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, 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 monitored by 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 reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. The unidentified leakage limit 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 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 walk down is performed when the unit reaches Mode 3 (full temperature I pressure) during the unit shutdown and startup for each refueling outage. This walkdown should identify any leak at the weld in question.
Paragraph: 0 Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB-2500-8 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).
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 16 of 19 One additional B09.01 1, 10.00" weld on the NC System was scheduled during this outage. No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examination of this weld.
This is a 10" Pipe to Nozzle Weld 2NC2FW22-9 located on the NC (Reactor Coolant System) C Loop Cold 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, 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 monitored by 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 reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. The unidentified leakage limit 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 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 walk down 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.
Paragraph: P Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB-2500-8 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).
Five additional B09.011, 6.00" welds on the NC System were scheduled and examined during this outage. No recordable indications were found on three of these welds. Recordable indications were found on two of the welds. The indications were determined to be Geometric Reflectors, and were determined to be acceptable after NDE evaluation.
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 17 of 19 This is a 6" Elbow to Nozzle Weld 2NC2FW16-6 located on the NC (Reactor Coolant System)
A Loop 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, 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 monitored by 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 reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. The unidentified leakage limit 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 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 walk down 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.
Paragraph: Q Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB-2500-8 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).
Four additional B09.0 11 welds on the NI System were scheduled and examined during this outage. No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examinations of these welds.
This is a 6" Elbow to Pipe Weld 2NI2F871 located on the NI (Safety Injection System). 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:
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 18 of 19 a) Increased containment humidity. This parameter is indicated in the control room and is monitored periodically by Operations and also monitored by 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 reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. The unidentified leakage limit 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 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 walk down 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.
Paragraph: R Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWC-2500-5 could not be covered, the amount of coverage obtained for this examination provides an acceptable level of quality and integrity. The liquid penetrant examination was performed in accordance with ASME Section V, Article 6, 1989 Edition with no addenda.
No additional C03.030 welds were scheduled during this outage.
This is an Integrally Welded Attachment located on the 2A Centrifugal Charging Pump Support Legs 2CCPUMP-2A-LEG. 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) A leak at this weld would likely result in abnormal Volume Control Tank (VCT) level trends and/or unexpected auto make-ups.
b) A leak at this weld would likely result in 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 Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.
The unidentified leakage limit in Technical Specification 3.4.13.1 is 1 gpm. Any increase reactor coolant leakage identified by the calculation would make suspect either the operating or idle CCP especially if a recent train swap has occurred (normally biweekly). To evaluate
Relief Request 04-MN-003 Page 19 of 19 either of these indicators an operator would be dispatched to the pump rooms, which would identify any leakage from this weld.
Also, operators perform surveillance once per shift during daily rounds of the room containing the 2A CCP. This surveillance should identify any leak at the weld in question.
The following individuals contributed to the development of this relief request:
Jim McArdle and Tim Tucker (Principal UT and RT NDE Level III Examiners, respectively) provided Sections II through V and part of Section VI.
Ed Hyland, Bryan Meyer and Larry Kunka (MNS Systems Engineers) provided parts of Section VI.
Gary Underwood (McGuire ISI Plan Manager) compiled the remaining sections.
Sponsored By:
Date 7-12-Coq Approved By:
Attachment I Date 47/i3/b UT Examination Data B05.070.001, BOS.070.002, B05.070.007, B05.070.008 UT Examination Data B08.020.001A UT Examination Data B09.011.009 UT, PT Examination Data B09.01 1.011, B09.01 1.01 IA respectively UT Examination Data B09.011.012 UT Examination Data B09.011.013 UT Examination Data B09.011.018 UT Examination Data B09.011.169 PT Examination Data C03.030.001
A JJM4 I
-. A
^-
(2 -
L
(.f W16t'qe-DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start:
1001 Form NDE-UT-2A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish:
1026 Revision 4 Station:
McGuire Unit:
2 Component/Weld ID: 2SGA-INLET-W5SE Date:
3/9/2002 Weld Length (in.):
119.4 Surface Condition:
AS MACHINED Lo: RT -0' Surface Temoerature:
78 0 F Examiner: Winfred C. Leepor 1v:
11 Scans:
Pyrometer S/N:
MCNDE 27228 Cal Due:
7/3/2002 Examiner:
A Level:
45 0 dB 70 0 dB
,y Configuration:
CIRC.
Procedure: NDE-9 0 Rev: 1 FC:
45T 10 73*
dB 70T El dB Is__
Flow
$Z 02-04 60 0 dB Safe End to Nozzle Calibration Sheet No:
6OT 0 _
dB Scan Surface: OD 0202056 Applies to NDE-680 only 0
Other:
330 @ 54dB dB Skew Angle:
Max MP W
L Beam Exam IND Max Max Max Li L2 WI Mpt W2 Mp2 Dir.
Surf.
Scan Damps R ef 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac DO I IOT WI 1ITE HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA D
NOT WRITI IN T 1S SP, CE 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 500/odac 50%dac IN THIS SPACE 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac NFI 330 NRI 45
=
Remarks: ** SCANNED AT 69dB DUE TO NOISE Limitations: (see NDE-UT-4 90% or greater coverage obtained: yes 0 no 0 Sheet1L ofL Reviewed Bv:
Level:
Date:
Authorize or:
Date:
Item No:
(4 f
m 3,
s~
27'B05.070.001 0
V.'
cK
AtWAsva t
/F-N a3 ?t 2o44 DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM NDEUTh4 ISI LIMITATION REPORT I
Revision 1 Component/Weld ID: 2SGA-INLET-W5SE Item No: B05.070.001 Remarks:
SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Nozzie Configuration E0 NO SCAN l
LIMITEDSCAN 0102 102O cw ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO 2w to Beond ANGLE: 0l 0 3 45 0 60 0 Other 330 FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN O
LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 0 2
01 0
2 0 cw O ccw FROM L ---
to L INCHES FROM WO__
to ANGLE: 0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN OLIMITEDSCAN 1 02 0
I E 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM _
DEGto DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN OLIMITEDSCAN 0102 El 1 2
0 cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to Prepared By Winfred C. eeer ee:
II Date: 3/;2002 Sketch(s) attached 0 yes 0no Sheet Z. of Reviewed By.
Date:3 1
\\
Authorized Inspector.
Date:?'<z
Station.
&t6
)<
nit 7..
Rev.
File No..
Sheet 3cOLIC 2
X.
5..A* -u l-i~.
a e
_1t 8 Prob No. *..g5>72.4.Q I_
Checked by Date
_-i..-.
-c, 0..
tC ~~~~1~
......~~~~~~~~
L. - --ll-
--/-**-
lX--
, _--t I
R
-\\\\
~.
-i,
. :.1 *#T
'R i'_-
,12 III.
i i-,
0
,X a
I.
a
~
¢~>
-fi-
,1,
~~~~~~~~~~-i-
- -i-1--.-
i I
aI!
i i1arf1 3T-
ER z4-HN^-0A3 c
DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination VolumelArea Defined 0 Base Metal 0
Weld 0 Near Surface 0 Boltino 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 1.17 x 2.55 = 2.98 sq. In.
2.98 sq. In. x 119.4 = 355.81 cu. In.
Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.)
(in.)
(cu.in.)
(cu.in.)
1 330 2
450 3
450 4
2.98 2.98 Aggregate 119.4 0
119.4 119.4 Coverage 355.81 0
355.81 355.81 1067.43 355.81 355.81 355.81 355.81 1423.24 100.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 75.00
1
Item No:
B05.070.001 Prepared By. Jay A. Eaton
(>
- Level: III Date: 3110/2002 Reviewed By.
.,<2,,Level:
Date: l A.
I
. -SfL cxi'l
A1'M%%\\M7 t k RO 6AI-OM-66' 'P..o 6.4,q DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start:
1027 Form NDE-UT-2A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish:
1053 Revision 4 Station:
McGuire Unit:
2 Component/Weld ID: 2SGA-OUTLET-W6SE Date:
3/9/2002 Weld Length (in.):
119.4 Surface Condition:
AS MACHINED Lo: RT 0" Surface Temroerature:
78
° F Examiner: Winfred C. Leeper/L4 teveI: II Scans:
Pyrometer S/N:
MCNDE 27228 ACal Due:
7/312002 Examiner:,
/f /1/
Level I/
45 0 dB 70 0 dB C a
tion: 7/120
/
/l
/
zConfiguration:
CIRC.
Procedure:
NDE.9K0/
Rev: 1 FC:
45T 0 73 dB 70T Ol dB dB Flow IS 02-04 60 O dB Safe End to Nozzle Calibration Sheet No:
6T d
Scan Surface: OD S60T dB Applies to NDE-680 only Other:
330 © 54dB dB Skew Angle:
,JA Max MP W
L Beam Exam IND Max Max Max Li L2 WI M pI W2 Mp2 Dir.
Surf.
Scan Damps Ref 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac N
DO NOT W111TE HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA Do NOT WRIT IN T IS SP CE 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac IN THIS SPAC 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac NRI 330 NRI 450 Remarks: ** SCANNED AT 69dB DUE TO NOISE Limitations: (see NDE-UT-4) 0 90% or greater coverage obtained: yes Ol no 10 Sheet 1L ofj q{
Reviewed Bv:
Level:
Date:
Authorized Insoector:
Date:
Item No:
7 b 5 3 I%),,
3r -oz 805.070.002
.. -A V
I L
AnwTiKwr MA gR Hi&24 DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM NDUT-4 ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revislon 1 Component/Weld ID: 2SGA-OUTLET-W6SE Item No: B05.070.002 Remarks:
NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Nozzle Configuration O LIMITEDSCAN E
1 0 2 03 1 El 2 0 cw a ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO 2"
to Beyond ANGLE:
O3 0 0 45 El 60 0 Other 33° FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION O NO SCAN O LIMITEDSCAN 10 2
El 1 l 2 Elcw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
O 0 El 45 El 60 El Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION E
NO SCAN OlLIMITEDSCAN 01 02 1 El 2 El cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 El 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG LZ El NO SCAN El LIMITED SCAN El FROM L to L_ _____
ANGLE:
0 El 45 El 60 0 Other Prepared By. Winfred C. LeeK r
Reviewed By.
_ 14 m
JRFACE 1 02 BEAM DIRECTION El El 2 cw El ccw WO -
to FROM DEG to INCHES FROM
/
11 Date: 319/2002 Sketch(s) attached O yes E no Sheet LoOf 4
Authorized Inspector Date:
Dat:Jop I
S,-3(.$ cm'di ?o. 892233 Station :
r Uni ;t 7.-.. - Rev.
File No..
Sheet '3 opL CkA#,
/X/,O Lgt Prob N
A0,2z
~3L~~ZL A.By~
Date /e.
No.
O~~Z
.Checked by P ate i-I.
. -I LLI II I
V i- -
1At s :
I
iI
- 1. i I If..
I
i II I
......... t--
I I I
~6 yZ Ir--a^
-7)
I
- iIII1, v
I A-f' f1
-I-.--
TiII I
Iji I
I Ii I
I ifi;III II 1.J1.L.... --
-....i...... +... -
iI 6
I J
iK lB1 I
4
- 1:*
I I I
kJ -
i... r-I 1'.
i II
-t-t.-+-I-.
f-i i
4
-. -~~
- 1.
- ~1-~
t-I- -
i
't I
I I
1--t i
i i
i I-F I -
t -
-- I -
- I --
1-4 I
I..
I AMTPW~W.T I 7
A1 KV 511-HN-do,3 y4°kosQ DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Umited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revsin 0 Examination VolumelArea Defined 0 Base Metal 0
Weld 0 Near Surface 0 Boltina 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 1.17 x 2.55 = 2.98 sq. In.
2.98 sq. In. x 119A4 = 355.81 cu. in.
Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Scan # Angle Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Direction (sq.in.)
(in.)
(cu.in.)
(cu.in.)
1 330 2
450 3
450 4
450 S2 Si Cw CCw Total 2.98 0
2.98 2.98 Aggregate 119.4 0
119.4 119.4 Coverage 355.81 0
355.81 355.81 1067.43 355.81 355.81 355.81 355.81 1423.24 100.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 75.00
ATCCAnRE I IB Re OL-ft'A-63 76 \\t A DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start:
1049 Form NDE-UT-2A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish:
1115 Revision 4 Station:
McGuire Unit:
2 l Component/Weld ID: 2SGD-INLET-W5SE Date:
3/8/2002 Weld Length (in.):
119.4 Surface Condition:
AS MACHINED Lo:
RT W0 Surface Temperature:
87 0 F Examiner: GaryJ. Moss 0
3 Level:
II Scans:
Pyrometer SCN:
MCNDE 27228 Cal Due:
7/3/2002 Examiner: Winfred C. Leeper eve!:
45 0 dB 70 C]
dB IV-Configuration:
CIRC.
Procedure: NDE-930 Rev: 1 FC:
45T 73 dB 70T O dB Is_
Flow 02-04 60 0 dB Safe End to Nozle Calibration Sheet No:
O dScan Surface: OD Clri S60T dB Applies to NDE-680 only 0202055 Other:
330 @ 54dB dB Skew Argle:
lA Max Mp W
L Beam Exam IND # e R %
Max Max Max Li L2 W1 Mpi W2 Mp2 Dir.
Sud.
Scan Damps
~R e f DO OT l
ITE 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac D
N W
.DO I 40T Wl lITE HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA Do NOT WRIT :
IN T IS SP CE 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac IN THIS SPACE 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac NRI 338 NRI 450 Remarks: SCANNED AT 69 dB DUE TO NOISE Limitations: (see NDE-UT-4) 0] I 90% or greater coverage obtained: yes Ol no 10 Sheet I
of 4 4
Reviewed Bv:
(
e:
}Authorized InsDector:
, IO2d 1 f
Date:
Item No:
B05.070.007 I
k
A-R t
118 RRVZ3q otqh -60 Zg DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM NDE-UT-4 ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revsison 1 Component/Weld ID: 2SGD-INLET-W5SE Item No: B05.070.007 Remarks:
0 NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Nozzle Configuration E LIMITEDSCAN O102 ED02 cw ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO 2"
to Beyond ANGLE: 0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other 330 FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0
NO SCAN 0LIMITEDSCAN 1 02 El 1 2 0 cw O[ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0
NO SCAN O LIMITEDSCAN 1 02 El 1 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 00 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG A I 0
NO SCAN 0
LIMITED SCAN 0
FROM L -to to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other Prepared By: Winfred C. Lee tei URFACE 1 02 BEAM DIRECTION El 1 2 0 cw [
ccw WO to FROM DEG to INCHES FROM WeI:
11 Date: 3/9/2002 l Sketch(s)attached 0 yes O no Sheet Z of 4 Reviewed By.
Authorized Inspector:
Date:
S:os CG'di '4o. 502;33 Station :.
U Jnt 7 Rev.
Subject 7Z.
2.(!%
~~~6 By Prob No. 305.
Q Checked by File No.. A-__
Sheet 3 ov4 Date 71 z?-
Date AdDL
. 0-
..... r
.J94*Ml
- 5.S":
I.--
I I
I II I
i I
-!.i i
i L
I i
J
I -
L..q.J.
r I
-i I
. c II.
r-I i
I I
I Gjb k
.X 1
,A I
l II I i I I
II 1-
_l-L
+-.
1 w
iI H'~ '-- -- -i--i 'i~ ~
IS I
I I-I -
t A7ft*91IEST/ I P(j6J-j-663 R
La 44 DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 U-mited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision ° Examination Volume/Area Defined 0 Base Metal 0
Weld 0 Near Surface 0 Boltinq 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 1.17 x 2.55m = 2.98 sq. In.
2.98 sq. In. x - 19.4* = 355.81 cu. In.
Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Scan Angle Direction (sq.in.)
(in.)
(cu.in.)
(cu.in.)
1 33° 2
45° 3
450 4
450 S2 Si Cw CCw Total 2.98 0
2.98 2.98 Aggregate 119.4 0
119.4 119.4 Coverage 355.81 0
355.81 355.81 1067.43 355.81 355.81 355.81 355.81 1423.24 100.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 75.00 (4
KC s5 V
Li oV L
A47FAWItEyt
,c
_R 0
,/- -63 Im IA4 DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start:
1012 Form NDE-UT-2A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish:
1048 Revision 4 Station:
McGuire Unit:
2 l Component/Weld ID: 2SGD-OUTLET-W6SE Date:
3/8/2002 Weld Length (in.):
119.4 Surface Condition:
AS MACHINED Lo: RT -0O Surface Temrerature:
87 0
F Pyrometer S/N:
MCNDE 27228 Exmier GaryCal Due:
7/3/2002 Examiner: Winfred C. Leeper/
evel:
II 45 0 dB 70 E0ClDe_7_2 dB Configuration:
CIRC.
Procedure: NDE-930 Rev:
1 FC:
45T 73*
dB 70T ° dB
' \\
Flow 5
02-04 60 0 dB Safe End to Nozzle Calibration Sheet No:
6T d
Scan Surface: OD o
60 dB Applies to NDE-680 only Other:
330 @ 54dB dB Skew Angle:
ro 1A Max Mp W
L Beam Exam IND # 4.
Max Max Max LI L2 Wi Mp1 W2 Mp2 Dir.
Surf.
Scan Damps Ref 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac D
N DO I OT WI 1TE HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA D
NOT WRIT :
IN T IS SP 'CE 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac IN THIS SPAC 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac NRI 330 NRI 450 Remarks: ** SCANNED AT 69dB DUE TO NOISE Limitations: (see NDE-UT-4) 90% or greater coverage obtained: yes 0 no 0 Sheet I ofiL Reviewed Bv:
Level:
Date:
Authorized Insoector:
Date:
Item No:
3Ji9Ic-IE-3 l-cz.
B05.070.008 A
A4XCHt'EArT /c Jef? A4'H4AIAA Vl~ IV~
- £ V
DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM NDET4 ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID: 2SGD-OUTLET-W6SE Item No: B05.070.008 Remarks:
SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Nozzle Configuration 0 NO SCAN E
LIMITED SCAN 0102 El 1 0 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO 2*
to Beyond ANGLE:
00 0 45 0 60 El Other 33X FROM __
DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN
[
LIMITED SCAN 1 02 0
El 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0
NO SCAN E LIMITEDSCAN 1 02 0
1 0 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L toL-INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG
-T SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 03 NO SCAN 0 LIMITED SCAN 01 02 El 1 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to L
/
Prepared By:
Winfred C.
Date: 3/9/2002 l Sketch(s) attached 0 yes O no Sheot of 1 Reviewed By-Authorized Inspetorctor:
Date:-'7j?4 ;i
S:.x.Oi C4e NJo. 89203 a
Station :.
Unt
.. Rev.
f thfr cz h
I-Al
-rhA,,,;~.1A
- ile No.
Sheet 3 0x~a4
.1
-'--I Ol4 Prob IN
"'OPZ BY1
_Date 351I oz No.
pQ~~~oe)
-Checked by Date 7'
-7
.1 J
r i
I i
II I
i
--A 1.
I--
I,
I S I I
--j-- I.II !
" I-I I
I I
I I
4.
I.I I
II II'I!.,yd,.
a..l
.1. 1
- IIhI j
'Ii III' I.
4-12 21
III1IV&w I
I. A7 ).
x I Z. I5S I A oze I
i}l I
II
-
a
jj I
I 4
J Iii
- 1 II I
I
'in' 4
-
I I
I IiI I
j 1
III I
I
4---
i ! -.-
I, A -
I
-1 I
L
-- L
--L.
I I
11 I I 17-I
-f-A
-t-..
. - ..
a I
1 ---
I -
-
--! -,I I
A-
.J ------ J L------
L-J ----
J
I AWMAVAEMT
) (C flDS
^P/
&M AA'>
7>
I I
KKo V
mm-Wo IC ov DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 U-mited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination VolumeiArea Defined i
Base Metal 0
Weld 03 Near Surface
° Boltinc 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 1.1 7 x 2.55S = 2.98 sq. In.
2.98 sq. In. x 119.4' = 355.81 cu. in.
Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.)
(in.)
(cu.in.)
(cu.in.)
r, 1
330 2
450 3
450 4
450 IPrepared By:,
S2 Si Cw CCw Total 2.98 119.4 0
0 2.98 119.4 2.98 119.4 Aggregate Coverage 355.81 0
355.81 355.81 1067.43 355.81 355.81 355.81 355.81 142324 100.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 75.00
.0 Ci~
e HVK~ Li of-Lf
AVACAtetr 2a RR oq-HN-603 2iSns: ka9 DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start:
1012 NDE-UT-3A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR LAMINAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish:
1020 Revision 2 Station:
McGuire Unit:
2 Component/Weld ID: 2PZR-SKIRT Date: 03/05/2002 Nominal Material Thickness (in):
1.5 Weld Length (in.):
273.3 Surface Temperature:
82° Deg F Measured Material Thickness (in):
1.69 Lo:
9.2.1 Pyrometer SIN:
MCNDE 27227 Surface Condition:
AS GROUND Calibration Sheet No:
Cal Due:
07/03/2002 Examiner: Gary J. Moss Level:
II 0202049 Configuration:
SKIRT to LOWER HEAD Examiner: James L. Panel Level:
II S2 Flow S1 Procedure:
NDE-64 Rev:
1 FC:
^
SKIRT to HEAD Ampi Li WI Mp1 W2 Mp2 L2 WI Mpi W2 Mp2
rem :
rem 2 rem A rem a rem Exam NO.
4 e$ BW BW BW BW BW BW BW 8W BW BW BW Surf.
Damps LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB LOB NRl 00 Remarks:
C 4t
- I Limitations:
see NDE-UT-4 0 None: 0 Sheet -lof -Z Reviewed By:
Level: Date:
Authorize inspector:
Date:
Item No:
/Zi 3),oJ012.
- ak iI B08.020.001A f/\\
ArrREtT P RR 6q -tlN-,6,5,3 _R*- Zo-f 5 DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start:
1012 Form NDE-UT-2A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish:
1105 RevisIon 4 Station:
McGuire Unit:
2 1 Component/Weld ID: 2PZR-SKIRT Date:
03/05/2002 Weld Length (in.):
273.3 Surface Condition:
AS GROUND Lo:
9.2.1 Surface Temnerature:
82 F
Examiner: Gary J. Moss I1/IfI)
Level: II Scans:
Pyrometer S/N:
MCNDE 27227
/ Q)/ { /oCal Due:
07/03/2002 Examiner: James L. Panel /
I vel: II 45 G 60.5 dB 70 EJ dB Configuration:
Skirt to Lower Head Procedure: NDE-952 Rev: 0 FC:
45T 0 60.5 dB 70T ° dB S2 Flow Si 02-05 0
63.5 dB Skirt to Head Clri SScan Surface: OD Calibration Sheet No:
60T 0 _
_dB Applies to NDE-680 only 0202049,020Other:
0 @ 34 dB Skew Angle:
N/A Max Mp W
L Beam Exam IND #
%4 Max Max Max Li L2 W1 Mp1 W2 Mp2 Dir.
Surf.
Scan Damps R ef 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac DO OT W ITE HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA D
NOT WRIT IN T IS SP CE 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac IN THIS SPAC IN Tf 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 1
300 350 2.83 Taper-5.7 0.0' 3600 INT.
IND.
_)4A
,Z)--
2 1
AX NO
ACMCURP a
RK 614-11Au-'O3 t-e 3vof 9 I ortAOD ; t.
- sv-t7-
S.7 Is -
1ZL-ZO I
iL2b*
3y:
%f.t::
Ba0. 02o. 00 IA 28PA-SXltR X 5.oz6-,-
/
?Ac 3 otI 31101D2.
4 Ae
AGCA-r 2 DUKE POWER COMPANY Form NDE-UT-8 ULTRASONIC INDICATION RESOLUTION SHEET Revision 1 Acceptance Standard:
IND. 1 - PLOTTING OF INDICATION SHOWS THIS TO BE A GEOMETRICAL REFLECTOR FROM THE l.D. OF THE WELD.
INDICATION WOULDNOT HOLD UP TO SKEWING.
Item No: B08.020.001A Acceptable Indications: IND. 1 Rejectable Indications:
NONE These indications have been compared with previous ultrasonic data
° Yes 0 No previous data available Examiner:
° A 1Level: Date:
Sheet Ltof Gary J. Moss" 0J, 2/ Pk,6 11 03/05/2002 Reviewer:
}@\\ilLevel:
Date:
Authorized Inspector:
Date:
I I A4
111
?RCS UZ I Z,5, CSUPPOX-r Jk/t XY E 4 "x//o' t'n
,,,E L
, X/ 7@
of XN§5
/u 99
-- OcL P,,
en
- J
.4-0 11o10
Arr dIq4 -663 z
A.J. 3f 314r 2fssu R I-Z6
\\SUGIat Yv JOeer Il I/T5:M I.D e SY:
Te"6:
Sgol
- t.
APo 81 A8CED-
'AoUw h aX' A 1,^.QWs e,8f 8
- 1.77,
/Pk
+ I k -- -
1A7 r(
En6 A/
.=7t x (2,715-1.7) :-/.07-%o08 sq Au.
.5 X1.O
.5 s.,
Ydr Sammyu
/.Os, 4.sT
/.d SS zeAa 6.7z.s./m-Aran ifO eMg~
fidr SrDJU a
.58sg./,U.=
- 5. 12 sq_.
I
?AV4 of '
V
pel:_~3 _zIL a t AMWNM2-
,Kr Gq-MN -6e JUPPotr '3 ta I
3
&l"At'a X1ria m*
a OzA2*
>LA;r r.t
.24z_0Z,)j
-Tr Zv:
%30 Jute 4A.e m j 2
---
=-
32 C'D E-d 5),IA 5s1 5E
-_i
.5)
- .I8S7S '.J9.30.
d APn (I AqjE b I s 49 A.1 I-i
.1 ir 6.7 s (PQ Ai 6t~oomm,),
C pA#aI
-- 6A
=42.'
&./
.5-I
.IN A:
At
)
N6f drCAkUf2b I7 4
1A 11.Pror L
Cl 31M41O6 3j%+tL Vt~
AT a4-,t NTM a2.
9ta 3A1qOIL 3^t
-M A,
?12r S s U 9I Z.O:r l Usti Pp e fkal.
SLffr:v3&
cfk,1' II 1<ra 414 450 %%g0Ace 2 ga I.
IY.s P, 6c Le p 22D
)-
aOXe07 2.54 frC~~
=
It.-
e sl Xe:.s k -
- 2.71 ARn: k (Ea-r) =2.7S X (2.7s 1.7s) 2. 795' 2.s A o. S J A N X
0 -
s b. W G. 7 (A
rS#)35S.
Y CD6Fr Pao (1(o (A c I10R )
1 AeL-A
-..... W.
WV..
o teR I IV
AVthA W\\¶tT Z DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision O Examination Volume/Area Defined 0 Base Metal It Weld 0 Near Surface
° Boltinq 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation SEE DRWG. - 6.7 SQ. IN.
6.7 SQ. IN. X 274 IN. = 1835 CU. IN.
Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Scan f Angle Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Direction (sq.in.)
(in.)
(cu.in.)
(cu.in.)
1 0° 2
450 3
30° 4
450 5
450 N/A 1
2 CW CCW TOTAL 5.12 274 3.4 274 6.42 274 5.12 274 5.12 274 AGGREGATE COVERAGE 1402.88 931.6 1759.08 1402.88 1402.88 6899.32 1835 1835 1835 1835 1835 9179 75.16 I Item No:
B08.020.001A Prepared By.
Level: -
D 0
Reviewed By:
Level:
Date: 311402I A v I
DS0r1)o-
RR CA-x-963 3AQ*4 DUKE POWER COMPANY Exam Start:
1013 Form NDE-UT-2A ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION DATA SHEET FOR PLANAR REFLECTORS Exam Finish:
1026 Revision 4 Station:
McGuire Unit:
2 Component/Weld ID: 2ncw-3673-1 Date:
2/26/2002 Weld Length (in.):
101" Surface Condition:
AS GROUND Lo: 9.1.1.1 Surface Temnerature:
118 0 F Examiner: Larry Mauldin L /
evel:
iII Scans:
Pyrometer S/N:
MCNDE 27227 Cal Due:
7/3/2002 Examiner: James L. Panel Level: II 45 0 68.5 dB 70 0 dB I
Configuration:PC.1 Loop 2) to Elbow (PC.A L Procedure: NDE-610 Rev: 4 FC:
45T 0 75 dB 70T 0 dB 0..W51 Flow %:
WS2^
60 E]
dB 05riatELBOW to PTIPE Calibration Sheet No:
60T dB Scan Surface: OD 60T08_2209Applies to NDE-680 only 0202028, 0202029 Other:
dB Skew Angle:
N/A Max MP W
L Beam Exam IND Max Max Max Li L2 Wi MPl W2 Mp2 Dir.
Surf.
Scan Damps R ef 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac 20%dac DO IOT WI 1ITE HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA HMA D
NOT WRIT IN T IS SP,CE 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac 50%dac IN THIS SPAC 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac 100%dac NRI 45A NRI 45C Remarks: *97-01, 98-20, 01-05 Limitations: (see NDE-UT-4) E 90% or greater coverage obtained: yes 0 no 0El Sheet I
of-4 Reviewed Bv:
Level:
Date:
Authorized Inspector:
Date:
Item No:
-J -6 2.-i 809.011.009 I I
AflrACHEW 3 fttqAk-^A60
'-!a ZC,4+
DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM NDE-UT-4 ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID: 2NCW-3673-1 Item No: B09.011.009 Remarks:
SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION DUE TO 18 INCH PIPE RESTRAINT 0i NO SCAN O
LIMITED SCAN 01 02 ED 1 0 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L 16.25" to L 34.25" INCHES FROM WO 2.0" to BEYOND ANGLE: 0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM N/A_ DEG to N/A DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION DUE TO 12 INCH PIPE RESTRAINT 0I NO SCAN O
LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 2
El 1 0 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L 44.5" to L 56.5" INCHES FROM WO 2.0" to BEYOND ANGLE: 0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM N/A_ DEG to N/A DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION DUE TO 12 INCH PIPE RESTRAINT 0i NO SCAN O
LIMITEDSCAN 1l 2
ElO 1 0 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L 69.75" to L 81.75" INCHES FROM WO 2.0" to BEYOND ANGLE:
0 O E0 45 0 600 Other FROM N/A DEG to N/ADEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION DUE TO 12 INCH PIPE RESTRAINT 0 NO SCAN O
LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 2
ElO 1 0 2 0 cN O ccw FROM L 95.0" to L 6.0" INCHES FROM WO 2.0" to BEYOND ANGLE:
0 0 El 45 0 60 0 Other FROM N/A_ DEG to N/A Prepared By.r Level:.,7 DateJ.2 C6 I Sketch(s) attached U yes lZno Sheet Z. of 2 Reviewed BY Date:
zj-l Authorized Inspector:.
a%.
1
AT1kCMF-r 3 tW -tZ-&0Aa3 VcQ -AJt4 DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revsion 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined 0D Base Metal 0
Weld 0 Near Surface 0 Boltina 10 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 3.5 IN. X 0.67 IN. = 2.35 SQ.IN.
2.35 SQ.IN. X 101 IN. = 237.35 CU.IN.
Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Scan # Angle Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Direction (sq.in.)
(in.)
(cu.in.)
(cu.in.)
1 45 2
2 45 1
2 45 1
3 45 CW 3
45 CW 4
45 CCw 4
45 CCW 2.35 2.35 0.0 2.35 1.68 2.35 1.68 101 47 54 47 54 47 54 237.35 110.45 0
110.45 90.72 110.45 90.72 750.14 237.35 110.45 126.9 110.45 126.9 110.45 126.9 949.4 79.01
~W4~
3 OP-j
i (C
A M4) LOD? \\W Kb Yb*ThAL
-X A f1 -
O 9D = S-el& X '. to 7'I.
- 2.3q5-7 Z._3.,
Op
-PIL--
RI a1@s AI1f A cAS S3 o St ALL Cove Ra-w eofet Lo sS
&.2SS!
a, O'D)J0/
RIACRRENT 3 R9 Gq-MM-603Sz^
c USw qLEt CV 7 1 (XC W
i ec
<d cdV D ECP 5,/.
X 0.6-7 go,.- /67S' - /. 68 shivI.
? =- rRAI l'r 1AAb T14S 4
rre-A-
.:Roq. 0,116 06q 3@O 19-Oit.
/ Ca 18.0 Wd.
.D. D6 a 73-I 23b':
1 GC 61($1 Silo 2-4*- F,
^ '
LL.
i A. 7kiET 4.
RK 0o4-1N-663.
te43 McGuire Unit #2 EOC14 Item #
Weld #
bc'e. otl.o0 I z~LeZeZ-I No Data Recorded. Reference Calibration Sheet #'s.
ozazoZ' S-4eIsoO
,.I.
6i-u--.1 ov~, 3
, t 9.k 8t~5v
AW~RwsT 4- -
DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM NDE:UT-4 ISI LIMITATION REPORT Revtsion 1 Component/Weld ID: 2NC2FW2-1 Item No: B09.011.011 Remarks:
SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION RIGID RESTRAINT 0 NO SCAN O LIMITED SCAN 0 1 0 2 l 1 O 2 a cw o ccw FROM L 19.0" to L 25.0' INCHES FROM WO C/L-to BEYOND ANGLE:
O0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM N/A DEG to N/A DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION RIGID RESTRAINT 0I NO SCAN O LIMITEDSCAN 10 2
El 1O 2 O cw O ccw FROM L 41.0' to L 3.0' INCHES FROM WO C/LL-to BEYOND ANGLE:
0 o 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM N/A DEG to N/A DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN 0 LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN 0 LIMITED SCAN 0 1 0 2
0 1O 2 O cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FO -
t o FROM ___DEG to J.
,.O) Sketch(s) attached 0 yes O no Sheet Z. of 3 Authorized Inspector:
-6~eA~
Date:3-/-2
_ $ _--J-s I
qLd
I tF-0
- 0 to DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined
> Base Metal 0
Weld 0 Near Surface 0 Boltina 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation T = 1.3" per past ultrasonic data.
1.373 X 2.00 = 0.87 sq. In.
0.87 sq. in. X 44.0 = 38.28 cu. In.
Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Angle Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Scan Direction (sq.in.)
(in.)
(cu.in.)
(cu.in.)
1 45 S2 2
45 Si 3
60 CW 4
60 CCW TOTAL 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 AGGREGATE 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 COVERAGE 27.84 27.84 27.84 27.84 111.36 38.28 38.28 38.28 38.28 153.12 72.73 I Item No:
B09.01 1.011 I Prepared By. DAVID K. ZIMMkRF*A
, Level:
III Date: 3/13/2002 8
j Reviewed By.
(A4i &
g=
Level:
jjj Date: 3M1O3 1 L I v 6wo 3W-3
t AtAW!{N A
tZ/tt4-o"-o3 A\\tAZ I
Form NDE-35A I Revision 3 DUKE POWER COMPANY STATION McGuire UNIT 2
LIQUID PENETRANT EXAMINATION REPORT WeldAD No. 2NC2FW2-1 Diameter 14 Procedure Rev. No.
Material Type: 0 SS 11.406 ED ISI E Cs a Inconel O PSI O Other 19 Schedule/Thickness
- 160, Field Change No.(s) N/A W/O No.
98395261 SKETCH OF ITEM EXAMINED Surface Temperature 75°F M&TE S/N:
MCNDE 27221 Penetrant Materials Category.
A CD A(SE)O 0B C O D O A(SE) Approved L4 Penetrant Materials Data:
Batch Numbers Cleaner 99M01 K Penetrant Developer*
Emulsifier Fluorescent 97A10K 01 B09K I
O Nonfluorescent I Black Light Intensity Verified Time Date Light Meter S/N:
Acceptance Standard:
A 0
Other:
B E C O D O E E F ED G O K
O H O L O J O M O Ind.
Indication Reference Documents Rocordale Repotatbe No.
Type/Dimensions NRI PIP S/N:
Rejectable 0 Acceptable 0
Exam Limitations:
D Yes St. ?Z
% Examined 0 No (100% Examined)
Comments:
Li m % _.
st>?
G P
A5 SAA4 A
oC1 Examiner: Jay A. Eaton Level:
II Date:
3/3/2002 Examiner Level:
Date:
Reviewed By.
Level:
Date:
3-/Ao Final Review j
Date ANII Review Date Item No.
I I
B09.011.011A
.WA p
I a
I!
V.
Z, I
~VI _ Ko'-/W-003 a
2fZ 3
DUKE POWER COMPANY NE1-Umited Examination Coverage Worksheet
.Revision O
Examination VolumelArea Defined 0 Base Metal 0
Weld a Near Surface 0 Bolting 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation 44 of weld length x 2.5w wide Inspection area = 110 sq.n. total weld area.
Coverage Calculations wcL g.-2 m AW~A A940/I Af&y Length Jvlm---31,Qy Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Scan # Angle Directin Exa4ln (in.)
q -
Percent Coverage
'},A eA 1kA 2.5 36 10 110 81.82 Item No:
B09.01 1.011IA Prepared By. Jay A. Eaton
(@Level:
I I Date: 3/3/2002 Reviewed By.
IL Level: -7g Date: 3//l l6oN
AV%9wt 5
0)
RW elq-wk-03 -?0t \\et 5 McGuire Unit #2 EOC14 Item #
Weld #
BZk9 Ot L -L
=)CZ:-0z e
No Data Recorded. Reference Calibration Sheet #'s ObZ07Z Cae?
sly I oa1
- r' AMWrtkT IS RZY? o~qq-
'2-t3 stZ60
-Jr DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM N&E-UT-4 IST LIMTATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID: 2NC2FW22-6 Item No: B09.011.012 Remarks:
SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION NOZZLE CONFIGURATION 0 NO SCAN O LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 0 2
° 1
O 2 O cw O ccw FROM L --
N/A to L __N/A INCHES FROM WO -
0.7" to BEYOND ANGLE:
0 o 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM 0
DEGto 360 DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0
NO SCAN
° LIMITEDSCAN O 1 0 2 O 1 0 2 O cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 0 o 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN O LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 0 2
O 1 0 2 O cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEGto DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN O LIMITEDSCAN 0l1 0 2 O 1 O 2 O cw a ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to Prepared ByL Date:
) attached yes 0 no Sheet2_ot; Reviewed By.
Date:
31 isJ l Authorized Inspector Date,4.S-CM V-1tAILIO
I-
- 4t f'
to A-1 I b
- -T----
I 7
_IA 0
L; 5 2SWt4 0 --
-A
._~~~~~~-
"IlII_____1_
z.lht
<_____-fi zz 91 I
I I'
_ _ _ _ __ ______ti t
~EudI I-
- " .
7:
I.
- -;,g,;.
,,.f.-.'......
A D-t i
'4J
.717
- X g 4k iAj
.1 p-1t 11 :
H 1.
1 1 "I IA A ITb us
- I.-i- -I -
I
+ I.-.-1 E__
e L__
XX 4
+-tz X
v 0
4 T
L
~~~~~~_
_Q___
_ 1_C__
t 4
t; i
4 Iz~
I>--
-A i
1W_'
iiI WtA0-lii 1jHIe I-i-
f i-l0-l 2
~
l 1
,, ~
~
~
~
~
~.
L 1
,I,_,,,_
.2.\\ i i.
,)
z eD,,
..I
. -~
I A77?1CA4/1/V7 s
()
m
.0,
DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revisin 0 Examination Volum&IArea Defined 0 Base Metal 0
° Near Surface 0 Bolting 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation SEE ATTACHED DRWG.
AREA = 0.63 sq. In.
33.8 In. X 0.63 sq. in. = 21.3 cu. In.
Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Scan # Angle Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Direction (sq.in.)
(in.)
(cu.in.)
(cu.in.)
1 60 S2 2
60 Si 3
45 CW 4
45 CCW TOTAL 0
0.28 0.63 0.63 COVERAGE 33.8 33.8 33.8 33.8 AGGREGATE 0
9.45 21.3 21.3 52.05 21.3 21.3 21.3 21.3 852 61.09 2
6ORL Si 0.35 33.8 TOTAL COVERAGE SUPPLEMENT 11.83 11.83 21.3 85.2 13.88 lItem No:
B09.011.012 l
Prepared By: DAVID K. ZIMMERMAN Level:
III Date: 3/14/2002 Reviewed By.
Level:
- i z
Date: 3l L I
I -
4~~ 1 5
5x-<,-fr
fK7ffNC4HA7 '
a' 6#t/WJ-a63 '-p 1eas McGuire Unit #2 EOC14 Item #
Weld #
- 5. C IO \\.oI3 IelA zH No Data Recorded. Reference Calibration
-Q.bZ O
09 -
qs i
1o oZ-ozo70-e0 L Sheet #'s I o:
I j4c4/f A1T oro D
RR?
6q-il,coos,3 PSAk Z~f 5 DUKE POWER COMPANY FORM NDEUT.4 IST LIMITATION REPORT RevLsion 1 Component/Weld ID: 2NC2FW22-9 Item No: B09.011.013 Remarks:
SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION NOZZLE CONFIGURATION 0D NO SCAN O LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 0 2
2O C wO ccw FROM L N/A to L __N/A INCHES FROM WO 0.7" to BEYOND ANGLE:
0 o 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM 0
DEG to 360 DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0
NO SCAN 0 LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0
NO SCAN O LIMITED SCAN 0 1 0 2 O 1 0 2 O cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0
NO SCAN 0
LIMITED SCAN 0 1 0 2
0 I 0 2 O cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to
,I Date v
I:
\\91 e
-i t.
V..
isS~~0 1 0 ? \\It
~-ry
- A. -L-,___
_A L-_Al 4l L)
.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 MT-
I
-
Lt.
LL1.
I1 I
_1.
I I
I
I
[v f EjT 4 Pk?
A 4-PiL-e3 6
()
DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 U-mited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined s Base Metal 0
Weld n Near Surface 0 Boltina 3 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation SEE ATTACHED DRWG.
AREA = 0.63 sq. In.
33.8 In. X 0.63 sq. in. = 21.3 cu. in.
Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.)
(in.)
(cu.in.)
(cu.in.)
1 60 S2 2
60 Si 3
45 CW 4
45 CCW TOTAL 0
0.28 0.63 0.63 COVERAGE 33.8 33.8 33.8 33.8 AGGREGATE 0
9.45 21.3 21.3 52.05 21.3 21.3 21.3 21.3 85.2 61.09 2
6ORL Si TOTAL 0.35 33.8 COVERAGE SUPPLEMENT 11.83 11.83 21.3 85.2 13.88 I Item No:
B09.011.013 Prepared By: DAVID K. ZIMMERMAN Level:
III Date: 3/14/2002 Reviewed By.
Level:
Date: 3(\\S1°t I
~G 0F-
McGuire Unit #2 EOC14 Item #_________t. I _
Weld #__lZ_
1-__
I No Data Recorded. Reference Calibration Sheet #' s DzozOnl -
As i &zc;,&
QZoZO?7- - (oO U.
rlp' I op
A77XcWqj!A1 7.
RK tU 04_qMd
- FgX&
D DUKE POWER COMPANY FORMINDE-UTr4 IST LIMITATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID: 2NC2FW16-6 Item No: B09.011.018 Remarks:
SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION NOZZLE CONFIGURATION 0i NO SCAN O LIMITED SCAN 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 cw a ccw FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO CtL to BEYOND ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM 0
DEG to 360 DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION I-BEAM ADJACENT TO PIPE 0~ NO SCAN O
LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L 7.0" to L 13.0" INCHES FROM WO C/L to BEYOND ANGLE:
O 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other 6ORL FROM N/A DEGto N/A DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION O
NO SCAN O LIMITEDSCAN 10 2 O 1 0 2 O cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN 0
LIMITED SCAN 0 1 0 2
0 1
2 O cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to Date:
I.I'/-CZ Sketch(s)attached 0 yes 0 no Sheet 7-of _4 Authorized Inspector:
Date:-3r;0 Q_
L.
A7f1Cg4j5ffT '7
)eie 64,Y-66,3 3&4 DUKE POWER COMPANY I
NDE-U-S UT PROFILE/PLOT SHEET Revision I I
EXAMINATION SURFACE 1 - tozZu£ 5AZ. t- -
AMINAT10N SURFACE 2 WELD
- 4 3
2 1
1 2
3.
I1 11 1111 1111 1111 j
4 I'll iiiil
.5 3
I /
)cV rw A
1tzv A' e-m '-r Z-v 2.5
- 3.
Component ID/Weld No.
u, 2-ic-z4::Q-it - (Q Remarks:
Item No: -boscia.ll o \\ c 1Exa.r.Yahi
-L 1Level: :z I Date: 3-t'/-&Z 270 90 IRevlewed By:
ILevel:
ti: I Date: z-5q-o2 Date:
A d 3 l, 180 Sheet.LoL+/-I rAuthwonzed Inspector.
Ql,
Authorized Inspector.
QV
Aq7McIth{4WJT7 i
DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 UImited Examination Coverage Worksheet j
Revision 0 Examination Volume/Area Defined 0 Base Metal 0
Weld 0 Near Surface D Boltina 3 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation SEE ATTACHED DRWG.
TOTAL AREA = 2.42 sq. in.
2.42 sq. in. X 20.8 In. = 50.33 cu. In.
Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Scan # Angle Direction (sq.in.)
(in.)
(cu.in.)
(cu.in.)
1 45 CW 2
45 CCW 3
60 S2 4
60 Si TOTAL 2.42 2.42 0
0.88 AGGREGATE 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 COVERAGE 50.33 50.33 0
18.3 118.96 50.33 50.33 50.33 50.33 201.32 59.09 4
6ORL Si 1.54 13.8 TOTAL SUPPLEMENT COVERAGE 21.3 21.3 50.33 201.32 10.58 47~
k-i I Item No:
B09.011.018 Prepared By. JAMIE H. RESOR Level:
II Date: 3/14/2002 Reviewed By.
(
Level:
-XI[
Date: 3Ii lcot v It
-5"c~i bom
ffcACRRT 8
'i RfR Oq-wk-u3 S I t'L McGuire Unit #2 EOC14 Item #
Weld #
z,3~ -L - -1 I No Data Recorded. Reference Calibration Sheet #'s OZOZO1 \\ - 45'0 t be pZoZoolhL t,
15w \\ ofX
, V
(
0? 641-tAJ -eoS %z Zeq DUKE POWER COPANY FORM NDE-UT-4 ISI LMTATION REPORT Revision 1 Component/Weld ID: 2NI2F871 Item No: B09.01 1.169 Remarks:
SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION ADJACENT WELD 0 NO SCAN O LIMITEDSCAN 1 0 2 1
2 O cw O ccw FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO C/L to BEYOND ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 E0 60 0 Other FROM 0
DEG to 360 DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION THROAT RADIUS OF 6* ELBOW 0 NO SCAN O LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 0 2El O
Oc O
ccw FROM L -
7.0 to L 13.0" INCHES FROM WO -
C/L to BEYOND ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 %9 Other 60RL FROM N/A DEG to N/A DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN 0 LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 3 Other FROM DEG to
_DEG SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 0 NO SCAN O LIMITEDSCAN 0 1 0 2 O 1 0 2 O cw O ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
0 0 0 45 0 60 0 Other FROM DEG to Date: 3.tl/.Z lI Sketch(s) attached 0 yes a no Sheet Z_ of 1 Authorized Inspector:
Date:
Authorized Inspector:
Date:3?j<6,t I
h V
-4 T
S W F-
][t1 MT N°
-5 U
?
-9 l
l l
]
t 2-EX 2 l
- rr I-4 tjW c~j fl 0
~~ZL co z
I..
in
ArrXcH14ENT S L7V A4U-N&-n6eR Ala IP4 I
DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Limited Examination Coverage Worksheet Revision 0 Examination VolumelArea Defined 0 Base Metal 0
° Near Surface 0 Boltino 0 Inner Radius Area Calculation Volume Calculation SEE ATTACHED DRWG.
TOTAL AREA = 2.42 sq. in.
2.42 sq. in. X 20.8 in. = 50.33 cu. in.
Coverage Calculations Area Length Volume Volume Scan # Angle Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Scn#Age Direction (sq.in.)
(in.)
(cu.in.)
(cu.1n.)
1 2
3 4
45 45 60 60 Cw CCw S2 Si TOTAL 2.42 2.42 0
0.88 AGGREGATE 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 COVERAGE 50.33 50.33 0
18.3 118.96 50.33 50.33 50.33 50.33 201.32 59.09 4
6ORL Si 1.54 13.8 TOTAL SUPPLEMENT COVERAGE 21.3 21.3 50.33 201.32 10.58 C~.
1" 4 D'4
- vz ((
s :H ;6:
s:::
o ::s t:.':> r'.
4' '- C S
!.N.,,
fa..'.' ;'
A, o'.
g.
- t.
- 5, 9,,
,1 t 8 <' "'
X,,'
W.;',.
'-.N t :;N...
',,.',. R '
R
- . t X,.'.
,?714 C///f 4E IT 9
-e-"
I Frorm Nog-35A I
RevikinS I DUKE POWER COMPANY STATION McGuire UNIT 2
.UQUID PENETRANT EXAMINATION REPORT
'Weldnp No. 2CCPUMP-2A-LEG Material Type.
SS a cS 03 r
iameter.
0 Sctedule k s _
/ISI1.0 Psl 0 O her
.R d ev..
19 Field CHov1e No.(s)
NA..
- 83520-PSKETCH OF TTEM EXAM M~
SuerfaceTmptur 840F M&TE SJN:
,. MCJDE 27228
?;
-77,Oc B :
- . SE) Approved
.:~~~k
.Wgoy Pr* setrantMaterals DaW
.tch Nunbers
.Cleaner
- 9M01K
,Penetrat
' -97A1OK.
D.veloper 96M09K E.uEsi fise r _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
flu o r e s c e n 0
tlo n fiuo re s c e it
.B1ackLgnt tensityVeofied Aceptm nard:
A 0 D 0 G 0 K a Time___
Date O__th B-O EO3 H 0 L O-Light Meter_
SN:'
C 1O F D J O MO s
.Nso^I
-Te ion m Documem n
-mF'.':
.- NRI.
s I S/N :
0
'=
>E a i iai n:~yes 82.85 4% Examfraed 0 No(00% Eianilned Comnmnts:
Se attached sheets for rimited area examhied calculationm.
mEia ber Marion T. Weaver t..evel if Date:
2ihm12002 Exankwe.-B. Dale Jofly R3
~
Levet It Date:
'2fl9Jk 0
.Levet De:
.o...
.i
,Dat.
,tem No.
Q.
C03.030.00i C
. -'S.,
4
.'1
.1 I
j'i a
I
. ; II.,
-.1 .. tz
- 1..1 r
=1
-.-,I -
c e4" kn-t=
f--
r -,- -
.
i;r I -
a-!a Station M Cj.
E Unit 2-Rev.
File No.
Atihiect 2?, r Pu m~t P - 27 A -Lado A
Sheet Of
~~-
Prob No.I'Xem4 c 0Cz. 03o. 0 OL By_
Checked By_
m.T.,
Date 2
Date _
T~i-I 6',
. i r
6."
I 4C 0cosaz&)
.....I w
7 90 4L-1, 6"
6" 6
k (
otx-srss 54V/0)
.WELI-15q~proA~r:
.. No T-b SCALE "
Rn ok-qAN-&3 -Pt--Zb.
.I (7.)
DUKE POWER COMPANY NDE-91-1 Umlted 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 138.5 of weld length x 2.40 wide Inspection area =
332.4 sq.in. total weld area.
Coverage Calculations A4A
-CA q(-Ae Length A m e-Ci~
vokmie-Scan # Angle Beam Examined Examined Examined Required Percent Coverage Direction gcin.)
(in.)
6 (>.n.)
in..). p N/A NWA NWA 2.4 114.5 e' 274.8 332.5 82.65 Item No:
C03.030.001 Prepared By: Marion T. Weaver Level:
II Date: 2/19/2002 Reviewed By.
7-Level:
Date: z-/
log
,4TAg RrH IIT-4ThA-o 1AEYT6c3
-?tAfi
'SJ qorT.Lt&
ATTACHMENT 3 Relief Request 04-MN-04
Relief Request 04-MN-004 Page 1 of 7 Proposed Relief in Accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(iii)
Inservice Inspection Impracticality Duke Energy Corporation McGuire Nuclear Station - Unit 2 (EOC-15), March 28, 2002 To October 6, 2003 Second 10-Year Interval - Inservice Inspection Plan Interval Start Date March 1, 1994. Interval End Date March 1 2004.
ASME Section XI Code - 1989 Edition with No Addenda Code Case N-460 is applicable
- 1.
II. & Ill.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
Limitation l.D.
System I Code Requirement from Which Relief Is Basis for Relief Alternate Justification for the ImplementatIon Schedule Number Component for Requested: 100% Exam Volume Coverage Examinations Granting of Relief Which Relief Is Exam Category or Testing Requested:
Item No.
Area or Weld to be Fig. No.
Examined Limitation Percentage 2ND2F-12 ND System Exam Category B-J See Paragraph "A" None See Paragraph "'"
The examination requirements 14" Pipe to Valve Item No. B09.011.104 also also for this interval were met: no 2ND2A weld Fig. IWB-2500-8 See Attachment I See Attachment I additional exams are planned.
35.20% Volume Coverage Pages 1-5 Pages 1.5 2NI2FW26-7 NI System Exam Category B-1 See Paragraph "B" None See Paragraph "F' The examination requirements 8" Valve 2N1129 to Item No. B09.011.171 also also forthis interval were met: no Pipe Weld Fig. iWB-2500-8 See Attachment 2 See Attachment 2 additional exams are planned.
34.96% Volume Coverage Pages 1-5 Pages 1-5 2N12FW26-16 NI System Exam Category B-J See Paragraph "C" None See Paragraph "F' The examination requirements 8" Valve 2N1125 to Item No. B09.011.172 also also forthis interval were met; no Pipe Weld Fig. IWB-2500-8 See Attachment 3 See Attachment 3 additional exams are planned.
34.96% Volume Coverage Pages 1-5" Pages 1.5" 2N12FW26-I5 NI System Exam Category C-F-I See Paragraph "D" None See Paragraph "G" The examination requirements 8" Elbow to Valve Item No. C05.011.168 also also for this interval were met; no 2N1125 Weld Fig. IWC-2500-7 See Attachment 4 See Attachment 4 additional exams are planned.
34.96% Volume Coverage Pages 1-5 Pages 1-5 Inspection Dates for Item Numbers B09.011.104 09/16/2003 B09.011.171 09/18/2003 B09.011.172 09/18/2003 C05.011.168 09/18/2003
Relief Request 04.MN-004 Page 2 of 7 IV. Basis for Relief Paragraph A:
(The pipe to valve weld material is stainless steel. The weld diameter is 14.00" with a wall thickness of 1.250".)
During the ultrasonic examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required scan and coverage examination volume could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 35.20%. Limitations are caused by austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the valve configuration which prevents scanning of the weld from two opposing sides. Obtaining coverage greater than 90% of the weld volume as defined in Code Case N-460 is not possible. The percent coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage from all shear wave scans performed on the weld and base material. A 450 shear wave axial scan was used to scan from the pipe side of the weld covering 40.8% of the examination volume. Two opposing 450 shear wave circumferential scans were performed on the pipe side of the weld covering 50% of the examination volume.
Duke Energy Corporation does not claim credit for coverage of the far side of austenitic welds. The characteristics of austenitic weld metal attenuate and distort the sound beam when shear waves pass through the weld. A 600 refracted longitudinal wave axial scan was used to supplement the shear wave scan to provide better penetration but cannot be used beyond the first sound path leg. This supplemental scan covered 100% of the examination volume from the pipe side.
The procedures, personnel and equipment have been qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). However, although longitudinal wave search units were used in the qualification and cracks were detected through the weld metal, PDI does not provide a qualification for single sided examinations of austenitic welds. No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examinations of this weld.
Paragraph B:
(The valve to pipe weld material is stainless steel. The weld diameter is 8.00" with a wall thickness of.906".)
During the ultrasonic examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required scan and coverage examination volume could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 34.96%. Limitations are caused by austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the valve configuration which prevents scanning of the weld from two opposing sides. Obtaining coverage greater than 90% of the weld volume as defined in Code Case N-460 is not possible. The percent coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage from all shear wave scans performed on the weld and base material. A 450 shear wave axial scan was used to scan from the pipe side of the weld covering 39.84% of the examination volume. Two opposing 45° shear wave circumferential scans were performed on the pipe side of the weld covering 50% of the examination volume.
Duke Energy Corporation does not claim credit for coverage of the far side of austenitic welds. The characteristics of austenitic weld metal attenuate and distort the sound beam
Relief Request 04-MN-004 Page 3 of 7 when shear waves pass through the weld. A 600 refracted longitudinal wave axial scan was used to supplement the shear wave scan to provide better penetration but cannot be used beyond the first sound path leg. This supplemental scan covered 100% of the examination volume from the pipe side. Duke Energy Corporation uses a combination of shear waves and longitudinal waves to examine single sided austenitic welds.
The procedures, personnel and equipment have been qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). However, although longitudinal wave search units were used in the qualification and cracks were detected through the weld metal, PDI does not provide a qualification for single sided examinations of austenitic welds. No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examinations of this weld.
Paragraph C:
(The valve to pipe weld material is stainless steel. The weld diameter is 8.00" with a wall thickness of.906".) During the ultrasonic examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required scan and coverage examination volume could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 34.96%. Limitations are caused by austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the valve configuration which prevents scanning of the weld from two opposing sides. Obtaining coverage greater than 90% of the weld volume as defined in Code Case N-460 is not possible. The percent coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage from all shear wave scans performed on the weld and base material. A 450 shear wave axial scan was used to scan from the pipe side of the weld covering 39.84% of the examination volume. Two opposing 450 shear wave circumferential scans were performed on the pipe side of the weld covering 50% of the examination volume.
Duke Energy Corporation does not claim credit for coverage of the far side of austenitic welds. The characteristics of austenitic weld metal attenuate and distort the sound beam when shear waves pass through the weld. A 60° refracted longitudinal wave axial scan was used to supplement the shear wave scan to provide better penetration but cannot be used beyond the first sound path leg. This supplemental scan covered 100% of the examination volume from the pipe side. Duke Energy Corporation uses a combination of shear waves and longitudinal waves to examine single sided austenitic welds.
The procedures, personnel and equipment have been qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). However, although longitudinal wave search units were used in the qualification and cracks were detected through the weld metal, PDI does not provide a qualification for single sided examinations of austenitic welds. No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examinations of this weld.
Paragraph D:
(The elbow to valve weld material is stainless steel. The weld diameter is 8.00" with a wall thickness of.906".) During the ultrasonic examination of the weld, 100% coverage of the required scan and coverage examination volume could not be obtained. The examination coverage was limited to 34.96%. Limitations are caused by austenitic weld metal characteristics and single sided access caused by the valve configuration which prevents scanning of the weld from two opposing sides. Obtaining coverage greater than 90% of the
Relief Request 04-MN-004 Page 4 of 7 weld volume as defined in Code Case N-460 is not possible. The percent coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage from all shear wave scans performed on the weld and base material. A 450 shear wave axial scan was used to scan from the pipe side of the weld covering 39.84% of the examination volume. Two opposing 450 shear wave circumferential scans were performed on the pipe side of the weld covering 50% of the examination volume.
Duke Energy Corporation does not claim credit for coverage of the far side of austenitic welds. The characteristics of austenitic weld metal attenuate and distort the sound beam when shear waves pass through the weld. A 60° refracted longitudinal wave axial scan was used to supplement the shear wave scan to provide better penetration but cannot be used beyond the first sound path leg. This supplemental scan covered 100% of the examination volume from the pipe side. Duke Energy Corporation uses a combination of shear waves and longitudinal waves to examine single sided austenitic welds.
The procedures, personnel and equipment have been qualified through the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). However, although longitudinal wave search units were used in the qualification and cracks were detected through the weld metal, PDI does not provide a qualification for single sided examinations of austenitic welds. No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examinations of this weld.
Justification for Relief VI. Paragraph E:
Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB-2500-8 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). No additional B09.011 welds on the ND System were scheduled during this outage. No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examination of this weld.
This is a 14" Pipe to Valve 2ND2A Weld 2ND2F-12 located on the ND (Residual Heat Removal System). 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 monitored by the Containment Ventilation System Engineer.
b)
Increased input into the Ventilation Unit Condensate Drain Tank (VUCDT). This parameter is monitored continuously by Operations via an Operator Aid Computer (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 a reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is
Relief Request 04-MN-004 Page 5 of 7 required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. The unidentified leakage limit 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 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.
Paragraph F:
Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB-2500-8 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). One additional weld on NI System was scheduled this outage. No recordable indications were found during the volumetric and surface examination of this weld.
These are 8" Valves 2NI129/2NI125 to Pipe Welds 2NI2FW26-7/2NI2FW26-16 (respectively) located on the NI (Safety Injection System). These welds are 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 welds in question, there are methods by which the leak could be identified for prompt Engineering evaluation. A leak at these welds 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 monitored by 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 a reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. The unidentified leakage limit 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 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.
Relief Request 04-MIN-004 Page 6 of 7 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.
Paragraph G:
Although the examination volume as defined in ASME Section XI 1989 Edition with no addenda, Figure IWB-2500-8 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). Eleven additional C05.011 welds on NI System were scheduled during this outage. Two welds had recordable indications on the surface examination. One weld had a Linear indications of.15" and.65", the other weld had a indication of.25". Subsequent evaluation determined these indications were acceptable per the Section XI Code.
This is a 8" SS Elbow to Valve 2NI125 Weld 2NI2FW26-15 located on the NI (Safety Injection System). 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 monitored by 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 a reactor coolant leakage calculation, which is required by Technical Specifications to be performed every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. The unidentified leakage limit 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 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.
Relief Request 04-MN-004 Page 7 of 7 VIII. Other:
The following individuals contributed to the development of this relief request:
Jim McArdle (Principal UT NDE Level HI Examiner) provided Sections II through V and part of Section VI.
Ed Hyland, Bryan Meyer and Larry Kunka (MNS Systems Engineers) provided parts of Section VI.
Gary Underwood (McGuire ISI Plan Manager) compiled the remaining sections.
Sponsored By:
Date
'7/12 AZ76 Approved A}
/
P By:
An -0
- 7 Attachment I UT Examination Data B09.011.104 UT Examination Data B09.011.171 UT, Examination Data B09.011.172 UT Examination Data C05.011.168 Date 7/1 Lo
Site/Unit: McGuire /
Summary No.:
B0i Workscope:
UT Pipe Weu Examination 2
).011.104 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
PDI-UT-2 C
98536824 kvNr VRW,4~ I, t-M FA~heAtZ'-
\\
Outage No.:
MN2EOC15 Report No.:
UT-03-109 Page:
1 of 5
'SI Code:
Section XI, 1989 Catiltem:
B-JIB9.11.104 Location:
N/A Drawing No.:
MCFI-2ND1
==
Description:==
Pipe to Valve (2ND2A)
System ID:
ND Component ID: 609.011.104 /2ND2F.12 Size/Length:
14" SS Thickness/Diameter:
1.25 Umitatlons:
Yes - Pipe to Valve Configuratlon Start Time:
1430 Finish Time:
1600 Examination Surface:
Inside Q Outside i Surface Condition: GROUND Lo Location:
Top of Pipe Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
03125 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE 27220 Surface Temp.:
79 OF Cal. Report No.:
CAL-03-164, CAL-03-165, CAL-03-166 Angle Used 01 45 45T 60l 6ORL l
Scanning dB 48 48 64.4 69.4 Indication(s):
Yes 0 No g Scan Coverage:
Upstream 0 Downstream 0 CW 0 CCW 0 Comments:
Results:
Accept 0 Reject D info E t
t Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
No -S*- 3 Reviewed Previous Data:
Yes Examiner Level 1l-N Signakie.
Date Reviewer
/
Iture Date Busby, John S.
2;, AV-};\\
9/16/2003 Jay A Eaton Level ill 9/23/2003 Examiner Level 1l-N Signature Date Site Review Signature Date Matteson, Mary F.
9/16/2003 Other Level N/A G/Slgnature Date ANII Review Signatre Date WIA
_ ({
9
V.
Ultrasonic In-.cation Report Site/Unit:
McGuire /
Summary No.:
B09.C Workscope:
I 2
111.104 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
PDI-UT-2 C
RR o'fY-9 i.-0o91 V3 Z,0F5 C Outage No.:
MN2EOC15 Report No.:
UT-03-109 Page:
2 of 5
SI 98536824 Search Unit Angle:
Wo Location:
Lo Location:
45-60 Weld CL (3 Piping Welds o Ferritic Vessels > 2"T o Other W\\o VWX CL i
1 v
.._ -DIU Too ot Ploe MP Metal Path Wmax Distance From Wo To S.U. At Maximum Response RBR Remaining Back Reflection W1 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
L Distance From Datum W2 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
Comments:
ILl Lmrexl L a
- 4 x
I, WIr WM Yf Scan Indication W
Forward Backward L1 L
L2 RBR Remarks No.
Of Max Of Max OfMax Max Of Amp.
DAC W
60%
1.6" 1.8" N/A NIA WA N/A 360" 12" NIA Int.
60-2 160%
2.5" 2.45" NA NIA N/A N/A 3600 0"
NA Int.
Examiner Level Il-N signa_
e Date Reviewer Signature Date Busby, John S.
0 9116/2003 Jay A Eaton Level III 9/23/2003 Examiner Level Il-N Signature Date Site Review Signature Date Matteson, Mary F.
/
9/16f2003 1
Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review Si'ure Date N/A 1
9'-2j R t1x
'A 1VSe3 r -
Ar-.
Summary No.: B09.011.104 Examiner: Busby, John S.,
k Examiner Matteson, Mary F Other NWA V
Supplemenudl Report NTNCAA)a-I 2g
'36 5 Report No.:
UT-03-109 P ge:
3 of X,'i Lu -r qW e
Date:_'1k3Io3 I
Date:
4<_
Date:
C o
Level:
11 N Level:
II-N Level:
NIA Reviewer
-A t
Site Review:
ANII Review Comments:
Plot Sheet Sketch or Photo:
\\\\ngofs1\\iddeal7\\iddeal-Server\\Graphics\\Common\\Contour2.jpg 4
3 2
1 1 111111III 1111 111II 1111 11111111 k i. 11 ILD 1 I ittii 1
0 0 2 3
4 I
IiII IIIIIII MIIIIII li III y
%: n-\\?o -3
rIVpa24 t\\M )'
Supplemental Report Summary No.: B09.011.104 Examiner: BusbyJohnS.
Level:
Il-N Examiner Matteson, Mary F y
Il-N Other NIA Level:
WA Report No.:
UT-03-109 P. ge:
4 of 5
Reviewer: JayAEaton Level Ill Date: 9/2312003 Site Review:
I Date:
ANI1 Review:
,A Date:,;L) 2 Comments:
Indication #1-454 & #2-600 are geometric reflectors from counterbore. Review of RT fillm showed extensive counterbore and near the bottom of this weld there Is evidence of thru-wall repair.
iR1? oqM-LNN-oqV A7FAcRIWNT-1 lrd dF-I
Mika iozigv-y' Limitation Record I?
SO^o Outage No.:
MN2EOC15 Report No.:
UT-03-109 Pago:
5 of s
Siteonit:
jummary No.:
Workscope:
McGuire /
2 B09.011.104 IS' Procedure:
Procoduro Rev.:
Work Order No.:
PDI1UT-2 C
98536824 Description of Umitation:
No scan on the downstream side of the weld CIL + 0.5' and beyond due to valve configuration.
C/L Us Sketch of Umitation:
t1o.801
&(p0.
U.5. S CA-D;s. $CAj C' W MAS/(o S 0
L 505 S0 /° Lo CAI O 6E 0iS I
Is 0/c%
C D1) i,_>IC
-. e, 5 I D C)
Umitations removal requirements:
NWA Ci W L4C
~
'I I03
<V-I W&~ 144,3`)
I
U, 0w~
N4 Z
o r z
0 0c x
4-Q iQ z C)
C?
-l 0
0O:
C)
-I
-I Zo C)
O 00 L
0210 I
CL 0) a-U 0)
E
,w 0
0CD h0E
- LL
('4 I-a 0
0 (0
l<
z E
9-co 9-7Im (I)
U)
N 0
0z c
V w
02
-j cL Z.:
g co I-
-I CL 0
8.
0 Z
0 C
v tL 0co N~
0)
I1I 0:
CD 0.
0 o
0 a-0 0
9-Q 0
o E
0'a a0 0) 0 C..
U,
.N V0 0E 0
0z 0) a:
0
- cc 0
C 0
0) 0 (D
0 0
0.E C-)
0 C)
Lu 0
Eo 0
C) a..
0 C
0 I5I E
wa)
C 0
0 E
V-9-
9-0 m
0
$0.
t oC~
V 0 T-V)
T-000 0
co)
Iqa L0 C) a o
- Q
-A 0
co (D-C 0O El 0
C a I I
o CD1 a
=
I E
o 8
a 3r c0;i0c U)
C 02 CC E
0 aLO 0
-0 CD0 2
00C0 I
C.
0 E
0LOO 0) 0 Q.
ZZ0 o*
o CO CL
-S a)
(0 Un o
40
- 0) 0D 0d a,
2E C>
E C
FL
('14 0z
-c 01 10 r
---
"o
'F lu 'o
- 1-
N
(.U, .o ww :I-- (:
L:
-C 0) 0?
~0 5=
0
- 3)
C.,
0 U.
0 CD Q
C) co 0
C)
.O U) oW 0
-J C0 o co ICa 0
CO a
C
.0 CD,
-5 0cc 0D 0
a)
.2 (n
0l 0
0z U)
,It 0c0 0)
C0 b
x a3 C-0 w
CL E
C, Z..;
C 0
C
- 0.
0 o
I C
tn
> 0z tL O0 o a:
0 o
tL 3.
C0 0)
,
E0
'I 3
°E I
El a cc Z~
0 U.
0
-I; Ca 0)
U I f C 0
co L0 C)I Za CD
-j 00 0)
- 0)
C cm C
E 0 -i C-C E! CD
Site/Unit:
McGuire /
Summary No.:
B09.C Workscope:
I Ultrasonic In.,cation Report 2
)11.171 lSI Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-600 15 98536824 fR o(A-E NTA Z
Outage No.:
MN2EOC15 Report No.:
UT-03-135 Page:
2 of 4
Search Unit Angle:
Wo Location:
Lo Location:
60L C/L of Weld Too of Ploe Q
(3 Piping Welds o Ferritic Vessels > 2T o Other NVO WIM CL I_
MP Metal Path Wmax Distance From Wo To S.U. At Maximum Response RBR Remaining Back Reflection W1 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
L Distance From Datum W2 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
Comments:
" T 13 DATUM L o
-L40 II U '
W
-r y
Y F
Forward Backward Remarls Scan Indication No.
Of DAC W
Max Forward Of Max Backward Of Max L1 Of Max M
Max LZ Of Max RBR Amp.
Remarks Of Ma O. Max W
80 1.4 1.7 WA WA N/A NiA 360' j0 Int N/A Examiner Level 1ii
/
A 3 nature Date Reviewer Signature Date Eaton, Jay A.
9/20/2003 Gayle E Houser Level iII 9125/2003 Examiner Level Signature Date Site Review Signature Date Other Level Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date K V"
\\%\\S
Summary No.: B09.011.171 Examiner Eaton, Jay A.
Examtner Other Supplemerttal Report AR otl-HtWT-00q A'7 NctcAEkT-z PM",
4q 6r-Report No.:
Page:
UT-03-1 35 3
of 4
X-11, I
L 11 V
Level:
IlIl Level:
Level:
Revlewer Gayle E Houser Level 11i ftoa/L Site Review:
ANII Review, Date: 9/252003 Date:
Date:
7 Comments:
Indication # 1-60'L Is a geometric reflector from the weld root / counterbore configuratIon. This was confirmed by review of RT film.
Sketch or Photo:
\\\\ngofslJDDear7Vddeal_SeervMGraphles\\Common\\ProfleLlne2.)pg VAU L-\\/
WS03&45I
ftpf Limitation Record AT0cqRRr-- IT-ts0v Site/Unit: McGuire /
2 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
NDE-600 15 Outage No.:
Report No.:
MN2EOC1 5 UT-03.135
.Summary No.:
Workscopo:
B09.011.171 lSI Work Order No.:
98536824 Page:
4 of 4
Description of Umitation:
Umited due to valve configuration on the Upstream side from the weld CA. + 0.5' and Beyond (360').
Sketch of Umitation:
I VA LU\\C
'Do t3~
s'ziAM
?I PC-I U F'ST1A M
'to; LMs C)s5 0
U-mitations removal requirements:
N/A
-5CA
-I Cow4ZA L1<c wa3-03 st50%
( Coo 3°1.5il3o lt~DS
'O CW)o oRL
-A l24L-U roV-0i VS S5tID5-
'DOW4J LS LCAAI
,SAAF UPS ' 5 1Mg E*D 0/0 e.e CPAI,10-V I0 (o
S SAK
?A,qto
'= 7 Ak U~t-4-A¶ e~J~MAA
'4-fI-I/zI 103
>W
-,rit Radiation field:
W/A IA Examiner Level 1
/\\/jJJbignature Date Reviewer Sign lro Date Eaton, Jay A.
9120/2003 Gayle E Houser Level 1ll
( 7ugc,9/25/2003 Examiner Level
' Signature Date Site Review Slgnatl ro Date r
Level Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date k/
Ns~'
C I
Site/Unit: McGuire I Summary No.:
Bo Workscope:
UT Pipe Weu Examination AIOc psr=4-mm-dt ATTr~c uPMr r-3 2
9.011.172 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
PDI-UT-2 C
Outage No.:
MN2EOC15 Report No.:
UT 52 Page:
1 of I
'SI 98536824 Code:
Section XI, 1989 Cat~item:
B-J/B9.11.172 Location:
N/A Drawing No.:
MCFI-2NI26
==
Description:==
Valve (2NI125) to Pipe System ID:
NI Component ID: B09.01.1;72 /2Nl2FW26-16 Size/Length:
81 SS Thickness/Diameter:
0.906-Umitations:
Yes Start Time:
1440 Finish Time:
1515 Examination Surface:
Inside Q Outside E Surface Condition: GROUND SMOOTH Lo Location:
Top of Pipe Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
00325 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE 27220 Surface Temp.:
80 OF Cal. Report No.:
CAL-03-174, CAL-03-175 AngleUsed 0
45 45T l 60 l I
Scanning dB 44.8 44.8 52.3 Indication(s):
Yes D No i Scan Coverage:
Upstream 0 Downstream g3 CW R CCW 0 Comments:
Results:
Accept 2 Reject E]
Info a Dr g
2.?
Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
No.
Dr3 4.9 Reviewed Previous Data:
Yes Examiner Level 1l-N Signature Date Reviewer
/
--Signature Date Matteson, Mary F.
9/18/2003 Jay A Eaton Level iII 9/25/2003 Examiner Level I-N ure.
Date Site Review Signature Date Charbonnet, Sh C
C911812003 Other Level
/
nature Date ANiI Review Sg Z
Dat Y,\\
cmtx',Z)
- I
Site/Unit: McGuire /
Summary No.:
BO Workscope:
UT Pipe Webs Examination gA-fCHA(EA^ 3 ByZ F's Outage No.:
MN2EOC15 Report No.:
UT-03-132 Page:
1 of 4
2 9.011.172 SI_
Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-600 15 98536824 Code:
Section Xi, 1989 Catlltem:
B-J/B9.11.172 Location:
NWA Drawing No.:
MCFI-2NI26
==
Description:==
Valve (2NI125) to Pipe System ID:
NI Component ID: B09.011.172 /2NI2FW26-16 Size/Length:
8" SS Thickness/Diameter:
0.906" Umitations:
Yes Start Time:
0945 Finish Time:
0951 Examination Surface:
Inside a Outside i Surface Condition: GROUND SMOOTH Lo Location:
Top of Pipe Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
01225 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE 27221 Surface Temp.:
80 OF Cal. Report No.:
CAL-03-188 Angle Used 0
45 45T 60 l
60L Scanning dB 60 Indication(s):
Yes ED No a Scan Coverage:
Upstream A Downstream fl CW 0 CCW a Comments:
60 L wave to gain coverage on the valve side of the weld.
Results:
Accept 0 Reject E Info ]
Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
No 3 4 r 3 Reviewed Previous Data:
Yes Examiner Level ill Signature Date Reviewer Signature Date Eaton, Jay A.
zS 9120/2003 Gayle E Houser Level Ill 9/2512003 Examiner Level
-Signature Date Site Review
> v Signature Date Other Level Signature Date ANiI Review Signature Date 9A ~. 3AAs$
Site/Unit:
McGuire /
Summary No.:
B09.C Workscope:
I Ultrasonic lnu.jc 2
111.172 SI Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
ation Report ATr4cH t(F-a-3 NDE-600 Outage No.:
MN2EOC15 15 Report No.:
UT-03-132 98536824 Page:
2 of 4
Search Unit Angle:
Wo Location:
Lo Location!
600 L C/L of Weld Ton of PInA Q
G Piping Welds Q Ferritic Vessels > 2-T C) Other CL! ii o
MP Metal Path Wmax Distance From Wo To S.U. At Maximum Response RBR Remaining Back Reflection W1 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
L Distance From Datum W2 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
Comments:
T Ut Lo ike I,
L Wi 0
Scan Indication W
Forward Backward Li L
L2 RBR Remarks No.
Of Max O Max Max Max Of Amp.
DAC W
100 1.4 1.7 N/A N/A NiA N/A 360 O
Int.
N/A Examiner Level IISignature Date Reviewer 5
aueDate Eaton, Jay A.
9/20/2003 Gayte E Houser Level III 9/25/2003 Examiner Level
'-tnalure Date Site Review fnature Date Other Level Signature Date ANII Review~
~
Si~gnature Date Kku
\\3'°
Summary No.: 809.a11.172 Examiner Eaton, Jay A.
Examiner:
Other Suppleme..I Report RREtUT 3f at
/' 0 /F5 Report No.:
UT-03-132 Page:
3 of 4
U V -
Level:
III Level:
Level:
Reviewer Gayle E Houser Level ll' Site Revlew ANII Revlew.
Date: 9/25/003 Date:
Dateo-27° 0
7;l i
Comments:
Indication # 1.60L Is a geometric reflector from the weld root / counterbore configuration. This was confirmed by review of RT film.
Sketch or Photo:
\\ngosl\\JDDea!t7ddeal-Server\\Gmphlcs\\Common\\ProflteUne2.jpg
\\/A LU./
oe,
P410IM"W, Limitation Record NACIARE t,-3 Outage No.:
MN2EOC15 Report No.:
UT-03-132 Pago:
4 of 4
Site/Unit: McGuire I Summary No.:
B09.
Workscope:
2 011.172 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-600 15 lSI 98536824 Description of Umitation:
Limited due to valve configuration on the Upstream side from the weld C/L + 0.5" and Beyond (360*).
Sketch of Umitation:
'DO 5.^VfA
?
PCC VA Lv'e OU S'TZA M Q aL.,
3q {.&.io/, a4 I.,-,Ai 6CA~-J Lo0L LASO 0
DO4-C)CvJ S.
c, \\
< 5 D(
bo 5q.V4 C9,/
fL 3 50 /
Coo 9t-12,11,1-CY Stp U. 15-OvAi 'DSE CvI C. LA%
-d IsaAMJ UPS '5 lDE
-t,,C.A.hA oPS S I-I LC.Ct.
Umitatlons removal requirements:
N/A
/01 GrCAl-
- %I7.4 0-I 3 I
Site/Unit: McGuire /
Summary No.:
C0!
Workscope:
40-1cf
)foq-j j-y UT Pipe Weu Examination AJTA1fHErAT-'
m'zs\\ o Fi5 2
5.011.168 isl Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
PDI-UT-2 C
98536824 Outage No.:
MN2EOC15 Report No.:
UT-03-150 Page:
1 of I
Code:
Section Xi, 1989 Catlitem:
C-F-1/C5.11.168 Location:
WA Drawing No.:
MCFI-2NI28
==
Description:==
Elbow to Valve (2NI125)
System ID:
NI Component ID: C05.011.168 12NI2FW26-15 Size/Length:
8" SS Thickness/Diameter:
0.906" Limitations:
Yes Start Time:
1520 Finish Time:
1602 Examination Surface:
Inside a Outside i Surface Condition: GROUND SMOOTH Lo Location:
Top of Pipe Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
00325 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE 27220 Surface Temp.:
80 OF Cal. Report No.:
CAL-03-174, CAL-03-175 Angle Used 0 I 45 45T 60 l l
Scanning dB 44.8 44.8 52.3 Indication(s):
Yes a No is Scan Coverage:
Upstream a Downstream 0 CW i CCW i Comments:
Results:
Accept 0 Reject 3 Info (]
lgjX..-03 Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
to0 47 34.q Reviewed Previous Data:
Yes Examiner Level 11-N Signature Date Reviewer I L j gnature Date Matteson, Mary F.
9/18/2003 Jay A Eaton Level III 9/2512003 Examiner Level 1l-N Sign re Date Site Review Signature Date Charbonnet, Shane C.
9/18/2003 Other Level N H V nature Date ANII Review Signature Date WA
'97 07 RIC o
Felto.
UT Pipe WedA Examination iA?- 2 OC-Outage No.:
MN2EOC15 Report No.:
UT-03-133 Page:
1 of 4
Site/Unit: McGuire /
Summary No.:
Co Workscope:
2 5.011.168 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-600 15 98536824 ISI Code:
Section Xl, 1989 Catiltem:
C-F-1/C5.11.168 Location:
NIA Drawing No.:
MCFI-2NI26
==
Description:==
Elbow to Valve (2NI125)
System ID:
NI Component ID: C05.011.168 /2NI2FW26-15 Size/Length:
8" SS Thickness/Diameter:
0.906" Umitations:
Yes Start Time:
0951 Finish Time:
0957 Examination Surface:
Inside i Outside a Surface Condition: GROUND SMOOTH Lo Location:
Outside Radius of Elbow Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
01225 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE 27221 Surface Temp.:
80 OF Cal. Report No.:
CAL.03-188 Angle Used 0
45 45T 601 60L l
Scanning dB 60 Indication(s):
Yes i No E Scan Coverage:
Upstream i Downstream El CW El CCW E Comments:
60" L wave to gain coverage on the valve side of the weld.
Results:
Accept i Reject al Info ED Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
No -45%- 34AL,'o Reviewed Previous Data:
Yes Examiner Level ll
/
aX Signature Date Reviewer A
SJ~ature Date Eaton, Jay A.
9/20/2003 Gayte E Houser Level Ill Q l 9/25/2003 Examiner Level Signature Date Site Review Stgnature Date Other Level Signature Date ANII Review Sj at rL Date
I^ n
- &WV_
Ultrasonic Inuaiation Report Site/Unit:
McGuire /
Summary No.:
Cos.a Workscope:
I 2
111.168 SI Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-600 15 98536824 Y#
Y? a4q1A),nL utage No.:
MN2EOCI5 Report No.:
UT-03-133 Page:
2 of 4
Search Unit Angle:
Wo Location:
Lo Location:
60°L CQL of Weld (G Piping Welds o Ferritic Vessels > 2T o
Other Wo W.,
CL IW W1
.I Too of Plpe MP Metal Path Wmax Distance From Wo To S.U. At Maximum Response RBR Remaining Back Reflection WI Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
L Distance From Datum W2 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
Comments:
Forward Backward Li 12 RBR Remarks Scan IndicatIon No.
Of DAC W
Max Forward ot Max Backward Of Max LI Of Max L
Max L2 Of Max R8R Amp.
Rernarks W
100 1.4 1.7 N/A NiA NiA WA 360 0"
Int WA Examiner Level iII Signature Date Reviewer
/1 S
ature Date Eaton, Jay A.
9/20/2003 Gayle E Houser Level IlI 9/25/2003 Examiner Level Y
Signature Date Site Review nature Date Other Level Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date I
? _ )J Rtc-'tk idiom)
Summary No.: C05.011.168 Eiaminer. Eaton, Jay A.
Examiner Other Supplemen.- Report RX axcff 4rP4-f bTh
- vNo.:
Page:
__\\
L3k' Level:
Ill Level:
Level:
Reviewer Gayle E Houser Level Ill Site Revlewu ANII Revlew 7
UT-03.133 3
of 4
Date: 9P25t03 Date:
Date: 4:7-t Comments:
Indication # 1.60L Is a geometric reflector from the weld root I counterbore configuration. This was confirmed by review of RT film.
Sketch or Photo:
\\\\ngofsl\\DDear7\\Iddeal_Seror\\Gmphics\\Common\\ProfieUne2.Jpg VA L'dO R\\6tA kfi 0:5
Site/Unit: McGuire /
Limitation Record Outage No.:
MN2EOCi5 Report No.:
UT-03-133 Pago:
4 of 4
2 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Summary No.:
Workscopo:
C05.011.168 NDE-600 i5 98536824
'SI Work Order No.:
Description of Umitation:
Umited due to valve configuration on the Upstream side from the weld CA. + 0.5' and Beyond (360').
Sketch of Umitation:
4---'
i V ?STVZA M 1
1 1
I,.
I I
I, I.
I I
I I
I -\\\\
I (0o LI I
I
-2A34.
0 I:
IV kuL
,SCAt4 boLW
(.0 5
0 COjCA bcC 30.Y ' o s
C-v0 1
COOAL o? e< sv N)
LAS 0
C, \\J Lcc 5
ID/
C Umitations removal requirements:
W ta-40 Djo 't$C4 3 L I loI
-lL A W7;./
U 5s qTIED AWS-oCkA-q eO\\J1*tAkE 9 - LI,5 CF i?^-I
,,I I