ML050820076

Calculation No. 86-5059194-00, DCPP Unit 2 R12 Voltage-Based ARC 90-Day Report.

ML050820076
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	03/11/2005
From:	Adrienne Brown Framatome ANP
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
86-5059194-00
Download: ML050820076 (116)

Text

20697-8 (41112004 A CALCULATION

SUMMARY

SHEET (CSS)

AR EVA Document Identifier 86 - 5059194 - 00 Title DCPP UNIT 2 R12 VOLTAGE-BASED ARC 90-DAY REPORT PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY:

METHOD: El DETAILED CHECK [a INDEPENDENT CALCULATION NAME Alan M Brown NAME Jeffrey M Fleck SIGNATURE eViAG eMl' SIGNATURE TITLE Principal Engineer DATE 3 TITLE Manager DATE COST REF. TM STATEMENT:

CENTER 12742 PAGE(S) 113-114 REVIEWER INDEPENDENCE 1 <-lV- Mgfev'F 31yl PURPOSE AND

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS:

This report summarizes the Diablo Canyon Unit 2- 2Ri2 inspection of the steam generator tubing with respect to the implementation of the voltage-based repair criteria as specified in NRC Generic Letter 95-05. This document provides the projected probability of burst and leak rate calculations needed for submittal to the NRC.

This report provides a non-proprietary summary of the results. The supporting proprietary calculations and necessary code verifications required for safety-related calculations are contained in Reference 23.

Appended pages Include Pages A-1 to A-2 THE FOLLOWING COMPUTER CODES HAVE BEEN USED INTHIS DOCUMENT: THE DOCUMENT CONTAINS ASSUMPTIONS THAT MUST BE VERIFIED PRIOR TO USE ON SAFETY-RELATED WORK CODEIVERSIONIREV CODE/VERSIONIREV lkr97v30.exe I Version 3.0 pob97v2O.exe / Version 2.0

__ YES Z NO Framatome ANP, Inc., an AREVA and Siemens company Page 1 of 114*

86-5059194-00 86-50591 94-00 Page 2 of 114 RECORD OF REVISIONS Revision Number Affected Page(s) Description of Change(s) 0 All Original Release

86-5059194-00 Page 3 of 114 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

.................................................. 8 2.0 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

.................................................. 8 3.0 EOC-12 INSPECTION RESULTS AND VOLTAGE GROWTH RATES .................................................. 10 3.1 EOC-12 INSPECTION RESULTS .................................................. 10 3.2 VOLTAGE GROWTH RATES .................................................. 14 3.2.1 SELECTION OF LIMITING GROWTH DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH STEAM GENERATOR .15 3.2.2 VOLTAGE-DEPENDENT GROWTH ANALYSES FOR CYCLE 12 .16 3.2.3 VOLTAGE-DEPENDENT GROWTH ANALYSES FOR CYCLE 11 .17 3.2.4 DELTA VOLTS ADJUSTMENT .17 3.2.5 SENSITIVITY STUDIES AND GROWTH

SUMMARY

.17 3.3 VOLTAGE DISTRIBUTIONS USED FOR MONTE CARLO ANALYSES .18 3.4 PROBE WEAR CRrTERLA 119 3.5 UPPER VOLTAGE REPAIR LIMIT .20 3.6 NDE UNCERTAINTY DISTRIBUTIONS .20 3.7 PLUS POINT TO BOBBIN VOLTAGE CORRELATION .21 4.0 CHEMICAL CLEANING.74 5.0 DATABASE APPLIED FOR LEAK AND BURST CORRELATIONS .......................................................... 75 5.1 CONDITIONAL PROBABILITY OF BURST .76 5.2 PROBABILITY OF LEAK AND CONDITIONAL LEAK RATE .77 6.0 EOC 12 CONDITION MONITORING, BENCHMARKING OF EOC-12 CONDITIONS AND ASSESSMENT:

OF POTENTIAL UNDERPREDICTIONS .79 6.1 EOC-1 2 CONDITION MONITORING RESULTS .79 6.2 EOC-12 BENCHMARK CALCULATIONS .79 7.0 PROBABILITY OF PRIOR CYCLE DETECTION AND EOC-13 PROJECTIONS USING DCPP POPCD92 7.1 UPDATED DCPP POPCD CORRELATION .92 7.2 INPUT TO INDUSTRY POPCD DATABASE .94 8.0 EOC-13 PROJECTIONS FOR PROBABILITY OF BURST AND LEAK RATE .107 8.1 INPUTS FOR CALCULATIONS .107 8.2 PROJECTED EOC-13 VOLTAGE DISTRIBUTIONS .108 8.3 PROJECTED TUBE BURST PROBABILTY AND LEAK RATE FOR EOC-1 3 .112

9.0 REFERENCES

.113

86-5059194-00 Page 4 of 114 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Glossary of Acronyms ................................................................ 7 Table 3-1: 2R12 DOS Indications > 2.0 Volts ................................................................ 22 Table 3-2: 2R12 AONDB Indications ..................... ........................................... 23 Table 3-3: Summary of Inspection and Repair for Tubes Affected by ODSCC at TSPs ........ 25 Table 3-4: Summary of Largest Voltage Growth Rates per EFPY ......................................... 27 Table 3-5: DOS/AONDB Voltage and Growth Distribution by TSP ........................................ 28 Table 3-6: Voltage Growth for Cycles 8 through 12 ............................................................... 29 Table 3-7: Summary of Independent Cycle 12 Voltage Growth per EFPY ............................ 30 Table 3-8: Delta Volts Adjustments ................................................................ 31 Based on Cycle 12 Breakpoints (Information Only) ..................................... ; 31 Table 3-9: Delta Volts Adjustments Based on Cycle 11 Breakpoints ..................................... 32 Table 3-10: Supplemented Cycle 12 Voltage Dependent Growth for SG 2-1 (Information Only) .............................................................. 33 Table 3-11: Supplemented Cycle 12 Voltage Dependent Growth for SG 2-2 (Information Only) .............................................................. 34 Table 3-12: Supplemented Cycle 12 Voltage Dependent Growth for SG 2-3 (Information Only) .............................................................. 35 Table 3-13: Supplemented Cycle 12 Voltage Dependent Growth for SG 2-4 (Information Only) .............................................................. 36 Table,3-14: Supplemented Cycle 12 Voltage Dependent Growth for All Steam Generators (Information Only) ............................................ .......... 37 Table 3-15: Cycle 11 Voltage-Dependent Growth for SG 2-1 (Used for SG 2-1) .................. 38 Table'3-16: Cycle 11 Voltage-Dependent Growth for SG 2-4 (Used for SG 2-4) ................... 39 Table 3-17: Cycle 11 Voltage-Dependent Growth for All SGs (Used for SGs 2-2 and 2-3) ... 40 Table 3-18: BOC-13 Voltage Distribution Used for Monte Carlo Analyses for SG 2-1 ........... 41 Table 3-19: BOC-13 Voltage Distributions Used for Monte Carlo Analyses for SGs 2-2, 2-3, and 2-4 .............................................................. 42 Table 3-20: Re-tested DOSs Ž 1.5 Volts that Failed the Probe Wear Check ........................... 43 Table 3-21: New 2R12 DOSs >=0.5 Volts In Tubes Inspected With A Worn Probe In 2R1 1.44 Table 3-22: Summary of New DOS Indications for Probe Wear Comparison . . 45 Table 3-23: Summary of ARC Out Tube Inspections in 2R11 ............................................... 45 Table 3-24: NDE Uncertainty Distributions .............................................................. 46 Figure 3-1: As-Found Voltage Distributions SGs 2-1 and 2-2 ................................................ 47 Figure 3-2: As-Found Voltage Distributions SGs 2-3 and 2-4 ................................................ 47 Figure 3-3: 2R12 Repaired Voltage Distributions SGs 2-1 and 2-2 ....................................... 48 Figure 3-4: 2R12 Repaired Voltage Distributions SGs 2-3 and 2-4 ....................................... 48 Figure 3-5: RTS Voltage Distributions for RPC Confirmed or Not Inspected SGs 2-1 and 2-2 .............................................................. 49 Figure 3-6: RTS Voltage Distributions for RPC Confirmed or Not Inspected SGs 2-3 and 2-4 .............................................................. 50 Figure 3-7: Indications RTS Voltage Distributions SGs 2-1 and 2-2 ...................................... 51 Figure 3-8: Indications RTS Voltage Distributions SGs 2-3 and 2-4 ...................................... 51 Figure 3-9: 2R12 DOS vs. TSP Elevation .............................................................. 52 Figure 3-10: Cycle 12 Growth Distributions SGs 2-1 and 2-2 ................................................ 53 Figure 3-11: Cycle 12 Growth Distributions SGs 2-3 and 2-4 ................................................ 53 Figure 3-12: Cycle 12 Independent Growth Curves - All SGs ............................................... 54

86-5059194-00 Page 5 of 114 Figure 3-13: Historical Change in Growth and BOC Voltage - All SGs . . 54 Figure 3-14: SG 2-1 Cycle 12 Growth vs. BOC Voltage ........................................................ 55 Figure 3-15: SG 2-2 Cycle 12 Growth vs. BOC Voltage ........................................................ 55 Figure 3-16: SG 2-3 Cycle 12 Growth vs. BOC Voltage ........................................................ 56 Figure 3-17: SG 2-4 Cycle 12 Growth vs. BOC Voltage ........................................................ 56 Figure 3-18: Cycle 12 Growth vs. BOC Voltage for All Steam Generators ............................ 57 Figure 3-19: Cycle 11 vs. Cycle 12 Growth Comparison for SG 2-1 . . 58 Figure 3-20: Cycle 11 vs. Cycle 12 Growth Comparison for SG 2-2 . . 58 Figure 3-21:. Cycle 11 vs. Cycle 12 Growth Comparison for SG 2-3 . . . 59 Figure 3-22: Cycle 11 vs. Cycle 12 Growth Comparison for SG 2-4 . .....................................59 Figure 3-23: SG 2-1 Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results .. 60 Figure 3-24: SG 2-2 Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results .. 60 Figure 3-25: SG 2-3 Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results .. 61 Figure 3-26: SG 2-4 Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results .. 61 Figure 3-27: Composite Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results ............ 62 Figure 3-28: SG 2-1 Cycle 11 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results .......................................... 63 Figure 3-29: SG 2-4 Cycle 11 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results ........................................... 63 Figure 3-30: Composite Cycle 11 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results .................................... 64 Figure 3-31: Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for SG 2-1 .......................................................... 65 Figure 3-32: Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for SG 2-2 ............................................................ 65 Figure 3-33: Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for SG 2-3 .......................................................... 66 Figure 3-34: Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for SG 2-4 ................... r.................66.......... 66 Figure 3-35: Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for All SGs ............................................. 67 Figure 3-36: Cycle 11 VDG for SG 2-1 .............................................. 68 Figure 3-37: Cycle 11 VDG for SG 2-4 .. 68 Figure 3-38: Cycle 11 VDG for All SGs ............................................. 69 Figure 3-39: 2R12 Probe Wear Voltage Comparison ...................................... 70 Figure 3-40: Bobbin Voltage Uncertainty Distributions .................................... 70 Figure 3-41: Inferred Voltage / Measured Voltage Comparison ............................................. 71 Figure 3-42: Plus Point to Bobbin Voltage Comparison for SG 2-1 ....................................... 72 Figure 3-43: Plus Point to Bobbin Voltage Comparison for SG 2-2 ........................................ 72 Figure 3-44: Plus Point to Bobbin Voltage Comparison for SG 2-3 ............... . ...................... 73 Figure 3-45: Plus Point to Bobbin Voltage Comparison for SG 2-4 ............... . 73 Table 5-1: Burst Pressure vs. Bobbin Amplitude Correlation ................................................. 76 Table 5-2: Probability of Leak Correlation .............................................................. 77 Table 5-3: Leak Rate vs. Bobbin Amplitude Correlation (2405 psi) ....................................... 78 Table 6-1: Inputs for EOC-12 Benchmark Projections ............................................................ 80 Table 6-2: Voltage Distribution Used for EOC-12 Benchmark Projections for SG 2-1 ........... 82 Table 6-3: Voltage Distributions Used for EOC-12 Benchmark Projections for SGs 2-2, 2-3, and 2-4 .............................................................. 84 Table 6-4: Cycle 11 Growth Distributions for SG 2-1 ............................................................. 86 Table 6-5: Cycle 11 Growth Distributions for SG 2-4 ............................................................. 87 Table 6-6: Cycle 11 Growth Distributions for All SGs ............................................................. 88 Table 6-7: As-found EOC-12 vs. Projected EOC-12 Conditions Without the 11.89 v/EFPY Growth............................................................................................................................. 89 Figure 6-1: As-found SG 2-1 vs Projected Voltage Distributions (DCPP POPCD) ......... ....... 90 Figure 6-2: As-found SG 2-2 vs Projected Voltage Distributions (DCPP POPCD) ................ 90 Figure 6-3: As-found SG 2-3 vs Projected Voltage Distributions (DCPP POPCD) ................ 91

86-5059194-00 Page 6 of 114 Figure 6-4: As-found SG 2-4 vs Projected Voltage Distributions (DCPP POPCD) ................ 91 Table 7-1: 2R1 POPCD Results ................... ............................................... 95 Table 7-2: DCPP Composite POPCD Results.................................................................. 96 Table 7-3: POPCD Matrix Table for Tracking Indications Between EOCn and EOCn+1.......... 97 Table 7-4: 2R1 1 POPCD Voltage-Specific Summary from 2R12 Inspection Results ............98 Table 7-5: 2R1 1 POPCD Summary from 2R1 2 Inspection Results Regardless of Voltage ... 99 Table 7-6: DCPP Composite Voltage-Specific POPCD Summary ....................................... 100 Table 7-7: DCPP Composite POPCD Summary Regardless of Voltage ............................. 101 Table 7-8: DCPP POPCD LogLogistic Parameters ............................................................. 102 Table 7-9: New POPCD Correlation Comparison to Previous POPCD Correlations (Best Estimate) ......................................................... 103 Table 7-10: 2R1 1 POPCD Results In Industry Format ........................................................ 104 Table 7-11: DCPP Composite POPCD Results In Industry Format ..................................... 105 Figure 7-1: 2R1 I POPCD Comparison to Composite POPCD ............................................ 106 Table 8-1: Inputs for EOC-1 3 POB and Leak Rate Projections ........................................... 107 Table 8-2: Projected EOC-13 Voltage Distributions (DCPP POPCD) .................................. 109 Figure 8-1: SG 2-1 EOC-13 Projected Voltage Distributions Using POPCD ....................... 110 Figure 8-2: SG 2-2 EOC-13 Projected Voltage Distributions Using POPCD ....................... 110 Figure 8-3: SG 2-3 EOC-13 Projected Voltage Distributions Using POPCD ........................ 111 Figure 8-4: SG 2-4 EOC-13 Projected Voltage Distributions Using POPCD ........................ 111 Table 8-3: Projected Leak Rate and Burst Probability at EOC-13 Using DCPP POPCD .... 112

86-5059194-00 Page 7 of 114 Glossary of Acronyms Term Definition AONDB Axial ODSCC Not Detected by Bobbin ARC Alternate Repair Criteria BOC Beginning of Cycle CDS Computer Data Screening CPDF Cumulative Probability Distribution Function CFR Code of Federal Regulations CLT Cold-Leg Thinning DCPP Diablo Canyon Power Plant DIS Distorted IDSupport Signal with possible Indication DOS Distorted OD Support Signal with possible Indication DNF Degradation Not Found EFPD Effective Full Power Day EFPY Effective Full Power Year ECT Eddy Current Test EOC End of Cycle FS Free Span FANP Framatome Advanced Nuclear Power GL NRC Generic Letter 95-05 GPM Gallons per Minute INR Indication Not Reportable ISI In-service Inspection LRL Lower Repair Limit LU Lookup MSLB Main Steam Line Break NDE Non Destructive Examination NDD No Degradation Detected NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission ODSCC Outside Diameter Stress Corrosion Cracking PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company POB Probability of Burst POD Probability of Detection POPCD Probability of Prior Cycle Detection POL Probability of Leak PWSCC Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking RPC Rotating Pancake Coil RSS Retest Support Plate Signal RTS Return to Service SG Steam Generator SER Safety Evaluation Report TS Technical Specification TSP Tube Support Plate VDG Voltage Dependent Growth

86-5059194-00 Page 8 of 114 1.0 Introduction The Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) Unit 2 completed the twelfth cycle of operation and subsequent steam generator ISI in November 2004. The unit employs four Westinghouse-designed Model 51 SGs with %/-inch OD mill annealed alloy 600 tubing and %-inch carbon steel drilled-hole tube support plates.

In accordance with the Generic Letter 95-05, ARC implementation requires a pre-startup assessment (Ref. 1) and a 90-day post-startup tube integrity assessment. The NRC Generic Letter 95-05, Reference 2, outlines an alternate repair criterion (ARC) for allowing tubes containing ODSCC indications to remain in service if the indications are contained within the TSP structure and the measured Bobbin voltage is <2.0 volts. A complete list of criteria for excluding TSP intersections from ARC application is provided in section 1.b of Reference 2 and in Reference 3. The NRC has approved implementation of the voltage-based repair criteria at both DCPP units per Reference 3. The steam generator TSP inspection results and the postulated MSLB leak rate and tube burst probabilities are summarized in .this report.

FANP uses Monte Carlo codes, as described in References 4 and 5, to provide the burst and leak rate analysis simulations. These evaluations are based on the methods in Reference 6 (for burst) and the slope sampling method for calculating the leak rate as defined in Section 9.5 of Reference 8. These evaluations also use the voltage-dependent POPCD (Probability of Prior Cycle Detection) and the new growth methods as defined in References 16, 25, and 28, and approved by the NRC in Reference 29.

2.0 Executive Summary During the 2R12 inspection, a total of 2102 DOS indications were detected with the bobbin coil. There were an additional 59 support plate intersections that were identified as containing AONDB (axial ODSCC not detected by bobbin). Since there were no DOS indications at these intersections, a bobbin voltage was inferred from the Plus Point results per the methodology provided in Reference 8. All of the inferred bobbin voltages were less than 1 volt.

There were 10 DOS indications greater than the lower repair limit of 2.0 volts. All of these indications were confirmed as axial ODSCC with Plus Point and were subsequently plugged.

An additional 29 DOS and AONDB indications less than or equal to 2 volts were also plugged for other reasons, such as ODSCC in the wedge region and pluggable indications at another location in the same tube.

A review of the growth rates over the previous cycle shows that axial ODSCC at support plates is most active in SG 2-4. SG 2-4 had the highest average growth rate and two of the three highest growth rates during Cycle 12. Voltage dependent growth was clearly evident in SGs 2-1 and 2-4. SGs 2-2 and 2-3 showed slight effects of voltage dependent growth.

Following the DCPP Unit 2 2R1 1 inspection in 2003, a significant amount of analysis and evaluation was performed on voltage growth for ODSCC at TSPs. The evaluations primarily involved statistical breakpoint analyses to determine where the data suggests a change in the slope of the regression curve that defines the growth data. These efforts led to the development of guidelines for determining the breakpoints and growth distributions. These

86-5059194-00 Page 9 of 114 guidelines were provided to the NRC via Reference 24, and were used to determine the breakpoints and growth distributions for the OA.

The POB and leak rate projections for EOC-13 provided in this report use the DCPP-specific POPCD. The use of the voltage-dependent POPCD was approved in Reference 29. The updated POPCD correlation is provided in Section 7. Using the DCPP-specific POPCD and the conservative growth rate analyses discussed in Section 3.2, the projected POB at EOC-13 for the limiting steam generator (SG 2-4) was determined to be 2.75 x 103. The projected leak rate for the limiting generator (SG 2-4) was 3.25 gpm. Both of these results are below the acceptance criteria of 1 x 10.2 and 10.5 gpm, respectively.

Section 6 provides the as-found EOC-12 condition monitoring results and results of a benchmarking study that compares the projected EOC-12 conditions to the as-found conditions. The as-found leak rate and POB at EOC-12 for the limiting steam generator (SG 2-4) were determined to be 0.47 gpm and 1.42 x 104, respectively, and are both below the acceptance criteria of 10.5 gpm and I x 10.2. EOC-12 projections have been previously provided to the NRC in Table 5 of Reference 25. The projections provided in Reference 25 used an estimated Cycle 12 operating interval of 1.54 EFPY and also used the Extreme Growth methodology as described in Reference 22. Since the NRC has not approved the Extreme Growth methodology and the actual Cycle 12 operating interval was 1.52 EFPY, the EOC-12 projections have been recalculated without the Extreme Growth methodology and with a cycle length of 1.52 EFPY, and -with and without the SG 2-4 R44C45 11 voltIEFPY extreme growth rate in cycle 11. -As shown in Section 6, the POB, leak rate, and number of indications were over predicted in all cases for EOC-12.

86-5059194-00 Page 10 of 114 3.0 EOC-12 Inspection Results and Voltage Growth Rates 3.1 EOC-12 Inspection Results The DCPP 2R12 bobbin coil inspection consisted of a 100% full-length bobbin coil examination of in-service tubes in all four steam generators except for Rows 1 and 2 U-bends which were inspected with Plus Point. 0.720" replaceable feet bobbin probes were used for the straight length examinations. All in-service TSP intersections were inspected with a 0.720" bobbin probe.

Special interest Plus-point examinations were conducted as follows in support of the voltage-based ARC, and in accordance with the Degradation Assessment (Ref. 9) and Surveillance Test Procedure STP M-SGTI (Ref. 12).

• 100% of DOS 21.7 volts

• 100% of DOS in dented intersections

• 100% of DIS (distorted ID support signal at dented intersection)

• 100% of hot leg SPR (Support Plate Residual) 2 2.3 volts; minimum of five largest hot leg SPRs in each steam generator

. 100% of prior cycle AONDB indications

• 100% of cold leg DOS ..

• Dented TSP examinations

• Other Special Interest or test programs that may test TSP intersections Based upon the bobbin inspection of all steam generators, a total of 2102 DOS indications were identified. The results of the inspections are summarized as follows:

1) Voltage Dependent Growth was evident in SGs 2-1 and 2-4. Its effect was minimal in SGs 2-2and2-3.

2) 10 DOS indications were greater than the lower repair limit (LRL-2.0 volts). Each of the indications were confirmed as ODSCC, required repair by plugging, and were distributed as follows: 5 in SG 2-1, 1 in SG 2-2, 0 in SG 2-3 and 4 in SG 2-4. Table 3-1 lists the DOS indications that were above the LRL (2.0 volts).

3) No indications were identified that exceeded the upper repair limit of 5.51 volts.

4) No less than or equal to 2.0 volt bobbin indications exceeded the 1.9 volt Plus Point threshold for preventive plugging, although several less than or equal to 2.0 volt bobbin indications were preventively plugged as a precautionary measure, as discussed later.

5) 59 indications were identified as AONDB (axial ODSCC not detected by bobbin). Table 3-2 lists the indications that were identified as AONDB. These are Plus-Point indications of axial ODSCC that have no signal present in the bobbin coil data (no DOS signal). These locations are typically smaller voltage ODSCC, by Plus Point, and can be accompanied by a dent that masks the bobbin voltage. Per Reference 8, a methodology has been developed to assign a bobbin voltage based on a correlation to the Plus-Point voltage.

Once the calculated voltages are obtained per Reference 17, the locations are subjected to exclusion criteria defined in Reference 12.

86-5059194-00 Page 11 of 114

6) Overall, 39 DOS/AONDB indications were repaired during 2R12. The breakdown is: 8 in SG 2-1, 10 in SG 2-2, 1 in SG 2-3, and 20 in SG 2-4. This population was used in computing the BOC-1 3 distributions for the OA calculations.

The average voltage was 0.61 volts, including AONDB indications. The 2R1 1 average was 0.68 volts. The main reason for the decrease in the average volts is the preventative plugging (down to 1.2 volts) that was performed during 2R1 1. The average voltage for new DOS indications, excluding prior AONDB indications, was 0.40v. The majority of the largest voltages were detected in SGs 2-1 and 2-4. SG 2-4 had the highest overall average voltage of 0.68 volts. Table 3-3 summarizes the voltage distributions for the as-found condition of the indications, the repaired indications, indications returned to service that were either confirmed by Plus-point or not inspected with Plus-point, and the total indications returned to service.

Ten confirmed DOS had to be repaired because they exceeded the 2-volt repair limit. The main reasons for repair of the other 29 DOS included DOS < 2.Ov (preventively, as discussed below), the wedge exclusion criterion, combined ID/OD degradation at the same intersection, or other pluggable tube degradation.

NEI letter to NRC dated April 13, 2004, provided guidelines for preventive tube repair of less than or equal to 2.0 volt bobbin indications to reduce the potential for finding large voltage growth rates for indications left in service. PG&E committed to implement the guideline by performing Plus Point inspection of 100% of greater than 1.7 volt bobbin indications, and to repair any Plus!Point confirmed ODSCC with a Plus Point amplitude greater than 1.9 volts, as this could be near throughwall and potentially result in a large voltage growth rate in the next cycle. (Note: This NEI report guideline has been subsequently incorporated into Addendum 6 of the EPRI ODSCC Database, with a more conservative recommendation to Plus Point inspect 100% of greater than 1.7 volt bobbin indications, consistent with PG&E's commitment, instead of performing a 20% sample.) 20 greater than 1.7 volt bobbin indications were therefore Plus Point inspected in 2R12 (that would not have been inspected otherwise) to meet this commitment. All of the indications were confirmed as ODSCC, and all Plus Point amplitudes were less than 1.9 volts, so none required preventive plugging per the guideline.

Nonetheless, as an additional precautionary measure, the Plus Point and bobbin voltages were reviewed for all confirmed ODSCC with less than or equal to 2 volt DOS, see Figures 3-42 to 3-45. Based on review of these figures, 10 less than 2 volt DOS indications with Plus Point amplitudes greater than about 1.4 volts (2 in SG 2-1, 2 in SG 2-2, and 6 in SG 2-4) were preventively plugged, thereby removing from service all tubes with ODSCC Plus Point amplitudes exceeding about 1.4 volts. A seventh indication in SG 2-4 in this category was already required to be plugged due to its location in the wedge exclusion region. Since some intersections contained more than one axial ODSCC indication, the figures noted above indicate that more than 10 Plus Point ODSCC indications were preventively plugged. The 10 indications with Plus Point amplitudes greater than about 1.4 volts were also depth profiled using phase angle analysis, and the profiles were adjusted using the Plus Point amplitude sizing correlation in Figure 8-23 of Addendum 6 of the EPRI ODSCC Database. The maximum depths of the adjusted profiles of these indications ranged from about 89% to 93%

throughwall. Therefore, it is concluded that the preventive plugging program removed all confirmed ODSCC indications from service with a Plus Point amplitude greater than about 1.4 volts (and associated maximum depths in excess of about 89%), which is more conservative than PG&E's commitment to the NRC.

86-5059194-00 Page 12 of 114 Based on preventive plugging of all greater than 1.2 volt DOS in 2R1 1, the largest Plus Point amplitude found in 2R12 was 2.37 volts and the largest bobbin voltage growth rate was 1.43 v/EFPY, therefore validating the basis that preventive plugging will significantly reduce the potential for large growth rates.

The Plus Point inspections required for DOS indications were accomplished as a part of the special interest exams. 330 Plus-point inspections were performed where DOS indications were called by bobbin, excluding the AONDB intersections. Of these inspections, 237 were confirmed yielding an overall confirmation rate of about 72%.

The 2R12 Plus Point TSP inspection scope also included intersections with signals that could potentially mask or cause a flaw to be missed or misread. These inspections included dented intersections based on the criteria in the degradation assessment (Ref. 9) and hot leg intersections with support plate residuals (SPR) 2 2.3 volts. Per GL 95-05, a large mixed residual is one that could cause a 1.0 volt bobbin signal to be missed or misread. In Reference 9, DCPP determined that a 2.3 volt SPR is the threshold that could potentially mask bobbin indications 2 1.0 volt. Per the inspection requirements specified in References 9 and 12, all hot leg intersections with SPRs with voltages 2 2.3 volts were inspected with Plus Point. In addition, References 9 and 12 require that, if there are less than five hot leg SPRs 2 2.3 volts in a given steam generator, the five largest hot leg SPRs in that steam generator be inspected with Plus Point. A total of 10 hot leg SPRs 2 2.3 volts were identified. Since none

-of the steam generators contained five SPRs 2 2.3 volts, a minimum of the five largest SPRs

-were inspected in each steam generator. A total of 24 SPRs were inspected with Plus Point.

No confirmed ODSCC indications were detected from these Plus Point inspections.

To augment the mixed residual inspection program, PG&E proactively implemented the recommendation in report "Noise Requirements for Voltage-Based ARC", transmitted in NEI letter to NRC dated April 13, 2004 (Ref. 10, but also later incorporated into EPRI ODSCC Database Addendum 6). Section 4 of the report provides a recommendation for performing a minimum of 100 (up to 200) hot leg TSP noise measurements per SG (prior or current outage data) and recommends rotating coil inspection of a minimum of 25 intersections exceeding the noise threshold value or the 25 TSP intersections with the highest noise levels. The noise threshold value is calculated using the DCPP POPCD curve that indicates a 0.86 POD assuming a 1.0 volt repair limit at noisy TSP intersections, which in turn correlates to a signal to noise (S/N) value of 1.6 by applying Figure 6 of the NEI report. Therefore 1.0/1.6 is 0.63 volts, or the DCPP specific noise threshold. To implement this recommendation, PG&E performed noise measurements (peak to peak) of the prior outage bobbin data for about 1000 non-dented, non-flawed hot leg intersections (250 per SG), biased to the lower TSP elevations. Only nineteen of the noise measurements exceeded 0.63 volts and were inspected along with an additional 6 TSPs for a total of 25. 24 of these inspections were NDD by Plus Point. One TSP had two AONDB indications detected in this inspection (SG 2-4 R14C7 2H), with an inferred bobbin voltage of 0.70 volts (see Table 3-2), and the intersection was determined to have a small 0.73 volt dent. The indication was returned to service under voltage based ARC, and no further sample inspections were performed based on the NEI report.

86-5059194-00 Page 13 of 114 Figures 3-1 and 3-2 show the as-found voltage distribution (including AONDB) for all indications detected during the 2R12 inspection. Figures 3-3 and 3-4 show the indications removed from service at 2R12. Figures 3-5 and 3-6 illustrate the indications returned to service that were confirmed as axial ODSCC or were not inspected with RPC. Figures 3-7 and 3-8 illustrate all of the indications returned to service following the 2R12 ECT inspection.

Table 3-1 shows all of the indications greater than the 2.0-volt lower repair limit. As previously stated, all of these indications were confirmed as axial ODSCC and were removed from service by plugging.

Of the intersections containing DOS/AONDB indications that were returned to service, 241 contained confirmed axial ODSCC at dented intersections. 224 of these intersections contained dents 52.0v, 16 of these intersections contained dents between 2 and 5 volts , and one intersection contained >5 volt dent and was therefore plugged. Of these indications, the largest bobbin voltage was 1.94v. This indication had six axial ODSCC indications with a maximum Plus Point voltage of 0.49v. The largest Plus Point voltage from this population was 1.36v with a corresponding bobbin voltage of 1.60v.

The DOS voltage distribution as a function of TSP elevation is provided in Table 3-5. Table 3-5 and Figure 3-9 show that the ODSCC mechanism is most active at the lower hot leg TSPs and the number of indications tends to decrease as a function of higher TSP elevations. This distribution shows the temperature dependence of ODSCC.

• ~~~s *,

Table 3-5 also includes a small number of cold leg DOS indications that were NDD by Plus Point based on the 100% Plus Point inspection of cold leg DOS performed in 2R12. 100% of cold leg DOS were Plus Point inspected to validate the cold leg thinning region. [Note: If 100% Plus Point inspection of cold leg DOS inspections is not conducted, as is normally the practice, potential cold leg ODSCC indications are distinguished from cold leg thinning indications by requiring that bobbin indications in the region of occurrence for cold leg thinning be Plus Point inspected (and confirmed as volumetric indications by Plus-Point) at the first occurrence of the bobbin indication]. No cold leg ODSCC has been confirmed by Plus Point to date at DCPP-2. Non-confirmed bobbin DOS indications in the cold leg are retained in the ODSCC ARC calculations.

86-5059194-00 Page 14 of 114 3.2 Voltage Growth Rates For projection of leak rates and tube burst probabilities at the EOC-13 operation, voltage growth rates were developed from the 2R11 and 2R12 inspection data. Cycle 12 was 1.52 EFPY in length per Reference 12. For repeat indications reported as DOS in both 2R11 and 2R12, growth rates were determined based on comparison of the voltages called in 2R11 and 2R12. For indications not reported during the 2R11 inspection (i.e. new at 2R12), the indications were sized using the 2R1 1 ECT signals based on a lookup review. Lookups were also performed for all of the 2R12 DOS locations that were previously reported as DIS. In some of these cases, an OD component could not be found in the 2R11 bobbin lookup results, and these intersections were excluded from the growth distributions.

As discussed in Section 3.2.1 below, the Cycle 12 growth rates for each SG were less than Cycle 11 growth rates. As mentioned above, repeat indication growth rates are determined based on comparison of the voltages called in the current and prior cycle (without lookup of prior cycle data). To validate this process and to investigate if potential analyst variability/sensitivity in 2R1 1 could have contributed to a growth rate reduction, the 2R1 1 and 2R12 bobbin data for all repeat indications were re-reviewed by two analysts. Minor changes were noted in some of the voltages, but were within the expected tolerance of the bobbin voltage analyst uncertainty distribution. The resultant Cycle 12 growth distributions were unaffected when compared with the growth distributions using the.as-found 2R11 voltages and .no changes were discernible. Therefore, the repeat indications' voltages as reported in 2R11 were used in the analysis in the following sections that assess limiting growth distributions, and potential analyst variability was not a factor in the Cycle 12 growth rate reduction.

There were 615 newly reported DOS indications in 2R12. This value excludes those intersections which had DIS indications reported in 2R1 1. 509 of these new indications were detected during the 2R11 lookup and were assigned a 2R11 voltage and subsequently included in the growth distributions. There were 106 new DOS indications that were not detected during the 2R11 lookup and were, therefore, not included in the growth rate analyses. The largest of these indications was 1.04v in SG 2-1 R36C71 2H. The upper 95%

growth rates of all new and repeat indications were 0.23 and 0.39 v/EFPY, respectively. The average growth rates for new and repeat indications excluding prior AONDB were 0.08 and 0.12 v/EFPY, respectively. These data indicate that the new indications are growing at a slower rate than the previously detected indications, which is consistent with prior inspection results at DCPP.

Table 3-4 provides a summary of indications with the largest growth during Cycle 12. Table 3-5 provides the maximum and average voltage growth distribution by TSP. Table 3-6 provides the average BOC voltage, average growth rate data and average percent growth for the last five cycles at DCPP-2. Figure 3-13 depicts this information graphically.

Table 3-7 shows the voltage independent growth distributions for each SG, the composite distribution for all four SGs, and the cumulative probability distribution function for each distribution. Figures 3-10 and 3-11 show the voltage growth distributions depicted in bar charts.

86-5059194-00 Page 15 of 114 Reviewing the Table 3-5 average and maximum voltage growth for all indications for each SG as well as the number of new indications in each SG shows that the ODSCC mechanism is most active in SG 2-4. This phenomenon of a leading SG in plants affected by ODSCC is common in the industry. Reviewing Table 3-6 and Figures 3-10 and 3-11 also supports this conclusion.

3.2.1 Selection of Limiting Growth Distribution for Each Steam Generator In June 2004, PG&E received a set of RAls from the NRC on their submittal for a permanent POPCD approval. The responses to these RAls were provided in Reference 25. In response to one of the questions, PG&E prepared a guideline for determining the appropriate growth distribution to use for the operational assessments.

This guideline was used for the determination of the growth rates used for the EOC-13 projections provided in this document. This guideline either meets, or is more conservative than the guidance provided in References 2 and 6 and Enclosure 3 of Reference 24.

The first step in determining the most conservative growth distribution for each steam generator is to compare the SG-specific and the composite growth distributions for each of the last two cycles. In accordance with Reference 28, the large growth from Unit 2 Cycle 11 (11.89 v/EFPY) was excluded from the growth assessments since no growth rates greater than 8 v/EFPY were observed during Cycle 12. These comparisons are initially done without considering the impact of voltage dependent growth. In order to determine which growth distribution to use for each steam generator, four different growth curves must be compared (SG-specific for Cycle 11, SG-specific for Cycle 12, composite for Cycle 11, and composite for Cycle 12). In order to provide a fair comparison between Cycle 11 and Cycle 12, the Cycle 12 growth data was supplemented with Cycle 11 data for those indications which were >1.2v at BOC-1 1. This was done because all indications >1.2v were plugged during 2R1 1.

Without this adjustment, the results would have been heavily skewed toward Cycle 11 being bounding due to the voltage-dependent growth effects.

Figures 3-19 through 3-22 provide these comparisons for each steam generator.

Figures 3-20 and 3-21 show that the Cycle 11 composite curve is bounding for SGs 2-2 and 2-3. From Figure 3-19, it appears that the Cycle 11 composite curve is bounding for SG 2-1. However, the Cycle 11 SG-specific curve for SG 2-1 is bounding above 2 volts per EFPY. For this case, sensitivity calculations were performed as discussed in Section 3.2.5 to determine which growth curve is bounding. Figure 3-22 appears to show that the Cycle 11 SG-specific curve is bounding for SG 2-4. However, following the voltage-dependent growth analyses, it was unclear if the Cycle 11 specific or composite growth curve was bounding for SG 2-4. Therefore, sensitivity calculations were also performed for SG 2-4 to determine which growth curve was bounding.

These sensitivity calculations are also discussed in Section 3.2.5.

86-5059194-00 Page 16 of 114 3.2.2 Voltage-Dependent Growth Analyses for Cycle 12 Even though the Cycle 11 growth rates were determined to be bounding, the voltage-dependent growth analyses for the Cycle 12 data are documented in this report for future reference. For Cycle 12, growth rates were plotted against the BOC voltage for all steam generators. Their data are shown in Figures 3-14 through 3-18. As demonstrated by the figures, a positive slope exists in all SGs. The slope is minimal (near 0.1) in SGs 2-2 and 2-3. A slope of 0.1 was included in Reference 25 as the point at which voltage-dependent growth should be considered in the operational assessment. The slope of the curve for SG 2-3 is slightly below this value. However, these curves include only indications that were S1.2v at BOC-12 since all indications

>1.2v were plugged at 2R11. The fact that there are no data points >1.2v is likely lowering the slope because the indications with the highest likelihood of experiencing higher growth rates were removed from service during 2R1 1. In addition, a review of similar figures for Cycle 11 show.slopes significantly greater than 0.1 for SGs 2-2 and 2-3. For these reasons, it is considered prudent to consider voltage-dependent growth to be active in all four steam generators.

Voltage-dependent growth is not a new concept, and has been documented by the European steam generators affected by ODSCC. Because of their higher repair limits, their data encompasses a much broader and higher.range of data than at DCPP and the US plants and provides significant basis for the VDG approach.

A significant amount of analysis and evaluation was performed following the 2R11 inspection on voltage growth for ODSCC at TSPs. The evaluations primarily involved statistical breakpoint analysis to determine where the data suggests a change in the slope of the regression curve that defines the growth data. These efforts led to the development of a guidelines document for determining the breakpoints. This document was transmitted to the NRC via Enclosure 3 of Reference 24. These methods were used to determine breakpoints for the Cycle 12 growth data.

Cycle 12 VDG breakpoint analyses were performed for each steam generator and for a composite growth distribution (including all steam generators). Since all DOS indications greater than 1.2 volts were plugged in 2R11, there are no Cycle 12 indications in the 1.2v-2.Ov range. Therefore, as discussed previously, the Cycle 12 growth data was supplemented with Cycle 11 data for those indications that were greater than 1.2 volts at BOC-1 1.

Figures 3-23 through 3-27 show the scatter charts and the resulting breakpoints for all of these analyses. The analyses for SGs 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3 each yielded one breakpoint at 1.12v, 1.00v, and 0.96v, respectively. The SG 2-4 analysis yielded two breakpoints at 0.47v and 1.038v. The composite analysis yielded two breakpoints at 1.10v and 1.71v.

86-5059194-00 Page 17 of 114 3.2.3 Voltage-Dependent Growth Analyses for Cycle 11 As discussed in Section 3.2.1, the Cycle 11 growth rates were determined to bound the Cycle 12 growth rates, and the extreme 11 volVtEFPY Cycle 11 growth rate can be excluded from Cycle 13 projections. This section provides the VDG breakpoint analyses for the growth curves used in the Monte Carlo analyses. These Cycle 11 growth curves include SG-specific curves for SGs 2-1 and 2-4, and the composite curve which was used for SGs 2-2 and 2-3. Figures 3-28 through 3-30 provide the results of the breakpoint analyses for these three data sets. As shown in the figures, SG 2-1 yielded one breakpoint at 1.06v. Both SG 2-4 and the composite data set yielded two breakpoints of 0.59v and 1.66v. These breakpoint values are the same as those determined in the prior cycle 90 day report, and used in the Section 6 benchmark assessment.

3.2.4 Delta Volts Adjustment Another part of the growth guideline provided in Reference 25 involves implementation of a "delta volts adjustment" when implementing POPCD. The purpose of this adjustment is to account for the possibility that the growth rates may increase over the next operating cycle. The amount of this adjustment is determined by comparing the average growth from Cycle 12 to the average growth from Cycle 11 forleach voltage bin. Tables 3-8 and 3-9 provide the required adjustments based on the Cycle 12 and Cycle 11 breakpoints, respectively. Per the Reference 25 guideline, if the Cycle 12 data has a higher average growth rate than the Cycle 11 data, then the difference between the average growth rates should be added to each growth rate value in the distribution being used prior to binning the data. If the Cycle 12 growth rates for SGs 2-1 and 2-2 were being used for the Monte Carlo analyses, which is not the case, small adjustments would have been required in Bins 1 and 2 based on Table 3-8. Table 3-9 shows the average growth rates and required adjustments for SG 2-1, SG 2-4, and the composite distributions because these are the bounding Cycle 11 growth curves that were used for these analyses. As shown in Table 3-9, only Bin 1 in SG 2-1 requires an adjustment.

3.2.5 Sensitivity Studies and Growth Summary As discussed in Section 3.2.1, the Cycle 11 composite growth curves should be used for SGs 2-2 and 2-3. For SG 2-1, however, it is not readily apparent from examining Figure 3-19 if the Cycle 11 composite or the Cycle 11 SG-specific growth is bounding.

Therefore, probability of burst and leak rate calculations were performed using each curve (after the VDG breakpoint analyses and the delta volts adjustment) to determine the more conservative growth rate. These calculations showed that the Cycle 11 SG 2-1 growth curve was more conservative.

For SG 2-4, it was not clear after the VDG analyses which growth curve was bounding.

A comparison of Figures 3-37 and 3-38 shows that the Bin 2 curve is more

86-5059194-00 Page 18 of 114 conservative for the SG-specific Cycle 11 data, but the Bin 3 curve is more conservative for the composite Cycle 11 data. In addition to the question over the Cycle 11 growth curves, the supplemented Cycle 12 growth curve for SG 2-4 yielded an upper breakpoint of 1.038v. This is much lower than the 1.66 volt breakpoint for either the SG 2-4 Cycle 11 or the composite Cycle 11 curves. A lower breakpoint means that more indications are having growth rates applied from the upper bin. Even though the average growth in the upper bin for the Composite Cycle 12 curve is lower, it was believed that this Cycle 12 curve could be more conservative since it would be applied to more indications. Therefore, leak rate and probability of burst calculations were performed using the SG 2-4 Cycle 11 growth curves, the composite Cycle 11 growth curves, and the supplemented SG 2-4 Cycle 12 growth curves. For both leak rate and probability of burst, the SG 2-4 Cycle 11 growth curves gave the most conservative results.

Tables 3-10 through 3-14 show the supplemented Cycle 12 growth distributions for each steam generator as well as the composite growth distributions. These growth distributions were not used in the EOC-13 projections and are provided for information only. Tables 3-10 and 3-11 for SGs 2-1 and 2-2 respectively, reflect the delta volts adjusted growth rates as discussed in Section 3.2.4. No delta volts adjustments were required for the other growth curves. These results are shown graphically in Figures 3-31 through 3-35.

Tables 3-15 through 3-17 show the Cycle 11 growth distributions that were used in the Monte Carlo analyses for SG 2-1, SG 2-4 and SGs 2-2/2-3, respectively. Table 3-15 for SG 2-1 reflects a +0.002v adjustment applied to Bin 1. The composite growth distributions shown in Table 3-17 were used for both the SG 2-2 and the SG 2-3 Monte Carlo analyses. These curves are shown graphically in Figures 3-36 through 3-38. As required by Generic Letter 95-05, the negative-growth values were included as zero growth rates in the ARC calculations.

3.3 Voltage Distributions Used for Monte Carlo Analyses Now that the breakpoints for the growth bins have been defined, the voltage distributions to be used in the Monte Carlo simulations can be defined. Tables 3-18 and 3-19 show the voltage distributions used for the Monte Carlo analyses. As shown in the tables, additional voltage bins are inserted at the value of the VDG breakpoints: an additional voltage bin at 1.06v was inserted into the SG 2-1 voltage distribution and additional voltage bins at 0.59v and 1.66v were inserted into the voltage distributions for SGs 2-2, 2-3, and 2-4. Adding these additional voltage bins forces the Monte Carlo simulation codes to apply each growth bin to the correct number of indications. As a result, these voltage distributions are slightly different than the distributions shown in Table 3-3.

86-5059194-00 Page 19 of 114 3.4 Probe Wear Criteria In order to maintain consistent detection and sizing capabilities throughout the inspection, probe wear is monitored by following the requirements of Reference 15. The first NRC requirement regarding probe wear is to minimize the potential for tubes to be inspected with a probe that had failed the probe wear check. This was accomplished by implementing the bobbin Examination Technique Specification Sheet (ETSS) #1 (Ref. 11), which required the probe have its feet replaced when failing the probe wear check, or in the case of non-changeable feet probes, the probe discarded. Review of the probe wear log sheets and the eddy current test results indicate that no tubes were inspected with a probe known to have failed the probe wear check.

If the DOS voltage is at or above the retest threshold (1.5 volts or higher) and the cal is designated as "ARC Out" on the cal board, the indication code is changed from a DOS to a RSS (retest support plate signal) indicating that a retest is required with a new probe. No new indications were detected in the tubes when retested with the new probe.

The 2R1 2 eddy current inspection resulted in 25 bobbin indications in excess of 1.5 volts that were inspected with a worn probe. These indications are shown in Table 3-20. Figure 3-39 shows a comparison of the worn probe and good probe voltages. The final acceptable DOS voltage values compare reasonably well with the RSS voltages in all cases except -one.

R25C47 in SG;24 had an RSS voltage of 2.19v with a DOS voltage of ,1.46v. Since the voltage with the worn probe was overestimated relative to the voltage with the good probe, this discrepancy is not a concern. The average change between the DOS and RSS voltage was -1.1% with the maximum increase in voltage being +13.9%. Therefore, continued use of the 1.5-volt retest threshold is justified (Ref. 13).

The next requirement involves monitoring tubes that contain new DOS indications that were inspected with probes that failed the wear check in the previous outage. This evaluation is intended to look for "new" large indications or a non-proportionately large percentage of "new" indications in tubes that failed the check in the previous outage. Table 3-21 shows the new 2R12 DOS indications that were 20.5 volts and were inspected on cal groups that failed the probe wear check in 2R1 1. As shown in Table 3-21, there are no newly reported DOS indications greater than 1 volt in tubes that were inspected with worn probes in 2R1 1.

Overall, there were 2102 DOS indications detected in the 2R12 inspection. 615 (or -29%) of the DOS indications were new indications. In order to assess the number of new indications against the probe wear requirements, Table 3-22 and 3-23 are presented. Of the 615 total new indications, 137 (-22%) were in tubes inspected with a worn probe in 2R11 and 478 were in tubes inspected with a good probe in 2R1 1. Additionally, the number of new indications >

0.5 volts was determined to be 133. Out of these, about 18% were in tubes that were inspected with a worn probe in 2R1 1.

Table 3-23 shows the ratio of the number of 2R11 examinations performed with worn probes versus good probes. The total number of examinations shown in this table is greater than the number of tubes in service because several tubes have multiple examinations. This table shows that approximately 29% of the tubes were inspected with a worn probe in 2R1 1. This

86-5059194-00 Page 20 of 114 percentage compares reasonably well with the percentages of new DOSs inspected with worn probes in 2R1 1 (about 22%) and new > 0.5 volt DOSs inspected with worn probes in 2R1 1 (about 18%). This demonstrates that the number of new indications is not biased towards the tubes that were inspected with worn probes in 2R1 1.

In summary, the NRC analysis requirements regarding probe wear monitoring were met during the 2R12 bobbin coil inspection and a more stringent wear tolerance is not required at DCPP.

3.5 Upper Voltage Repair Limit Per Generic Letter 95-05, the upper repair limit must be calculated prior to each outage. The more conservative of the plant-specific average growth rate per EFPY or 30 percent per EFPY should be used as the anticipated growth rate input for this calculation. Since the average growth rate for Cycle 11 was 38.7% (Ref. 7 and Table 3-6), the actual Cycle 11 average growth was used for the upper repair limit calculation. The structural limit used for this calculation was taken from Reference 27 and is based on the Addendum 5 database supplemented with the tube pull results from 2R1 1. Based on the following formula, the upper repair limit was calculated to be 5.51v.

. VURL. VSL .4.

% VNDE  % VCG 1+ +

100 100 where: VuRL = upper voltage repair limit, VNDE = NDE voltage measurement uncertainty = 20%,

VCG = voltage growth anticipated between inspections = 38.7%/EFPY x 1.33 EFPY = 51.5%,

VSL = voltage structural limit from the burst pressure - Bobbin voltage correlation, where the limit of 9.45 volts was used based on Reference 7.

3.6 NDE UncertaintyDistributions NDE uncertainties must be taken into account when projecting the end-of-cycle voltages for the next operating cycle. The NDE uncertainties used in the calculations of the EOC-13 voltages are described in Reference 6. The acquisition uncertainty was sampled from a normal distribution with a mean of zero, a standard deviation of 7%, and a cutoff limit of 15%

based on the use of the probe wear standard. The analyst uncertainty was sampled from a normal distribution with a mean of zero, a standard deviation of 10.3%, and no cutoff limit.

These uncertainty distributions are shown in Table 3-24 and Figure 3-40.

86-5059194-00 Page 21 of 114 3.7 Plus Point to Bobbin Voltage Correlation In Reference 28, PG&E committed to providing an assessment in each 90-day report to ensure that the bobbin voltages assigned to AONDB indications continue to be conservative.

That is, for those prior cycle AONDB indications that become detectable by bobbin (DOS), this assessment was to include a review of the current cycle bobbin voltages against the expected bobbin voltages assuming that all of these indications grew at the average growth rate for the DOS population.

In 2R1 2, none of the three 2R1 1 returned to service AONDB indications were detected with bobbin and were reported as AONDB again. Therefore, an assessment is not required to be performed.

As a prudent measure, the bobbin to Plus Point voltage correlation continues to be assessed by comparing the inferred bobbin voltages against the measured bobbin voltages for all of the intersections that had both bobbin DOS indications and Plus Point indications of axial ODSCC. The 2R12 Plus Point indications were assigned bobbin voltages based on the following equation from Reference 17.

Voobbi.-MCL = V+Pr

• 1.0161 + 0.2835 + J0.00024+0.001 0.45)2 For cases where more than one Plus Point indication was reported at the same intersection, each indication was assigned an inferred voltage. These multiple voltages were then combined via the square root of the sum of the squares method (SRSS) to obtain a single inferred bobbin voltage for those intersections.

These inferred bobbin voltages were then compared to the measured bobbin voltages to ensure that the inferred voltages are generally conservative relative to the measured bobbin voltages. There were a total of 235 intersections with DOS indications that were confirmed as containing axial ODSCC with Plus Point. In 148 of these 235 cases (about 63%), the inferred voltage was over predicted relative to the measured bobbin voltage. The average difference between the inferred voltages and the measured voltages was a 0.026v over-prediction.

In 2R12, the largest inferred voltage for an AONDB indication was 0.842v. Since the Plus Point to bobbin voltage correlation was only used for intersections with inferred voltages less than 0.842v, this is the voltage range of interest for this comparison. When only the inferred voltages less than 0.842v are considered, 89 of 138 (about 64%) inferred voltages were over predicted relative to the measured voltage. The average difference between the inferred voltages and the measured bobbin voltages for this population was a 0.034v over-prediction.

Figure 7-41 shows this comparison graphically. This figure shows the inferred voltages plotted against the measured bobbin voltages. The linear regression fit shows that, in the region of interest (<0.842 inferred volts), the voltage is generally over predicted. Based on the facts that about 64% of the voltages are over predicted and the average difference in voltages is a 0.034v over-prediction in the range of interest, the Plus Point to bobbin voltage correlation is shown to provide generally conservative results.

86-5059194-00 Page 22 of 114 Table 3-1: 2R12 DOS Indications > 2.0 Volts SG l Row l Col Ind l Elev Volts SG 2-1 38 46 DOS 2H 2.38 SG 2-1 3 47 DOS IH 2.14 SG 2-1 6 85 DOS 2H 2.11 SG 2-1 25 42 DOS IH 2.1 SG 2-1 17 45 DOS 1H 2.02 SG 2-2 29 70 DOS 2H 2.03 SG 2-4 2 65 DOS 2H 2.87 SG 2-4 33 50 DOS 2H 2.62 SG 2-4 27 43 DOS 2H 2.43 SG 2-4 14 41 DOS 2H 2.09

. i

86-5059194-00 Page 23 of 114 Table 3-2: 2R12 AONDB Indications SG Row Elev DnCol Plus Pt Inferred Bobbin Voltage Voltage Se Voltage Indication Intersection SG2-1 2 47 2H 0.81 0.21 0.514 0.514 SG 2-1 22 58 2H 1 0.40 0.706 0.706 SG 2-1 44 55 1H 0.91 0.09 0.395 0.395 SG2-1 44 57 2H 0.55 0.11 0.414 0.414 SG 2-2 8 13 1H 2.91 0.22 0.524 0.524 SG 2-2 8 30 1H 2.47 0.24 0.544 0.544 SG2-2 11 12 1H 7.7 0.21 0.514 0.514 SG 2-2 13 22 1H 3.92 0.16 0.464 0.464 SG 2-2 14 42 1H 3 0.23 0.534 0.534 SG 2-2 17 42 1H 3.69 0.29 0.595 0.595 SG 2-2 19 75 1H 0.87 0.19 0.494 0.494 SG2-2 22 28 2H 2.71 0.21 0.514 0.514 SG 2-2 22 62 1H 0.93 0.14 0.444 0.444 SG2-2 24 40 2H 1.11 0.16 0.464 0.464 SG2-2 25 8 1H 4.16 0.24 0.544 0.544 SG 2-2 25 46 2H 1.19 0.26 0.564 0.564 SG 2-2 26 17 3H 0.47. 0.18 0.484 0.484 SG 2-2 31 22 2H 1.49 0.30 0.605 0.605 SG 2-2 37 46 2H 1.18 0.30 0.605 0.605 SG 2-2 45 39 2H 1.14 0.44 0.746 0.746 SG 2-3 5 66 3H 1.53 0.19 0.494 0.494 SG 2-3 6 76 2H 0.68 0.08 0.385 0.385 SG 2-3 13 58 1H 0.58 0.20 0.504 0.504 SG 2-3 16 32 1H 0.62 0.09 0.395 0.395 SG2-3 18 53 2H 1.11 0.21 0.514 0.514 SG 2-3 22 10 1H 0.52 0.14 0.444 0.444 SG 2-3 24 45 1H 0.56 0.09 0.395 0.395 SG2-3 29 61 1H 1.14 0.29 0.595 SG 2-3 29 61 1H 1.14 0.16 0.464 0.842 SG2-3 29 61 1H 1.14 0.07 0.375 SG 2-3 29 66 2H 0.81 0.13 0.434 0.434 SG 2-3 33 35 2H 0.96 0.09 0.395 0.395 SG 2-3 33 57 2H 0.73 0.17 0.474 SG 2-3 33 57 2H 0.73 0.12 0.424 0.636 SG 2-3 37 19 1H 1.21 0.36 0.665 0.665 SG2-3 37 61 1H NA 0.14 0.444 0.444 SG 2-4 2 21 3H 2.77 0.20 0.504 0.504 SG 2-4 2 36 2H 0.86 0.18 0.484 0.484 SG2-4 5 27 1H 1.01 0.14 0.444 0.444 SG2-4 5 67 2H 0.91 0.15 0.454 0.454 SG 2-4 7 65 3H 0.47 0.28 0.584 0.584 SG 2-4 8 41 1H 0.76 0.22 0.524 0.524 SG2-4 10 29 3H 2.2 0.12 0.424 0.424 SG2-4 10 77 3H 0.66 0.14 0.444 SG2-4 10 77 3H 0.66 0.10 0.404 0.601

86-5059194-00 Page 24 of 114 Table 3-2: 2R12 AONDB Indications S C l Dent l Plus Pt Inferred Bobbin Voltage SGVoltage Voltage Indication I ntersection SG 2-4 10 84 2H 1.23 0.22 0.524 0.687 SG 2-4 10 84 2H 1.23 0.14 0.444 SG 2-4 13 77 4H 0.37 0.14 0.444 0.444 SG 2-4 14 7 2H 0.73 0.26 0.564 0.700 SG 2-4 14 7 2H 0.73 0.11 0.414 SG 2-4 16 36 1H 0.8 0.25 0.554 0.704 SG 2-4 16 36 1H 0.8 0.13 0.434 SG 2-4 19 82 2H 1.14 0.13 0.434 0.600 SG 2-4 19 82 2H 1.14 0.11 0.414 SG 2-4 20 78 4H 0.35 0.21 0.514 0.514 SG 2-4 22 16 1H 0.74 0.27 0.574 0.574 SG 2-4 22 22 3H 0.88 0.14 0.444 0.444 SG2-4 24 10 17H 0.78 0.18 0.484 0.484 SG 2-4 25 27 1H 0.84 0.12 0.424 0.424 SG 2-4 25 66 2H 0.46 0.38 0.685 0.685 SG 2-4 30 36 3H 4.08 0.22 0.524 0.524 SG 2-4 35 65 2H 1.1 0.18 0.484 SG 2-4 35 65 2H 1.1 0.14 0.444 0.777 SG 2-4 35 65 2H 1.1 0.11 0.414 SG 2-4 36 28 2H 1.08 0.13 0.434 0.594 SG 2-4 36 28 2H 1.08 0.10 0.404 SG 2-4 36 29 1H 1.13 0.26 0.564 0689 SG 2-4 36 29 1H 1.13 0.09 0.395 SG 2-4 36 33 2H 0.94 0.09 0.395 0.395 SG 2-4 37 29 2H 0.6 0.22 0.524 0.650 SG 2-4 37 29 2H 0.6 0.08 0.385 SG 2-4 41 61 4H 0.8 0.15 0.454 0.454

86-5059194-00 Page 25 of 114 Table 3-3: Summary of Inspection and Repair for Tubes Affected by ODSCC at TSPs SG 2-1 SG 2-2 SG2-3 DOSs DOSs DOSs As Returned to Service As Returned to Service As- Returned to Service Voltage Found Repaired Fond Repaired Foun Repaired Bin EOC>12 Tubes Cant. ODSCC Foa Ound2 Tubes Conf. ODSCC EOun12 Tubes Conf. ODSCC E or Not Insp Total EO(C12 or Not Insp Total EOC-12 or Not Insp Total w/ +Pt wI+Pt W/+Pt 0.1 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0.2 29 0 28 29 28 1 24 27 17 0 17 17 0.3 74 0 72 74 54 0 46 54 42 0 35 42 0.4 97 0 84 97 70 1 59 69 65 0 61 65 0.5 55 1 52 54 72 2 64 70 35 0 33 35 0.6 54 0 48 54 47 2 43 45 38 1 34 37 0.7 43 0 42 43 31 0 .28 31 20 0 20 20 0.8 33 0 32 33 24 1 20 23 18 0 18 18 0.9 25 0 23 25 23 0 21 23 11 0 11 11 1 14 0 13 14 15 0 15 15 5 0 5 5 1.1 11 0 11 11 5 0 5 5 2 0 2 2 1.2 10 0 10 10 5 0 5 5 5 0 5 5 1.3 2 0 2 2 7 0 7 7 5 0 5 5 1.A 4 0 4 4 4 0 4 4 1 0 1 1 1.5 8 0 8 8 6 0 . 6 6 5 0 5 5 1.6 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 2 0 2 2 1.7 3 0 3 3 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 1.8 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.9 2 1 1' 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.1 2 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

>3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 472 8 435 464 397 10 350 387 272 1 255 271

>IV 48 7 41- 411 33 J 3 30 30111 20 1 0 20 20

>2V 5 j 5 0 01 1 1 1 0 0 0 to

86-5059194-00 Page 26 of 114 Table 3-3 (cont): Summary of Inspection and Repair for Tubes Affected by ODSCC at TSPs SG 2-4 Composite of All SGs DOSs DOSs Voltage As- . Returned to Seice As- Repai. Returned to Service Bin Found RTupared Conf. ODSCC Found Tubes Conf. ODSCC EOC-12 or Not Insp Total EOC-12 or Not Insp Total

.W +Pt l w/+Pt 0.1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0.2 31 0 31 31 105 1 100 104 0.3 104 0 99 104 274 0 252 274 0.4 134 0 128 134 366 1 332 365 0.5 141 3 137 138 303 6 286 297 0.6 127 1 126 126 266 4 251 262 0.7 100 0 100 100 194 0 190 194 0.8 77 2 73 75 152 3 143 149 0.9 66 2 64 64 125 2 119 123 1 56 0 56 56 90 0 89 90 1.1 45 0 45 45 63 0 63 63 1.2 38 0 38 38 58 0 58 58 1.3 26 0 26 26 40 0 40 40 1.4 20 0 20 20 29 0 29 29 1.5 18 0 18 18 37 0 37 37 1.6 5 0 5 5 9 0 9 9 1.7 11 1 10 10 16 1 15 15 1.8 7 2 5 .- 5 o10 -4 6 6 1.9 6 3 3 .3 -8 4 4 4 2 4 2 2 2 5 3 2 2 2.1 1 1 0 0 4 4 0 0 2.2 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 2.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.4 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2.5 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 2.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.7 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

>3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 1020 l 20 l 986 l1000 [ 2161 l 39 2026 2122

>1V 184 1 12 j 172 1172 285 j 22 263 263

>2V 4 4 j 0 J 10 10 0 10

86-5059194-00 Page 27 of 114 Table 3-4: Summary of Largest Voltage Growth Rates per EFPY Prevy rwh lsP SG Row Col Elev Volts Volts GEFwPY RPesults New?

______ (2R11 ) EPY Rsls Nw SG24 2 65 2H 2.87 0.69 1.434 SAI Repeat SG21 6 85 2H 2.11 0.56 1.020 SAI New SG24 33 50 2H 2.62 1.11 0.993 SAI Repeat SG21 3 47 1H 2.14 0.70 0.947 SAI Repeat SG21 38 46 2H 2.38 1.01 0.901 SAI Repeat SG24 27 43 2H 2.43 1.080 0.888 SAI Repeat SG21 16 49 3H 1.84 0.58 0.829 SAI Repeat SG24 37 23 2H 1.88 0.65 0.809 SAI Repeat SG24 10 60 2H 1.80 0.62 0.776 SAI Repeat SG22 29 70 2H 2.03 0.85 0.776 SAI Repeat SG21 12 40 1H 1.78 0.64 0.750 SAI Repeat SG21 1 47 2H 1.79 0.710 0.711 SAI Repeat SG24 7 78 3H 1.72 0.66 0.697 SAI Repeat SG24 1 60 2H 1.41 0.36 0.691 New SG24 32 66 2H 1.97 0.95 0.671 SAI Repeat SG21 25 42 1H 2.10 1.09 0.664 SAI Repeat SG24 20 43 2H 1.41 0.420 0.651 Repeat SG21 17 45 1H 2.02 1.04 0.645 SAI Repeat SG24 18 25 1H 1.39 0.43 0.632 Repeat SG22 2 88 3H 1.79 0.87 0.605 SAI Repeat SG24 13 88 2H 1.67 0.75 0.605 Repeat SG22 4 67 1H 1.96 1.07 0.586 SAI Repeat SG24 14 41 2H 2.09 1.20 0.586 SAI Repeat SG24 9 61 1H 1.69 0.80 0.586 Repeat SG24 25 34 1H 1.99 1.12 0.572 SAI Repeat SG23 22 52 2H 1.40 0.54 0.566 Repeat SG21 40 56 1H 1.89 1.04 0.559 SAI Repeat SG24 7 10 2H 1.64 0.79 0.559 Repeat SG24 16 84 2H 1.80 0.97 0.546 SAI Repeat SG24 36 34 3H 1.92 1.09 0.546 SAI Repeat SG24 33 55 2H 1.60 0.78 0.539 Repeat SG24 19 43 2H 1.75 0.94 0.533 SAI Repeat SG24 8 76 2H 1.94 1.13 0.533 SAI Repeat SG24 30 16 2H 1.80 1.01 0.520 SAI Repeat SG24 17 43 1H 1.87 1.08 0.520 SAI Repeat SG22 29 44 2H 1.62 0.84 0.513 Repeat SG24 9 79 2H 1.31 0.53 0.513 Repeat SG24 40 47 2H 1.69 0.91 0.513 Repeat SG24 4 60 1H 1.61 0.84 0.507 Repeat SG24 27 31 2H 1.19 0.42 0.507 Repeat SG24 20 46 IH 1.78 1.01 0.507 SAI Repeat SG21 25 52 1H 1.44 0.68 0.500 Repeat SG24 11 63 2H 1.14 0.38 0.500 Repeat

86-5059194-00 Page 28 of 114 Table 3-5: DOSIAONDB Voltage and Growth Distribution by TSP SG 2-1 SG 2-2 Tube Tube Plate of Max Average Growth/ Growtha Plate Indications Votage Voltage rowthEFPY Indications Voltage Voltage EFPY EFPY Vlag otae Maxaios P Aerage 1H 294 2.14 0.59 0.89 0.11 1H 138 1.96 0.59 0.55 0.10 2H 102 2.38 0.53 0.96 0.10 2H 156 2.03 0.57 0.73 0.08 3H 31 1.84 0.53 0.78 0.09 3H 58 1.79 0.50 0.57 0.07 4H 5 0.89 0.50 0.34 0.14 4H 18 1.16 0.50 0.14 0.03 5H 18 0.93 0.51 0.16 0.01 5H 3 0.98 0.57 0.32 0.13 6H 3 0.9 0.65 0.37 0.12 6H 1 0.35 0.35 0.09 0.09 7H _ 7H 2 0.51 0.51 0.16 .0.07 CL 19 0.91 0.47 0.06 0.01 . CL 21 0.83 0.40 0.22 0.03 All Inds 472 2.38 0.57 0.96 0.10 All Inds 397 2.03 0.55 0.73 0.08 llSG 2-3 SG 2-4 Tubce ll l Tube l Plt Indications lVoltage lVoltag~e lGrowth/ Growth/ Plate lI Ndctons Voltage lvoltage lGroth Gvrowth 1H ll 148 l1.60 l0.53 l0.34 l70.05 l 1H ll 371 l1.99 l0.66 l0.60 l0.12 2H 11 83 1.49 0.55 0.53 0.06 ' 2H 436 l2.87 l0.76 l1.35 l0.15 3H ll 23 l1.18 l0.46 l0.16 l0.02 l 3H 148 l1.92 l0.57 l0.66 l0.10 4H ll 1 l0.30 l0.30 l-0.01 l 4.01 l 4H ll 47 l1.19 l0.51 l0.34 l0.10 5H ll 4 r0.86 0.44 r0.14 0.03 l 5H ll 7 0.71 0.39 0.12 0.05 6H 2 l0.32 l0.30 l0.05 l0.03 l 6H ll 1 l0.20 l0.20 l-0.03 l-0.03 7H ll 1 l0.21 l0.21 l0.04 l0.04 l 7H l CL l 10 l0.42 l0.30 l0.09 l0.00 l CL ll 10 l0.75 l0.39 l0.19 l0.04 AlIdll 272 l1.60 l0.52 l0.53 l 0.05 l All Inds 1020 l2.87 l0.68 l 1.35 l0.13 Composite of All Four SGs Tube Support Max Average I MaxM I Average No. of Molaxe AVertage Growth! Growth/

Plate Indications VolagVltge EFPY EFPY 1H 951 2.14 0.61 0.89 0.10 2H 777 2.87 0.67 1.35 0.12 3H 260 1.92 0.54 0.96 0.09 4H 71 1.19 0.51 0.34 0.08 5H 32 0.98 0.48 0.96 0.03 6H 7 0.90 0.44 0.37 0.07 7H 3 0.51 0.41 0.16 0.06 CL 60 0.91 0.40 0.22 0.02 All Inds 2161 2.87 0.61 1.35 0.10

86-5059194-00 Page 29 of 114 Table 3-6: Voltage Growth for Cycles 8 through 12 SG 2-1 SG2-2 SG 2-3 SG 2-4 All Avg BOC Volts 0.338 0.358 0.403 0.415 0.385 Cycle 8 Average Growth Per EFPY 0.054 0.054 -0.008 0.059 0.051 Average Percent Growth Per EFPY 16.0% 15.2% -1.9% 14.3% 13.3%

Avg BOC Volts 0.388 0.362 0.324 0.387 0.377 Cycle 9 Avg Growth Per EFPY 0.036 0.087 0.168 0.173 0.134 Average Percent Growth Per 9.2% 24.2% 52.0% 44.7% 35.6%

l Avg BOC Volts 0.42 0.43 0.48 0.53 0.49 Cycle Avg Growth Per EFPY 0.14 0.08 0.12 0.20 0.16 J Average Percent Growth Per EFPY 33.2% 19.0% 25.5% 37.5% 33.4%

Cycle J Avg BOC Volts Avg Growth Per EFPY l 0.423 0.131 0.437 0.103 0.379 0.131 l 0.514 0.233 0.467 0.181 Average Percent Growth Per EFPY 30.9% 23.5% 34.7% 45.3% 38.7%

Avg BOC Volts 0.419 0.432 0.448 0.496 0.461 Cycle Avg Growth Per EFPY 0.106 0.085 0.050 0.136 0.110 Average Percent Growth Per EFPY 19.8% 11.2%

_25.3% 27.4% 23.8%

I

86-5059194-00 Page 30 of 114 Table 3-7: Summary of Independent Cycle 12 Voltage Growth per EFPY Delta Volts Per Pe EFpy FY

[

No.

SG 2-1 Obs.of CPDF CPF No.

Obs.of SG 2-2 CPDF CPF IN.o No.

SG 2-3 Obs.of CPDF CPF No.

SG 2-4 Obs.of

~ IN.o lCPDF jObs.

Total No. of lCPDF CD

<=0.0 75 0.170 71 0.196 79 0.324 75 0.080 300 0.151 0.1 198 0.620 163 0.645 110 0.775 389 0.492 860 0.583 0.2 88 0.820 84 0.876 39 0.934 266 0.774 477 0.823 0.3 43 0.918 27 0.950 10 0.975 121 0.902 201 0.924 0.4 20 0.964 9 0.975 4 0.992 44 0.949 77 0.962 0.5 7 0.980 5 0.989 1 0.996 21 0.971 34 0.979 0.6 1 0.982 2 0.994 1 1.000 16 0.988 20 0.989 0.7 2 0.986 1 0.997 0 1.000 6 0.995 9 0.994 0.8 2 0.991 1 1.000 0 1.000 1 0.996 4 0.996 0.9 1 0.993 0 1.000 0 1.000 2 0.998 3 0.997 1 2 0.998 0 1.000 0 1.000 1 0.999 3 0.999 1.1 1 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 0.999 1 0.999 1.2 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 0.999 0 0.999

• 1.3 0 1.000, 0 , 1.000 0 1.000 0 0.999 0 0.999 1.4 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 0.999 0 0.999 1.5 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 1 1.000 1 1.000 1.6 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 1.7 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 1.8 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 1.9 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 2 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000

>2 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 0 1.000 Total 440 NA 363 NA 2441NA 943 1 NA Pr9 G ro t _ _

0.362 0.296 11_ _ _

0.235 0.401

_ _ _ _ _ I _ _

0.355

86-5059194-00 Page 31 of 114 Table 3-8: Delta Volts Adjustments Based on Cycle 12 Breakpoints (Information Only)

Average Growth (Volts per EFPY)

SG Cycle Breakpoint(s)

Bin1 Bin2* Bin3 Cycle 11 0.104 0.198 SG 2-1 Cycle 12 1.12 0.105 0.204 NA Delta +0.001 +0.006 Cycle 11 0.080 0.157 SG 2-2 Cycle 12 1.00 0.083 0.160 NA Delta +0.003 +0.003 Cycle 11 0.114 0.654 SG 2-3 Cycle 12 0.96 0.046 0.130 NA Delta <0 <0 Cycle 11 0.116 0.261 0.790*

SG 2-4 Cycle 12 0.47 / 1.03 0.095 0.178 0.284*

Delta <0 <0 <0 Cycle 11 0.140 0.384 Composite Cycle 12 1.10 / 1.71 0.108 0.205 NA**

Delta <0 <0

• Since no indications were returned to service >1.2 volts at BOO-12, the averages for both cycles in Bin2 (Bin3 for SG 2-4) only include indications up to and including 1.2v.

• • Since all indications >1.2 volts were plugged at BOC-12, there are no Cycle 12 indications that fall into the Bin3 category for indications >1.71 volts at EOC-12. Therefore, no comparison is possible.

86-5059194-00 Page 32 of 114 Table 3-9: Delta Volts Adjustments Based on Cycle 11 Breakpoints Average Growth (Volts per EFPY)

SG Cycle Breakpoint(s)

BinI Bin2* Bin3 Cycle 11 0.103 0.286 SG 2-1 Cycle 12 1.06 0.105 0.219 NA Delta +0.002 <0 Cycle 11 0.127 0.347 SG 2-4 Cycle 12 0.59 /1.66 0.103 0.212 NA**

Delta <0 <0 Cycle 11 0.105 0.289 Composite Cycle 12 0.59 /1.66 0.085 0.182 NA**

Delta <0 <0

• Since no indications were returned to service >1.2 volts at BOC-1 2, the averages for both cycles in I Bin2 only include indications up to and including 1.2v.

• • Since all indications >1.2 volts were plugged at BOC-1 2, there are no Cycle 12 indications that fall into the Bin3 category for indications >1.66 volts at EOC-12. Therefore, no comparison is possible.

86-5059194-00 Page 33 of 114 Table 3-10: Supplemented Cycle 12 Voltage Dependent Growth for SG 2-1 (Information Only)

Growth Cycle 12 Data Cycle 11 Data l Combined (volts/EFPY) BinI 1Bin2 BinI Bin2 BinI Bin2

(<=1.12v) (>1.12v) (<=1.12v) (>1.12v) (<=1.12v) (>1.12v)

<0 62 0 0 3 62 3 0.1 211 0 0 1 211 1 0.2 86 2 0 1 86 3 0.3 43 0 0 1 43 1 0.4 19 1 0 0 19 1 0.5 6 0 0 0 6 0 0.6 2 0 0 0 2 0 0.7 2 0 0 0 2 0 0.8 2 0 0 0 2 0 0.9 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 2 1 1.1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 1.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 1 0 1 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.3 0 0 0 1 0 1 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.6 0 0 0 1 0 1 2.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0

>3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total l 437 l 3 l 0 j 12 J 437 [ 15

86-5059194-00 Page 34 of 114 Table 3-11: Supplemented Cycle 12 Voltage Dependent Growth for SG 2-2 (Information Only)

Growth Cycle 12 Data Cycle 11 Data Combined (volts/EFPY) Binl Bin2 Binl Bin2 Binl Bin2

(<=lv) (>lv) (<=1v) (>lv) (c=lv) J (>1V)

<0 53 1 0 0 53 1 0.1 169 3 0 0 169 3 0.2 89 2 0 0 89 2 0.3 25 3 0 0 25 3.

0.4 8 1 0 0 8 1 0.5 5 0 0 0 5 0 0.6 1 1 0 0 1 1 0.7 1 0 0 0 1 0 0.8 1 0 0 1 1 1 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.2 0 0.. 0 0 0 0 1.3- 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 0 0 0 1 0 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.7 0 0 0 1 0 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.7 0 0 0 1 0 1 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0

>3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 352 11 0 4 352 15

86-5059194-00 Page 35 of 114 Table 3-12: Supplemented Cycle 12 Voltage Dependent Growth for SG 2-3 (Information Only)

Growth Cycle 12 Data Cycle 11 Data Combined (volts/EFPY) Bin1 Bin2 BinI Bin2 Binl Bin2

(<=0.96v) (>0.96v) (<=0.96v) (>0.96v) (<=0.96v) (>0.96v)

<0 77 2 0 2 77 4 0.1 107 3 0 0 107 3 0.2 36 3 0 0 36 3 0.3 5 5 0 0 5 5 0.4 4 0 0 0 4 0 0.5 1 0 0 0 1 0 0.6 1 0 0 0 1 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1.2 # ~0 f0 0 0 0 1.3 .0 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.7 0 ,0 0 0 0 0 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0

>3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 231 13 0 3 231 16

86-5059194-00 Page 36 of 114 Table 3-13: Supplemented Cycle 12 Voltage Dependent Growth for SG 2-4 (Information Only)

Cycle 12 Data Cycle 11 Data l Combined GrowthIFY Bin2 Bin2 Bin2 Growth/py MMn (0.48v- IBin3 Binl (0.48v- Bin3 Binl (0.48v- Bin3

(<=0.47v) l1.3v) (103v l 3v) (>1l (<=0.47v) 1.03v) (>1.03v)

<0 47 25 3 0 0 6 47 25 9 0.1 286 98 5 0 0 8 286 98 13 0.2 134 122 10 0 0 4 134 122 14 0.3 47 68 6 0 0 7 47 68 13 0.4 3 38 3 0 0 1 3 38 4 0.5 4 11 6 0 0 1 4 11 7 0.6 1 10 5 0 0 3 1 10 8 0.7 3 3 0 0 0 2 3 3 2 0.8 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 0.9 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 1 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 1.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 1.3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1.5 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 1 3 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1.9 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.2 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 2.3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2.6 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2.7 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

>3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 525 378 40 0 0 60 525 378 100

86-5059194-00 Page 37 of 114 Table 3-14: Supplemented Cycle 12 Voltage Dependent Growth for All Steam Generators (Information Only)

Cycle 12 Data Cycle 11 Data Combined Growth Bin2 I Bin2 l Bin2 (voltsIEFpy) Binl (1.iv- Bin3 BnIM (1 liv- Bin3 Binl '1 liv- Bin3

(<='1.v) 1v) (>1J.71v) (<=.1v) 1.71v) (>1.71v) (<=l__v) 1.71vl (>1.71v)

<0 293 7 0 0 11 0 293 18 0 0.1 856 4 0 0 7 2 856 11 2 0.2 468 9 0 0 5 0 468 14 0 0.3 192 9 0 0 6 2 192 15 2 0.4 75 2 0 0 1 0 75 3 0 0.5 29 4 0 0 1 0 29 5 0 0.6 18 3 0 0 2 1 18 5 1 0.7 9 0 0 0 3 0 9 3 0 0.8 4 0 0 0 2 0 4 2 0 0.9 3 0 0 0 4 0 3 4 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 1.1 1 ,.0 0 0 1 0 1 1 _ _

I 1.2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 1.3 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 1.4 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1.5 1 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 2 1.6 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 2 1 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1.9 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.2 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 3 1 2.3 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 2.4 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2.6 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 2.7 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

>3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 1951 39 0 0 162 17 1951 101 17

86-5059194-00 Page 38 of 114 Table 3-15: Cycle 11 Voltage-Dependent Growth for SG 2-1 (Used for SG 2-1)

Growth l Bin l Bin2 (Volts/EFPY) (<=1 .06v) (>1 .06v)

<=O 38 3 0.1 179 2 0.2 73 1 0.3 19 1 0.4 9 1 0.5 9 1 0.6 0 0 0.7 1 0 0.8 0 0 0.9 0 2 1 0 0 1.1 0 0 1.2 1 0 1.3 1 0 1.4 1 0 1.5 0 0 1.6 0 1 1.7 1 0 1.8 0 0 1.9 0 0 2 0 0 2.1 0 0 2.2 0 0 2.3 0 1 2.4 0 0 2.5 0 0 2.6 0 1 2.7 0 0 2.8 0 0 2.9 0 1 3 0 0 3.1 0 0 3.2 0 0

>3.2 0 0 Total 332 15

86-5059194-00 Page 39 of 114 Table 3-16: Cycle 11 Voltage-Dependent Growth for SG 2-4 (Used for SG 2-4)

Growth Binl Bin2 Bin3 (Volts/EFPY) (<=0.59v) l 166v) l (>1.66v)

<=0 48 28 0 0.1 307 50 2 0.2 220 37 1 0.3 79 29 3 0.4 24 24 0 0.5 5 21 0 0.6 8 13 1 0.7 5 6 0 0.8 3 4 0 0.9 0 7 0 1 1 6 0 1.1 0 6 0 1.2 0 3 0 1.3 1 5 0 1.4 0 1 1 1.5 0 3 2 1.6 0 3 1 1.7 1 0 0 1.8 0 2 0 1.9 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 2.1 0 0 0 2.2 0 3 1 2.3 0 1 0 2.4 0 1 0 2.5 0 1 1 2.6 0 1 0 2.7 0 0 1 2.8 0 0 0 2.9 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 3.1 0 0 0 3.2 0 0 0

>3.2 0 0 , 0 Total l 702 257 J 16

86-5059194-00 Page 40 of 114 Table 3-17: Cycle 11 Voltage-Dependent Growth for All SGs (Used for SGs 2-2 and 2-3)

Growth (Volts/EFPY)

I Bin

(<=0.59v) l Bin2 (0.5Vv to Bin3

(>1.66v)

<=O 152 68 0 0.1 690 84 2 0.2 374 59 1 0.3 124 53 3 0.4 32 37 0 0.5 17 28 0 0.6 10 19 1 0.7 5 10 0 0.8 3 6 0 0.9 0 10 0 1 1 6 0 1.1 0 7 0 1.2 1 3 0 1.3 1 7 0 1.4 0 3 1 1.5 0 3 2 1.6 0 3 2 1.7 1 1 1 1.8 0 2 0 1.9 0 2 1 2 0 1 0 2.1 0 0 0 2.2 0 3 1 2.3 0 2 0 2.4 0 1 0 2.5 0 1 1 2.6 0 1 1 2.7 0 0 2 2.8 0 0 0 2.9 0 0 1 3 0 0 1 3.1 0 0 0 3.2 0 0 0

>3.2 0 0 0 Total [ 1411 [ 420 J 21

86-5059194-00 86-50591 94-00 Page 41 of 114 Table 3-18: BOC-13 Voltage Distribution Used for Monte Carlo Analyses for SG 2-1

[ SG 2-1 Voltage l Bin As-Found Reaie EOC-12 Repaired 0.1 0 0 0.2 29 0 0.3 74 0 0.4 97 0 0.5 55 1 0.6 54 0 0.7 43 0 0.8 33 0 0.9 25 0 1 14 0 1.06 9 0 1.1 2 0 1.2 10 0 1.3 2 0 1.4 l 4 0 1.5 i 8 0 1.6 1 0 1.7 3 0 1.8 2 1 1.9 2 1 2 0 0 2.1 2 2 2.2 2 2 2.3 0 0 2.4 1 1 2.5 0 0 2.6 0 0 2.7 0 0 2.8 0 0 2.9 0 0 3 0 0

>3 0 0 Total ll 472 [ 8

86-5059194-00 Page 42 of 114 Table 3-19: BOC-13 Voltage Distributions Used for Monte Carlo Analyses for SGs 2-2, 2-3, and 2-4 SG 2-2 SG 2-3 SG 2-4 Bin jEOC-1 As-Found Repaired Rpaie As-Found EOC-12 Repaired As-Found Rpie.EOC-12 Repaired Rear 0.1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.2 28 1 17 0 31 0 0.3 54 0 42 0 104 0 0.4 70 1 65 0 134 0 0.5 72 2 35 0 141 3 0.59 42 2 35 1 108 1 0.6 5 0 3 0 19 0 0.7 31 0 20 0 100 0 0.8 24 1 18 0 77 2 0.9 23 0 11 0 66 2 1 15 0 5 0 56 0 1.1 5 0 2 0 45 0 1.2 5 0 5 0 38 0 1.3 7 0 5 0 26 0 1.4 4 0 1 0 20 0 1.5 6 0 5 0 18 0 1.6 1 0 2 0 5 0 1.66 2 0 0 0 7 1 1.7 0 0 0 0 4 0 1.8 1 1 0 0 7 2 1.9 0 0 0 0 6 3 2 1 1 0 0 4 2 2.1 1 1 0 0 1 1 2.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 0 0 0 0 1 1 2.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.7 0 0 0 0 1 1 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0

>3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 397 l 10 272 1 1020 l 20

86-5059194-00 Page 43 of 114 Table 3-20: Re-tested DOSs 2 1.5 Volts that Failed the Probe Wear Check SG Row Col Ind mev Volts Probe Cal No. 2R1Z  % Diff 16 49 RSS 3H 1.64 720RF HL-6 Yes 16 49 DOS 3H 1.84 720RF CL-17 12.2%

17 45 RSS 1H 1.89 720RF HL-6 Yes 17 45 DOS 1H 2.02 720RF CL-17 6.9%

SG2-1 25 42 RSS 1H 2.09 720RF HL-6 Yes 25 42 DOS 1H 2.1 720RF CL-15 0.5%

38 46 RSS 2H 2.46 720RF HL-7 Yes 38 46 DOS 2H 2.38 720RF CL-28 -3.3%

40 56 RSS 1H 1.66 720RF HL-5 Yes 40 56 DOS 1H 1.89 720RF CL-17 13.9%

12 8 RSS 2H 1.61 720RF HL-16 Yes SG2-3 12 8 DOS 2H 1A3 720RF CL-35 -11.2%

20 32 RSS IH 1.61 720RF HL-8 Yes 20 32 DOS IH 1.6 720RF CL-35 -0.6%

7 10 I RSS 1 2H 1 1.89 1 720RF I CL-33 Yes 7 10 DOS 2H 1.64 720RF CL-39 .13.2%

14 36 RSS 2H 1.89 720RF CL-10 Yes 14 36 DOS 2H 1.87 720RF CL-31 -1.1%

14 41 RSS 1H 1.75 720RF CL-9 Yes 14 41 DOS 1H 1.63 720RF CL-31 -6.9%

14 41 RSS 2H 1.99 720RF CL-9 Yes 14 41 DOS 2H 2.09 720RF CL-31 5.0%

15 47 RSS 1H 1.6 720RF CL-9 Yes 15 47. DOS 1H 1.6 720RF CL-39 0.0%

17 43 RSS 1H 1.68 720RF CL-9 Yes 17 43 DOS 1H 1.87 720RF CL-31 11.3%

18 71 RSS 2H 1.56 720RF HL-10 Yes 18 71 DOS 2H 1.63 720RF CL-39 . 4.5%

19 40 RSS 1H 1.51 720RF CL-9 Yes 19 40 DOS 1H 1.4 720RF CL-30 -7.3%

19 43 RSS 2H 1.6 720RF CL-9 Yes 19 43 DOS 2H 1.75 720RF CL-31 9.4%

20 46 RSS 1H 1.84 720RF CL-9 Yes 20 46 DOS 1H 1.78 720RF CL-39 -3.3%

SG 2-4 21 42 RSS 1H 1.71 720RF CL-9 Yes _

21 42 DOS 1H 1.76 720RF CL-30 2.9%

24 75 RSS 2H 1.53 720RF HL-10 Yes 24 75 DOS 2H 1.6 720RF CL-39 4.6%

25 34 RSS 1H 1.81 720RF CL-9 Yes 25 34 DOS 1H 1.99 720RF CL-O0 9.9%

25 47 RSS 1H 1.55 720RF CL-10 Yes 25 47 RSS iH 2.19 720RF CL-29 Yes _

25 47 DOS 1H 1A6 720RF CL-39 -33.3%/-5.8%

28 78 RSS 2H 1.97 720RF CL-26 Yes 28 78 RSS 2H 1.98 720RF CL-33 Yes 28 78 DOS 2H 1.88 720RF CL-39 -5.1% /4.6%

30 16 RSS 2H 1.66 720RF CL-14 Yes 30 16 DOS 2H 1.8 720RF CL-31 8.4%

33 50 RSS 2H 2.58 720RF HL-10 Yes 33 50 RSS 2H 3.03 720RF CL-33 Yes 33 50 DOS 2H 2.62 720RF CL-39 -13.5%/-1.6%

34 53 RSS 2H 1.69 720RF HL-10 Yes 34 53 RSS 2H 1.74 720RF CL-33 Yes 34 153 1DOS I2H I1.59 I720RF ICL-39 -8.6%l-5.9%

34153 IDOSI 2H I 1.59 I720RF1 CL-39 -8.6% 1-S.9%

86-5059194-00 Page 44 of 114 Table 3-21: New 2R12 DOSs >=0.5 Volts In Tubes Inspected With A Worn Probe In 2R11 SG Row Volts Cal Col 1

Ind

_ _ I Elev

_ _ _ j _ _ _ _ _ _ JJNew? l ARC Out l ARC Out 2 1R12 J 2 R111 9 39 DOS 1H 0.76 HC-15 New Yes 12 37 DOS 2H 0.72 HC-16 New Yes 8 48 DOS 1H 0.69 HC-16 New Yes SG 2-1 34 50 DOS 1H 0.65 CC-5 New Yes Yes 26 42 DOS IH 0.61 CC-16 New Yes 25 54 DOS 1H 0.6 CC-9 New Yes 17 55 DOS 3H 0.58 CC-9 New Yes 1 23 DOS 1H 0.51 HC-2 New Yes 1 58 DOS 1H 0.93 HC-2 New Yes 23 51 DOS IH 0.86 CC-12 New Yes 23 55 DOS 2H 0.83 CC-9 New Yes SG 2-2 3 56 DOS 1H 0.77 HC-1 New Yes 21 85 DOS 3H 0.68 CC-9 New Yes 12 45 DOS 1H 0.66 HC-17 New . Yes 4 56 DOS 1H 0.58 HC-2 New Yes SG2-3 14 36 DOS 1H 0.54 HC-7 New l_=_Yes 31 15 lDOS 1H 0.5 HC-12 New Yes 14 57 DOS 1H 0.76 HC-16 New l Yes 12 65 DOS 2H 0.75 HC-14 New Yes 2 10 DOS 5H 0.71 HC-1 New Yes SG 2-4 24 25 DOS 2H 0.59 CC-14 New Yes Yes 5 4 DOS 1H 0.58 HC-1 New Yes 18 63 DOS 1H 0.55 HC-8 New Yes 27 76 DOS 2H 0.51 CC-25 New Yes Yes

86-5059194-00 Page 45 of 114 Table 3-22: Summary of New DOS Indications for Probe Wear Comparison New 21R12 211 e 212md. New 21R12 Ind. >=O.5 DOSs in New 2112 In Tubes Ind. In New 2R12 Volts in SG Activ e nR1 InspT we Tubes lnsp. Ind. >=.5 Tubes lnsp.

SG 2-1 468 147 54 93 23 8 SG 2-2 381 125 50 75 19 7 SG 2-3 259 48 9 . 39 9 2 SG 2-4 994 295 24 271 82 7 Total [ 2102 l 615 137 478 133 24 Table 3-23: Summary of ARC Out Tube Inspections in 2R1 I

1. ARC # ARC In Ttlo SG Tube Tubes Ttl#o Tubes) (2R111) Inspections SG 2-1 1322 2361 3683 SG2-2 1120 2269 3389 SG 2-3 986 2671 3657 SG 2-4 669 2895 3564 Total 1 4097 l 10196 14293

86-5059194-00 Page 46 of 114 Table 3-24: NDE Uncertainty Distributions Analyst Uncertainty Acquisition Uncertainty Percent Cumulative Percent Cumulative Variation Probability Variation Probability

-40.0% 0.00005 -15.0% 0.00000

-38.0% 0.00011 -15.0% 0.01606

-36.0% 0.00024 -14.0% 0.02275

-34.0% 0.00048 -13.0% 0.03165

-32.0% 0.00095 -12.0% 0.04324

-30.0% 0.00179 -11.0% 0.05804

-28.0% 0.00328 -10.0% 0.07656

-26.0% 0.00580 -9.0% 0.09927

-24.0% 0.00990 -8.0% 0.12655

-22.0% 0.01634 -7.0% 0.15866

-20.0% 0.02608 -6.0% 0.19568

-18.0% 0.04027 -5.0% 0.23753

-16.0% 0.06016 -4.0% 0.28385

-14.0% 0.08704 -3.0% 0.33412

-12.0% 0.12200 -2.0% 0.38755

-10.0% 0.16581 -1.0% 0.44320

-8.0% 0.21867 0.0% 0.50000

-6.0% 0.28011 1.0% 0.55680

-4.0% 0.34888 2.0% 0.61245

-2.0% 0.42302 3.0% 0.66588 0.0% 0.50000 4.0% 0.71615 2.0% 0.57698 5.0% 0.76247 4.0% 0.65112 6.0% 0.80432 6.0% 0.71989 7.0% 0.84134 8.0% 0.78133 8.0% 0.87345 10.0% 0.83419 9.0% 0.90073 12.0% 0.87800 10.0% 0.92344 14.0% 0.91296 11.0% 0.94196 16.0% 0.93984 12.0% 0.95676 18.0% 0.95973 13.0% 0.96835 20.0% 0.97392 14.0% 0.97725 22.0% 0.98366 15.0% 0.98394 24.0% 0.99010 >15.0% 1.00000 26.0% 0.99420 28.0% 0.99672 Std Deviation = 7.0%

30.0% 0.99821 Mean = 0.0%

32.0% 0.99905 Cutoff = +1-15.0%

34.0% 0.99952 36.0% 0.99976 38.0% 0.99989 40.0% 0.99995 Std Deviation = 10.3%

Mean = 0.0%

No Cutoff 0

86-5059194-00 Page 47 of 114 Figure 3-1: As-Found Voltage Distributions SGs 2-1 and 2-2 Voltage Distributions of As-Found DOSIAONDB Indications SG 2-1 and SG 2-2 160 140 120 100 0

80 E

60 z

40 20 0

- (N 0' 0 0( a 1- V 0 r- -N -' - -D -- - )( - N N C' N Nt N IN. V4 0)' A Bobbin Volts Figure 3-2: As-Found Voltage Distributions SGs 2-3 and 2-4 Voltage Distributions of As-Found DOSIAONDB Indications SG 2-3 and SG 2-4 1btU 140-

_ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ SG 2-3 O SG 2-4 120 100 C

80 0a E9 S

40 -

20 -

0 Bobbin Volts cot

86-5059194-00 Page 48 of 114 Figure 3-3: 2R12 Repaired Voltage Distributions SGs 2-1 and 2-2 Repaired Tube Voltage Distributions SG 2-1 and SG 2-2 10

• SG 2-1 8 O SG 2-2 a 4 E

z 2

0 O

_ cq q ru

- Cs '- c r

-~0 - _7 r

~I q m O O O O - - - - - N N bi S A Bobbin Volts Figure 3-4: 2R12 Repaired Voltage Distributions SGs 2-3 and 2-4 Repaired Tube Voltage Distributions SG 2-3 and SG 2-4 10

• SG 2-3 O SG 2-4

.2 I

S 2 4-z 2

0 -

O 10 I. O - C 10 r- O TB - ( BBB 10 O O O 6 _. A_

Bobbin Volts CoZ,7

86-5059194-00 Page 49 of 114 Figure 3-5: RTS Voltage Distributions for RPC Confirmed or Not Inspected SGs 2-1 and 2-2 Voltage Distributions of DOS/AONDB Indications Returned to Service That Were Confirmed as Axial ODSCC or Were Not Inspected With RPC SG 2-1 and SG 2-2 160

• SG 2-1 140 -- O SG 2-2 120_

.° 100 _ .

U 40-12 N_

_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ - _ __ _ __D1_____-Q ___

t Q __ /J __ __ _ N t a___

.o 20 100 OOO

- __ _- - -___ - N ________N___N__N________N__N__N___

E ,60i 20 ._. ._ ._ _._ _. _._ _ . .

666666d66 C NNCN C CiC~ A Bobbin Volts C03

86-5059194-00 Page 50 of 114 Figure 3-6: RTS Voltage Distributions for RPC Confirmed or Not Inspected SGs 2-3 and 2-4 Voltage Distributions of All DOSIAONDB Indications Returned to Service That Were Confirmed as Axial ODSCC or Were Not Inspected With RPC SG 2-3 and SG 2-4 160 MSG 2-3 140 O SG2-4 120 ________

=0100 80 E 0 z

40 20 0 CN C)r*U D - 0 - 1 CN U O -C n, 0)Cn

, - Cl D D - O0C)

N 0 U)0tO 0 0 C - N r-_ 0 N V 0 UCN ( O A Bobbin Volts

86-5059194-00 Page 51 of 114 Figure 3-7: Indications RTS Voltage Distributions SGs 2-1 and 2-2 Voltage Distributions of All DOS/AONDB Indications Returned to Service SG 2-1 and SG 2-2 160 10________ *SG 2-1 140 OSG 2-2 120 . __._..___ ..

0 100 - ___._

3Et

£

.2

.0 80 __ _ .-

E z

0

_ Ci U0 r- O 0C - 10 r- O - C! 0 - a>

O O O O O _ _ -_ cN 4 c0i Nj N' A Bobbin Volts Figure 3-8: Indications RTS Voltage Distributions SGs 2-3 and 2-4 Voltage Distributions of All DOS/AONDB Indications Returned to Service SG 2-3 and SG 2-4 160 140 ... SG 2-3 __

OSG 2-4 120 co 100 -

0r

-I Ei 80 60 z

40 -

20 0

o C

o IQ 6

1-0 Oa 0

.-M_~ HE J 10 r-Bobbin Volts nn CD n

-e N (N 1

N' i Cj A

Cvi-

86-5059194-00 Page 52 of 114 Figure 3-9: 2R12 DOS vs. TSP Elevation Distribution of Indications by TSP Location 500 400

.o2 300 l - . ._ _ ._

0 300

. ~ 200 -_

z 102 31 5 1 18 3 156 58 . _ 18 3 1 83 23 1 _ 2 436 148 14 Tube Support Plate

86-5059194-00 Page 53 of 114 Figure 3-10: Cycle 12 Growth Distributions SGs 2-1 and 2-2 Delta Volts per EFPY SG 2-1 and SG 2-2 500

• SG 2-1 400 .. _. 1oSG 2-2 300 - __ __ __ ___ _ _ . . _ _ _. _ _ _ _. ._

.20 E 200 -... _ __ . _ _ _ __ ___ __ ... _ _ __ .. ....

z 100 Delta Volts per EFPY Figure 3-11: Cycle 12 Growth Distributions SGs 2-3 and 2-4 Delta Volts per EFPY SG 2-3 and SG 2-4 500

• SG 2-3 400 __

o SG 2-4 300 A0 200 - - _ _ _ _ ~ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

z 100 __ _ _ __

O . _- ~-I

• 1,-1 I I j I II I 1, r" I I

,tc , I 'Z' OZ, QI Is " b Ip Z ooN NN N N N N N N9 e NJ -

Delta Volts per EFPY co7

86-5059194-00 Page 54 of 114 Figure 3-12: Cycle 12 Independent Growth Curves - All SGs Cycle 12 Growth Comparison 1.0 0.8 0.6 U.

a 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2 >2 Voltage Growth per EFPY Figure 3-13: Historical Change in Growth and BOC Voltage - All SGs Change in Average Growth DCPP-2 All SGs 0.25 1 . n-u.U 0.2 0.4

>I U-1 uJ a 0n ILgi 0.15 0.3 I-m0 Oe 0.1 0.2 &

0.

0.05 0.1 0 0 Cycle 8 Cycle 9 Cycle 10 Cycle 11 Cycle 12

86-5059194-00 Page 55 of 114 Figure 3-14: SG 2-1 Cycle 12 Growth vs. BOC Voltage Growth Rate vs. BOC Voltage DCPP-2 SG 2-1 It L.C 04 0.5 N

So U

0 0.5 1 1.5 BOC-12 Voltage Figure 3-15: SG 2-2 Cycle 12 Growth vs. BOC Voltage Growth Rate vs. BOC Voltage DCPP-2 SG 2-2 2

1.5 ut I-iC 1 0.5 CD To g0.5 N

0 Q

0

-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 BOC-12 Voltage

86-5059194-00 Page 56 of 114 Figure 3-16: SG 2-3 Cycle 12 Growth vs. BOC Voltage Growth Rate vs. BOC Voltage DCPP-2 SG 2-3 2

o SG 2-3 Data 1.5 - Linear Regression (Slope = 0.085) t -- --

S.

I.C I

2 0.

aN s0

• S 00 U

0 ________ ___ ___

d 000 ,

mu.o 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 BOC-12 Voltage Figure 3-17: SG 2-4 Cycle 12 Growth vs. BOC Voltage Growth Rate vs. BOC Voltage DCPP-2 SG 2-4 2

1.5 u-

.C 1 0

0 .

0 0.5

.3 co U

O 0

-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 BOC-12 Voltage

86-5059194-00 Page 57 of 114 Figure 3-18: Cycle 12 Growth vs. BOC Voltage for All Steam Generators Growth Rate vs. BOC Voltage DCPP-2 AlI SGs 2

All SGs

-Linear Regression (Slope = 0.192) 1.5 -

La.

0.1.

0 o 0000

-0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 BOC-12 Voltage

86-5059194-00 Page 58 of 114 Figure 3-19: Cycle 11 vs. Cycle 12 Growth Comparison for SG 2-1 Cycle 11 vs. Cycle 12 Growth Comparison SG 2-1 1.0 0.9 0.8 The Cycle 12 results in this chart have been 0.7 supplemented with growth data from Cycle 11 for those indications that were >1 .2v at BOC-1 1. This was done to provide a fair comparison since no indications >1.2v were 0.6 returned to service for Cycle 12.

IL in 0.5 2

0.4 +-- SG2-1 Cycle 11 0.3 -*_- All Cycle I1 1r__

-- SG 2-1 Supplemented Cycle 12 0.2

° All SGs Supplemented Cycle 12 0.1 Voltage Growth per EFPY Figure 3-20: Cycle 11 vs. Cycle 12 Growth Comparison for SG 2-2 Cycle 11 vs. Cycle 12 Growth Comparison SG 2-2 0.9 0.8 The Cycle 12 results in this chart have been 0.7 supplemented with growth data from Cycle 11 for those indications that were >1 .2v at BOC-1 1. This was done to 0.6 provide a fair comparison since no indications >1 .2v were returned to service for Cycle 12.

LA.

A. 0.5 C.)

0.4 ------ SG 2-2 Cycle 11 0.3 -x- All Cycle 11

- SG 2-2 Supplemented Cycle 12 0.2 e- All SGs Supplemented Cycle 12 0.1 0.0 R As Z" He Zs e ;9 e e N" NN N- N, N>

1 Nb NZ NA '.NC 'v e b , ,9 _ 19 v9 ', 9 ;b Voltage Growth per EFPY c2-

86-5059194-00 Page 59 of 114 Figure 3-21: Cycle 11 vs. Cycle 12 Growth Comparison for SG 2-3 Cycle 11 vs. Cycle 12 Growth Comparison SG 2-3

_ _ a Iii ____- i i_- ...... - p -

0.9 0.8 The Cycle 12 results in this chart have been 0.7 supplemented with growth data from Cycle 11 for those -

indications that were >1 .2v at BOC-1 1. This was done to 0.6 provide a fair comparison since no indications >1 .2v were -

returned to service for Cycle 12.

UL.

R 0.5 U

0.4 SG 2-3 Cycle 11 0.3 - x - All Cycle 11

-dSG 2-3 Supplemented Cycle 12 0.2

-H-AAll SGs Supplemented Cycle 12 0.1 0.0 Gw NVotg pe AV V V Voltage Growth per EFPY Figure 3-22: Cycle 11 vs. Cycle 12 Growth Comparison for SG 2-4 Cycle 11 vs. Cycle 12 Growth Comparison SG 2-4 1.0 0.9 0.8 The Cycle 12 results in this chart have been 0.7 supplemented with growth data from Cycle 11 for those indications that were >1 .2v at BOC-1 1. This was done to 0.6 _ provide a fair comparison since no indications >1.2v were returned to service for Cycle 12.

I 0.5 U

0.4 -4

- - SG 2-4 Cycle 11 0.3 < - * - All Cycle 11

-*-SG 2-4 Supplemented Cycle 12 0.2

- All SGs Supplemented Cycle 12 0.1 0.0 p o~ Q- c, (Z.,t', o9 o" o' o9 N NN eolt NGrwt p EF PY 1 q¢ eO O q9 L 1 ,

Voltage Growth per EFPY C13

86-5059194-00 Page 60 of 114 Figure 3-23: SG 2-1 Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results Bilinear Growth Determination for SG 2-1 Cycle 12 + Cycle 11 >1 .2v 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 BOC Bobbin Amplitude (Volts)

I = Data -Piece 1 - -Piece 2l Figure 3-24: SG 2-2 Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results Bilinear Growth Determination for SG 2-2 Cycle 12 + Cycle 11 >1 .2v 4.0

-Regression Break Point - 1.00 Volts SG 2-2 Cycle 12 + Cycle 11 >1.2v 3.0 - Bound 1 = 1.00 V Min. Bin= 15

a. Act. Bin= 15 LL SSE = 5.060 02 .0 00 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 BOC Bobbin Amplitude (Volts)

I 0 Data -Piece 1 - -Piece 2

86-5059194-00 Page 61 of 114 Figure 3-25: SG 2-3 Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results Bilinear Growth Determination for SG 2-3 Cycle 12 + Cycle 11 >1 .2v 4.0 3.0 5-2o 2.0 (D

1.0 0.

tO 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 BOC Bobbin Amplitude (Volts)

I o Data-Piece 1 - -Piece 2 l Figure 3-26: SG 2-4 Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results Trilinear Growth Determination for SG 2-4 Cycle 12 + Cycle 11 >1 .2v 4.0 SG 2-4 Cycle 12 + Cycle 11 >1.2v Bound 1 = 0.47 V Bound 2 = 1.038 V 3.0 Min. Bin= 10 a- Act. Bin= 100 LL Std. Error = 0.239 A A w

o 2.0 0 U A A 2

_A A 1.0  : a ^A

_i l b o ^^ ^^^A. A 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 BOC Volts I & Data - Piece 1 - -Piece 2 - Piece3 1

86-5059194-00 Page 62 of 114 Figure 3-27: Composite Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results Trilinear Growth Determination for Unit 2 Cycle 12 + Cycle 11 >1 .2v 4.0-All SGs Cycle 12 + Cycle 11 >1.2v Bound 1 = 1.10 V Bound 2 = 1.71 V 3.0 Min. Bin= 15 Act. Bin= 17 0.A U_ Std. Error =0.200 2.0 -

1.0 A AA-10 A A A AI A A 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 BOC Volts I ^ Data -Piece 1- -Piece 2 - Piece 3 l

86-5059194-00 Page 63 of 114 Figure 3-28: SG 2-1 Cycle 11 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results Bilinear Growth Determination for SG 2-1 Cycle 11 4.0 3.0 0L U-2 2.0 1.0 0.0 -0 C1.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 BOC Bobbin Amplitude (Volts)

I - Data - Piece 1 - -Piece 21 Figure 3-29: SG 2-4 Cycle 11 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results Trilinear Growth Determination for Unit 2 Cycle 11 w/o R44C45 4.0 3.0 a-LI U,

o 2.0 09 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 BOC Volts I - Data - Piece 1 - - Piece 2 - Piece 3 C11

86-5059194-00 Page 64 of 114 Figure 3-30: Composite Cycle 11 VDG Breakpoint Analysis Results Trilinear Growth Determination for Unit 2 Cycle 11 w/o R44C45 4.0 3.0 (0

0 2.0 0

O..

1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 BOC Volts I A Data -Piece 1 - -Piece2 - Piece3 coq6

86-5059194-00 Page 65 of 114 Figure 3-31: Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for SG 2-1 Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for SG 2-1 1.0o ___ * * . . * * . . . . . . . . . , , ,U

_4- -. ---- - -

1. /K 4

0.8 II t- -a-u-u-f 0.6

.. _ This chart is provided for information only since the_

Cycle 12 growth data were not used for the leak 2.

IL 0.4 II . 0 is rate and POB analyses. The data in this chart include all Cycle 12 data plus Cycle I11data for those indications that were >1.2 volts at BOC-1 1.

0.2 -4*- Binl (<=1.12v) -

l Bin2 (>1.12v) 0.0 j P Nb NbN.I, a 1 r0~ b1 1-l Voltage Growth per EFPY Figure 3-32: Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for SG 2-2 Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for SG 2-2 1.0 III M M _

0.8 0.6 _This chart is provided for information only since the -

U-Cycle 12 growth data were not used for the leak a rate and POB analyses. The data in this chart

a. include all Cycle 12 data plus Cycle 11 data for U

those indications that were >1.2 volts at BOC-1 1.

0.4 0.2 -I - - Binl (<=lv) -

-U-

+Bin2 (>lv) 0.0

'V.olt.age1 Got per E' Voltage Growth per EFPY c19

86-5059194-00 Page 66 of 114 Figure 3-33: Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for SG 2-3 Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for SG 2-3 1.0 0.8 0.6 U-a-

IL AL 0.4 0.2 0.0 5 of ZoW 09 opf N"~ oe,V Gw per FPY 9{

Voltage Growth per EFPY Figure 3-34: Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for SG 2-4 Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for SG 2-4 1.0 0.8 0.6 U-0 9-0.4 0.2 0.0

'll ofv o o9 p N N">- of NN I' ,vp >9 cli II A '1' Voltage Growth per EFPY

86-5059194-00 Page 67 of 114 Figure 3-35: Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for All SGs Supplemented Cycle 12 VDG for All SGs 1.0 0.8 0.6 U-a 0n U

0.4 0.2 0.0

°' Q) of t at V oltage Gro t p e e eFP Voltage Growth per EFPY C~2 1

1111111 86-5059194-00 Page 68 of 114 Figure 3-36: Cycle 11 VDG for SG 2-1 Cycle 11 VDG for SG 2-1 1.0 0.8 0.6 U.

a A.

0.4 0.2 0.0

'R° o) o9 4 'f X,9 q> "' ,%

"L.

Voltage Growth per EFPY Figure 3-37: Cycle 11 VDG for SG 2-4 Cycle 11 VDG for SG 2-4 1.0 0.8 0.6 LaL a

f-U 0.4 0.2 0.0 ep oN 4'V - 9 'V X 'V ,. 395 eV Voltage Growth per EFPY c2Z:

86-5059194-00 Page 69 of 114 Figure 3-38: Cycle 11 VDG for All SGs Cycle 11 VDG for All SGs 1.0 0.8 0.6 U-a C.

C.

0.4 0.2 0.0

,, lz, ls Op Of N 0' N t e e X e eg t Voltage Growth per EFPY

86-5059194-00 Page 70 of 114 Figure 3-39: 2R12 Probe Wear Voltage Comparison Probe Wear Voltage Comparison 4

3 E

2 1

.0 0 2 3 4 Bobbin Volts (New Probe)

Figure 3-40: Bobbin Voltage Uncertainty Distributions NDE Uncertainty Distributions 1.0 -

0.9_

0.8-0.7

=

IU 0.6 _

0.

c IL 0.5 -- _

0.4 _

E 0.3 -

0.2 0.1 0.0 -

-40.0% -30.0% -20.0% -10.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0%

Percent Variation In Voltage

86-5059194-00 Page 71 of 114 Figure 3-41: Inferred Voltage / Measured Voltage Comparison Inferred Volts vs. Measured Bobbin Volts DCPP-2 10/04 2R12 3.0 I

• ODSCC at TSPs 2.5 l *---- Equivalence Line

- Linear Regression Fit

• n-Ul 2.0 -

0 S

8 1.5 . w 4 *

• R =0.8124 m I.

M *

• a 1.0 * *

• I- -- - - - *-

9

'aM-------------- 1--------------

0.5 I Max AONDB Voltg .4 0.of ,- -

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Measured Bobbin Volts C2N5

86-5059194-00 Page 72 of 114 Figure 3-42: Plus Point to Bobbin Voltage Comparison for SG 2-1 SG 2-1 Plus point vs. Bobbin Volts 3.50 -

• Indications

- Equivalency Line 3.00 X Preventively Repaired 2.50 o 2.00 r°

" 1.50- 4 r]

1.00 t 2 ._ e 0.50 +-

.40. 4 4

0.00 ,

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 Bobbin Volt S Figure 3-43: Plus Point to Bobbin Voltage Comparison for SG 2-2 SG 2-2 Plus point vs. Bobbin Volts 3.50

• Indications i - Equivalency Line 0 X Preventively Repaired 2.50 -

1 2.00 +

1 M

1.50 1 1.00 4

0.50 -

I*

• t 4 U x

0.00 -- ___ .

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 Bobbin Volts c26

86-5059194-00 Page 73 of 114 Figure 3-44: Plus Point to Bobbin Voltage Comparison for SG 2-3 SG 2-3 Plus point vs. Bobbin Volts 3.50

• Indications

- Equivalency Line 3.00 2.50 l--

2.00 2

1.50 IL 1.00 ----

0.50

/ iI.. . .

0.00 --

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 Bobbin Volts Figure 3-45: Plus Point to Bobbin Voltage Comparison for SG 2-4 SG 2-4 Plus point vs. Bobbin Volts 3.50 ___ .

• Indications 3.00 - X Preventive Repairs

-Equivalent Line 2.50 2.00 --- - -

S 1.50 - - ..

1.00 --- .

, .1I 050- *r *

"h*. S . I 1044*

• 0.00 _ __ I . 30-- 3 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 Bobbin Volts Cr~47

86-5059194-00 Page 74 of 114 4.0 Chemical Cleaning During 2R12, chemical cleaning was performed on all four steam generators. GL 95-05 requires that, if the SGs are chemically cleaned, the impact of chemical cleaning on the BOC voltage distribution and on voltage growth rates shall be evaluated. The TSP crevice cleaning step was not performed in 2R12, which was the same practice in 1R12, so PG&E's judgment was that the TSP ODSCC signals would not be affected by chemical cleaning. This judgment was determined to be correct based on the assessment performed during the 1R12 chemical cleaning. Since the evaluation performed for the 1R12 chemical cleaning showed no significant changes in the bobbin voltages, this study was not repeated for the 2R1 2 chemical cleaning. The 1R12 assessment is documented in Reference 27.

86-5059194-00 Page 75 of 114 5.0 Database Applied for Leak and Burst Correlations Per GL 95-05, the databases used to perform the tube integrity evaluations should be the latest NRC approved industry database. The databases used for the evaluations in this report use the data from Reference 8 plus the results from the tubes pulled during the 2R1 1 outage at Diablo Canyon. During 2R1 1, a 21.5 volt indication was detected at a 2H intersection in SG 2-4. Due to the potential impact of this large indication on the databases, new correlation parameters were calculated in 2003 using the latest EPRI database plus the 2R11 pulled tube results. The 2R11 pulled tube results plus the updated ARC correlation parameters were included in the 2R1 1 90-Day Report (Ref. 7). Since the updated correlation parameters have already been provided to the NRC, these parameters were used again for the tube integrity evaluations provided in this report.

The correlation parameters presented in this section do not include the results from the tube that was removed during the 1R12 outage. A summary of the results from the 1R12 pulled tube are presented in Reference 27. Updated leak and burst correlations for the ODSCC database including the 2R11 and 1R12 tube pull results are provided in Addendum 6 of the ODSCC Database Report, EPRI Report NP-7480-L Update 2004, issued January 2005. The Addendum 6 leak and burst correlations are very similar to the correlation used in this 2R12 90 day report (referred to as Addendum 5+ in Tables 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3) but were not available at the time of these calculations. In Tables 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3, the Addendum 6 values are listed next to the Addendum 5+ values to show that they are very similar. Therefore, the affect of not using the Addendum 6 values has no impact on the results for EOC-13.

86-5059194-00 Page 76 of 114 5.1 Conditional Probability of Burst For the case of the burst pressure versus voltage correlation, the Addendum 5 database contained in Reference 8, as modified by the addition of the DCPP 2R1 1 pulled tubes meets all GL 95-05 requirements and was used in both the as-found calculations and the EOC-13 projections. The correlation parameters were taken from Reference 20 and are shown in Table 5-1.

Table 5-1: Burst Pressure vs. Bobbin Amplitude Correlation P, = a, + a, log(Volts) l Addendum 5 +

Parameter DCPP 2R1 1 Addendum 6 Database Intercept, a. 7.48475 7.4801 Slope, a, -2.39502 -2.4002 r 79.6 % 79.67%

Std. Dev., a Effor 0.88248 0.8802 Mean Log(V) 0.306657 0.3111 SS of Log(V) 51.4665 51.6595 N (data pairs) 99 100 Structural Limit (2560 psi) (1) 7.54 V 7.51V Structural Limit (2405 psi) 9.45 V 9.40V p Value for a, (2) 1.4-10-35 5.60-10-36 Reference af 68.78 Notes: The number of significant figures reported simply corresponds to the output from the calculation code and does not represent true engineering significance.

(1) Values reported correspond applying a safety factor of 1.4 on the differential pressure associated with a postulated SLB event.

(2) Numerical values are reported only to compare the calculated result to a criterion value of 0.05. For such small values the relative change is statistically meaningless.

(3) This is the flow stress value to which all data was normalized prior to performing the regression analysis.

86-5059194-00 Page 77 of 114 5.2 Probabilityof Leak and ConditionalLeak Rate Reference 8 presents the results of the regression analysis for the voltage-dependent leak rate correlation using the Addendum 5 leak rate database for 7/8" tubes. It should be noted that, for the 2405 psi delta pressure, the one-sided p-value for the slope parameter in the Addendum 5 voltage dependent leak rate correlation is 2.3% which meets the 5% threshold for an acceptable correlation specified in Generic Letter 95-05. Additionally, when adding the DCPP 2R1 1 data to the database, the Addendum 5+ correlation is improved with the new p-value at 1.0%. FANP computer simulations included the slope sampling method for the leak rate correlation that is presented in Reference 8.

The methodology used in the calculation of these parameters is consistent with NRC criteria in Reference 2. The probability of leak and leak rate correlation parameters used in the CM and OA were taken from Reference 20 and are shown in Tables 5-2 and 5-3.

Table 5-2: Probability of Leak Correlation Pr(Leak) 1+ e-[bI+b2 log(Volts)]

Addendum 5 +

Parameter DCPP 2R1 I Addendum 6 Database Intercept, b1 -5.0503 -5.0407 Slope, b2 7.4342 7.5434 Vil 0) 1.3299 1.3311 V12 -1.7253 -1.7606 V22 2.6861 2.7744 DoF ') 115 118 Deviance 31.47 32.37 Pearson SD 0.594 0.611 MSE 0.274 0.279 Notes:

1) Parameters Vi are elements of the covariance matrix of the coefficients, bi of the regression equation.

2) Degrees of freedom.

86-5059194-00 Page 78 of 114 Table 5-3: Leak Rate vs. Bobbin Amplitude Correlation (2405 psi)

Q = 1 0 [b3 +b4 log(Vos)]

Addendum 5 +

Parameter DCPP 2R11 Addendum 6 Database Intercept, b3 -0.664317 -0.8039 Slope, b4 1.106101 1.2077 Index of Deter., r2 17.5% 20.0%

Std. Error 0.772757 0.7774 Mean of Log(Q) 0.55024 0.5090 Std. Dev. of Log(Q) 0.83625 22.6667 p Value for b4 1.0% 0.5%

Data Pairs, N 31 32 Mean of Log(V) 1.09805 1.0871 SS of Log(V) 2.99300 3.1116 Note: The number of significant figures reported simply corresponds to the output from the calculation code and does not represent true engineering significance.

86-5059194-00 Page 79 of 114 6.0 EOC 12 Condition Monitoring, Benchmarking of EOC-12 Conditions and Assessment of Potential Underpredictions This section provides the EOC-12 condition monitoring, the results of a benchmarking study that compares the projected EOC-12 conditions to the as-found conditions, and an assessment of potential underpredictions as committed to the NRC.

6.1 EOC-12 Condition Monitoring Results EOC-12 as found conditions were evaluated to ensure that CM burst and leakage requirements were not exceeded. Failures at SLB pressure were predicted in 500,000 trials for each of the steam generators. The failures were distributed as follows: 27 failures were predicted in SG 2-1, 14 in 2-2, 5 in 2-3, and 57 in 2-4. The resulting burst probabilities are shown at the bottom of Table 6-7. In the same manner, the leak rate was also calculated for each SG at EOC-12 and is also in Table 6-7. The requirements for burst probabilities are met for all of the SGs, and for the leak rate, the plant-specific value of 10.5 gpm for the faulted steam generator was not exceeded in any steam generator.

6.2 EOC-12 Benchmark Calculations EOC-12 projections have been previously provided to the NRC in Table 5 of Reference 25.

The projections provided in Reference 25 used an estimated Cycle 12 operating interval of 1.54 EFPY and also used the Extreme Growth methodology as described in Reference 22.

Since the NRC has not approved the Extreme Growth methodology and the actual Cycle 12 operating interval was 1.52 EFPY, the EOC-12 projections have been recalculated without the Extreme Growth methodology and with a cycle length of 1.52 EFPY.

The determination of the growth distributions to use in these benchmark calculations followed the guidelines provided in References 25 and 28, with special considerations for the application of the large (11.89 v/EFPY) growth from Unit 2 Cycle 11. One set of leak rate and POB calculations were performed for SG 2-4 (limiting) which included this large growth point in the upper growth bin. The results from these calculations over predicted the as-found EOC-12 results by a wide margin, as expected (projected POB and leak rate of 6.36E-03 and 3.10 gpm versus as-found values of 1.42E-04 and 0.47 gpm). The other steam generators would be expected to be over-predicted by a wide margin as well if the large Cycle 11 growth point were used in the composite growth distribution. Therefore, in order to obtain a more realistic benchmark comparison, calculations for all four steam generators were done without the large Cycle 11 growth value.

Table 6-1 provides a summary of the inputs required and the corresponding section(s) or table(s) that provide these data.

86-5059194-00 Page 80 of 114 Table 6-1: Inputs for EOC-12 Benchmark Projections Input Description Section or Table Reference Comments BOC Voltage Distribution Tables 6-2 and 6-3 Same as Reference 25 Repaired Voltage Distribution Tables 6-2 and 6-3 Same as Reference 25 NDE Uncertainties Section 3.6; Table 3-24 POD Table 7-7 Composite POPCD through 2R1 1 (5 inspections)

Growth Tables 6-4 through 6-6 Same as Reference 25 Cycle Length Section 6.0 1.52 EFPY (actual Cycle 12 operating interval)

Tube Integrity Correlations Tables 5-1 through 5-3 Addendum 5 plus 2R1 1 tube e Integrity Crropeltis Secti .pull Material Properties ISection 8.1 I_____________

Per Reference 25, the growth analyses for these projections showed that Cycle 11 SG-specific growth should be used for SGs 2-1 and 2-4. SGs 2-2 and 2-3 should use the composite Cycle 11 growth data. For SG 2-1, the VDG breakpoint analysis for the Cycle 11 growth data revealed a single breakpoint at 1.06v. The composite Cycle 11 revealed two breakpoints at 0.59v and 1.66v. Tables 6-4 through 6-6 provide the growth distributions used for the EOC-12 projections. i Tables 6-2 and 6-3 provide the BOC-12 voltage distributions that were used for these analyses.

Table 6-7 provides a comparison of the projected EOC-12 conditions to the as-found EOC-12 conditions. This table shows the voltage distributions as well as the POB and leak rate results. In all cases, the leak rate, POB, and the number of indications were over-predicted by wide margins. Since these calculations didn't include the large Cycle 11 growth value, the projections would be even more conservative if the large growth value had been included. In conclusion, the EOC-12 projections using DCPP POPCD correlation and the new growth guidelines provided conservative results relative to the as-found conditions. Therefore, no adjustments to either of the methodologies are warranted at this time.

86-5059194-00 Page 81 of 114 6.3 Assessment of Potential Underpredictions DCPP Tech Specs require that, upon implementation of POPCD, if the EOC conditional MSLB burst probability, the projected MSLB leak rate, or the number of indications are underpredicted by the previous cycle operational assessment, the following guidelines must be applied to assess the need for methods adjustments:

. The assessment of the probable causes for the under predictions, proposed corrective actions, and any recommended changes to probability of detection or growth methodology indicated by potential methods assessments.

• An assessment of the potential need to revise the ARC analysis methods if: the burst probability is underpredicted by more than 0.001 (i.e., 10% of the reporting threshold) or an order of magnitude; or the leak rate is underpredicted by more than 0.5 gpm or an order of magnitude.

• An assessment of the potential need to increase the number of predicted low voltage indications at the BOC if the total number of as found indications in any SG are underestimated by greater than 15 percent or by greater than 150 indications. If future inspection results provide additional information that could alter these guidelines, PG&E would provide recommended changes to the guidelines and basis for the changes in the subsequent 90 day report.

As discussed above, new EOC-12 projections using the actual Cycle 12 operating interval were performed in order to benchmark the POPCD and growth methods. As shown in Table 6-1, the POBs, leak rates, and numbers of indications were overestimated in all cases for EOC-12. Therefore, there is no requirement to perform a method adjustment assessment.

86-5059194-00 Page 82 of 114 Table 6-2: Voltage Distribution Used for EOC-12 Benchmark Projections for SG 2-1 Voltage Bin As-Found j SG 2-1 Repaired 0.1 0 0 0.2 21 0 0.3 66 3 0.4 59 2 0.5 51 1 0.6 36 1 0.7 34 0 0.8 21 0 0.9 11 0 1 5 0 1.06 9 0 1.1 2 0 1.2 4 0 1.3 11 11 1.4 2 2 1.5 4 4 1.6 0 0 1.7 1 1 1.8 1 1 1.9 2 2 2 0 0 2.1 0 0 2.2 0 0 2.3 1 1 2.4 0 0 2.5 0 0 2.6 0 0 2.7 0 0 2.8 1 1 2.9 2 2 3 0 0 3.1 0 0 3.2 0 0 3.3 1 1 3.4 0 0 3.5 1 1 3.6 0 0 3.7 0 0 3.8 0 0 3.9 0 0 4 0 0

86-5059194-00 Page 83 of 114 Table 6-2: Voltage Distribution Used for EOC-12 Benchmark Projections for SG 2-1 SG 2-1 Voltage Bin l As-Found Repaired

__________jEOC-12 Rpie 4.1 0 0 4.2 0 0 4.3 0 0 4.4 1 1 4.5 0 0 4.6 0 0 4.7 0 0 4.8 0 0 4.9 0 0 5 0 0 5.1 0 0 5.2 1 1 5.3 0 0 5.4 0 0 5.5 0 0 5.6 0 0 5.7 0 0 5.8 0 0 5.9 0 0 6 0 0 6.1 0 0 6.2 1 1 6.3 0 0 6.4 0 0 6.5 0 0 6.6 1 1 6.7 0 0

>6.7 0 0 Total 350 T 38

86-5059194-00 Page 84 of 114 Table 6-3: Voltage Distributions Used for EOC-12 Benchmark Projections for SGs 2-2, 2-3, and 2-4 SG 2-2 SG 2-3 SG 2-4 Voltage I Bin I As-Found EOC-12 Reard Repaired As-Found Repaired EOC-12Found As-ound i

Repaired 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 13 0 17 0 14 1 0.3 50 1 42 3 91 8 0.4 45 3 58 3 135 13 0.5 47 3 39 0 139 15 0.59 29 1 28 1 100 11 0.6 2 0 0 0 6 0 0.7 27 2 19 1 94 13 0.8 11 0 19 1 81 6 0.9 18 1 3 0 60 7 1 7 0 4 0 33 5 1.1 7 0 4 0 22 2 1.2 .5 -0 7 0 26 -3 1.3 5 5 6 6 20 20.

1.4 1 1 1 1 18 18 1.5 1 1 3 3 12 12 1.6 0 0 3 3 16 16 1.66 0 0 1 1 9 9 1.7 2 2 0 0 7 7 1.8 1 1 1 1 12 12 1.9 0 0 2 2 10 10 2 2 2 1 1 9 9 2.1 0 0 1 1 1 1 2.2 0 0 0 0 2 2 2.3 0 0 1 1 6 6 2.4 1 1 0 0 8 8 2.5 1 1 0 0 3 3 2.6 0 0 0 0 3 3 2.7 0 0 0 0 3 3 2.8 0 0 0 0 2 2 2.9 0 0 1 1 4 4 3 0 0 0 0 3 3 3.1 0 0 1 1 2 2 3.2 0 0 0 0 1 1 3.3 0 0 0 0 2 2 3.4 0 0 0 0 3 3 3.5 1 1 0 0 1 1 3.6 0 0 0 0 1 1 3.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.8 0 0 0 0 2 2

86-5059194-00 Page 85 of 114 Table 6-3: Voltage Distributions Used for EOC-12 Benchmark Projections for SGs 2-2, 2-3, and 2-4 SG 2-2 SG 2-3 SG 2-4 Voltage Bin As-Found Repaired As-Found Repaired As-Found Repaired Vlae EOC-12 epie EOC-12 EOC-12 Rpie 3.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.1 0 0 1 1 1 1 4.2 0 0 0 0 2 2 4.3 0 0 0 0 1 1 4.4 0 0 0 0 1 1 4.5 0 0 0 0 1 1 4.6 1 1 0 0 1 1 4.7 0 0 0 0 1 1 4.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.9 0 0 0 0 1 1 5 0 0 0 0 3 3 5.1 l 0 0 0 0 2 2 5.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.3 0 0 0 0 1 1 5.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.5 0 0 -0 0 2 2 5.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.7 0 0 0 0 1 1 5.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.2 0 0 0 0 1 1 6.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.4 1 1 0 0 0 0 6.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.7 0 0 0 0 1 1 6.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 21.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 21.5 0 0 0 0 1 1

>21.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total II 278 1 28 263 J 32 982 265

86-5059194-00 Page 86 of 114 Table 6-4: Cycle 11 Growth Distributions for SG 2-1 (Used for EOC-1 2 Benchmark Projections for SG 2-1)

Growth l Bini l Bin2 (VoltsIEFPY) (<=1 .06v) (>1 .06v)

____ __ __ _49 0 0.1 168 1 0.2 73 1 0.3 20 0 0.4 8 0 0.5 9 0 0.6 0 0 0.7 1 2 0.8 0 2 0.9 0 1 1 0 1 1.1 0 0 1.2 1 1 1.3 1 0 1.4 1 0 1.5 0 0 1.6 0 2 1.7 1 0 1.8 0 0 1.9 0 0 2 0 0 2.1 0 0 2.2 0 1 2.3 0 0 2.4 0 0 2.5 0 0 2.6 0 0 2.7 0 0 2.8 0 0 2.9 0 1 3 0 0 3.1 0 0 3.2 0 0 3.3 0 1 3.4 0 0 3.5 0 0 3.6 0 1

>3.6 l 0 0 1 Total IF 332 J 15

86-5059194-00 Page 87 of 114 Table 6-5: Cycle 11 Growth Distributions for SG 2-4 (Used for EOC-12 Benchmark Projections for SG 2-4)

Growth l Bin' l Bin2 Bin3 (VoltsIEFPY) (<=0.59v) (0.60v-1.66v) (>1.66v)

<=O 48 6 0 0.1 307 31 2 0.2 220 54 1 0.3 79 40 3 0.4 24 30 0 0.5 5 28 0 0.6 8 17 1 0.7 5 15 0 0.8 3 7 1 0.9 0 5 0 1 1 6 0 1.1 0 9 0 1.2 0 5 0 1.3 1 2 0 1.4 0 7 1 1.5 0 2 2 1.6 0 4 1 1.7 1 1 1 1.8 0 0 1 1.9 0 2 1 2 0 2 0 2.1 0 1 0 2.2 0 0 1 2.3 0 3 0 2.4 0 1 0 2.5 0 1 1 2.6 0 2 0 2.7 0 2 1 2.8 0 0 0 2.9 0 0 0 3 0 1 1 3.1 0 0 0 3.2 0 0 0 3.3 0 0 0 3.4 0 0 0 3.5 0 0 0 3.6 0 0 0

>3.6 0 0 0 Total 702 284 19

86-5059194-00 Page 88 of 114 Table 6-6: Cycle 11 Growth Distributions for All SGs (Used for EOC-12 Benchmark Projections for SGs 2-2 and 2-3)

Growth Bini Bin2 Bin3 (Volts/EFPY) (<=0.59v) (0.60v-1.66v) (>1.66v)

_ __ _152 24 0 0.1 690 75 0 0.2 374 76 2 0.3 124 62 2 0.4 32 38 2 0.5 17 38 0 0.6 10 22 1 0.7 5 18 0 0.8 3 7 0 0.9 0 6 0 1 1 10 0 1.1 0 7 0 1.2 1 5 0 1.3 1 3 0 1.4 0 -: -8 0 1.5 0 2 1 1.6 0 5 3 1.7 1 0 1 1.8 0 1 1 1.9 0 4 0 2 0 1 1 2.1 0 0 0 2.2 0 0 0 2.3 0 4 1 2.4 0 1 0 2.5 0 1 1 2.6 0 2 0 2.7 0 0 2 2.8 0 0 1 2.9 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 3.1 0 0 1 3.2 0 0 0 3.3 0 0 0 3.4 0 0 0 3.5 0 0 0 3.6 0 0 0

>3.6 0 0 0 Total [ 1411 J 420 21

86-5059194-00 Page 89 of 114 Table 6-7: As-found EOC-12 vs. Projected EOC-12 Conditions Without the 11.89 vIEFPY Growth Voltage SG 2-1 SG 2-2 SG 2-3 SG 2-4 Bin As- Projected As- Projected As- Projected As- Projected

_____ Found roee Found Poetd Found oje Found _____

0.1 0 1.5 0 0.68 1 0.89 0 0.46 0.2 29 30.42 28 14.15 17 17A6 31 10.6 0.3 74 87.95 54 50.73 42 58.15 104 52.85 0.4 97 146.52 70 96.28 65 100.07 134 134.35 0.5 55 165.92 72 121.52 35 128.87 141 218.11 0.6 54 134.33 47 110.24 38 110.86 127 253.43 0.7 43 97.56 31 83.38 20 85.06 100 224.65 0.8 33 71.93 24 57.26 18 55A2 77 169.63 0.9 25 52 23 35.42 11 33.49 66 115.46 1 14 38.44 15 23.05 5 20.67 56 77.54 1.1 11 26.07 5 17.15 2 14.48 45 57.52 1.2 10 16.23 5 13.61 5 10.9 38 47.53 1.3 2 10.44 7 11.19 5 8.75 26 41.44 1.4 4 6.42 4 9.61 1 7.4 20 37.9 1.5 8 3.65 6 7.95 5 6.16 18 33.54 1.6 1 1.96 1 6.3 2 4.88 5 27.83 1.7 3 1.04 2 5.09 0 3.9 11 22.87 1.8 2 0.55 1 4.03 0 3.09 7 18.68 1.9 2 0.28 0 2.99 0 2.32 6 14.6 2 0 0.66 1 2.32 0 1.81 4 11.24 2.1 2 1.17 1 1.95 0 1.54 1 8.89 2.2 2 1.65 0 1.8 0 1.49 0 7.75 2.3 0 2.05 0 1.61 0 1.33 0 7.67 2.4 1 1.98 0 1.37 0 1.1 0 7.47 2.5 0 1.52 0 1.17 0 0.89 1 6.72 2.6 0 1.08 0 0.96 0 0.72 0 5.47 2.7 0 0.86 0 0.88 0 0.65 1 4.65 2.8 0 1.21 0 1.01 0 0.81 0 5.01 2.9 0 1.15 0 0.95 0 0.77 1 4.98 3 0 0.76 0 0.8 0 0.62 0 4.33 3.5 0 1.53 0 2.42 0 1.80 0 12.69 4 0 0.94 0 1.25 0 0.94 0 6.87 4.5 0 0.37 0 1.24 0 0.94 0 6.89 5 0 0.32 0 0.83 0 0.62 0 6.88 5.5 0 0.23 0 0.11 0 0.10 0 2.66 6 0 0.46 0 0.04 0 0.04 0 0.67 6.5 0 1.23 0 0.08 0 0.08 0 0.54 7 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

>7 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Total 472 912.38 397 691A1 272 689.08 1020 1670.36

<=1 424 826.57 364 592.71 252 610.94 836 1257.08

>1 48 85.81 33 98.71 20 78.14 184 413.29

>2 5 18.51 1 18.47 0 14.45 4 100.14

>5 0 1.92 0 0.24 0 0.23 0 3.87 POB 7.45E-05 8.94E-04 4.38E-05 5.13E-04 2.10E-05 3.73E-04 1.42E-04 3.16E-03 Leak Rate 0.15 0.65 0.09 0.58 0.04 0.46 0.47 3.02

86-5059194-00 Page 90 of 114 Figure 6-1: As-found SG 2-1 vs Projected Voltage Distributions (DCPP POPCD)

EOC-12 As-Found vs. Projected Voltage Distributions DCPP-2 SG 2-1 300 E As-Found 250 _ O Projected (DCPP POPCD)

• 200 C

.2

= 150 0

E z 100 50 0

r cci eeo e. ~

h~d~ :

niii--

A obn V o lt q Bobbin Volts ft f f f f a . r. . . n

. e

• Figure 6-2: As-found SG 2-2 vs Projected Voltage Distributions (DCPP POPCD)

EOC-12 As-Found vs. Projected Voltage Distributions DCPP-2 SG 2-2 300 l As-Found 250 .O Projected (DCPP POPCD)

- 200 2

' 150 0

E z 100 50 0 t ft U4C .@ -o C

.... f ft.

_o><_NnNncoocoocow - n ft n rf C BobbIn Volts

86-5059194-00 Page 91 of 114 Figure 6-3: As-found SG 2-3 vs Projected Voltage Distributions (DCPP POPCD)

EOC-12 As-Found vs. Projected Voltage Distributions DCPP-2 SG 2-3 300 250 n 200 0

C U

E z 100 50 0

_Oe00 q r" --aO n~

O 0 IOc a _ _

- _ q n

_ w

_ n

_ e_ _ o o

-r r_ q1N Z N N qn eN N

-< :zt N

rg nN qn n nnf o I I*

Bobbin Volts Figure 6-4: As-found SG 2-4 vs Projected Voltage Distributions (DCPP POPCD)

EOC-12 As-Found vs. Projected Voltage Distributions DCPP-2 SG 2-4 300 iAs-Found 250 l O Projected (DCPP POPCD) c 200

.2

- 150 0

E Z 100 50 0

q a C i1AA1nalA-i- n=AMf n C o ccN N Bobbin Volts N N Nn N N N C y

• 86-5059194-00 Page 92 of 114 7.0 Probability of Prior Cycle Detection and EOC-13 Projections Using DCPP POPCD The NRC approved use of the voltage-dependent POPCD at DCPP in Reference 29. This section provides the 2R11 POPCD results, which is based on the 2R11 and 2R12 inspections' results. This section also provides the updated POPCD correlation that was used in the EOC-13 projections provided in Section 8, as well as NRC reporting requirements for continued application of POPCD.

7.1 Updated DCPP POPCD Correlation The POPCD method, which is based on results from actual field inspections, reflects the DCPP detection results that approach 1.0 at bobbin voltages above 1.6 volts. The resulting larger POD above about two volts realistically lowers the detection uncertainty, thereby lowering the number of the larger undetected indications in the BOC voltage distribution.

Reference 27 provided the DCPP-specific correlation through IR12 (six inspections). The data from Reference 27 has since been updated to include the 2R12 results, also referred to as the 2R1 1 POPCD data. Tables 7-1 and 7-2 provide the 2R1 1 and composite POPCD data, respectively. The composite POPCD includes results from seven inspections (2R8, 1R9, 2R9, 1R10, 2R10, 1R11, and 2R11). Table 7-3 provides the POPCD tracking matrix with column letters that correspond to the columns in Tables 7-1 and 7-2. Table 7-4 provides the POPCD matrix table including data from only the just completed cycle segregated into voltage bins of

<=1.00v, 1.01-2.00v, and >2.00v based on the beginning-of-cycle voltage. Table 7-5 provides the POPCD matrix table for the just completed cycle regardless of the beginning-of-cycle voltage. Table 7-6 provides the composite multi-cycle POPCD matrix table segregated into the three voltage bins. Table 7-7 provides the composite multi-cycle POPCD matrix table regardless of the beginning-of-cycle voltage. Table 7-8 provides the correlation parameters for the composite data set.

During the preparation of the 2R1 1 POPCD data tables, minor errors were found in the previous tables. These errors affected the indications that were NDD in the look-back analyses. Since no voltage reading from the previous inspection is available for these flaws, the voltage is assumed to be equal to the current voltage minus the average growth for that cycle. In some cases, the average growth rates used for these calculations were incorrect in prior POPCD tables. These errors have been corrected for all of the previous POPCD results and because the number of affected indications is very small in conjunction with the large size of the overall data set (>8000 indications) the changes did not have any affect on the POPCD determination.

The largest 'undetected" POPCD indication in 2R11 was 1.16v. SG 2-2 R7C74 4H had a bobbin indication reported in 2R11 and was inspected, but not confirmed with Plus Point in 2R1 1 (BDD/RND in Table 7-1 Column G) and had a 1.1 6v DOS in 2R1 2 (BDD/ w/o RPC). At the NRC's request, bobbin indications that were Plus Point inspected but not confirmed at the prior outage (EOCn) should be considered as "No Detection" at EOCn.

86-5059194-00 Page 93 of 114 7.1.1 Assessment of POPCD Changes NRC requires an assessment of the POPCD method for potential changes over time, that is, the multi-cycle POPCD distribution-applied for the last operational assessment must be compared with the POPCD distribution obtained for only the last operating cycle. Differences in the two POPCD distributions must be assessed relative to the potential for significant changes in detection capability. Figure 7-1 shows the POPCD curves for the just completed cycle as well as three composite POPCD curves (composite data through 2R11, 1R12, and 2R12). The curve labeled "through 2R11 (five inspections)" was used for the benchmarking calculations provided in Section 6 of this document. The composite POPCD through 2R12 was used for the EOC-13 projections provided in Section 8 of this document. The 2R11 POPCD distribution for the just completed cycle (based on the 2R12 inspection'results) is improved over the entire range of expected voltages compared to the composite POPCD distribution applied in the prior cycle OA. Therefore, the updated composite POPCD curve is also improved over the entire range of expected voltages. Table 7-9 provides a direct comparison of the best estimates of the previous and current composite cycle POPCD values up through 10 volts. The improvement in the POPCD based on the just completed Cycle 12 may not represent a significant change in actual detection capability and may be more reflective of reduced rates of new crack initiation at detectable levels. The increased POPCD below about 0.7 volt moves the DCPP POPCD closer to that found across the industry as reflected in the industry POPCD distribution of Addendum 6. The growth rates decreased in Cycle 12 compared to Cycle 11. ,This growth rate decrease may have contributed to the improvement in the POPCD distribution, assuming that slower growth implies reduced rates of new crack initiation at detectable levels and therefore fewer new indications, which translates into fewer misses for POPCD. From Table 7-1 which is the POPCD'for the just completed cycle based on 2R12 inspections, the number of non-detected POPCD indications was only 724, compared to 1704 detected POPCD indications. This is a greater than 2-to-1 ratio, compared to prior inspections where the ratio of detections to non-detections was about equal to, or less than 1. Additionally, there were a large number of new indications detected in 2R11. These new indications were then re-identified in 2R12 and counted as detections at EOCn, which also improved DCPP POPCD based on larger numbers of detected indications.

7.1.2 Assessment of Disappearing Flaws NRC also requires an assessment of disappearing flaws. For RPC -confirmed indications at EOC, that are RPC NDD at EOCn+1, an assessment is required for the cause of the "disappearing flaws" if the Plus Point voltage is greater than 0.5 volt. If there are a significant number of occurrences of these "disappearing flaws", the cause must be evaluated independent of the Plus Point voltage. (Note: In support of this evaluation, an RPC inspection is required at EOCn+1 for RPC confirmed indications at EOCn (either bobbin detected or bobbin NDD) that are bobbin NDD at EOCn+1. This inspection is necessary to ensure that all known ODSCC indications are included in the condition monitoring and operational assessments as well as properly categorized for the POPCD method evaluation.)

During the 2R12 inspection, there were no cases where a Plus Point confirmed indication from 2R11 was not also'detected in 2R12. Thus, there were no "disappearing flaws", and no additional Plus Point inspections were required to satisfy this commitment.

86-5059194-00 Page 94 of 114 7.2 Input to Industry POPCD Database Tables 7-10 and 7-11 provide the 2R11 and the composite POPCD results in the format of EPRI ODSCC Database Report Addendum 6, Table 7-2, for eventual inclusion in the next addendum of the database report. The EPRI format differs slightly from the DCPP format in that DCPP treats EOCn RPC NDD indications as no detection as requested by the NRC (listed in Column G of Table 7-1 and Table 7-2), whereas the EPRI table treats these as detection.

86-5059194-00 Page 95 of 114 Table 7-1: 2R11 POPCD Results Ccibm I A I B I C I D I E I F I G I H I I J I K 2R11 POPCD Data Table IDatlon *I EOC. I No D..d&Ion at EOCn (N.. Indictions) I EOC. Bobbin od. RPC EOCBobbin hd. RPC C IEOC_ NOuO Bo RPC I bgiFOu Only yRPC d EOC_ TEOC_9oUAnWolRPC EOC, RPC NDD Bobbn ExcluddToln TotlfrPOPCO R4 ConC .EOC.Bobbld A InspeWd 0 DOEO.Phd*tEDOC bdlc4ion POPCD Evaluaflon nnn linned atHWIuw EOC I atnnnC -

Inspecte d10 no AI ONUW ndi. b IUU *-0 -_rGn WIGugg M.nn

n. _) at _ I I BWIFIW

• BW I -s  :: 1.4;9 d *I co, eND w/o wIKDeDw uC~e -Pw -

voa BOD/RDD _ BNO I RD BOD I ROD OD w RPC SW who RPC _ Puggd 1 EOtn BND I ROD -_ ODB IRD BND I ROD _ BWd w RPC BNO I RO - ND / ROD EDO/RNO -_ BOO/RDD Al BNDwh RPC DHecdlon No POPCDtor Bln I BODwo RPC _ BD I R I BNO/RND _ BWD/ RD BNDO/RNO _ ODD w/ RPC BNOIRNO _ BND/RDD BW/RNO _ BND/RO at EOcn-1 dt EOCn *EDd con Voltl" el" BW wlo RPC - BNO I ROO ENO / ROD - P_Fd atEDOC. BO IRNDIVIgd dt EOCn Note M dt EOCn t) ;PCDfobr eacdhvbian cmialted as (Dateclton at EOCnYD(oledbn at EOcnO. No Detecton at EOCn Bycolw. P09C0-I (A.E-BClA.B.C D.E-FG) -

1) EOCn RPC NOD Wo bbhdl Wdcal" aMotod " now dletaions por NRC reuest

3) Include Wt*4Itom ad EDOC pugd at EOCAnd neI dcara d 4 EOCn1. rd npald Ih Obobbin Irpedin.ad bepedlonddrbdt..xbed rnl'isoro/arrnbono cGodybyRPC lho RPc kpetbn

4) BWD-Bobbin dedd indiation END . Bobbin NO Ft hblod3n ROD. RPC dc'nd idcefln. RND . RPC NODIdntadton

86-5059194-00 Page 96 of 114 Table 7-2: DCPP Composite POPCD Results Cown I A IB l C I D l I F l0 H I I J I K DCPP Specific POPCD Data Table Deotocton at E[C. I No Ddetion tdEOCn (Now tdeationhs EOC. Bobbin ad. RPC lOC Bobbin Idn Not RPC E1OCBobbnn d Rhd aEOC NowEDC_Boooh R _,5.WMNdRPC IdnFotdDnqyOTRPC d EDC_ EOC.RPC NW Bobbin Exdudd n Td f POPCO Conind at EDC_

-1 1 l DOAA.

I Inspcted at EDC_,

__C_-a B.

_- Nw -A

-E Conthiwd o.

J Nor_.

InnropBctbd BoAin N Donbn C bD.

at CC a Pkw" en R FoAAd

_ OD b_- Pcn Aud St EBOC. I

- aun au

• ann bftdetagon. P R N Dun FO--.

_ann POPCD t _aun from Evaluaiont Totann I P C BDD R -.. B wn FlvC BW0 I RhD -0 SOD I/ RF C voltag BW/RD -DBNDIRW SODI RDD MWADRPC BO wAoRPC _ Pd a EOCn BNOIDRPDC-BOOIDD SNDIRDD- DBOODaRPC :NO ItOD -ID BNO I RW BWIRNO _ BDOIROO AIBNDOWIRPC Detection No POPCD for Bin BODWo RPC _ BW0IRW BNOIRNO _ BWOIROD BNOIRND _ BWOMoR°C BNOIRNO _ BNO IRW BOO IRNC _* bNClRDD t EOCn-I at EDCn Ddtdction Volago Bin BW doRPC - BND I RO BNO I ROO -_ F EOCn Sl,,td BWIRNDRNDPb d at EOCn Not. m at MEn ho;

1) POPC oN.d b . bin mbla a8 (DoteBon at E mndl(oDtecdonat ECn

• No Detecton at EOCno Byncokmn. POPCO D (A.BCCY(A.B.C.D.E-F OE

2) EOCn RPC NPWbobbin Wdeatons amoveated as new hdlcatono par NRC request I) todcditsbdlcan at EOCnnpiggod atEOCn nd now Vdletor at PE0C".1 nmreported In tle bIInahpactin an Amm onlyby RPC bloct of dents. mined reiduatalorn Oa son forn RPC Inspetion.

) BODO Bobbin detlcted bdetin: ONO a Bobbin NWMIntacadn: ROa

• RPC detected dbin: RNC

• RPC NWM tAnwction

86-5059194-00 Page 97 of 114 Table 7-3: POPCD Matrix Table for Tracking Indications Between EOCn and EOCn+1 BDD at EOCn, 1 l BND at EOC, 1 l EOCn BDD w/o RPC BDD wIRDD BDD w/RND BND wlo RPC BND w/RDD BND w/RND Not Not Not Not Not Not Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged -Plugged Plugged Plugged C . ... - . -

BDD w/o RPC Not Plugged B B A A H H H H A A H H BDD BOO wI RD Plugged C :-D-_ -_

at EOCNot Plugged _ B B A A H (2) H (2) H (1) H (1) A A H (2) H (2)

BDD w/ RND Plugged H -: -

Not Plugged G(3) G (

G (3) 3 H H H H G (3) G (3) H H Plugged - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _._ _ _

BND w/o RPC Not Plugged - E E D D H H No Count No Count F F No Count No Count BBND ND wI ROD Plugged F - -. -: . -; . -.

at EOC, Not Plugged _ E E D D H (2) H (2) H (1) H (1) F F iI(2) H(2)

BND w/ RND Plugged - - - - .. - .--

Not Plugged E E D 0 H H No Count No Count F F No Count No Coun General Notes:

The column letters correspond to the column letters in POPCD Tables 7-1 and 7-2.

BDD = Bobbin detected indication BND = Bobbin no detectable degradation (NDD) Intersection RDD = RPC detected Indication RND = RPC no detectable degradation intersection No Count = Intersections having no bobbin or RPC Indication at either EOCn or EOC,+ 1. These are not needed for POPCD.

Specific Notes:

1) For EOCn bobbin Indications that are confirmed by RPC or detected only by RPC, EOCn+1 RPC will be performed when bobbin is NDD and the number in this category will be 0" for future Inspections.

2) If Indications are RPC confirmed at EOCn but RPC NDD at EOCn+ 1, and the Plus Point voltage is greater than 0.5 volts the causative factors for this change in RPC detection will be discussed In the ARC 90-day report. If there are a significant number of these occurrences of this category, independent of the Plus Point voltage, the cause will be evaluated in the 90-day report.

3) EOCn bobbin indications that were RPC NDD at EOCn, and at EOC,+. are either RPC detected or bobbin detected without RPC Inspection, are treated as undetected at EOCn in accordance with NRC request.

86-5059194-00 Page 98 of 114 Table 7-4: 2111IPOPCD Voltage-Specific Summary from 2R112 Inspection Results 2R11 Results POPCD Matrix for Indications <=1.00v at EOCn 1BDD at EOCn+1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __BND at EOCn+1 _ _ _ _ _

EQnBDD wRPC BOO w/RD BOO wIRND BND waRPC BND wRD BND W/RND PugdPlugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged 60 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _

BDD BD W/o RPC NoP ~~6 881 7 6 0 28 0 19 0 4 0 0 at B OOw R ODD Pug e 40 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __

0_ _

Not Plugged . 0 205 4 144 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 E~O C n BO IR D Piug ed 2 - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

___ o~ugd0 63 2 16 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 BND ND wl PC Not Plugged 2 564 4 22 0 21 No Count No Count 1 16No Count No Count atBND WIROD Plugged 6 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _

OflNot Plugmed I_____ 0 1 0 0 0 0 No Count No Count 0 15No Count No Count E EnND wI RND Plugged I____M___ -. , + , -_.4 -. .I I. .,C.  ; . . IMI~~i:, ._ 4 . ..

= Aot Plugged - -0 0_2 0 0 0 11 INo Count No Count 0 9 No Countl No Counj POPCD Matrix for Indications >1.00v and <=2.00v at EOCn________________

BDD at EOCn+1 BND at EOCn*1 EOnBDD W/RPC I DO wRDI BOO w/RND BND w/RPC IBND wID I ND WIRND Plugged Plugged Plugged] Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged 0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

BDD BOO wlo RPC Not Pluged ____ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 at DD w/ DD Plugged 168 . I  !- I "

____I_. -. IM  : , !~

______ ___ I_. .:: ., I~ I.~ .

atB~IONot Pluged ___ 1 47 12 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BOOwnRNO Plugged 1I__ __

_____Not Plugged ____ 0 2 10 1 0 1 0 0 10 0 0 0 Plu gged _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

BND END w/o RPC Not Pluggqed I________ 0 0 0 0 0 NoCount No Count 0 0 No Count No Count at BND w/R OD Plugged 0 z! ___IM _ I____,1~~1 ___ I_ M.) __ _ ____ -  : , .. ja I;.  ;  ; _~..

EOnNot Plugged ____ 0 0 0 0 0 No Count No Count 0 0 No Countl No counq E Bn w R D Plugged __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _

-_ Nt Lugged - 0 0 -0 -0 -0 10 - No Count No Count 0 0 No Count!No Coun POPCD Matrix for Indications >2.00v at EOCn _________

__ ___BDD at EOCn+1 B ND at EOCn+1 _____

BDODl RPC IEDD wID I EDO wIRND BND woRPC IEND wRDI END w/RND Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged BDD BD w/o RPC NoI Pluged 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 at BDD wIRDD Plugged 82 lue 0o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EOC n __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

____Nolugd____ 0 0 0 0 0- 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 BND PC Not Plugged _____ 0 0 0 0 0- 0 No Count No Count 0 0 No Count No Counl END w/ R NDD Pu g d _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

at Not Plu __ 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Count N~ut0 0 N~utN~u

86-5059194-00 Page 99 of 114 Table 7-5: 2R1 I POPCD Summary from 2R12 Inspection Results Regardless of Voltage POPCD Matrix for All Indications Regardless of Voltage BDD at EOCn+1 BND at EOCn+1 EOC n BDD wloRPC ln Not I l

BDD wRDDfiNot BDD W/RND Not BND w/oRPCNot BND wtRDD Not BNDwIRND Not Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged 60 - I 1 __. .,, -_

,- _. -_  !, fi . -, ' -\ ,W -i : -

BDD BDD wo RPC Not Plugged 6 881 7 6 28 19 4 at BDD wJ RDD Plugged 290  :.. 1 ..

EOr Not Plugged 1 252 16 161 . 14 EOCn RND PPlugged 3 .. _ i_ _  ; .r _ '

Not Plugged 65 2 17 45 Plugged,-. I...

BND BNDwo RPC Not Plugged I__ 2 564 4 22 21 No Count No Count 1 16 No Count No Count at t BNDwRD Plugged Not Plugged 6 ......

1 No Count No Count 15 No Count No Coun EOCn BND wI RND Pu g d _ _ _ _

____eed

_ ._ I 1_ NoI No Coun 9

N Coun N Coun

______Not Plumaed _I_ I_____ No Cou~n No Coulnt :9 No ou~ntj No Courn

86-5059194-00 Page 100 of 114 Table 7-6: DCPP Composite Voltage-Specific POPCD Summary Composite of I1R9, I RIO0, I RI 1, 2R8, 21R9, 2R110, & 2111IPOPCD Evaluations POPCD Matrix for Indications <=1.00v at EOCn BDD at EOCn+1 ______BND at EOCn41 _____

BOnDOD wia RPC BOO wIRDD BOO wlRND BN W/o RPC BND w/RDD BND wlRND

-lu-gedP-u-ge Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged.

Plugged 18 _ _ _ _ _

BDD BOO W/o RPC NtPued57 1482 138 189 0 33 0 38 0 0 0 0 at BOO wI RODD Pugd 6 __

280 26 315 0 1 0 0 0 7 0 2

_____ o1ugd1 EOCn pug~ 2 - --

DODw/ RND

___Ntlge___ 4 72 8 35 0 57 0 36 0 3 0 3 BND NwoRCNot Plugged I____ 5 2117 105 456 4 99 No Count No Count 36 132 No Count Noau at BND wI ROD Plugged 39 I _____' 7.- ~ t,:. . 141 -+ . ~b 1

_____A 1W _____ ~.

at _____Not Plugged _____ 0 2 1 17 0 0 No Count No Count 8 71 No Count No Count EOnBND w/RND Plge ___ ____

-- - -Not EL I 0 - 1 115ugged 3 - oCutN on 6 1 oCutN~u

_____________ _______POPCD Matrix for Indications >1.00v and <=2.00v at EOCn_________

BD____--SDat EOCn+1 -_ BND at EOCn+1 BOnDOD w/o RPC DODw/RDD BOO w/RND BDN wlo RPC BND w/RDO BDN wIRND Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged 10 _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _

BDBOD wfo, C Not Plugged 2 87 167 28 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 at BOOwI R OD Plugged 6 -- _. _ _ __.-.I !_ __II_. .4. , ~ - w4 .  :. 6 + b. _ ,"'~  ;, ~ _I _ _ __.,'

EOnNot Pluggned 1 30 17 22 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 BOOwInNO Plugged 1I__ __

BDDw____ Not Plugged ____ 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0o Plugged _______ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ____ ~ ,  : ,. " .I, AI--. _ _ _ __.

! - A 61 BND BN l PC Not Plugged I_____ 0 17 4 14 1 4 No Count No Count 0 0 No Count No Count at BND wI R ODD Pu g d 0_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

EOnNot Plge ____ 0 0 0 0 0 No Count No Count 0 0 No Count No Coun BN /RDNot Plugged 0 0 0 0 0 0 oCout:NL un 0 1No Countl No Counj

-BOD POPCD Matrix for Indications >2.00v at EOCn BOnDODwa RPCI at~E BOO wRDI BDDwIRND

- T BND

/ RPC I BND at EOCn+1 BND R D I BNO w/RND Plugged Plugged jPlugged Plugged Plugged jPlugged jPlugged Plugged Plugged tPlugged Plugged IPlugged Plugged 0 __ ___

BDBD w/o RPC Not Plugged 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 at B OOwI RDD Plugged 43 _____ ____

. I . __

,~  %, Ir.. s ___ _____.

- ___I_

EOnNot Plugged 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BOO WInNO Plugged 0 _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _

_____Not Plugged ____ 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 010 0 10 0 BND BN l PC Not Plugged I____ 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Count No Count 0 0 No Count No Count at BND w/_____Not O lge Plugged I_____ 0 0

0 0

0 0 No Count No Count 0 0 No ont Noou EOCn -'?- -- i I:I. - __ __7_

BND wI RND l g e _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_____Not Plugged I____0 0 0 0 01 0 No Count No Count 0 0 No Count No Counj

86-5059194-00 Page 101 of 114 Table 7-7: DCPP Composite POPCD Summary Regardless of Voltage POPCD Matrix for All Indications Regardless of Voltage BDD at EOCn+1 BND at EOCn+I EOCn [ BDD w/o RPC Not No tuged BDD wRDD BDD wIRND BND wlo RPC Not BND w/RDD Not BND w/RND ot Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged Plugged 28 -. -- .! .  !-- _

BDD BDDw/oRPC NotPlugged - 59 1569 305 217 36 36 at at BDD0w/ RODD ~

Not Plugged 13_ 2 310 43 337 _

1 __

8 _ _ _

2 EOCn BD w/RN Plugged 3 Pluqgd___ No.-lugg-d

. 4 73 8 38 60 38 3 3 BND BND wlo RPC Not Pluqqed 50 2134 109 470 5 103 No Count No Count 36 132 No Count No Count atNot Plugged 2 17 No Count No Count 8 71 No Count No Coun EOCnNolugu_______ 2 1 1 __

BND wlRND Ptugged Not Plugged t

3 5 5 No Count No Count 16 10 No Count NoCoun

86-5059194-00 Page 102 of 114 Table 7-8: DCPP POPCD Log Logistic Parameters Composite Composite Updated Parameter POPCD POPCD POPCD Through 2R11 Through 1R12 Through 2R12 (5 Inspections) (6 Inspections) (7 Inspections)

Number of Data Points 4688 6219 8647 a.0 (intercept) 1.644 1.844 2.147 a.1 (slope) 4.659 4.781 4.846 VII 0.00522 0.00407 0.00317 V12 0.01043 0.00806 0.00607 V22 0.02654 0.02022 0.01454

86-5059194-00 Page 103 of 114 Table 7-9: New POPCD Correlation Comparison to Previous POPCD Correlations (Best Estimate)

V POPCDThrough2R1 l1POPCDThroughIR12 l New POPCIDThrough Volts (Five Inspections)* (Six Inspections) InSpevons 0.1 0.047 0.050 0.063 0.12 0.066 0.072 0.090 0.14 0.088 0.096 0.120 0.16 0.113 0.123 0.153 0.18 0.139 0.152 0.188 0.2 0.166 0.183 0.224 0.22 0.195 0.214 0.261 0.25 0.238 0.262 0.316 0.3 0.312 0.342 0.404 0.35 0.382 0.417 0.484 0.4 0.448 0.485 0.554 0.45 0.507 0.546 0.615 0.5 0.560 0.600 0.666 0.6 0.648 0.686 0.745 0.7 0.716 0.751 0.802 0.8 0.767 0.799 0.843 0.9 0.807 0.836 0.873 1 0.838 0.863 0.895 1.1 0.863 0.885 0.913 1.2 0.882 0.902 0.926 1.4 0.911 0.927 0.946 1.6 0.931 0.944 0.958 1.8 0.944 0.955 0.967 2 0.955 0.964 0.974 2.2 0.962 0.970 0.978 2.4 0.968 0.975 0.982 2.6 0.973 0.979 0.985 2.8 0.977 0.982 0.987 3 0.980 0.984 0.989 3.5 0.985 0.988 0.992 4 0.988 0.991 0.994 4.5 0.991 0.993 0.995 5 0.9926 0.9944 0.9961 6 0.9949 0.9962 0.9973 7 0.9962 0.9972 0.9981 8 0.9971 0.9979 0.9985 9 0.9977 0.9984 0.9989 10 0.9982 0.9987 0.9991

• Used for Section 6 EOC-12 Benchmarking Projections

86-5059194-00 Page 104 of 114 Table 7-10: 2R11 POPCD Results In Industry Format Ccnlunn I A I B I C I 0 l E I F I 0 I H I I I J DCPP 2R11 Input to Generic POPCD Data Table

- 0.t-dOon it EOC. Illeo tDion at EOCM(NM ItndatI EOC- Bobbb kd. RPC OWDD ab

_U00 FeOO 81C M ROO I Ic"_

EOC. Bobbbh IndANot RPC DAAAdAf 8u0 wo FOU _IZJ at EOAD._

_00wo F C C. Bobbb 8tIUUI _

R pa atnM I o

F lnd Nby

_NOO to d

-. I HOLU VW_0 _NOU EOCBOCbin Not RPC MD MIio -Z cDA 00 WO KPU CdCA UNO _'o to-B.

.at OC RPsbbi at-ZOC..

I FN.14 MW Ed OA-- of at _

Ir JO ornOPC DDAADADA_Towsf forstr D.____ POPCD _DDA_

Vog EOm / tD RDO_8N/A9 S SO0/ ROD BDO Wo WC BOO edoRPC PMluggdat EDOCM NvDI ROD _ BOO/ RDO 8NO /FDv _~BOOwloRPC BND I RWD_ BN9 RWO Al BNDeo RPC At EOC., Oitectofi No POChOt Bbg BOOM/RNO _ BOOI RDO BOIRNO _-BDOvdoRPC BNRO /RNO _- BOO/ ROO BNO I RO _ BODeo RPC BND/RNO _- BROIRDO BDOPNDWfl9ed at EOCn atCOCn I tection I Vollg Bin' BNOMRI _ Pggid EOCn at EOCn (NWM1)

BOOo/RNO_ 8NDI/ROD BOO Wo R.PC_* 800I FOD BOOwit RPC _ BNO I Rgo Nle.

1) POPCODar eac sebnafalaeted n (Dteceond ECCny(Deledonat EOCn+NoDeteon a1EOCn) ByeObM POPCD C(A+B.AA+B+OCD.E.F)

2) Plintspeorci POPlObe bauedonvog bituoO t10ot.idryPOPOCDdalems oty uoO20vo btsbe ifLaily of 4ustobng ~dabase mIft bits

3) hidus bd dEbo pEOCnggedtEOCn ond nwbdab atE0Ca, nolroed hi Bibabbbl donybyRPO hpondders deos Imad do tatfor e RPChpet 41*OO

• Bobban deteced Iicationo BND. BobbinNOD teuldton ROD* RPCdeteced dcat" RNO. RPCNODintewdion

86-5059194-00 Page 105 of 114 Table 7-11: DCPP Composite POPCD Results In Industry Format CdnM I A I a I C I D I E l F I a I H I I I J DCPP Total Input to Generic POPCD Data Table Dd_____onid EOC. No Detection d EOCn (Nmw ndctonsl EOC. Bobbin hdt RPC EOC. Bobbn Id Nd RPC E bM Nw EOC aobbn RPC Nw EOC_ Sobbdh NORPC jhd Fod Only by RPC d EOCC, orM ToEbfo for POPCO Confimd d ce_ Inspetd at EC., E Contnod _ npL COC. A Plugged at EOC." Evauatlo BD D RDB oRP D RC I B nDP OO ID N RCCBDO n N RCBDo P N nI N FRD I A RnEC P I Voksti BDDIRDD0 60D0oRPC 600IdO RPC - PaggedatEICn BND/RW _BWIROD 8 .N BO.oRPC 6";016;0 - 6101600 Al BNDeo RPCd EO0_, Detmcovn No POPCOFor 60 0! n w -~ 61 0! RO 6BNDIIRDO _-BND I6RD Bhs BDDI RODC -BN WIFWDD 800DIRND -*_ B ORPC O W I RND -_BDDI6R01 6 I SW ND -_ MDo 0 R,°C BND FND _* BNDIRDO SODRND? dSt EOCn at EOCn Det0ion (NOW bin BDD I RND -I BND I RDD BNDIROO _ ftqgndrvEOCM SaEOCn BDD vda RPC BDD I RDD Boo fo RPC -8NO IRD

1) POPCOFar h eISed " (Detection bintie at EOCny(dscon at EOCn* No Deedion dt EOCn).Bycokom POPCD. A##CK(A*BS0C0+E+F)

PSd specl POPCDob basedupon a b dof O.10 svt biiy POPC dobse may u0e 020 voltWidAbje dufftbdlofa4ses dab eo xhed hm kIfudel h bdIMOU AtEOCnpuggeddS0 aCnedn IW aSEOCnl.notbpoted inebdibbpeon. endbandyonRy byRCkyeronddas. edre ISof ota emaot frlVe R(PCkopecbo I) BDO *Bobbkdethded

• BN6

• 6,Bobffn NMWwooebo 600. RPCdhed Ihdietim RND. RPCNM Bdeain

86-5059194-00 Page 106 of 114 Figure 7-1: 2R11 POPCD Comparison to Composite POPCD DCPP POPCD Comparison 0.9 - 7_ _ _____

0.6 90.4 e11__

0.3 - / - ------ 2R11 POPCD (from 2R12 Results) 0- Composite POPCD Through 2R1 1 (Five Inspections)

.--- Composite POPCD Through 1Ri2 (Six Inspections)

--- Composite POPCD Through 2R12 (SevenInspections) 0.0.i__,_

0 67 EOCn Bobbin Volts

86-5059194-00 Page 107 of 114 8.0 EOC-13 Projections for Probability of Burst and Leak Rate This section provides the results of the EOC-13 POB and leak rate projections. FANP uses Monte Carlo codes, as described in References 4 and 5, to provide the burst and leak rate analysis simulations. These evaluations are based on the methods in Reference 6 (for burst) and the new slope sampling method for calculating the leak rate as defined in Section 9 of Reference 8. In addition, these evaluations use the POPCD and growth methodologies as described in Reference 16, as updated in References 25 and 28.

8.1 Inputs for Calculations Most of the inputs required for the POB and leak rate calculations have been described in other sections of this document. Table 8-1 provides a summary of the inputs required and the corresponding section(s) or table(s) that provide these data. The inputs that have not been previously discussed are provided in this section.

3 -* . t Table 8-1: Inputs for EOC-13 POB and Leak Rate Projections Input Description Section or Table Reference Comments BOC Voltage Distribution Tables 3-18 and 3-19 Repaired Voltage Distribution Tables 3-18 and 3-19 NDE Uncertainties Section 3.6; Table 3-24 POD Table 7-5 Composite POPCD through e2R12 POD (7 inspections)

Growth Section 3.2; Tables 3-15 Cycle 11 growth used for through 3-17 EOC-13 projections Cycle Length Section 8.1 1.33 EFPY Tube Integrity Correlations Tables 5-1 through 5-3 Addendum 5 plus 2R1 tube Material Properties Section 8.1 Material Properties Since the burst pressure for a given flaw varies with the material properties of the tube, the material properties of the tubes must be included as an input into the POB program. This data is obtained from Reference 6. The values used for the EOC-13 projections were taken directly from Reference 6 and were a mean flow stress of 68.78 ksi and a standard deviation of the flow stress of 3.1725 ksi.

86-5059194-00 Page 108 of 114 Cycle Length The estimated cycle length for Unit 2 Cycle 13 is 1.33 EFPY (Ref. 12). This value was used in all projections for EOC-13 conditions.

8.2 ProjectedEOC-13 Voltage Distributions The EOC-13 voltage distributions are obtained by applying a Monte Carlo sampling process to the BOC-13 voltages. The process starts by selecting a random POPCD correlation based on the POPCD parameters through 2R12 shown in Table 7-5. Based on the POPCD correlation, the BOC-13 population of indications is determined (detected plus assumed undetected). The process then randomly assigns NDE uncertainty values and a growth value to each of the BOC-13 indications. The EOC-13 voltage distributions are then used to calculate a leak rate and probability of tube burst. As discussed in Section 3.2, the Cycle 11 growth rates were determined to bound the Cycle 12 growth rates. Therefore, the Cycle 11 growth rates were used for projecting the EOC-1 3 voltages. SG 2-1 used SG-specific Cycle 11 growth rates divided into two growth bins with a breakpoint at 1.06v. SGs 2-2 and 2-3 used composite Cycle 11 growth rates divided into three bins with breakpoints at 0.59v and 1.66v. SG 2-4 used SG-specific Cycle 11 growth rates divided into three bins with breakpoints at 0.59v and 1.66v. The 'delta volts adjustment' was only required for Bini of the SG 2-1 growth distribution. This adjustment was very small (+0.002v). Table 8-2 'and Figures 8-1 through 8-4 provide the projected EOC-13 voltage distributions.

0

86-5059194-00 Page 109 of 114 Table 8-2: Projected EOC-13 Voltage Distributions (DCPP POPCD)

Voltage Bin 2 EOC-13 Projected Distributions with DCPP POPCD SG 2.1 SG 2.2 SG 2.3 SG 24

_ =0.1 1.18 1.07 7.35 0.75 0.2 23.42 20.61 34.63 15.47 0.3 102.96 85.28 71.57 88.21 0.4 158.83 122.38 99.23 171A3 0.5 171.77 137.63 110.49 226.71 0.6 137.59 126.47 93.76 240.17 0.7 101.11 96A1 70.26 209.88 0.8 76.17 63.84 45.65 156.89 0.9 59.84 40.00 27.96 106.96 1 44.11 26.76 17.89 76.05 1.1 31.12 19.97 12.78 60.88 1.2 20.75 16.26 10.13 53.83 1.3 13.43 13.75 8.38 49.91 1.4 8.42 11A9 7.03 45.04 1.5 5.47 9.62 5.85 38.91 1.6 3.85 7.82 4.75 32.33 1.7 2.96 6.21 3.85 26.28 1.8 2.91 5.18 3.22 21.83 1.9 2.91 4A3 2.79 19.00 2 2.83 3.74 2.37 16.70 2.1 2.64 3.17 2.00 14.75 2.2 2.20 2.61 1.61 12.72 2.3 1.85 2.14 1.32 10.89 2.4 1.80 1.94 1.21 9.69 2.5 1.97 1.77 1.09 8.37 2.6 1.71 1.52 0.95 7.23 2.7 1.27 1.32 0.80 6.50 2.8 0.86 1.14 0.68 5.82 2.9 0.60 0.92 0.56 4.67 3 0.42 0.77 0.46 3.85 3.1 0.34 0.69 0.42 3A1 3.2 0.37 0.63 0.39 2.97 3.3 0.41 0.55 0.34 2.60 3.4 0.39 0.44 0.27 2.23 3.5 035 0.39 0.23 2.20 3.6 0.30 0.44 0.27 2.67 3.7 0.24 OA8 0.30 2.81 3.8 0.18 0.47 0.29 2.72 3.9 0.13 OA3 0.25 2.56 4 0.13 0.38 0.22 2A1 4.1 0.21 0.34 0.20 2.25 4.2 0.32 0.28 0.17 1.94 4.3 0.36 0.22 0.13 1.56 4A 0.39 0.16 0.09 1.23 4.5 OA7 0.11 0.07 0.98 4.6 0.54 0.08 0.05 0.77 4.7 0.54 0.06 0.04 0.61 4.8 0.52 0.04 0.03 0.49 4.9 0.56 0.03 0.02 0.40 5 0.60 0.02 0.01 0.36 5.1 0.57 0.01 0.01 0.34 5.2 OA9 0.01 0.00 0.33 5.3 OA1 0.01 0.00 0.31 5.4 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.28 5.5 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.26 5.6 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.25 5.7 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.24 5.8 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.21 5.9 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.17 6 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.13 7 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.20 8______ 0.00 0.00 0.00-- 0.00 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

>10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Totals 996.72 842.53 1 654.39 1781.63

86-5059194-00 Page 110 of 114 Figure 8-1: SG 2-1 EOC-13 Projected Voltage Distributions Using POPCD Voltage Distribution Prolected at EOC-13 for SG 2.1 Using POPCO 300 250 200 S

S 10 iE 2

50 o IDI iiiI- --- -

0 q 0m0 m e r e0 cq _ _: y e .,- q eRN, e, Cl N _ -i If e e Pt eq 0 X V I q e e r- e ax o o a o a o o o O - - - - 1

- - - - _ N " N N N S N 0 m A Bobbin Volts Figure 8-2: SG 2-2 EOC-13 Projected Voltage Distributions Using POPCD Voltage Distribution Projected at EOC-13 for SG 2-2 Using POPCD 300 250 200 S

150 1.r 50 - -

0~I 6

"o eo w o o o o imfn-SI G P e a _ _

o o - -

q e- t- k- e r- e-N _V o"Ni (" .:N e epN r- e qN e n7 . e 0 eBbb N N Nib o *A Bobbin Volts

86-5059194-00 Page 111 of 114 Figure 8-3: SG 2-3 EOC-13 Projected Voltage Distributions Using POPCD Voltage Distribution Projected at EOC-13 for SG 2-3 Using POPCD 300 250 200 t

150 IE z

100 50

_ 0 a 0 a a 0 a 0 - - - - - - - - -c NVo n l ts N N 0 C A Bobbin Volts Figure 8-4: SG 2-4 EOC-13 Projected Voltage Distributions Using POPCD Voltage Distribution Projected at EOC-13 for SC 2-4 Using POPCD 300 250 200

.5150 EI 100__L_________________ _

° ° ° ° ° a ° a ° - - - - - - - - -o N V N N N *, N ,; Alto Bobbin Volts

86-5059194-00 Page 112 of 114 8.3 Projected Tube Burst Probability and Leak Rate for EOC-13 Calculations to predict SLB leak rate and tube burst probability for each steam generator in DCPP Unit 2 at the projected EOC-13 conditions were performed using the burst pressure, leak rate, and probability of leakage correlations provided in Tables 5-1 through 5-3. The results of these calculations are shown in Table 8-3. As shown in Table 8-3, all of the results for projected EOC-13 conditions are below the acceptance criteria of 1.0 x 10-2 for POB and 10.5 gpm for leakage.

Table 8-3: Projected Leak Rate and Burst Probability at EOC-13 Using DCPP POPCD Projected Probability of Burst SLB Leak Steam Number of 95% UCL Generator Indications at EOC-13 Best Estimate (iFailures) or More _ _

(gpm)

SG 2-1 996.7 1.06 x 104 1.14 x 103 0.95 SG 2-2 842.5 4.26 x 10-4 4.77 x 104 0.64 SG 2-3 654.4 2.06 x 104 2.43 x 104 0.40 SG 2-4 1781.6 2.56 x 1043 2.75 x 104 3.25 Reporting Threshold 1.0 x 10' 2 10.5

86-5059194-00 Page 113 of 114 9.0 References

1. FANP Document 86-5053832-00, "DCPP Unit 2R12 Voltage-Based ARC and W-star Startup Report", November 2004.

2. NRC Generic Letter 95-05, "Voltage-Based Repair Criteria for the Repair of Westinghouse Steam Generator Tubes Affected by Outside Diameter Stress Corrosion Cracking," USNRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, August 3, 1995.

3. NRC SER for Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 for Voltage-Based Repair Criteria, letter to PG&E dated March 12, 1998.

4. FANP Document 51-5001160-02, "Steam Generator POB Simulation Code -

POB97vbR20.F90", December 2003.

5. FANP Document 51-5001151-02, "Steam Generator Leak Rate Simulation Code LKR97VB2_r30.F90", December 2003.

6. WCAP 14277, Revision 1, SLB Leak Rate and Tube Burst Probability Analysis Methods for ODSCC at TSP Intersections, December 1996.

7. FANP Document 86-5029429-00, "DCPP 2R1 1 Bobbin Voltage ARC 90-Day Summary Report", June 2003.

8. EPRI Report NP 7480-L, Addendum 5, 2002 Database Update, "Steam Generator Tubing Outside Diameter Stress Corrosion Cracking at Tube Support Plates Database for Altemate Repair Limits", Electric Power Research Institute,.January 2003.

9. Pacific Gas and Electric, Diablo Canyon Unit 2 Refueling Outage 2R12, "Steam Generator Tubing Degradation Assessment", Revision 0, October 20, 2004.

10. "Noise Requirements for Voltage-Based ARC", transmitted in NEI letter to NRC dated April 13, 2004.

11. Diablo Canyon Power Plant Procedure, NDE ET-7, "Eddy Current Examination of Steam Generator Tubing", Revision 5, October 26, 2004.

12. Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Surveillance Test Procedure, STP M-SGTI, Revision 10, "Steam Generator Tube Inspection", November 2, 2004.

13. FANP Document 51-5053831-00, "Bobbin Coil Probe Wear Monitoring for DCPP 2R12",

November 2004.

14. Not Used.

15. NRC Letter to NEI, dated February 9, 1996, "Probe Wear Criteria."

86-5059194-00 Page 114 of 114

16. PG&E Letter DCL-04-028, License Amendment Request 04-01, "Revised Steam Generator Voltage-based Repair Criteria Probability of Detection Method for DCPP Units 1 and 2",

March 18, 2004.

17. FANP Document 51-5039454-00, "Bobbin/+Point Correlation for AONDB Indications at DCPP", February 2004.

18. Not Used.

19. Not Used.

20. Westinghouse Letter to Diablo Canyon (Rice to Arhar), Revised ARC Database Parameters Including Tubes Removed During 2R1 1,June 23, 2003.

21. Not Used.

22. NEI Letter to NRC, "Revision to ODSCC ARC Task - 'Extreme Values of ODSCC ARC Growth'", July 9, 2004.

23. FANP Document 32-5059193-00, "DCPP Unit 2 R12 Voltage-Based ARC 90-Day Report".

24. NEI Letter to NRC, 'Generic Letter 95-05 Altemate Repair Criteria Methodology Updates",

June 2, 2004.

25. PG&E Letter DCL-04-104, "Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding License Amendment Request 04-01", August 18, 2004.

26. Not used.

27. FANP Document 86-5049264-00, "DCPP Unit 1 R12 Voltage-Based ARC 90-Day Report",

September 2004.

28. PG&E Letter DCL-04-117, "Response to August 24, 2004, NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding License Amendment Request 04-01", September 17, 2004.

29. NRC Letter to PG&E, "Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 - Issuance of Amendment Re: Permanently Revised Steam Generator Voltage-Based Repair Criteria Probability of Detection Method (TAC Nos. MC2313 and MC2314)", October 28, 2004.

30. PG&E Letter DCL-04-105, "Response to July 8, 2004, NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding License Amendment Request 04-01", August 20, 2004.

22410.3 (5/10/2004) Page 1of 2 EA DESIGN VERIFICATION CHECKLIST AREVAi Document Identifier 86 - 5059194- 00 Title DCPP Unit 2 R12 Voltage-Based ARC 90-Day Report

1. Were the inputs correctly selected and incorporated into design or analysis? 10 Y al N El N/A

2. Are assumptions necessary to perform the design or analysis activity El Y Ea N 0 N/A adequately described and reasonable? Where necessary, are the assumptions identified for subsequent re-verifications when the detailed design activities are completed?

3. Are the appropriate quality and quality assurance requirements specified? Or, 0 Y El N El N/A for documents prepared per FANP procedures, have the procedural requirements been met?

4. If the design or analysis cites or is required to cite requirements or criteria . E Y El N 0 N/A based upon applicable codes, standards, specific regulatory requirements, including issue and addenda, are these properly identified, and are the requirements/criteria for design or analysis met?

5. Have applicable construction and operating experience been considered? al Y El N 0 N/A

6. Have the design interface requirements been satisfied? Qj Y [I N E0 N/A

7. Was an appropriate design or analytical method used? E 0 Y El N ° N/A

8. Is the output reasonable compared to inputs? '0 Y aE N N/A

9. Are the specified parts, equipment and processes suitable for the required El Y El N 0 N/A application?

10. Are the specified materials compatible with each other and the design ° Y al N 0 N/A environmental conditions to which the material will be exposed?

11. Have adequate maintenance features and requirements been specified? El Y El N 0l N/A

12. Are accessibility and other design provisions adequate for performance of El Y Dl N 0D N/A needed maintenance and repair? _

13. Has adequate accessibility been provided to perform the in-service inspection ° Y a N 0 N/A expected to be required during the plant life?

14. Has the design properly considered radiation exposure to the public and plant a Y a N 0 N/A personnel?

15. Are the acceptance criteria incorporated in the design documents sufficient to El Y El N 0D N/A allow verification that design requirements have been satisfactorily accomplished?

16. Have adequate pre-operational and subsequent periodic test requirements ° Y El N 0 N/A been appropriately specified?

17. Are adequate handling, storage, cleaning and shipping requirements El Y El N 0 N/A specified?

18. Are adequate identification requirements specified? ° Y E N 0D N/A

19. Is the document prepared and being released under the FANP Quality 0 Y D N El N/A Assurance Program? If not, are requirements for record preparation review, approval, retention, etc., adequately specified?

Framatome ANP, Inc., an AREVA and Siemens company 86-5059194-00 Page A-1 of A-2

22410-3 (5/1012004) Paoe 2 of 2

[

AREVA Document Identifier DESIGN VERIFICATION CHECKLIST 86 - 5059194 - 00 J

Comments:

Verified By: . JeffreyM Fleck G 3/ Z9/5 .

(First, MI. Last) Printed I Typed Name - regntureDate Framatome ANP, Inc., an AREVA and Siemens company 86-50591 94-00 Page A-2 of A-2