ML071370232

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Internal Report, IR-2007-271, Evaluation of Dissimilar Metal Weld Examinations Performed During Refueling Outage 19 (N1R19), Attachment 3
ML071370232
Person / Time
Site: Nine Mile Point Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 05/10/2007
From: Cilento J, Latiolais C
Constellation Energy Group, Electric Power Research Institute
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
N1R19 IR-07-271
Download: ML071370232 (75)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:ATTACHMENT (3) EVALUATION OF DISSIMILAR METAL WELD EXAMINATIONS PERFORMED AT NINE MILE POINT UNIT 1 DURING REFUELING OUTAGE 19 (N1R19) Performed for NMPNS By The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC May 10, 2007

IE=I-I~ I ELECTRIC POWER e IRESEARCH INSTITUTE Evaluation of Dissimilar Metal Weld Examinations Performed at Nine Mile Unit 1 during Refueling Outage 19 (NIR19) IR-2007-271 WARNING: Please read the Export Control Agreement on the back cover.

Evaluation of Dissimilar Metal Weld Examinations Performed at Nine Mile Unit 1 during Refueling Outage 19 (N1R19) IR-2007-271 Internal Report, April 2007 EPRI Project Manager C. Latiolais Cosponsors Joseph Cilento, Constellation Energy ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1395

  • PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813
  • USA 800.313.3774
  • 650.855.2121
  • askepri@epri.com
  • www.eph.com

DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM: (A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I) WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (11) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (111) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTANCE; OR (B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT. ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. Copyright © 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.

CITATIONS This document was prepared by Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Nondestructive Evaluation (NDE) Program 1300 WT Harris Blvd. Charlotte, NC 28262 Principal Investigator C. Latiolais This document describes research sponsored by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). This publication is a corporate document that should be cited in the literature in the following manner: "Evaluation of Dissimilar Metal Weld Examinations Performed at Nine Mile Unit I during Refueling Outage 19 (N1R19) ". EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2007. IR-2007-271. iii

ABSTRACT The inservice examination scope for Nine Mile Unit 1 during the 19th refueling outage (N 1 R19) included the examination of selected recirculation system welds. During these examinations, one planar indication was found in the 32-WD-1 64(N2D) safe-end-to-inlet nozzle weld and a second indication was reported in a similar weld 32-WD-122. EPRI NDE Program personnel were requested to provide a technical review of the indications reported in the aforementioned welds. The initial technical support provided included:

  • Review and analysis of available automated ultrasonic data including ultrasonic examinations intended to further characterize and evaluate the recorded indications.

Review of previous ultrasonic examination data. Review of available fabrication data including construction radiographs. Communicate with utility and vendor personnel regarding the repair and examination history of this weld. V

CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background.............................................................................................................. 1-1 2 SERVICE RELATED EXPERIENCE...................................................................................... 2-3 2.1 Background.............................................................................................................. 2-3 Hope Creek (1997)......................................................................................................... 2-3 Riverbend Unit 1 (1989, RF-2)....................................................................................... 2-4 Duane Arnold (RF-16, 1999).......................................................................................... 2-4 Nine M ile - Unit 2 (RF07, 1999)..................................................................................... 2-5 Pilgrim Unit 1 (2003)...................................................................................................... 2-5 Susquehanna Unit 1 (RF-13, 2004)............................................................................... 2-6 Duane Arnold (RF-20, 2007).......................................................................................... 2-6 3 EXAM INATIO N HISTORY...................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Previous Ultrasonic Exam ination History (N2D)....................................................... 3-1 4 REVIEW OF FABRICATION DATA (INCLUDING RADIOGRAPHS).................................... 4-1 4.1 General..................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 (N2D) W D-164 Evaluation................................................................................ 4-1 5 REVIEW O F PREVIO US EXAM INATIO N DATA................................................................... 5-1 5.1 (N2D) 32-W D-164.................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 (N2C) 32-W D-122.............................................................................................. 5-1 6 EVALUATION OF INDICATION IN INLET SAFE-END-TO-NOZZLE (N2D) 32-WD-164...... 6-1 6.1 (N2D) 32-W D-164 Flaw Characterization................................................................. 6-1 7 EVALUATION OF INDICATION IN INLET SAFE-END TO NOZZLE (N2C) 32-WD-122...... 7-1 7.1 (N2C) 32-W D-122 Flaw Characterization................................................................. 7-1 8 CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................ 8-1 9 REFERENCES....................................................................................................................... 9-1 vii

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1 N2 Configuration....................................................................................................................... 1-1 Figure 4-1 Repair Area on (N2D) 32-W D-164........................................................................................... 4-2 Figure 4-2 Evidence of Enlarged Root due to Repairs............................................................................. 4-3 Figure 4-3 Possible Crevice on Radiograph.............................................................................................. 4-3 Figure 7-1 Location of Flaw........................................................................................................................ 7-1 Figure 7-2 Cladding Fabrication Flaw Reported during 2007 Examination............................................... 7-2 Figure 7-3 Image from 1999 Data Showing Cladding Fabrication Flaw Reported during 2007 Examination 7 -2 ix

LIST OF TABLES Table 3-1 N2D Safe-end-to-nozzle Weld 32-WD-164 Ultrasonic Examination History............................. 3-1 Table 3-2 N2C Safe end-to-nozzle Weld 32-WD-122 Ultrasonic Examination History............................. 3-1 Table 4-1 Fabrication W eld Identifications................................................................................................. 4-1 Table 4-2 Repair History for Weld (N2D) 32-WD-164............................................................................... 4-4 xi

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

During refuel outage 19, inservice inspections (ISI) at Nine Mile Unit 1 included automated ultrasonic examination (UT) of the N2D and the N2C safe-end-to-nozzle welds. The welds were examined as part of the population scheduled in Unit One's third ten-year interval ISI program. Both the N2D and the N2C safe-end-to-nozzle weld configurations (see Figure 1-1) contain a dissimilar metal weld joining the carbon steel nozzle to a stainless steel safe-end. Both welds are denoted in Nine Mile's BWRVIP-75 program as Category "A" welds and the specific weld identification numbers are 32-WD-164 (N2D) and 32-WD-122 (N2C) [1]. This category refers to welds made entirely of resistant materials. Nine Mile also relies on Hydrogen Water Chemistry (HWC) and Noble Metal Chemical Addition (NMCA) for mitigation of stress corrosion cracking (SCC) in these welds. 32W00843 &32-WD-043-IR 32WO083 &32-WO-083-IR 32WO1123 & 32-Wfl-123-IR 32WO1165 & 32-WO4-165-IR 32WO4209 & 32-WO-20q-IR 32WO1042 (REF) 32WD082 32W1.4222 32W01 64 7 1 32WO1208 Figure 1-1 N2 Configuration 1-1

The examinations of the N2C and N2D safe-end-to-nozzle welds were performed during RF019 by Nine Mile's inspection vendor, WESDYNE International, using a automated technique defined in procedure WDI-SSP-1 105 Revision 0, titled "Generic Procedure for the Automated (IntraSpect) Ultrasonic Examination ofDissimilar Metal Welds using WDI-STD-119A." As documented on the applicable Performance Demonstration Qualification Statement (PDQS No. 523) dated February 16, 2006, the procedure meets the requirements of the Performance Demonstration Initiative's implementation of The American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, Appendix VIII, Supplement 10. WESDYNE's initial evaluation of the N2D weld 32-WD-164 UT data revealed a planar-type, circumferential indication located at the approximate three o'clock position. The planar indication was reported to be contained in the weld material and connected to the inside surface. Length and depth measurements were performed and the indication was reported to be 1.59" long (measured at the inside surface) with a through-wall dimension of 0.27" (15.43%). A second indication was also reported in the N2C nozzle weld 32-WD-122. This indication did not have the same character as the indication reported in the N2D nozzle weld and it appeared to be solely contained in the nozzle cladding. Joe Cilento of Constellation Energy requested assistance from the NDE Program to support a technical evaluation of the reported data, and EPRI's Carl Latiolais was selected to support this request. This summary report documents the NDE Program's results of the technical review of past examination history for N2D weld 32-WD-164. 1-2

2 SERVICE RELATED EXPERIENCE

2.1 Background

Documentation from dissimilar metal weld degradation in boiling water reactors (BWRs) was collected and reviewed for relevance and also guided the direction of this evaluation. Information relevant to this review is included below. Hope Creek (1997) In October of 1997, Hope Creek Nuclear Power Station detected a through-wall circumferential crack in their N6 Core Spray nozzle-to-safe-end-weld. Root cause analysis determined that this crack was due to SCC in the alloy 182 weld material located in a weld repair area. The presence of this weld repair was confirmed by a review of the fabrication data indicating that the weld had been repaired nine times, and in some cases was excavated down to the root [2]. This type of repair process may have caused a crevice condition on the inside surface of the component, which is a known initiation point for SCC. Due to problems in the ultrasonic characterization of the defect, GE issued a revision to SIL-455 [3] to incorporate lessons learned from this experience. Additionally, EPRI issued an NDE Alert [2] that included additional inspection processes aimed at increasing the reliability of the examinations. The following recommendations were made:

  • Expand the examination volume to cover the entire inconel weld and adjacent heat affected zone.
  • Interrogate the upper regions of the weld, outside the code examination volume, to search for reflections from midwall to deep flaws orientated both axially and circumferentially.
  • The use of enhanced automated imaging systems that allow multiple views of the ultrasonic data that aid in evaluation.
  • Review of previous examination data using the improved ultrasonic data analysis software.

" Thorough reviews of the fabrication records in an effort to locate fabrication defects or known repair areas, especially on inside surfaces that are potential sites of SCC initiation. 2-3

Riverbend Unit 1 (1989, RF-2) During a 1989 scheduled inservice inspection, a circumferential indication was found by ultrasonic examination in the N4A-2 inlet feedwater nozzle-to-safe-end weld during the second refueling outage. The indication, approximately 6" long with a reported maximum depth of 0.20", was located in the Alloy 182 weld butter on the safe-end side of the weld. This indication was reexamined four times in a period of three years, and crack growth was reported each time. The safe-end was replaced during the 1992 RF-4 refueling outage. The NRC contracted Brookhaven National Laboratory to conduct a metallurgical examination and failure analysis, including destructive examination of the safe-end weld [4]. The results of this evaluation indicated that the cracking was SCC of Inconel 182 weld metal that initiated at a weld defect (lack of root penetration or lack of fusion) located at the original base metal/alloy 182 interface, approximately 84% through-wall and 7.0" long. The cracking mechanism determination in this report was based on tests performed on alloys 82 and 182 in simulated reactor environments. Testing was conducted on creviced and non-creviced slow strain specimens. These experiments showed that in the uncreviced condition, all alloys were immune to SCC, but in the creviced conditions, both Alloys 600 and 182 were susceptible to SCC. It also demonstrated that the fractography of the specimens was quite similar to the River Bend crack and that the fabrication flaw noted acted as the crevice condition needed for initiation. Duane Arnold (RF-16, 1999) While performing scheduled ultrasonic examinations on the recirculation system, two circumferential indications were found in the N2B safe-end-to-nozzle inlet weld. As a result, expanded scope examinations were performed on welds of a similar configuration. During these examinations, similar indications were found in the N2D. The examinations were performed using automated ultrasonic examination procedures approved for application to dissimilar metal weld configurations that were enhanced based on the Hope Creek's experiences in 1997. Depth sizing data was collected, but this data was limited due to the presence of weld crowns. The flaws, however, could be measured to a depth of at least 65% of the thickness. Weld overlay repairs were performed on both nozzles. In preparation for overlay, one of the flaw locations began to leak, confirming that the indication was associated with a deep crack found with the enhanced automated techniques. Review of previous automated data with the advanced data analysis software indicated that the indications were present in the 1996 data. A complete review of the fabrication records and digitized radiographs show that there were extensive weld repairs performed in the root area of the welds during fabrication. The final root, while acceptable, contained areas of suck-back and root concavity in the area of the flaws, which appear to have sharp edges creating an inner surface creviced condition. These conditions are believed to act as stress risers that are initiation points for SCC. 2-4

Nine Mile - Unit 2 (RF07, 1999) During RF07 (1999), as a result of industry events and implementation of lessons learned from Hope Creek, Nine Mile staff reviewed the data on 17 dissimilar metal welds that were previously examined with automated techniques. This review was performed with RD-TECH TomoView data analysis software. While reviewing the feedwater nozzle-to-safe-end weld 2RPV-KB20 (N4D), it was noted that there were several circumferential indications present that were not addressed in previous examination reports. The newly identified indications appeared to be located in the same radial plane above a surface connected fabrication flaw originally reported in 1995. A detailed flaw analysis was performed in 1998, and it was considered acceptable for continued operation. Although this analysis was performed conservatively, assuming active IGSCC, it was considered to be most likely a fabrication flaw that exhibited no growth based on three UT examinations (1990, 1995 and 1998). Based on this evaluation, it was determined that the flaw identified in the Inconel 182 buttering of this weld was representative of an active stress corrosion crack initiated from a previously documented area containing a fabrication defect believed to be lack of fusion connected to the inside surface. This condition may have provided a crevice condition that acted as the initiation point for the SCC. Pilgrim Unit 1 (2003) While online, Entergy personnel noted an increasing trend of unidentified drywell leakage. The plant was shutdown in a planned outage to install a Unit Aux Transformer (UAT). At this time, it was noted that the Control Rod Drive nozzle (N 10) was leaking in the nozzle-to-cap weld area. Subsequent investigations by NDE ultrasonic personnel determined that source of the leak appeared to be a 1.75" long circumferential crack located in the butt weld adjacent to what seemed to be a previously repaired area. A manual examination was performed on this weld to better characterize the flaw and provide information to support the overlay repair. This examination was performed in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VIII, Supplement 10, as modified by the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI) program. The following was observed during the examination:

  • A circumferential flaw was detected within the area adjacent to the through-wall leak.
  • This flaw could only be evaluated with the higher angle (60 and 80-ODCR ) degree refracted longitudinal search units due the unusually large weld width caused by the repair.
  • The length of the flaw was measured to be 1.75", with a semi-elliptical depth profile that started out shallow on the ends and propagated radially toward the center of the flaw where it actually leaked through.
  • This flaw exhibited typical ultrasonic signal characteristics indicative of SCC.
  • It was visually and physically apparent that a weld repair was performed in the same location as the flaw.

Fabrication records for this weld were reviewed and confirmed that a weld repair was made in the area of this flaw. Radiographic reader sheets state that the inside surface in the area of the flaw was also ground in an effort to remove unacceptable conditions noted on the fabrication radiograph. Additionally, the radiographs were digitally enhanced to increase resolution and also confirmed the presence of the weld repair in the area of the leaking crack. 2-5

Susquehanna Unit I (RF-13, 2004) During the U1-13RIO inservice inspections (ISI) at Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (SSES), the NIB nozzle-to-safe-end weld was examined as part of the population scheduled in Unit One's second ten-year interval ISI program. During this examination, a planar-type, circumferentially oriented flaw was reported to be located at the approximate top dead center. This flaw appeared to be contained in the weld material and connected to the inside surface. Evaluation of the qualified UT sizing data showed the flaw to be approximately 2" long, with a through-wall dimension of 1.14". The N lB nozzle-to-safe-end configuration contained a dissimilar metal weld joining the carbon steel nozzle to a stainless safe-end (28" OD and nominal thickness of 2.15"). While in the process of performing a required scope expansion, a second flaw was reported in the N2J safe-end-to-nozzle weld. Initial examination of this weld indicated a suspect indication in an area where it appeared that the search unit was being compromised by weld crown. The vendor requested that the surface condition of this weld be improved to eliminate the limitation. After removal of the weld crown restriction, the examination was repeated and the vendor reported a planar-type, circumferentially oriented indication located at approximately 45 degrees. The flaw appeared to be contained in the weld material and connected to the inside surface. Evaluation of the qualified UT sizing data showed the flaw to be 12.14" long, with a through-wall dimension of 0.94". Similar to NIB, the N2J configuration contains a dissimilar metal weld joining the carbon steel nozzle to a stainless safe-end (14" OD and nominal thickness of 1.32"). Both of these welds were classified as Category "C" welds. This category refers to welds not made of resistant materials that have undergone a stress improvement (SI) process. Mechanical stress improvement (MSIP) was applied to the N2J in 1993 and to the NIB in 1995. SSES also started Hydrogen Water Chemistry in 2000. A complete review of all available ultrasonic data was performed using advanced data analysis software. This software provided the examiners with enhanced data analysis capabilities (A, B, C and D Scans) above and beyond what was available to the data analyst during the original analysis. As a result of this review, there was strong evidence that these flaws were actually present prior to MSIP in thesame location and relative depth. Weld overlay repairs were performed on both nozzles. Duane Arnold (RF-20, 2007) During refuel outage 20, inservice inspections (ISI) at Duane Arnold Unit I included manually-driven, encoded automated UT of the N2F safe-end-to-nozzle weld. The weld was examined as part of the population scheduled in Unit One's fourth ten-year interval ISI program. The N2F safe-end-to-nozzle weld configuration contains a dissimilar metal weld joining the carbon steel nozzle to a SB-166 Inconel safe-end (13" OD and nominal thickness of 1.1"). N2F safe-end-to-nozzle weld is denoted in Duane Arnold's BWRVIP-75 program as a Category "D" weld and the specific weld identification number is RRF-F002. This category refers to welds not made of resistant materials that have not undergone a stress improvement (SI) process. Duane Arnold relies on Hydrogen Water Chemistry (HWC) and Noble Chemical Addition (NMCA) for mitigation of SCC in this weld. 2-6

Evaluation of the N2F weld RRF-F002 UT data revealed a planar-type, circumferential indication located at the approximate six o'clock position. The planar indication appeared to be contained in the weld material and connected to the inside surface. Length and depth measurements were performed and the indication was reported to be 5.9" long (measured at the inside surface) with a through-wall dimension of 0.59" (55.6%). As a result of this finding, Duane Arnold expanded the examination scope to include three additional welds with similar configurations. During the examination of these additional welds, a flaw was reported in the N2C inlet safe end-to-nozzle weld RRC-F002. This flaw also was also reported to be contained wholly in the weld and butter with a length of 6.30" (ID) and a maximum depth of 0.79" (71.8%). Review of the radiographs on N2F in the area of the flaw showed evidence that some inside surface repairs may have been performed, but these were not documented in the fabrication records. Repair records for N2C showed that the weld had been repaired in the area of the reported flaw and root condition could have acted as a stress riser. Both welds were subsequently overlaid. 2-7

3 EXAMINATION HISTORY 3.1 Previous Ultrasonic Examination History (N2D) Available documentation was reviewed to determine the examination history of N2D and N2C (see Table 3-1 and 3-2, respectively). Table 3-1 N2D Safe-end-to-nozzle Weld 32-WD-164 Ultrasonic Examination History Examination Type of Examination Results Date (Automated/Manual) 1982 Manual (Initial Pre-Service Geometric reflectors (Root and ID Examination) geometry) 1995 Note I Manual Inside surface geometry (Root) 2007Note 2 Automated (Manual Reported a planar-type, circumferential Performed for Information indication located at the approximate WESDYNE) three o'clock position. The planar indication appeared to be connected to the inside surface. Length and depth measurements were performed and the indication was reported to be 1.59" long on the inside surface, with a through dimension of 0.27" (10.58%). Note 1 First examination using a refracted longitudinal search unit Note 2 First PDI qualified examination Table 3-2 N2C Safe end-to-nozzle Weld 32-WD-122 Ultrasonic Examination History Examination Type of Examination Results Date (Automated/Manual) 1982 Manual (Initial Pre-Service Root Geometry Examination) 1988 Note I Manual Root Geometry 1995 Manual No Recordable Indications 1999 Automated Acoustic Interface and Non-Relevant General Electric Indications 2 0 0 7 Note 2 Automated Reported a planar-type, circumferential WESDYNE indication located at the approximate twelve o'clock position. The planar indication appeared to be wholly contained in the nozzle cladding. Note 1 First examination using a refracted longitudinal search unit Note 2 First PDI qualified examination 3-1

4 REVIEW OF FABRICATION DATA (INCLUDING RADIOGRAPHS) 4.1 General A complete review of the fabrication data for the N2 safe-end-to-nozzle weld (N2D) 32-WD-164 was performed. Table 4-2 contains the repair history for weld (N2D) 32-WD-164. The radiographs and repair records for (N2C) 32-WD-122 were not reviewed during this evaluation because the indication was confirmed to be a cladding flaw and not in the structural portion of the weld volume. The weld identification numbers for these welds were different during fabrication. Table 4-1 below shows the weld identification used during fabrication for tracking the in-process inspections. Table 4-1 Fabrication Weld Identifications Fabrication Weld Identification In-service Weld Identification FW-14D-SEN 32-WD-1 64 4.2 (N2D) WD-164 Evaluation The review of the radiographs and repair records for this weld revealed that this weld was repaired up to nine times during installation and the majority of the repairs were due to unacceptable ID root conditions, which would have required significant working of the inside surface. These numerous repairs altered the normal shape of the root in this area, which is evident on the ultrasonic data shown in Figure 4-1 and the radiographs in Figures 4-2 and 4-3. Additionally, there was evidence on some of the intermediate radiographs that a crevice condition due to root concavity could have been formed on the inside surface of the weld. Figure 4-3 identifies this possible crevice area. While the reported flaw could be associated with welding flaws left in the weld during fabrication, the correlation between stress corrosion cracking can be closely associated with 82/182 materials, weld repairs, and/or ID creviced conditions as noted in References 2-4. 4-1

Eile " ctw"I YU E-ftw Lý-Sm ý-Sm 1WIS Dimplav Llattinp Eu.,t J*ML.:~k fi kto. WMW Th.: MW2 - V 91 II 91 6.UI hG" at IM Oft 0.* "b. foil %U. W2 9 him 4" a k OFF Ut $AO a.0 PAW %It"" 40 Y-.: -100a. 1.19 hl* I10 V10 52 3.0 1-M. -.

. 71 3

AoboO Reported Planar Flaw [ 2.0 2.0 j 40 0.O 13 IU U 10 0.0 1.0 20-S:Mo04*oýoUf..U 1.1 2.'0 2.0

6.

LU 00 Figure 4-1 Repair Area on (N2D) 32-WD-164 4-2

Excavation into safe-s m ri I end Dbase xc v 'i to material t root aking root wiider Figure 4-2 Evidence of Enlarged Root due to Repairs Figure 4-3 Possible Crevice on Radiograph 4-3

Table 4-2 Repair History for Weld (N2D) 32-WD-1 64 Date Film Marker Locations Type of Defect Comments 10/30/1982 14"-28" and 28"-42" (Info Incomplete fusion, Root Shot prior to filling cavity. Only) Tungsten Inclusions, Porosity and a burn through 10/31/1982 14"-28" and 28"-42" (Info Incomplete fusion Root Shot prior to filling cavity Only) Repair I of Root 11/2/1982 14"-28" and 28"-42" (Info Incomplete fusion, porosity, Root Shot prior to filling cavity Only) Tungsten inclusions Repair 2 of Root 11/3/1982 14"-28" and 28"-42" (Info Incomplete fusion, porosity, Root Shot prior to filling cavity Only) Tungsten inclusions Repair 3 of Root 11/4/1982 14" - 30"(Info Only) Acceptable Other areas on weld still had incomplete fusion that required repair 11/6/1982 14"- 28" (Info Only) Incomplete fusion Root Shot Prior to filling cavity Repair 4 11/8/1982 14" - 28" (Info Only) Incomplete fusion Root Shot prior to filling cavity Repair 5 11/8/1982 14"- 28" (Info Only) Porosity and Tungsten Excavation Shot inclusions (Acceptable) 11/10/1982 14" - 28" (Info Only) Incomplete fusion, porosity, Intermediate shot during filling of cavity Tungsten inclusions Repair 6 11/11/1982 20" - 32" (Info Only) Incomplete fusion Intermediate shot during filling of cavity Repair 7 11/11/1982 14" - 28" (Info Only) Incomplete fusion Intermediate shot during filling of cavity Repair 8 11/12/1982 18"- 30"(Info Only) Incomplete fusion Intermediate shot during filling of cavity Repair 9 11/12/1982 14"-28."'(Info Only) Acceptable (Tungsten Excavation Shot inclusions) 11/13/1982 22"- 32" (Info Only) Acceptable Informational shot after filling of cavity 11/13/1982 14" 30" (Info Only) Acceptable Informational shot a little over half way filled 12/5/1982 14"-28" and 28"-42" (Tungsten inclusions, Final artifacts) Acceptable 4-4

5 REVIEW OF PREVIOUS EXAMINATION DATA 5.1 (N2D) 32-WD-164 A thorough review of the manual examination data from the 1992 and 1995 outages was performed. With the exception of the 1995 examination, the previous examinations were performed with shear wave search units only, which are known to be ineffective in the examination of dissimilar metal welds. (The use of shear waves in the current qualified procedures is limited to examination of the base material on both sides of the weld and is not relied upon for examination of the weld material.) The 45 and 60 degree refracted longitudinal search units used in 1995 were not optimally focused for the depth of the reported indications. Based on the aforementioned information, it is possible that the reported flaw could have been present since fabrication and therefore not detected due to limitations in the examination techniques used. 5.2 (N2C) 32-WD-122 The 1999 automated report was reviewed; it was clear that the flaw was present in the data and appeared to not have changed in dimension since the last examination. Previous manual examinations did not have the benefit of the advanced ultrasonic imagery, and it is likely that without it, the examiners would have classified this flaw as clad noise and thus not reported it. 5-1

6 EVALUATION OF INDICATION IN INLET SAFE-END-TO-NOZZLE (N2D) 32-WD-164 6.1 (N2D) 32-WD-164 Flaw Characterization EPRI staff, along with the qualified examiner that originally reported the flaws, performed a detailed review of the automated data collected and the results of the inspection vendor's analysis of this weld using the Intraspect data analysis software. The ultrasonic analysis approach used by WESDYNE makes use of advanced imaging software that is capable of displaying A, B, B-Prime, and C scan images. The results of EPRI's review are detailed below. This flaw exhibits characteristics typical of a planar flaw that could be related to the original fabrication of the weld. This conclusion is based on the following key attributes:

  • The indication plots to the fusion zone of the inconel weld and safe-end in an area where several documented repairs were performed.

" The echo dynamic pattern observed from this flaw is smooth and no evidence of branching or multifaceted tip signals was detected. " The B and B-Prime (D-Scan) views indicate that the flaw does not vary in depth for the entire length of the scan. This uniform response pattern is not indicative of SCC.

  • The C-Scan image shows that the flaw is extremely straight and its axial position does not vary along the entire length of the scan. This consistent response is also not indicative of SCC.

The flaw appears to be connected or in very close proximity to the inside surface, but due to the inherent limitations of the ultrasonic techniques being used, it is impossible to determine if it is actually open to the inside surface. However, it has been evaluated conservatively by the vendor and the utility to be a surface connected flaw. While there is evidence that the reported flaw may be related to fabrication welding processes, the large number of ID weld repairs, and the possible presence of an ID creviced condition on the inside surface make it impossible to completely rule out that the reported flaw may actually be shallow SCC. 6-1

7 EVALUATION OF INDICATION IN INLET SAFE-END TO NOZZLE (N2C) 32-WD-122 7.1 (N2C) 32-WD-122 Flaw Characterization A thorough review of both the 1999 and the 2007 automated data confirm that the reported indication is clearly a fabrication flaw located near the transition between the stainless steel cladding and the nozzle butter (see Figure 7-1). The flaw is 1.3" long on the ID and is wholly contained in the cladding. It does not propagate into either the carbon steel base material or the inconel butter material. See Figures 7-2 and 7-3 below for images of the flaw collected from the 1999 and the 2007 data.

  • .732_

P I Figure 7-1 Location of Flaw S /S C L _ý.r 7-1

Figure 7-2 Cladding Fabrication Flaw Reported during 2007 Examination Figure 7-3 Image from 1999 Data Showing Cladding Fabrication Flaw Reported during 2007 Examination 7-2

8 CONCLUSION EPRI personnel were requested to provide assistance during the Nine Mile Unit 1 RF-19 outage by performing a technical evaluation of examination results reported by WESDYNE International for the N2D and N2C safe-end-to-nozzle dissimilar metal welds. The data provided for this review support their conclusion that N2D safe-end-to-nozzle weld contains a 1.59" long planar-type, circumferential flaw. The flaw reported in the N2D weld appeared to be ID connected and contained within the Alloy 82/182 weld material. The characteristics of this indication are not typical of SCC located in Alloy 82/182 weld material. EPRI's technical evaluation results confirm WESDYNE's conclusions; however, due to the numerous ID weld repairs and possible crevice condition noted, stress corrosion cracking (SCC) in this area cannot be completely ruled out. Data provided by WESDYNE from the examination of N2C supports their conclusion that the flaw reported in the N2C weld is consistent with a fabrication flaw. This flaw is 1.3" long on the ID located near the transition between the stainless steel cladding and the nozzle butter and is wholly contained in the cladding. The flaw does not appear to propagate into either the carbon steel base material or the inconel butter material and is typical of a cladding defect. 8-1

9 REFERENCES

1. Boiling Water Vessel Integrity Program (BWRVIP) document BWRIP-75 Titled "BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Technical Basis for Revisions to Generic Letter 88-01 Inspection Schedules
2. NDE Alert Bulletin P-98-009 Titled "Lessons Learned Regarding Effective Detection and Discrimination of Flaws in Dissimilar Metal Welds." Issued early 1998.
3. GE Nuclear Energy Services Information Letter (SIL) SIL No. 455 Revision 2 Titled "ISI of additional Alloy 182 Welds" Dated January 29, 2001.
4. Brookhaven National Laboratory Report Titled "Metallurgical Evaluation of a Feedwater Nozzle to Safe-End Weldfrom River Bend Station Unit 1". This report was prepared by request of the NRC. (Task Order No; 2, Fin E2089, Subtask No. 5a.) Dated August 1995.

9-1

ATTACHMENT (4) AUTOMATED ULTRASONIC WELD EXAMINATION

SUMMARY

REPORT FOR RECIRCULATION INLET NOZZLE-TO-SAFE END WELD NO. 32-WD-164 (Page 94 of 186 thru page 140 of 186) Performed for NMPNS By WesDyne International Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC May 10, 2007

Automated Ultrasonic WELD EXAMINATION SUMMARN Report # W-1-1105-07-007 Site: Nine Mile Unit I Outage #: NIRI9 Procedure # VIDI-SSP-1105 Revision: 0 System: Recirc Component ID: 32-WD-164 Compone t Config: Safe End to Nozzle Examiner: Thomas Walsh Level: I/ Examiner: Li3rry Musgrave Level: I/ Examination Type: PSI: ISI: _ Operating Syste m: IntraSpect Calibration Data Pkg.(s): W-1-1105-07-02 EXAMINATION

SUMMARY

One relavent indication was seen in the automated ultrasonic examination c atl taken on the weld listed above. The examination meets the requirements of ASME B&PV Code, Sec tion XI, Appendix VIII, 1995 edition with addenda through 2000. The PDI qualified procedure required d tection scanning with a 45 degree refracted longitudinal 1 MHz, 60 degree refracted longitudinal I MHz, 60 degme refracted longitudinal 2 MHz, and 45 degree shear 2.25 MHz transducers. An additional 45 degree refraec f longitudinal 2 MHz transducer was used to depth size the indication. The indication found is on the safe end side of the weld in an area of previous weld repair. The repair was for incomplete root fusion. Although the repair was performed the UT indicaiioi charactenstics are more indicative of a lack of fusion reflector than a service induced flaw. A manual *xam of the indication was also performed to look for additional flaw characteristics such as faceting. No face eing was found. The indication has been evaluated as a flaw using the ASME Code IWB tables. The 45 shear recorded one relevant, non-relevant indications, and acoustic i The I MHz 45 degree refracted longitudinal recorded non-relevant indicatioi The 1 MHz 60 degree refracted longitudinal recorded non-relevant indicatio, The 2 MHz 60 degree refracted longitudinal recorded non-relevant indicatioi off indication #1.) The 2 MHz 45 degree refracted longitudinal recorded the indication. nterface. Zs. ýs. s (the shear component reflected The examination coverage was limited by the OD geometry (taper) of the safe end. Previous Data Reviewed: -yes* Type: UT&RT Examination Coverage Achieved: Risk Informed - 100%, Lower 1/3 -100% (Base, I on Single Sided Demonstration) I Acceptable: Rejectable: 4 V'WW'U1. k&ýýA Date: --,29-Level Date: 4 -Z 0/ q [5')6-7 I I

  • sec-#s-is ziseostriom' -P&ep: cl-I..oO17-,/or Pageij1f a8C/

4-I

F"wuEsDyflE Ultrasonic INDICATION DATA Sheet Report # W-1-1105-07-007 Site: Nine Mile Unit: I Outage #: NIR19 Procedure # WDI-SSP-1105 Revision: 0 FCN: N/A System: Recirc. Weld #: 32-WD-164 Thickness: 1.69 inches Datum 0 Location: W1 WM W 2 Weld CL Top Dead Center Weld Center Line Abbreviations The layout at the left shows a perpendicular propagating sca For parallel scans the L and V dimensions would be reverse in relation to the weld centerlir Lma"DATM 0 2 I L lWM L2a Wltl4 0 L-Distance from Datum 0 (typically measuring an. flaw's major dimension, ie. length) MP-Metal Path US-J Prop.- Propagation DS-he. RL-Remaining Ligament above flaw CW. .SU Loc-Search Unit Location CCI W-Distance from Datum 0 (typically locating flaw's minor dimension, ie. width) L2 Lenoth I RL I DeDth I Upstream Downstream Clockwise V-CounterClockwise IND. I Angle &Mode Prop. Direction W SU Loci W Ind. Loc. LlI MP Comments 1 45S DS 26.85 28.8 i j Track Dimensions 145S DS -1.9 2.39 -0.17 24.7 26.51 1.8 11.51 0.18 Pipe OD Dimensions Reflector RL measured at top of echo dynamic pattern, no tip signal seen ___Consistant W measurement across indication I _45L2 OS_ ___1 _277 I 129.05 Track Dimensions 1 45L2 DS -1.9 2.4 -0.19 25.5 I 26.7 I 1.2 I 1.42 I 0.27 I Pipe OD Dimensions ~enecwor IEL measurea ar ro0 or echo dvnamic Dattem (DOssDilef. sianal) Consistant W measurement across indication I Track Offset Ratio = 93.25/101.25 = 0.92 I 92I 1...... /0/0D Ratio = 25.7/29.0* = 0.886 Most conservative length x ID/OD Ratio = 1.8 x 0.886 = 1.59 (Length at ID)

  • Inside and outside diameters taken from Safe End drawing #00788-3667 alyst Level Date

,Pg of Review by Level ' Date I Review by Date AN II ReAig /y Date

mWEsDyl ,SKETCH Sheet Site: Nine Mile Unit: I

Outage #: NIR19' System:

Recirc. Weld #: Procedure # WDI-SSP-1105 Revision: 0 IN D (eC 770W q5-,#4 -SI.;Lz I I d\\/ZZ LE ESP F40WL~ SYI'ETC-r.C1 USIAtC. 2)"wlAvev J0 O7eg -346 7

'&r 9 7 J 1841 IWB 3514-2 Calculation Project : System: Weld No.: Nine Mile Point NIR19 Recirc (32) 32-WD464 Exam R4 Flaw Thruwall Dimension *a" 0.27 Flaw Length "I. 1.59 Surface Separation "S" 0.00 Indi .Tr no "T mea Clad "'1 no raton:EIZ rn~nal 1z.;6: miredj ASME SECTION XI, 1989 W/A FOR ISI AUSTENITIC STEI=-L WELDS ALLOWABLE PLANNER FLAWS FOR CATEGORY B-F AND B-J TABLE IWB 3514-2 FOR 2.0" THICKNESS Aspect Ratio Surface Subsurface Surface Sutbsuiace a/I alt% alt % Truth alt % 0.00 10.0 10.0 FALSE 0.05 10.2 10.2 FALSE 0.10 10.4 10.4 FALSE ~ 0.15 10.5 10.5 TRUE 10.6* . 3 V 0.20 10.7 10.7 FALSE 0.25 10.9 10.9 FALSE 0.30 11.1 11.1 FALSE 0.35 11.2 11.2 FALSE 0.40 11.4 11.4 FALSE 0.45 11.6 11.6 FALSE 0.50 11.7 11.7 FALSE Allow.ed Ao loved a = a/I value= .y= 0.270 0.170 0.000 If a/l >.5, then a/I =.5 Y = S1a, IfY > 1, then Y = I Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t = 10.58% a/t = 15.43% I Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3514-2. Comments: Analyst: leLel: Dati: 3-"28-O7 Reviewer: Level:. Date: Utilty Reviewer: Level: Dat .7-347-..

Weld Number: Interfering Condition: Size of Interfering Condition: Distance from Weld Centerline: Distance from Datum Point 0.0: Reference Drawing Number: Ultrasonic Examination SCAN LIMITATION Sheet 32-WD-164 W-1-1105-07-007 Report # Page_18_of /86 OD TAPER FULL 3600 2.95" FULL 3600 0078 3667 FIG1I Comments and Sketches: Some coverage missed on nozzle only due to drop out on circumferential This does not affect reported coverage by single side demonstration. xcans. See Attached Sketch Sheet EXAMINER REVIEWER REVIEWER Authorized In-ion Agency LEVEL -2E LEVEL LEVEL ,2iW DATE DATE DATE DATE 11./ s-67

Fq1WESpYnE-SKETCH Sheet Site: Nine Mile Unit: I Outage #: NIR19 System: Recirc. Weld #: Procedure # 32 - v -1 WDI-SSP-1105 Revision: 0 Coverage Plot I /dioZ L-5 qFE F1.0 4 SKETC HCI4. &r1wccrD1? Uw6'.000 709. -346 AN!4 ReviYZ* Date

'Awr!sPDn IntraSpect Automated UT System EXAMINATION DATA for OD examination of Dissimilar Metal Welds Report # W-1-1105-07-007 Page Qo of- /86 Site: Nine Mile System: Recirc. Configuration: Sa Component Temp.: 7 Calibration Data Pkg. # Operator(s) / Level(s): Exam Date & Time: Unit: I Outage #: N1R19 Drawing ID: F-45183-C Sht. 7 Weld #: 32-WD-164 Procedure# WDI-SSP-1105 fe End to Nozzle Revision: 0 FCN: N/A 7 OF Thermometer #: 105227 W-1-1105-07-02 Di 3k #: A Walsh /II. Hopkins / II. Musorave /,'1. Overy / II 3126/07 0205 Thru 3127/07 12251 ANALYSIS RESULTS ANALYSIS RESULTS Angle &Mode Skew CH # File Name Indications & Comments 45L1 3 (DS) I N2D 3 SETUPI 01 NRI 4 X='0 to 59 60LI 2 NRI X=4 to 63 45L1 1 N2D 3 SETUPI02 NRI - X:= 57 to 103 60L1 2 NRI-X:=61 to 107 60L2 1 N2D 3 SETUP6 01 Indication #1 seen W'ih shear component only 45S, 2 Indication #1 - see Ibd~ation sheet and images 45L2 1 N2D 3 SIZING 01 Indication #1 - Best !"age, ', Indication sheet and-images, 58dB 45L2 1 N2D 3 SIZINGI 02 Indication #1 - 63dB, Ip-efer N2D 3 SIZING 1 01 45L2 4 (US) I N2D 4 SIZING1 01 Ind. #1 -from nozzle side, see images, prefer N2D_3 SIZING 1_01 60L2 3 (DS) 1 N2D 3 SETUP6 02 NRI - Added Coverage on nozzle side, X= 40 to 65 45S 2 b NRI - Added Coverage on nozzle side, X= 43 to 68 45L1 4(US) I N2D 4 SETUP4 01 1 IRI 600L 2 ii'IRI 60L2 1 1 N2D 4 SETUP5 01 I fRI 45S 1 I ARI 60L2 1 N2D 4 SETUP5 02 i NRI 45S 2 1 AIRI 60L2 1 N2D 4 SETUP5 03 1 !RI 45S 2 j ARI 45L1 5 (CK. 1 N2D 5 SETUP2 01 NRI - Drop out X=1 12 to 40 on nozzle side 60LI 2 I AhRI 45L1 I 1 N2D 5 SETUP2 02 NRI - X= 0 to 50, Drop Qut X= 12 to 40 on nozzle side 60LI1 1 ARI' 45L1 I N2D 5 SETUP2 03 Incomplte,-. Not Used 60L1 2 Incomplete..- Not Used (Codflinued) Remarks: RT film was reviewed in the area of indication number 1. The UT indication correlated to the repair area - documented on the construction radiographic reports. The ultrasonic characienistics such as consistent W measurements and lack of defined tip signals are not indicative of a seA,-we induced flaw, however, this indication will be conservatively evaluated as a surface plalnar flaw agaijist the ASME Code Table IWB-3514-2. A nalyst4 . Svad,6 JLevel b Date 3:-28-o 7 Reviewer Level Date. Z_?--e> Auth. InspeDate _L)i-

,n Ul=,DwOy E IntraSpect Automated UT System EXAMINATION DATA for OD examination of Dissimilar Metal Welds Site: Nine Mile Unit: I Outage #: NIR19 Drawing ID: System: Recirc. Weld #: 32-WD-164 Pr Configuration: Safe End to Nozzle Re Component Temp.: 77 OF Thermometer #: 105227 Calibration Data Pkg. #: W-1-1105-07-02 Operator(s) / Level(s): Walsh/Il, Hopkins /I, Musgrave Exam Date & Time: 3/26/07 0205 Thru 3/27/07 1225 Report # W-1-1105-07-007 Page /Ot of 184 F-45183-C Sht. 7 )cedure # WDI-SSP-1105 .vi ion: 0 FCN: N/A Disk#: A j/ il, Overtly/ I/ F ANALYSIS RESULTS Angle &Mode Skew CH # File-Name Indications & Comments 45L1 1 N2D 5 SETUP2 04 NRI - Drop out X= 83,Oru 0 to 41 on nozzle side 60L1 2 .I NRI 45L1 1 N2D 5 SETUP2 05 NRI - Drop out X, 1'0 to 41 on nozzle side 60L1 0 2 I IVRI 45L1 5 (CW) 1 N2D 5 SETUP2 06 NRI - X= 0 to 40, Drop *t. X= 10 to 40 on nozzle side 60L1 2 I V/RI 45L1 6 (CCW) 1 N2D 6 SETUP3 02 NRI - Drop out X= 12 to 36 on nozzle side 60L1 2 I bRI 45L1 0 1 N2D 6SETUP3 03 NRI - Drop out X,,23to 32 on nozzle side 60L1 2 I IhRI 45S 6A (CCV49 1 N2D 5A SETUP7..01 i RI 45S 5A (CWM 2 IJRI 45S 5B (CW) I N2D 5B SETUP8 01 i1RI 45S 6B (CCW) 2 "____IjRI A I Analyst_ -.IeeDtI

Remarks:-

Track circumference is 101 1/4" and weld circumference is 93 1/4". NRI = No Relevant Indications I ______________ Analyst CL 514

  • "*Level Date 3--2-o7' Reviewer

,Level - Date _7--?O > Auth. Inspect ency __Date /Il5-ZA.-.

nwawn Nine Me Pobbti 31019 MARCH ao., Rpop# W-1-1105-07-007 &'p ~ L~' ~ ka' t 1-1 0 CLWpj lotting* V640d 4I.1. *,oa via. POW so 1 IL 1.0 LI LA uft-no. 40 - 4d 1.0 w-a a p I L04 U-H., 140 40-0a~ I I-Wat.I ?d& twor 5 9 10.00 Iabe La mL*.0 Le .4 mu AN4ALYST 2EL AE LEVEL -;T DATE. 3.0 7p

m1pasayna NbwmeMiePont 1 370 19 MARCH 2wo7 RhOWl 8 pop l Eli-I-s-Lk-er-Lools oisp4mv lattirw "mmw TM we W.6 " r = adps OA do not WIF "LMA T-w -IAM. W-W vim ft*4 a i V A V-84"$ -&0, 4'Lw* VAN Mm.=Jo - fm 0 c L.o- ,.a-W-1-1 105407-007 )3 1t I6, -lp 320 124-Ico-U A I I. A C t i.0 1.9 3. COW 441* SU4SW ftof howm..M.. liE

4.

34 34 NRI ANALYS LE& ANALYST LEVEL:

DATE, 3 -. 28-497

MWEISOWnE hM Pt1 Nine NM Point s RFO iO MIA~ 2007 RaOM 0 W-1-1 105.0 7.00 pop O. d 18(v AN -,q; 2-. nd

  • -,Wi WMt

£- I 1:40 XtSw 10.OqijjtiG ~1*p I IA 4A0 ¢LI LO LO 3j~- S 7. UIi I U p 1.9 U 1£*1 U-I.-. A 1.5 LU 2;0 2:9 1;*0 I 45 4. ftmo sue-UNm~t JmawmA". ut1 C-NOLA PM, NPI eLLE2 ANALYST LEVEL: -2r DTL3 -2,9-,0Z

wmoyn. I Nine Mfl. Po i MRO 19 MACHsoo7 tie IýCt-I fst rft tft &ft 110Olplw Atie Tu~~~~a~~a La.Mu.

  • iPs 4,0 1.4 4.

PapeJO of 5 ex~ I.M *Af DAIPI LWA V4 M C 4.. Hl 'U I4~ N-N V 44

2. 1
2.

1.4 ~w~$ PUloW - Iw".d". uc 44 14 6.4 NRI ANALYST LEVEL: ANALYST LEVEL: _ZC-DATE: -29 8-o7

mswasDnEW.W 1 RPO 19 MAKCH zoo7 RhiOW# pope W-1-11O5"-O7WOO OeOf Ii" Ei1. m Culmp c~w.t S-scam ft-4an e-4otn !golf Osplou fot.tines T."". 4.40 *.ad" 3.1W Plm3v 29 2.0 V io. p 0.0 A 4.0. -2.0 50 1 20-70U 4 sid V-d. 2.M

  • d" W

wwý. mW" ob-0C t ka.o 38wa la 3v 3 C a-SI 2.01 --I fto* -1 UP-9o-

10 40 70 40Iw lnb 2.'

0.0 2.0 1. 2.0 1:6 &I LI NRI - Show componeft of OORL refletin off kiNdcaio 0 1 ~h~ ANALYST LEVEL:.X-DATE.J; -.28-,:p7 ANALYST LEVEL: DATh

WESOYNE M~ MU. ~ i Nie Mie Point 0 RPO 19 MUL.CH soot7 R~apois W-1-1105O7-OO7 Peg. /07 d at ~~i~~rj e-i 6 sb hal-V.umkII aw 1-04 -lw ý UAMfwU UIVA t !!alp Li V Li I4Am -I.. -IA 3 h~mW -1.15 ~ a VA U b IA 11*1 1113 Is S I. 11 a 10 I. V IA Li 1wl~ ini~ budw. ~ld. LU rvt .MAT&V fts 4W 13 liiI 'a:8 I~I '-31 S ( M11di p*~ m~1 211 ~II IA Ii! LI L 2.54A L

4.

'sI kxik:ebm #1 - W moewauranft does not vay ANALYST DATE S-,2 LEVEL -12r

!q oyn. Nine Mile Point i RO 19 MARCH 0oo7 pop~ W-1-1O6.O7-007 (09 I' waftsIm u. FAUWI t Y~,m -4.m. Wow. J~w Few~ 27I I 2.2 ALA awl] too-90 20I IA-I h 2.12 km¢ to-W. SM-I IS IS 42 U 5.5 1.5 Iw4sSs MS4 bs~. rM~&d. US LI5 21* 4* 4.'# kdcamon #1 ,c- &spa ANALYn LEVEL:Z DATE: S.928-497

5m-awn, Nine Mile Poin 1 3.FO x, MARCH soo? RoweS W-1-110".7-007 Pwg 109 of/8 Ella sod. l qww flu. psca k-Scan a4ca 100s 1, Otla f~ttinve Ju p,.10mv Laa ma A.OOS4ISUS yT* MOW - amW WIs " WO Au. Gs U0" IA %&IFuA ftho FlMo a A~~~~~~~.0p amOWf-4*d ot"4 v-aw -IAX. X-m U.W fda ?o0X j ~ Lila t!-" [qLwvw flat. i-Sca B-scmn e-Scan 10016 Olspl.w getting. O-.Odu -1.700 **an NmW P.& soa 4.5 4.0 V 0 4.0 -LI -5.. 1.51 Iti ,3,0 M.0 25.03. Y~~~Ia0~MO 0 1.oOW 3.3 tTT ~ 0A-I. - 1i - I p Si 1.51 L0~ 2.0 5., 20 13-00 00 4. @5 1.0 I ~ UW-WOS b.~p. btw..Ud, 210 -~ U-00 U-38-1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 C-brOS tCw4WM MU-OGD1 NMs35 104w"O1PA, UZ9 dtsIon #1 - End poits (Lengh) ANALYST DATE: 0 LEVEL: -2r

WESD~flE Nine Mile Pont I RiO 19 MARCH so@7 Raw#~t W-1-11O6.07-W0 pq. d 8(

  • p X, LW1P Y-3 -IU,

.1 Am FWqa 9 O k.lw am"".,.mu ton ID LI LI IA ,- Oph hidlatlo 81 - Remainin W&gMet uluwn widW 'DOWV ANALYST LEVEL: DATE:3 -?-29?-407 ANALYST LEVEL:

NWESDyE Wnb. We Pohmt I RFO ig MARCH 2007 ROW 0l W-1-1 105-07-007 pape jf Of a -O,- Taft., WI - UT:

  1. .aa

..m. a...a u~u. i.e us 4., 14. -I -a a - a U - U a a I 0 a-i.-. TM a-I I11 I 4-i-I-1.&- b Li-I Li~ Li-I.ao L swts04afem oa"6u Li 3.5 Li Ixdkzbof #I - ftom rnzzi side ANALYST ý-00M mlLEVEL: 2 DATE: 9-.20-07 b

mwESDu Nine Mil Point 1 RPO t9 MARCH s007 Pape W-1-1105-07-007 112 a8e

tila, ffado CL-l Eats -scar-
  1. -8C*n_&-U4m :Eppla-Diatplav LwttlNs ftsw urm am wo VI

=: Ik. wr.04 OIA I =-Vza6 OAM, Xý.j V.70 ft*A a z V 14 2.1 IN - II., IN. RI-SI--a ~~~U RI U 40 a U 2*I. 4 4-R.~ae 461 IRI R"p0U .. M R-tft 27.M F. WMN ft4 10 C e5~ uwl~~~'~a!Iu04 1.$* *Akab I WK lS 0% 4A m m24 0A 30 1$ 2*ý 4 ca3t f""**wb-WO* L C-ftma PU NRI ANAYS zLVE: AT .Aq.KALLYT LEVEL: JZ-7 DATE: 1-26 -.0-7

nwEsOwEN~MU MARCH £007 PAWSut pop. WIL-1~105-07-007 h&lp e".9.. C-1 i-t k 9 9 W 11k 46 -o ipa ti fla ý-9.9 UK.Em.u ft )W PsM i 37= I V 2.9. 'a- ~A9-so-n 3 49 U U I. ~- a,.-. pa-a inc LUI 1.3 6I.0-m14V El ow U 9 I pa9 9 2~04 6.* 2.0 Le 49

16.

4. NR! ANALYST LEVEL: _______ ANALYST LEVEL: 12r DATE 7Z

w~~mwyn, aeMl on Nine Wie Point i RFO 19 MARCHnoo Raw#it W-1-1105-07-007 pop /// /t O -51 IJInwLf Iwzu sw~m ft m ax a m 1.4 4.0 LI 2.0 1.0 P.O '2.0 -0.4 C >1 sh4 4 4-sul 0.)5 i000 .U W MA " toI 'Maur ~ m gO GA-Lj~ IA VA-00-10-20 0, 0.0 LA ~WI~ MU-urn iMunA...l. U5 320' se. f.0s 16 I NRI ANALYST ANALYS LEVEL DE__T .Z6. '0 z DATE: f-

iswawn Nine Mil Point I RmO 1 MARCH soo7 Re Pon 8 K41410507.O007O Puge ~5of /8(. 6 X, WIN,7me I= Maws~ 0 W=0 8.1.1 W =0 r* IA~ 4.0-iLO-2.0-I LI-0A- -3.0. S p S OA-J -. 1 Ls~ C43. Is-120-20 20-10-fl 20 U

  • U IoU:1, 8-~.

P.~ ao m 120-100-II 10, 30-00i m-"". sbep hM.eos."& ux LI LbD 2:5 10 3:8 43ý 4.8 NRI ANALYST LEVEL.2z7 ANALYST LEVEL: -2z-DATE: 3-26-o

12WIRDYTIN wm nuNine Mfl* Pon 1 RPO iq Rq PiloR aoo7~ SWOit W-1-11OS-7,-00 Popaf i 9 Pool-VO a- ,' W-jua LP spla Lwtting 0Y1E.WL.M*n ANt* Z 7 1-u IA-F,' 120. 1#.~fl N - -U

  • U 1*

4-. 0.,'. 4~i 4 4 3 a0 UIh 0J.~ 1.041.0.1 3,- 'At' 10-W- 10-10-14. 1:5: 4. U 9 4.5 3.0 3.0 3M.- U~ ~m*d. UZ NRI -Adwo~p to krpovn OWt quaity X= 46 to 46 ANALYST LEVEL_____ ANALYST LEVEL -1=7 DATE: .5 r

owmun, Nine Mile Point 1 apO 19 MARCH 3007 Report 0 pop W-1-1105-07-OO7 O1fC T-~~~~88~a

.4 .UI nm 1C4 U I 8.4 I 4.0 2.0 IC 8.** -IA -3.0. 15-110 Cu 3-W1-U' 31 20

  • I, 10

(- *.8. WJ*t LW U m~ 40 IA V a p BA-1.0.4 8.04

1

'to-go-ISO ID I*- we, aws,40 00"MU Aseo aftaft8.l us I 1.0 2.8 2.0 1.0 11 4.8 4.0 NRI -Aftgean to Wmprove drt quaft Xm 48 lo49 ANALYST S~c q -: DATE: 3-?2e -a7 -~--I-

,q W.48Dy NineWe M tint RPO 19 MARCH 0007 Rowe A*- J~ 3.. -S, an8 a-S, loi ORaUlti W-1-1 105-07-007 dri 6.0 4.0 3., L 4 14 49 4' A W 0 23d=.L60 .MDW L 10-112-17,- V 73-3 a,-.:lf u-rnI 7, 4.. myow S 1.8 "'Ip -t 6-N- a, t IifI 4-b~. U 8 4.8 1 1.8 twhei* 34N ~ Z~Ud. UL 4

2.

1.8 3.8 NPi - Alaumpt to inmpfv dab quafty X= 45 to 46 ANAYS LEVEL:,, j ANALYST LEVEL:.2r DA: 3-28-07

w m......... y 1 NimeMie Pak* 1 11019 MARCH 3007 ft"' ort# W-1-1105.07007 Pqp I/? 1'86 AN-flo &IPp tilo dnda Ctm-wl J"o &-$can &-Gcw Imle Oloplag Awttir*o 08, It"Aft" 4w I-W -*Ak *od"

  • All ftGU 9 3 T

1.0 4.l 3A 2,# 0.0 LI 4.. 4.0 V -IA. 4" ORA whaij mm e .0,"4 ^ L" a 1 W IUS hin eji 1.01 q 1.4 It* 21 jA Z, CM U-wl-aA1.. 2:0 1.0 3.04 4.10 4:6 NRI -Atlsmpt lo impov. daba iAfty Xx 48 lo 49 ANALYST LEVEL_ ANALYST LEVEL DATE: S-28-,07

mwESyflE Nine Mile Point t RFO 19 MARCH 2O7 a am. 4.2' V-.d* 464 ftiýs ftS" 1.0 0. m Rtpwte W-1-1105-07-007 or.- 120 i10 9D x0

  • 4" ULn Uý Ifsw t

o A iZ = W I~.= m.00 in v is dlJ Ii S 2.1-1.4. 24. p.- iu~ 13-I ilk-12-35 3 U-10

14.

I1 4.5

2.

.1 L's 4.0* 4.50 .i&PM -O60 0"0400 Rnt hI~..smb.L LLS NRI - Omp out X= 12 to 40 on nozzle sde ANALYST LEVEL -. ZC DATE:.20 --or ANALYST DATh:

N-aw-EDn. hED on Nine Mile Poin 1 RFO ig MARCH aoo7 Raw$I W-1-1106-07-007 Pq. /,l Of /a(*

r.

ý CL. 8av J~t* E60N-t4w-Sc an

1001, jw lv plvj ajetl~rE, n~ft 0e~nI&

F- &.."AIIP4 Tam ow-,18 U.. -4 44 &Iwp 2.4 an no-uo-IN-97O OD-48

  • -.%.I WIN Vý.

I.W PWý U.M*

  • AM I.M Thdý
  • r.?n 1 14 V U

I p Ih 1.0-i L4-{ 4,44 U U '.4.4 lIt 18-LO 1. 148MOW Wfojw&O k~t.U 404 1.8 US* 1 NRI ANALYST LEVEL: _______ ANALYST LEVEL: -2z-DATE3)80

NWESDyN i.Ml on RPO i9 MARCH sow~ RiFNWO W'.1-110"7O-007 p" 1,22of "(D &1p ,PIS r~w CL-1 2t. &-Sý WI i sl a Vii t n I-g fft& 0-m b~o; MANfh VtIM 4= "Is*4 IS Y I.-. 01~- I~It ( X-dI 6. "IA 4.01 no-I p I 'i U-70" IA L LIIA L LI3.14.0 4.6 cawf ant-on ftc.~ 1Tww"aik.a U.9 I (- Uld Pal. NRI - Drop out X= 12 to 40 on nfouts side ANALYST LEVEL__ DATE ANALYST LEVEL -Z-DATE:.5 -.26-a r

I m n b Ml ~ RFO 19 KAKI= 3007 ROW 8# pape W-1-1106-07-4007 12'3 ftfta~W

0.

".a" I IW1U 37.UL 1uiU I.M htl N It a,-

1 I. U I

< I2-~. Nd~ 412 Lb it 36 X-W wwc &on. M.W IN C I.Ft .0 A-S Impilmo. no_ U I I p Ih 3.O,4A U 2)9 I OmWelaf MW-UU Xf* IMk. A. Ut 4.1 LI LI 7.4 NRI ANAYS aLEEL4____ ANALYST -7 LEVEL: Z' DATE: 3?-29-07

nW~yewNn iePit MARCH a007 Repm 0 W-1-105-07-OOT 214 of9I A d 1p =ý a ftU A-* I~~I, J3~. Y-s Law ft1 Pa~ I 1 LI j VI U I 1.1 sA -IAIII III-15 ~I0-I II ~ S S (- I-ad.

  1. -IA LA -

0 p a h IA0 1.0 LI I I I A

4.

4.0 C.ws" at-OsU Noma LoMd URM - Drop out Xw 83 Thtu 0 10 41 on nozzle aMl ANAYS LEVE 4 4 p? ANALYST LEVEL

  1. 'Z DATE S-.28-497

w.sDvnE NMn.MU. an~t RPO 19 MARCH soo7 Repolto W-1-11O5-07-00 Pop dJ8( u".ni g6. v-a lAmb Fs a3I 70. I U I ~ U j Uf L 1 La Li La N

  • 'A I

I L..1 p.1 las ILL U.- ILL-V 7. 7. LI J f. "S U A Anp bIt0 t ý Lwaw u-G U- .~~ ~~~~... iU~ U-LI a-IA LA La ~*I Um4gU bashas. ILC

4.

La 7: 4-Sta? Fa NRJ ANALYST LEVEL: _______ DATE ANALYST LEVEL: _aý DATE 3 -A 19 -,0 7

wVASDvn n O on RIO 19 MAMM 2oo7 RepottB W-1-11O54O7-007 P-i2 4 'a '" a-MWAOO TM Ofm Mba ma A* widet" r= 2 =*W O"Lro Oft~cmeses 4l 0 I 1.6 1.4 O05 Poo 110:- I-it p 3U 0.1 1,01 151 LI 4,- ON t I I I p ah t 10-I m "A

  • ..ua L

C-11ad Pak NRI - Drop out X 10 o 41 on nozesuide ANALYST LEVEL: _______ ANALYST LEVEL: ý2r DATE: 3-.28-V7

NWRsOyn ieMl on MARCH s007 Raows8 W-1-11O&OT007 1' 2 7 "/ ~.4p Uh-l r .mL 1.4.1 0-Va wA- .*1" 'l

  • .do 6.30. Y-U4 1.m Pfd*g 26 I

,I IAý 120 120 go-5- S -fl~ 4*- 5-(- I-~1. W-a, 4Lm rý Lue FWý LL= ftý a Vvm W-S 6 F m *.We. 16 A

  • 4A p

7.81 so, 1.0 3.a Lo ami aneeu nmf bowagi"06& ur (- ug.a PUsh 4.0 Lt9 0o 1.6 ANALYST L LI DATE: 3-.29-97

mwESu E ieMiePon RPO 19 MARCH a007 Rtwi# W-1-11O0"7-007 P" 128 ` I5e-A - -.;qý X: erf-".

0.

0 U.w iL.M Wý.? 4.wh %*: at LOWIP Vt Li~ 1.0 0.04 0.0 LII L04 I p 8 0.0 8 4A.j 's-I p.- m 00-ec' 50

  • -m
a.

3.0 H 110 100 50-40 30 4 -n-I 4- &0* 30-14-NO4K0.04 1.0 b 1.1 LI 0.0 LAC01 0.0 NRI - Dopout Xs1Ob 40an nozze &ft ANALYST ANLYT EVL LEVEL: DATE: 20?

Nine Mile Point I 3.7019 MARCH 3007 ROW ps lsW--10.7-O

    • 129 P

asr m em-0.".4 WrJ alto. P=i U.. 9 if 1.41 U,. .9. 40-u 00 = (- 11-ad. ~,.-0u) U 1U .9- .9- .9 .9 20 I I"- C.9# 96MfM#0WM460 L 4.0

1.

6o NRI ANALYST LEVEL DATE ANALYST LEVEL: -Ac DATE; 1-29-67

NW"Dyna Nine Mile powIn1 miFO1 MARCH 20f17 Repofl# W-1-1105-01-00 Pa 1:30o 1 Is(, fta" ~ ~ Il so mwrfýt"@VI7SM i

  • .ajo.i

~ .Y1S 4S t0 Y 21 11 II -1.0 -2.0 "II 4 I' III m on fw i lp wlNj a 14 S p h "IA 2. 1: 29 2.0 La L CSW9A 84 oti t NRI - Drop out Xw 12 to 36 on nozzle "ide ANAYST zEEL:"Pah ANALYST LEVELI.Z: DATE- _--.28-0.7

,nwwSyl Nb.Mf oM NinMe Point 1 IIARME 2wo7 ROW 09 W-1-1105-07-007 pa (31 ofis1g; b.w UMLu Vod -cm F.d*I a I I 2.4 I LI 4.1 4.4 An b43MTkIWU I IM rat0-e irJ L9 LS 3a~ 140 20-Owws40 ~ p ows~,U 1.0 2I 3: NRI ANALYST ED LEVEL: _:z DATE: S-29-407

U yN e e NMA Ce PoOn i MAiLM aOO7 Rpmoqt# W-1-1105O07-07 POP P2 1* (a N.lf fl.e6. YId r-1 . C i S t 1 PP .I 1.0 lii D ws m i 4 i =C N,1 L I* Ow t i h L w iO-I" P-* is) go.+ ill ,01-" If-i 4M-S-lw Sm wo Se-ltul.dln l*lm

  • ~m+

+. 3:0I. NRI - Drop out x-23 to 32 on nozzle side ANALYST LEVEL__ ANALYST LEVEL ---W DATE: 0- 107

iswmypn. Nine MWe Point i RFO 19 KARCH z007 Ie;pat W-1-1106-Q.07W p". a r.

  • ~n" 4L40. T-ýIe 2.4S ft 39 ft0 V

I -I1

  • +..

iN.. I H so-40 GWkt004Mf.-ADWW-UL N-03--I:1' 40 U 1~ 4-. ~* 2;6 2.9 s.0 NRI ANALYST LVL~j LEVEL- -W-DATE:- -,2 1;~

wmswasE Nine Mile Point 1 am1119 MARCH aoo7 Rspwt 0 W-1-11OS-O7.007 Ping / 3 q d 18 ~J5JAJ

  • -"~ WAO. "Maui Ai~m ft."

u x

  • l p !

V £ 1.4 SA pw-so-SQ - IQ-70-1m 39 2 -M. n"IV W, L .N xw 4L00 mUASca UI 6 U I. 01.61 LOI F I a pSh 40- &WN wm 40wSWtm.u 1.4 4 2:6. LO NRI - S-Scan &lows* am of Indicat~n 51 YNJ B--- L DAT AM DATE 5-.2,8-07

~sDynE Mn MU. Point 1 370 19 HAKCH saw RIWSt W-1-1105-07-007 pap 35.oe/( F q !I" M - R K g - & W @ A W I W W I1 W 1 k Uf ,iE "n-w NAM y-mew~ -4.mI ft*4 0 2 T t1w1p P.- U.- U.- U.- Li-Li Li U'T1 1 '~ I-~* Mm ý]Q -m rl 38 m .U F-m Uc ~~ U ~IJ~ftir. 00k; lAW .M~mS OAT sm-s 1W Li Lii NRI Scasi homwsu of kxdkation 01 ANALYST LEVEL: _______ ANALYST LEVEL: -W DATE: Y-.2,0O

w.sayn. Nine Mile Pont i MARCH 2007 fpRaw# W-1-110W-O7OO pop16at/( xfi 3PIU Wk.IS Y-wu SAN ftdt Ia Z IA L-1p 4.0 4O~1I C-5.~8* -L S* I iij 1~ LS>~ 1u we CC 20 0.0 1.0 c~~ mu-mu b.~m hOw4WId. IU P.~ OU U-10-p U, U I C-kp 16 2:9 1:$ 50 NRI ANALYSTEVL LEVEL-_V:: DATE:, -,286- 07

MSyN MwMl Pk RPO 19 MARCH so07 ROPorI# W-1-1105.7-007 Pps" /57 *r/#4 ti.!. j-_u1 20-l q-3-w &l-Soon a-Sca., jloa Displa letting* 'M sm~ WI MIS on If OAQ 4A10 I]' 16 0 A A 0 S h 411 f go 1¶ l0~:1 0-3' 0.. 1.5 IA ~w*t U4~ bw.11u4. U~ IA 2:6 LI6 e NRI ANAYS LEVE: _____ ANALYST LWEL- -ý DATE: S -.29- /7

rnWESpynE I NTC R NAT 1 0 A Westinghouse NDE Company Plant: Nine Mile Point I Comp/System: 32 ULTRASONIC CALIBRATION DATA SHEET 'PA&E 138 ~ Page 1 of 3 W-1-1111-07-002 Unit: 1 UT No. 7-F-45183-C, Sht. 7 ISO #: Rev. 7 Procedure N WDI-SSP-1 111 Rev. 0 Reference BIk. # SAP 103435 Cal Block No. SAP 102915 Examination Surface Thermometer s/n: SAP 105230 Block/Comp ITEmp R OD 68 D1 ID OF / 76 OF SEARCH UNIT Scan Angle: 450 Mode: Shear Serial No.: 0095VM Mfg. .KBA Fixturing : Non Integral Model: Comp G Size: 0.50" Shape: Round Frequency: 1.5 MHz

  1. Elem:

Measured Angle: 45* 0° or.L TO WELD II TO WELD SCAN AREA 0* WRV H] 0' BM e ] _I To Weld [ I I To Weld [ .. or .... WELD I TO WELD Sweep AMI[. ATTEN Sweep AMPL ATTEN IDENT Pos dB Pos dB 2.0 Notch 6.6 80%_ 13.2 _ I _A Cable Type: RG-174 Length: 6' uConnectors I j Couplant Brand: Ultragel 11 Exit Pnt Dim: 0.35" Couplant Batch: 06225 Contoured W N/A [] Ax CAL. INSTRUMENT SETTINGS CHECKS TIME Mfg/Model No.: Krautkramer USN 58L SW Initial Cal. 13:04 Serial No.:. SAP 104390-Intermediate 17:10 Damping: .500 jPuls Wth: 330 Intermediate N/A Pulsl: Square - Single lReject: Off Intermediate N/A Freq.: 2.0 MHz lRectify Full Final Cal. 18:43 D Circ 70 -K.-- 60 50 20 I.I.U.J WLL _uJI 11 1A.LL'J 1U.UJ WJ. PRF: Auto High Volt: ' 450 Jack: T Range 1 4.42 Vel. 0.1245 Swp Delay 1 0.000 lZero 7.38341 Gain 0" or I dB 13.2 Gain II dB N/A Scan Sensitivity Ax = 23.2 dB.. Circ = N/A Screen Height Linearity High'~ Low __High Law 1 100 50 .6 50 25 2 90 45 7 40-2-0 3

80.

40 8 30 15 E 4 70 35 9 20 10 5 60 30 1101 10 5

  • 0 1 12 3

4 Screen Divisions, 10 = 5 6 7 8 9 10 4.42 EXAMINATION WELD/AREA Recordable Indications can Lirr itation

  • COMMENTS Yes No Yes No 4
4.

4 32-WD-164 X X See indication data sheet. sheet. 4

4.

4-.~-.I 4 Code Coverage Achieved: N/Al

  • Low must be % High +/-5% FSH Amplitude Control Linearity Initial A dBI Result 80

-6dBj 40 80 -12dB 20 40 +6dB j 80 20 +12dB J 80 R RI RI Print Se en T. Williams - KAMINER ,,71,- /' LV Print David M. Griebel EVi EWER A(-J_ S.'_,* /.- EVIEWER uthorized In 9 1etion Agency _ II DATE 3/27/2007 II DATE 3/27/2007 L./ DATE &1*rI/2 LV Z DATE 4 -z.-o i A-* ~DATE Acceptance Criteria: Risk Informed D Yes Welds [] Acceptable 1989 ASME Sec. Xl, N0 AOd. P r No D] Rejectable ADDITIONAL SHEETS? (ChcBo Zi I¸ El Supplement [ Plot D Other F] N/A I "A powerful part of your team"

WESDN~ l* ?*=a J.*? o.-B~ W!sPYnyr WESDYNE INTERNATIONAL, LLC A Westinghouse NDE Company WELD No ý12-WD-1164 WALL THICKNESS PROFILE SHEET WELD NO _"_2-WD-164_ UT DATA H-ET NO. W-1-111-07-002 Page 2 of 3 Position 00 900 1800 2700 ei'

  • Weld Edge

-nil-n TOEoT a__ TOE* W 2 CROWN HEIGHT: Flush DIAMETER: 29.68" CROWN WIDTH: 1.40" WELD LENGTH: 93.25" LONG SEAM @: N/A ISO. DRWG. # F-45183-C Sht. 7, Rev. 7 PROFILE AREA if~Z0 7 /&.. Examiner: Level 1I Date: 3/27/*207 Ste Tý.W.l "- Examiner: Step-, 7 Level II Date: 312712007 David M. Griebel I Reviewer:. J Level -7 Date: -3,29 4Y Utility Review: Level Date: 42.-2 Authorized Inspection Agency Date: 4jJ5"/7 "A poweffu1 part of your team"

iIWESDynE ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION INDICATION REPORT A Westinghouse NDE Company /ia/ o / SITE: Nine Mile Point, Unit 1 UT Sheet No.: W-1-1111-07-002 Weld No.: 32-WD-164 Datum 0 Location: TDC Page 3 of 3 Procedure No. WDI-SSP-1 111 Rev. 0 Exam Surface OD W ID El Thickness: 1.68" W-9 WM W2 (Exam Volume:Lower 1/3 EL Full El Weld CL W Max-Distance from CLto SU at Maximum Response Layout shown for "IZ2 -1] MP Metal Path perpendicular scan. L-Distance from Datum 0 For parallel scan, L's RBR - Remaining Back Reflection & Ws would be reversed. _ SU Loc - Search Unit Location Max Forward Backward Ind. Amp WMax %ofDA( %ofDAC L Li L2. RBR SU Loc No. % of Max Amp US, DS DAC W MP W1 MP W2 MP DAC DAC 0 degree CW, COW REMARKS 1 45% 1.95" 2.44" N/A N/A N/A N/A 25" 24.7 26.5 N/A DS Supplemental manual exam for an automated detected indication. _Indication does not exhibit IGSCC _crack-like characteristics (ex. J* L LAR * ,L -1 4 4 j -JaceungT-va~yLng-v~-voum-.-eýG--- I._ ( 1 1 11* 1 __I I __t_ _I_ Comments: 450 Shear 1.5 MHz EXAMINER: StephenT Williarns LEVEL II DATE 3/27/2007 Signature: EXAMINER: DvidM. GrDpbel LEVEL II DATE 3/27/2007 Signature: REVIEWER: DATE 2 Authorized Inspection Agency t*.* DATE "A powerful part of your team"}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML071370232&oldid=5346595"