ML082750499

Third Ten Year Inservice Inspection Interval Request for Relief No. 04-ON-009, Revision 1, Request for Additional Information Response

ML082750499
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee
Issue date:	09/30/2008
From:	Baxter D Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Corp
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML082750499 (32)

Text

DA VE BAXTER Duker Vice President

• Energy Oconee Nuclear Station Duke Energy Corporation ONO1 VP17800 Rochester Highway Seneca, SC 29672 864-885-4460 864-885-4208 fax dabaxter@dukeenergy. com September 30, 2008 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001

Subject:

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit 2 Docket Nos. 50-270 Third Ten Year Inservice Inspection Interval Request for Relief No. 04-ON-009, Revision 1 Request for Additional Information Response By letter dated February 13, 2008, Duke submitted request for relief No. 04-ON-009 Rev.1 seeking relief, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(iii), from the requirement to examine 100% of the volume specified by the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, 1989 Edition with no Addenda (as modified by Code Case N-460).

The relief would allow Duke Energy to take credit for ten (10) limited ultrasonic examinations on welds associated with various systems and components described in the request.

On May 22, 2008 Duke received a request for additional information (RAI) via email from the NRC Staff concerning the revision Duke submitted on February 13, 2008. This submittal is to address the staff's questions posed in the RAI. The following enclosure contains the reviewer's questions, and Duke's responses to each.

If there are any questions or further information is needed you may contact Corey Gray at (864) 886-6325.

Very truly yours, Dave Baxter, Site Vice President Enclosure 1 4_y47 www. duke-energy com

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission September 30, 2008 Page 2 xc w/att:

Luis Reyes Region II Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth St., SWW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, GA 30303 Leonard Olshan, Project Manager, Section 1 Project Directorate II Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 xc(w/o attch):

Andy Hutto Senior NRC Resident Inspector Oconee Nuclear Station Susan Jenkins, Section Manager, Division of Waste Management Bureau of Land. and Waste Management SC Dept. of Health & Environmental Control 2600 Bull St.

Columbia, SC 29201

RAI on Relief Request 04-ON-009 Oconee, Unit 2 Page 1 of 2 DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION RESPONSE TO NRC REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION'(NRC LETTER DATED MAY 22, 2008 - FOUR ITEMS) 3RD 10-YEAR INSERVICE INSPECTION INTERVAL

1. For welds 2-51A-17-124, 2-51A-17-125, 2-51A-17-20A, 2-51A-17-102, 2HP-227-11, and 2-51A-31-50 in the High Pressure Injection System, supplemental inspections such as 600 refracted longitudinal or 700 shear wave scans were performed. For each of these welds, in Section IV, Impracticality of Compliance of this RR, 100% coverage was claimed for these supplemental inspections.

However, upon review of the inspection data sheets, it is clearly noted for each weld that less than 100% coverage was obtained for the supplemental inspections. Please discuss these discrepancies.

Response

Each weld listed was examined to a Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI) qualified procedure requiring shear waves as the mode for interrogation. The primary shear wave angles used were 450 for circumferential scans (clockwise/counter-clockwise) and 600 for axial scans (upstream/downstream).

The aggregate coverage is calculated using coverage obtained by the primary shear waves only. The aggregate percent of coverage is compared to the coverage requirement of >90% to determine any exam limitations.

When axial scan limitations are encountered (e.g. single-sided) on stainless steel pipe components, 600 refracted longitudinal wave or 700 shear waves, depending on component thickness, are used to interrogate the remaining volume for which coverage by the primary shear wave angles 45' and 60' was not achieved. The, additional coverage obtained is considered supplemental only and is not included

.in the aggregate percentage.,

See attached tables (6) (separate pdf file) for each of the six questioned welds.

2. Have you considered additional surface preparation to increase the inspection coverage for the ten welds included in RR 04-ON-009., Rev. 1? From a dose standpoint, how much would it take to get additional 'inspection coverage for these welds?

Response

All limitations are caused by the physical geometry of each component, such as tee or valve configurations, that result in single sided coverage. Additional surface preparation would not remove the scan limitations and therefore would not increase the obtained coverage. Only a change in the component design would permit additional coverage.

RAI on Relief Request 04-ON-009 Oconee, Unit 2 Page 2 of 2

3. For all ten welds included in RR 04-ON-009, Rev. 1, in Section VII, Justification for Granting Relief, you use the future tense (i.e., "will use") when discussing pressure and visual testing. Since the request was for the third 10-year inservice inspection interval and that ended on September 9, 2004, these tests should have been completed. Please discuss this discrepancy.

Response

All ten welds were included as part of the pressure retaining components that received pressure testing and a VT-2 visual examination during the third 10-year interval. There was no through wall leakage observed during these pressure tests.

The referenced wording appeared in the original request. The relief applies to work performed during refueling outage 2EOC 20, which occurred during spring of 2004. Even during review of the original submittal, Duke should have identified and corrected this wording. The wording was transferred into the revision and should have been detected and corrected during review of the revision.

4. For welds 2-LDCB-INLET-V1 and 2-LDCB-OUTLET-V2, RR 04-ON-009 states that the Examination Volume is A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I-J. However, in Figure IWB-2500-7(a), the examination volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I is provided.

Please correct this inconsistency.

Response

For welds 2-LDCB-INLET-V1 and 2-LDCB-OUTLET-V2, examination data sheets defined the examination volumes as A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I-J in accordance with interpretation of the nozzleconfiguration of the letdown coolers. Review of the Duke component and weld isometric drawings show that the examination volume defined as A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-l in Figure IWB-2500-7(a) accurately represents the examination volume of welds 2-LDCB-INLET-V1 and 2-LDCB-OUTLET-V2.

Recalculation of coverage using the examination volume of Figure IWB-2500-7(a) shows an aggregate coverage of 29.4% for each weld 2-LDCB-INLET-V1 and 2-LDCB-OUTLET-V2.

See attached data sheets 1 through 22 of 22 for re-calculation of percentage of coverage.

2-51A-17-124 pa _/ tj4 PrmayAnls ea.Dietin Weld Length Percent of Volume Percent of Scanned (in.)

Covered Coverage Claimed 60 shear Axial pipe side 14.!

38.1 38.1 No scan from valve side 45' shear Clockwise pipe side 14.1 50 50 450 shear Counter clockwise 14.1 50 50 pipe side Aggregate =34.52%

Supplementary Beam Weld Length Percent of Percent of Percent Actual Angle Direction Scanned (in.)

Volume Coverage Coverage Covered Claimed 60' RL, Axial pipe side 14.1 61.9 61.9

~2~~

//,

/

/

2-51A-1Bt125 t y2 1 Z PrmryAgls BemDietin Weld Length Percent of Volume Percent of Primary Angles Scanned (in.)

Covered Coverage Claimed 60 shear Axial elbow side 14.1 38.1.

38.1 No scan from valve side 45' shear Clockwise elbow 14.1 50 50 side

.45 ý' sheat-C ounter clockw ise

14.

50 50 elbow side Aggregate r34.i2%

Supplementary Beam Weld Length Percent of Percent of Percent Actual Angle lDirection Scanned (in.)

Volume Coverage Coverage Covered ClaimedCovrg 60" RL Axia elbow 14 I 61.9 61.9 side 6ý1.

Tt 2-51 A-17-20A

ý I e- ý d, z-,,

PrmryAgls BemDietin Weld Length Percent of Volmne Percent of Scanned (iii.)

Covered Coverage Claimed 600 shear Axial pipe side 11.0 40.6 40.6 No scan from valve side

45) shear Clockwise pipe side I 1.0 50 50 45' shear Counter clockwise 11.0 50 pipe side Ag-gregate =35.15%

Percent ot' Percent of Supplementary Beam Weld Length Percent Covergen Percent Actual Angle Direction Scanned (in.)

Volume Colimrge Coverage Covered Claimed 700 shear Axial pipe side 1 1.0 59.4 059.4

2-51A-17-102 Note: The calculations on page 3 of 3 in the UT report are incomplete. The percent coverage was re-calculated as follows:

600 axial shear coverage fronm the pipe side is shown as 46.7%. However, this was along only 4 inches of a weld that is I I inches long. There is no calculation for the shear wave scan f'rom the tee side. This is simply done by dividing the weld length scanned on the ice side by the total weld length which is:

7Mi-

= 0.636 x 100 = 63.6%

The limited coverage on the pipe side was only along 4 inches o0' the weld. The calculation for that pOrtiOn is:

0.3636x 100 = 36.36% (rounded to 36.4%)

Multiplying 36.4% by the 46.7% shown on page 3 of: 3, results in 0.364x 0.467 = 0.1699 x 100 = 16.99% (rounded to 17%). This is shown as Scan I on page 2 of 3.

In order to arrive at the total coverage For the pipe side the 17% mnust be added to the 63.6% which yields 80.6%

/

7

2HP-227-11I I~~;

(7____

e.4,ý,S~ N J t2~664 ~

Z',I

ýw

&A b.4

..o T

q~~[~c4

, *Pý*Q wpioýoy UT Vessel Examination Site/Unit. Oconee 1 2

Summary No:

B03.150.003 Workscope:

IS1 Proce (ure Proc-ed' re Rev W\\Io;k Order No NOE-630 2

98603899 Outage No ONS2EOC20 Report No.:

UT-04-152 Page:

.1 of-2 Code,-

Asme Section XI 1989 Cat./item:

B-D- /83,150.3 Location.

NIA Drawing No:

1-34097-2

==

Description:==

Nozzle to Channei:Body System CD 51A

• Comrponent ID B03.150.003 12-LDCB-INLET-VI S2/Lerg1h N/A Thickness/Diameter.

0.875"/3,0" Lmitations:

Yes-See attached limitation report.

Star, Time 0854 Finish Time 0950 Examination Surface Inside Outside f*

Sursace Condation: AS GROLIND Lo Location 9.2.2 Wc Location:

Centerline of W'eld c.plarW ULTRAGEL ll Batch No 03125 Temp Tool Mbf FISHER Seriaý No.

MCNDE327-36

'-.rface Temrri 59 Cal. Report No.

CAL-04-242, CAL-04-243, CAL-04-244, CAL-04-245 Angle Used

0

[ 45 45T 6,OL-600T 45RL Scanning dB 40.:

40.5 63.5

.5 lndication(sV Yes [

No 7 Scan Coverare uos'rear ['-

.iwn.tr',,irej.

CW

• CCn

v Comments. "

FC 99-02, 03-17, 03:-30

- Resu!is Accept i

Reject inio FT Scanning db's less than rel.-r1.4 to abtain 2:1 signal to noise ratio.

Percent OCoverage Obtained 90%

No -29.!26 Prev;osl{'ata Yes I Y e

/-

/

Examinei Level III

/

Signature.

Ote R eviewýdp, 5*V

.*4n ML V

Dale Zimm'erman, David K..

4,1512004 I..

Examin er Level 1 1 SicleatV' e

)3..-

Site Re.'i1E,

-Signature D. ate Mauldin* Larry E../j"

/

4/5/2004 Other Level.

Signature Date 1 AP"ll Rere"'

. Signature a!

tiCL.VJIC4 K._

14,Mýor.

4 L~

if /.)

I 2-LDCB-INLET-V 1 B03.150.003 AGGREGATE COVERAGE

_Base Metal Scan Percentage Aggregate %

Total Aggregate%

450 Axial (Scan 1) 41.9 60'Axial (Scan 2) 57.1 45' Circ (CW)..

12.6 450 Cire (CCW) 12.6 600 Circ (CW) 12.6 600 Cire (CCW) 12.6 Total Base 149.4 149.4/6 24.9 Weld Metal 45' Axial (Scan 1) 2.1.9 450 Axial (Scan 2) 35.0 450 Axial (Scan 1) 13.1 450 Axial (Scan 2) 21.9 450 Circ (CW) 44.9 450 Circ (CCW) 44.9 600 Circ (CW) 44.9 600 Cirb (CCW) 44.9 Total Weld 27.1.5 271.5/8 33.9 24.9 + 33.9/2 =29.4 David K. Zimmerman NDE Level IIt

'lee6III:):

06/17/08

'-I P Examination Volume ABCDEFGH1 ABI = 0.15 Sq in.

CDEF = 0.766 Sq in.

Nozzle 8CFG = 0.914 Sq in.

A BGHI 0.753 Sq in.

Vessel I

0 c

.375 Vs

/

{p Total examination area 2.58 Sq in.

SCALE 1:1 I

is H

4 ~47 ~

Ll 1 ID

-AV Ij!AL

.7

(),gp3~

~, ~

c~.

~

~

,2-- 1

-nc FfpY Vi.

-~~L~J2L

p4:ý-z I-3/4s~5~~aEz~

I

)( )BA 0c 4vt~l-al 2n712 a Q.'L oo,

-OQZZI.E I,-- L Olt B - I NJ I 17F-r-V I

ý2!Lba.k7-j-- I: I

AdA~A,. or

~z(r~

(h~r?*t

-~

OL1s~

cL~1eJ c~ Sht Sx u Cl C-1 p

E -Lbca -- L If Li ý'- v I 5cAd*

i:r.

,i2 Aol 0A, A

I, Zi, 0

q--Incs- -IJLtýýT-WL

- tC-Al.9-1 : I

C-1,ý. 4 f4 k -- I 4? ~

ACT) 24t W

I4 Lý,,I

( 7 "

y 2.-LOCE-t)JLg<-vt

g 919 zI'Z6

- L-.LQCl3- :LJL-6r-Ill f~gAIl -t::j:

c)~

C ~l~R11f~i*f I-keZ 1

cl-i 4-~L 6,00 kA(l1L~'

IkVU1L~J7)

~J~JQL~U~

/

,'r

ne&

orntv~g&06, L L zi i-..

'~

• 7 7

~

s U.i'~-~ L).CV~l~9

~2.

p ~j1 ~ Z

~

~-z. ~

O.3o~

p.'~z1I x

0 N

... "E--LrQ5-I J Lf T-Vf*

5ciAI*

1:1

Site/Unit: Oconee '

2 Summary NNo:

B03.150.004 Workscope:

SI UT Vessel Examination Procedure:

Procedure Rev.

Work Order No.

NDE-630 2

98603899 Outage No..

ONS2EOC20 Report No.

UT-04-153 Pageý of 2

Code Asme Section XI 1989 Cat./Item:

B-D-/B3.150.4 Location N/A Dravwino No 1-34097-2 Descnption. Nozzle to Channel Body System 10 51A Component ID. B03.1 50.004 /2-LDCB-OUTLET-V2 Size/Length N/A Thickness/Oiameter 0.875"/3,0" Limitations.

Yes-See attached limitation report.

Start Time 0854 Finish Time.

0950 Examination Surface Lo Location Temp Tool Mfg.:

Inside 0 9.2.2 Outside [

Wo Location:

Serial No.:

Surface Condition AS GROUND Centerline of Weld CuJren MCLND E-32764 ULTRAGEL II ip 59 oF Batch No 03125 FISHER Srace Ter Cal Report No.

Angle Used Scanning dB Indication(s).

CAL-04-242, CAL-04-243, CAL-04-244, CAL-04-24.5 45 45T 60RLI 50T I 45RL 40.5 40.5 63.5 66.5 YesD Nof]

Scan Coverage, Upslream@

DOcvnsi[ean-.'!

cW O CcwIZI Comments-FC 99-02, 03-17, 03-30 Results.

Accept [o Reject E)

Percent Oi Coverage Obtained > 90%:

Info [D Scanning db's less than Io,.

-Tz;/'z R

No-_29.

(4,Jq03R eviewed Previous Data:

ref.+14 to obtain 2:1 signal to noise ratio.

Yes

/~

II ~-j2~

Ctli~,o7~i~

/

Sintr Dat o Review r t'U Da, Examiner Level ill Sinaturee Zimmerman, David K.

.4/5/2004 Exmnr Lvl1 lDate Site Review.

YSignature

.Date

'Mauldin, Larry E.

.C*/J*

In/*:'*

415/2004 Othe Levelsgnatur Date A.

Signature

-,Date c'

z1f

/

0F ~-

2-LDCB-OULET-V2 B03.150.004 AGGREGATE COVERAGE Base Metal

.Scan Percentage Aggregate %

Total Aggregate%

45' Axial (Scan 1) 41.9 60°Axial (Scan 2) 57.1.

45° Circ (CW) 12.6

.45' Circ (CCW) 12.6 600 Circ (CW) 12.6 600 Circ (CCW) 12.6 Total Base 149.4 149.4/6 =24.9 Weld Metal 45' Axial (Scan 1) 21.9 i_....

4 5 0 A x ia l (S c a n 2 )

3 5.0 45' Axial (Scan 1) 13.1 450 Axial (Scan 2) 21.9 450 Circ (CW) 44.9 450 Circ (CcW) 44.9 600 Cire (CW) 44.9 600 Circ (CCW) 44.9 Total Weld 271.5 271.5/8 =33.9 1

24.9 + 33.9/2 29.4 David K. Zimmerman NDE Level III 06117/08

Examination Volume = ABCDEFGHI ABI= 0.15 q in, CDEF = 0.766 Sq in, NozzleL BCFG = 0,914 Sq in.

BGHI- 0.753 Sq in.

Vessel 4

-~

A38 D

C

.375 tis I_

Total examination area 2.58 Sq in.

SCALE 1:1

?aree

~

~1 (i.~k~-a £~i.~) a-~~

-~ ~

77*j?

It

~0

'7.

ec~3~

/~6 r' oZ~i67,65~

n

~LQ~L~

Li 1-,LfDCB-oull-EFC-YZ.;

5IfCi&1,1; 1:

2~mJi~

Zs" 6

kn8a

ýa< 1-AIV i&I

~W)

BASr-A~V A~

L Z/1 1, -

ce I

E-LEJC3-BO*-

<\\

~cJ1A~ ~ll

Avzc-tý,-. ofý,

-Al-S Z L&~

~

O~S1~L.

-~ S 4 ý

0. :jt&a3EZ c -1 ?"r

-F-X A.

113,

Ž9 F"*Sm I I..

.. J f

J J

II

-- - I l i

C-

-0 I.

,?-LD

-cR,-

(") r<L 7-I2 t+/-cmAýJ I '.

1 - -,.

O~

i~jee fN A~3c L34~$+/-D.-

- 1ý

ý,da Lx)

Aa/1L t 5 OIQ7ZL-C 0

17,.f-f-ncp,- oL-Kl f:2.Al I'-'

4

AA?*&

o~

~

TýA Af;7z-j.~

~

f'~

'7_

AP C-

_0 Q

LJ~ ~AI~LTh J~V1M

(-?>

~

'2 q-- Lnci-

-Q-fLL!h.J

(~~O kA1~L7)

IkVULL(f~

<cYA'.

a!Z V

DCf31 - (JLJ<L6'r-\\/'2'

~CAi1~

i:~

M~A*A~

OF Thje 'a k3Q~~0.

13~LQ~k~

A-ow~~_

q'~

p~~

Go0 ARLD PIV/ i 4 LZ (2ý1 V5LrEýK 1

'2-I Dc~- OuTL~ -VZ.

f-cal 9-1: -

.LS?-& - Of C

j¶ i

~j)aie 7~

(', 4-"-> f*L Y t-I IS,.L

-4 L,- ~,C f.j.

t-tirc Z:

0..

L.

atkýS.9C f~oo-2 17- - I nc R -

0( I-r-I

- \\ 17.

f2 C-4u 1;_ý -I I. I