ML092820488
| ML092820488 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 10/05/2009 |
| From: | Morris J Duke Energy Carolinas |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 09-CN-001 | |
| Download: ML092820488 (68) | |
Text
PDuke EEnergy Carolinas JAMES R. MORRIS, VICE PRESIDENT Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC Catawba Nuclear Station 4800 Concord Road / CN01 VP York, SC 29745 803-701-4251 803-701-3221 fax October 5, 2009 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention:
Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.
20555
Subject:
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke)
Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Docket Number 50-413 Request for Relief Number 09-CN-001 Limited Weld Examinations During the End-of-Cycle 17 Refueling Outage Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g) (5) (iii),
please find attached Request for Relief 09-CN-001.
This request for relief is associated with limited weld examinations during inservice inspection activities for the subject refueling outage.
The attachment to this letter contains all technical information necessary in support of this request for relief.
Duke is requesting NRC review and approval of this request at your earliest convenience.
There are no regulatory commitments contained in this letter or its attachment.
If you have any questions concerning this material, please call L.J. Rudy at (803) 701-3084.
Very truly yours, James R. Morris LJR/s Attachment
/~LV1 www. duke-energy. corn
Document Control Desk Page 2 October 5, 2009 xc (with attachment):
L.A.
Reyes, Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth St.,
SW, Suite 23T85
- Atlanta, GA 30303 G.A. Hutto, III, Senior Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Catawba Nuclear Station J.H.
Thompson, Project Manager (addressee only)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop 8-G9A Washington, D.C.
20555-0001
Document Control Desk Page 3 October 5, 2009 bxc (with attachment):
R.D.
Hart L.J. Rudy M.A.
Pyne E.B. Miller, Jr.
K. Douthit RGC File Document Control File 801.01 ELL-ECO50 NCMPA-1 NCEMC PMPA
Attachment Request for Relief 09-CN-001
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 1 of 27 Relief Request 09-CN-001 Proposed Relief in Accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(iii)
Inservice Inspection Impracticality Duke Energy Corporation Catawba Nuclear Station - Unit 1 (EOC17)
Third 10-Year Interval - Inservice Inspection Plan Interval Start Date = 6-29-2005 Interval End Date = 6-29-2015 This Relief Request has 5 welds for which relief is being sought.
The ID's, Summary Numbers, Attachments, Pages Per Attachment for the 5 welds are as follows:
List Number Weld ID Summary Number Attachment/
Pages Per Attachment
- 1.
1PZR-W2 C1.B3.110.0002 A/10
- 2.
1PZR-W3 C1.B3.110.0003 B/8
- 3.
1ELDHX-HD-FLG C1.C1.20.0003 C/7
- 4.
1VCT-LH-SH C1.C1.20.0019 D/6
- 5.
1NI11-9 C1.C5.21.0002 E/6 Designated Attachments contain the examination data for each of these five welds.
Items in this relief request were examined during May of 2008.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 2 of 27
- 1.
ASME Code Component Affected Pressurizer Reactor Coolant System Pressurizer Spray Nozzle to Upper Head Weld Weld ID = 1PZR-W2 Summary Number = C1.B3.110.0002 II.
Applicable Code Edition and Addenda
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI - 1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III.
Applicable Code Requirement
IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-D, Item Number B3.110 Fig. IWB-2500-7 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I IV.
Impracticality of Compliance The material is carbon steel. This is a pressure vessel weld with a diameter of 12.75 inches and a wall thickness of 3.0 inches.
During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 81.7% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained. This weld is limited to 81.7% of the required examination volume because of the proximity of the nozzle blend radius which prevents scanning the weld from the nozzle side. The ultrasonic examination was performed in accordance with the requirements of Section V, Article 4 and the additional requirements of Section XI, Appendix 1, 1998 Edition through the 2000 Addenda. Refracted shear wave angles of 350, 450, and 600 were used to scan the weld and base material covering the examination volume to the maximum extent practical. In addition, a straight beam examination was performed. The percentage of coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material. The coverage from each scan is shown in the following tables.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit 1 Page 3 of 27 Angle Beam Weld Metal Coverage Weld Length Percent of Percent of Prgmar Bieao Scanned Volume Coverage (inches)
Covered Claimed 350 and 45' Perpendicular 100 100 100 shear from Surface 1 350 and 450 Perpendicular 100 (76.1 +
68 shear from Surface 2 58.9)/2 = 68 350 and 450 Parallel to the weld clock 100 100 100 shear ws wise 350 and 450 Parallel to the weld counter 100 100 100 clock wise Total Weld Metal Coverage = 91.9%
Angle Beam Base Metal Coverage Primary Beam Weld Length Percent of Percent of Angles Direction Scanned Volume Coverage (inches)
Covered Claimed 350, 450 and Perpendicular 600 shear from Surface 100 90.5 90.5 1
No scan from nozzle side 350 and 450 Parallel to the weld clock 100 64.5 64.5 shearwise 35' and 450 shear Parallel to the weld counter 100 64.5 64.5 Total Base'Metal Coverage = 77.5%
The straight beam examination covered 75.6% of the weld and base material.
The aggregate coverage is the average of the weld metal angle beam scans, the
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit 1 Page 4 of 27 base metal angle beam scans and the straight beam scan, (91.9 + 77.5 + 75.6)- 3 = 81.7%. To obtain more coverage the weld would need to be re-designed to allow scanning from the nozzle side which is impractical. There were no recordable indications on this weld.
The Catawba Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I. Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the criteria of this Code Case.
V.
Proposed Alternative and Basis for Use Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.
No substitution alternative for this weld is available which would provide better coverage.
Vl.
Duration of Proposed Alternative This request is for the duration of the third inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on June 29, 2015.
VII.
Justification for Granting Relief
Background:
The vessel / nozzle juncture containing weld 1 PZR-W2 is an ASME Ill, Class 1 component with a design temperature of 6801F and a design pressure of 2500 psia. This weld is located inside the Unit 1 containment and serves as part of the reactor coolant system (RCS) pressure boundary. The design functions of the RCS as described in the UFSAR are a) to maintain primary fission product barrier of the fuel assemblies, b) to provide a barrier against the release of radioactivity generated within the reactor, c) to support the transfer of heat from the fuel assemblies to the S/Gs during power operation and when the reactor is subcritical, including the initial phase of plant cooldown, to the steam and power conversion system, d) to support transfer of the heat produced during the subsequent phase of plant cooldown and cold shutdown to the Residual Heat Removal System, e) to support heat transfer via natural circulation, assuring no fuel damage within the operating bounds permitted by the Reactor Control and Protection Systems, f) to serve as a boundary for containing the fluid used as the core neutron moderator and reflector and as a solvent for chemical shim control, and g) to maintain the homogeneity of soluble neutron poison concentration and rate of change of coolant temperature such that uncontrolled reactivity changes do not occur.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 5 of 27 Weld 1 PZR-W2 is a full penetration butt weld between the pressurizer spray nozzle and the pressurizer vessel head. The nozzle forging is fabricated from SA508 Class 2 material. The head is fabricated from SA533,Grade A, Class 2 material.
The justification for this proposed relief request is:
a) The deficient margin between the actual and required inspection volumes for this examination is small (see Section IV). Furthermore, no recordable indications were identified in the examined volume. The ultrasonic examination of the weld was conducted using personnel qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda and ultrasonic procedures complied with the requirements of ASME Section V, Article 4 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as amended by Section XI, Appendix I.
b) Visual examinations (VT-2) are performed each refueling outage in accordance with ASME XI, IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-P, System Leakage Tests. These examinations further confirm the structural integrity of the welded joint and the absence of pressure boundary leakage.
c) The base materials have good mechanical properties and are highly weldable. The primary failure mechanism of these materials in the RCS application is wastage due to corrosion. However, these low alloy steel components include a stainless steel cladding on inside surfaces to preclude the corrosion effects of primary coolant. As for other degradation mechanisms such as erosion/corrosion, fatigue, stress corrosion cracking, and hydrogen embrittlement, no service induced problems have been observed at similar locations in operating PWR plants.
d) During each refueling outage, multiple walkdowns of containment are performed to determine the presence of external leakage. These walkdowns include a boric acid walkdown (PT/1/A/4150/001 H) while the primary system remains at temperature and pressure (Mode 3). Other walkdowns performed during the outage are system engineer walkdowns (PEP 3.09), operation walkdowns at 350 psi, 1000 psi, and normal operation pressure (OP/i/A/6100/001) and the ASME XI, IWA 5000, system leakage test. During these various walkdowns, any leakage from this weld would be recognized by active leakage or boron deposit buildups around the nozzle and mirror insulation.
e) In addition, leakage during operation at this weld location would be detected by various leakage detection systems available to the operator. These systems identified in plant technical specifications include:
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 6 of 27
" Containment Atmosphere Particulate Radioactivity (EMF 38) Monitoring System which would detect airborne radiological activity; Containment Ventilation Unit Condensate Drain Tank Level Monitoring Subsystem which collects and measures as unidentified leakage the moisture removed from the containment atmosphere; Containment Floor and Equipment Sump Level and Flow Monitoring Subsystem where unidentified accumulated water on the containment floor would be monitored and evaluated as sump level changes.
" A reactor coolant system water inventory balance is performed on a regular basis (i.e. at least once every three days). The normal operating practice is to perform this computer based program on a daily frequency and/or whenever the operators suspect any abnormal changes to other leakage detection systems. A Plant Technical Specification requires system leakage from "unidentified" sources be maintained below 1 gpm; however, plant operation procedure (PT/1/A/4150/001D, NC System Leakage Calculation) establishes an administrative limit of 0.15 gpm above which the source of leakage will be investigated. Leakage as a result of a failed weld discussed in this section would show up as unidentified leakage and subject to the 0.15 gpm administrative limit.
Other leakage detection parameters available to the operator include 1) Volume Control Tank (VCT) level changes, 2) VCT make-up frequencies, 3) Containment Humidity indication, and 4) Containment Air Temperature and Pressure variations.
Based on the reasons stated above, the limited volumetric examination coverage associated with this weld has no significant impact on the continued assurance of structural integrity of the pressurizer spray nozzle to head weld. Thus, the design functions of the reactor coolant pressure boundary are maintained without full examination coverage of the subject weld.
References:
- 1) Flow Diagram CN-1553-1.1
- 2) CNM-1201.01-0066, Pressurizer Drawing
- 3) CNM-1201.01-0175, Pressurizer Drawing
- 5) Technical Specification 3.4.15, RCS Leakage Detection Instrumentation
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 7 of 27 VIII.
Previous Submittals None.
The limitations from EOC 17 were compared with the past examination data.
This comparison shows the following:
Pre outage estimates of percentages were inaccurate because the precise search unit size and wedge configuration was not known at the time.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit 1 Page 8 of 27
- 1.
ASME Code Component Affected Pressurizer Reactor Coolant System Pressurizer Safety/Relief Nozzle to Head Weld Weld ID = 1PZR-W3 Summary Number = C1..B3.110.0003 I1.
Applicable Code Edition and Addenda
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI - 1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda II1.
Applicable Code Requirement
IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-D, Item Number B3.110 Fig. IWB-2500-7 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I IV.
Impracticality of Compliance The material is carbon steel. This is a pressure vessel weld with a diameter of 15.0 inches and a wall thickness of 3.0 inches.
This weld is limited to 81.2% of the required examination volume because of the proximity of the nozzle blend radius which prevents scanning the weld from the nozzle side. The ultrasonic examination was performed in accordance with the requirements of Section V, Article 4 and the additional requirements of Section XI, Appendix 1, 1998 Edition through the 2000 Addenda. Refracted shear wave angles of 350, 450, and 600 were used to scan the weld and base material covering the examination volume to the maximum extent practical. In addition, a straight beam examination was performed. The percentage of coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material. The coverage from each angle beam scan is shown on the following tables.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 9 of 27 Angle Beam Weld Metal Coverage Weld Length Percent of Percent of Primar Bieao Scanned Volume Coverage (inches)
Covered Claimed 350 and 45' Perpendicular 100 100 100 shear from Surface 1 350 and 450 Perpendicular 100 (82.4 +
71.9 shear from Surface 2 61.4)/2 = 71.9 350 and 450 Parallel to the weld clock 100 100 100 shear ws wise 350 and 450 Parallel to the weld counter 100 100 100 clock wise Total Weld Metal Coverage = 93%
Angle Beam Base Metal Coverage Primary Beam Weld Length Percent of Percent of Angles Direction Scanned Volume Coverage (inches)
Covered Claimed 350, 450 and Perpendicular 600 shear from Surface 100 89.3 89.3 1
No scan from nozzle side 350 and 450 Parallel to the weld clock 100 63.1 63.1 shearwise 350 and 450 shear Parallel to the weld counter 11 1....;--
100 63.1 63.1 Total Base Metal Coverage = 76.2%
The straight beam examination covered 74.3% of the weld and base material.
The aggregate coverage is the average of the weld metal angle beam scans, the
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 10 of 27 base metal angle beam scans and the straight beam scan, (93 + 76.2 + 74.3)+ 3 = 81.2%. To obtain more coverage the weld would need to be re-designed to allow scanning from the nozzle side which is impractical.
There were no recordable indications found during the examination of this weld.
The Catawba Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I. Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the criteria of this Code Case.
V.
Proposed Alternative and Basis for Use Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.
No substitution alternative for this weld is available which would provide better coverage.
Vl.
Duration of Proposed Alternative This request is for the duration of the third inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on June 29, 2015.
VII.
Justification for Granting Relief
Background:
The vessel / nozzle juncture containing weld 1PZR-W3 is an ASME III, Class 1 component with a design temperature of 680OF and a design pressure of 2500 psia. This weld is located inside the Unit 1 containment and serves as part of the reactor coolant system (RCS) pressure boundary. The design functions of the RCS as described in the UFSAR are a) to maintain primary fission product barrier of the fuel assemblies, b) to provide a barrier against the release of radioactivity generated within the reactor, c) to support the transfer of heat from the fuel assemblies to the S/Gs during power operation and when the reactor is subcritical, including the initial phase of plant cooldown, to the steam and power conversion system, d) to support transfer of the heat produced during the subsequent phase of plant cooldown and cold shutdown to the Residual Heat Removal System, e) to support heat transfer via natural circulation, assuring no fuel damage within the operating bounds permitted by the Reactor Control and Protection Systems, f) to serve as a boundary for containing the fluid used as the core neutron moderator and reflector and as a solvent for chemical shim control, and g) to maintain the homogeneity of soluble neutron poison concentration and rate of change of coolant temperature such that uncontrolled reactivity changes do not occur.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 11 of 27 Weld 1 PZR-W3 is a full penetration butt weld between the pressurizer PORV nozzle and the pressurizer vessel head. The nozzle forging is fabricated from SA508 Class 2 material. The head is fabricated from SA533,Grade A, Class 2 material.
The justification for this proposed relief request is:
a) The deficient margin between the actual and required inspection volumes for this examination is small (see Section IV). Furthermore, no recordable indications were identified in the examined volume. The ultrasonic examination of the weld was conducted using personnel qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda and ultrasonic procedures complied with the requirements of ASME Section V, Article 4 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as amended by Section Xl, Appendix I.
b) Visual examinations (VT-2) are performed each refueling outage in accordance with ASME XI, IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-P, System Leakage Tests. These examinations further confirm the structural integrity of the welded joint and the absence of pressure boundary leakage.
c) The base materials have good mechanical properties and are highly weldable. The primary failure mechanism of these materials in the RCS application is wastage due to corrosion. However, these low alloy steel components include a stainless steel cladding on inside surfaces to preclude the corrosion effects of primary coolant. As for other degradation mechanisms such as erosion/corrosion, fatigue, stress corrosion cracking, and hydrogen embrittlement, no service induced problems have been observed at similar locations in operating PWR plants.
d) During each refueling outage, multiple walkdowns of containment are performed to determine the presence of external leakage. These walkdowns include a boric acid walkdown (PT/1/A/4150/001 H) while the primary system remains at temperature and pressure (Mode 3). Other walkdowns performed during the outage are system engineer walkdowns (PEP 3.09), operation walkdowns at 350 psi, 1000 psi, and normal operation pressure (OP/i/A/6100/001) and the ASME XI, IWA 5000, system leakage test. During these various walkdowns, any leakage from this weld would be recognized by active leakage or boron deposit buildups around the nozzle and mirror insulation.
e) In addition, leakage during operation at this weld location would be detected by various leakage detection systems available to the operator. These systems identified in plant technical specifications include:
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 12 of 27 Containment Atmosphere Particulate Radioactivity (EMF 38) Monitoring System which would detect airborne radiological activity; Containment Ventilation Unit Condensate Drain Tank Level Monitoring Subsystem which collects and measures as unidentified leakage the moisture removed from the containment atmosphere; 0 Containment Floor and Equipment Sump Level and Flow Monitoring Subsystem where unidentified accumulated water on the containment floor would be monitored and evaluated as sump level changes.
A reactor coolant system water inventory balance is performed on a regular basis (i.e. at least once every three days). The normal operating practice is to perform this computer based program on a daily frequency and/or whenever the operators suspect any abnormal changes to other leakage detection systems. A Plant Technical Specification requires system leakage from "unidentified" sources be maintained below 1 gpm; however, plant operation procedure (PT/1/A/4150/001D, NC System Leakage Calculation) establishes an administrative limit of 0.15 gpm above which the source of leakage will be investigated. Leakage as a result of a failed weld discussed in this section would show up as unidentified leakage and subject to the 0.15 gpm administrative limit.
Other leakage detection parameters available to the operator.include 1) Volume Control Tank (VCT) level changes, 2) VCT make-up frequencies, 3) Containment Humidity indication, and 4) Containment Air Temperature and Pressure variations.
Based on the reasons stated above, the limited volumetric examination coverage associated with this weld has no significant impact on the continued assurance of structural integrity of the pressurizer spray nozzle to head weld. Thus, the design functions of the reactor coolant pressure boundary are maintained without full examination coverage of the subject weld.
References:
- 1. Flow Diagram CN-1553-1.1
- 2. CNM-1201.01-0066, Pressurizer Drawing
- 3. CNM-1201.01-0175, Pressurizer Drawing
- 5. Technical Specification 3.4.15, RCS Leakage Detection Instrumentation
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 13 of 27 VIII.
Previous Submittals None.
The limitations from EOC 17 were compared with the past examination data.
This comparison shows the following:
Pre outage estimates of percentages were inaccurate because the precise search unit size and wedge configuration was not known at the time.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 14 of 27
- 1.
ASME Code Component Affected Excess Letdown Heat Exchanger Chemical and Volume Control System Head to Flange Weld Weld ID = 1ELDHX-HD-FLG Summary Number = C1.C1.20.0003 II.
Applicable Code Edition and Addenda
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI - 1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III.
Applicable Code Requirement
IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-A, Item Number C1.20 Fig. IWC-2500-1 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume A-B-C-D IV.
Impracticality of Compliance The materials are carbon steel and stainless steel. This weld has a diameter of 9.5 inches and a wall thickness of.75 inches.
This weld is limited to 21.6% of the required examination volume because of the weld joint design, the proximity of a nozzle drain line and the flange configuration. These factors prevent scanning the weld from two axial and two circumferential beam path directions as required by ASME,Section XI, Appendix III, 111-4420 and 111-4430, 1998 Edition through the 2000 Addenda. The examination volume was scanned with 450 shear waves and 70' refracted longitudinal waves to achieve the maximum practical coverage. The coverage from each angle beam scan is shown in the following table.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 15 of 27 Weld Length Percent of Percent of Primar Bieao Scanned Volume Coverage (inches)
Covered Claimed 450 shear &
Axial Head 14.0 59.4 27.7 700 RL Side No axial scan from flange side Clockwise and Counter 450 shear Clockwise 14.0 31.4 29.3 Head Side at Drain Nozzles 450 shear Clockwise and Counter Clockwise Flange Side Balance of
\\AlIsIrl I znrith 14.0 31.4 29.3 Aggregate = 21.6%
(27.7 + 0 + 29.3 + 29.3) = 21.6%
4 In order to obtain more coverage the weld would have to be re-designed to allow scanning from both sides of the weld and the drain line would have to be moved.
This is impractical. There were no recordable indications found during the examination of this weld.
The Catawba Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume A-B-C-D. Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the criteria of this Code Case.
Proposed Alternative and Basis for Use V.
Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.
No substitution alternative for this weld is available which would provide better coverage.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 16 of 27 VI.
Duration of Proposed Alternative This request is for the duration of the third inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on June 29, 2015.
VII.
Justification for Granting Relief
Background:
The head to flange juncture containing weld 1 ELDHX-HD-FLG is an ASME III, Class 2 component with a design temperature of 650°F and a design pressure of 2500 psia. This weld is located inside the Unit 1 containment and serves as part of the chemical and volume control system (NV) pressure boundary. The design functions of the NV system as described in the UFSAR are a) to maintain a predetermined water level in the pressurizer, i.e. maintain required water inventory in the Reactor Coolant System, b) to maintain seal water injection flow to the reactor coolant pumps, c) to control reactor coolant water chemistry conditions, activity level, soluble chemical neutron absorber concentration and makeup, d) to provide emergency core cooling (safety injection), and e) to provide conditions for filling, draining, and hydrostatic testing in the Reactor Coolant System.
Weld 1 ELDHX-HD-FLG is a full penetration butt weld between the primary side head and flange of the excess letdown heat exchanger. The primary side flange is fabricated from SA105 material and welded with SS 309L cladding on the inside surface. The primary side head is fabricated from SA240 Type 304 material.
The justification for this proposed relief request is:
a) While the margin between the actual and required inspection volumes for this weld was large, no recordable indications were identified in the limited volume that was examined. The ultrasonic examination of the weld was conducted using personnel qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda and ultrasonic procedures complied with the requirements of ASME Section V, Article 4 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as amended by Section XI, Appendix I.
b) Visual examinations (VT-2) of the heat exchanger are performed each inspection period in accordance with ASME XI, IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-H, System Leakage Tests. These examinations further confirm the structural integrity of the welded joint and the absence of pressure boundary leakage.
c) This weld is a dissimilar metal weld between the austenitic stainless steel head and the cladded carbon steel flange. These materials (with credit for the
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 17 of 27 internal cladding of the flange) have a high corrosion resistance with low contribution of corrosion products to the coolant, have good mechanical properties and are highly weldable. Very few service induced problems with stainless steel in PWR primary system applications have been observed in operating plants. There has been limited susceptibility to stress corrosion cracking due to chloride contamination and cracking in stagnant borated systems. However, chemistry limits on chlorides, fluorides, sulfides, and dissolved oxygen are controlled by Selected Licensee Commitment (SLC) and other administrative procedures at Catawba to ensure that any favorable conditions for SCC are precluded. Additionally, controls on welding filler material consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.31 also have served to limit the susceptibility of these welds to SCC. No other known degradation mechanisms are applicable to this material at this particular location within the system.
d) During each refueling outage, multiple walkdowns of containment are performed to determine the presence of external leakage. These walkdowns include a boric acid walkdown (PT/1 /A/4150/001H) while the primary system remains at temperature and pressure (Mode 3). Other walkdowns performed during the outage are system engineer walkdowns (PEP 3.09), operation walkdowns at 350 psi, 1000 psi, and normal operation pressure (OP/1/A/6100/001) and the ASME XI, IWA 5000, system leakage test. During these various walkdowns, any leakage from this weld would be recognized by active leakage or boron deposit buildups around the nozzle and mirror insulation.
e) The excess letdown heat exchanger is normally isolated. However, if the heat exchanger is placed in service, leakage during operation at this weld location would be detected by various leakage detection systems available to the operator. These systems identified in plant technical specifications include:
Containment Atmosphere Particulate Radioactivity (EMF 38) Monitoring System which would detect airborne radiological activity; Containment Ventilation Unit Condensate Drain Tank Level Monitoring Subsystem which collects and measures as unidentified leakage the moisture removed from the containment atmosphere; Containment Floor and Equipment Sump Level and Flow Monitoring Subsystem where unidentified accumulated water on the containment floor would be monitored and evaluated as sump level changes.
A reactor coolant system water inventory balance is performed on a regular basis (i.e. at least once every three days). The normal operating practice is to perform this computer based program on a daily frequency and/or whenever the operators suspect any abnormal changes to other leakage detection systems. A Plant Technical Specification requires
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 18 of 27 system leakage from "unidentified" sources be maintained below 1 gpm; however, plant operation procedure (PT/1/A/4150/001D, NC System Leakage Calculation) establishes an administrative limit of 0.15 gpm above which the source of leakage will be investigated. Leakage as a result of a failed weld discussed in this section would show up as unidentified leakage and subject to the 0.15 gpm administrative limit.
Other leakage detection parameters available to the operator include 1) Volume Control Tank (VCT) level changes, 2) VCT make-up frequencies, 3) Containment Humidity indication, and 4) Containment Air Temperature and Pressure variations.
Based on the reasons stated above, the limited volumetric examination coverage associated with this weld has no significant impact on the continued assurance of structural integrity of the excess letdown heat exchanger flange to head weld.
Thus, the design functions of the NV system pressure boundary are maintained without full examination coverage of the subject weld.
References:
- 1) Flow Diagram CN-1554-1.0
- 2) CNM-1201.06-0083, Auxiliary Heat Exchangers, Instruction Manual
- 3) CNM-1201.06-0037, Excess Letdown Heat Exchanger Outline Drawing
- 5) Technical Specification 3.4.15, RCS Leakage Detection Instrumentation VIII.
Previous Submittals This weld was last inspected 12/16/97 during 1EOC10 with 38.52% coverage.
Relief Request 98-02 was submitted to and accepted/granted by the NRC without an RAI recognizing that best effort was made to complete the examination with maximum coverage and that re-design and/or replacement of the component in order to fully comply with Code requirements would be a significant burden.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 19 of 27
- 1.
ASME Code Component Affected Volume Control Tank Chemical and Volume Control System Lower Head to Shell Weld Weld ID = 1VCT-LH-SH Summary Number = C1.C1.20.0019 II.
Applicable Code Edition and Addenda
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI - 1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III.
Applicable Code Requirement
IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-A, Item Number C1.20 Fig. IWC-2500-1 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume A-B-C-D IV.
Impracticality of Compliance The material is stainless steel. This weld has a diameter of 90.0 inches and a wall thickness of.25 inches.
This weld is limited to 89.4% of the required examination volume because of the proximity of four support legs. This factor prevent scanning the weld from two axial and two circumferential beam path directions as required by ASME,Section XI, Appendix III, 111-4420 and 111-4430, 1998 Edition through the 2000 Addenda.
The examination volume was scanned with 450 shear waves to achieve the maximum practical coverage. The coverage from each angle beam scan is shown in the following table.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 20 of 27 Weld Length Percent of Percent of Angle Bireamo Scanned Volume Coverage (inches)
Covered Claimed 450 Axial Head 283.0 89.4 89.4 Side 450 Axial Shell 283.0 89.4 89.4 Side Clockwise and 450 shear Cockie 283.0 89.4 89.4 Clockwise Head Side 450 shear Clockwise and Counter Clockwise
.0,hck11.qirlg 283.0 89.4 89.4 Aggregate = 89.4%
(89.4 + 89.4 + 89.4 + 89.4) = 89.4%
4 In order to obtain more coverage the supports would have to be moved to allow scanning from both sides of the weld. This is impractical. There were no recordable indications found during the examination of this weld.
V.
The Catawba Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume A-B-C-D. Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the criteria of this Code Case.
Proposed Alternative and Basis for Use Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.
No substitution alternative for this weld is available which would provide better coverage.
Duration of Proposed Alternative VI.
This request is for the duration of the third inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on June 29, 2015.
VII.
Justification for Grantinq Relief
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 21 of 27
Background:
The volume control tank (VCT) lower head to shell weld, 1VCT-LH-SH, is an ASME III, Class 2 component with a design temperature of 650°F and a design pressure of 2500 psia. This weld is located inside the Unit 1 auxiliary building and serves as part of the chemical and volume control system (NV) pressure boundary. The design functions of the NV system as described in the UFSAR are a) to maintain a predetermined water level in the pressurizer, i.e. maintain required water inventory in the Reactor Coolant System, b) to maintain seal water injection flow to the reactor coolant pumps, c) to control reactor coolant water chemistry conditions, activity level, soluble chemical neutron absorber concentration and makeup, d) to provide emergency core cooling (safety injection), and e) to provide conditions for filling, draining, and hydrostatic testing in the Reactor Coolant System.
Weld 1VCT-LH-SH is a full penetration butt weld between the shell and lower head of the volume control tank. The head and shell are fabricated from SA240 Type 304 material.
The justification for this proposed relief request is:
a) The deficient margin between the actual and required inspection volumes for this examination is small (see Section IV). Furthermore, no recordable indications were identified in the examined volume. The ultrasonic examination of the weld was conducted using personnel qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda and ultrasonic procedures complied with the requirements of ASME Section V, Article 4 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as amended by Section XI, Appendix I.
b) Visual examinations (VT-2) are performed each inspection period in accordance with ASME XI, IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-H, System Leakage Tests. These examinations further confirm the structural integrity of the welded joint and the absence of pressure boundary leakage.
c) This weld is a similar metal weld between austenitic stainless steel base materials. These materials have a high corrosion resistance with low contribution of corrosion products to the coolant, have good mechanical properties, and are highly weldable. Very few service induced problems with stainless steel in PWR primary system applications have been observed in operating plants. There has been limited susceptibility to stress corrosion cracking due to chloride contamination and cracking in stagnant borated systems. However, chemistry limits on chlorides, fluorides, sulfides, and dissolved oxygen are controlled by Selected Licensee Commitment (SLC) and other administrative procedures at Catawba to ensure that any favorable
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 22 of 27 conditions for SCC are precluded. Additionally, controls on welding filler material consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.31 also have served to limit the susceptibility of these welds to SCC. No other known degradation mechanisms are applicable to this material at this particular location within the system.
d) During plant operation, periodic walkdowns of the auxiliary building are performed to determine the presence of external leakage. Radioactive systems outside containment, which includes the VCT, are visually inspected weekly.
Other activities performed where leakage would be identified are the NV system leak rate determination performed each 18 months and system engineer walkdowns performed 3 times yearly. Any leakage from this weld would be recognized by these activities through the presence of active leakage or boron deposits at the head to shell interface.
e) Leakage during operation at this weld location would also be detected by various leakage detection systems available to the operator. Since the VCT is within the boundary of the Reactor Coolant Inventory Balance Calculation, any leakage would be indicated by this calculation which is required by Technical Specification every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> yet typically run every 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. Other leakage detection parameters available to the operator include VCT level changes and VCT make-up frequencies.
Based on the reasons stated above, the limited volumetric examination coverage associated with this weld has no significant impact on the continued assurance of structural integrity of the excess letdown heat exchanger flange to head weld.
Thus, the design functions of the NV system pressure boundary are maintained without full examination coverage of the subject weld.
References:
- 1. Flow Diagram CN-1554-1.1
- 2. CNM-1201.04-0102, Volume Control Tank, Unit 1 Outline Drawing
- 4. Technical Specification 3.4.15, RCS Leakage Detection Instrumentation VIII.
Previous Submittals This weld was last inspected 5/4/99 during 1 EOC1 1 with 88.34% coverage.
Relief Request 99-02 was submitted to and accepted/granted by the NRC without an RAI recognizing that best effort was made to complete the examination with maximum coverage and that re-design and/or replacement of the component in order to fully comply with Code requirements would be a significant burden.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 23 of 27 ASME Code Component Affected Piping Weld Safety Injection System Elbow to Tee Weld Weld ID = 1NIl1-9 Summary Number = Cl.C5.21.0002 I1.
Applicable Code Edition and Addenda
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI - 1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda II.
Applicable Code Requirement
IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-F-i, Item Number C5.21 Fig. IWC-2500-7(a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume C-D-E-F IV.
Impracticality of Compliance The material is stainless steel. This weld has a nominal pipe size of 4.0 inches and a wall thickness of 0.531 inches.
This weld is limited to 77% of the required examination volume because of the proximity of the tee radius. The tee radius prevents scanning in two axial and two circumferential directions for the full length of the weld on the tee side as required by 10CFR50.55a (b)(2)(xv)(A)(1). Therefore no credit is taken for the examination volume past the centerline of the weld on the tee side where access is limited. The ultrasonic examination was performed using Appendix VIII qualified personnel, procedures, and equipment. A 600 refracted longitudinal wave was used to examine the tee side and elbow side in the areas of the obstructions but is not included in the percent of coverage. The coverage from each angle beam scan is shown in the following table.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit 1 Page 24 of 27 Primary Beam Weld Length Percent of Percent of Scanned Volume Coverage Angles Drto(inches)
Covered Claimed 600 shear Axial Tee Side 14.2 50.8 50.8 600 shear Axial Elbow 14.2 64.8 64.8 Side Clockwise 450 shear Elbow Side 14.2 92.2 92.2 and Tee Side Counter 45° shear Clockwise 14.2 100 100 Elbow Side and Tee Side Aggregate = 77.0%
Supplemental Beam Weld Length Percent of Percent of Supplem Direction S
neld (ingh Volume Coverage Angle Direction Scanned (in.)
Covered Claimed 600 RL Axial Elbow 6.0 13.0 0
Side 600 RL Axial Tee Side 2.0 12.1 0
(50.8 + 64.8 + 92.2 + 100) = 77.0%
4 In order to obtain more coverage the weld would have to be re-designed to allow complete scanning from the tee side and the adjacent pipe would have to be relocated. This is impractical. There were no recordable indications found during the examination of this weld.
The.Catawba Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460,,
which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume C-D-E-F. Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the criteria of this Code Case.
Proposed Alternative and Basis for Use Radiography (RT) is not a desired option because RT is limited in the ability to detect expected degradation mechanisms such as thermal fatigue cracking and V.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit I Page 25 of 27 stress corrosion cracking initiating at the pipe inside surface. Additionally, Radiography has not been qualified through performance demonstration.
No substitution alternative for this weld is available which would provide better coverage.
VI.
Duration of Proposed Alternative This request is for the duration of the third inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on June 29, 2015.
VII.
Justification for Granting Relief
Background:
The piping containing weld 1NI11-9 is an ASME Ill, Class 2 component with a design temperature of 650OF and a design pressure of 2500 psia. This weld is located inside the Unit 1 containment and serves as part of the safety injection system (NI) pressure boundary. The safety related function of the NI System is to provide emergency core cooling in order to prevent unacceptable fuel damage and to assure that the core remains intact during all phases of a Design Basis Event (DBE). Weld 1NI11-9 is a full penetration butt weld between the branch side of a 4" schedule 160 tee and a 4" 900, schedule 160 elbow. These seamless components are fabricated from SA403 WP304 material.
The justification for this proposed relief request is:
a) The deficient margin between the actual and required inspection volumes for
.this examination is small (see Section IV). Furthermore, no recordable indications were identified in the examined volume. The ultrasonic examination of the weld was conducted using personnel, equipment, and procedures qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VIII Supplement 2 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as administered by the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI).
b) Visual examinations (VT-2) are performed each inspection period in accordance with ASME XI, IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-H, System Leakage Tests. These examinations further confirm the structural integrity of the welded joint and the absence of pressure boundary leakage.
c) This weld is a similar metal weld between austenitic stainless steel base materials. These materials have a high corrosion resistance with low contribution of corrosion products to the coolant, have good mechanical properties, and are highly weldable. Very few service induced problems with stainless steel in PWR primary system applications have been observed in
Relief Request 09-CN-001 Catawba, Unit 1 Page 26 of 27 operating plants. There has been limited susceptibility to stress corrosion cracking due to chloride contamination and cracking in stagnant borated systems. However, chemistry limits on chlorides, fluorides, sulfides, and dissolved oxygen are controlled by Selected Licensee Commitment (SLC) and other administrative procedures at Catawba to ensure that any favorable conditions for SCC are precluded. Additionally, controls on welding filler material consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.31 also have served to limit the susceptibility of these welds to SCC. No other known degradation mechanisms are applicable to this material at this particular location within the system.
d) During each refueling outage, multiple walkdowns of containment are performed to determine the presence of external leakage. These walkdowns include a boric acid walkdown (PT/1/A/4150/001 H) while the primary system remains at temperature and pressure (Mode 3). Other walkdowns performed during the outage are system engineer walkdowns (PEP 3.09), operation walkdowns at 350 psi, 1000 psi, and normal operation pressure (OP/1/A/6100/001) and the ASME XI, IWA 5000, system leakage test. During these various walkdowns, any leakage from this weld would be recognized by active leakage or boron deposit buildups at the weld.
e) The NI piping containing this weld is under FWST static pressure during normal plant operation. Leakage during normal operation is unlikely due to the low piping stresses in this piping.
Based on the reasons stated above, the limited volumetric examination coverage associated with this weld has no significant impact on the continued assurance of structural integrity of the safety injection piping inside containment. Thus, the design functions of the NI system pressure boundary are maintained without full examination coverage of the subject weld.
References:
- 1. Flow Diagram CN-1562-1.3
- 2. CN-1NI-0011, Piping Weld Isometric
- 4. Technical Specification 3.4.15, RCS Leakage Detection Instrumentation VIII.
Previous Submittals None.
Relief Request 09-CN-001 V
Catawba, Unit I Page 27 of 27 The limitations from EOC 17 were compared with the past examination data.
This comparison shows the following:
- 1. Limitations increased for similar metal piping welds as expected due to the limitations imposed by 10CFR50.55a(b)(2)(xv)(A)(1) since the last 10 Year Interval.
- 2. Pre outage estimates of percentages were inaccurate because the precise search unit size and wedge configuration was not known at the time.
-V
pbmý-,- -
UT Vessel Examination Site/Unit: Catawba /
Summary No.:
Cl.E 1
13.110.0002 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
NDE-640 4
Outage No.:
CI-17 Report No.:
UT-08-007 WorKscope:
ISI Work Order No.:
01756752 Page:
1 of I
Code:
199812000A Cat./Item:
B-D/B3.110 Location:
Drawing No.:
CNM 1201.01-17511
==
Description:==
Nozzle to Head System ID:
NC Component ID: IPZR-W2 Size/Length:
NA Thickness/Diameter: 3.000 / 12.750 Limitations:
Yes - See Limitation Information on Report UT-08-009 Start Time:
1441 Finish Time:
1610 Examination Surface:
Inside F-Outside []
Surface Condition: GROUND Lo Location:
9.2.3 Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
07125 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE 27220 Surface Temp.:
69 0F Cal. Report No.:
/CAL-08-013 Angle Used 0
45 145T 60 60T Scanning dB 41.8 Indication(s):
Yes D No []
Scan Coverage:
Upstream I]
Downstream []
CW W CCWRJ Comments:
Results:
Accept E]
Reject []
Info D]
Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
No -81.7%
Reviewed Previous Data:
7 Yes Examiner Level I11-N
/>
i re,/
9 Date Reviewer Signature Date Griebel, David M.
5/7/2008 1l I6 Examiner Level Il-N.
Siqnjure Date Site Review Signature "Date Ellis, Ken I.
517/2008 N/A A
Other Level II-N Signature Date ANII Review nature Date Keene, Douglas L.
5/7/2008 05A'4Jvf.
J K-O(CT-ll u-e-st 6J-CX-6t)J.,
/oV, 1/0 ý/
AlkDRAM jr4,VXiiW UT Vessel Examination Site/Unit: Catawba /
Summary No.:
CI.B Workscope:
1 3.110.0002 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-820 2
Outage No.:
CI-17 Report No.:
UT-08-009 Page:
I of 9
ISl 01756752 Code:
199812000A Cat./Item:
B-DIB3.110 Location:
Drawing No.:
CNM 1201.01-175/1
==
Description:==
Nozzle to Head System ID:
NC Component ID: IPZR-W2 Size/Length:
N/A Thickness/Diameter: 3.000 / 12.750 Limitations:
Yes - Single Sided Due to Nozzle Start Time:
1441 Finish Time:
1540 Examination Surface:
Inside D]
Outside []
Surface Condition: GROUND Lo Location:
9.2.3 Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
07125 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE 27220 Surface Temp.:
69
-F Cal. Report No.:
CAL-08-014, CAL-08-l 5, CAL-08-01/6 Angle Used 0
45 45T 60 60T 35T1 Scanning dB 66.0 66.0 75.4 70.0 70.0 Indication(s):
Yes /]
No [-
Scan Coverage:
Upstream [
Downstream S[]
CW []
CCW W
Comments:
See attached coverage and indication data sheets.
Results:
Accept []
Reject []
Info D Additional Inspectors: Josie Muirhead I Ken Ellis Percent Of Coverage. Obtained > 90%:
No-81.7%
Reviewed PreviousData:
Yes,,
Examiner Level II-N S*Z, Date Reviewer igatr Dt
,, O u
S i g a u eD t
'Griebel, David M.
,.51712008
_UJIt'
{
Examiner Levef UII-N atu Date Site Review ISignature b ate Stauffer, Lester, E.
S-
ý/
5/7/2008 NIA Other Level Il-N nature Date ANII Review sighature Date Keene, Douglas L.
5/7/20081 c I 1'et 6-CkOb, kit-eltez A,4
Pj-M--
Ultrasonic Indication Report Site/Unit:
Catawba Summary No.:
C1.1B3 Workscope:
1 3.110.0002 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-820 2
01756752 Outage No.:
Cl-17 Report No.:
UT-08-009 Page:
2 of 9
ISI Search Unit Angle:
35 Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Lo Location:
9.2.3 o Piping Welds (c Ferritic Vessels > 2"T C) Other wo L
qL W1 W2 Lo.oc
.io:..2.3.
MID Metal Path Wmax Distance From Wo To S U. At Maximum Response RBR Remaining Back Reflection W1 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
L Distance From Datum W2 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
Comments:
L @IP T 'lel f
-- 4 -----
LJAI UJII IT Lo WI ~Vniax W2 Scan Indication W
Forward Backward L1 I
L L2 RBR Remarks No.
Of Max Of Max Of Max Of Max Of Amp.
DAC W
MP Wl -
105%
1.1 3.4 N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A 3.25 N/A N/A ID Geometry CCw*
Examiner Level li-N
,~K~'
~
aueDate Reviewer Signature Date Griebel, David M.
5/7/2008 1-1W, Examiner Level III-N
.S1 dtur Date Site Review Signature Dt Stauffer, Lester, E.
i~-
-/5/7/2008 N/A Other Level Iu.N Signature Date ANII Review
,/
S 1
n ture Date
,Keene, Douglas L.
"5/72008 V
Summary No.: CI.B3.110.0002 Examiner: GreeDvdM Examiner: Stauffer, Lester, Other: Keene, Douglas L. T Supplemenmal Report Report No.:
Page:
ýaL' UT.08-009 3
of 9
Date:
Date: _______
Date:
-40 Level:
II-N Level:
1Il-N Level:
Il-N Reviewer:
Site Review:
ANII Review:
Comments: Ind. #1 -.350 was determined to be a geometric reflector due to weld root geometry. This area was previously recorded on PSI and ISI exam data which was resolved by review of radiographs.
I
.350 Ii 1
Ald2ZLE:
- 1_
/
k j
Pressurizer Spray Nozzle to Head % of Covera2e Item No. : C1.B3.110.0002 Weld No.: 1PZR-W2 Weld Coverage Scan S1 S2 S1 S2 Cw Cw CCw CCw Anple 350 350 450 450 350 450 350 450
% Coverage Obtained 100 76.1 100 58.9 100 100 100 100 735 Total 735
- 8=
91.9
% Coverage Base Material Coveraie S1 Cw & CCw 35 0°450&60 0 450&350 Total 90.5 64.5 155 77.5 75.6 155 -2=
% Coverage
% Coverage 00 Scan Coverage Aggregate Coverage = Weld + Base Material + 00 - 3 81.7
% Coverag~e Inspector
/ Date:
Page £4 of 9 Inspector / Date :
Page 4 of,1
Pressurizer Spray Nozzle to Head Total Area Weld & Base Material Item No. :C1.B3.110.0002 Weld No. : 1PZR-W2 Scale 1" = 2" Total Weld Area = 3.48 sq. in.
Total Area of Base Material = 3.99 + 4.26 = 8.25 sq. in.
Total ExamArea = 3.99 + 4.26 + 3.48 = 11.73 sq. in.
Surface 2 Nozzle Area = 3.48 sq. in.
Surface I - Head Area= 3.99 sq in.
Clad Inspector / Date:.j"-*&
Page of I.
-ff 663Z
Pressurizer Spray Nozzle to Head 00 Scan Coverage Item No. : C1.B3.110.0002 Weld No. : 1PZR-W2 Scale 1" = 2" 0' Scan Total Area = 8.87 sq. in.
Total 00 Scan Coverage = 8.87 / 11.73 x 100 = 75.6 %
Surface 2 Nozzle 00 Surface 1 - Head Clad Inspector / Date :
A510,6
Pressurizer Spray Nozzle to Head Base Material Coverage -Axial Scans Item No. : C1.B3.110.0002 Weld No. : 1PZR-W2 Scale 1" = 2" Total Area of Base Material = 3.99 + 3.48 = 7.47 sq. in.
Total Base Material Coverage = 7.47 / 8.25 x 100 = 90.5 %
Surface 2 Nozzle 450 600 Surface 1 - Head Area =3.99 sq. in.
Clad Inspector / Date:
k_
Page -1 of
.S18108
Pressurizer Spra Nozzle to Head Weld Coverage -Axial & Circumferential Scans Item No. : C1.B3.110.0002 Weld No. : IPZR-W2 100% Coverage 350 & 450 Scans CW, CCW and Axial from Surface 1 Total Weld Coverage 350 from Surface 2 = 2.65 / 3.48 x 100 = 76.1 %
Total Weld Coverage 450 from Surface 2 = 2.05 / 3.48 x 100 = 58.9 %
Scale 1" =2" Surface 2 Nozzle
- 350 450 Area = 2.05 sq. in. - 45° Surface 1 - Head
= 2.65 sq. in. - 35' Clad Inspector Date :
t Page B of
Pressurizer Spray Nozzle to Head Base Material Coverage - Circumferential Scans Item No. : CI.B3.110.0002 Weld No.: 1PZR-W2 Scale 1" = 2" Total Area of Base Material = 3.99 + 1.33 = 5.32 sq. in.
Total Base Material Coverage = 5.32 / 8.25 x 100 = 64.5 %
Surface 2 Nozzle 450 350 Surface 1 - Head Area = 3.99 sq. in.
Clad Inspector /Date:
1_I.5 J]oh3, Page ci of_._
Site/Unit: Catawba /
Summary No.:
C1.E Workscope:
UT Vessel Examination NDE-640 Outage No.:
CI-17 1
13.110.0003 ISl Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
4 01756752 Report No.:
UT-08-008 Page:
1 of 1
Code:
1998/2000A Cat./Item:
B-D/13.110 Location:
Drawing No.:
CNM 1201.0.1-75/1
==
Description:==
Nozzle to Head System ID:
NC Component ID: 1 PZR-W3 Size/Length:
N/A Thickness/Diameter: 3.000 / 15.000 Limitations:
Yes - See Limitation Information on Report UT-08-010 Start Time:
1429 Finish Time:
1540 Examination Surface:
Inside j]
Outside []
Surface Condition: GROUND Lo Location:
9.2.3 Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
07125 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE 27220 Surface Temp.:
69 OF
/
Cal. Report No.:
CAL-08-013 Angle Used 0
45 45T 60 60T Scanning dB 41.8 Indication(s):
Yes U No W Scan Coverage:
Upstream W]
Downstream W CW R CCW W Comments:
Results:
Accept E)
Reject Wj Info E]
Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
No - 81.2%
Reviewed Previous Data:
/
Yes Examiner Level Il-N Signatu Date Reviewer Signature Date Griebel, David M.
5/7/2008 Examiner Level II-N Signature Date Site Review Signature Date Ellis, Ken 5/7/2008 NIA Other Level II-N S* ature Date ANII Review
ýiqnature Keene, Douglas L.
5/7/2008 IL
,21"4 ___J
UT Vessel Examination Site/Unit: Catawba I Summary No.:
C1.E Workscope:
I 13.110.0003 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-820 2
01756752 Ou R*
itage No.:
Cl-17 eport No.:
UT-08-010 Page:
1 of 7
ISI Code:
199812000A Cat./Item:
B-D/B3.110 Location:
Drawing No.:
CNM 1201.01-17511
==
Description:==
Nozzle to Head System ID:
NC Component ID: 1PZR-W3 Size/Length:
NIA Thickness/Diameter: 3.000 115.000 Limitations:
Yes - Single Sided Due to Nozzle Start Time:
1429 Finish Time:
1610 Examination Surface:
Inside []
Outside []
Surface Condition: AS GROUND Lo Location:
9.2.3 Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
07125 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE 27220 Surface Temp.:
69
°F I/
V Cal. Report No.:
CAL-08-614, CAL-08-015, CAL-08-016 Angle Used 0
45 45T 60 60T 35T Scanning dB 66.0 66.0 75.4 70.0 70.0 Indication(s):
Yes R No [
Scan Coverage:
Upstream W Downstream 99 CW W CCW W Comments:
See attached coverage data sheets.
Previously recorded ID Geometry was seen, but at less than recordable indications Results:
Accept E]
Reject [
Info E]
Additional Inspectors: Josie Muirhed f Ken Ellis*
/as J.
Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
No-81.2%
Reviewed Previous Data:
Yes Examiner Level 1.1N Sig nataure Date Reviewer SgtrDate Griebel, David M.
2 5/7/2008 Examiner Level III-N
-Signature Date Site Review Signaturee Stauffer, Lester, E.
- 2 5/7/2008 N/A Other Level I1-N S ipature Date ANII Review Signature Keene, Douglas L.
51
.7/2008
Pressurizer Safety/Relief Nozzle to Head % of Coverage Item No. : C1.B3.110.0003 Weld No.: 1PZR-W3 Weld Coverage Scan S1 S2 S1 S2 Cw cw Ccw Ccw Anzle 350 350 450 450 350 450 350 450
% Coverage Obtained 100 82.4 100 61.4 100 100 100 100 743.8 Total 743.8
- 8 =
93.0
% Coverage Base Material Coverage S1 Cw & CCw 350,450&600 450&35)
Total 89.3 63.1 152.4 76.2 74.3 152.4 -2=
% Coverage
% Coverage 00 Scan Coverage Aggregate Coverage = Weld + Base Material + 00 + 3 81.2
% Coverag-e A
AAI Inspector / Date :
z51iBlos Page -7Z of -7
Pressurizer Safety / Reliet Nozzle to Head Total Area Weld & Base Material Item No. : C1.B3.110.0003 Weld No.: 1PZR-W3 Total Weld Area= 3.29 sq. in.
Scale 1" = 2" Total Area of Base Material = 3.59 + 3.87 = 7.46 sq. in.
Total ExamArea = 3.59 + 3.29 + 3.87 = 10.75 sq. in.
Surface 2 Nozzle Area = 3.29 sq. in.
Area = 3.87 sq. in.
/,Date:
Page "5 of __
hIspector Clad
Pressurizer Safen Relief Nozzle to Head 00 Scan Coverage Item No.: C1.B3.110.0003 Weld No. : 1PZR-.W3 Scale 1" =2" 00 Scan Total Area = 7.99 sq. in.
Total 00 Scan Coverage = 7.99 / 10.75 x 100 74.3 %
Surface 2 Nozzle 00 Surface I - Head Clad Inspector / Date:
Page -
of-S615(06
Pressurizer surizer Safet / Relief Nozz/e to Head Base Material Coverage -Axial Scans Item No. : C1.-3.110.0003 Weld No. : iPZ-W3 Total Area of Base Material = 3.59 + 3.07 = 6.66 sq. in.
Total Base Material Scan Coverage = 6.66 / 7.46 x 100 = 89.3 %
Scale 1 =2" Surface 2 Nozzle Area = 3.59 sq, in.
Surface 1 -Head Inspector /Date :
111 SJMO'8 page -5 of-
Pressurizer Safety I Relief Nozzle to Head Weld Coverage -Axial & Circumferential Scans Item No. : C1.B3.110.0003 Weld No. : 1PZR-W3 100% Coverage 350 & 450 Scans CW, CCW ans Axial from Surface 1 Total Weld Coverage 350 from Surface 2 = 2.71 / 3.29 x 100 = 82.4%
Total Weld Coverage 450 from Surface 2 = 2.02 / 3.29 x 100 = 61.4%
Sur No:
Scale 1" =2" face 2 zzle 350 Ir Area 45' = 2.02 sq. in.
Inspector / Date:
Page_(of -7If Clad
Pressurizer Safet / Relief Nozzle to Head Base Material Coverage. Circumferential Scans Item No. : C1.B3.110.0003 Weld No. : 1~PZR-W 3 TotalArea of Base Material =3.59 + 1.12 = 4.71 sq. in.
Total Base Material Scan Coverage = 4.71 / 7.46x 100 = 63.1 %
Suza 44 450 & 350 Scale " =2 2" ce2 N
e 510;5*
Ata = 3-59 sq, in.
Surface 1 - Head Inspector/Date:
Site/Unit. Catawba /
Summary No.:
CII.C1.20.0003 Workscope:
ISI.
UT Vessel
()ainain A-f4Ck1; Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-3630 1
01756741 Outage No.:
CI-17 Report No.:
UT-08-054 Page:
1 of 7
Code:
199812000A Cat.I/tem:
C-AJic.20" Location:
Drawing No.:
CN-ISIN3-1554-1.0
==
Description:==
Head to Flange System ID:
NV Component ID: IELDHX-HD-FLG S ize6Length:,
N/A Thicknessli3ameter:
0.750 / 9.500 Limitations:
Yes - See Attached Limitation Calculations Start Time:
0946 Finish Time:
1020 Examination Surface:
Inside [
Outside []
Surface Condition: AS GROUND Lo Location:
RT #1 Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
07125 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE32768 Surface Temp.:
72
°F Cal. Report No.:
CAL-08-071., CAL4.8-072, CAL-083-073, CAL-08-0T4 Angle Used a.45 l45F i...
.,.5 4-L Scanning d*B 4.1
- 50.
5' 41 6
60-Inecation(s):
Yes j]
No fj Scan Coverage:
Upstream [
Downstream 2]
CW 21 CCW[
Comments:
Reduced scanning dB to obtain 2:1 signal to noise ratio.
Results:
Accqpt-Rbject Rj Info.
Percent Of Coverage Obtained - 0%:
kNo -a
- RevieWedPrevious Data:
Yes ftxaminer Level Ill-N Sinature Date ReiwrASignature Dt Ex mie L ve ll, V* tL---gn'tr 2
at008 Reviewer,//k 4"
D intue
/
ate:-
i'er ev
'l vL
- s@,tr o e ste eie Sg tre "7
f Eaton; Jay A..5/2/008 2
f/I)
Examniner Level Ill-N Si~u IDatle Site ReviewV Signature Date S Itauffor, Le'steir; E.,
ý5/2008.NIA Other Level NIA Signature Date ANtI Review natignaure Date N,
5122 12008
/
2: V e
Site/Unit:
Summary No.:
Workscope:
Ultrasonic Indication Report Catawba
/
I Ci.CI.20.0003 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-3630 1
01756741 Outage No.:
Cl-17 Report No.:
UT-08-054 Page:
2 of 7
ISl Search Unit Angle:
Wo Location:
Lo Location:
45 CL of Weld RT. #1 o Piping Welds o Ferritic Vessels
> 2"T (j Other Vessel < 2"T wo u
qL W1 W2 MP Metal Path Wmax Distance From Wo To S.U. At Maximum Response RBR Remaining Back Reflection W1 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
L Distance From Datum W2 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
Comments:
tHi LoD Scan Indication W
Forward Backward Li L
L2 RBR Remarks No.
Of Max Of Max Of Max Of Max Of Amp.
DAC W
1 200%
1-1.6 1.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A CL+1" N/A N/A Geometry 3
2 200%
1-2.9 1.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A CL+1" N/A N/A Geometry Examiner Level Ill-N Signature Date Reviewer Signature pate Eaton, Jay A.
5/22/2008 7 o Examiner Level Ill-N Sgqna-e Date Site Review Signature Date Stauffer, Lester, E.
5/22/2008 N/A EOther Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date I N/A 5/2212008
-zt
-,og
vA J4i;-
CA. C\\, Zo. oooC i L.*L- *'4-P:u sJ~3
-FA6,cý -:ý C)(-' -1 K : t D. - W A. -
4c 5 k
L A I1*4O5 D m e r
C -
-E9 " L Ec Wl
- A s
DUKE ENERGY COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #:
C1.C1.20.0003 Component ID 1ELDHX-HD-FLG remarks:
I NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Nozzle Connection FI-LIMITED SCAN EI 1Z 2 0
1 [] 2 0 cw N ccw FROM L 26.0" to L 30.0" INCHES FROM WO
+ 0.5 to Beyond ANGLE:
[I 0 N 45
-' 60 other 700 FROM DEG to DEG N
NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Nozzle Connection
"-1 LIMITED SCAN L-II S2
-1 2 [Z cw S ccw FROM L 30.0" to L 3.5" INCHES FROM WO
+ 0.5 to Beyone ANGLE:
nI 0 Z 45 E] 60 other 700 FROM DEG to DEG 0
NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Nozzle Connection LIMITED SCAN EI-I Z
2 Z
I [I 2 Zcw Z ccw FROM L ii.o" to L 16.0" INCHES FROM WO
+0.5 to Beyond ANGLE:
L] 0 Z 45 LI 60 other 700 FROM DEG to DEG I
NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Nozzle Connection r-1 LIMITED SCAN 01 Z
2 Z
1
-2 Zcw Z
ccw FROM L 16.0" to L 19.5" INCHES FROM WO
+ 0.5 to Beyond Sketch(s) attached ANGLE:
L] 0 Z 45 0I other 700 FROM DEG to DEG Z
yes L
No Prepared By:
Jay EatonCLevel:
- ll1, Date:
05/22/2008 Sheet H..
of Reviewed By:
L E,
Date:
-7./P Authorized Inspector:
Date:'
_O,
% Coverage Calculation Summary No:
C1.C1.20.0003 Weld ID:
IELDHX-HD-FLG Diameter:
9.5" Thickness:
0.750" Weld Length: 3 0" Limited coverage for a total of 14" because of nozzle interference for 50% of the weld length.
Aggretate Coverage Calculation Axial Scans.
At 4 Nozzles Remaining length Total 0%
27.7%
27.7%
Circ. Scans CW at 4 Nozzles CW for Remaining length Total CW CCW at 4 Nozzles CCW for Remaining length Total CCW (46.7% of the weld length x 0% of the volume)
(46.7% of the weld length x 59.4% of the volume) 12.3% (46.7% of the length x 26.4% of the volume) 17.0% (46.7% of the length x 36.3% of the volume) 29.3%
12.3% (46.7% of the length x 26.4% of the volume) 17.0% (46.7% of the length x 36.3% of the volume) 29.3%
Total = (27.7+29.3+29.3) = 86.3/4 = 21.6%
Examiner/Date A6 ~2
) I,--
/
- /
+*page 5 of 7
/
Summary No. C1.C1.20.0003 Weld No. IELDHX-HD-FL)G Scale:I" = 1" Total Exam Area = 1.75 sq. in.
Cire. Coverage for 50% of the weld lenIth
% Coverage in the Circ. direction = ( 0. 173 + 0.344 + 0.118 ) / 1.75 x 100 = 36.3%
450 Shear Circ. Coverame for 50% of the weld length due to Nozzles (, 4 locations
% Coverage in the Circ. direction = ( 0.344 + 0.118 ) / 1.75 x 100 = 26.4%
Jnpetr Dt:L IM
~
f hispector / Date :
Page G of '7
Summary No. C1.C0.20.0003 Weld No. IELDHX-HD-FLG Scale: V'= 1" 450 Shear Axial Scan 450 Shear ( ED / OD / ID Calibration )
% Coverage from S2 with Shear,waves = 0.786 / 1.75 x 100 = 44.91/o Axial Scan 700 RL
% Coverage From S2 with 700 RL= 0.253 / 1.75 x 100 = 14.5%
Total % Coverage From S2 with 700 RL and 450 shear = 14.5% + 44.9% = 59.4%
"npeto Dtet c-Page -1 of-Inspector / Date :
Site/Unit: Catawba /
Summary No.:
Cl.
Workscope:
UT Vessel Examination Procedure:
NDE-3630 Outage No.:
CI-17 I
C1.20.0019 Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
1 01756742 Report No.:
UT-08-031 Page:
1 of
-.L(p ISI Code:
199812000A Cat./Item:
C-A/Cl.20 Location:
Drawing No.:
CN-ISIN3-1554-1.1
==
Description:==
Lower Head to Shell System ID:
NV Component ID: 1VCT-LH-SH Size/Length:
H N/A Thickness/Diameter:
0.2501 0.000 Limitations:
Yes - See Attached Limitation Report Start Time:
1025 Finish Time:
1115 Examination Surface:
Inside E]
Outside W Surface Condition: GROUND Lo Location:
9.2.1 Wo Location:
-,.ee, lluue or riywhlaI Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
07125 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE 27219 Surface Temp.:
87 OF Cal. Report No.:
CAL-08-052 Angle Used 0
45 45T 60 60T I
Scanning dB 61.8 61.8 Indication(s):
Yes []
No E]
Scan Coverage:
Upstream 7v Downstream W]
Comments:
Results:
Accept D Reject 7-Info II Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
No - 89.4%
Reviewed Previous Data:
Yes Examiner Level Il-N Si ature Date Reviewer Signature Date Leeper, Winfred C.
.5/1412008 itS'l Examiner Level 1l-N gign re Date Site Review Signature Date Muirhead, Josie F J 6-w L-'7J 5/14/2008 NIA Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review ISignature Date NIA 5/14/2008 1~Y 2&
&W 6
I
Site/Unit:
Summary No.:
Workscope:
Ultrasonic Indication Report Catawba
/
1 C1.C1.20.0019 IS' Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-3630 1
01756742 Outage No.:
CI-17 Report No.:
UT-08-031 Page:
2 of 0*
4,*06Oe Wo Wynex CL W
W W1 W2 Search Unit Angle:
Wo Location:
Lo Location:
45 C
9.2.1 o Piping Welds o Ferritic Vessels
> 2"T
() Other Vessel < 2"T MP Metal Path Wmax Distance From Wo To S.U. At Maximum Response RBR Remaining Back Reflection W1 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
L Distance From Datum W2 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)
Comments:
---..-------- I ULM TU 17-L 4m 0 W1 WRXV Scan Indication W
Forward Backward LI L
L2 RBR Remarks No.
Of Max Of Max Of Max Of Max Of Amp.
DAC W
40%
.20
.38 N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A Geometry - 3600 INT.
Examiner Level Il-N Signature Date Reviewer Signature Date Leeper, Winfred C.
5114/2008 W
- 15108 Examiner Level Il-N Sign ture Date Site Review Signature Date Muirhead, Josie f.,
511412008 NIA Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review
/
/j Signature//
Date NIA 5/14/2008 7{~
y y~
Supplemen Summary No.: Ct.Ct.20.0019 Examiner: Leeper, Winfred C.
Level:
Il-N Examiner: Muirhead, Josie y1 j
g Level:
1I-N Other: N/A Level:
NIA tal Report Rep ort No.:
Page:
Reviewer:
Site Review:
N/A ANII Review:
a
, 1--~
UT-08-031 3
of Date:
Date:
Date:_____
Comments: Indication #1 - 45*- 360* INT. is geometrical weld root indication caused by beam redirection.
Sketch or Photo: ZAUTnlDDEAL\\ProfileLine2.jpg
-2i'5 *3d'31"
- U f
MIL nudm Determination of Percent Coverage for UT Examinations - Vessels Site/Unit:
Catawba
/
I Summary No.:
C1.C1.20.0019 Workscope:
ISt Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-3630 1
01756742 Outage No.:
CI-17 Report No.:
UT-08-031 Page:
4 of
% total for 0 deg 0 deg Planar Scan
% Length X
% volume of length / 100 =
45 deg Scan 1 Scan 2 Scan 3 Scan 4 89.400 89.400 89.400 89.400
% Lehgth X
% Length X
% Length X
% Length X 100.000 100.000 100.000 100.000
% volume of length / 100 =
% volume of length / 100 =
% volume of length / 100 =
% volume of length / 100 =
89.400
% total for Scan 1 89.400
% total for Scan 2 89.400
% total for Scan 3 89.400
% total for Scan 4 Add totals and divide by # scans =
89.400
% total for 45 deg Other den Scan 1
% Length X Scan 2
% Length X Scan 3
% Length X Scan 4
% Length X Add totals and divide by # scans =
% volume of length / 100 =
% volume of length / 100 =
% volume of length / 100 =
% volume of length / 100 =
% total for deg
% total for Scan 1
% total for Scan 2
% total for Scan 3
% total for Scan 4 Percent complete coverage Add totals for each angle and scan required and divide by # of angles to determine; 89.400
% Total for complete exam Note:
Supplemental coverage may be achieved by use of other angles / methods. When used, the coverage for volume not obtained with angles as noted above shall be ca ulated and added to the total to provide the percent total for the complete examination.
Site Field Supervisor:
2 Date:
r It~lOb
DUKE ENERGY COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #:
C1.C1.20.0019 Component ID 1VCT-LH-SH remarks:
Z NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 7 1/2" at 4 support leg F1 LIMITED SCAN Z
I Z
2 Z
I Z
2 Z cw Z ccw
@45',135',225°and315° FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO CL to Beynod ANGLE:
El 0 Z 45 r-E 60 other FROM DEG to DEG
% of weld not examined E-l NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION
= 7.5" X 4 = 30"'
E-l LIMITED SCAN l 1
[El 2 E-1 1El 2
["] cw [-] ccw Total weld length = 283" FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to
% examined =(283-30) / 283x100 ANGLE:
El 0 E] 45 El 60 other FROM DEG to DEG
=89.4%
0" NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION rl LIMITED SCAN Eli E l 2 E1 D 2 l
cw 0 ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
El 0 E] 45 El 60 other FROM DEG to DEG El NO SCAN El LIMITED SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION El 1 El 2 El cw El ccw El I El2 FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to Sketch(s) attached ANGLE:
El 0 El 45 E] 60 h o DEG to FROM DEG El yes E
No Date:
05/14/2008 Date-Sac-ob I
DUKE POWER COMPANY ULTRASONIC BEAM AN 3LI MEASUREMENT RECORD,
- 1. Take thickness measurements between S.wedge locations.
d
..t, tan 96 = (d/2) t 2.. Place search unit on straight run of pipe, and peak the signal.
- 3. Measure distance (d) between exit points.
- 4. Calculate beam angle with formula as shown using measuied wall thickness.
- 5. Use the measured beam angle to determine coverage and when
- 'Mplotting any indications.
P iraqi7P
[A
=f=*
7J For thin wall pipe uso 2nd Vee path tan (d/2) 2t qNominal 45 deg: d=.OL....;
Nominal 60 deg: d-.__'_,"
Nominal 70 deg: d=_
I.
Pipe Schedule:._*_i_.'__
It
- I.
t=_,,3i; measured angle=.,* deg t=_T -
- ,measured angle=
deg t=_,._; measured angle=.
deg 6
~AL~C,(~
oF:6 Examiner Level Date Exam Level te Revi ed By Level Date Autho
- 1 Inspector Date nit r
Date I
Site/Unit: Catawba /
Summary No.:
C1.(
Workscope:
Outage No.:
C1-17 Report No.:
UT-08-023 32 Page:
1 of 6
-bb (1 I
- 5.21.0002 ISI Procedure
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-60 17 017567 Code:
1998/2000A Cat./Item:
C-F-i/C5.21 Location:
Drawing No.:
CN-1 NI-11I
==
Description:==
Elbow to Tee System ID:
NI Component ID: 1NI11-9 Size/Length:
NIA Thickness/Diameter:
0.531 14.000 Limitations:
Yes - See Attached Limitation Report Start Time:
0935 Finish Time:
1020 Examination Surface:
Inside F]
Outside []
Surface Condition: AS GROUND Lo Location:
9.1.1.1 Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
07125 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE,27220 Surface Temp.:
68 0F
/
/
/
Cal. Report No.:
CAL-08-'41, CAL-08-042, CAL-08-043 Angle Used 0
45 145T 60 60L' Scanning dB 45.0 45.0 50 Indication(s):
Yes D No W Scan Coverage: Upstream V Downstream V CWS6 CCW [
Comments:
FC 08-03 Results:
Accept D]
Reject W Info n_
Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
'lo-77.0%
Reviewed Previous Data:
Yes Examiner Level III-N gnature Date Reviewer Signature Date Eaton, Jay A.
5/1212008
//
Examiner Level Il-N
_.Signature Date Site Review Signature Date Ellis, Ken 1
5/12/2008 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review
/i nature Date N/A 5/12/2008 MA
Item No. C1.C5.21.0002 Weld NoAN111-9 I
I I
600 RLWave and 600 Shearl SElbow S1 Coverage Claimed = 50%/
ee S2 Scale: 1"= 1" No Coverage Claimed Supplemental coverage with 600 RL Wave Only See Note:
Note: 600 RL scan not included in percentage coverage due to requirements of 10CFR50.55a(b)(2)(xv)(A)(1). Best effort scan with 600 RL obtained 13.1% coverage in one axial direction.
Side View-Not to Scale r, 1I Limited Area I/
1 Surf 2 Limited Area Weld INVI 1-9 Surf. 1 Plan View - Not to Scale Limited 3" in throat area each side of Tee for a total of 6" on Surface 2. Limited area from Lo +2.1" to Lo + 5.1" and from Lo +9.3" to
+ 12.3".
Inspector/Date":
_Iv_5t
- 1 o8[ Page 7Z. of _
I V
Item No. C1.C5.21.0002 Weld No.IN111-9 Side View - Not to Scale Surf. 2 Weld 1NV11-9 Adjacent Pipe qlrf" 1 Plan View -Not to Scale Limited 2" due to adjacent pipe on Lo + 6.1" to Lo + 8.1".
Surface 1 side of the weld. Limited area from
____________5 Page -3 of (o Inspector / Date:
Item No. C1.C5.21.0002 Weld NoAN111-9 Scale: 1"= 1" 450 Shear 450 Shear Circ. Scan limitation due to adjacent pipe Total inspection volume = 2.3 sq. in. x 1.1 x 1.8" = 2.3 cu. in.
Volume not examined = 0.16 sq. in. x 1.1" 0.18 cu. in.
Total volume examined circ. scan from Surface 1
= 100- ( 0.18 / 2.3 x 100 )= 92.2%.
eorDt:'5 Page _A of (,
Inspector / Date :
Item No. C1.C5.21.0002 Weld No.1NIII-9 Scale: 1" = 1" I
I I
600 RLWave and 600 Shear Coverage Claimed = 50%
No Coverage Claimed Supplemental coverage w~ith 600 RL Wave Only See Note:
Note: 60' RL scan not included in percentage coverage due to requirements of 10CFR50.55a(b)(2)(xv)(A)(1). Best effort scan with 600 RL obtained 12.1% coverage in one axial direction.
Limited due to adjacent pipe on the surface 1 side of the weld.. Limited area from Lo + 6.1" to Lo + 8.1" pctr" ae:Te,
_° Page -
of C, hispwtor / Date :
% Coverage Calculations Item No. : Cl.C5.21.0002 Weld No. 1 Nilll-9 Pipe 0 = 4.5" 1111 =
0.531" Weld Length =
14.2" Limited scan on Surface 2 due to the throat of the tee for 6" of the weld length.
Limited scan on Surface 1 due to adjacent pipe for 2" of the weld length.
% of Length at throat of Tee = 6 / 14.2 x 100 = 42.2%.
% of Length atadjacent pipe = 2 / 14.2 x 100 = 14.1%.
% of Length examined 100% = 100 - 14.1 - 42.2 = 43.7%.
Aggregate Coverage Calculation S1 = Pipe Sl = Pipe S1 = Pipe Total SI S2 = Tee S2 = Tee Total S2 SI S3 & S4 S2 S3 & S4 43.7 %
21.1 %
0%
64.8 %
43.7 %
0%
7.1 %
50.8 %
92.2 %
100 %
( 43.7% of the Length x 100% of the Volume)
(42.2% of the Length x 50% of the Volume)
(14.1% of the Length x 0% of the Volume )
(43.7% of the Length x 100% of the Volume)
(42.2% of the Length x 0% of the Volume )
(14.1% of the Length x 50% of the Volume)
(92.2% of the Volume)
(100% of the Volume)
Total= 307.8+4=
77.0%
Aggregate Coverage InspctorI Dae:
Pge..of C Inspector I Date:
Page (e of (e