ML102870692

Ctl 059169 Final Report.Pdf

ML102870692
Person / Time
Site:	Crystal River
Issue date:	01/22/2010
From:	CTL Group, Progress Energy Florida
To:	Office of Information Services
References
FOIA/PA-2010-0116, 059169
Download: ML102870692 (102)

Text

Progress Energy CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Nondestructive Evaluation of Delamination in a Concrete Containment Wall Structure Crystal River Nuclear Plant Unit 3 Crystal River, Florida Date: January 22, 2010 Submitted by:

CTLGroup 5400 Old Orchard Road Skokie, Illinois 60077-1030 (847) 965-7500 www.CTLGroup.com CIGROUP B u i I d I n g K n o w 1 e d g e D e I I v e r 1n g R e s u I t s.

P) 91

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 1 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EX EC U T IV E S U M M A R Y .................................................................................... 2 BACKG RO UND AND O BJECTIVE ...................................................................... 4 S C O P E O F W O R K ............................................................................................... 5 METHODOLOGIES AND TEST PROCEDURE ...................................................... 6 F IE LD T E S T IN G ..................................................................................... . . ...... 10 TEST RESULT AND DISCUSSIO N ...................................................................... 11 APPENDICES A. STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS PROVIDED BY PROGRESS ENERGY B. TEST METHOD DESCRIPTIONS C. TEST PROCEDURE DEVELOPMENT D. IR TEST RESULT FIGURES E. CORE LOCATIONS AND BOROSCOPE OBSERVATIONS PROVIDED BY PROGRESS ENERGY F. EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION RECORDS C CJGROUP Bu gKi 1dq DcwednuReus, wwwUCLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 2 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 NONDESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION OF CONTAINMENT WALL STRUCTURE CRYSTAL RIVER NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 3, CRYSTAL RIVER, FLORIDA by 1 2 3 Honggang Cao , PE, Jerzy Zemajtis , Ph.D., Salvador Villalobos-Chapa EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

A scheduled refueling outage at the Crystal River Nuclear Plant Unit 3 (CR3), located at 15760 West Powerline Street in Crystal River, Florida commenced in early October, 2009. During the outage, an opening was cut in the 42-in. thick wall of the reactor containment building, to remove and replace the two steam generators, installed during Unit 3 construction. The containment building is approximately 137 ft in outer diameter and 192 ft tall, measured from the base mat top elevation, to top of the roof dome. The concrete wall structure contains a large number of circumferential and vertical tendons, mild-steel reinforcing bars, and a 3/8-in. thick internal steel liner. The Steam Generator Replacement (SGR) opening was 25 ft by 27 ft.

Following post-tensioning tendon de-tensioning and removal, it is understood that the rectangular wall opening was created using high pressure water jets; a technique previously used at a number of other nuclear facilities undergoing SGR. During the cutting process, a significant anomaly in the plane of the wall, resembling a crack or delamination was discovered, visible along the perimeter of the opening. The delamination was located approximately in the plane of circumferential tendons, parallel to the wall surface, approximately 7 to 12 in. deep from its exterior face. The width of the anomaly was variable, and measured to be as wide as / in.,

around the SGR opening perimeter.

CTLGroup was retained by Progress Energy Florida, Inc. in accordance with the Contract (Progress Energy Contract No. 468833) signed on November 11, 2009, to provide nondestructive testing (NDT) and evaluation services of the containment wall structure at CR3.

1Senior Engineer, CTLGroup, 5400 Old Orchard Road, Skokie, IL 2 Project Manager, CTLGroup, 5400 Old Orchard Road, Skokie, IL 3Associate II,CTLGroup, 5400 Old Orchard Road, Skokie, IL CT GROUP WUinKnandge. Dw.eterong upcfts.m www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 3 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 The main objectives of the services, were to characterize the extent of the delamination around the opening, and assess whether similar delamination existed elsewhere within the wall structure.

To achieve the objective, CTLGroup performed site-specific trial testing to evaluate the suitability of several available nondestructive testing techniques for detecting a delamination in this containment wall structure. The Impulse Response (IR) technique was selected as the primary method in the NDT program. Subsequently, CTLGroup developed a written detailed NDT procedure and following approval of the procedure, performed NDT at nearly all exposed exterior surface areas of the containment wall structure and at accessible surface areas from inside the adjacent buildings. Cursory testing was also performed on a portion of the roof dome structure which was reportedly repaired in 1970's after experiencing subsurface delaminations.

CTLGroup's field testing effort took place between October 8 and November 24, 2009.

Based on the NDT results, verified by core sampling and boroscope examination of core holes, CTLGroup concluded that the large delamination visible along the perimeter of the SGR opening was isolated to the wall element between buttresses #3 and #4 horizontally, and from top of the equipment hatch opening to approximately 10 ft below the ring girder vertically, and resembling an hour glass shape centered at the SGR opening. Delaminations of a similar nature were not identified in other areas of the containment wall structure. Approximately eighty (80) core samples were removed from the structure to confirm NDT findings.

C AGROUP BuildingKnowfodgm DelvedingResUts..

www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 4 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 BACKGROUD AND OBJECTIVES A refueling outage began in early October, 2009 at the Crystal River Nuclear Plant Unit 3 (CR3),

located at 15760 West Powerline Street in Crystal River, Florida. One of the objectives of the scheduled outage was to remove and replace two steam generators. This part of work was identified as Steam Generator Replacement (SGR). The SGR required an opening in the reactor containment wall. The containment wall is a reinforced post-tensioned concrete structure of cylindrical shape with a dome roof and a 3/8" thick steel liner covering the interior of the structure. The outer diameter of the structure is approximately 137 ft and its height is approximately 192 ft tall, measured from the base mat top elevation, to top of the roof dome.

The wall consists of a 3/8-in. steel liner and 42-in. thick post-tensioned concrete wall. The circumferential (hoop) post-tensioning tendon ducts are positioned alternately at 1 ft and 2 ft on center in vertical direction, and vertical tendon ducts are placed at 3 ft on center in horizontal direction. The diameter of the tendons ducts is 5-1/8 in. In addition, the wall is reinforced with mild steel bars. The containment wall structure is divided by six (6) buttresses into six bays, referenced as Bays 0010 to 0015. The distance along the wall outer surface between faces of the adjacent buttresses in each bay is approximately 60 ft. (Related structural drawings are included in Appendix A.)

Following post-tensioning tendon de-tensioning and removal, the SGR opening was cut to approximately 25 ft by 27 ft. High pressure water jetting was used to remove concrete for the wall opening. During the water jetting operations, a delamination was visibly discovered in the wall along the perimeter of the opening. The delamination was observed approximately at a depth of 7 to 12 in., which coincides with the plane of horizontal post-tensioning tendons parallel to the wall surface. Reportedly, the width of the delamination was measured up to approximately 1

1/2in.

CTLGroup was retained by Progress Energy Florida, Inc. to provide nondestructive testing (NDT) and evaluation services of the containment wall structure at CR3. The main objectives of the services, were to characterize the extent of the delamination around the opening, and assess whether similar delamination existed elsewhere within the wall structure.

/'i1GROUP Ik Knowlodge. ODetlwng Results..

BuCT www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 5 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 SCOPE OF WORKS CTLGroup's scope of works on this project included:

1) Initial trial testing to evaluate suitability of several nondestructive testing in detection of the delamination in this containment wall structure.

2) Develop a test procedure / program of the selected test method(s).

3) Provide documentation and procedure to comply requirements related to quality control, safety training, qualification requirement, equipment calibration.

4) Perform NDT at all accessible areas, including nearly all of the exposed exterior wall surface areas, portions of wall areas accessed inside adjacent buildings and a portion of the roof dome.

5) Perform petrographic examination of a core sample to evaluate general quality of the concrete and observed cracking. The report has been submitted on November 2, 2009.

(Not included in this report.)

6) Prepare a project report presenting the test program and findings.

wCoGROUP Kn*-WpdgDaoieng Rens..l Wulbdhig wvw. CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 6 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 METHODOLOGIES AND TEST PROGRAM At the initial stage of testing, several candidate nondestructive test methods were considered.

These test methods included Impulse Response (IR) testing, Impact Echo (IE) testing, and Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) testing. Each test has its advantages and limitations in evaluation of internal defects in concrete. A round of trial testing and core sampling verification was performed on the containment wall structure, to evaluate the individual suitability and accuracy of test methods. Based on the trial test results and the specific condition of the wall structure, coupled with CTLGroup's experience on other projects, the Impulse Response test was selected as primary NDT method for detecting the delamination in this containment wall. In addition, core sampling and borescope examination of core holes were to be used to correlate and verify IR results. General description of test methods are enclosed in Appendix B, and the key aspects of the IR test are summarized below. The trial test program is described in detail in Appendix C (Test Procedure Development).

IR Test Method The Impulse Response (IR) technique was developed based on refinement of the vibration method for deep foundation testing in the 1970's, and has been called the transient dynamic response (TDR), mobility or impedance method. The method was extended to the inspection of general concrete structures, other than deep foundation in 1990's, principally through the efforts of the late Dr. Allen Davis and others. The technique is particularly effective for plate-like elements such as floor slabs, walls and large cylindrical structures. The method employs a low strain transient impact, generated using a 1.5-kg hammer, to send a stress wave into the test element. The resultant bending behavior of the element is analyzed to characterize the integrity of the structure.

Average Mobility is the principal parameter that the IR test produces. Average Mobility is defined as the structure's surface velocity in response to the impact, divided by the force input

[a measure of flexibility] in the frequency domain. The mean mobility value over the 0.1-1 kHz range is directly related to the modulus, density and most importantly the thickness of a plate-like element. In general, presence of significant voiding or an internally delaminated or CT CGRouP 1Bu"g I K dgC.DeTing Results..

www.CTLGroup~com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 7 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 unbonded layer will result in an increased average mobility value. On the other hand, a sound concrete element without distress will produce a relatively low average mobility value. The application of this method for detecting delaminations is directly analogous to thickness evaluation. When a plate-like structure contains a significant delamination it behaves like two independent plates. The effective thickness is defined as distance from the test surface to a crack parallel to the surface if delaminated, or the full structural thickness if no internal separations exist. The presence of delamination will effectively reduce the thickness of wall or slab responding to the impact, which results in a drastically increased average mobility value.

The test results can be analyzed and presented in the form of contour plots. The suspect, anomalous areas can be identified through a scaled color scheme. In practice, the IR method is utilized on a comparative basis, which allows the engineer to compare the difference in dynamic responses between test areas, within the same structure or between similarly-constructed structures. The measured response data are correlated to condition via intrusive sampling such as core drilling or chipping.

Based on CTLGroup's experience using IR method evaluating similar structures for the similar type of defect, IR testing was estimated to be effective to an approximate 20 in. depth from the exterior wall face, with an influence range encompassing an approximately 1 to 1.5 ft radius surrounding each test point. A test grid of 2 ft x 2 ft is considered adequate to detect delamination in the wall.

Test Procedure Guidance In cooperation with Progress Energy, CTLGroup developed the following procedure guidance for nondestructively testing the containment wall structure. The justification for this guidance is included in Appendix C (Test Procedure Development):

1. Perform Impulse Response (IR) testing to gather Average Mobility data. An orthogonal coordinate grid, with a 2-ft square spacing is established prior to data gathering in each containment wall section. The following threshold values were initially established based on calibration between Average Mobility values collected using IR equipment system B at four general areas, and five (5) core sample verifications:

C iGRouP Buildang Knowledga.Delvering ReWsd.

www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 8 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169

" M < 0.4: sound concrete

" 0.4<M<1.0: "gray" area, evaluate the need for further testing or coring

" M>1I.0: potentially delaminated concrete or other type of anomaly may exist, evaluate the need for further coring After completion of all the testing and examination of approximately eighty (80) core sample verification locations, analysis of the large amount of data revealed that the initially-established mobility values appeared to be overly conservative. To more accurately reflect the condition of the containment wall structure, the threshold values were modified as follows for the data analysis / interpretation and presentation in this report:

" M < 0.5: sound concrete

" 0.5<M<1.0: "gray" area, evaluate the need for further testing or coring

" MW1.0: potentially delaminated concrete or other type of anomaly may exist, evaluate the need for further coring The details of core sample verification observations and corresponding IR Average Mobility values are presented in the Appendix C "Test Procedure Development" of this report. It is important to note that the threshold values are only applicable to the wall structure. Since the roof dome structure is different from the wall structure in several aspects, such as thickness, orientation, materials, amount and configuration of tendons and reinforcement, the threshold values for the dome would be different. In this exercise, the testing on roof dome was for information only, no specific threshold values were established. Areas with higher mobility values were verified by coring. See the test result section on Page 13.

Based on previous experience, the potential performance difference exists between different sets of Impulse Response (IR) systems, each comprised of a geophone sensor, an instrumented hammer and a data acquisition unit. The raw Average Mobility values collected using an equipment system other than B were normalized by applying a pre-established correction factor. The process employed was as follows:

C i-GROUP BCuilVgKnowlodge. Delvng Resu13.

wwwCTLGroup~com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 9 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 When a different system is used, a cross checking process shall be conducted at areas that have been previously tested using IR system B, to obtain a baseline comparison. If the average value of Average Mobility (M) differs more than 10% from the previous results, all of the values obtained from the second system shall be normalized using the ratio of the average values, so that the data analysis can be made consistently, based on the established thresholds. An experienced CTLGroup engineer should analyze the data using the thresholds as a guide, taking other related information into consideration, and any adjustments to the thresholds are documented.

2. In areas where Average Mobility values fall within 0.4 and 1.0 (the criteria was revised to 0.5 to 1.0 after analysis of more data), the condition and test results were evaluated and core bore verification were needed at some areas. Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) testing was performed to locate the reinforcement and tendons prior to the coring.

3. In some areas where potential delaminations were identified, core samples were removed to verify condition. The core locations were selected jointly by Progress Energy and CTLGroup. GPR scans were made prior to the coring operation, to locate embedded reinforcement and tendon ducts.

4. In sound areas, judged based on IR test results, core samples were randomly removed to confirm conditions.

T GROUP Building tKnoM0edge Delvetng Resuts.

wwwCTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 10 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 FIELD TESTING After initial trial testing was completed and a test procedure was developed, CTLGroup performed testing at nearly all exposed exterior surface areas of the containment wall structure, and at accessible surface areas at various elevations from inside the adjacent buildings, i.e.

intermediate building and auxiliary building. Access was obtained via four automated working platforms (Sky Climbers) installed around the circumference of the cylindrical containment building, the chipping platform at the SGR opening, and erected staging at various locations.

The access was provided by Progress Energy through Bechtel. Two teams from CTLGroup were mobilized and performed the testing. Each team consists of a NDT leader and an assistant, with a set of IR equipment and a GPR unit.

The IR data collected were preliminarily analyzed on site, and core locations were laid out on the surface, where deemed necessary. The sizes of cores were primarily 2-in. or 4-in. diameter, depending on the tendon and reinforcing steel configuration in the area. GPR testing was performed to locate reinforcing bars, circumferential and vertical tendon ducts, to avoid damage during the coring process. While the GPR testing was successful in most of the core locations, however, in areas where reinforcing bars are closely spaced, such as near the equipment hatch where the reinforcing bars were approximately 6 in. on center in both the horizontal and vertical directions, and in bay 0015 where a delamination was present, it was difficult to locate the vertical tendons using GPR. The depths of cores were mostly 20 in., with a small number of cores were drilled to approximately 12 in. Core sample removal and borescope examination of core holes were performed by others. As requested by Progress Energy, IR testing was also performed on a portion of the roof dome, between buttresses #3 and #4. The pie-shaped test area covered both original concrete and a previously repaired section. The purpose of these tests was to examine the bond condition between the repair concrete and the original concrete substrate. A number of core samples were also removed from the roof slab to verify conditions.

IR tests were performed at approximately 9,500 test points on the containment structure. A total of approximately 80 core samples were removed for NDT calibration and result confirmation.

CT GROUP Bull&,~ing Knou*dga De~vCGing Ratsu.

wwvw.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 11 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Contour plots showing Average Mobility values in all test areas are presented in Figures 1 to 3 in Appendix D. In accordance with the calibration results and the test procedure, areas with Average Mobility values exceeding 1.0 (shown in red color) typically indicate the presence of delamination within an approximate depth of 20 in. from the exterior face. Areas with Average Mobility values below 0.5 (shown in gray color) indicate the sound concrete free of delaminations. Localized areas with Average Mobility values between 0.5 and 1.0 (depicted by a yellow color) indicate either the transition from sound to delaminated concrete (Bay 0015) or inconclusive preliminary interpretation of IR results, which required further investigation. In accordance with the test procedure, core samples were removed at various locations to verify or correlate the NDT results. The core sample locations and boroscope observations are provided by Progress Energy and included in Appendix E.

Bay 0015 Areas Exposed to Outside The SGR opening was made in containment wall bay 0015 between buttresses #3 and #4. A large delamination with an hour glass shape centered at the opening was defined by the NDT program. The delamination was concluded to be within an area of approximately 80 ft by 60 ft, extending between the edges of the two buttresses in horizontal direction, and from top of the equipment hatch opening to approximately 10 ft below the ring girder in vertical direction.

Average Mobility values all exceeded 1.0 in the delaminated area. Based on core sampling and borescope examination of core holes, the depth of delamination ranged from 3 to 10 in., with an average delamination depth between 7 and 8 in. from the exterior face. The delamination appeared to be associated with the plane of circumferential post-tensioning tendons in the wall.

Forty-five (45) core samples were removed from this bay at locations selected by Progress Energy. Core selections were made based on the Average Mobility plots. The extent of the delamination was confirmed by the core samples and borescope examination.

CT GRoUP ul Knaw~edp. Do~ang Results.

www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 12 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Bays 0010-0014 Areas Exposed to Outside The overwhelming majority of the areas tested in these bays showed Average Mobility values below 0.5, indicating sound concrete. Significant delamination similar to that noted in bay 0015 was not found in other areas of the containment wall structure. However, a small portion of the tested areas showed elevated Average Mobility values from 0.5 to 1.0. Very isolated points had Average Mobility values slightly above 1.0. These areas were small in size. CTLGroup investigated the causes of the higher mobility values, through visual inspection, GPR testing, hammer sounding and core sampling. The following are potential causes of these apparent higher Average Mobility values:

1) In some areas where IR test points were located directly over a circumferential or hoop tendon duct, and this tendon duct has less concrete cover than typical, the Average Mobility value could be elevated.

2) When a row of IR test points was located between two closely spaced circumferential tendons (typically 12 in. on center), the Average Mobility values appeared elevated due to the presence of two unbonded tendon ducts (greased) within the zone of influence, but no defect is present. For example, elevated Average Mobility values were encountered at lower section in Panel K of bay 0011, the row #1 of IR test grid fit in between two closely spaced circumferential tendons. Core #33 removed in this area showed no significant defect in the concrete wall.

3) Variations in the material properties, such as modulus of elasticity of concrete material can influence IR testing as can internal defects or changes in thickness. For example, Core #13 removed from bay 0014 showed lack of coarse aggregate in the concrete at this location, which is within an area showing higher Average Mobility values.

4) Conservative correction factor used to normalize the Average Mobility values. A factor of 2 was applied to the raw data collected using IR system C. This factor was relatively conservative. See Appendix C (Test Procedure Development) for details.

5) Shallow spalls (- 1 in. deep) at the corners of a couple of panels were noted, such as Panel 0012-W lower left corner. Typically the size of this defect is very small (less than a square foot) and adjacent to a corner or construction joint, and can be easily removed with a chipping hammer.

CT GROUP 1B.A Knowiedga, Dolerng Rsuts.

• ,b www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 13 of 13 Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Test Data Collected from Inside Adjacent Buildinqs These IR test results did not reveal the presence of delaminations, except for one localized area below the equipment hatch opening in bay 0015. Core #54 was removed from this location, a small crack or delamination at approximately 8 in. deep was encountered. The crack was directly over a horizontal tendon duct. In addition, concrete at this location appeared to contain less aggregate than normal. Based on the borescope record, the characteristic of this defect is not a continuation of the delamination at bay 0015 above the equipment hatch opening. The defect was later removed to sound concrete. Reportedly, the defect was within approximately 8 in. diameter.

Roof Dome Structure The post-tensioned roof dome structure was reportedly repaired in 1970's, after discovery of a delamination. A drawing showing a section through the repaired roof is included in Appendix A.

The repair drawing indicated that the outermost 12 in. of the 3-ft. thick roof slab had been removed and replaced. The IR test results (see Figure 3) showed relative differences in the Average Mobility values measured in the test area. However, thresholds established for the containment wall testing could not be used for interpretation of roof data due to the differences in various aspects such as thickness, orientation, materials, amount and configuration of tendons and reinforcement. Nevertheless, areas with consistently high Average Mobility values were of interest. A total of seven (7) core samples up to approximately 14 in. long, with 2 in the original, non-repaired area and 5 in the repaired portion of the roof, were removed from the roof dome to evaluate the significance of IR results. Core location drawings are included in Appendix D. According to the core sample and borescope records provided by Progress Energy, all 7 locations showed no evidence of cracking or delamination in the roof structure. The apparent variation could be the result of changes in slab thickness, material properties, surface conditions and amount of reinforcement.

CT GRoUP BuIJlk Krwgo. DeW*enq Rets*.

ww.CTLGroupcorn

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix A Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 APPENDIX A Structural Drawings Provided by Progress Energy

""i1GROUP CT ulVK~n~ow4eDgeW O RUemdts www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix Al of A7 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Figure A.1 Overall diagram of the containment building.

www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix A2 of A7 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169

. .. .. .. .-* . . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~..

.. -r II* ~~ rII ~

T1 - - t - - -1 T-r- -

• Containment Fuel

, _ Structure _ _ _ _ uilding 3

[

1 Intermediate Building

~I, Sea Water Auxiliary Building Figure A.2 Plan view and buttress layout of the containment structure.

Kii UI*I

-hd' fmU www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix A3 of A7 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 PLANT VENT PLATEC is.. 24. * .I.AL 27,.

BUTTR Figure A.3 Unwrapped Elevation of the exterior of the containment structure between buttresses 4 and 1 ClW . dp RVub. www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix A4 of A7 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 w 1W I JTEI .

It1urWmm 02 12 ~ g4 JT1RESS EL25E-'

Y TWICAL FORM RE, FEAIIFM S F4 -M "C i I i I IjH c~~~

-!let I* -l*4K=

• I I I I T I I IM T/ftCF EL. 1,9'-I" TI/FLOCOEL Ilt'-r" T)ItOOR p. M Y-..

1/8AS( NAi? (1. 9"-e Figure A.4 Unwrapped Elevation of the exterior of the containment structure between buttresses 1 and 4

1. 8 Horizontal bars T-4 12 in O.C A Concrete wall Cover 2 1/4"

1. 8 Vertical bars B 3/8" Steel Liner 12 in O.C (interior of containment)

Cover 3 1/4" 5 in. diameter vertical tendon 5 in diameter horizontal tendon duct spaced 36 in. O.C. approx duct 10 in. approximate cover 16 in. cover to centerline to center line A= Spacing between horizontal tendons (1' 3/4/4" or I '1")

B= Spacing between horizontal tendons (2' 1-1/2" or 2'1")

Note: spacing of horizontal tendons may vary depending on elevation of tendons and openings or penetrations within the wall.

Figure A.5 Typical reinforcement and tendon layout within the wall.

www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix A5 of A7 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 50O0 Figure A.6 Plan view of the delaminated region of the dome

ý ýn'-'VT . PA Kft* www.CTLGroup.corn

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix A6 of A7 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Figure A.7 Cross Section of Containment Wall iio '-ww-'V4w www.CTLGroup com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix A7 of A7 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Figure A.8. Roof Dome Repair Section www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix B Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 APPENDIX B Test Method Description

• Appendix B.1 - Impulse Response (5 pages)

• Appendix B.2 - Impact Echo (2 pages)

• Appendix B.3 - Ground Penetrating Radar (2 pages)

CIiGROUP KnowAedge.

Bulkding Dehvedng Resut3. www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix B.1 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 APPENDIX B.1 Impulse Response CT ~GROUP

""Bulldhng Know4ege, Doe!?t Rilng www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 1 of 5 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Impulse Response (IR) Test Method.

The IR test method was initially developed in the 1970's for testing of deep foundations and its application to general concrete structures occurred in the1990's. Its application is based on the propagation of stress waves produced by the impact of a hammer and the measurement of the velocity response of the structure. Typical applications of the technique in structure testing include detection of: voiding or loss of support beneath concrete pavements and floor slabs; delamination in concrete plate-like structures; presence of low density concrete within a structural member; debonding of asphalt and concrete overlay, etc. The different applications of the test method use the same basic theory and functions. Furthermore, some of the parameters obtained with the testing equipment could be more relevant than others depending on the type of structure and features found within the structure.

Test Equipment The IR test equipment is comprised of a 1 kg impact hammer equipped with a load cell, a receiving transducer, a twin channel data acquisition/processing system and a laptop computer installed with a special software. A diagram of the test equipment is shown in Figure B.1.1. Typical stress levels generated using the hammer range from 5 MPa for hard rubber tips to more than 50 MPa for alumjnum tips. The receiving transducer is generally a directional geophone that is used only for either vertical or horizontal surfaces. In the case of special structures, such as sloped walls and dome structures, a multi-directional geophone could be used. Geophones are typically used because they are more stable at low frequencies generated by the impact of the hammer and its robust performance in the field. The data acquisition system is connected to a computer that stores the data and performs the analysis. The processed result is displayed on the computer screen immediately after the test is completed.

C GROUP BuIiting Krowde. DOWO~g ReStS wCTLGroupýcom

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 2 of 5 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Principle When testing plate-like structures, the IR test method uses a low strain impact to produce a stress wave to propagate through the tested element. The rubber tip of the hammer produces a long duration impact by which the structure responds in a bending vibration mode at a frequency range between 0 to 1000 Hz. The time and force history of the hammer is recorded and digitized by the data processing card. Simultaneously, the geophone measures the surface velocity response generated by the transient stress pulse from the impact of the hammer. Both the time records for the hammer force and the geophone velocity response are processed in the field computer using the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) algorithm. The resulting velocity spectrum is divided by the force spectrum to obtain a transfer function, referred to as the Mobility of the element under test. The test graph of Mobility plotted against frequency over 0-1 kHz contains information on the condition and the integrity of the concrete in the tested elements.

SIGNAL ANALYSER Y--"RUCTU Figure B.1.1 www.CTLGroup.com Bý11ulldhig Kno~*edge.

DeoWerng Rmt~tsý

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 3 of 5 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Average Mobility is a principal parameter that IR test produces. The Average Mobility is defined as the structural surface velocity responding to the impact divided by the force input [a measure of flexibility] in frequency domain. The main variable that influences the average mobility parameter is the "effective" thickness of the structure. The effective thickness is defined as distance from the test surface to a crack parallel to the surface (if delaminated) or the full structural thickness if no internal separations exist.

Dynamic Stiffness is another parameter the IR test produces. The slope of the portion of the mobility plot below 0.1 kHz indicates the compliance, or flexibility of the area around the test point for a normalized force input. The inverse of the compliance is the dynamic stiffness at the test point. The value depends on the thickness, density and elastic modulus of the material, and the support condition.

The evaluation of Impulse Response test results is typically performed in a comparative manner, with the change or variation in results between test points used to identify anomalous conditions. Ideal condition for using this method to detect any potential flaws requires that the structural elements being tested have similar geometrical characteristics and are made of relatively similar concrete material. A significant increase in average mobility within an element or structure could indicate that flaws exist within the structure.

The IR test method for concrete structure evaluation is in the process of being standardized by ASTM Committee C09 (Concrete & Concrete Aggregate) and its sub-committee C09.64 (Nondestructive In-place Testing). In addition, ACI Committee 228 (Nondestructive Testing) is revising the committee report 228.2R "Nondestructive Test Methods for Evaluation of Concrete in Structures" which will include IR testing for concrete structure evaluation in addition to pile integrity evaluation.

Limitations:

The potential limitations about IR testing in detecting delamination in plate-like structure include: 1) the absolute size or width of the crack could not be evaluated, other method such as core hole examination using boroscope shall be used; 2) the absolute depth of CT GROUPww.TrLICO Eul1WfbV KnoYWqadý DeW~eting ResulWts wwCLruýo

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 4 of 5 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 the delamination from surface can not be readily determined, the depth can only be ascertained by coring or other.NDT method; 3) The depth of influence is typically up to 20 in. based on CTLGroup's experience using this method evaluating similar structures for the similar type of defect. However, this depth of effectiveness was considered sufficient for the CR3 evaluation. (See Page 7 of the report.)

Significantand/or recent references:

1. Ottosen, N.S., M. Ristinmaa and A.G. Davis. "Theoretical Interpretation of Impulse Response Tests of Embedded Concrete Structures". Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, September, 2004.

2. S. Nazarian, S. Reddy, "Study of parameters affecting Impulse Response method",

Journey of Transportation Engineering, July/August, 1996.

3. Davis, A.G., "The Nondestructive Impulse Response Test in North America: 1985-2001 NDT&E International, 36 (2003), 185-193.

4. Michols, K.A., A.G. Davis and C.A. Olson, "Evaluating Historic Concrete Bridges".

Concrete Repair Bulletin, Vol. 14, No.4, July/August 2001, 5-9.

5. Corley, W.G. and A.G. Davis, "Forensic Engineering Moves Forward". Civil Engineering, June 2001, Vol. 71 No. 6, 64-65.

6. Davis, A.G., and C. G. Petersen, "Nondestructive Evaluation of Prestressed Concrete Bridges using Impulse Response". International Symposium (NDT-CE 2003), Non-Destructive Testing in Civil Engineering 2003.

7. Davis, A.G., M.K. Lim and C. Germann Petersen, "Rapidand Economical Evaluation of Concrete Tunnel Linings with Nondestructive Impulse Response and Impulse Radar".

Keynote Address, Conference on Structural Faults and Repair 2001, London U.K., July 2001.

8. Gentry, T.A. and A.G. Davis, "IntegratingAdvanced Evaluation Techniques with Terra Cotta Examinations". ASTM Symposium, STP 1444 Building Facade Maintenance, Repair and Inspection, October 12-13, 2002, Norfolk Virginia, 13 pp.

9. Farahmandpour, K., V.A. Jennings, T.J. Willems and A.G. Davis, "Evaluation Techniques for Concrete Building Envelope Components". RCI Interface, Vol. XX, No.

3, March 2002, 3-15.

10. Davis, A.G., "NDE of Existing Transmission Tower Foundations". Conference on Structural Faults and Repair 2001, London U.K., July 2001.

.11. A.G. Davis, "Rapid non-destructive test method at the Taiwan High-Speed Rail project",

Concrete Technology Today, Volume 3, 2004.

12. A. Davis, G. Seegebrecht, and H. Cao, "Concrete Bridge Deck Overlays Evaluated by NDT", Proceeding of ASNT Structural Materials Technology (SMT) Conference-NDT/NDE for Highways and Bridges, Buffalo, New York, September, 2004.

13. H. Cao, "Implementation of NDT techniques in an underground tunnel investigation",

Proceeding of 6 th International Symposium on NDE in Civil. Engineering, St. Louis, Missouri, 2006.

14. E. Dodge, M. Sherman, "Structure evaluation and repair of internally damaged concrete",

Proceedings of Fourth Forensic Congress, Cleveland, Ohio, 2006.

CT~ J~ROUP Cdn nwog D~en www.CTLGrouip.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 5 of 5 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169

15. Davis, A.G. and C.S. Dunn, 1974. "From Theory to Experience with the Nondestructive Vibration Testing of Piles". Proc. Inst. Civ. Engnrs. Part 2, Vol. 57, paper 7764, 571-593.

16. Davis, A.G. and B.H. Hertlein, 1987. "Nondestructive Testing of Concrete Pavement Slabs and Floors with the Transient Dynamic Response Method", Proc. Int. Conf.

Structural Faults & Repair, London, July 1987, Vol. 2, 429-433.

17. Reddy, S. 1992, "Improved Impulse Response Testing: Theoretical and Practical Validations", Master of Science Thesis, University of Texas at El Paso (Director, S.

Nazarian), 219 pp.

18. Davis, A.G., 1993. "Evaluation of the Integrity of Some Large Concrete Structures using NDT", A.C.I. Spring Convention, Vancouver B.C., Committee 228 Session on Location of Flaws in Concrete using NDT, March 1993, 17 pp. published in: Innovations in Nondestructive Testing of Concrete, ACI SP-168, Ed. S. Pessiki & L.Olson, 1997, 333-356.

19. Davis, A.G. and B.H. Hertlein, 1995. "NondestructiveTesting of Concrete Chimneys and Other Structures ", Proc. Conf. Nondestructive Evaluation of Aging Structures and Dams, S. Nazarian & L. Olson, Ed., Proc SPIE 2457, 129-136, Oakland, CA, June 1995.

20. S. Nazarian, S. Reddy, "Study of parameters affecting Impulse Response method",

Journey of Transportation Engineering, July/August, 1996.

21. Davis, A.G., J.G. Evans and B.H. Hertlein, 1997. "Nondestructive Evaluation of Radioactive Concrete Waste Tanks". J. Perf. Constr. Facilities, ASCE, Vol. 11, No. 4, November 1997, pp. 161-167.

C ~GRouP C

CT eeO l R www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE . Appendix B.2 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 APPENDIX B.2 Impact Echo CT GJRoUP www.CTLGroup~com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 1 of 2 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Impact Echo Method The Impact Echo (IE) technique was developed in the mid 1980's for testing concrete structural members. Its main applications include: determination of the thickness of slab or plate-like structures; detecting internal flaws in concrete structures; assessing the quality of bond of an overlay; evaluation of depth of delamination; and void detection in grouted post tensioning ducts, etc. IE test and its recommended use for plate-like structure thickness determination are described in ASTM C1 383. The test method is also included in American Concrete Institute (ACI) report 228.R2 "Nondestructive Test Methods for Evaluation of Concrete in Structures".

Test Equipment An Impact Echo system is composed of three components: an impact source; a receiving transducer; and a data acquisition system used to capture, store and analyze the signals. The impact source is typically a spherical impactor used to produce a short duration impact. As the impact duration is shortened, higher frequency components are generated.

Principle Impact Echo is based on the use of transient stress wave generated by elastic impact. A diagram of the method is shown in Figure B.2.1 A short-duration mechanical impact, produced by tapping a small steel sphere against a concrete or masonry surface, is used to generate stress wave that propagate into the structure and are reflected by flaws and/or external surfaces. Surface displacement or acceleration caused by reflections of these waves is recorded by a displacement transducer or accelerometer, located adjacent to the impact. The resulting displacement or acceleration versus time signals is transformed into the frequency domain by Fast Fourier Transform (FFT), and plots of amplitude versus frequency (spectra) are obtained. This spectrum has a periodic nature, which is a function of the depth to the reflective boundary (either the back of the element, or some anomaly such as a crack in the element under test). The depth of a concrete/air interface (internal void or external boundary) is determined by:

d = Vc / 2f

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 2 of 2 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 d is the interface depth, Vc is the primary stress wave velocity and f is the frequency due to reflection of the P wave from the interface. If the material beyond the reflective interface is acoustically stiffer than concrete (e.g. concrete/steel interface), then the following equation applies:

d = Vc / 4f The difference in the acoustic impedance of the two materials at an interface determines whether the presence of an interface could be detected by an IE test. For example, a concrete/grout interface gives no reflection of the stress wave because the acoustic impedance of concrete and grout are nearly equal. In contrast, at a concrete/air interface, nearly all the energy is reflected, since the acoustic impedance of air is very much less than concrete.

Figure B.2.1 Limitations The potential limitations of IE testing in evaluating the delamination in CR3 containment wall structure include: 1) relative slow process which requires laying out the PT ducts and reinforcement at every test point prior to testing; 2) the test data is affected by the surrounding tendons in the vicinity of test points which frequently cause false-positive indications of delamination.

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix B.3 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 APPENDIX B.3 Ground Penetrating Radar CT GROUP B"IuilkinKno~.ovegDelingewb. www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 1 of 2 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Ground Penetrating Radar Method Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) has been successfully used in a variety of civil and structural engineering applications, including evaluation of embedded reinforcement locations; evaluation of grouted and ungrouted cells in masonry block walls; locating embedded foreign objects in concrete pavements; evaluation of dowel bars alignment and the consolidation of concrete, etc. The principle of operation is based on signal reflection of high frequency electromagnetic waves from varying dielectric constant boundaries in the material being probed. The GPR test method and its applications are included in the American Concrete Institute report 228.2R "Nondestructive Test Methods for Evaluation of Concrete in Structure".

Test Equipment A GPR system consists of a main computer unit, a high frequency antenna and a shielded connecting cable. By changing the antenna with different center frequency, the depth of penetration and corresponding resolution will change. The antenna transmits and also receives the radar signals. The raw data can be stored in the computer unit for post analysis.

Principle High frequency, short pulse electromagnetic wave is transmitted into the element under test. Each transmitted pulse travels through the material, and is partially reflected when it encounters a change in dielectric constant. For example, the dielectric constant of concrete typically ranges between 6 and 12, the dielectric constant of air is 1 and steel is considered as infinity. Steel does not allow the waves to penetrate through and thus results in almost complete reflection of the waves. The location and depth of the dielectric constant boundary is evaluated by using recorded transit time from start of pulse to reception of reflected pulse and the velocity of wave propagation. Boundary depth is proportional to transit time. Since concrete to air, water, and/or backfill interfaces etc., are electronically detected by the instrument as dielectric constant boundaries, the GPR method is capable of assessing a variety of reinforced concrete, masonry and environmental characteristics.

S o. DngRfts w.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page 2 of 2 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Limitations The limitations of GPR testing in evaluating locations of reinforcement and tendon ducts in concrete wall structure include: 1) an embedded metallic feature may not be detected if it is placed immediately behind another metallic embedment; 2) the depth of penetration is limited depending on concrete quality, amount of reinforcement, and antenna frequency. The resolution will reduce considerably when using lower frequency antenna for deeper penetration.

CT CJROUP www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix B Progress Energy January 22, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 APPENDIX C Test Procedure Development

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C1 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 APPENDIX C - TEST PROCEDURE DEVELOPMENT A nondestructive testing (NDT) trial program was conducted to evaluate the suitability of two promising nondestructive testing techniques in detecting the delamination in the CR3 containment wall structure. The techniques included Impulse Response (IR) testing and Impact Echo (IE) testing. The initial trial testing was performed by CTLGroup from October 13 to 21, 2009. A preliminary test program and respective evaluation criterion was developed. While the production type of testing was in progress in accordance with the preliminary test procedure, the evaluation criterion was modified after more IR data were available and a refined correlation was established.

METHODOLOGY Impulse Response (IR) testing and Impact Echo (IE) testing were evaluated in the trial testing.

In addition, Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) testing was used to locate post-tensioning tendon ducts and reinforcing steel in the containment wall structure prior to IE testing and to facilitate coring operations. Descriptions of the test methods are included in Appendix B.

1. INITIAL TRIAL TEST PROCESS The initial trial testing was performed at the following areas:

Area 1: Immediately west of the existing SGR opening. in bay 0015, panel S, approximate elevations 180 ft to 190 ft.

Area 2: Bay 0011, panels N and 0, between elevations 200 ft and 210 ft, accessed from the Fuel Transfer Auxiliary Building (North) roof top.

Area 3: Bay 0010, panels W and X, between elevations 170 ft and 180 ft, accessed from Seawater Auxiliary Building rooftop.

Area 4: Bays 0012 and 0013, Panels 0012-AD and 0013-AC, accessed from Intermediate Building roof top.

Each test area included individual panels of approximately 10 ft to 20 ft wide by approximately 6 ft tall wall section.

CT GRouPBuildingKnowledge. DeUvering Results. www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C2 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 IR testing was performed using IR system B at intersections of a gridline system of 1 ft x 1 ft or 2 ft x 2 ft at various locations. IE testing was performed at the same test points where IR was performed in Areas 1 to 3 listed above. IE testing was not performed in Area 4.

The initial NDT in Areas 1 to 4 was completed by October 16, 2009. Based on the preliminary analysis of the NDT results, five coring locations were identified to correlate NDT test data. GPR testing was performed to identify layout of the reinforcing steel and tendon ducts in the vicinity of the identified core sample locations. Progress Energy procured five core samples on October 18 and 19, 2009.

Results

1) IR Testing At the west side of the existing SGR opening where the delamination was visible in the plan of circumferential tendons along the perimeter of the opening, IR test results showed Average Mobility values ranging from approximately 1.03 to 2.40 with an average of approximately 1.5.

Higher average mobility values typically indicate higher probability of existence of delamination or reduced effective thickness. In general, test results in Areas 2 to 4 showed significantly lower average mobility values, typically ranging from 0.16 to 0.72, with an average ranging from approximately 0.25 to 0.35 for various areas.

Cores #1 to 3 were removed in test area 2, Core #4 was removed from test area 3, while Core

1. 5 was removed from test area 1 (west side of opening). Correlations between core observations and IR test results are shown below:

Core # IR Average Depth of Core Observation Mobility Value Core (in.)

1 0.233 16-1/2 Sound concrete 2 0.420 13-1/2 Sound concrete 3 0.292 13 Sound concrete 4 0.166 12 Sound concrete 5 1.690 8-1/2 Delamination noted at 8-1/2 in. deep CT Guldig K ge. Defirng Results.

www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C3 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 Based on the limited sampling size and test result information, the IR test results indicated relatively good correlation between the Average Mobility values and internal condition of the containment wall structure. The following threshold values were initially recommended to be used to determine the existence of potential delaminations or other significant anomalies in the concrete wall structure:

M < 0.4: solid concrete 0.4<M<1.0: "gray" area, further test or coring is needed M>1.0: potential "delaminated" concrete or other type of anomaly may exist It was recognized that the correlation between IR and presence of delaminations was preliminary in view of the limited areas tested, and a small number of core samples removed for correlation of the IR test data. The fact of the preliminary nature of the above classification criteria was communicated with Progress Energy. Additional IR testing and verification coring were needed for a refined correlation between the NDT results and physical condition of the wall structure. In addition, several IR tests were performed directly over a located tendon duct, or in between two closely spaced tendon ducts (typically 12 in. on center). In such cases, the average mobility values could be slightly elevated to the range of approximately 0.4 to 0.7.

CTLGroup communicated that a modification could be necessary once more data became available.

2) IE Testing Impact Echo tests performed with a small ball bearing impactor showed distinct responses on the frequency spectra from the existing delaminations at all of the test points at the west side of opening area where delaminations were noted. The IE estimated depths of detected delaminations ranged from approximately 6.5 to 11.8 inches, and showed good correlation to the physically measured depth through a core hole. For example, the depth of existing delamination measured using Core #5 is 8.5 in., the corresponding IE resonant frequency is 9000 Hz, assuming a typical stress wave propagation velocity of 13,100 ft/s for regular concrete, the estimated depth of reflector (delamination) is estimated at approximately 8.4 inches. The IE frequency spectrum at this test point is shown in Figure C.1.

d ,GROUP OIulidkig Krowdedg Ddfloing ResUts. www.CTLGroup corn

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C4 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969

~AI Figure C.1: IE test signal at Point (5, 5) in Area 1 - In the vicinity of Core #5 The IE test appeared to correlate well with the known delamination depth based on one verification core sample in this test area.

Impact Echo testing was performed in Areas 2 and 3 using a small ball bearing impactor.

Majority of the test results obtained in these areas suggested a potential reflector at approximately 5 to 10 in., even though the resonant frequency appeared to be less pronounced compared to the signal obtained from Area 1. Although the corresponding IE results at locations in the vicinity of Cores #1 to 4 suggested potential reflectors at depths of approximately 6.3 in.

to 10 in., the core samples did not indicate signs of any cracking or defects at those depths.

Analysis of the test locations with regard to the tendon locations suggested high possibility of strong influence from the 5-1/8 inches diameter unbonded tendon ducts to the signal propagation. The apparent reflectors could be false positive readings.

Impact Echo test was also performed in all the above areas using a regular hammer with a rounded head in order to excite the back wall reflection of the 42-in.thick wall. (The previously utilized ball bearing impactor could not provide enough energy to excite the back wall reflection.)

Test results in Areas 2 and 3 showed clear back wall responses at approximately 42 to 58 in.

(see Figure C.2), while the results in Area 1 typically showed complex low frequency responses where the back wall reflection was not readily discerned (see Figure C.3). It should be noted that the apparent thicker back wall responses (greater than 50 in.) with a downward shifted B w W ReMAU wwwCTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C5 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 resonant frequency were obtained when the test points were close to or directly above a tendon duct (see Figure C.4.)

Figure C.2: Typical IE test signal obtained using hammer impact (Area 2) showing distinct back wall reflection Figure C.3: Typical IE test signal obtained in Area 1 using hammer impact showing complex back wall reflection

~0*'..' sL www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C6 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 Figure C.4: Typical IE test signal obtained (Area 2) using hammer impact showing distinct but apparently thicker wall, the test point is close to a horizontal tendon Summary of Initial Trial testing Findings based on NDT results, field observations and limited core samples suggested a good correlation between IR average mobility values and concrete condition. The proposed evaluation criterion was preliminary and modification could be necessary when more data became available.

IE testing had potential to evaluate the depth of delamination, however, the test was not recommended due to the following:

• The test tended to produce false positive results which were likely influenced by the presence of adjacent 5-1/8 in. diameter unbonded post-tensioning duct(s).

" In order to perform an accurate IE test, the post-tensioning tendons and reinforcement in the wall need to be mapped out at every test point prior to testing. This process is time consuming and still could not eliminate the potential false positive readings.

Core sampling coupled with boroscope examination of core holes were recommended to evaluate the depth of delamination when indicated by IR testing, and this process could also be used to verify the IR results.

. KIW- RhiA$. www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C7 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969

2. IR SYSTEM NORMALIZATION Recognizing the potential performance difference between different Impulse Response (IR) systems, a correction (or normalization) factor need to be applied to the data collected using a different system other than IR system B used in the initial testing. Each IR system comprised a geophone sensor, an instrumented hammer, and data acquisition (DAQ) system. The threshold values stated in the existing procedure were established based on the data collected using the IR system B (Geophone S/N: 4003, Hammer S/N: 26088, DAQ: CTL-1). When a different IR system was first used, a cross checking procedure was conducted at areas that have been previously tested using system B with a minimum of 100 test points. This formed a baseline comparison. If the mean value of Average Mobility (M) differed by more than 10% from the previous results, all of the values obtained from the second system were normalized using the ratio between the average values. The correction factor was recorded for future analysis of data collected using IR system different than system B.

Three (3) different IR systems were used in the wall testing. (Dome testing using an Omni-Geophone was for information only, not listed in this table.) The tests were primarily performed using systems B and C. The component serial references of each system and corresponding normalization factors applied are shown below:

Table C. 1 System Computer DAQ box Geophone Hammer* Normalization factor A Panasonic CTL-1 1010 PCB 26088 1 CF-Y2 B Panasonic CTL-1 4003 PCB 26088 1 CF-Y2 PCB 23054 C Panasonic CTL-2 1010 PCB 22610 2; CF-T1 PCB 26519 0.86 (while power switch button turned on in several locations)

Note: * - System B had originally a hammer SN 26088, swamped with SN 23054 at later phase.

- System C had originally a hammer SN 22610, swamped with SN 26519 at later phase.

The comparison tests between systems B and C were performed at the following panel locations: 0013-AB, 0013-AC, 0013-AD, 0011-N, 0011-0, 0010-W, 0010-X, 0014-AB, 0014-AC, 0015-X and 0009-A (Spent Fuel Area). Approximately 500 points were tested. The average ratio C CTGROUP Buflkli Kn~owledge.

De~vering Results. w .CTLGroup corn

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C8 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 (C/B) obtained from different test locations between the two systems was 1.77. The correction factor was conservatively chosen as 2.0. In very few locations the power switch button on the DAQ unit was turned on, the correction factor changed to 0.86 based on comparison tests of a hundred points performed at panels 0014-AB and 0014-AC. (The voltage switch function of the DAQ unit was designed to limit the voltage input for some older version data cards to avoid saturating the channels, however, the newer data cards used in these IR system do not indeed require this function.) The raw data comparisons between the systems are shown in Table C.2.

As a relative test method, the Impulse Response test is typically used to compare the parameter (such as Average Mobility) values between different points collected with the same test system.

Performance of different systems is subject to influence from various factors, such as: hammer impact angle, geophone unit, DAQ box design and wiring, temperature, and sometimes operator.

When a test program requires use of multiple systems, a comparison test is normally performed to evaluate differences between raw data and correlation is established so that all results can be analyzed using the same criteria. In addition, due to the heterogeneous characteristics of concrete material, the Average Mobility values typically vary within a narrow range or band (in this case, the range is approximately 0.2 to 0.4). When condition of a concrete element changes significantly, such as existence of a delamination or changes in geometry, the Average Mobility values would increase or decrease significantly beyond the typical range. Therefore, a small variation due to the above mentioned factors does not impact data analysis. On this project, the typical Average Mobility value in areas where delaminations were noted exceeded 1.0 (with the Average Mobility values approaching 15 depending on the depth of delamination), while in solid concrete areas the Average Mobility values were typically below 0.4. There is large difference in structural response to the hammer impact when comparing a solid 42-in. wall to a concrete wall with delamination at approximately 6 to 12 in. from the surface.

ý CT IG.BldVKnowledge.

IUP DeI~cng Results. www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C9 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969

3. Adjustment of Evaluation Criteria As stated previously, the slightly elevated Average Mobility values between 0.4 and 0.7 could result if the test point is directly over a circumferential tendon duct or between two closely spaced tendons. After a larger amount of data was collected, more core samples were removed and boroscope examinations of core holes were performed, the previously developed threshold values for IR data interpretation were modified. The correlation information between Average Mobility and core observations obtained within bays 0010 to 0014 is presented in Table C.3. A complete core observation provided by Progress Energy is included in Appendix D. Additional IR data, core and core hole examination, field observations, and GPR testing strongly suggested that the previously chosen value of 0.4 as upper bound for solid concrete appeared to be overly conservative. Therefore, the threshold values were modified as follows:

" M < 0.5: sound concrete

• 0.5<M<1.0: "gray" area, evaluate the need for further testing or coring

" MW1.0: potentially delaminated concrete or other type of anomaly may exist, evaluate the need for further coring The above threshold values are intended for evaluation of delaminations in the containment wall structure within approximately 20-in. depth from the exterior face. The above values are used in the data presentation included in this report.

C GRouP Guldng KJnow4edgo.

Deltve~ng RelulI3 wwCTLGroup corn

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C10 of 016 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 Table C.2 Normalization Test Data Panel # J 001 3-AB 0013-AC [ 0013-AD IRSystem # JB C Ratio j~B C Ratio LB C Ratio Average Mobility 0.06 0.135 0.44 0.143 0.146 0.98 0.58 0.14 4.14 0.235 0.123 1.91 0.263 0.096 2.74 0.202 0.13 1.55 0.092 0.199 0.46 0.357 0.106 3.37 0.206 0.26 0.79 0.195 0.17 1.15 0.284 0.172 1.65 0.455 0.136 3.35 0.075 0.112 0.67 0.263 0.126 2.09 0.224 0.134 1.67 0.267 0.181 1.48 0.194 0.09 2.16 0.12 0.161 0.75 0.121 0.103 1.17 0.291 0.067 4.34 0.167 0.196 0.85 0.228 0.159 1.43 0.209 0.112 1.87 0.235 0.139 1.69 0.315 0.097 3.25 0.209 0.135 1.55 0.47 0.189 2.49 0.209 0.089 2.35 0.292 0.099 2.95 0.216 0.102 2.12 0.316 0.083 3.81 0.462 0.176 2.63 0.24 0.136 1.76 0.136 0.094 1.45 0.198 0.119 1.66 0.177 0.142 1.25 0.311 0.066 4.71 0.219 0.105 2.09 0.215 0.191 1.13 0.185 0.181 1.02 0.205 0.14 1.46 0.341 0.173 1.97 0.226 0.099 2.28 0.194 0.077 2.52 0.208 0.145 1.43 0.18 0.209 0.86 0.182 0.141 1.29 0.249 0.231 1.08 0.159 0.139 1.14 0.188 0.071 2.65 0.446 0.098 4.55 0.254 0.171 1.49 0.234 0.095 2.46 0.531 0.211 2.52 0.307 0.056 5.48 0.29 0.06 4.83 0.384 0.211 1.82 0.084 0.1 0.84 0.111 0.09 1.23 0.226 0.15 1.51 0.231 0.117 1.97 0.195 0.123 1.59 0.354 0.113 3.13 0.104 0.084 1.24 0.192 0.067 2.87 0.232 0.205 1.13 0.288 0.199 1.45 0.16 0.066 2.42 0.374 0.219 1.71 0.255 0.121 2.11 0.248 0.144 1.72 0.24 0.188 1.28 0.203 0.18 1.13 0.137 0.098 1.40 0.107 0.118 0.91 0.223 0.132 1.69 0.225 0.193 1.17 0.397 0.163 2.44 0.2 0.16 1.25 0.108 0'052 2.08 0.074 0.124 0.60 0.112 0.141 0.79 0.197 0.096 2.05 0.316 0.074 4.27 0.24 0.085 2.82 0.28 0.13 2.15 0.271 0.208 1.30 0.252 0.13 1.94 0.158 0.068 2.32 0.267 0.15 1.78 0.142 0.194 0.73 0.183 0.123 1.49 0.154 0.136 1.13 0.161 0.089 1.81 0.238 0.087 2.74 0.496 0.076 6.53 0.193 0.093 2.08 0.3 0.138 2.17 0.205 0.224 0.92 0.308 0.143 2.15 0.294 0.131 2.24 0.206 0.121 1.70 0.09 0.117 0.77 0.267 0.09 2.97 0.167 0.096 1.74 0.168 0.163 1.03 0.258 0.172 1.50 0.339 0.117 2.90 0.175 0.075 2.33 0.215 0.127 1.69 0.172 0.077 2.23 0.202 0.143 1.41 0.236 0.127 1.86 0.282 0.141 2.00 0.366 0.176 2.08 0.263 0.121 2.17 0.425 0.099 4.29 0.17 0.103 1.65 0.272 0.101 2.69 0.139 0.092 1.51 0.28 0.094 2.98 0.384 0.207 1.86 0.268 0.108 2.48 0.156 0.188 0.83 0.213 0.11 1.94 0.328 0.113 2.90 0.183 0.154 1.19 0.204 0.103 1.98 0.157 0.106 1.48 0.167 0.096 1.74 0.213 0.13 1.64 0.497 0.156 3.19 0.241 0.114 2.11 0.265 0.118 2.25 0.253 0.145 1.74 0.366 0.233 1.57 0.169 0.081 2.09 0.236 0.068 3.47 0.368 0.197 1.87 0.423 0.136 3.11 0.2 0.176 1.14 0.221 0.113 1.96 0.224 0.107 2.09 0.29 0.091 3.19 Average [ 0.21 0.13 1.75 j 0.24 0.12 2.22 1 0.28 0.15 2.09 CT C~oUp

'*' Building Knowledge.

De~retng Results. www.CTLGroup.coni

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page Cll of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 Table C.2 Normalization Test Data (Cont'd)

Panel # 0011-N 0011-0 1 0010-W IR System # B C Ratio B C Ratio B C Ratio Average Mobility 0.269 0.178 1.51 0.162 0.098 1.65 0.204 0.129 1.58 0.488 0.261 1.87 0.372 0.125 2.98 0.233 0.169 1.38 0.19 0.399 0.48 0.437 0.236 1.85 0.079 0.092 0.86 0.288 0.173 1.66 0.287 0.213 1.35 0.357 0.147 2.43 0.16 0.111 1.44 0.135 0.148 0.91 0.426 0.371 1.15 0.176 0.152 1.16 0.294 0.237 1.24 0.242 0.092 2.63 0.376 0.162 2.32 0.341 0.249 1.37 0.425 0.177 2.40 0.29 0.177 1.64 0.265 0.23 1.15 0.343 0.28 1.23 0.286 0.199 1.44 0.212 0.11 1.93 0.283 0.221 1.28 0.283 0.298 0.95 0.174 0.156 1.12 0.251 0.084 2.99 0.344 0.202 1.70 0.364 0.297 1.23 0.159 0.117 1.36 0.388 0.181 2.14 0.426 0.224 1.90 0.235 0.125 1.88 0.348 0.193 1.80 0.11 0.068 1.62 0.238 0.094 2.53 0.259 0.226 1.15 0.188 0.142 1.32 0.198 0.072 2.75 0.437 0.304 1.44 0.256 0.221 1.16 0.36 0.069 5.22 0.606 0.344 1.76 0.303 0.133 2.28 0.157 0.081 1.94 0.642 0.182 3.53 0.217 0.16 1.36 0.402 0.133 3.02 0.454 0.391 1.16 0.253 0.164 1.54 0.326 0.112 2.91 0.319 0.216 1.48 0.237 0.163 1.45 0.124 0.078 1.59 0.226 0.328 0.69 0.4 0.221 1.81 0.244 0.084 2.90 0.351 0.364 0.96 0.179 0.133 1.35 0.425 0.301 1.41 0.255 0.118 2.16 0.414 0.257 1.61 0.203 0.13 1.56 0.543 0.461 1.18 0.338 0.151 2.24 0.243 0.203 1.20 0.415 0.121 3.43 0.339 0.26 1.30 0.23 0.185 1.24 0.517 0.292 1.77 0.369 0.097 3.80 0.43 0.376 1.14 0.246 0.131 1.88 0.261 0.123 2.12 0.431 0.115 3.75 0.449 0.247 1.82 0.273 0.117 2.33 0.649 0.473 1.37 0.297 0.222 1.34 0.323 0.308 1.05 0.292 0.118 2.47 0.178 0.177 1.01 0.201 0.112 1.79 0.345 0.445 0.78 0.31 0.133 2.33 0.235 0.367 0.64 0.232 0.196 1.18 0.276 0.311 0.89 0.22 0.275 0.80 0.324 0.176 1.84 0.21 0.283 0.74 0.514 0.365 1.41 0.22 0.154 1.43 0.609 0.46 1.32- 0.455 0.173 2.63 0.44 0.223 1.97 0.156 0.163 0.96 Average 0.37 0.27 1.45 1 0.27 0.17 1.77 0.26 0.14 2.20 CT GRoup www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C12 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 Table C.2 Normalization Test Data (Cont'd)

Panel # 0010-X 0014-AB ] 0014-AC IR System # B C Ratio B C Ratio B C Ratio Average Mobility 0.521 0.22 2.37 0.152 0.092 1.65 0.348 0.091 3.82 0.233 0.109 2.14 0.42 0.096 4.38 0.209 0.101 2.07 0.237 0.119 1.99 0.252 0.079 3.19 0.223 0.08 2.79 0.33 0.097 3.40 0.384 0.254 1.51 0.27 0.24 1.13 0.178 0.11 1.62 0.283 0.139 2.04 0.25 0.098 2.55 0.21 0.144 1.46 0.221 0.079 2.80 0.196 0.083 2.36 0.18 0.104 1.73 0.132 0.093 1.42 0.25 0.175 1.43 0.153 0.116 1.32 0.306 0.095 3.22 0.417 0.119 3.50 0.178 0.184 0.97 0.269 0.084 3.20 0.088 0.105 0.84 0.226 0.082 2.76 0.148 0.093 1.59 0.284 0.144 1.97 0.202 0.158 1.28 0.173 0.099 1.75 0.28 0.298 0.94 0.137 0.078 1.76 0.221 0.098 2.26 0.325 0.143 2.27 0.217 0.082 2.65 0.278 0.144 1.93 0.213 0.127 1.68 0.252 0.114 2.21 0.226 0.168 1.35 0.214 0.142 1.51 0.176 0.113 1.56 0.218 0.094 2.32 0.206 0.128 1.61 0.219 0.118 1.86 0.236 0.095 2.48 0.238 0.188 1.27 0.233 0.139 1.68 0.147 0.106 1.39 0.414 0.091 4.55 0.227 0.094 2.41 0.282 0.064 4.41 0.329 0.095 3.46 0.251 0.079 3.18 0.218 0.105 2.08 0.246 0.182 1.35 0.176 0.077 2.29 0.198 0.113 1.75 0.331 0.173 1.91 0.142 0.116 1.22 0.256 0.097 2.64 0.188 0.13 1.45 0.233 0.071 3.28 0.107 0.088 1.22 0.486 0.27 1.80 0.214 0.094 2.28 0.204 0.086 2.37 0.288 0.159 1.81 0.299 0.096 3.11 0.24 0.094 2.55 0.359 0.134 2.68 0.145 0.085 1.71 0.179 0.084 2.13 0.139 0.122 1.14 0.135 0.066 2.05 0.2 0.101 1.98 0.41 0.272 1.51 0.216 0.065 3.32 0.199 0.086 2.31 0.138 0.14 0.99 0.256 0.142 1.80 0.253 0.078 3.24 0.195 0.1 1.95 0.182 0.171 1.06 0.266 0.108 2.46 0.091 0.112 0.81 0.207 0.11 1.88 0.206 0.091 2.26 0.305 0.272 1.12 0.132 0.173 0.76 0.318 0.067 4.75 0.165 0.162 1.02 0.212 0.125 1.70 0.354 0.095 3.73 0.407 0.113 3.60 0.237 0.117 2.03 0.224 0.13 1.72 0.19 0.135 1.41 0.135 0.134 1.01 0.191 0.073 2.62 0.405 0.214 1.89 0.138 0.074 1.86 0.268 0.096 2.79 0.192 0.133 1.44 0.21 0.091 2.31 0.21 0.074 2.84 0.162 0.058 2.79 0.18 0.12 1.50 0.224 0.113 1.98 0.264 0.127 2.08 0.235 0.12 1.96 0.264 0.118 2.24 0.413 0.289 1.43 0.323 0.082 3.94 0.245 0.123 1.99 0.164 0.069 2.38 0.26 0.078 3.33 0.172 0.149 1.15 0.279 0.087 3.21 0.138 0.09 1.53 0.219 0.097 2.26 0.148 0.127 1.17 0.326 0.107 3.05 0.189 0.126 1.50 0.27 0.135 2.00 0.124 0.14 0.89 0.218 0.116 1.88 0.219 0.176 1.24 0.327 0.099 3.30 0.091 0.078 1.17 0.189 0.129 1.47 0.244 0.149 1.64 0.348 0.209 1.67 0.221 0.229 0.97 0.316 0.133 2.38 Average 0.28 0.15 2.01 0.20 0.12 1.87 0.24 0.10 2.39 CI GROUP hCT

,G,Knowxedge.Delvering RuIt. www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C13 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 Table C.2 Normalization Test Data (Cont'd)

Panel # 0015-X 0009A - Spent fuel IR System # B C Ratio B C Ratio Average Mobility 0.157 0.101 1.55 0.277 0.266 1.04 0.257 0.162 1.59 0.171 0.128 1.34 0.257 0.189 1.36 0.277 0.275 1.01 0.201 0.259 0.78 0.163 0.15 1.09 0.077 0.209 0.37 0.164 0.193 0.85 0.163 0.247 0.66 0.25 0.232 1.08 0.283 0.332 0.85 0.238 0.203 1.17 0.14 0.154 0.91 0.214 0.144 1.49 0.186 0.228 0.82 0.216 0.216 1.00 0.194 0.085 2.28 0.137 0.258 0.53 0.172 0.166 1.04 0.113 0.147 0.77 0.28 0.29 0.97 0.14 0.277 0.51 0.229 0.188 1.22 1.989 1.354 1.47 0.257 0.146 1.76 3.142 1.333 2.36 0.23 0.134 1.72 1.961 1.49 1.32 0.237 0.215 1.10 1.257 1.061 1.18 0.242 0.166 1.46 0.2 0.13 1.54 1.657 1.718 0.96 0.269 0.217 1.24 1.929 1.706 1.13 0.16 0.189 0.85 2.09 1.986 1.05 0.196 0.202 0.97 1.698 1.515 1.12 0.182 0.228 0.80 0.279 0.256 1.09 4.446 5.702 0.78 0.157 0.144 1.09 5.554 7.254 0.77 0.146 0.274 0.53 5.22 4.412 1.18 0.238 0.138 1.72 5.991 3.265 1.83 0.356 0.196 1.82 0.226 0.226 1.00 9.445 8.903 1.06 0.134 0.134 1.00 6.85 8.99 0.76 0.231 0.246 0.94 8.527 7.058 1.21 0.171 0.309 0.55 11.131 7.709 1.44 0.113 0.168 0.67 0.242 0.136 1.78 CT GRoup wwwGCTLGroup.corn

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C14 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 5.031 12.287 0.41 0.308 0.187 1.65 9.92 9.086 1.09 0.271 0.323 0.84 0.31 0.379 0.82 0.214 0.335 0.64 0.126 0.147 0.86 0.08 0.18 0.44 0.217 0.139 1.56 0.258 0.176 1.47 0.243 0.12 2.03 0.283 0.225 1.26 0.165 0.195 0.85 0.14 0.208 0.67 0.203 0.182 1.12 0.205 0.172 1.19 0.21 0.234 0.90 0.194 0.159 1.22 0.197 0.177 1.11 0.22 0.181 1.22 0.165 0.152 1.09 0.174 0.209 0.83 0.285 0.238 1.20 0.221 0.212 1.04 0.136 0.121 1.12 0.123 0.219 0.56 0.275 0.155 1.77 0.176 0.116 1.52 0.143 0.212 0.67 0.161 0.269 0.60 0.154 0.272 0.57 0.307 0.25 1.23 0.103 0.126 0.82 0.19 0.263 0.72 0.234 0.142 1.65 0.087 0.141 0.62 0.197 0.187 1.05 0.207 0.218 0.95 0.205 0.207 0.99 0.193 0.139 1.39 0.168 0.202 0.83 0.189 0.172 1.10 0.303 0.217 1.40 0.267 0.257 1.04 0.155 0.244 0.64 0.20 0.15 1.33 0.30 0.213 1.38 0.15 0.253 0.58 0.14 0.208 0.65 0.20 0.175 1.15 0.228 0.237 0.96 CT GRouP

""'I~dh Kn~p.DeWeing ResUlts. www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C15 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 0.195 0.111 1.76 0.16 0.148 1.08 0.181 0.178 1.02 0.217 0.164 1.32 Average 4.88 4.82 1.17 0.20 0.20 1.09 CT Gioup

""' 13uldh Kn~p.DeW~enng Rmis.i www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Page C16 of C16 Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 051969 Table C.3: Concrete Core Examination Log Core Core Location on Normalized Core RBCN Panel Dimensions Panel (X, Y) IR Test Point Core No. Location Designation Diameter x (from left hand (Col, Row) Mobilitu Condition Length upper corner) 1 0011 N 4" x 16.5" 181.5", 39" 8,3 0.649 G 2 0011 N 4" x 17" 228.5", 76" 10,2 0.514 G 3 0011 0 4" x 13" 169", 38.5" 7,3 0.369 G 4 0010 W 4" x 13" 154", 96" 7, 1 0.426 G 11 0011 N 1"X 20" 197", 25" 9,4 0.276 G 12 0014 K 2" X 12" 165", 91" 8, 2 0.152 G 1.102 to 13 0014 N 2" X 12" 193", 114" (8,1) to (9, 1) 0.375

• 20 0010 D 2" x 12" 107", 41" 5,4 0.168 G 24 0011 H 2" X 20" 11.5", 99.5" 1, 1 0.944 G 29 0011 L 2"X 12" 119", 51" 5,4 0.471 G 30 0010 K 8" X 15" 80", 73" 4, 2 0.398 G 31 0010 K 2" X 10" 17", 106" 1, 1 0.673 G 33 0011 K 2" X 20" 113", 110" 5,1 0.830 G 40 0010 N 4" X 30" 15", 25" 1,4 0.707 G 42 0011 Q 2" X 12" 68", 40" 3,4 0.252 G 43 0014 U 2" X 12" 168", 34" 7, 4 0.197 G 44 0014 I 2" X 12" 65", 57" 3, 3 0.285 G 45 0014 L 2"X 12" 17", 109" 1, 1 0.705 G 50 0010 AA 1" x 12" 96", 50" 4, 3 0.602 G 62 0013 H 1" x 20" 56", 60" 3, 3 0.258 G 63 0013 H 4" x 20" 158.5", 37" 7,4 0.311 G 64 0013 N 1" X 20" 158", 10" 7,5 0.270 G 65 0013 Q 4" x 20" 163", 23" 8,4 0.328 G 66 0013 W 4" x 20" 77", 97" 4,2 0.215 G 67 0012 H 4" X 20" 186", 24" 8, 4 0.238 G 68 0012 G 2" x 20" 58", 32" 3, 4 0.320 G 69 0012 P 2" x 20" 62", 84" 3, 2 0.210 G 70 0012 Y 2" X 12" 185", 9" 8, 5 0.648 G 71 0014 G 2" x 20" 111", 34" 5,4 0.520 G 72 0014 J 2" X 20" 205", 30" 9, 4 0.368 G 73 0011 C 2" X 20" 148", 63" 7, 3 0.580 G 74 0014 E 2" X 12" 42", 98" 3,1 0.286 G 75 0012 W 2" X 20" 184", 41" 8,4 0.508 G 195-3/4", 14-76 0012 Q 2" X 20" 1/2" 9, 4 0.550 G 77 0012 L 2" x 20" 52", 99" 3,1 0.240 G 85 0012 W 2" X 12" 22" x 113" 2,1 0.344 G G - Good Condition

• - lack of course aggregate and presence of a gouge at 12 in. deep CT GRouP www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix D Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 APPENDIX D IR Test Result Figures

TMMNOaLO-Y LAMORATORM I Power Plant I I CrysaI ver., FL 05 Li 0 MOBULTY SCALE

-LWf KIW~. =

TamomAmCWOTIO -

TECHNOLOGYCONNA TANTS I SHEaOLD ORN ROAD agOE,.USM MOfl-10" PAM: 847-U6.75c.

FM 8474685541

-.CTLG-4w-Crystal River Nuclear Power Plant I I Crystal Rier, FL 0.5 HO MOBILTY SCALE

THNOLOOY LABRPATOIUJE Crystal River Nuclear Power Plant I 1.2 Crystal River, FL 0.8 i IA Lio MOBILITY SCALE LOCATION OF CORESIN NOTE:

THEFIELD 54OU.D 6OVERN.

0 1 CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE DOME NTS

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix E Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 APPENDIX E Core Locations and Borescope Observations (Provided by Progress Energy)

M-N

-~ r -r i r 1 rT r T A B C A 8 C A B C D E F D E g F D E F Ge H *_I H o1* H I J.. K L p .J a;

• . K L J K L c

I I 0* M N 0 M N 0 SGR i P Q R P OPENING I °R P Q R

-Iu s"' ... ... u '

S T U S T U D

V W X V Ow

• x V W X y Z AA Y °Z AA Y AUX.BLDG.ROOF EL.167"-8 F

AS INTERMEDIATE BLDG.ROOF EL 141r-r AC AD AE AF AG z

°AS AB AC E~

0

• c~ar 05MS1fl EQUIPMENT ,

HATCH

~,Pt2R:

RBCN-0014 RBCN-DO15 RBCN-0010 G

_______ I L 4.

A 8 C It " A a C A B C

. 0 E F 0 D E F D E F

. 4, .. 3 IG H 1 G H 67 I G H I1 2,2

" J K L J K L *. J K L

,33

• 77 M N 0 M N 0 M N 0 FUELTRAN4SFER 5 76, P BUMGROOF P 90Q 6

9? aR P Q R EL 20W-4* "

Q3 "0 S 99 9 T ,o U S T U -

R V W  ; X V X Y Z AA Y Z AA I- . AB AC AD AB AC AD o" INTERIEDIATE INTERMEDIATE I B*DG.ROOF BLDG.ROOF EL 149-0 EL 14W-0 I .- K3w2 1RBCN-001I RBCN-0012 RBCN-0013 -

REV--M 4L

• NUCLEAR ENGINEERING CRYSIAL 1VI-R UNIT 3 Progress

-' _*gy CORE BORE LOCATIONS

"'==SK-7481-2 ! = A A

L------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- -

= n

• silt sitti W W-tt V..?

- I V-v I - I NUCLEAR ENGINEERING Progress CONTAhXMENTDOM-Energy .. ...... .

I I.ý ý,.SK-75000-COO

1. I.

1/13/2010 Core Examination Log Dia. x Core Out of plane Abnormality Reviewed Crack depth Avg. crack Ot o lane Voids (embedded object, tendon Comments Co (RBCN) ID Length Location Core Boroscope

___ ( D (in.) (X,Y) (in.) Date Date Date from face (in.) width (in.) (in.) grease)

Distance Axial/ Distance Axial/

Near Far Near Far Start End from Circum. Depth from Circum. Metalic face Dim. face Dim. organic 11/8/09 11/21/09 NO CRACKS, HOLES, GAPS, OR 1 -0011 N 4 x 16.5 181-1/2 x 39 10/17/09 IMPERFECTIONS 10/18/09 11/8/09 11/21/09 NO CRACKS, HOLES, GAPS, OR 2 -0011 N 4 x 13.5 228-1/2 x 76 IMPERFECTIONS SMALL BUG HOLES 3 -0011 0 4 x 13 169 x 38-1/2 10/18/09 11/8/09 11/21/09 NO CRACKS, HOLES, GAPS, OR IMPERFECTIONS 4 -0010 W 4 x 13 154 x 96 10/18/09 11/10/09 11/10/09 NO CRACKS, HOLES, GAPS, OR 4 -0 W 1IMPERFECTIONS Hairline fracture running in and 11/6/09 &

5 -0015 4x9 151/ 40 10/19/09 1 11/21/09 8 TO 9 7/16 3-7/8 out of wall in direction of liner 11/16/09 plate.

6 -0015 J 4 149 x 64 10/23/09 - 11/21/09 See core # 6aa 6a -0015 J 8 x 12 149 x64 10/30/09 - 11/21/09 See core # 6aa 9 to 6aa -0015 J 8 x 18 149 x64 11/5/09 11/20/09 11/29/09 8-1/2 10- 1 1/4 Drilled 8",dia. hole 6" deeper 812 1/2 1/2Ato 7 -0015 J 4x8 99-1/2 x 63 10/28/09 11/14/09 11/21/09 7 7-3/8 1/4 1/8 1/4 8 -0015 W 2 x 10 48 x 39 10/24/09 11/11/09 11/21/09 6 8-3/8 3/4 1-5/8 Drilled to 11".

Out of plane crack at the end of 9 -0015 W 2x9 188 x 39 10/24/09 11/11/09 11/21/09 7-1/8 - 1-1/2 - the hole along the perimeter.

Drilled to 8-1/2.

10 -0010 E 11/21/09 - Unable to core due to inferences Note: X, coordinate from top left corner of panel L:\Shared\CR3 Containment\CONDITION ASSESSMENT Files\Core Examination Log.docx Page 1 of 10

1/13/2010 Core Examination Log Reviewed Crack depth Avg. crack Out of plane Voids Abnormality Core BAY PANEL Core Boroscope

1. Co rBAY(RBCN( ID Length in) Location X,)i.) Date Date Date from face (in.) width (in.) Crackin)(in.)grae length (embedded object, tendon Comments

___(in.) (XY) (in.) (in.) grease)

Distance Axial/ Distance Axial/ Metallic/

Near Far Near Far Start End from Circum. Depth from Circum. organic face Dim. face Dim.

• One crack out of plane at the 11/10/09 11/21/09 end of the hole (crack is around 11 -0011 N 1 x 20 197 x 25 11/08/09 the entire perimeter and running into the building).

12 -0014 K 2 x 12 164-1/2 x 91 10/28/09 11/11/09 11/12/09 . No imperfections found.

Object noted at 1200. Light gouge from D700 to 12D0 9-1/2" in <

12-1/2 fro m 0 u l 1amo aggregate 13 -0014 N 2 x 12 193 x 114 10/28/09 11/11/09 11/21/09 1/32". Small amount of aggregate present.

Small out of plane crack at the end 14 -0015 D 2 x 12 206 x 14 10/28/09 11/14/09 11/21/09 of the hole, -1/4 of the circumference of the hole 15 -0015 J 2 x 12 24 x 62 10/28/09 11/14/09 11/21/09 No imperfections found.

16 -0015 M 2 x 20 60 x 60 11/6/09 11/14/09 11/21/09 No imperfections found.

11-17 -0015 M 2 x 12 132-1/2 x 53 10/30/09 11/14/09 11/24/09 10 1/ 1/8 3/8 1/2 18 -0015 J 2 x 14 59-1/2 11/3/09 11/14/09 11/24/09 7-1/2 - 1/16 -

63-1/2 19 -0015 D 2 x 14 201-1/2 x 36 11/3/09 11/14/09 11/24/09 7-1/8 1/8 20 -0010 D 2 x 12 107 x 41 11/14/09 11/14/09 11/24/09 - - No imperfections found.

21 -0015 AC 1x 6 86 x 4 11/9/09 11/11/09 11/24/09 4-1/4 < 1/4. Drilled to 11-1/2".

22 -0015 X ix6 208 x 79 11/4/09 11/10/09 11/24/09 2 3-1/4 3/8 Y4 Drilled to 12".

Note: X,Y coordinate from top left comer of panel L\Shared\CR3 Containment\CONDITION ASSESSMENT Files\Core Examination Log.dmox Page 2 of 10

1113/2010 Core Examination Log Dia. x Core Out of plane Abnormality Core CoeBY BAY PNL PANEL Length Location Daerataatcfomfce(i.)

Core Boroscope Reviewed Crack depth wdtg(nhebede Avg. crack CrackVoids (embedded ojctntndn object, tendon Comet Comments

1. (RBCN) ID (in.) (X,Y)(mface (in.) width (in.) (in.) grease)

Distance Axial/ Distance Axial/ Metallic/

Near Far Near Far Start End from Circum. Depth from Circum. organic face Dim. face Dim.

Drilled to 19.5". No imperfections 23 -0015 U 2 x12 223 x 88 11/4/09 11/10/09 11/24/09 -found.

11-1/2 x D t 220-1/2". No Drilled to No 24 -0011 H 2 x 20 11/16/09 11/16/09 11/24/09 99-1/2 imperfections found.

Drilled tto 119.5'. N D No imperfections imperfectionsfound.

25 -0015 R 2 x 20 148-3/4 x 93 11/4/09 11/10/09 11/24/09 26 -0015 0 2 x 20 177 x 52 11/4/09 11/10/09 11/24/09 No imperfections found.

27 -0015 L 2 x 20 177 x 104 11/4/09 11/10/09 11/24/09 7-1/2 1/32 Drilled to 18".

28 -0015 L 2 x 20 210 x 103 11/4/09 11/10/09 11/24/09 - - 13 Y4- 3/8 No other imperfections found.

Small voids/bug holes throughout 29 -0011 L 2 x 12 119 x 51 11/14/09 11/17/09 11/23/09 hole. Pilot hole penetrated core.

No other imperfections found.

Small voids/bug holes throughout hole. Strain gauge installation 30 -0010 K 8 xs5 80 x 73 11/2/09 11/19/09 11/20/09 partially obscured hole. No abnormalities seen around perimeter of epoxy.

31 -0010 K 2 x 10 17 x 106 11/2/09 11/14/09 11/24/09 No imperfections found.

32 -0015 F 2 x 12 212 x 35 11/4/09 11/10/09 11/24/09 No imperfections found.

Drilled to 19-11/16". Noticeable grooves in and out of plane of 113 x 110 11/16/09 11/16/09 11/23/09 wall. Appears to be caused by 33 -0011 K 2 x 20 drilling process. Small voids/bug holes seen throughout hole. No other abnormalities.

Note: X,Y coordinate fwom top left comer of panel L:SharedXCR3 Containment\CONDITION ASSESSMENT Files\Core Examination Log.docx Page 3 of 10

1113/2010 Core Examination Log of plane Voids Abnormality Core BAY PANEL I Core COut Core RBCND ID Length a Location Core Boroscope Reviewed Crack depth Avg. crack (embedded object, tendon Comments

1. (in.) (XI(inin.) Date Date Date from face (in.) width (in.) Crack length (in.) (i. grease)

Distance Axial/ Distance Axial/ Metallic/

Near Far Near Far Start End, from Circum. Depth from Circum. organic face Dim. face Dim.

34 -0015 E 1 x20 201 x 12 11/12/09 11/13/09 11/24/09 No imperfections found.

35 -0015 P 2 x2D 139 x 52 11/6/09 11/14/09 11/21/09 No imperfections found.

36 -0015 Y 2 x 12 42 x 79 11/5/09 11/06/09 11/24/09 5-3/4 1/4 No other imperfections found.

37 -0015 Y 2 x12 19-1/2 x 115 11/5/09 11/06/09 11/24/09 - - No imperfections found.

38 -0015 Y 1 x 20 7 x 18 11/9/09 11/11/09 11/24/09 - Several small holes < %"long.

39 -0015 V 2 x 12 37 x 41 11/7/09 11/12/09 11/24/09 3-1/2

' Small voids/bug holes seen 40 -0010 N 4 a30 15 x 2S 11/7/D9 11/14/09 11/23/09 - throughout hole. No other imperfections found.

41 -0015 V 1 x 12 12 x 22-1/2 11/7/09 11/12/09 11/24/09 Drilled to 20".

42 -0011 Q 2 x 12 68 x 40 11/11/09 11/12/09 11/24/09

• Small bug holes.

43 -0014 U 2 x 12 168 x 34 11/8/09 11/12/09 11/24/09

• Drilled to 12-1/4". Bug holes.

44 -0014 I 2 x 12 65 x 57 11/8/09 11/12/09 11/24/09

• Bug holes.

45 -0014 L 2 x 12 17 x 109 11/8/09 11/12/09 11/24/09 No imperfections found.

3/8 x 20 3/16 Deleted due to proximity to #21.

46 -0015 AC PILOT 11/13/09 11/24/09 1I HOLE Lower left pilot hole scoped.

Note: X,Y mordinate from top left corner of panel L:\Shared\CR3 Containment\CONDITION ASSESSMENT Files\Core Examination Log.docx Page 4 of 10

1/13/2010 Core Examination Log Reviewed Crack depth Avg. crack Out of plane Voids Abnormality tendon Core CoeBAY BY PNL PANEL Length Dia. x Location Core Core Boroscope Rvelength eph Av. Crackoosop rak-ois(embedded object, Comments Date from face (in.) width (in.) Cracklength (in.) grease)

1. (RBCN) ID (in.) (X,YL (in.) Date( Y)(n)(i Date (n) n.) grease)

Distance Axial/ Distance Axial/ Metallic/

Near Far Near Far Start End from Circum. Depth from Circum. organic face Dim. face Dim.

Crack identified by visual inspection on 12/16/09 after the 47 -0015 AD 1 x 20 43 x 19 11/9/09 11/11/09 11/24/09 3/8 1/32 11-3/4 <1/4 boroscope was performed. Upper right pilot hole inspected with no crack visible.

48 -0015 AD 1 x 14 43-1/2 x 11/5/09 11/13/09 11/29/09 - - - - Bug holes.

34-1/2 3/8x20 43-1/2 x 4 pilot holes examined with no 48 -0015 AD PILOT HOE 34-1/2 11/5/09 11/18/09 11/24/09 - - imperfections found.

imperfections found HOLE Drilled to 12". One crack seen 209-1/20x after a review r with w multiple m facets.

facets.

49 -0015 Y 4 x 12 1/2 11/5/09 11/06/09 11/25/09 9-1/4 10 1/16 1/8 102 Depth adjusted to locate a single crack.

50 -0010 AA 1 x 12 96 x 50 11/12/09 11/13/09 11/24/09 - - - - Bug holes.

51 -0015 AA 4x9 167 x 92-1/2 11/9/09 11/10/09 11/25/09 5-1/4 6-1/2 1/8 Y2 Drilled to 7-1/2".

Drilled to 19". Small hole less S2 -0015 AA 1020 219-1/20 11/9/09 11/10/09 11/25/09 than %" long. No other 116 _imperfections found.

53 -0015 F 1 x 20 184 x 108 11/13/09 11/13/09 11/25/09 6 1/8 129" RIGHT Small crack 3600. No other 54 -0003B N/A 2 x 12 OF B3 x 136" 11/11/09 11/13/09 11/25/09 8 -imperfections found.

FROM FLOOR 3 ea. Small void, possible rock pocket

-0003B N/A 3/8l 12 Below core 11/17/09 11/18/09 11/22/09 9-1/4 from boring. No cracks or other Pilot bore abnormalities observed.

Holes -'

132" RIGHT Crack runs partially out of plane of 54a -0003B N/A 4 x 12 OF B3 x 136" 11/23/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 8 to 9 1/32 wall. No other signs of distress or FROM FLOOR anomalies.

Note: X,Y coordinate from top left corner of panel L:\Shared\CR3 Containment\CONDITION ASSESSMENT Files\Core Examination Log.docx Page 5 of 10

1/13/2010 Core Examination Log Dia. x Core Out of planeAbomit Crack depth Avg. crack Voids Abnormality Core BAY PANEL Length Core Core Boroscope Reviewed Date from face (in.) width (in.) Crack length (in.)

1. (RBCN) ID (in.) (X,Y)(in.) Date Date (in.) grease)

Distance Axial/ Distance Axial/ Metallic/

Near Far Near Far Start End from Circum. Depth from Circum. organic face Dim. face Dim.

55 -0015 K 4 x 12 201 x 42 11/12/09 11/13/09 11/25/09 9-1/2 2 56 -0015 E 1 x 10 201 x 36 11/12/09 11/13/09 11/25/09 7 -

57 -0015 R 2 x 20 94 x 53 11/13/09 11/13/09 11/21/09 - No imperfections found.

g8x14-57a -0015 R' 94 x 53 11/19/09 11/25/09 11/25/09 1/2 58 -0015 U I x 10 173 x 89-1/2 11/12/09 11/13/09 11/25/09 7  %

Shield 115 x 55 59 -0015 Wall 4 x 12 (from top 11/12/09 11/13/09 11/25/09 - No imperfections found.

right) 68 x 64 Shield 60 -0015 4 x 12 (from bottom 11/11/09 11/18/09 11/25/09 -

right)

Drilled to 13". There is rebar or 61 -0015 Y 2 x 12 222 x 100 11/9/09 11/11/09 11/25/09 9-3/4 metal at the end of the hole.

62 -0013 H 1 x 20 56x60 11/08/09 11/17/09 11/24/09 - No imperfections found.

63 -0013 H 4 x 20 158-1/2 x 37 11/08/09 11/17/09 11/24/09 No imperfections found.

Small voids/bug holes seen. No 64 -0013 N 1 x 20 1SS O 11 ii/09/09 11/17/09 11/24/09 -other imperfections found.

65 -0013 Q 4 x 20 163 x 23 11/09/09 11/17/09 11/25/09 No imperfections found.

66 -0013 W 4020 77 x 97 11/08/09 11/17/09 11/25/09 No imperfections found.

Note: X,Y coordinate trom top let corner ot panel L:\Shared\CR3 Containment\CONDITION ASSESSMENT Files\Core ExaminatJon Log.docx Page 6 of 10

1/13/2010 Core Examination Log Boroscope Reviewed Crack depth Avg. crack Out of plane voids Abnormality Core BAY PANEL Dia. x Core Core Co rBAY ID Length Location Date Date Date from face (in.) width (in) Cracklength (embedded object, tendon Comments

1. (RBCN) ID (in.) (X,Y) (in.) (in.) (in.) grease)

Distance Axial/ Distance Axial/

Near Far Near Far Start End from Circum. Depth from Circum. Metalic face Dim. face Dim. organic 67 -0012 H 4 x 20 186 x 24 11/12/09 11/12/09 11/24/09 No cracks, voids, or imperfections.

Small voids/bug holes seen. Pilot 68 -0012 G 2 x 20 58 x 32 11/13/09 11/17/09 11/24/09 hole penetrated side wall of core.

No other imperfections found.

69 -0012 P 2 x 20 62 x 84 11/13/09 11/17/09 12/6/09 No imperfections found.

No cracks, voids, or imperfections.

70 -0012 Y 2 x 12 185 x 9 11/15/09 11/15/09 11/24/09 Pilot hole penetrated side wall of core.

71 -0014 G 2 x 20 111 x 34 11/16/09 11/16/09 11/25/09 No imperfections found.

72 -0014 J 2 x 20 205 x 30 11/16/09 11/16/09 11/25/09 16-3/4 <1 shallow No other imperfections found.

Small voids/bug holes throughout 73 -0011 C 2 X 20 148 x 63 11/16/09 11/16/09 11/23/09

• hole. No other imperfections found.

74 -0014 E 2 x 12 42 x 98 11/16/09 11/16/09 11/25/09 No imperfections found.

Small voids/bug holes throughout 75 -0012 W 2 x 20 182 x 41 11/13/09 11/28/09 12/7/09 hole. No other imperfections found.

76 -0012 Q 2x20 195-3/4 x 11/13/09 11/17/09 11/24/09 No imperfections found.

14-1/2 Small voids/bug holes seen in 77 -0012 L 2 x 20 52 x 99 11/13/09 11/17/09 11/24/09 hole. Pilot hole penetrated core.

No other imperfections found.

78 -0015 Z 2 x 12 105 x 32 11/15/09 11/15/09 11/25/09 9-1/4 2-1/8 4-5/8 1/4 8-79 -0015 V 2 x 12 178 x 40 11/15/09 11/15/09 11/26/09 7/16 1-5/8 -

Note: X,Y coordinate from top left corner of panel L:\Shared\CR3 Containment/CONDITION ASSESSMENT Files\Core Exanminaton Log.docx Page 7 of 10

1/13/2010 Core Examination Log Dia. x Core Out of plane VisAbnormality Reviewed Crack depth Avg. crack Crc le n.b)o Voids bjelty Core BAY PANEL Length Core Core Boroscope

1. (RBCN) ID Length Location Date Date Date from face (in.) width (in.) (embedded object, tendon Comments (in.) (XY) (in.) (in.) grease)

Distance Axial/ Distance Axial/ Metallic/

Near Far Near Far Start End from Circum. Depth from Circum. organic face Dim. face Dim.

80 -0015 X 2 x 12 58-1/2 x 11/15/09 11/15/09 11/26/09 8-1/2 - 1-5/8 41-3/4 81 -0015 H 2 x 12 204 x 28 11/14/09 11/15/09 11/26/09 8-1/4 9-3/4 Y 1 8-9 to 9-5/8 Over ercore of #.

core o #81. PPilot holes 81a -0015 H 4 x 15 204 x 28 11/19/09 11/20/09 11/30/09 8 to 9 i 1/2 1 3/8 to 11 penetrate core.

82 -0015 H 2 x 12 33 x 30 11/14/09 11/15/09 11/29/09 8 10 1  % Drilled at 10-3/4" deep.

83 -0015 G 2 x 12 112 x 65 11/15/09 11/16/09 11/29/09 7/

7/16 - 1-1/8 Drilled at 8-5/8" deep.

84 -0015 I 2 x 12 95 x 64 11/15/09 11/16/09 11/29/09 7-3/8 1-1/8 Drilled at 8-1/2" deep.

11/29/09 7-3/4 1 It appears that loose material has 84A -0015 1 8 x 15 95 x 64 11/19/09 11/20/09 -

filled a portion of the crack.

85 -0012 W 2 x 12 22 x 113 11/15/09 11/15/09 11/29/09 - - - No cracks, voids, or imperfections.

Repair material/original concrete 86 -0016 A 2 x 14 fromx dome 129S 198W 11/17/09 11/17/09 11/18/09 11-3/8 Bonding interface identified with a good adhesive seal/bond between the repair center material and the original concrete.

250S x 100W Repair material/original concrete Bonding interface identified with a good 87 -0016 A 2 x 14 from dome 11/17/09 11/17/09 11/18/09 11-3/8 adhesive seal/bond at interface. No center separation seen.

198S x 471W Repair material/original concrete Bonding interface identified with a good 88 -0016 A 2 x 14 from dome 11/17/09 11/17/09 11/18/09 10 adhesive seal/bond at interface. No center centerseparation seal/bon seen.

seen .

Note: X,Y mordinate from top left comer of panel L:Shared\CR3 ContainmentCONDITION ASSESSMENT Files\Core Examination Log.doc Page 8 of 10

1/13/2010 Core Examination Log Dia. x Core Ou fpaeAbnormality Boroscope Reviewed Crack depth Avg. crack Out of plane Voids Abnobjelty Core BAY PAN Length Location Core Date Date Date from face (in.) width (in.) Crack length (in.)

1. (RBCN) ID Len.t (in.) Locatin (XY) (in.) (in.) grease)

Distance Axial/ Distance Axial/

Near Far Near Far Start End from Circum. Depth from Circum. Metalic face Dim. face Dim. organic Repair material/original concrete 383S x 233W Bonding interface identified with a good 89 -0016 A 2 x 14 from dome 11/17/09 11/17/09 11/18/09 12-1/8 adhesive seal/bond at interface. No center separation seen.

Small voids/bug holes seen 321S x 546W throughout hole. Residue at break 90r dlocation 0016 A X4 is not consistent with 90 -0016 A 2 X 14 from dome 11/18/09 11/19/09 11/20/09 appearance of bonding adhesive center observed in the 4 cores made in the repair area.

604S x 271W 91 -0016 A 2 X 14 from dome center 11/18/09 11/19/09 11/20/09 Small voids/bug holes seen 92 -0010 G 8 x 14 65 x 74 11/21/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 No cracks, voids, or imperfections.

93 -0010 G 4 x 22 138 x 74 11/21/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 No cracks, voids, or imperfections.

94 -0010 G 4 x 22 186 x 73 11/21/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 No cracks, voids, or imperfections.

95 -0012 Q 4 x 10 44 x 48 11/21/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 No cracks, voids, or imperfections.

96 -0012 Q 4 x 10 105 x 86 11/21/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 No cracks, voids, or imperfections.

Pilot hole penetrated core. No 196 x 86 11/21/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 Pilot h o penetrate ctiore.

97 -0012 Q 4 x 14 cracks, voids, or imperfections.

T 4 x 10 43 x 86 11/21/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 Small voids/bug holes seen 98 -0012 throughout hole.

Pilot hole penetrated core. No 99 -0012 T 4*x 14 105*x 84 11/21/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 -cracks, voids, or imperfections.

100 -0012 T 4 x 14 43x38 11/21/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 No cracks, voids, or imperfections.

Note: X,Y coordinate from top left comnerof panel L:\Shared\CR3 Containment\CONDITION ASSESSMENT Files\Core Examination Log.docx Page 9 of 10

1/1312010 Core Examination Log Dia. a Core Out of plane Voidsn.) Abnormality PAN Length Location Core Boroscope Reviewed Crack depth Avg. crack Crc le Core BAY (RBCN) ID (in.) (X,Y)(in.) Date Date Date from face (in.) width (in.) Cracklength (in.) (embedded object, tendon Comments (in.) ____(in.)(in.) grease)

Distance Axial/ Distance Axial/

Near Far Near Far Start End from Circum. Depth from Circum. Metallic!

face Dim. face Dim. organic 101 -0012 T 4 x 14 196 x 39 11/21/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 No cracks, voids, or imperfections.

102 -0012 T 4 x 14 195 x 88 11/21/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 Small voids/bug holes seen throughout hole.

75S x 580W 103 -0016 A 1 x 14 from dome 11/23/09 11/23/09 11/29/09 Core drilled pilot hole. No centercracks, voids,over or imperfections.

Note: X,Y coordinate from top left comner of panel L:\Shared\CR3 Containrnent\CONDITION ASSESSMENT Files\Core Examination Log.docx Page 10 of 10

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix F Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 APPENDIX F Equipment Calibration Records

• F.1 - Calibration Records Of Impulse Hammers

" F.2 - Calibration Records Of Geophones

• F.3 - Calibration Records of Accelerometers for IE C fGRouP Buildi Kno~.edge. fleve~frg Re',di. www.CTLGroup.com

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix F Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 APPENDIX F.1 Calibration Records of Impulse Hammers

• Hammer Model 086M91 SN 23054 (1 page)

• Hammer Model 086D20 SN 26519 (1 Page)

• Hammer Model 086M91 SN 26088 (1 Page)

" Hammer Model 086M91 SN 22610 (1 Page)

CT GROUP Building Kn-owledge.

DegverdngResults, www.CTLGroup.com

-M A

A I

"'Calibration Certificater' Model No.: 086M91 Customer:

Serial No.: 23054

Description:

Impulse Force Hammer PO No.:

Manufacturer: PCB Calibration Method: Impulse (at-303-1)

Data Output Bias: 10.2 Temperature: 70 OF 21 OC Relative Humidity: 55 %

HAMMER SENSITIVITY:

Tip Medium (Red)

Hammer Configuration Extender None Hammer Sensitivity mV/Ib 1.02 (mV/N) 0.23 Above data is valid for all supplied tips.

Condition of Unit:

As Found In Tolerance, Cable Connection Looks Weak.

As Left Special Note: Hcs-2 Notes:

1. Calibration is N.I.S.T traceable through project No. 822/274086 and PTB Traceable thru Project 1060.

2. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval from PCB Piezotronics, inc.

3. Calibration is performed In compliance with ISO 10012-1, ANSI/NCSL Z540-i-1994.

4. See Manufacturer's specification sheet for a detailed listing of performance specifications.

5. Measurement uncertainty (95% confidence level with a coverage factor of 2) is +/-3.8%.

Technician: Brian Kemp Date: 3/13/2009 OPCB PIEZOTRONI5 CAAueTIONCEAT imm 3425 Walden Avenue Depew, N.Y. 14043 bPage 1of I

TEL: 716-684-0001 I) FAX: 716-684-0987 Qwww.pcb.com CalibrationStation: 4ý ri I I 111 I

AM I

"Calibration Certificate"'

Model No.: 086D20 Customer:

Serial No.: 265.19

Description:

Impulse.Force Hammer PO No.:

Manufacturer: PCB Calibration Method: Impulse (at-303-1)

Data Output Bias: 9.2 Temperature: 73 0 F 23 "C Relative Humidity: 54 %

HAMMER SENSITIVITY:

Tip IMedium (Red)

Hammer C(onfiguration Extender None 1.06 Hammer Seensitivity mV/lb 0.24 (mV/N)

Above data is valid for all supplied tips.

Condition of Unit:

As Found Non-operational, Intermittent Bnc Conn.

As Left In tolerance, after repair.

S ecial Note: Hcs-2 4tes:

1. Calibration is N.I.S.T traceable through project No. 822/274086 and PTB Traceable thru Project 1060.

2. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval from PCB Piezotronics, inc.

3. Calibration is performed in compliance with ISO 10012-1, ANSI/NCSL Z540-1-1994.

4. See Manufacturer's specification sheet for a detailed listing of performance specifications.

5. Measurement uncertainty (95% confidence level with a coverage factor of 2) is +/- 3 . 8%.

Technician: Luke Rogers.. J . Date: 7/16/20.09.

I PCBPIEZOTRONICS 3425 Walden Avenue Depew, N.Y. 14043 2 TEL: 716-684-0001 FAX: 716-684-0987 P, www.pcb.com Carlbration Station: q7 PageIof 7_777=-X I A

I I

I

,"Calibration Certificate^.;

Model No.: 086M91 Customer:

Serial No.: 26088

Description:

Impulse Force Ham-mer PO No.:

Manufacturer:- P.CB Calibration Method: Impulse (at-303-1)

Data Output Bias: 8.9 Temperature: 69 'F 21 0C Relative Humidity: 49 %

HAMMER SENSITIVITY:

Tip Medium (Red)

Hammer Configuration Extender

....... .......... ....... ........ . . None mV/lb 1.03 Hammer Sensitivity (mV/N) 0.23 Above data is valid for all supplied tips.

Condition of Unit:

As Found Non-operational As Left In tolerance, after repair.

Special Note: Hcs-2 Notes:

1. Calibration is N.I.S.T traceable through project No. 822/274086 and PTB Traceable thru Project 1060.

2. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval from PC8 Piezotronics, inc.

3. Calibration is performed in compliance with ISO 10012-1, ANSI/NCSL Z540-1-1994.

4. See Manufacturer's specification sheet for a detailed listing of performance specifications.

5. Measurement uncertainty (95% confidence level with a coverage factor of 2) is +/-3,8%.

Technician: Luke Rogers Date: 7/22/2009.

9PCBPIEZOTRONICS 3425 Walden Avenue Depew, N.Y. 14043 W TEL: 716-684-0001 [l FAX: 716-684-0987 R www.pcb.com I

0 calibrationl Sialticn: 47 paw,- I of f

I

U U

Il I 1:21 11 11111safflow PER,b , Eill-Ft-Jilill IN WMENNEW. - I N-001 8 &A0 =-1 L

",Calibration Certificate", WWI

.fý Model No.: 0861M91 Customer:

Serial No.: 22610

Description:

Impulse Force Hammer PO No.:

Manufacturer: PCB Calibration Method: Impulse (at-303-1)

Data Output Bias: 10.0 Temperature: 70 OF 21 0C Relative Humidity: 47 %

HAMMER SENSITIVITY:

Tip Medium (Red)

Hammer Configuration Extender None Hammer Sensitivity mV/Ib 1.06 (mV/N) 0.24 Above data is valid for all supplied tips.

Condition of Unit:

As Found Non Operational, Damaged Cable.

As Left In tolerance, after repair.

Special Note: Hcs-2 Notes:

1. Calibration is N.I.S.T traceable through project No. 822/274086 and PTB Traceable thru Project 1060.

2. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval from PCB Piezotronics, inc.

3. Calibration Is performed in compliance with ISO 10012-1, ANSI/NCSL Z540-1-1994.

4. See Manufacturer's specification sheet for a detailed listing of performance specifications.

5. Measurement uncertainty (95% confidence level with a coverage factor of 2) is +/-3.8%.

Technician: Luke Rogers Date: 11/24/2008 uPCBPIEZOTRONIC5" 3425 Walden Avenue CAUBRlArnN~ii 1162.01 Depew, N.Y. 14043 W TEL: 716-684-0001 R FAX: 716-684-0987 Q www.pcb.com q

gPage I

I of1 nI Calibration 5tation:

4S 47 rJ 1

0 I

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix F Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 APPENDIX F.2 Calibration Records of Geophones

• Calibration Of Impulse Response Geophones dated 1012412009 (8 pages)

• Calibration Of Impulse Response Geophones dated 10126/2009 (7 pages)

" Calibration Certificate of Omniphone (1 page, for information only)

C GRoup Bulldfr K'iop1edge. De1 t Resdts www.CTLGroup.com

AECOM Calibration of Impulse Response Geophones CTL Group Skokie, Illinois October 24, 2009 Prepared by:

Sean B Brady Instrumentation Specialist AECOM USA, Inc.

Telephone: 847-279-2500

AECOM 750 Corporate Woods Parkway, Vernon Hills, IL 60061 T 847.279.2500 F 847.279.2510 ww.aecom.com October 24, 2009 CTL Group Honggang Cao P.E, S.E 5420 Old Orchard Road Skokie, Illinois 60077 RE: Annual Calibration of Impulse Response Geophones s/n

Dear Mr. Honggang Cao:

We are pleased to present our calibration report for the Impulse Response geophones that AECOM calibrated on Saturday October 24, 2009.

Geophones with serial numbers 4001, 4002, 4010, and 1010 are within calibration specifications for the Smash Impulse Response Testing System. Please find attached to this letter the calibration records for each Geophone calibrated the equipment used to perform this calibration and.

We thank you for this opportunity to be of service to you, and remain available for any further consultation or discussion that you may require. If you have any questions concerning the contents of the attached calibration documents, please call Sean Brady at 847.279.2425.

Respectfully, Sean B Brady Instrumenttion Specialist Attachments:

Calibration Sheet's CTL Impulse Response Geophones Calibration Sheet Nicolet Phazer 4 Channel Acquisition System Calibration Sheet PCB 393B12 Accelerometer

AECOM Calibration Report for Vertical Geophone: CTL s/n 4001 Time and Date of Calibration: Saturday, October 24, 2009 09:22:46 Calibrated by: SBB Signal Analyzer Brand: Nicolet Signal Analyzer Model Number: Photon Phazer Signal Analyzer Serial Number: 5317454 Signal Analyzer Traceability Certificate Number: AECOM 5317454 Dated March 3, 2009 Signal Analyzer Certificate Date: 03-03-09 Signal Analyzer Certificate Due Date: 03-03-10 Accelerometer Brand: PCB Accelerometer Model Number: 393B12 Accelerometer Traceability Certificate Number: 24462 Accelerometer Certificate Date: June 6, 2008 Accelerometer Certificate Due Date: June 6, 2010

• • * * ***** ******* ********* ** *W Initial (as received)

Frequency (Hz) PCB Range (V) Geophone Range (V) 20 0.02102 0.02170 22.5 0.02009 0.02162 25 0.02118 0.02265 27.5 0.02105 0.02419 30 0.02146 0.02485 Final (calibrated)

Frequency (Hz) PCB Range (V) Geophone Range (V) Result 20 0.02032 0.02054 PASS 22.5 0.02011 0.02045 PASS 25 0.02127 0.02105 PASS 27.5 0.02090 0.02136 PASS 30 0.02105 0.02171 PASS Overall calibration result: Pass

• • • • • • • • • end of calibration report *********

AECOM Calibration Report for Vertical Geophone: CTL sin 4002 Time and Date of Calibration: Saturday, October 24, 2009 09:22:46 Calibrated by: SBB Signal Analyzer Brand: Nicolet Signal Analyzer Model Number: Photon Phazer Signal Analyzer Serial Number: 5317454 Signal Analyzer Traceability Certificate Number: AECOM 5317454 Dated March 3, 2009 Signal Analyzer Certificate Date: 03-03-09 Signal Analyzer Certificate Due Date: 03-03-10 Accelerometer Brand: PCB Accelerometer Model Number: 393B12 Accelerometer Traceability Certificate Number: 24462 Accelerometer Certificate Date: June 6, 2008 Accelerometer Certificate Due Date: June 6, 2010 Initial(as received)

Frequency (Hz) PCB Range (V) Geophone Range (V) 20 0.02102 0.02010 22.5 0.02009 0.01985 25 0.02118 0.01921 27.5 0.02105 0.01818 30 0.02146 0.01928 Final (calibrated)

Frequency (Hz) PCB Range (V) Geophone Range (V) Result 20 0.02032 0.02082 PASS 22.5 0.02011 0.02011 PASS 25 0.02127 0.02090 PASS 27.5 0.02090 0.02111 PASS 30 0.02105 0.02178 PASS Overall calibration result: Pass

• • • • • • • • • end of calibration report """"

AECOM Calibration Report for Horizontal Geophone: CTL s/n 4010 Time and Date of Calibration: Saturday, October 24, 2009 10:12:03 Calibrated by: SBB Signal Analyzer Brand: Nicolet Signal Analyzer Model Number: Photon Phazer Signal Analyzer Serial Number: 5317454 Signal Analyzer Traceability Certificate Number: AECOM 5317454 Dated March 3, 2009 Signal Analyzer Certificate Date: 03-03-09 Signal Analyzer Certificate Due Date: 03-03-10 Accelerometer Brand: PCB Accelerometer Model Number: 393B12 Accelerometer Traceability Certificate Number: 24462 Accelerometer Certificate Date: June 6, 2008 Accelerometer Certificate Due Date: June 6, 2010 Initial(as received)

Frequency (Hz) PCB Range (V) Geophone Range (V) 20 0.02031 0.02079 22.5 0.02113 0.02056 25 0.02198 0.02118 27.5 0.02076 0.02210 30 0.02123 0.02236 Final (calibrated)

Frequency (Hz) PCB Range (V) Geophone Range (V) Result 20 0.02022 0.02077 PASS 22.5 0.02036 0.01963 PASS 25 0.02023 0.01984 PASS 27.5 0.02076 0.02021 PASS 30 0.02109 0.02048 PASS Overall calibration result: Pass

• • • • • • • • • end of calibration report ""

I AECOM Calibration Report for Horizontal Geophone: AECOM s/n 1010 Time and Date of Calibration: Saturday, October 24, 2009 010:12:03 Calibrated by: SBB Signal Analyzer Brand: Nicolet Signal Analyzer Model Number: Photon Phazer Signal Analyzer Serial Number: 5317454 Signal Analyzer Traceability Certificate Number: AECOM 5317454 Dated March 3, 2009 Signal Analyzer Certificate Date: 03-03-09 Signal Analyzer Certificate Due Date: 03-03-10 Accelerometer Brand: PCB Accelerometer Model Number: 393B12 Accelerometer Traceability Certificate Number: 24462 Accelerometer Certificate Date: June 6, 2008 Accelerometer Certificate Due Date: June 6, 2010 Initial(as received)

Frequency (Hz) PCB Range (V) Geophone Range V) 20 0.02031 0.02193 22.5 0.02113 0.02211 25 0.02198 0.02129 27.5 0.02076 0.02276 30 0.02123 0.02189 Final (calibrated)

Frequency (Hz) PCB Range (V) Geophone Range (V) Result 20 0.02022 0.02103 PASS 22.5 0.02088 0.02137 PASS 25 0.02023 0.02074 PASS 27.5 0.02076 0.02098 PASS 30 0.02109 0.02177 PASS Overall calibration result: Pass

• • • • • • • • • end of calibration report ********

AECOM Calibration Report for Photon serial number: 5317454 Calibration software library version: 6.050 FEB version: 1.50 Time and Date of Calibration: Monday, March 02, 2009 13:35:11 Calibrated by: BHH )

Signal Analyzer Brand: HP Signal Analyzer Model Number: HP3560 Signal Analyzer Serial Number: 3019A00190 Signal Analyzer Traceability Certificate Number: N/A Signal Analyzer Certificate NDate: 01-31-05 Signal Analyzer Certificate Due Date: 01-31-10 Front end DSP box Serial Number = 5317454 Number of Settings to Test for Output Channels = 1 Number of Output Channels = 1 Number of Settings to Test for Input Channels =2 Number of Input Channels =4 Initial (uncalibrated) Output Channel Offsets (volts)

Channel 10.0 Volt Range Drive -0.004800 Initial (uncalibrated) Output Channel Gain Error (percentage)

Channel 10.0 Volt Range Drive -1.380674 Final (calibrated) Output Channel Offsets (volts)

Channel 10.0 Volt RangeResults Drive 0.000000 Pass Final (calibrated) Output Channel Gain Error (percentage)

Channel 10.0 Volt RangeResults Drive 0.000000 Pass

AECOM Initial (uncalibrated) Input Channel Offsets (volts)

Channel Number 10.0 Volt Range1.0 Volt Range 1 0.026743 0.002197 2 0.014310 0.001674 3 -0.035599 -0.004321 4 0.070274 0.007020 Initial (uncalibrated) Input Channel Gain Error (percentage)

Channel Number 10.0 Volt Range1.0 Volt Range 1 3.185332 3.990946 2 6.228880 7.156713 3 4.975634 5.288795 4 7.071058 7.858483 Final (calibrated) Input Channel Offsets (in volts)

Channel Number 10.0 Volt Range1.0 Volt Range Results 1 0.000128 0.000006 Pass 2 0.000076 0.000018 Pass 3 0.000028 0.000006 Pass 4 0.000067 0.000012 Pass Final (calibrated) Input Channel Gain Error (percentage)

Channel Number 10.0 Volt Rangel.0 Volt Range Results 1 0.009708 0.011301 Pass 2 0.013952 0.015712 Pass 3 0.009127 0.008249 Pass 4 0.012102 0.011861 Pass Overall calibration result: Pass

• • • • • • • • • end of calibration report "'

AECOM Calibration of Impulse Response Geophones CTL Group Skokie, Illinois October 26, 2009 Prepared by:

Sean B Brady Instrumentation Specialist AECOM USA, Inc.

Telephone: 847-279-2500

AECOM 750 Corporate Woods Parkway, Vernon Hills, IL 60061 T 847.279.2500 F 847.279.2510 ww.aecom.com October 26, 2009 CTL Group Honggang Cao P.E, S.E 5420 Old Orchard Road Skokie, Illinois 60077 RE: Annual Calibration of Impulse Response Geophones sin

Dear Mr. Honggang Cao:

We are pleased to present our calibration report for the Impulse Response geophones that AECOM calibrated on Monday October 26, 2009.

The Horizontal Geophone with serial number 4003 is within calibration specifications for the Smash Impulse Response Testing System. Please find attached to this letter the calibration records for the Geophone calibrated and the equipment used to perform this calibration and.

We thank you for this opportunity to be of service to you, and remain available for any further consultation or discussion that you may require. If you have any questions concerning the contents of the attached calibration documents, please call Sean Brady at 847.279.2425.

Respectfully, Sean B Brady Instrumenttion Specialist Attachments:

Calibration Sheet's CTL Impulse Response Geophones Calibration Sheet Nicolet Phazer 4 Channel Acquisition System Calibration Sheet PCB 393B12 Accelerometer

IAECOM Calibration Report for Vertical Geophone: CTL sin 4003 Time and Date of Calibration: Monday, October 26, 2009 12:14:23 Calibrated by: SBB Signal Analyzer Brand: Nicolet Signal Analyzer Model Number: Photon Phazer Signal Analyzer Serial Number: 5317454 Signal Analyzer Traceability Certificate Number: AECOM 5317454 Dated March 3, 2009 Signal Analyzer Certificate Date: 03-03-09 Signal Analyzer Certificate Due Date: 03-03-10 Accelerometer Brand: PCB Accelerometer Model Number: 393B12 Accelerometer Traceability Certificate Number: 24462 Accelerometer Certificate Date: June 6, 2008 Accelerometer Certificate Due Date: June 6, 2010 Initial (as received)

Frequency (Hz) PCB Range (V) Geophone Range (V) 20 0.02120 0.02061 22.5 0.02119 0.02009 25 0.02087 0.02111 27.5 0.02072 0.02310 30 0.02112 0.02253 Final (calibrated)

Frequency (Hz) PCB Range (V) Geophone Range (V) Result 20 0.02066 0.02097 PASS 22.5 0.02138 0.02106 PASS 25 0.02088 0.02105 PASS 27.5 0.02039 0.02038 PASS 30 0.02146 0.02082 PASS Overall calibration result: Pass

• • • • • • • • • end of calibration report ** ....

AECOM Calibration Report for Photon serial number: 5317454 Calibration software library version: 6.050 FEB version: 1.50 Time and Date of Calibration: Monday, March 02, 2009 13:35:11 Calibrated by: BHH Signal Analyzer Brand: HP Signal Analyzer Model Number: HP3560 Signal Analyzer Serial Number: 3019A00190 Signal Analyzer Traceability Certificate Number: N/A Signal Analyzer Certificate Date: 01-31-05 Signal Analyzer Certificate Due Date: 01-31-10 Front end DSP box Serial Number = 5317454 Number of Settings to Test for Output Channels = 1 Number of Output Channels =1 Number of Settings to Test for Input Channels =2 Number of Input Channels =4 Initial (uncalibrated) Output Channel Offsets (volts)

Channel 10.0 Volt Range Drive -0.004800 Initial (uncalibrated) Output Channel Gain Error (percentage)

Channel 10.0 Volt Range Drive -1.380674 Final (calibrated) Output Channel Offsets (volts)

Channel 10.0 Volt RangeResults Drive 0.000000 Pass Final (calibrated) Output Channel Gain Error (percentage)

Channel 10.0 Volt RangeResults Drive 0.000000 Pass

AECOM Initial (uncalibrated) Input Channel Offsets (volts)

Channel Number 10.0 Volt Rangel.0 Volt Range 1 0.026743 0.002197 2 0.014310 0.001674 3 -0.035599 -0.004321 4 0.070274 0.007020 Initial (uncalibrated) Input Channel Gain Error (percentage)

Channel Number 10.0 Volt Rangel.0 Volt Range 1 3.185332 3.990946 2 6.228880 7.156713 3 4.975634 5.288795 4 7.071058 7.858483 Final (calibrated) Input Channel Offsets (in volts)

Channel Number 10.0 Volt Rangel.0 Volt Range Results 1 0.000128 0.000006 Pass 2 0.000076 0.000018 Pass 3 0.000028 0.000006 Pass 4 0.000067 0.000012 Pass Final (calibrated) Input Channel Gain Error (percentage)

Channel Number 10.0 Volt Rangel.0 Volt Range Results 1 0.009708 0.011301 Pass 2 0.013952 0.015712 Pass 3 0.009127 0.008249 Pass 4 0.012102 0.011861 Pass Overall calibration result: Pass

• • • • • • • • • end of calibration report *********

CalibrationCertificate - Per ISO 16063-21 Model Number: 393B12 Serial Number: 24462

Description:

ICP Accelerometer Method: Back-to-Back Comparison (AT401-3)

Manufacturer: PCB CalibrationData Sensitivity @ 100.0 Hz 10.34 V/g Output Bias 11.6 VDC (1.054 V/m/s2 ) Transverse Sensitivity 2.6  %

Discharge Time Constant 6.9 seconds Resonant Frequency 12.4 kHz Sensitivity Plot Temperature: 69 'F (21 °C) Relative Humidity: 41 %

Ji U 1 2.0-1.0-0.0-dB

-1.0-

-2.0-

-3.01....

10.0 100.0 1000.0 Hz Data Points Frequency (Hz) Dev. (%) Frequency (Hz) Dev. (%)

10.0 0.9 300.0 -1.0 15.0 0.9 500.0 -0.9 30.0 0.8 1000.0 -1.3 50.0 0.5 REF. FREQ. 0.0 Mounting Surface: StoinlesSteeln!SiliconeGreaseCotuing Fastener: StudMaunt FixtureOrientation: Vertical Acceleration.*leel(norsi': 0.100V (0.981oras'

'The ureeleration letel nmabe limitedb. shaler displacement at lowfrequencies.If the listedlevel canoetbeobtained. sstemusesthefollowisg formulasosetthe ibraion amplitude:Acceleration the calibration Level Sl - 0.010(freql MThe lovitalioual constant usedforcalculations by the calibrationsystemis: 18 9.80665 mesI.

Condition of Unit As Found: n/a As Left: Ne'w Unit. In Tolerance Notes I. Calibration is NIST Traceable thru Project 822/274086 and PTB Traceable thru Project 1060.

2. This certificate shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval from PCB Piezotronics, Inc.

3. Calibration is performed in compliance with ISO 9001, ISO 10012-1, ANSI[NCSL Z540-1-1994 and ISO 17025.

4. See Manufacturer's Specification Sheet for a detailed listing of performance specifications.

5. Measurement uncertainty (95% confidence level with coverage factor of 2) for frequency ranges tested during calibration are as follows: 5-9 Hz: -+/- 2.0%, 10-99 Hz; +/- 1.5%, 100-1999 Hz; +/- 1.0%, 2-10 kHz; +/- 2.5%.

Technician: Brian Kemp&/ef* Date: 06/1 8/08 0;0PCB PIEZO TRONICS VVIBRATION OMSION Headquarters: 3425 Walden Avenue, Depew, NY 14043 CALIBRATION CERT 81862.02 Calibration Performed at: 10869 Highway 903, Halifax, NC 27839 PAGE I of 2 TEL: 888-684-0013 - FAX: 716-685-3886 - www.i~cb.com cal4g -321065230b 97 11111 11111 111111111111111 11111 11111 1111111111~IIII11111 111111111111111 1111111111 11111 111111111111111 11111

605 -rjual International Country Club~r Work Order/ Cert Number 103238- 5357- 103248 Bensenville, IL60106 ELECTRONIC MEASUREMENT SERVICES (610) 238-8100 LIBRATION CArit"cae CERTIFICATE or any Derlaof ,shell AND b* reor'odused, without wolfen, eonmvelDATA fiom Tru CalSHEET int'l lnc, Page 1

,.n,'ai~so shfbrwdtý auwte nrvlfonTuClItlIc SHIP ITUALDUDR Dynamic Signal Analyzer 3109A00190 STS Cosultants Description Serial No.

750 Corporate Woods Pkwy Hewlett Packard TC12807 Vernon Hills, IL 60061 Manufacturer Control No. Asset No.

3560A Charles Brown Manufacturer 3560A Model Number Department 365 1/31/2005 P.O. Number cycle Cal Date Location.cust Release Number Received Codtion R In Tolerance [ In Tolerance/Cal Only IO Field Service Required 0 Power Cord D Out Of Tolerance LI Limited Use [o Data Required 10 Service Manual

[ Inoperative/Req. Repair LI Service Only o Outside Service 0O Test Probes

[ Service Only LI Return As Is IR Non Accredited Service 10 Cable Assembly

[3 Evaluation Only El Repair Only [o Add To Agreement 0O Connectors LI In Tolerance/After Repair O Warranty Service 0 Supplemental Cert b I L Envimmedne Condilons Fault/Symptom 32.99 °F 39.55 %RH Procedure Used IN Mfg. Technical Evaluation 0 Other HP 3560A Work Performed Verified ManufacturersSpecifications.

c to5 M U A I l N A460 Fluke 5500 SC Calibrator 10/27/2005 1899.01 QA A569 HP 3325B Generator 10/6/2005 101437-0142-101447

.P"ater Tested/Tes S N A Limit + Limt As Found As Left i

[3 nTiscaiboration Is in compliance witn 45)O02A,iSO-UU1 :2uu,00. [ / i -:4U,lbU 1u1 z,IU/II. 1U" III ser0ll provide a 4: 1 uncerainty raa unless otherwise stated. The uncertainty ratio was calculated using the expanded measurement uncertainty at the 95% lopfilce 1e1 an4 with a co age factor K=2. Traceable to N.I.S.T. and or Fundamental or Natural physical constants, 2901accented ttiometric. es.

es be 'Dj1Acee Received by Rec'd Date Tech InUal CenfivedIy

/wArmlau DY

GERMANN INSTRUMENTS, INC.

8845 Forest View Road

• Evanston, Illinois 60203-1924 USA Phone: (847) 329-9999

• Fax: (847) 329-8888 E-mail: germannogermann.or

• Web site: http://www.germann.org October 22, 2009 Calibration certificate for s'MASH omniphone No. 7051 for 3600 testing.

Calibration Value: 20 mV/(m/s)

Technician: BH Next recommended calibration date: October 22, 2010 or sooner if damaged.

• 1- _

Mr. Paul Fagan, PE Appendix F Progress Energy January 22, 2010 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 APPENDIX F.3 Calibration Records of Accelerometers for IE

" PCB Accelerometer 352A60 SN 106253 (1 page)

• PCB Accelerometer WJ352A78 SN 69808 (1 page)

CT GROUP Gu"d186Knowledge. elieing Resuts. www.CTLGroup~com

CalibrationCertificate

• 1 Per ISO 16063-21 M~'odel Nunibetr: 3152 360 Scrial Number: 106523 Decscription: I.PO Accelerometer Method: Back-to-Black Comparison (ATl101-3)

Mlliu tfct itrer: PC 13 CalibrationData Sensitiv'ity (if) 100.011lZ 9.90 mV/g Output Bias 10.9 VDIC 2

(1.009 mV/m/s ) Transverse Sensitivity 0.9  %

Sensitivity Plot Tcmlperature: 72 "F (22 '() lRali:ve llmiditv: :2%

2.0" 1.0-dB13 0.0f

-1.0

-2 .0.

3-30" , . , . . ,L I .0.....0 5.0 10.0 100.0 1000. 10000.0 I1z Data Points Frequency (IIz) l)ev. (%) Frequency (INz) l)ev. (3/4) I[requency (l1,/) Dcv. (3/4) 5.0 -9.7 RlE'. FREIQ. 0.0 5000.0 -4.3 10.0 -1.5 300.0 -1,1 7000.0 -5.0 15.0 -0.0 500.0 -1.6 1000.0 -5.8 30.0 0.7 1000.0 -2.3 50.0 0.4 3000,. -3.5 tltoitufh.Suictýc S~iiiSciiSicio ici r~it' hc ii Slid Miioom iimiic Oiinotm Voico:'clc Dil( l) icq'1 T iw c I Ustnwcd for i;,icitioii u.,*t*c.h IIIh*Citoiiitic h*ti 'c ,lit is: I . : IlJirAS iiitil.

Col ditioni of Unit As ~ -0_;!

I~ud As Lell: New Unit. Ini Tolerance ........

Notes I. Calibration is NISTl Traccable thru Project 822/277342 and PI'l3 TIraceabil c1hru ProJect 1251.

2. This certificate shill not be reproduced, excepl in lull, without written1 appllOv rIMlIn PCto PiB ol ronics. Inc.

. Cali brat on is performecd in compliance with ISC) 9001, ISO 10012-1. ANSI/NCSI. Z540-1-1994 and ISO 17025.

4. See Man ulacturcrs Specification Sheet lor a detailed listing of performance speciflications.

5. NiCas uieCm ct tlnClI 'l:1lhit (95W confidence level with coverage factor o(I2) for lr{cquenicy ranges tested (luring calibration aic xafollo\vs: 5-9 1i1: Z.- 2.0/%, 10-99 lHz; 1/- 1.5%. 100-1999 1Iz; -/- 1.0%. 2-10 kI lIz/- 2.5%.

Technician: Mary \Varrci jVl*,j,) DaI)ate: 101/01/09 wPCBPIEZOTRONIC. VIBRATION DIMISION

..'A~....... S CALIBRATION CERT (1802 .0 125 Waden Avesue tl)ptw, NY 14043 I 888-684-0{1 FAX: 716-085-3886 -8v\ ipcb.com H MI PAW;Ii Wi 2 lii11111 1111111111 1111111111 IIli11Ili1111111111 Hi1111111H HiiiM1111M11111 11M11M 11111 11111ll11111

CalibrationCertificate Per ISO 16063-21 1

Model Number: WJ352A78/002C30 Serial Number: 69808

Description:

IC0 Accelerometer Method: Back-to-Back Comparison (AT40I-3)

Manufacturer: PCI3 CalibrationData Sensitivity @W 100.0 liz 95.3 mV/g Output Bias 11.6 VDC (9.72 nmV/m/sl) Transverse Sensitivity 0.1  %

Resonant Frequency 45.1 kHz Sensitivity Plot "renmperatur~e: 73 '1-(23 'Q) Relative liumidity: 42 %

I1 31. ____________

2a.0 1.0-'

d13 0.0- X

-1.0-

-2,0-

-3.0--

10.0 100.0 1000.0 10000.0 1-lZ Data Points FIre(uLency (11y) Dev. (%) FIrequency (Hlz) Dev. (%) Frequency (0z) I)ev. (%)

10.0 1.6 300.0 -1.0 7000.0 -0.7 15.0 1.5 500.0 -1.4 10000.0 3.4 30.0 1.0 1000.0 -2.0 50.0 0.5 3000.0 -2.1 REF. FREQ. 0.0 5000.0 -2.1 Ace~atre LOAe(ons.4: letI 1 (tIML",)2 lie ireedb., IhaIW, 1,11wwoele, a,ton, lmevl1.0 ulripitenteir.t 1- ft~qII6fC's. If thekwd Ikrjl cau t oel irerb1,d. tikccalilbrtmoir v w~ltbr1, foellerrtme flntrmrmrl1.

motirerbmxlrrr iet. Ariw3.lh Arlllre: level (g)

-00106x (her1) 1 1C1' eIr 1,0 w~r a C( Sm~ti"sed fo, olodari otor by Oweeuhil-frim,1-jer 11 SYS u I g L J665 11, Con ditlon of Unlit As F'ound: n/a ______ _______________

As Left: News U~nit. In, Tolerance Notes I. Calibration is NIST Traceable thru Project 822/277342 and PTB Traceable thru Project 1254.

2. This certificate shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval firom PCB Piezotronics, Inc.

3. Calibration is performed in compliance with ISO 9001, ISO 10012-1, ANSI/NCSL Z540-1-1994 and ISO 17025.

4. See Manufacturer"S Specification Sheet For a detailed listing of performance specifications.

5. Measurement uncertainly (95% confidence level with coverage factor of 2) for frequency ranges tested duItrinlg calibration are as follows: 5-9 Hz; 4/- 2.0%. 10-99 Hz; 1-- 1.5%, 100-1999 Hz: l/- 1.0%. 2-10 kl-lz: 1/- 2.5%.

Technician: Dave Grotke

• __Date: 10/27/09

' PCBPIEZOTRONICS. VIBRATION DIVISION CALIBRATIlON CERT 4186 2.01 3,125 Walden AeueIm Depew, NY 1,1043 VA1(I0 or I TEL: 888-684-0013 - FAX: 716-685-3886 vv.pcb.com eal4- .133.1918316 12 1111111111 Ii~II 11111 11111 11111 11111 Hil 11111 11111 li i! 11111111111111111111 11111 Ill/I 11111 111111 li i

t5 A z,1-. /'

-r /s FM 5.8 Exhibit 3b F Daae 1 of 3 Copy No. 1 Report for N Progress Energy CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Petrographic Examination of Concrete Half Core from Delaminated Containment Wall, Crystal River, Florida November 2, 2009 Submitted by:

Derek Brown COA #4731 5400 Old Orchard Road Skokie, Illinois 60077-1030 (847) 965-7500 9030 Red Branch Road, Suite 110 Columbia, Maryland 21045 www.CTLGroup.com "ICGROUP B u i I d .i n g K n o w Ie d g e D e I i v e r in g R e s u ,1 t s CTLGroup is a registered d/b/a of Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc.

a 1 .

FM 5.8 Exhibit 3b Raaae 2 of 3 Pag*3 of 10 Progress Energy Crystal River November 2, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 For thin-section study, small rectangular blocks were cut from the core inner surface fracture region and within the body of the core. One side of each block was lapped to produce a smooth, flat surface. The blocks were cleaned and dried, and the prepared surfaces mounted on separate ground glass microscope slides with epoxy resin. After the epoxy hardened, the thickness of the mounted blocks was reduced to approximately 20 gtm (0.0008 in.). The resulting thin sections were examined using a polarized-light (petrographic) microscope at magnifications up to 400X to study aggregate and paste mineralogy and microstructure.

Estimated water-cement ratio (w/c), when reported, is based on observed concrete and paste properties including, but not limited to: 1) relative amounts of residual (unhydrated and partially hydrated) portland cement clinker particles, 2) amount and size of calcium hydroxide crystals,

3) paste hardness, color, and luster, 4) paste-aggregate bond, and 5) relative absorbency of paste as indicated by the readiness of a freshly fractured surface to absorb applied water droplets. These techniques have been widely used by industry professionals to estimate w/c.

Depth and pattern of paste carbonation was initially determined by application of a pH indicator solution (phenolphthalein) to freshly cut and original fractured concrete surfaces. The solution imparts a deep magenta stain to high pH, non-carbonated paste. Carbonated paste does not change color. The extent of paste carbonation was confirmed in thin-section.

40ýa Derek Brown Senior Microscopist Microscopy Group DB/DB Notes: 1. Results refer specifically to the sample submitted.

2. This report may not be reproduced except in its entirety.

3. The sample will be retained for 30 days, after which it will be discarded unless we hear otherwise from you.

S'dir Kn O.wiRf W www.CTLGroup.com

'A

FM 5.8 Exhibit 3b page 3 of 3 Progress Energy P ge 0 of 10 Crystal River November 2, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 to 0.4 in.). Somewhat uneven distribution of voids. Marginally air entrained based on the very low volume of moderate to small sized spherical air voids in the hardened cement paste.

Depth of Carbonation: 4 to 5 mm (0.16 to 0.20 in.) as measured from the outer surface.

Negligible when measured from the inner fractured core surface.

Calcium Hydroxide*: Estimated 6 to 12% of small to medium sized crystals evenly distributed throughout the paste, and around aggregate to paste interfaces. Estimation of the volume is difficult due to the presence of calcite fines in the cement paste.

Residual Portland Cement Clinker Particles*: Estimated 4 to 8%. Some large cement particles, particularly belite clusters, of up to 0.15 mm in size suggest a portland cement as produced more than 30 years ago.

Supplementary Cementitious Materials*: None observed by the core supplied.

Secondary Deposits: None observed either in the body of the core and or near the fracture surface.

MICROCRACKING: A small number of medium length (5 to 10 mm), randomly orientated microcracks are evenly distributed throughout the body of the core. At the fractured end of the core there was no observed increase in microcracking relative to the body of the core.

ESTIMATED WATER-CEMENT RATIO: Moderate to moderately high (0.50 to 0.60) but estimation may be biased upwards due to the well advanced degree of hydration / apparent old age of the concrete.

MISCELLANEOUS:

1. Water droplets applied to freshly fractured surfaces were somewhat slowly absorbed by the hardened cement paste.

2. Some small areas of the inner fractured surface of the core, as received, exhibit a thin white haze of efflorescence-like substance suggesting leaching of lime in solution from within the core, or altematively, moisture on or flowing past the fractured surface at the delamination position within the wall.

3. A moderate volume of fine calcite particles is present within the hardened cement paste, most likely from coarse aggregate crusher fines.

percent by volume of paste S i

• bh *IIIA www.CTLGroup.com

1 6 FM 5.5 Exhibit 3b -r~13( ?f9?- cfl page 1 of 3 Copy No. I Report for Progress Energy CTLGroup Project No. 059169 Petrographic Examination of Concrete Half Core from Delaminated Containment Wall, Crystal .River, Florida November 2, 2009 Submitted by:

Derek Brown COA #4731 5400 Old Orchard Road Skokie, Illinois 60077-1030 (847) 965-7500 9030 Red Branch Road, Suite 110 Columbia, Maryland 21045 www.CTLGroup.com B I udi n K n o w Ie d 9 e Del iverin/Results.

CTLGroup is a registered d/b/a of Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc.

FM 5.5 Exhibit 3b page 2 of 3 Progress Energy Page 3 of 10 Crystal River November 2, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 For thin-section study, small rectangular blocks were cut from the core inner surface fracture region and within the body of the core. One side of each block was lapped to produce a smooth, flat surface. The blocks were cleaned and dried, and the prepared surfaces mounted on separate ground glass microscope slides with epoxy resin. After the epoxy hardened, the thickness of the mounted blocks was reduced to approximately 20 gm (0.0008 in.). The resulting thin sections were examined using a polarized-light (petrographic) microscope at magnifications up to 400X to study aggregate and paste mineralogy and microstructure.

Estimated water-cement ratio (w/c), when reported, is based on observed concrete and paste properties including, but not limited to: 1) relative amounts of residual (unhydrated and partially hydrated) portland cement clinker particles, 2) amount and size of calcium hydroxide crystals,

3) paste hardness, color, and luster, 4) paste-aggregate bond, and 5) relative absorbency of paste as indicated by the readiness of a freshly fractured surface to absorb applied water droplets. These techniques have been widely used by industry professionals to estimate w/c.

Depth and pattern of paste carbonation was initially determined by application of a pH indicator solution (phenolphthalein) to freshly cut and original fractured concrete surfaces. The solution imparts a deep magenta stain to high pH, non-carbonated paste. Carbonated paste does not change color. The extent of paste carbonation was confirmed in thin-section.

40ýa /30-ýý1%

Derek Brown Senior Microscopist Microscopy Group DB/DB Notes: 1. Results refer specifically to the sample submitted.

2. This report may not be reproduced except in its entirety.

3. The sample will be retained for 30 days, after which it will be discarded unless we hear otherwise from you.

g kmis -DupWRsAiLwww.CTLGrnupcorm FM 5.5 Exhibit 3b 01/01/10 page 2 of 3

FM 5.5 Exhibit 3b page 3 of 3 Progress Energy Page 10 of 10 Crystal River November 2, 2009 CTLGroup Project No. 059169 to 0.4 in.). Somewhat uneven distribution of voids. Marginally air entrained based on the very low volume of moderate to small sized spherical air voids in the hardened cement paste.

Depth of Carbonation: 4 to 5 mm (0.16 to 0.20 in.) as measured from the outer surface.

Negligible when measured from the inner fractured core surface.

Calcium Hydroxide*: Estimated 6 to 12% of small to medium sized crystals evenly distributed throughout the paste, and around aggregate to paste interfaces. Estimation of the volume is difficult due to the presence of calcite fines in the cement paste.

Residual Portland Cement Clinker Particles*: Estimated 4 to 8%. Some large cement particles, particularly belite clusters, of up to 0.15 mm in size suggest a portland cement as produced more than 30 years ago.

Supplementary Cementitious Materials*: None observed by the core supplied.

Secondary Deposits: None observed either in the body of the core and or near the fracture surface.

MICROCRACKING: A small number of medium length (5 to 10 mm), randomly orientated microcracks are evenly distributed throughout the body of the core. At the fractured end of the core there was no observed increase in microcracking relative to the body of the core.

ESTIMATED WATER-CEMENT RATIO: Moderate to moderately high (0.50 to 0.60) but estimation may be biased upwards due to the well advanced degree of hydration / apparent old age of the concrete.

MISCELLANEOUS:

1. Water droplets applied to freshly fractured surfaces were somewhat slowly absorbed by the hardened cement paste.

2. Some small areas of the inner fractured surface of the core, as received, exhibit a thin white haze of efflorescence-like substance suggesting leaching of lime in solution from within the core, or alternatively, moisture on or flowing past the fractured surface at the delamination position within the wall.

3. A moderate volume of fine calcite particles is present within the hardened cement paste, most likely from coarse aggregate crusher fines.

• percent by volume of paste SBI K ,ws DwIgRhaft. www.CTLGroup.com FM 5.5 Exhibit 3b 01/01/10 page 3 of 3