ML103060071
| ML103060071 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 09/30/2002 |
| From: | Kleinsmith S GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| DRF #0000-0007-9747, GE-NE-0000-0007-9747, Rev 1 | |
| Download: ML103060071 (59) | |
Text
Attachment 2 "The Evaluation of Indications in Peach Bottom Unit 2 Vessel Closure Head For Continued Operation,"
Report Number GE-NE-0000-0007-9747, September 2002
GE Nuclear Energy ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY GE Nuclear Energy 175 Curtner Avenue, San Jose, CA 95125 GE-NE-0000-0007-9747 Rev. 1 DRF #0000-0007-9747 Class H September 2002 THE EVALUATION OF INDICATIONS IN PEACH BOTTOM UNIT 2 VESSEL CLOSURE HEAD FOR CONTINUED OPERATION September 2002 Prepared for Exelon Corp.
Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 2 I
GENE 0000-0007.9747, Rev. 1 THE EVALUATION OF INDICATIONS IN PEACH BOTTOM UNIT 2 VESSEL CLOSURE HEAD FOR CONTINUED OPERATION September 2002 Prepared by:
S. Kleinsmid, Engindr 7'
Structural Mechanics & Materials Verified by:
H.
- A A +. A H.S. Mehta, Engineering Fellow O;onno -
Structural Mechanics & Materials Approved by:
- 6.
)a /!Q R.M. Horn, Manager Structural Mechanics & Materials i
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1 DISCLAIMER OF RESPONSIBILITY Important Notice Regarding the Contents of this Report Please Read Carefully The only undertakings of the General Electric Company (GE) respecting information in this document are contained in the contract between Exelon Corporation and GE, Purchase Order 01026357 Revision 5, effective 8/28/02, as amended to the date of transmittal of this document, and nothing contained in this document shall be construed as changing the contract.
The use of this information by anyone other than Exelon Corporation, or for any purpose other than that for which it is furnished by GE, is not authorized; and with respect to any unauthorized use, GE makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, and assumes no liability as to the completeness, accuracy, or usefulness of the information contained in this document, or that its use may not infringe privately owned rights.
Copyright, General Electric Company, 2002.
ii
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1 Table of Contents Subjec Page No.
- 1.
EXECUTIVE SUM M ARY..................................................................................
1 1.1.
R E F E R E N C E..................................................................................................................................
1
- 2.
INTRODUCTION AND REPORT OUTLINE....................................................
2 2.1.
REFERENCE..................................................................................................................................
2
- 3.
UT INSPECTION RESULTS & FLAW GEOMETRY FOR EVALUATION........ 4 3.1.
UT INSPECTION RESULTS...................................................................................................
4 3.2.
FLAW GEOMETRIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION...................................................
4 3.3.
FABRICATION REVIEW........................................................................................................
5 3.4.
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................
5
- 4.
FRACTURE M ECHANICS EVALUATION...................................................... 12 4.1.
ASSUMPTIONS...........................................................................................................................
12 4.2.
APPLIED AND WELD RESIDUAL STRESSES..................................................................
12 4.3.
K CALCULATION METHODOLOGY.................................................................................
13 4.4.
FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH................................................................................................
14 4.5.
ALLOW ABLE K VALUES......................................................................................................
14 4.6.
DISPOSITION OF INDICATIONS.........................................................................................
15 4.7.
REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................
16
- 5.
SUM M ARY AND CONCLUSIONS.................................................................. 20 APPENDIX A.....................................................................................................................
A APPENDIX B.....................................................................................................................
B iii
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1
- 1.
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
The reactor pressure vessel closure head at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 2 (PBAPS-2) was ultrasonically examined during refueling outage fourteen (2R-14).
Each of the six meridional welds was examined. Several indications were noted at these welds. Other than the CH-MB weld, the detected indications at the other meridional welds were acceptable as-is by the acceptance standards IWB-35 10 of ASME Section XI (1989 Edition without Addenda). At the CH-MB weld numerous recordable indications were noted out of which eighteen (18) indications/flaws displayed tip signals and possessed a through-wall dimension.
Sixteen (16) of these flaws did not meet the acceptance standards.
The Section XI Code allows for the acceptance of such flaws for continued service if they meet the requirements of Paragraph IWB-3600, Analytical Evaluation of Flaws. The analysis involves the use of fracture mechanics procedures in accordance with Appendix A of Section XI. The objective of this report is to document the results of such evaluation.
The use of surface proximity rules of Section XI indicated that all sixteen (16) indications need to be characterized as surface flaws for the purposes of fracture mechanics evaluation. Two conditions were deternined to be governing: bolt-up and system pressure test. The bounding membrane and bending stress values for the fracture mechanics evaluation for the two conditions were obtained through a review of previous stress analyses of the closure heads. The bolt-up temperature was assumed as 70'F [1-1
& 1-2] at a pressure of 0 psi and the pressure test temperature was assumed as 169°F [1-1] with a pressure of 1050 psi [1-1]. The stress intensity factors for the characterized surface flaws were calculated for various flaw depth (a) to flaw length (1) ratios (or, aspect ratios). It was determined that the pressure-test condition was governing. The limiting flaw was found to be acceptable per ASME Section XI Code even after accounting for projected crack growth for the life of the plant including license renewal (60 total years).
Based on this evaluation it is concluded that all of the indications found in PBAPS-2 vessel closure head during Refueling Outage (2R-14) are acceptable by the flaw acceptance criteria of the ASME Section XI Code.
1.1.
REFERENCE
[1-1]
Exelon Nuclear, Peach Bottom Unit 2, Surveillance Test Specification ST-O-080-680-2, Rev. 6: Reactor Pressure Vessel (Class 1) Hydrostatic Pressure Test.
[1-2]
PECO Energy Company, Peach Bottom Unit 2, Surveillance Test Specification ST-O-080-500-2, Rev. 7: Recording and Monitoring Reactor Vessel Temperature and Pressure.
I
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1
- 2.
INTRODUCTION AND REPORT OUTLINE The reactor pressure vessel closure head at Peach Bottom, Unit 2 (PBAPS-2) was ultrasonically examined during the 2R14 refueling outage.
Figure 2-1 shows the geometry of the vessel head. The inside radius of the head is 125.69 inches and the minimum specified thickness is 4.00 inches [2-11.
However, the measured thickness reported during the UT examination is 4.25 inches, the value used in the evaluations conducted for this report [2-2].
The inside surface of the closure head is unclad.
Meridional welds were examined. Several flaws were noted in the meridional weld CH-MB. All of the flaws are not ID connected (i.e. sub surface) as confirmed by surface examination conducted at the ID surface. However, portions of the flaws are less than 0.4d from the ID surface, thus they were classified as surface flaws for fracture mechanics analysis. The observed flaws were first characterized and compared with the acceptance standards provided in Table IWB-3500-1 of Section XI, ASME Code [2-3].
Some of the flaws did not meet the acceptance standards.Section XI, subparagraph IWB-3132.4 allows for the acceptance of such flaws for continued service if they meet the requirements of Paragraph IWB-3600, Analytical Evaluation of Flaws. The analysis involves the use of fracture mechanics procedures in accordance with Appendix A of Reference 2-3. The objective of this report is to document the results of such evaluation.
Section 3 of this report summarizes UT inspection results and describes the flaw geometries considered in the evaluation. The results of the fracture mechanics evaluation are presented in Section 4. A comparison with the allowable flaw values is presented.
Finally, summary and conclusions are presented in Section 5.
2.1.
REFERENCE
[2-1]
Babcock & Wilcox CO. Pressure Boundary Drawing, "Closure Head Assembly" for Peach Bottom Unit 2, Drawing # 129392 E R7, GE VPF# 1896-67-8.
[2-2]
GE Nuclear Energy, Peach Bottom Unit 2 - 2R14 UT Examination Report #
008900 for Weld ID - CH-MB Meridional Weld @ 60 Degrees. September 27, 2002.
[2-3]
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, Rules for In-Service Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components, ASME, 1989 Edition without Addenda.
2
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1 (OMMZIS AD*6 LOP Figure 2-1 PBAPS 2 Vessel Closure Head Geometry 3
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1
- 3.
UT INSPECTION RESULTS & FLAW GEOMETRY FOR EVALUATION This section discusses the UT results and the flaw geometries considered in the subsequent fracture mechanics evaluation. Appendix B shows the evaluation sheets for the limiting/bounding case flaws that were found to exceed acceptance standards and required fracture mechanics evaluation.
A brief discussion on the origin of the indications is also provided.
3.1.
UT INSPECTION RESULTS Automated 00L, 2.25 MHz, 45'S, 1.0 MHz, 60'L, 2.0 MHz, 70'L, 2.0 MHz scans were performed on the closure head meridional weld CH-MB.
The scans and calibrations were performed in accordance with procedure GE-UT-704 Version 4 DRR#
P3-001, that is qualified to the Performance Demolition Initiative (PDI). All of the detected flaws were sub-surface but in close proximity to the surface, thus they were classified as surface flaws for the analysis [Appendix A & B].
There were sixty-five (65) recordable indications detected in the CH-MB weld.
Eighteen (18) indications displayed tip signals and possessed a through wall dimension.
Forty-seven (47) indications without through wall dimension have been evaluated as being acceptable to the requirements of Table IWB-3510-1 [2-3].
Of the eighteen (18) remaining separate flaws, two (2) of the recorded flaws have been evaluated as being acceptable to the requirements of Table IWB-3510-1 [2-3]. Sixteen (16) of flaws have been evaluated as being rejectable to the requirements of Table IWB-3510-1.
These Sixteen (16) flaws are characterized in Table 3-2.
The GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheets for each indication can be found in the Appendix A. The GERIS 2000 Indication Evaluation Data Sheets for each flaw can be found in the Appendix B.
Figures 3-1-1 thru 3-1-3 shows the approximate locations of the indications relative to the CH-MB weld centerline.
3.2.
FLAW GEOMETRIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION Table 3-2 shows the criteria used to determine if the indications that are to be evaluated need to be characterized as surface or sub-surface type flaws for the purpose of fracture mechanics analysis. The guidance for this characterization is provided in Article IWA-3000 [2-3]. Figure 3-2 shows the parameters used for surface proximity evaluation.
It is seen in Table 3-2 that all of the indications are to be characterized as surface. In view of the varying aspect ratio (a/0, the stress intensity factors in the next section were calculated for different a/l values: 0.0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3,.0.4, and 0.5.
4
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1 3.3.
FABRICATION REVIEW All the indications in question are sub surface, in close proximity to the surface and are not service induced, but were considered as surface flaws for the fracture mechanics evaluation. A fabrication review (Reference 3-1) concluded the following:
- The flaws detected during 2R14 have existed since the closure head was fabricated.
- These flaws do not indicate "abnormal degradation of the pressure boundary" as defined by the USNRC.
- These flaws should be considered newly discovered flaws, rather than newly developed flaws.
Indications at vessel welds of the type seen in the Peach Bottom Unit 2 top head welds are not uncommon and have been found in other reactor pressure vessel welds in other plants. In most cases, the new finding is attributed to the ability of current UT techniques to detect flaws that would have been undetectable using inspection techniques available during the time of fabrication of the Peach Bottom vessel. Thus, as long as the required fracture margins are demonstrated, the indications are judged to be benign and have no impact on structural integrity.
3.4.
REFERENCES
[3-1]
Miller, W.F., "Investigation into the Origin of Ultrasonic Indications in RPV Closure Head Welds for the Peach Bottom 2R14 Outage," GE Report No. GENE-955-004-0902 Rev. 1, September 2002.
5
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I Table 3-1 Listing of Ultrasonic Indications in RPV Closure Head Weld CH-MB at Peach Bottom Unit 2 Number of Number of Acceptable per Weld ID Location Recordable Indications / flaws Table IWB-3510-1 Indications with through wall dimension CH-MB 600 Azimuth 65 18 2
(See description
(#10 & #39) below )
CH-MB IND # 5 Flaw length = 0.75" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" S = 0" IND # 6 Flaw length = 1.00" Flaw depth (a) = 0.20" S = 0" IND# 10 IND# 14 IND # 16 IND # 20 IND # 24 IND # 34 IND # 38 IND # 39 IND # 42 IND # 44 IND # 50 IND # 53 IND # 56 IND # 57 IND #161 Flaw length = 0.75" Flaw length = 1.75" Flaw length = 3.75" Flaw length = 1.25" Flaw length = 1.00" Flaw length = 0.75" Flaw length = 0.75" Flaw length = 0.40" Flaw length = 1.75" Flaw length = 0.75" Flaw length = 1.00" Flaw length = 0.75" Flaw length = 1.00" Flaw length = 1.00" Flaw length = 1.00" Flaw depth (a) = 0.10" Flaw depth (a) = 0.16" Flaw depth (a) = 0.25" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" Flaw depth (a) = 0.16" Flaw depth (a) = 0.19" Flaw depth (a) = 0.16" Flaw depth (a) = 0.19" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" Flaw depth (a) = 0.12" Flaw depth (a) = 0.14" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" Flaw depth (a) = 0.12" S = 0" S = 0"l S = 0"l S=0,,
S = 0"l S = 0"l S = 0"l S = 0"l S=0,,
S = 0"1 S = 0"l S = 0"9 S = 0" S = 0"l IND # 63 Flaw length = 1.50" Flaw depth (a) = 0.17" S = 0" Note: Values reported are taken directly from Appendix A & B.
6
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1 Table 3-2 Characterization of Flaws Weld ID IND #
I (in.)
(in.)
S (in.)
a/l CH-MB 5
0.75 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.2267 CH-MB 6
1.00 0.20 0.0 Yes 0.2 CH-MB 10 0.75 0.10 0.0 Yes 0.1334 CH-MB 14 1.75 0.16 0.0 Yes 0.0914 CH-MB 16 3.75 0.25 0.0 Yes 0.0667 CH-MB 20 1.25 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.136 CH-MB 24 1.00 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.17 CH-MB 34 0.75 0.16 0.0 Yes 0.2133 CH-MB 38 0.75 0.19 0.0 Yes 0.2534 CH-MB 39 0.40 0.16 0.0 Yes 0.4 CH-MB 42 1.75 0.19 0.0 Yes 0.1086 CH-MB 44 0.75 0.17 0.0-Yes 0.2267 CH-MB 50 1.00 0.12 0.0 Yes 0.12 CH-MB 53 0.75 0.14 0.0 Yes 0.1867 CH-MB 56 1.00 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.17 CH-MB 57 1.00 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.17 CH-MB 61 1.00 0.12 0.0 Yes 0.12 CH-MB 63 1.50 0.17 0.0 Yes 0.1134
- Flaw characterized as surface flaw if S < 0.4a.
7
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1
-.-*--WELD CENTERLINE UT INDICATIONS WITH NO THROUGH WALL DIMENSION Figure 3-1-1 Plot displaying Approx. Location of Indications with No Throughwall Dimension 8
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1 WELD CENTERLINE ACCEPTABLE UT INDICATIONS Figure 3-1-2 Plot displaying Approx. Location of Acceptable Indications with Throughwall Dimension 9
Figure 3-1-3 Plot displaying Approx. Location of Unacceptable UT Indications with Throughwall Dimension 10
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I Figure 3-2 Parameters for Surface Proximity Evaluation 11
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1
- 4.
FRACTURE MECHANICS EVALUATION The fracture mechanics evaluation was conducted for several surface flaw shape geometries using the procedures outlined in Appendix A of Section XI [4-1].
Two conditions were found to be limiting for the determination of allowable flaw sizes: (1) bolt-up, and (2) system pressure test.
4.1.
ASSUMPTIONS The following values were used for the pressure and temperature conditions during the bolt-up and system pressure test conditions. These values remain unchanged for power uprate conditions, but can change when new PT curves are licensed.
" The bolt-up temperature is 70'F [4-2 & 4-3].
- The pressure test pressure and temperature are 1050 psi and 169°F [4-4].
- The limiting RTNDT value for the closure head side plate (torus) region is 10°F.
[4-3]
The number of bolt-up, pressure test and start up-shut down events assumed in the fatigue crack growth calculation was based on [Reference 4-5], and is discussed in Subsection 4.4.
4.2.
APPLIED AND WELD RESIDUAL STRESSES The applied stresses in the vessel closure head to flange region are primarily from the following sources: bolt preload, internal pressure and weld residual stress.
The internal pressure is zero during the bolt-up. Since all of the flaws are in the meridional direction welds, the circumferential or hoop stress is of interest for the purpose of this evaluation. Due to the complex geometry of the flange region, only a detailed finite element analysis of PBAPS Unit 2 closure head geometry can provide a complete picture of the stress distribution due to bolt-up and internal pressure. Since such an analysis was unavailable, the results from finite element analyses conducted for other BWR vessels of similar size on file with GENE were reviewed to conservatively determine a set of membrane and bending stresses. The determination took into account the differences in the R/t ratios between the available finite element model geometry and the PBAPS, Unit 2 closure head geometry.
During bolt-up large hoop bending stresses are introduced in the head near the flange junction but they attenuate rapidly as one moves away from the flange meridionally. These bending stresses are compressive at the ID surface near the flange junction. The hoop membrane stress is tensile but attenuates less rapidly. The longest 12
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I flaw extends 3.75 inches in the meridional direction beginning approximately 41 inches above the top surface of the flange. Therefore, the hoop membrane and bending stress distributions corresponding to the meridional length of this indication were reviewed to determine the following conservative values for hoop membrane and bending stresses:
am= 14.0 ksi crb-
-8.0 ksi During the pressure test, the internal pressure stresses are superimposed over those induced by the bolt-up condition. Since some of the discontinuity related internal pressure stresses cancel those due to bolt-up, the overall stress level is lower than the simple addition of the bolt-up and the nominal pressure stresses in the vessel head. The same approach as that used for bolt-up case was also used to determine the following set of conservative membrane and bending stress values for the pressure test case:
am= 25.0 ksi 9b = 0 ksi It should be noted that the nominal value of hoop or meridional stress from an internal pressure of 1050 psi is 15.5 ksi. Thus, the difference between this value and the 25.0 ksi reported above represents the discontinuity effects from bolt-up and pressurization.
After the torus section plates are welded together, residual stresses remain due to thermal expansion and contraction. The post-weld heat treatment effectively reduces these residual stresses. A bending stress of 8.0 ksi was assumed in this analysis to model the remaining residual stresses. This bending stress closely approximates the measured cosine stress distribution for welds with PWHT reported in [Reference 4-6]. The 8 ksi magnitude was added algebraically to the calculated bending stresses due to bolt-up and pressure. Figures 4-1 and 4-2 graphically show the stress distributions used for the bolt-up and pressure test cases, respectively.
4.3.
K CALCULATION METHODOLOGY Since all of the analyzed indications have been characterized as surface flaws (Table 3-2), the stress intensity factor (K) calculation procedures specified for surface flaws in Appendix A of Section XI [4-1] were used. Table 4-1 shows the calculated values of K as a function of 'a' values for the pressure test cases for an assumed aspect ratio of 0.0. Similar calculations were also conducted for aspect ratios of 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5.
13
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rep. 1 4.4.
FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH Since all the flaws are characterized as surface flaws, they are assumed as being exposed to the reactor water environment.
Thus, the crack growth analysis was performed using the Section XI fatigue crack growth rates for water environment.
The current analyzed reactor pressure vessel cycles for the 40-year design life are listed in [Reference 4-5].
Only the bolt-up (66), hydrostatic test (130) and heatup-cooldown (161) events are significant from the perspective of fatigue crack growth in the vessel closure head. The stress range for the heatup-cooldown cycle is bounded by that for the pressure test, and therefore, the cycles for the two events were lumped together for the fatigue crack growth calculation purposes. The number of cycles for these events were increased by 50% to account for operation during the license renewal period. Thus, the number of events assumed for the bolt-up were 66xl.5 or 100. The number of events assumed for the pressure test were {(130+161)xl.5} or -
440.
This approach is conservative since it does not take any credit for the number of cycles already used so far. The highest. applied K values listed in Tables 4-2 and 4-3 were used for the fatigue crack growth calculations. The predicted crack growth was calculated as 56.2 micro inches per cycle. Which results in a crack growth of 0.025" for 440 cycles.
4.5.
ALLOWABLE K VALUES The first step in the allowable flaw calculation is to determine the Kia value at the temperature appropriate for the operating condition being analyzed. The 1989 version of Section XI [4-1] does not provide an explicit mathematical equation for the calculation of Kia at a given temperature and RTiaT. However, Reference 4-7 gives the following equation that was used to calculate the Kla curve given in Figure A-4200-1 [4-1]:
Kla = 26.78 + 1.233
- Exp ( 0.0145 * ( T - RTNDT+ 160))
where, T and RTNDrT are in 'F and Kia is in ksi*in.
Paragraph IWB-3613 of Section XI [4-1] also indicates that for flange region a safety factor of 42 can be used for bolt-up condition. Thus, a safety factor of 42 was used for the bolt-up condition to obtain KIa allowable. For the pressure test condition, a safety factor of 410 was used as specified in IWB-3613[4-1]. The following summarizes the numerical values:
14
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I Bolt-up Applied K =
Allowable K =
14.3 (ksi \\iin ) at 0 (psi) and 70 ('F) 40.1 (ksi 4in)
Pressure test Applied K =
Allowable K 34.8 (ksi 'Iin ) at 1050 (psi) and 169 (fF) 48.3 (ksi 4in ) at 1050 (psi) and 169 (fF) 4.6.
DISPOSITION OF INDICATIONS Tables 4-2 and 4-3 show comparisons of the K values for the limiting flaw being evaluated and the allowable values for bolt-up and pressure test conditions, respectively.
It is seen that the calculated K values for all of the indications are less than the allowable values.
The calculated primary stresses after subtracting the area lost to indications, satisfied the primary stress limits specified in the original Code of construction for the reactor vessel.
Based on the preceding, it is concluded that the subject flaws are acceptable for continued operation in as-is condition.
15
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I 4.7.
REFERENCES
[4-1]
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, Rules for In-Service Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components, ASME, 1989 Edition without Addenda.
[4-2]
PECO Energy Company, Peach Bottom Unit 2, Surveillance Test Specification ST-O-080-500-2, Rev. 7: Recording and Monitoring Reactor Vessel Temperature and Pressure.
[4-3]
L. Tilly, "Pressure-Temperature Curves for Exelon Peach Bottom Unit 2" GE Nuclear Energy, San Jose, CA, GE-NE-B13-02118-00-01 Rev. 0, September 2002.
[4-4]
Exelon Nuclear, Peach Bottom Unit 2, Surveillance Test Specification ST-O-080-680-2, Rev. 6: Reactor Pressure Vessel (Class 1) Hydrostatic Pressure Test.
[4-5]
PECO Energy Company, Peach Bottom Unit 2, Surveillance Test Specification ST-O-080-940-2, Rev. 6: Reactor Pressure Vessel Transients Cycles Record.
[4-6]
D.A. Ferrill, et al, "Measurement of Residual Stresses in Heavy Weldment,"
Welding Journal Research Supplement, Vol 45, Nov. 1966.
[4-7]
EPRI Report No. NP-719-SR, "Flaw Evaluation Procedures: ASME Section XI,"
August 1978.
16
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I Table 4-1 Calculated K values for Pressure test Cases Calculation of Stress Intensities (ksi-sqrt[in])
I=
0.25 (in) 3.75 (in) 25.0 (ksi)
Tys:
ayb =
4.25 (in) 45.0 (ksi) 8.0 (ksi)
Cm =
Ap a//
Q Mm Mb Km Kb KTOTAL A K (psi)
(ksi)
(ksi)
(ksi)
(ksi) 1050 0.0 0.879 1.147 1.057 27.100 7.991 35.091 27.100 1050 0.1 0.989 1.117 1.016 24.889 7.242 32.131 24.889 1050 0.2 1.212 1.105 0.985 22.236 6.340 28.577 22.236 1050 0.3 1.521 1.10 0.963 19.740 5.538 25.277 19.740 1050 0.4 1.904 1.10 0.953 17.660 4.896 22.556 17.660 1050 0.5 2.356 1.10 0.937 15.880 4.329 20.209 15.880 17
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. I Table 4-2 Comparison of Calculated and Allowable K values for bolt-up Weld ID:
CH-INDD#:
16 a (initial) =
1=
'm=
TEMP =
a//=
MB 3.75 14.0 70 0.067 0.25 (in)
(ksi)
(OF)
(in) ab =
AP=
4.25 45.0 (ksi) 0.0 (ksi) 0 (psi)
(in)
Applied K =
Applied K Allowable K =
13.6 (ksi 4in) 14.3 (ksi 4in )
40.1 (ksi 4in)
Assumes no crack growth Includes an increase of 5%
to account for fatigue crack growth Table 4-3 Comparison of Calculated and Allowable K values for pressure tests Weld ID:
CH-MB IND#:
16 A (initial) =
I =
3.75 (Ym =25.0 TEMP=
169 a/1=
0.067 0.25 (in)
(in)
(ksi)
(OF)
Gys 4.25 (in) 45.0 (ksi) 8.0 (ksi) 1050 (psi)
Applied K =
Applied K =
Allowable K =
33.2 (ksi 4in )
34.8 (ksi '4in )
48.3 (ksi 4in)
Assumes no crack growth Includes an increase of 5%
to account for fatigue crack growth 18
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1 BOLTUP LOAD COLNDITION WELD RESIDUAL STRESS, 8.0 KSI MEMBRANE STRESS, 14.0 KSI BENDING STRESS, 8.0 KSI U
ID 0 D t
Figure 4-1 Through-Wall Stress Distribution Assumed for Bolt-up Condition PRESSURE TEST LEAD CENDITIEN WELD RESIDUAL STRESS, 80 KSI MEMBRANE STRESS, 25.0 KSI (PRESSURE TEST AND B0LTUP)
U ID OID Ft Figure 4-2 Through-Wail Stress Distribution Assumed for Pressure Test Condition 19
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1
- 5.
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS The reactor pressure vessel closure head at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 2 (PBAPS-2) was ultrasonically examined during refueling outage fourteen (2R-14).
Each of the six meridional welds was examined. Several indications were noted at these welds. Other than the CH-MB weld, the detected indications at the other meridional welds were acceptable as-is by the acceptance standards IWB-3510 of ASME Section XI (1989 Edition without Addenda). At the CH-MB weld numerous recordable indications were noted out of which eighteen (18) indications/flaws displayed tip signals and possessed a through-wall dimension.
Sixteen (16) of these flaws did not meet the acceptance standards. The Section XI Code allows for the acceptance of such flaws for continued service if they meet the requirements of Paragraph IWB-3600, Analytical Evaluation of Flaws. The analysis involves the use of fracture mechanics procedures in accordance with Appendix A of Section XI. The objective of this report is to document the results of such evaluation.
The use of surface proximity rules of Section XI indicated that all sixteen (16) indications need to be characterized as surface flaws for the purposes of fracture mechanics evaluation. Two conditions were determined to be governing: bolt-up and system pressure test. The bounding membrane and bending stress values for the fracture mechanics evaluation for the two conditions were obtained through a review of previous stress analyses of the closure heads. The bolt-up temperature was assumed as 70'F at a pressure of 0 psi and the pressure test temperature was assumed as 169°F with a pressure of 1050 psi.
The stress intensity factors for the characterized surface flaws were calculated for various flaw depth (a) to flaw length (1) ratios (or, aspect ratios). It was determined that the pressure-test condition was governing. The limiting flaw was found to be acceptable per ASME Section XI Code even after accounting for projected crack growth for the life of the plant including license renewal (60 total years).
Based on this evaluation it is concluded that all of the indications found in PBAPS-2 vessel closure head during Refueling Outage (2R-14) are acceptable by the flaw acceptance criteria of the ASME Section XI Code.
20
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1 APPENDIX A GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheets Rev 1 September 2002 (Includes 2 Appended Pages September 27, 2002)
A
Sep 27 02 11:31a Richard Kock 717 456 4151 p.2 GE NUCLEAR ENERGY UT EXAMINATION
SUMMARY
SHEET Report No:O0O8900 PROJECT Peach Bottom Unit 2 -2R14 WELD ID:
CH-MB Meridional Weld @ 60 Degrees SYSTEM:
RPV - Closure Head INITIAL CALIBRATION:
VES.IN.1 FINAL CALIBRATION:
VES.OUT.1 GERIS DATA:
mbl.1, mbl.2, mbL3. mbL4, mbr.1, mbr.2 EXAMINERS:
CE Frakes Lv 11, Shane Gauthier Lv II, Mark Hilbom Lv I1 MANUAL DATA:
RPV-024, RPV-026 EXAMINERS:
C. Minor Lv. ill.
MAGNETIC PARTICLE:
MT-016 EXAMINERS:
Steve Woodward Lv II Ultrasonic examination results were unacceptable to the requirements of ASME B&PVC Section XI, 1989 Edition No Addenda, Category S-A Welds.
Automated 0L, 45",
60"RL, and 70"RL scans and calibrations were performed in accordance with procedure GE-UT-704 Version 4.
Automated scanning was performed from the OD surface, exanining the top and bottom sides of weld H9 for a There were sixty five (65) recordable indications. The indications are located intermittently along the weld length and are aligned with the fusion line.
Eighteen (18) indications displayed Up signals and possessed a through wall dimension. Sixteen (16) of the recorded indications have been evaluated as being unacceptable to the requirements of Table IWB-3510-1.
Two (2) of the recorded Indications have been evaluated as being acceptable to the requirements of Table IWB-3510-1.
The remaining forty seven (47) indications without through wall dimension have been evaluated as being acceptable to the requirements of Table IWB-3510-1.
Baseline examination results were reviewed, the number and lengths of indications changed but the location did not.
Magnetic partide examinations were performed on the weld CH-MB Inside surface in accordance with GE-MT-I 00 Revision V3. No recordable indications were found.
A visual VT-3 examination was performed on the weld CH-MB inside surface in accordance with MAG-CG-407 Rev. 7. No recordable Indications were found.
Supplemental manual ultrasonic examination of selected areas of the internal surface of weld CH-MB was performed In accordance with PDI-UT-7 Rev. E Addenda-01. PDI-UT-7 used for information only, not qualified for ID detection or sizing. No near surface indications were found.
Due to scan limitations it not possible to examine 100% of the ASME code required area.
Auto UT composite coverage = 93.1%
PREPARED BY REAEWF.08Y UTIJT REVIEW ANn REVI PEACH BOTTOM PER
%4i PAGE I..........
OF MiL...
Sep 25 02 05:08p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.3 GE GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Weld ID: CH-MB Exam Data Sheet: mhL3 Patch ID: mbl.3 Channel: 2 Angle:
45 Direction:
- 2 Search Unit SY V
1TruWellLnat ndC Am S
Comments 9.64 i
12%
135.28 9.89 N/A 0.50 0.00 110.14 11.64 2
15%
135.53 12.14 N/A 1.00 0.00 12.64 12.39 3
13%
137.28 12.39 N/A 0.25 0.00 12.64 12.64 4
13%
137.03 12.64 NIA 0.25 0.00 12.89 18.89 5
64%
136.78 19.14 0.17 0.75 0.00 19.64 20.39 35 20%
137.03 20.89 NIA 0.75 0.00 21.14 Comments Analyst Reviewed By:
Level:
~-
Date:
~
2.Level:
~~i.
Date:.,2 V2.-S 2
P82-CH-MB-Data 2R14.xds
Sep 25 02 05:08p Richard Keck 717 458 4151 p.4 GE GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Data Sheet Project: Peach Uottom 2 - 2R14 Weld ID : CH-CM Exam Data Sheet: mbL1 Patch ID.: mbL1 Channel: 2 Angle:
45 Direction : 270 Search Unit X
V ThruYWal Lenath Ind# #
m S
Comments 20.39 6
84%
137.28 20.89 0.20 1.00 0.00 21.39 22.39 7
13%
137.53 22.90 N/A 0.75 0.00 23.14 24.14 8
26%
137.28 24.14 N/A 0.75 0.00 24.89 28.14 9
18%
136.28 28.29 N/A 0.75 0.00 28.89 29.14 10 12%
137.53 29.64 0.10 0.75 0.00 29.89 30.14 11 12%
139.29 30.14 N/A 0.50 0.00 30.64 32.14 12 11%
138.29 32.A4 NIA 0.50 0.00 32.64 Comments:
Analyst:
Reviewed By:
Level:
Date:
A._
Level:
Date: "elI2Z/o P82-CH.MB-Data 2R14.xis
PB2-CH-MB-Data 2R14.x1*
GE Nuclear Energy GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Weld ID :
Exam Data Sheet: mbL1 Patch ID: mbl.1 Channel: 2 Angle:
45 Direcdon: 2M Search Ut V
ThWl Sal l*nmmanV*
In 0
l-x--hualLnth SCmet 34.89 13 17%
136.03 35.14 N/A 0.75 000 35.64 36.64 14 24%
136.53 37.64 0.16 1.75 0.00 38.39 40.14 15 14%
137.78 40.64 N/A 0.75 0.00 40.89 41.64 16 76%
137.28 44.14 0.25 3.75 0.00 46.39 45.14 17 13%
133.03 45.39 N/A 0.75 0.00 45.89 48-14 1e 34%
137.53 48.39 N/A 0.75 0.00 1_
48.89 50.64 19 187%
137.78 52.14 NIA 2.50 0.00 53.14 comments Analyst?;-I3 S
ý Reviewed By:
i A
g Level:
Date:
q-2,Z.
2-.
Level:
Date: a"h25-C 7
MB-CH.MB-Dala 2R14.xis
Sep 25 02 05:08p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.5 GE Nuclear Energy GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet exam ata Seetmil Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Weld ID: CH-MB Exam Data Sheet : mbl.1 Patch ID: nflkb Direction: 2n Channel: 2 Angle:
45 Search Unit t-14.A.A-V V
Th"AW3II J."t.nh R
52.39 20 22%
135.78 53.39 0.17 1.25 0.00" 53.64 55.14 21 131%
137.28 56.14 NIA 1.50 0.00 56.64 55.14 22 17%
135.78 55.30 NIA 0.50 0.00 55.64 57.89 23 31%
135.53 58.39 N/A 1.00 68.89 58.39 24 41%
137.07 58.89 0.17 1.00 0.00 59.39 58.89 25 18%
137.28 60.14 NIA 1.75 0.00 60.64 Comments:
- Analyst,
- -e.A7....&S Reviewed By
Level: ~~Zr-=
Date: 9-2.-02 Level:.4L.
Date-22 0
PB2-CH-MB-Oata 2R14.xis
Sep 25 02 05:09p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.9 GE Nuclear Energy GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Weld ID: CH-MB Exam Data Sheet: mbl.2 Patch ID: :
Channel: g Angle:
45 Search Unit Direction : 270 Ind #
Amp.
X Y
ThruWail Length S
Comments 63.64 26 20%
137.78 63.89 NIA 0.25 0.00 63.89 67.89 27 12%
139.04 68.39 N/A 0.75 0.00 68.64 73.14 28 15%
138.04 73.39 N/A 0.75 0.00 73.89 74.89 29 76%
138.04
'75.14 NIA 0.75 0.00 75.64 76.89 1 30 143%
138.04 77.39 NIA 1.25 0.00 78.14 82.64 31 91%
138.54 83.14 N/A 2.25 0.00 84.89 "1
'87.14 32 156%
138.79 87.89 N/A 1.00 0.00 1 88.14 W.
Comments:
Analyst.:
6
ý ate *-
1-a.4 --
Reviewed By:-I---
at P 1
-h.
Level:
=
Date:
f-2t-J Level:
='lL Date: "
icf-P82-CH-M8-Data 2R14.xlr
Sep 25 02 05:09p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.10 GE Nuclear Energy GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Weld ID: CH-MB Exam Data Sheet: mbl.2 Patch ID: mbt2 Channel: 2 Angle: 45 Direction: 270 Search Unit IndM Atn X
V Thru WallLnah S
Comments 89.89 33 64%
139.29 90.14 N/A 2.05 0.00 91.94 91.89 34 53%
139.04 92.14 0.16 0.75 0.00 92.64 S
Comments:
Analyst: ---
e.*,1
-t Reviewed By:
Level:
Date:
Level:
DateW 9i7I~
PB2,-CH-MB-Data 2R14.xI3
Sep 25 02 05:09p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.11 GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Data Sheet ExmDtaSet:mL Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Weld ID : CH!:
Channel:
Angle:
45 Search Unit Intl #
m X
Y Thi Exam Data Sheet: mbl.4 Patch ID : mblA Direction: 270 Comments iuWall Lenoth S
5.39 36 18%
137.03 5.64 N/A 0.50 0.00 5.89.
Comments:
Analyst:
R2k.t;.-
I L..-
Reviewed By:
Level: 77r Date:
~
-Level:
-~--~-
Date:
'I 2Ž I~
PB32-CH-MB-Oata 2Ri4.icfs
Sep 25 02 05:10p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.12 GE Nuclear Energy GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Weld ID: CH-MB Exam Data Sheet: mbr2 Patch ID: mbr.2 Channel: 2 Angle.
45 Direction: 270 Search Unit I'
V ThrisI WAIlffl InH Am S
- .nmmranfe 37 15%
125.96 11.38 N/A 0.50 0.00 11.61 18.36 38 45%
127.96 18.61 0.19 0.75 0.00 I
19.11
_21.86 39 31%
127.45 22.11 0.16 0.40 0.00 22.26 25.36 40 31%
125.71 25.61 NIA 0.50 0.00 25.86 31.61 41 31%
126.21 32.61 N/A 1.50 0.00 33.11 34.61 42 29%
125.96 35.11 0.19 1.75 0.00 36.36 39.11 43 20%
127.21 39.11 N/A 0.25 0.00 39.36 Comments:
Analyst:c2#,1Cý Reviewed By:
Level: -
L.
Date: *SA*,/
,L Level:
Date:
'i I "-*
(
2.._
PBM-CH-MR-Daia 2R14.xls
Sep 25 02 05:08p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.
6 GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 21314 Weld ID : CH-MB Exam Data Sheet:
Patch ID; mbr.2 Channel: 2 Angle:
45 Direction:
Search Unit IndE mr r
Y ThruWallant
- .nmm*ntc 40.35 44 45%
128.22 40.61 0.17 0.75 0.00 41.11 41.38 45 41%
128.22 41.86 WUA 1.00 0.00 42.38 42.86 40 20%/6 128.47 42.86 N/A 0.50 0.00 43.36 45.86 47 34%
28.22 46.11 NIA 0.75 0.00, 46.61 Reviewed By:
Level:.ý Date: 'ý S-i :ýQ-PB2-CH-M-Daio 2R14Ads
Sep 25 02 05: 10p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.13 GE Nuclear Energy GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Weld ID:
Exam Data Sheet: mbr.1 Patch ID : mbrL1 Direction: 270 Channel: 2 Angle: 4!
Search Unit Ind Amp.
X Y
ThruWall Lenoth S
Comments 48.11 48 131%
128.97 48.61 NIA 0.75 0.00 48.86 49.38 49 143%
128.72 49.61 NIA 1.00 0.00 50.36 49.86 50 37%
126.96 50.61 0.12 1.00 0.00 50.86 53.61 51 143%
128.47 53.88 N/A 0.75 0.00 54.36 56.11 52 45%
127.21 56.61 N/A 0.75 0.00 56.86 56.36 53 37%
128.97 56.61 0.14 0.75 0.00 57.11 60.11 54 18%
127.46 60.86 N/A 1.00 0.00 61.11 Comments:
Analyst.
I f
Reviewed By:
M, Level:2~
Date: ý3t/;
Level:
_L13~-
Data-:
z?
~
(
PB2-CH-MB-Data 2R14.xis
Sep 27 02 11:31a Richar~d Keck 717 456 4151 p.3 GNulaEnryGERIS 2000 Indication GE Ncler EnrgyData Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2-22R14 Exam Data Sheet: nbr.1 Weld ID : CH-MB Patch ID: mbLr.
Channel: Z Angle:
4A Direction: 270 Search Unit Ind #
AmD.
X Y
ThruWaell Lenth S
Comments 61.10 55 22%
129.47 81.38 N/A 0.51 0.00o 61.61 72.1_
56 100%
129.71 73.10 0.17 1.00 0.00 1
73.61 74.6 1 57 109%
129.47 75.11 0.17 1.00 0.00 7.6-6 80.11 58 70%
129.22 80.61 N/A 1.25 0.00 81.38 81.61 59 45%
129.72 82.11 N/A 0.75 0.00 82.36 84.11 60 45%
129.47 84.11 NIA 0.50 0.00 84.61 5
684.1 61 171%
128.97 85.11 0.12 1.00 0.00 85.61 Comments: None Analyst:
Reviewed By:
Level:
Date:
_Date:I_&
Level:
Date:
-V
. 9. ":
P82-CH.MB-Data 2R14.xts PEACH BOTTOM PGR 04:
.2 L
PAGE
'k0.
OF.*
=_
Sep 25 02 05:09p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.8 GGERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 -2R14 Weld ID: CH-MB Exam Data Sheet: mbr.
Patch ID: mbr.1 Channel: a Angle:
45 Direction : 270 Search Unit Ind #
Am.
X V
Thu Wall Lanath S
Comments 87.61 62 84%
129.22 87.86 N/A 0.50 0.00 88.11 88.81 63 26%
128.72 89.36 0.17 1.50 0.00 90.11 92.86 64 24%
127.46 93.36 N/A 0.75 0.00 93.61 Comments:
Analyst
!Reviewed By: VA t*A"-'
n,-
Lee._Z;-
Date: '241 i/P-Level: A..
Date:
[2 IO.-
P82-CH-MB-Data 2R14.xAs
Sep 25 02 05:lOp Richard Kock 717 456 4151
- p.
14 E Nuclear Energy GERIS 2000 Indication Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom 2 - 2R14 Weld ID : CH-MB Channel: 4 Angle:
45 Search Unit Ind #
Amp.
X Y
ThruWall Length Exam Data Sheet: mbr, I Patch ID: mbr.1 Direction : 270 Comments S
127.51 65 26%
128.02 92.25 N/A 1.00 0.00 128.52
-Rem Comments:
Analyst______________
Reviewed By:
Level:
Date.:
Level:
Date:
z 2.O MB-CH-MS-Oafa 2RI4.xts
GENE 0000-0007-9747, Rev. 1 APPENDIX B GERIS 2000 Indication Evaluation Data Sheets Rev 1 September 2002 (Includes 2 New Pages September 27, 2002)
B q
Sep 25 02 05:10p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.
1 5 GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Eneray Evaluation Data Sheet Project; Peach Bottom. Unit-2 Weld ID: CH-MB Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0.170 Flaw Length "/'= 0.75 Surface Separation "S" = 0.00 Exam Data Sheet: mbl.3 SIiing Data Sheet: n/a Indication : 5 "T" nominal = 4.25 "T'measured - 4.30 Clad "Tnominal = N/A ASME Section Xl, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE lWB-3510-1 for 4" to 1 Z" all Surface %
Subsurface %
Surface % Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2-2 0.10 2.2 2.5 0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 3.07 3.57 Y 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.6 Allowed Allowed 3.07 0.00 ae ail value Y=
0.170 0.227 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed aft =
3.07%/
aft =
3.95%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
Comments: None.
Data Review By Reviewed By: ______--
Level:
2 Date: 9-. A -d. &..
Level:
m Date:
EXAM&04V1 7Y&
.d.r-lý
Sep 25 02 05:lOp Richard Keck 717 45G 4151
- p. 1 6 OGERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Weld ID.: CH-MB Exam Data Sheet;: mbl.1 Sizing Data Sheet: nia Indication: 6 "T" nominal = 4.25 "T-measured = 4.30 Clad 'T" nominal = NIA Flaw Throughwall Dimension =
Flaw Length ""r-Surface Separation "S" -
0.200 1.00 0.00 ASME Section Xl, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB.3510.1 for 4" to 12" a/A Surface %
Subsurface %
Surface %
Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5
~
0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 2.80 3.30 Y 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7
~
0.50 5.2 7.6 Alowed Allowed 2.80 0.00 a-adl value =
y=
0.200 0.200 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t =
2.80%
alt =
4.65%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
OMM-Data Review By:
Reviewed By: A i-- ---- "'-
Level:
2 Date:
-LL-O
,Z Level:
Date:
I-- TL._
EXAMOS"? MW.7 le*v
Sep 25 02 05:11p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.17 IGERIS 2000 Indication GE NucleE Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unlt-2 Exam Data Sheet; mbL.1 Weld ID: CHoMB Sizing Data Sheet: nla Indication: 14 Flaw Throughw#li Dimension = 0.
160
'r nominal = 4.25 Flaw Length '1' 1.75 "T measured= 4.30 Surface Separtion "S" 0.00 Clad "T" nominal = NIA ASME Section XI. 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" a/l Surface % Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0
~
0.05 2.0 2.2 2.A7 2.45 Y 0.10 2.2 2.5
~
0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1
~
0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2.
7.6 Allowed Allowed 2.17 0.00 a=
0.160 all value -
0.091
,Y=
0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed alt =
2.17%
aft =
3.72%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
Comments" None.
Data Review BY:
,,,2 R
Leviewed By:
Dat Level:
Z=...~
Date:
0 -
Level:
Date:
Z.
100om v.7 7W=
.~~a 4-l
Sep 25 02 05:11p Richard Keck 717 456 4151
- p.
18
~GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Eramy-Evaluation Data Sheet
________clE 200Indcaio Project: Peach Bottom. Unit-2 Weld ID: CH-MB Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0.100 Flaw Length '1" = 0.75 Surface Separation "S" - 0.00 Exam Data Sheet: mbl. I Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 10 Tr nominal = 4.25 "T* measured = 4.30 Clad "T" nominal - N/A ASME Section XI, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" anl Surface %
Subsurface %
Surface %
Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5 2.40 2.77 Y 0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 18 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.6 Allowed Allowed 2.40 000 al_
a/ value=
Y=
0.100 0.133 0.000 Flaw Is Surface Allowed a/t =
2.40%
alt =
2.33%
Flaw is acceptable by Table IWB-351 0-1.
Comments: None.
Data Review By:'7
.,61..*
.,,,.4 Reviewed By:
Level:
29=--
Date: 9",,
Level: :M 1 Date: -'*1--5 IZ GXAM.14V7las Oi
Sep 2S 02 05zlip Richard Kock 717 456 4151 p.19 GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Eneroy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbl.1 Weld ID: CH-MB Si2ing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 16 Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0.250 "T' nominal = 4.25 FlawLength " = 3.75 Tr measured= 4.30 Surface Separation "S" 0.00 Clad "T" nominal = NIA ASME Section Xl, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 forr4 to 12" all Surface %
Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 2.07 2.30 Y 0.10 2.2 2.5 0.15 2.5 29 0.20 2.8 3.3--
0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.8 4vle-A0 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7--
0.50 5.2 7.6 Allowed Allowed 2.07-0.00 W
a =
0.250 all value =
0.007 Y =
0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t =
2.07%
aft 5.81%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table (WB-3510-1.
Comments: None.
Data Review By: "
Reviewed By:
I-
"--Tr Level:
7 Date:
- ,A.Z Level:
Date: 57,-
1ZA.OS-7ý
Sep 25 02 05:11p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.20 I
GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Ene Evaluation Data Sheet I.valudlt Project: Peach Bottom. Unit-2 Weld ID: CH-MB Raw Throughwall Dimension = 0.170 Flaw Length "1i= 1.25 Surface Separation "S" 0.00 Exam Data Sheet: mbl.1 Sizing Data Sheet: nra Indication: 20 T7" nominal - 4.25 "T measured = 4.30 Clad 'T" nominal = N/A ASME Section Xl, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" nok af/
Surface %
Subsurface %
Surface %
Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0
~
0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5 2.42 2.79 Y 0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.B 4.4
~
0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.46 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.6 Allowed Allowed 2.42 0.00 a=
0.170 aAl value =
0.136 Y =
0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed ait =
2.42%
a/t =
3.95%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
Comme~ntg.
None.
Comments : None.
Data Review By:
Reviewed By: B T"2-A Level:
--~r Date:
- z - - -Z-Level
Date: C 2~/L.
tAAMOS4V 7ý
Sep 25 02 05:l1p Richard Kock 717 456 4151
- p.
21 0GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Enerqy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbl.1 Weld ID: CFH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: nla Indication : 24 Maw Throughwall Dimension = 0.170 Flaw Length 1"= 1.00 Surface Separation "S" = 0.00 "T-nominal = 4.25 "T7 measured = 4.30 Clad "" nominal -
N/A ASME Section Xl, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" all Surface %
Subsurface %
Surface %
Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5
~
0.15 2.5 2.9 2.62 3.06 Y 0.20 2.8 3.3 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.6 Allowed Allowed 2.62 0.00
.k-,
a M 0.170 ai value =
0.170 Y =
0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t =
2.62%
a/t =
3.95%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
Comments: None.
Data Review By: -',',
Reviewed By.
'-c..-..'
Level:
V Date:
9",
0
% -2 L.-
Level:
Date:.'. 4.z.'i(
fiE.c.
V., ?,,S mdkcMk* 4.1M
Sep 25 02 05:12p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.
2 2 GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Enery Evalu inData Sheet IIII_
aa h
e Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbl.2 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 34 Flaw Throughwall Dimension - 0.160 "T-nominal a 4-25 Flaw Length "1'- 0.75 "T measured = 4.30 Surface Separation "S' = 0.00 Clad "T'nominal = N/A ASME Section XI, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" a/1 Surface %
Subsurface %
Surface %
Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5 0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 2.93 3.43 Y 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.6 Allowed Allowed 2.93 0.00 al all value=
Y=
0.160 0.213 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t =
2.93%
alt =
3.72%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
Comments: None.
Data Review By; £a/
.A*--,--
Reviewed By:
- "&D jL.L-'T--"
Level:
.Z.r-.
Date:
3-,7.2 - a 2-.
Level:
Date: '
EAADUVJ MaW i,,dml,*
- m
Sep 25 02 05: 12p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.
2 3 GERIS 2000 Indication
.GE Nuclear Enery Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Weld ID: CH-MB Flaw Throughwall Dimension a 0. 190 Flaw Length "1"= 0.75 Surface Separation 'S" = 0.00 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.2 Sizing Data Sheet: nra Indication: 38 "T" nominal = 4.25 "T'measured = 4.30 Clad T nominal = NIA ASME Section X), 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" afl Surface %
Subsurface %
Surface %
Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5 0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 0.25 3.3 3.8 3.33 3.84 Y 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.5 Allowed Allowed 3.33 0.00 10mmmlmlum al a/n value-Y=
0.190 0.253 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t =
3.33%
alt
=
4.42%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
t'Vnmmn9fl*
- NkmnA Comments: None Data Revie By.Cj /'r~
Reviewed By:
Ac -
ir Level._
Date:
a Level:.
Date:
'T
.I 1.Z IAM.OM7 7 M.
Sep 25 02 05:12p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.
2 4 GERIS 2000 Indication O
GE Nuclear Energv Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Weld ID: CH-MA Flaw Throughwall Dimension x 0.160 Flaw Length "10 = 0.40 Surface Separation "S..
0.00 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.2 Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 39 "T nominal = 4.25
'TO measured = 4.30 Clad "T" nominal = N/A ASME Section XI, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" a/I Surface %
Subsurface %
Surface %
Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5 0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 0.25 33 3.8 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 5.00 5.80 Y 0.45 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.6 Allowed Allowed s.00 0.00 a=
a/I value -
Y=
0.160 0.400 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed aft =
5.00%
a/t a 3.72%
Flaw Is acceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
Comments: None.
Data Review By Dae A
RLeveewed By:
"k-.
kate...
/-.
Level, ~'
Date: 'f Level:
Date:-~.
2 exm"$.V.7 MW 0*
Sep 25 02 05:12P Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.
2 5 GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.2 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 42 Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0.190 "T" nominal = 4.25 Flaw Length "1" = 1.75 "T' measured = 4.30 Surface Separation "S" 0.00 Clad "T" nominal = NIA ASME Section XI. 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" an Surface %
Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5 2.25 2.57 Y 0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8
~
0.45 5.1 6.7
~
0.50 5.2 7.6
~
Allowed Allowed 2.25 0.00 a=
0.190 a/l value -
0.109 Y =
0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed aA =
2.25%
alt =
4.42%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
Comments: None.
Level:
2 Date:
Level: I Date:
I.Z---/
EflAMO4*,lV,)
7tS
Sep 25 02 05:12p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.
2 6 GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom. Unite2 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.2 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indicadon : 44 Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0.170 "T nominal = 4.25 Flaw Length "1"= 0.75 "T measured = 4.30 Surface Separation S" = 0.00 Clad '7T nominal -
N/A ASME Section XJ, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-351 0-1 for 4" to 12" all Surface %
Subsurface % Surface % Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2
~
0.10 2.2 2.5 0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 3.07 3.57 Y 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.8 Allowed Allowed 3.07 0.00 a=
0.170 a/I value =
0.227 Y =
0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed adi =
3.07%
alt =
3.95%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IVS-3510-1.
Comments: None.
Data Review BY( )JR ati Reviewed By:
Level:
LA1-Date: 5Level:
-JI Date:
)- 2 tZAMOS4V.?
7jSu
Sep 25 02 05:13p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.
2 7
~GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Eneray Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Weld ID; CH-MB Flow Throughwall Dimension = 0.120 Flaw Length 71"= 1.00 Surface Separation "S" = 0.00 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.1 Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication : 50 "T-nominal = 4.25 "T' measured = 4.30 Clad 'T-nominal -
N/A ASME Section Xl, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" all Surface %
Subsurface %
Surface %
Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5 2.32 2.66 Y 0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.6
- ~
Allowed Allowed 2.32 0.00 al all value=
Y:
0.120 0.120 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a/t =
2.32%
alt -
2.79%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
Comments: None.
Data Review By:
Reviewed By:
Level:
Date:
'?/Z 40 Level:
Date: 9i.z 1
I z.S..
LUM-03.Y.7 'ý
Sep 25 02 05:13p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.
2 8 GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Enemy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Weld ID: CH-MB Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0.140 FlawLength "1"- 0.75 Surface Separation "S' - 0.00 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.1 Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 53 "T-nominal -
4.25
'T measured= 4.30 Clad "I-nominal -
N/A ASME Section XI, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" anJ 0.10 0.15 0,20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 Surface %
1.9 2.0 2.2 2.5 2.8 3.3 3.8 4.4 5.0 Subsurface %
Surface %
Subsurface *A 2.0 2.2 2.5 2.9 3.3 3.8 4.4 5.1 5.8 2.72 3.19 Y 5.1 6.7 5.2 7.6 Allowed Allowed 2.72 0.00 a =
0.140 ali value =
0.187 Y =
0.000 Flaw Is Surface Allowed ait =
2.72%
att =
3.26%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-351 0-1.
Comments : None.
Comments: None.
Data Review By: &.
iate:
../
Reviewed By:
t C*).7r
/*
Level: :z~.....
Date:
46 ~
Level:
II..
Date-,
U-61.
Sep 27 02 11:31a Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.4 GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Eneroy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Weld ID: CH-MB Exam Data Sheet: mbr. 1 Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 56 "T-nominal = 4.25 "T-measured = 4.30 Clad "Tnominal-WA Flaw Throughwail Dimension =
Flaw Length "/'=
Surface Separation S
=
0.170 1.00 0.00 ASME Section XI 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510.1 for A" to 12" all Surface %
Subsuface %
Surface %
Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5 0.15 2.5 2.9 2.62 3.06 Y 0.20 2.8 3.3 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.6 Allowed Aflowed 2.62 0.00 am BA value 0.170 0.170 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed ant
=
2.62%
a/t -
3.95%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
Comments: None.
Data Review By.* L e Reviewed By: ~.
.- ~
Level:
-7, Date: 7K/
c6'e Level:
Date:_
PFACH BMO
-L.
P14
Sep 27 02 11:32a Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.
5 GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.1 Wld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: nia Indication: 57 Flaw Throughwall Dimension -
- 0. 170 "7-nominal = 4.25 FlawLength '1"-
1.00 "T'measured, 4.30 Surface Separation "S" 0.00 Clad 7 nominal
- N/A ASME Section XI, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-351 0-1 for 4" to I 2 afi Surface %
Subsurface %
Surface %
Subsurfnae %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5 0.15 2.5 2.9 2.62 3.08 Y 0.20 2.8 3.3 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.0 Allowed Allowed 2.62 0.00 a-0.170 a/I value 0.170 Y=
0.000 Flaw Is Surface Allowed a/I =
2.02%
alt =
3.95%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
Comments.: None.
Level:_
,;-Dae t.
Level:
Date:
- ).
Dae 26:10i EXA06 7.7 74 Z :- (L.4
Sep 25 02 05:13p Richard Keck 717 456 4151 p.29 GERIS 2000 Indication GE Nuclear Energy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom, Unit-2 Weld ID: CH-MB Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0.120 Flaw Length 1'= 1.00 Surface Separation "S" - 0.00 Exam Data Sheet: mbr.1 Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication: 61 "T-nominal= 4.25
"- measured = 4.30 Clad -T-nominal = N/A ASME Section X), 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" all Surface %
Subsurface %
Surface %
Subsurface 0/
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5 2.32 2.66 Y 0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 0.25 3.3 3.8
~
0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 6.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.6 Allowed Allowed 2.32 0.00 a/I value =
Y:
0.120 0.120 0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed a 2.32%
att 2.79%
Flaw Is unacceptable by Table IWB-3510-1.
Comments: None.
Data Review By.O24ý /Zf Reviewed By:___________
Level: "Ir Z Date:
Level:A Date:
Fý{*-Ol 4,1?/
baa...ik e t
Sep 25 02 05:13p Richard Kock 717 456 4151 p.
3 0 GERIS 2000 Indication G.E Nuclear Energy Evaluation Data Sheet Project: Peach Bottom. Unit-2 I Exam Data Sheet: mbr.1 Weld ID: CH-MB Sizing Data Sheet: n/a Indication : 63 Flaw Throughwall Dimension = 0.170 "T nominal = 4.25 Flaw Length "1" = 1.50 "r measured = 4.30 Surface Separation "S' = 0.00 Clad "T" nominal = NIA ASME Section X1, 1989 Edition, No Addenda TABLE IWB-3510-1 for 4" to 12" all Surface %
Subsurface %
Surface % Subsurface %
0.00 1.9 2.0 0.05 2.0 2.2 0.10 2.2 2.5 2.28 2.61 Y 0.15 2.5 2.9 0.20 2.8 3.3 0.25 3.3 3.8 0.30 3.8 4.4 0.35 4.4 5.1 0.40 5.0 5.8 0.45 5.1 6.7 0.50 5.2 7.6 Allowed Allowed 2.28 0.00 a=
0.170 all value =
0.113 Y =
0.000 Flaw is Surface Allowed alt =
2.28%
ait =
3.95%
Flaw is unacceptable by Table iWS-351 0-1.
Commentv : None.
Data Review By:
Reviewed By:
.'C-L*
T r
L..
Level: +*Date:
9/1',141 Level:
Date:
+, /,-'c..%<
UAM-fl4 14=