ML20112G485

Forwards Affidavit Supporting Proprietary Classification of Meeting Overheads Used in 960528 SG Electrosleeve Meeting & non-proprietary Version of Overheads

ML20112G485
Person / Time
Site:	Callaway
Issue date:	05/30/1996
From:	Taylor J BABCOCK & WILCOX CO.
To:	Kennedy J NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
JHT-96-37, NUDOCS 9606120034
Download: ML20112G485 (63)

Text

__

r

{

M F R AM ATO M E TECHNOLOG1ES Integrated Nuclear Services

[- Mb JHT/96-37 May 30,1996 Ms. Janet L. Kennedy, Project Manager U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, DC 20555-0001

Subject:

Affidavit For Meeting Slides

Dear Ms. Kennedy:

l Please find attached an affidavit supporting the proprietary classification of the meeting i

overheads used in the May 28,1996 Steam Generator Electrosleeve Meeting. As requested, we have eliminated the proprietary note on some of the overheads, but most of them remain proprietary.

Enclosed also is the non-proprietary version of the overheads.

Very tnily yours, At/ G7 J. H. Taylor, Manager Licensing Services JHT/mel l

Attachment l

9606120034 960530 PDR ADOCK 05000483

/[h P

PDR 2v l

3315 Old Forest Road, P.O. Box 10935, Lynchburg. VA 24506-0935

)

Telephone: 804-832-3000 Fax: 804-832-3663

l l

i l-EXIIIBITS A & B l

l l

EXIIIBIT A 1.

Electrosleeve Review Meeting - May 28,1996 EXIIIBIT B The above listed document contains information which is considered Proprietary in accordance with Criteria b, c, d, e and f of the attached affidavit.

t

t l

l AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES H. TAYLOR l

A.

My name is James H. Taylor.

I am Manager of Licensing Services for Framatome Technologies, Inc. (FTI), and as such, I am authorized to execute this Affidavit.

B.

I am familiar with the criteria applied by FTI to determine whether certain information of FTI is proprietary and I am familiar with the procedures established within FTI to ensure the proper application of these criteria.

l 1

l C.

In determining whether an FTI document is to be classified as proprietary information, an initial determination is made by the Unit Manager, who is responsible for originating the document, as to whether it falls within the criteria set forth in Paragraph D hereof. If the information falls L

within any one of these criteria, it is classified as proprietary by the originating Unit Manager.

l This initial determination is reviewed by the cognizant Section Manager. If the document is designated as proprietary, it is reviewed again by Licensing personnel and other management within FTI as designated by the Manager of Licensing Services to assure that the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR Section 2.790 are met.

D.

The following information is provided to demonstrate that the provisions of 10 CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations have been considered:

(i)

The information has been held in confidence by FTI. Copies of the document are clearly identifled as proprietary. In addition, whenever FTI transmits the info.rmation to a customer, customer's agent, potential customer or regulatory agency, ihe transmittal requests the recipient to hold the information as proprietary. Also, in

(

order to strictly limit any potential or actual customer"s use of proprietary information, the substance of the following provision is included in all agreements entered into by FTI, and an equivalent version of the proprietary provision is included in all of FTI's proposals:

l l

1.

l

l AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES H. TAYLOR (Cont'd.)

l "Any proprietary information concerning Company's or its Supplier's 1

products or manufacturing processes which is so designated by Company or its Suppliers and disclosed to Purchaser incident to the performance of such contract shall remain the property of Company or its Suppliers and is disclosed in confidence, and Purchaser shall not publish or otherwise disclose it to others without the written approval of Company, and no rights, implied or otherwise, are granted to produce or have produced any products or to practice or cause to be practiced any manufacturing processes covered thereby.

4 Notwithstanding the above, Purchaser may provide the NRC or any other regulatory agency with any such proprietary information as the NRC or such other agency may require; provided, however, that Purchaser shall first give Company written notice of such proposed disclosure and Company shall have the right to amend such proprietary information so as to make it non-proprietary..In the event that Company cannot amend such proprietary information, Purchaser shall prior to disclosing such information, use its best efforts to obtain a commitment from NRC or such other agency to have such irf,rmation withheld from public inspection.

Company shall be given the right to participate in pursuit of such confidential treatment."

2

l l

AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES H. TAYLOR (Cont'd.)

t r

i (ii)

The following criteria are customarily applied by FTI in a rational decision process to determine whether the information should be classified as proprietary. Information may be classified as proprietary if one or more of the following criteria are met:

a.

Information reveals cost or price information, commercial strategies, production capabilities, or budget levels of FTI, its customers or suppliers.

b.

The information reveals data or material concerning FTI research or development plans or programs of present or potential competitive advantage i

to FTI.

1 c.

The use of the information by a competitor would decrease his expenditures, l

\\

in time or resources, in designing, producing or marketing a similar product.

l d.

The information consists of test data or other similar data concerning a l

process, method or component, the application of which results in a

[

competitive advantage to FTI.

I l

e.

The information reveals special aspects of a process, method, component or the like, the exclusive use of which results in a competitive advantage to FTI.

l f.

The information contains ideas for which patent protection may be sought, s

3

O l

l AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES H. TAYLOR (Cont'd.)

The document (s) listed on Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and made a part l

hereof, has been evaluated in accordance with normal FTI procedures with respect to classification and has been found to contain information which falls within one or more of the criteria enumerated above. Exhibit "B", which is attached hereto and l

made a part hereof, specifically identifies the criteria applicable to the document (s) listed in Exhibit "A".

(iii)

The document (s) listed in Exhibit " A", which has been made available to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission was made available in confidence with a request that the document (s) and the information contained therein be withheld from public disclosure.

(iv)

The information is not available in the open literature and to the best of our knowledge is not known by Combustion Engineering, EXXON, General Electric, Westinghouse or other current or potential domestic or foreign competitors of FTI.

(v)

Specific information with regard to whether public disclosure of the information is likely to cause harm to the competitive position of FTI, taking into account the value of the information to FTI; the amount of effort or money expended by FTI developing the information; and the ease or difficulty with which the information could be properly duplicated by others is given in Exhibit "B".

E.

I have personally reviewed the document (s) listed on Exhibit "A" and have found that it is considered proprietary by FTI because it contains information which falls within one or more of the criteria enumerated in Paragraph D, and it is information which is customarily held in confidence and protected as proprietary information by FTI. This report comprises information l

l 4

O AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES H. TAYLOR (Cont'd.)

utilized by FTI in its business which afford FTI an opportunity to obtain a competitive advantage over those who may wish to know or use the information contained in the document (s).

/f/W JAMES H. TAY State of Virginia)

)

SS. Lynchburg City of Lynchburg)

James H. Taylor, being duly sworn, on his oath deposes and says that he is the person who subscribed his name to the foregoing statement, and that the matters and facts set forth in the statement j

]

are true.

/.

- hMh

/ JAMES H. TAYLO Subscrpi and sworn before me this$L_ day of /71tu 1996.

b a4 o

Notary Public in and for the City of Lynchburg, State of Virginia.

/2 ~ WIb My Commission Expires 5

l i

ELECTROSLEEVE REVIEW MEETING i

May 28,1996 i

Topical:

BAW-1021 P Rev.01 March 1996 FTl NONPROPRIETARY Framatome Technologies, Inc.

Integrated Nuclear Services 155 Mill Ridge Road Lynchburg, VA 24502-4341

FTl Electrosleeve Review l

l Obiectives l

Provide Overview of Electrosleeve Program l

Qualification Approach Technical Review l

Identify Additionalinformation Requests Discuss Schedule

=

l M

EC oLoo a

l I

i FTl Electrosleeve Review Agenda Topic Presenter Introduction B. Newton

===.

Background===

J. Helmey Material Properties J. Helmey Analyses / Structural Tests R. Schaefer Creep J. Galford l

Corrosion P. Gonzalez Non Destructive Examination S. Wilson

===.

System Description===

J. Galford Wrap-Up B. Newton I

/[-

l

" fMWNRM'i

FTl Electrosleeve Review

/

Sleeve Description 0

- Material

- Nanostructured Nickel Microalloy 4" Sleeve

- Electroformed TSP O

Structrual Repair

- Tube Transitions

- Tube Supports

- Axial / Circ Defects Tube O

Characteristics

- No Tube Deformation

- No Stress Relief Top of Tubesheet

/

8" Sleeve

- No Crevices

- Tube Microstructure Unchanged TS i

/

~

kwam

FTl Electrosleeve Review l

Experience Nickel S/G Sleeves (1982-1992) a Bi-Metallic 1600 I Ni200 Ni on OD for Corrosion Resistance Nickel Electroplating (1985 - Present)

Doel 2, Tihange 2, Ringhals 2

> 2000 S/G Tubes Roll Transitions (IDSCC)

Nickel Electrosleeving (1993 - Present)

Pickering Units 6,8,1 (1993 Demo) l Pickering Unit 5 14 Sleeves in Service (1994)

Oconee 1 (1995 Demo) 9 Sleeves @ ist TSP 16 Sleeves in Platform Mockup fec D N o D ak l

j l

I i

FTl Electrosleeve Review l

1 Qualification' Basis

)

ASME Code Guidelines t

2 Section lli i

)

Design Stress I

Section XI Qualification i

4 i

Reg Guide 1.121 1

i Qualification Acoroach i

i j

SIG Specific Stuctural Verification Tests (7.0)

I j

SIG Specific Performance & Stress Analyses (8.0) e Corrosion Evaluation / Tests (9.0)

Non-Destructive Examination (11.0) m-am m,-,

FTl Electrosleeve Review Material Qualification Tensile Properties Specimens 5/8", 3/4", 7/8" ASTM E-8 / E-21 Results Fatigue Properties Specimens 1/2", 5/8", 3/4", 7/8" ASTM E-466 / E-606 Results

==

tC oLoo a

i a

e FTl Electrosleeve Review i

i Tensile Properties i

~

I i

i i

i i

i l

i i

i.

1 i

4 1

1

.i 4

l 1

s i

l i

l 1

i l

F R AM ATO M E TECH N OLOGIES I

l i

i FTl Electrosleeve Review 4

4 i

Fatigue Properties 4

i l

d 4

3 k

t i

3 3

l l

4 3

4 4

1 i

1 1

1 F R AM ATO M E TECHNOLOGaE5

PTl Electrosleeve Review Material Properties Ductility e

Specimens ASTM B-489 i

I j

Note: All Tests to Failure Have Been Ductile 4

Burst j

4 i

j Specimens Note: Defective Specimens Tested for Plugging Criteria i

Results i

A d

i i

i i

M j

EC otoo E i

i

i-l FTl Electrosleeve Review Material Properties Thermal Stability o

Specimens Condit!ons ASTM E-92 4

i Results t

Thermodynamic Properties Property Ni 201 Alloy 600 Alloy 690 l

Thermal Expansion (600F) 8.1 7.8 8.2 4

(10 inlin/F)

Thermal Conductivity (600F) 34.0 11.1 10.0 (Btulhr-ft-F)

Modulus of Elasticity (600F) 27.8 28.7 28.1 (10' psi) fed.TMRMS

FTl Electrosleeve* Review Analyses / Structural Tests Sleeve Wall Thickness ASME Code Min Wall Installed Wall Tube Size (Inches)

(Incheal 11/16" x 0.040" 3/4" x 0.042/0.043" 3/4" x 0.048" 7/8" x 0.050" ECH oLoe &

FTl Electrosleeve" Review Analyses / Structural Tests e

Sleeve Stress ASME Code Primary Stress Parent Max Primary Tube Size Stress intensity Allowable 11/16" x 0.040" P

=

m 3/4" x 0.042" P

=

m 3/4" x 0.048" P

=

m 7/8" x 0.050" P

=

m Operating Stress e

1423 psi dP Hoop Axial e

includes All Loads Pressure, Thermal, Locked Tube i

m ECH oko E

FTl Electrosleeve* Review Analyses / Structural Tests 4

e FIV Acceptable For All Locations Thermal / Hydraulics Sleeve / Plug Ratio e

Model D e

Model F e

Model 51 e

CE SYS 80

??h?NRME

FTl Electrosleeve* Review Analyses / Structural Tests e

Fatigue Tests Specimens Minimum Bond Length Procedure e

e e

Result:

No Failures f-EC OLO E

FTl Electrosleeve* Review Analyses / Structural Tests i

l e

Locked Tube Tests Specimens Tubes j

Fixed Span Length i

Results:

l Tube Size Span Length Axial Stress (in.)

(in.)

(ksi) 2 11/16 40.3 3/4 36.0 i

j 7/8 50.5 s

I i

i i

e ECH oLoe E

FTl Electrosleeve Review Analyses / Structural Tests e

Degraded Sleeve Fatigue Test Acceptance Criteria e

RG 1.121 e

e Specimens -

e e

Result:

e e

Specimens -

e e

Result m

ECH ot00 E

FTl Electrosleeve* Review Analyses / Structural Tests e

Degraded Sleeve Burst Test e

Acceptance Criteria j

e RG 1.121 e

e Specimens e

e Sleeve Wall:

e e

o Results Sleeve Test Burst Defect Temo. F Pressure, osig 30% TW Pit RT 30% TW Pit RT 30% TW Axial 30% TW Axial 50% TW Axial ECM otoe 5

O FTl Electrosleeve* Review Analyses / Structural Tests e

Sleeve Plugging Criteria RG 1.121 Analysis Plugging Criteria e

Inspection Interval e

Allowable Defect:

e Plugging Limit i

l fMSUPM

i FTl Electrosleeve Review Creep Tests 1

4 5

e O

M M

F R AM ATO M E TECHNOLOG1ES

FTl Electrosleeve Review Reference Acceptance Criteria m

e W

e M

M F R AM ATO M E TECH NOLOGIES

i FTl Electrosleeve Review Creep Evaluation i

l Evaluate creep based on the

=

Inherent differences Creep testing I

M F R AM ATO M E TECH HOLOGIES

Creep Testing / Evaluation Logic

- f RA po J, g,y A

1 i

i FTl Electrosleeve Review f

Analysis For Creep 4

0 i

I, l

i a

e l

l 1

t 3

]

i i

a

}

l (EM F R AM ATO M E TECHHOL0GIES

1 Creep Strain Analysis,100% Power

[ sum M F R AM ATO M E I E C H N otOG I E S

FT.I Electrosleeve* Review Defects in Parent Tubing Perform creep tests with defects to evaluate the of the material e

Use of Test Results Electrosleeve* material is e

Results consistent with I

M M

F R AM ATO M E TECH NOLOG1E5

i FTl Electrosleeve Review i

J Testing Methodology:

Perform i

i Perform Perform i

Test Results e

X F R AM ATO M E TECHNOLOGIES

l FTl Electrosleeve Review i

i i

4 I

t At operating temperature and pressure,

/ mm M

F R AM ATO M E TECH NOLOG1ES

\\

t F R AM ATO M E TECH NOLCOaES

7 j

FTl Electrosleeve Review Creen Evaluation Methodology i

Creep Tests i

4 Compare To Tests Specimens Key Results sleeve Creep l

Creep Ductile Meet M

i M

F R AM ATO M E TECHNOLoG1ES

n 8

L 4

1 v>Q F-o.

G Q) uO f==R AM ATO F

TCCHHOLOOIE$

ELECTROSLEEVE CORROSION PERFORMANCE GENERAL CORROSION u

Resistant to intergranular degradation (SCC) m Resistant to general corrosion j

u Nanostructured enhances resistance to intergranular degradation (SCC, IGA) and pitting.

i i

i GENERAL CORROSION TESTING a

POURBAIX DIAGRAMS Show stability at high T under pH and Redox ranges compatibles with operating and shutdown conditions j

u ASTM G28, G35, G36, G44, G48 1

l Show resistance to IGA, SCC, Pitting and Crevice Corrosion uns F R AM A M

r e c s u o,T O M..E.

na

SECONDARY SIDE SCC PF;RFORMANCE PARENT TUBE RESIDUAL STRESSS e

CAUSTIC TEST u

RESULTS

~

~

SCC in C-ring controls No SCC in parent I600 m

CONCLUSIONS f

No SCC on Electrosleeve i

4 CRACK ARREST CAPABILITY OF ELECTROSLEEVE a

SCC TEST a

RESULTS multiple through wall cracks on I600 parent tube superficial general attack on Electrosleeve and Ni-200 no cracking on Electrosleeve and Ni-200 All cracks arrested at the Electrosleeve/I600 interface a

CONCLUSION cracks progressing from secondary side are blunted at interface fF R AM AT ans TECH N O 1 maer e

i PRIMARY SIDE SCC PERFORMANCE PURF; WATF;R a

SCC TEST Ni-plated RUB specimens pure water i

a RESULTS i

no cracking on parent I600 tube no corrosion on Ni-plate a

CONCLUSIONS Ni plate stops primary side cracking on I600 Ni plate is compatible with a pure water environment i

PRIMARY WATER a

SCC TEST

~

Ni-plated RUB specimens m

RESULTS No cracking on parent tube No corrosion on Ni plate

\\

m CONCLUSIONS Ni plate stops primary side cracking on I600 Ni plate is compatible with primary coolant envir ent aus F R AM ATO M E TECH N O nne r e

PRIMARY SIDE SHUTDOWS CONDITIONS DE-A ERATED PRIMARY WATER a

GENERAL CORROSION TEST 2500 ppm B j

de-aerated 80,150, 250 *C Ni-plated specimens

~

j u

RESULTS No corrosion of the Ni plate a

CONCLUSIONS Ni plate is compatible with de-aerated primary side environments at different shutdown temperatures CRUD BURST TEST a

GENERAL CORROSION TEST u

m CONCLUSION corrosion at crud burst conditions is acceptable sus a

F R AM ATO M E TCCH N oe nas ee

FTI ElectFo'sle'ete Revie'w AERATED PRIMARY WATER m

GENERAL CORROSION TEST 3100 ppm B 90 *C and 25 *C 4

i n

u CONCLUSIONS electrosleeve is compatible with primary side shutdown aerated environments tC oLoo E

SECONDARY SIDE OPERATING CONDITIONS SCOPING TESTS a

CAPSULE TESTS specimens m

C a

CONCLUSIONS electrosleeve is corrosion resistant to normal and abnormal operating SG secondary environments MODEL STEAM GENERATOR TESTS a

CONSTANT CHEMISTRY HEAT TRANSFER TESTS

/

uns F R A M AT O M E.

M TECH H oe na e

i 256 *C secondary side a

RESULTS a

CONCLUSIONS CORROSION TESTING CONCLUSION u

ELECTROSLEEVES WILL STOP SECONDARY SIDE CRACKS m

ELECTROSLEEVES WILL STOP PRISIARY SIDE CRACKING m

ELECTROSLEEVES ARE COSIPATIBLE WITH PRISIARY SIDE OPERATING AND SHUTDOWN ENVIRONh1ENTS a

ELECTROSLEEVES ARE COAIPATIBLE WITH SECONDARY SIDE ENVIRONAIENTS M

F R AM ATO M E 7ECH N oe nae e e

e FTl Electrosleeve Review 1

1 I

i fM F R AM ATO M E TECH N oLOG I E5

FTl Electrosleeve Review NDE Examination Installation Examination i

UT Position and Length Verification of Sleeve Thickness Detection of Bond / Non-bond Defect detection ECT Baseline Inspection i

Inservice inspection UT or ECT

/ mm M

F R AM ATO M E TEC H N OL0G I ES

9 FTl Electrosleeve Review UT Inspection System and Probe Full RF Signal Storage Rotating 3 Transducer Probe Head 0 Degree Thickness / Profilometry 45 Degree Axial Beam 45 Degree Circ Beam

^

um E CH OLOG E

BWNT - NDE SERVICES : Thickness

I i

i l

BWNT - NDE SERVICES

Thickness l

t 1

l l

l l

l 4

9 l

t BWNT NDE SERVICES : Profilometry l

l l

I i

i 1

l l

\\

8 d

BWNT - NDE SERVICES : Amplitude

O BWNT - NDE SERVICES : Amplitude 1

l l

1 i

i

FTl Electrosleeve Review UT Qualification Defects Used for Process Qualification of UT m

W W

em 9

m M

F R AM ATO M E TECH N OLOG iES

FTl Electrosleeve Review UT Qualification Thickness Accuracy =

Volumetric Length Sizing e

M F R AM ATO M E TEC H N OLOG l E S

I FTl Electrosleeve Review UT Field Data A

1 1

1 1

s 1

i 5

I a

1 i

j i

k M

M F R AM ATO M E TEC H N OLOG 1 E S

s FTl Electrosleeve Review i

i DE vs UT of Field Data W

i i

l fF R AM AT TECH N OL OG I E S

F FTl Electrosleeve Review System and Probe 4

j Summary of Detection Capability 4

e 4

I j

4

)

fF R AM AT ans TEC H N OLOGI E S

FTl Electrosleeve Review

\\

d e

J 4

4 F R AM ATO M E TEC H N OL OG I ES

Q FTl Electrosleeve* Review 1

M F R AM ATO M E TEC H NOLOGiES

a FTl Electrosleeve Review j

Continuina NDE Plans a

4 e

UT 4

a b

I I

1 ECT M

W M

M 4

i i

l F R AM ATO M E TE C H N OLOG I ES

'O LEAK DETECTOR

/bi/

l py CENTERING / SEALING lA!

3!

!q RETURN y

d l

s TUBE / CATHODE

/

\\

't l

l 4

J ANODE

/

e l

SUPPLY 7

O l

,e CENTERING / SEALING l

n, n:

a

[m,wan

1

/

i FIGURE 10.3.1 ELECTROSLEEVE INSTALLATION SYSTEM SCHEMATIC i

l i

l i

i l

FRAM ATOME TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

10-6 l

t

i 0

FTl Electrosleeve Review ASME Code Case N-XXX Electrodeposit Procedure Qualification Requirements for Requalification if Essential Process Variable is Changed Electrosleeving Equipment Operator Qualification and Renewal Requirements NDE Performance Qualification (ME ECH OLOG E

4_

i l

l FTl Electrosleeve Review '

i Electrochemical Deposition Process Control l

l l

ASME Code Case N-XXX

=

Electrodeposition Procedure Specification j

(EPS) l Define Electrosleeve and Tube Materials Qualified Essential and Nonessential Process i.

Variables I

Requirements for Tube Preparation, l

Electrosleeve installation and j

Attachment Criteria Requirements for Electrosleeve l

Examination and Acceptance Criteria Sequence of Operations j

i i

4 mm i

F R AM ATO M E TECHNOLOGIES 1

.