ML20128A011

Summary of 920727 Meeting W/Util,Westinghouse & Pnl in Rockville,Md Re Discussions on Steam Line Break Leakage Issues Relating to Licensees SG Tube Alternate Plugging Criteria Proposal.List of Attendees Encl

ML20128A011
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	11/25/1992
From:	Hoffman S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 9212030142
Download: ML20128A011 (94)

Text

l

• 'e*

November 25, 1992 Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364 LICENStr:

Southern Nuclear Operating company, Inc.

FACllllY:

Joseph H. rarley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 SUDJLCT:

SUMMARY

Of JULY 27, 1992, MEE11NG WITH SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY, INC., REGARDING STEAM GENERATOR TUBE ALTERNATE PLUGGING CRITERIA (TAC N05. M79818 and M79819)

Representatives from Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (the licensee),

and their contractor, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, met with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff and its contractor, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, on July 27, 1992, at NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss steam line break leakage issues relating to the licensee's steam generator tube alternate plugging criteria (APC) proposal and to discuss the licensee's proposal for an interim APC to be implemented at Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Unit 1.

Due to the extent of the proprietary material discussed, the meeting was not open to the public.

Attendees at the meeting are listed in Enclosure 1.

A summary of the meeting and subsequent NRC staff actions are contained in.

By letter dated August 24, 1992, the licensee submitted the handouts as WCAP-13464 (Proprietary) and WCAP-13465 (Non-proprietary),

Response to NRC Questions on f arley Steam Generator Tube Alternate Plugging Criteria Presentation Materials," dated August 1992.

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.790, WCAP-13464 is being withheld from public disclosure. is a copy of WCAP-13465 (Copyrighted) which contains-the non-proprietary information discussed at the meeting.

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:

Stephen T. Hoffman, Project Manager Project Directorate 11-1 Division of Reactor Projects 1/11

Enclosures:

1.

List of Attendees 2.

Meeting Summary 3.

WCAP-13465 Summary was held until WCAP-13464 Proprietary acknowledgement letter was issued.

OFC LA:PD21;DRPE PM:PD21 0flPE D://E21:DRPE 2

NAME MAnNrson SHoffnd:'ims EAdham DATE 11/h/92 11/tT/92 11/p.Y/92 Cocument Name:

FA79818.MTS

?

O bi w

9212030142 921125

h. h 'i PDR ADOCK 05000348 G

P PDR r

-. E

Mr. W. G. Hairston, !!!

Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

cc:

Mr. R. D. Hill, Jr.

State Health Officer General Manager - f arley Nuclear Plant Alabama Department of Public Health Southern Nuclear Operating 434 Monroe Street Company, Inc.

Montgomery, Alabama -36130-1701 P.O. Box 470 Ashford, A?abama 36312 Chairman Houston County Commission Mr. B. L. Moore P.O. Box 6406 Manager, Licensing Dothan,-Alabama 36302 Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

Regional Administrator, Region 11 3

P.O. Box 1295 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 101 Marietta Street, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 l

James H. Hiller, 111, Esq.

Balch and Bingham Resident inspector P.O. Box 306 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1710 Sixth Avenue North P.O. Box 24 - Route 2 Birmingham, Alabama 35201 Columbia, Alabama 36319 i

,n-.-

.,., +

4

l l

ENCLOSURE 1 blI.mDELLLSI July 2 7.u_1192 liRLliELIlliGEld 50VIBIRUM LAR_QEEM111iLCQtiL%!it SILA.M_g[NLRA10R lyEE ALTlRNATE ELVEG114G CR1IERIA NAME QRGb!]lZATION S. Hoffman NRC E. Adensam NRC J. Richardson NRC K. Matthews Westinghouse S. Hodge AEPSC/0.C. Cook K. Toth AEPSC/D.C. Cook N. Economos NRC S. Long NRC E. Hackett NRC J. Muscara NRC R. Kurtz Battelle-PNL P Heasier Battelle-PNL R. Mullins SNC B. Moore SNC T. Pitterle Westinghouse G. Johnson NRC E. Murphy NRC D. Malinowski Westinghouse N. Salgado NRC s

K. Karwoski NRC L. Marsh NRC S. Casey SNC D. Pugh SNC R. Assa NRC H. Chernoff PGE/ Trojan K. Eccleston NRC J. Lee, Jr.

Virginia Power E. Throckmortan, 111 V'rginia Power G. Whiteman We tinghouse P. Prabhu Westinghouse K, Campe NRC J. Stang NRC J. Winton NRC H. Conrad NRC-

ENCLOSURE 2

SUMMARY

OF JULY 27, 1992, HEETING CONCERNING INTERIM AND ALTERNATE STEAM GENERATOR TUBE PLUGGING CRITERIA By letters dated July 10 and August 4.1992, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff transmitted to Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (the licensee),

a request for additional information (RAI) concerning their requested amendments for steam generator tube alternate plugging criteria.

The licensee was requested to address preliminary findings by the staff (provided in Attachment A to the RAl) that the licensee's proposed steamline break (SLB) leakage model may not be sufficiently conservative, and, in addition, that the proposed Monte Carlo analysis may be substantially under-predicting leakage that should be yielded by the model, lhe licensee's contractor, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Westinghouse), made a presentation responding to these concerns.

Details of the Westinghouse presentation are contained in the-meeting handouts (Enclosure 3).

The staff mtde the following three comments concerning the Westinghouse presentation:

1.

The licensee's estimates of SLB leak rate are based on the 90% comulative probability values of the potential leak rate distribution for each indication as determined by Monte Carlo techniques.

The staff believes the use of the 90% cumulative probability value is non-conservative because it does not appear to adequately account for the upper tail of the leak rate versus voltage distribution.

The staff believes that the upper tail of the distribution is likely to be a dominant contributor to the total leakage in each steam generator when dealing with large numbers of leaking tubes.

The staff believes the arithmetic mean is more appropriate for use than the 90% cumulative probability value.

2.

The SLB leakage data used in the licensee's regression analysis include both censored and uncensored data.

The staff believes that if censored data is to be used, the regression technique to fit the data should be appropriate for censored data.

The staff's contractor has provided the licensee a copy of a technical paper discussing this issue entitled, "A Note on the Regression Analysis of Censored Data," published in Technometrics, Vol. 23, No. 2, dated May 1981.

3.

The fit of the regression model to the data should be assessed and shown to be appropriate.

The licensee stated it would consider these comments, r

in response to question 4 of the RAl, Westinghouse presented the status of its ongoing evaluation of burst pressure and SLB leakage versus voltage correlations for 3/4 inch tubing. Westinghouse is evaluating Belgian pulled tube burst strength, SLB leakage, and voltage amplitude data for incorporation into the existing data base for 3/4 inch diameter tubing, issues regarding how the Belgian voltage amplitude and leak rate data are to be normalized to be consistent with the existing data were presented. Westinghouse also discussed considerations for comparing and combining burst and SLB leakage versus voltage data for'3/4 inch tubing with that for 7/8 inch tubing.

---m.,,,,,,n.,-,-,-

-,.,~,--~.-..n-n.,,ana..

-,.,--,,,.nn-.,n-.--,-,--,,--n,--n.n.,----v.nr w

---,n=,

. we v.-.

The licensee _ stated that it planned to submit, by August 28, 1992, a proposal for an interim APC to be implemented at Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant (Farley), Unit 1 during the upcoming refueling outage beginning September 25, 1992, Westinghouse presented the technical justification for this proposal.

Specifically, the licensee is planning to propose:

Eddy current bobbin probe (bobbin) indications less than 1 volt do not require repair.

Above 1 volt, bobbin indications confirmed by a rotating pancake coil probe (RPC) shall be limited to 200 indications per steam generator between 1 and 2 volts.

All bobbin flaw indications above 3,6 volts will be repaired.

As part of its presentation of the technical justification for this proposal, recognizing that there remain technical issues to be resolved regarding the Westinghouse methodology for calculating SLB leakage (see earlier discussion above), Westinghouse presented an alternative, largely deterministic method for determining SLB leakage that could be used in support of the planned interim APC proposal.

The licensee requested feedback from the staff on the planned interim APC proposal as soon as )ossible. After a staff caucus subsequent to the meeting, the staff informed tie licensee by telephone that the proposal _to accept up to 200 indications per steam generator between 1 and 2_ volts would not be acceptable.

As has previously been approved for farley, Uni'. 2, it is the staff's position (pending completion of the APC review) that ii.'_arim voltage--

based limits shou M not exceed 1 volt (as measured by a bobbin) for bobbin indications confinned by RPC, and should not exceed 3.6 volts for bobbin indications not confirmed by RPC.

WESTINGHOUSE CLASS 3 (NON PROPRIETARY)

+,

WCAP-13465 l

RESPONSE TO NRC QUESTIONS ON FARLEY STEAM GENERATOR TUBE ALTERNATE PLUGGING CRITERIA PRESENTATION MATERIALS-G. W. WHITEMAN AUGUST 1992 P

l-Westinghouse Electric Corporation Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division P.O.-Box 355' Pittsburgh. Pa. 15230 i-

-(c) 1992 Westinghouse Electric Corporation All Rights Reserved f-

~

1 i

A meeting was held on July 27,1992 based alternate plugging criterion for th

ompany, e voltage The presentation rnaterials are included within. initiate er diameter erator tubes.

The following te, pics were discussed by Westinghouse:

1.

altemate steam generator tube p10gging enterion e

2.

signals having confirmed IUC indicati ro e steam generator between 1.0 and 2.0 volts. All bobbin probe er volts will be plugged or repaired.

A status of the evaluation of 3/4" tube diameter data and the impa bunt and leaktightness database was provided to the NRC s existing tube an out.

1 1

PAGE 1 l

\\

JULY 27, 1992 INTERIM PLUGGING CRITERIA ISSUES INTRODUCTION BRAD MOORE STEAM LINE BREAK LEAKAGE TOM PITTERLE e

INTERIM PLUGGING CRITERIA TOM PITTE e

RIcx MULLINS CONCLUSION e

BRAD MOORE l

l PAGE 2 i

l l

v=-

e

~,e v ~

--r

,we-w.

+

-.-.w-

,---aw,.g

,v.k--

s, me-.

-e*.

?

i i

SLB LEAK RATE ANALYSES QUESTIONS 21, 22 AND ATTACNMENT-A DISCUSSION TOPICS ATTACHMENT A ISSUE

SUMMARY

MEAN LEAK RATE MEAN OF LOG NORMAL VS ARITHMETIC AVERAGE e

" EXPECTED"

" AVERAGE" 0F ATTACHMENT A VS REAL '

e LIKELIN000 0F OCCURRENCE CONVERGENCE OF MONTE CARLO EXAMPLES FOR SAMPLING OF LEAK RATE CORRE e

FORM OF LEAK RATE CORRELATION CONCERNS ON ATTACHMENT A CORRELATION e

BASIS-FoR FARLEY/EPRI CORRELATION e

SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT OF CORRELATION e

CONCLUSIONS e

ALTERNATE SLB LEAK RATE ANALYSIS METHODS e

MONTE CARLO e

DETERMINISTIC PROBABILITY OF LEAKING TUsES L

PAGE 3 t prostions

'T 1r d'

FW9---'

Wet#W?5 Tr M1W*'9 9Nadv+*W*m'++TI--'M.am+-*

="m--a.

'-4M--

.-T N-

~WWh 9Wq.w-w-+-V-4-"*Ww-

@$*wcv

.+yW-W e-+%rwh y

e-wT-m-rr&.'-

CRACK LENGTH CONSIDERATIONS F0 CRACK LENGTH FOR' BURST =

(c 36P-CRACK LENGTH

)"THRUWALL (>0. 75" TSP e

R.G.1.121 CRITERfA FOR CRACK LE o

EXCESSIVE MARGINS AGAINST BURST AT CRACK LENGTHS (PART-THRUWAL PRESSURES >9000 PSI RST TSP ODSCC CRACK LENGTHS OFTEN e

OCCASIONALLY LOCAL, SHORT AN (MICR0 CRACKS)

REPAIR BASIS OF PLUGGIN CANNOT DEVELOP A CRITERIA BE e

APPLIED CONSERVATIVE DUE-TO CU TO LIMITED ACCURACY ON DEPTH CALLS HRUWALL DUE WOULD NEED RPC VOLTAGE FOR e

GROWTH DATA)

COULD REQUIRE EXCESSIVELY CONSER INSPECTION OF ALL TSP INTERSECTIONS ON CRACK LENGTH SCREENING CONCLUSIONS CRACK LENGTHS WOULD LEAD TO EXCES e

CONSERVATIVE REPAIR CRITERIA DUE T TO POSTULATE AS THRUWALL NEED CRACK LENG1MS CAN ONLY BE U e

ACCURATE DEPTH VS LENGTH NDE MEASURE NOT WITHIN CURRENT OR NEAR TE 4.

nosh o m et PAGE 4 w

y g

~

w V,p p

-y.

v w-w-

,-v,w

,ye---

+

-*w,e

-r-savt--gW.--w,

,e,-tw---

er -

~+s-e w

a we4--

--*-M-

'm

SLB LEAK RATE ANALYSES 2

ATTACHMENT A Issue

SUMMARY

UTILIZATION OF PROBABILITY OF LEAKAGE PROPOSED IN ATTACHMENT e

\\

NOT CURRENTLY PART OF APC e

FORM OF LEAK RATE CORRELATION 1

UTILIZATION OF NON-LEAKING DATA IN e

DEFINITION AND INTERPRETATION OF "M 0F DISTRIBUTION APPLICABILITY OF AVERAGE OF DISTRIBU e

CONVERGENCE OF MONTE CARLO NUMBER OF SAMPLES REQUIRED e

p

.l

. i-i PAGE 5 roationat -

c r.

.,my

. +.., - --,,

,.r...-.s

,.-s.

e.

s

l l

SLB LEAK RATE ANALYSES HEAN" LEAK RATE DEFINITIONS i

DEFINITION OF "MEAN" 0F LOG NORMAL D:sTRIsUTIO "HEAN" DEPENDENT ON COORDINATE SYSTEM:

B LOG OR LINEAR SYSTEM I

B LOG / LOG COORDINATES LOG OF DISTRIBUTION APPROACNE5 NORMAL MEAN (AVERAGE OF LOG YALUE5) AND MED BEST ESTIMATE VALUE IN LOG COORDINATES LOG NORMAL IN LINEAR COORDINATES e

I MEDIAN UNCHANGED MEAN (AVERAGE OF ABSOLUTE OR LINEAR V 5HIFT5 TO LARGER VALUE A5 A STRONG FUNCTIO 3

OF STANDARD DEVIATION MEAN 15 DIRECT NUMERICAL AVERAGE OVER i

I DISTR.TRUTION AND CAN BE DOMINATED BY UPPER TAIL OF THE DISTRIBUTION NUMERICAL AVERAGE ("HEAN") 0F LOG NORMAi IS NOT AN EXPECTED VALUE INCREASES ABOVE MEDIAN OR EXPECTED VALUE B

CORRELATION A5 STANDARD DEVIATION INCREASES FOR LEAK RATE CORRELATION, ' AVERAGE NUMBERS -OF e

DIFFERING BY A FEW DECADES SUCH THAT LARGEST DISTRIBUTION VALUE5 DOMINATE AVERAGE AVERAGE : + 90% ON ONE-SIDED PREDICTION INTERVAL MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS RESULT AT 90% CUMULATIVE l

PROBABILITY (TWO-SIDED) ON DISTRIBUTION SHOULD B THAN NUMERICAL AVERAGE MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS ARE CONSISTENT WIT e

VALUES PAGE 6 roonm a

m S---+--*,t

+ v i-- ?

-wyrw e.e t warr

--w++

.c e.w.m--.+me a w. y w.,.

..-e,..

v.,s,..

.....e-,--,--,s.

-,w.+

v

-..3 w---,e--+--,w-4,m-.

==<=,w--,w-s-

+ - -. +

m'e-me.-

- s wes,

r NORMAL & LOGNORMAL DISTRIBUTIONS t

SIGMA = 0.2 O.8 4

i

" " " "t. " " " " " " " " " j "" " ". e. " " " "

'"""".t"""*" '"""."b'""""".""""

O.6 r

3.5

.I

0. 4 -......g o

.....a.....'.**...a*..e....j.*.....*...*....*.. ***.*...*b.."..*.a

...*.... 3 W

e i

i 4

8 1

l 0.2-...............9....................j....

g.......

.......... <.........-......... 2.5 l

iN

&.........,...........l....

..l.........S..........

2

......... +!.........l....

0.2-8

.................a:.........

3.

.i.5 i

N<

ml t

n

......4.........;.........j..........}..........l....................l'........a, 0,4......... '

1 1

I

.j 0.6 I

t 1

4

. """t"""-r.l"""-

1"""-

""".""""""g l

N.

0.5

~ ~ " " -

l I

I 0.8 i

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 i

0 f

5 l

i PAGE 7

n

_23e--w--.hA"b$*

8 h

g NORMAL & LOGNORMAL DISTRIBUTIONS SIGMA = 1.465 hr

-1000 f

.......(,......... s..........i.,e.....4.........,......... 4,..u.........u......,...no..,...........

3 e""""

' " " " - ~~"*"4 N

" " " " "! " " " " 4" " " " " -600 g'

o I

t 7

2-i* "*

• j' " -

- 4 00

...i........,........................!......... %

................................ 00 0-4-

l-i v<

4

... 6CD 8

.1 i

........ 4......

l t

40o l<

i<

2-c

-300

........ I' <./

3 I

200 1

t i

4

.........+!.........p.........,.

jgo lN 5

i

-0 i

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.26 0.3 a36 0.4 0.45 0.5 f

\\.

i

\\.

1

=

-s s

l

(

i i

a I

~,

t

}

l I

_\\ <

1 1

)

i I

l l

\\i

\\

..............'.....a e

PAGE 8 v

,e-

+~w-.

-,-----orre,-

,--r

,,e m,,,--,,--.,~r

4

.g Figure 3 Comparison of Expected teak Rates as a Fun Votege for the Ahemate and Westingbuse Lea c 0n of o es S

PAGE 9 l

. - - - ~ ~

n i

MONTE CARLO CONVERGENCE SAMPLING OF l.EAk RATE CORRELATION PERFORMED FOR 2.0 AND 6.2 VOLT INDICATIO e

SPAN REGION OF INTEREST PERFORMED WITH - AND WITHOUT GROWTH + HDE e

UNCERTAINTY EVALUATED AT CUMULATIVE PROBABILITY e

90% CUM. PROS. <+

90% ONE-SIDED CONFIDENCE CONCLUSIONS CUMULATIVE PRoBAsILITY CONVERGENCE e

WITHIN ~5% OF THEORETICAL ON LEAK RAT 10,000 SAMPLES ESSENTIALLY No DIFFERENCE FROM: THEOR AT 100,000 SAMPLES NUMERICAL AVERAGE OF PREDICTED DISTRIsU e

HORE DIFFICULT TO CONVERGE DUE TO SENSITIVITY TO A FEW LARGE -5AMPLES '

YARIATIONS BY FACTORS -OF 2-4 BETWEEN 10,000 AND 1,000,000 SAMPLES-PAGE 10 croatson nt rfu"*?

r y

e qty = p w y-+ p-q w g nu ry avy94==gte-e-me, g p e s 9qww--_

-v-ty y -

--c-u.

y-w

=>-yetm g-

-w---*-wen s ty wy-q w

y w

my,,.,,eg,wt e

-=

-wv'N-v

es

-rm la-t-'

w ww-tvY 9-r' we

EXAMPLES OF HoNTE CARLO CONVERGENCE NO. MONTE GPM WITHOUT GROWTH OR NDE UNC.

{_ARLO_$AMPLEs HEDIAN AVERAQI 90% CUM.

2.0 VOLT INDifAI1QB 1,000 2.0E-6 1.9E-3 2.8E-4 10,000 2.4E-6 2.5E-2 2.3E-4 THEORETICAL 2.3E-6

~1.2E-3*

2.4E-4 6.2 VOLT INDICATION 5,000 1.6E-4 7.6E-2 1.4E-2 10,000 1.8E-4 1.3E-1 1.5E-2 50,000 1.8E-4 1.2E-1 1.6E-2 100,000 1.7E-4 6.1E-1 1.6E-2 200,000 1.7E-4 4.6E-1 1.6E-2 500,000 1.7E-4 3.6E-1 1.6E-2 1,000,000 1.7E-4 3.3E-1 1.6E-2 THEORETICAL 1.7E-4

~6.2E-2*

1.6E-2 oTH EL.;i' '4'b :

AL OF ATTACHMENT 2 ASSUMES NORMAL DISTRIBU (LA E,

1. 90LATION).

(LIMITEc POPULATION). CORRELATION BASED ON T r

PAGE 11 sotmnonm

i 1

CONCERNS ON ATTACHMENT A CORR STATISTICAL FIT TO PART OF DATA TO BE CONSISTENT WITH PHYSICS OF LEAKA AINT IGNORES THRUWALL CRACKS WIT 4

OF DATA BASE INCONSISTENT WITH KNOWLEDGE R 9

LEAKAGE AT LOW VOLTAGES AND LARG HICH V0LTAGES

- T SLOPE OF FIT INCONSISTENT WITH e

DEPENDENCE ON CRACK SIZE COMPARISON OF LEAK RATE CORRELATIONS FARLEY/EPRI CORRELATION -

e r

n3 i.

J-ALTERNATE CORRELATION e

L.R..c y0.70

- u,mm PAGE 12

=

4 T-

+

er w

e pg g-g+ m v-syw=-

gv-g--T-tdev---g d'yig-f y'wr'-+=wI w'-e t y-Twwry:9--

--ww=s-%,r

-M

=*

• ee-ys-e-r

• r--wry-

-w-+r=s--r-mer---s- + = -. -r-V hym--'e-e-

4 4

4 4

e n

_=

1 I

1 l

l l

3; 1

I N

1

(

PAGE 13

,e.....--.

l t

FORH OF LEAK RATE CORRELATION BASI 5 FOR FARLEY AND EPRI APC i

CORRELATION MUST SATISFY KNOWN STATISTICS SHOULD BE USED ONLY T 9

CORRELATION WITHIN BOUNDING PHYS LEAKAGE LEAKAGE SHOULD BE 8

9 ALL PULLED TUBE AND MODEL BOIL THRUWALL CRACKS FOR"INDICATESNEGL l

I EVENIFTHRUWALLCRACKOCCURhED, i

LENGTH WOULD BE TOO SHORT (<0.15")

TO HAVE MEASURABLE LEAKAGE EXPONEpT OF VOLTAGE SHOULD BE ON THE e

r LEAK RA}E VS CRACK LENGTH HAS t

OF, 0N CRACK LENGTH VOLTAGE INCREASES APPR0XIMATE WITH-CRACK LENGTH FOR THRUWA LEAKING) CRACKS RESULTS IN-LARGE LEAKAGE AT H (LARGE CRACK LENGTHS)

LEAKAGE AS A' FUNCTION OF VO A SIGNIFICANT THRUWALL CRACK W e

l CORRELATION CONSISTENT WITH LEAKAGE PROBASILITY OF LEAKAGE VS VOLTA e

VOLTAGE VALUE AND 14AV CRACK 1

T nonisonm.

PAGE 14

-+ - ' "

4 we**-V^r v'+vi1rn-etr e&C'?61+44 Pr-e'e-W-M'iT'w1-tm-wN+7-?7--mTr*@ 4m*-73E--*e-=?'mTer--;rever g,wg--g.m.Agry w

yw,--gg-w---wm_amg et-gry-Tgw<g vyw mgvymur w ywvt g wrg-vv--

'FTVr-'-

t'tv-e7-m-T

1 100..

E E

Rectar$wtar was sioi N E E

~

12 "a

c_

10:

l-

.c A

g L at "

'.h t.

~

m... w Tapered Asial sies T

we I

I 5

1-3 0

0 0

' a O

n O

O I

4730 NlllH TR sn SCM COL AT 4 Ctrl 0D 0.1, O

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

1; SLOT LENGTH, INCH E TM*U *ALL 4 M DEEP O 80% DEEP Z m DEN ~

M TAPERED i.

Figure 5 2. Bobbin Coll Vohage Dependence on Slot Largth PAGE 15 r

p.

p y

y y.

---z w-.g-w--m---

g

.q.

=

w y - - - --

y w

-4_e1

---4J

=)

L.

Xa--

+-+m

-W M 4-44 4 M -

4.M-N4-+2*-4ha A,w

--h42M*-LL4hg_awWGA--.a+A+4 A

4 Jwm4A.A Amm am--

v4W aa d-4AWaAA--A-,AAA__.

e_-a e

~ $

g a

s e

0.875 INCH OD 50 MIL THlCK l-600 TUBIN 100 i

0.720 NCH DAMETER BOBBN Cot. AT 400(100 W 9>

I m

80 w

h 70-64 B

SO.

40-

• 5 30-N 20-

"a 10

!m k

A 0:

n O

E'l 0.'2 3

i 0.3 c.'4 05

• 7 as o's i

s AxiAt. st.or tes

,y m E MAWAL1, & g W X m R

O m DEEP W yg PAGE 16.

r e k Rate w Crad Length from CRACKFLO

~

steam Line Break 7/8"TWng i

-y 7

I 1

m E

a a

v e

~

m'

$T x

m e

u

)

i l

E L

l CM Length (inches) 2 I

l

~,, _ _. _.,

\\,.

- - -- - --- - ~~

FORM OF LEAK RATE CORRELATI0' BASIS FOR FARLEY AND EPRI/APC TA ATION NONLEAKERS WITH THRUWAl L CRACKS SHO ABOUT LABORATORY THRESHOLD OF LExKAGE PLOTTED AT APPROXIMATELY ETECTICH r

e lj APPLYING NONLEAKERS AT e

/HR RESULTS IN STEEPER SLOPE AND LARGER UNCERTAINTY RATE CURVE - JUDGED CONSERVATIVE FOR OR LEAK INDICATIONS ARGE MAY HOT BE CONSERVATIVE AT SMALL VOLTAGES (INTERIM APC) FOR WHICH LEAK RATES ARE VERY SMALL COMPARED t

TO CALCULATED ALLOWABLE LIMITS PENDING ADDIT 13th DeTA ON NONLEAKERS WITH THRUWALL CRA CKS, LIMITED DATA ON NON-THRUWALL CRACKS TO Ak,'H0k CURVE AT BE USED INDICATIONS SHOULD BE >90%

'".EP BY DESTRUCTIV

'EAKAGE 8

EXAM TO PROVIDE VOLTAGES REPRESENTAT E

THRUWALL CRAXS OF SHORT VOLTAGE INTER 9

ACCEPTABLE

'PT AT ~ZERO LEAKAGE MUST BE n4 2:o m er PAGE 18

_ - - - - - - - - - - - - ^

1,,

LEAK RATE CONSIDERATIONS FOR SELEC m

MODEL BOILER SPECIMENS 543-1, 543-2 SPECIMENS PART OF INITIAL TESTS e

UTILIZED EXISTING MODEL BOILER SPEC UTILIZED EXISTING-LEAK TEST FACILITY-LIMITED TO ~6 L/HR LEAK RATE CAPAC 9

SPECIMENS COUND TO HAVE 6 L/HR LEAK RATE e

VISUAL EXAMINATION OF BURST CRACK I LEAK-RATE SHOULD HAVE BEEN >6 L/HR SPECIMENS THEREFORE NOT INCLUDED IN L e

CORRELATIONS LEAK RATE FACILITIES SUBSEQUENTLY MO S

INCREASE LEAK RATE CAPACITY FA9L2Y PM LED Tust R31046 NOT LEAK TESTED BUT SMALL THROUGHWALL e

(0,02") INDICATED NO LEAKAGE WOULD BE EXPECTED EVALUATION OF DESTRUCTIVE EXAMINATIO e

FACE INDICATED CRACK-WOULD NOT OPEN SUF

(>0.1") TO LEAK AT SLB CONDITIONS THEREFORE INCLUDED AS NON-LEAKER AT e

IN LEAK RATE CORRELATION i.

4P2042:073292 PAGE'19

~

t s

E,--.,a.'(5 I

-. y.s,,,,

c,

[ '7

,.c dt; -

5 o

t.

y

.* /

o

.t b'

,.?,,

K,,,

.,. 1. :

...,,s A7..~,.. r

~~s ue Figure 3.2 - SM fractography of the opened first support plate crevice crack montage starts 0.2 laches above the crack bottom acc* 3xtends 0.32 inches above this

. The The 'L' marks latergranular ledges where smaller cracks have joined t.ogether to form the 0.62 inch sacro-crack.

corrosion regica and the shear area where the materials was tora la the labor Area A shows an enlargement of the latergranular corrosion region, and area B shoss enlargement of the shear area.

an I

i

l-'

l l'

3 SENSI IVITY ASSESSMENT OF SLB LEAK RATE CORRELA 3ENSITIVITY TO MODELING WITHIN 7/8" TUBING DEFINITION OF ~0 LEAKAGE.FOR NON-LEAKER 4

I 0F DETECTION DELETION OF NON-THRUWALL TUBES AT ~0 LEA e

TRENDS FORM 3/4" TUBING DATABASE (SOME RATE DATABA$E THAN 7/8" DATA)

DATA FROM INCOMPLETE, 9

ONGOING EVALUATION OF 3/4" TUBING (PRELIMINARY) 3/4" VOLTAGES INCREASED BY 1.36 FACTOR FOR e

COMPARISONS WITH 7/8" DATA 3/4 LEAK RATES DECREASED BY 20% FoR c0MP 6

WITH 7/8 DATA COMPARISON OF SLOPSS AND ~0_ LEAKAGE INT TRCNDS FROM COMBINED 3/4" AND 7/8" DATABASE e

PRELIMINARY DATA COMPARISON-OF SLOPES AND ~0 LEAKAGE INTE e

PAGE 21 P}Q$2:C72292

____ _ __ _ _a

SENSITIVITY OF SLB LEAK RATE CORRELATI oELING ANo DATA RATIO No or Avs.

sg DESCRIPTIoM ZEno PoINrs CONSTANT Exponent COEFF.

ERaon L.R.

To Core.

STo.

NoMxnAL 8" DATA F

1 FAnLEY (7/8" oNLY) 99 2

CASE 1, MoorFIEn ZERO 3

CASE 2, TW DATA ONLY 4

CASE 3, MooIFIED y

ZERO P,

i.

4" DATA

• m

~

Al REFERENCE EVAL.

p J

8"+3/4" DATA _*

m9 B1 REFERENCE EVAL.

C1 CASE B1, DELETE ZERO DATA.

t J5LTERNA M COMBINATION (3/4"N. B. )

RELIMINARY EvatuATxon E

1

=

~

1 w

SLB LEAK RATE EVALUATON COMPARISON OF REGRESSION UNES r

9-

~'

- i E

LU F-n:a 9

v>

BOBBIN AMPUTUDE, VOLTS O MB SPEOMEN I PULLED TUBE -- CASE 1:

- CASE 2

--- CASE 3

.w CASE 4 t

PAGE 23 i

I J

s a

mw, w

e

...n

E F

)

SLB LEAK RATE EVALUATION 1

CASE A1: 3/4' OD DATA l

,g 2

=

Y b

e v>

BOBBIN AMPUTUDE, VOLTS A MS SPEQMEN N ' PULLED TUSE - REGR. PIT.

PAGE 24 l

l

-^

_ FORM OF_ LEAK RATE CORRELATION CONCLUSIONS INCREASED DATABASE FROM 3/4" TUBING SUPPO (SLOPE, ZERO LEAKAGE INTERCEPT) 0F SLB LEAKAGE-

-CORRELATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES INDICATE VARIABILITY {0N LEAK RATE CORRELATION IS ABOUT A FACTOR OF g

VOLTS BASED ON 7/8" DATA ONLY.

CHANGES WHICH INCREASE THE NOMINAL LEAK RATE TEND TO REDUCE THE COR STANDARD ERROR.

INCORPORATING NON-LEAKERS AT ~ZERO LEA STANDARD ERROR (CONSERVATISM) COMPARED TO FO

~ZERO LEAKAGE DATA.

A PRELIMINARY COMBINATION OF THE 3/4" AN TUBING-INDICATES A TREND TOWARD GREATER LE 3/4" TUBING.g THE COMBINED DATA THEN RESULTS IN UP FACTOR OF INCREASE IN THE LEAK RATE CORRELATION COMPARED t0'THE 7/8" DATA ONLY.

l.

l l

t PAGE 25 erostion292 w,--

ALTERNATE SLB LEAK RATE ANALYSI MONTE C RLO ANALYSIS e

ADVANTAGES CAN READILY ACCOMMODATE ANY TYP DISTRIBUTION (DIRECT MEASUREMENT,

NORMAL, ETC.) PRESCRIBED FORMULA OR C T,

PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION OUTPUT YIELDS CUMULATIVE PROBAB DISTRIBUTION OF LEAK RATES WHICH C EVALUATED AT THE DESIRED CONFIDE (90%)

e DISADVANTAGE REQUIRES COMPUTER PROGRAM DETERMINIS7IC ANALYSIS e

ADVANTAGE SIMPLICITY IN APPLICATION DISADVANTAGE e

REQUIRES ASSUMPTIONS ON UNCER TO BE APPLIED FOR EACH VARIABLE (NDE GROWTH, LEAKAGE)

PAGE 26

'roariorr 92

i, ALTERNATE SLB LEAK RATE ANALYSIS M i

DETERMINISTIC MODEL EVALUATED EOC VOLTAGE = BOC VOLTS +- NDE UNC.1+

e GROWTH NDE UNC. AND GROWTH EACH ADDED CUMULATIVE PROBABILITY LEAK RATE FOR E00 VOLTS EVALUATED AT 9

90% CONFIDENCE-ON MEAN OF SLB L l

CORRELATION l

90% PREDICTION INTERVAL OF SLB L CORRELATION COMPARISON FOR-BOC 2.0 VOLTS MONTE CARLG SLB LEAK RATE = 2.3X1 9

DETERMINISTIC 9

GPM FARLEY 1,2 GROWTH / CYCLE AT 90% cum.

PR0s. = 0.6 VOLTS NDE UNCERTAINTY AT EOC VOLTS = 2.92 VOLTS 90% = 16% = 0 LEAK RATE: 90% ON MEAN =t 7

--g-90% ON PRED. INTERVAL =

r

3 a

MONTE CARLO RESULT CONSERVATIVELY e

DETERMINISTIC METHODS ~ APPLYING 90%

INTERVAL 90% ON MEAN IS HORE: REPRESENTATIV COLLECTIVE LEAKAGE FROM A LARGE-P PAGE 27 rosanonm I

w

,--m i

PROBABILITY OF SLB LEAKAGE ASSESSMENT BASED ON PULLED TUBE AND M COMBINED 7/8" AND 3/4" 0ATA e

167 INDICATIONS' EVALUATED AS PERCENT OF INDICATIONS W e

AS A FUNCTION OF VOLTAGE e

EVALUATED FOR:

LEAKAGE >0.0 L/HR LEAKAGE >1.0 L/HR = 0.0044 GPM 225 INDICATIONS ~1 GPM e

CONCLUSIONS THRESHOLD FOR LEAKAGE >0.0 t/HR.

e

_S FARLEY PULLED TUBE TUBE R4C73 9

THRESHOLD FOR LEAKAGEPLANT R-1 (3/

g e

PLANT E-4 (3/4"T R33C96 (1.5 t/HR) ~AT 4.8-7.2 VOLTS DEPENDENT ON CURRENT VO RENORMALIZATION UNCERTAINTY IMPLICATIONS FROM LEAKAGE EXPERIENCE e

LEAKAGE F,0R _EgC INDICATIONS <2.5 VOLTS WOULD BE LEAKAGE 50REOCINDgCATIONSOF2.5-4 VOLTS

~

WOULD BE

~22'SE00INDiCATIONSOF2.5-4V0gTS e

WCULD HAVE SLB LEAK RATE PAGE 28 3&2:073292

PRonABILITY OF SLB LEAK - Swe4ARY DATA BASE

^

E TYPE OF VOLTAGE DIRECT MEASUREMENTS INFERRED FROM MORPHOLOGY g

SPECIMEN

_ RANGE _

No LEAK

<1.0L/na*

11.0L/na No Lr.ag Lgag N00EL 0.1 - 11 BOILEn 10 80 6.5 - 140 i

PULLED 0.2 - 10 TUsES 2.8 - 34 18

- 44 0.2 - 2.8 7.0 36 HODEL 0.6 - 6**

s BOILER 4-9 R

4.2 - 65 3

PULLED 0.4 - 2 TusEs 1.8 3.5 - 10 0.2 - 1.2 1

TOTAL INorcArrons

= 167 e

M00EL BorLEn =

74 e

PutLEn TusEs =

93 1.0 LITER /He = 0.0044 GPM On ~225'IwoICATIons AT L/HR PER GPM.

DIRECT 3/4" VOLTAGES WITHOUT 1.36 FACTOR FOR COMPARING WITH 7/

2.9 t

4 9

SLB LEAKAGE - MB SPECIMEN DATA

_g 9

I g

2 y

a l

_l_

b I

PAGE 30 y

- _., _. = ~.. - - - - _

c_ :

... _. ~ - - - - - - - - -

' " - ~ ' " ^ ~ ~

f..

4 SLB LEAKAGE - PULLED TUBE DATA _

,- t E

b i

~

SOBBIN AMPUTUDE RANGE, VOLTS ^

e Q WTTH LEAK I

IW!THOUT LEiAK 4

PAGE 31

h SLB MGE PROBABluTY P'

,g.

t i

b 8

a 8

4 1

BOBBIN AMPUTUDE RANog, yOLTS -

a 1

PAGE-32

-___,-,-.m_,4-,

e m, _

m a js, dm*

iA ae -

J 4

,.am-

+

4*.w44 r-

,e-s

..a-m

- 4 m

a.s, a-

-e sea O

a 8e' e

e 4

SLB LEAKAGE PROBA81UTY

-^

=

_. g.

8 1

8 th t

- l M

PAGE 33 e

~~5-

,-er.

m.

,v.

.+-

a

• -m--

y v

+ -.

• ar*

T r v e-

• w, t>=

4 n+.a nass a

aa------.--e+nu--2.

e e

s.

.n--

=ame s

.a a

a-

,~...-,sp a-.

=---,s

-..w

.aw-s an.*

-..,wu.v s

sass.

.s.4 g

4 e.

f e

4 i

l e

SLB LEAKAGE - MS SPECIMEN DATA

- -9

^t I

1. 1M L l LEAK < 1 Lpgg 4

5 PAGE 34-a

4 t

-9

.g

-I SLB LEAKAGE - PULLED TUBE DATA-

9..

I b

I I

J.

OM>1M 1.

luiAK < 1 Lael---

PAGE 35 y,-,,

e SLB LEAKAGE PROBABlUTY 9

1 A

b I

a 8

i W

PAGE 36

..~

....~.

...~ -,

SLB LEAKAGE PROBABluTY=

7 9

G a.

J A

8 8

8 I

-M DATA

- LOOSTIC RT -

PAGE 37 4

,sw

.-.y

_ - - - - - ~ - - ~

~

~

4

\\

OVERALL CONCLUSION THE FORM (SLOPE, ZERO LEAKAGE INTENCEP SLB LEAK RATE CORRELATION IS SU EY 3/4" TuaING DATA. LEAKAGE BEHAVIOR AN CLUDING UNCERTAINTY ON NOMINAJ. CpRRELATION A 0

BE ABOUT A FACTOR OF ABOUT 2 AND 10 v0LTS7 ~ CN LEAK RATES BETWEEN MONTE CARLO ANALYSES FOR SLB LEAK CONVERGE IN ABOUT 10,000 SAMPLES.

RATE ACCEPTABLY THE MEAN OR NUMERICAL AVERAGE O RATE DISTRIBUTION REPRESENTS A

LOW AK OCCURRENCE (AT ABOUT

+

90%

PREDICTION INTERVAL)

PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION.STRONGLY INFLUENCED BY THE LEAK RATE RATES EXCEEDING A DETERMI AK CONFIDENCE ON THE MEAN LEAK RATE ASED ON 90%

EXPECTEDLY LESS THANBASED ON THE +90% PREDICTION CORRELATION WHILE INTERVAL.

EVALUATION OF THE FIELD AND MODEL BOILER DATA FOR THRESHOLD FOR HO LEAKAGE IS AB THEg0LTAGE SIGNIFICANT LEAKAGE (> 1 LITER /HR)j~IS ABOUT '] AND F0 t

PAGE 38

_.--~--'--

~. - - - ' - - - ' ' ~

_ - - - - ~ - ~ - ~ ' '

INTERIM PLUGGING CRITERIA FOR UNIT 1,

FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT 100% soBBIN COIL INSPECTION OF A o

TUBES o

NO MORE THAN 200 INTERSECTIONS WITH BOBBIN VOLTAGES BETWEEN 1

AND 2

VOLTS, OF ODSCCCONFIRMED BY RPC,AS A RESULT

FLAWS, WILL BE LEFT IN SERVICE o

AUGMENTED INSPECTION PROGRAM PAGE 39

4 INTERIM PLUGGING CRITERIA BASIS e

l' 4.5 volts 3/4 7/8 INCH o

i STRUCTURAL LIMIT (WCAP-13237) o 1.0 VOLT 99%

CUMULATIVE PROBABILTTY FOR GROWTH OVER LAsT UNIT 1 AND 2 CYCLES o

0.7 volts 25% NDE UNCERTAINTY e

2.8 volts PLUGGING LIMIT l

PROPOSED INTERIM PLUGGING LIMIT 2.0 VOLTS PAGE 40 4

~

s

--m

i BASIS FOR INCREASED INTERIM APC VOLTA INCREASED TUBE BURST AND SLB LEAKAGE DA 3/4" HODEL BOILER o

3/4" BELGIAN AND PLANT R PULLED TUBES e

7/8" FRENCH DATA e

ENHANCEDDATABASETODEFINg$lBLEAKAGETHRESHOLD e

THRESHOLD FOR 2ERO LEAKAGE e

THRESHOLD

[IORNEGLIGIBLELEAKAGE 1.0 LITER HR. = 0.0044 GPM

-ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR NDE UNCERTAIN HISTORICALLY (1985-1992) $ MALL GROW UnrTS 1 AND 2 CONSERVATISMS IN SLB BURST ANALYSES

-LARGE MARGINS AGAINST BURST FOR VO NEGLIGIBLE SLB LEAKAGE o

7/8" DATAsASE PRELIMINARY COM8INED 7/8" AND 3/4" l

e DETERMINISTIC AND PR0sABILISTIC MAR O

xtson2sz PAGE 41 I

st' l

DATABASE APPLIED FOR INTERIM APC ASSESSMENT 1

VOLTAGE / BURST CORRELATIONS e

7/8" TUBING:

FARLEY CORRELATION e

7/8" + 3/4":

EPRI (~FARLEY) + TOTAL 3/4" DATABASE SLB LEAK RATE CORRELATIONS

.e 7/8" TUBING:

FARLEY CORRELATION e

7/8" + 3/4":

CONSERVATIVE EPRI (~FARLEY) + 3/4" MODEL BOILER i

PAGE 42 onusonm i

MpureS2

Surst Pressure Correlatbn Whh nothin yo9 F

0 7

==

V PAGE 43

- - - - ^ ' "

i 1

Burst Pressure Vsrsus-Bobbin Volto9e s

i

'E

.x m

6 5

ee 6c.

• • e L

c3 mms.m Bobbin Voltoge. Volts S

PAGE 44 f

9

0 9

4 I

e i

O3 9

.cSb O

T

^

Qd 3

$ v$.

.c e,

O Cr k

.x O

8' a,

a J

CC (awl)60, 9

3 PAGE 45

c gw-v-ADDITIONAL HDE UNCERTAINTY EVALUAT"0NS CHANNEL HEAD HOCKUP TESTS WITH PROBE WEAR PURPOSE COMPARE VOLTAGE VARIABILITY FOR WORN EC e

ZETEC PROBES ASSESS PROBE REPLACEMENT CALLS FOR VARIOUS e

LOCATIONS OF WEAR STANDARD AcS!rss HDE UNCERTAINTY PRIOR TO PROBE RE e

BASED ON REQUIRING REPLACEMENT IF VOLTAGE FOR ANY NOLE CHANGES BY 15% FOR WORN PROBE. COMPARED THAT FOR THE NEW PROBE CONCLUSIONS UNCERTAINTY FOR PROBE WEAR ESSENTIALLY T 9

FOR ECHORAM AND ZETEC PROBES PRIOR TO REP PROBE REPLACEMENT AT A 15% CHANGE IN A NOL e

VOLTAGE RESULTS IN AN NDE UNCERTAIK W STANDAR DEVIATION OF 7% FOR ALL MEASUREMENT's PROBE REPLACEMENT PRIOR TO 90% CHANCE OF PROBE REPLACEMENT AT PO WEAR WNEN STANDARD DEV7ATION PEAKS AT 12%

PROBFS CAN BE PREMATURELY REFLACED DUE e

OF LEADS - DEPENDENT ON LOCATION OF WEAR STA AND EC FIXTURE TUBE LOCATION PAGE 46 utousomn

_ _ _ _ - - - - - - ~~~~

-..~.

M Ute 8 1g 9

Probe Wear CaNtraten Standard 4

4

\\

m w

s i

h d-e l

8 i

i

'.g 9

i

\\.*

t c a

i

$.s.i.........

c i r i

.* 6 l

a n

1p u

... *.............. r. s.. ' s t

s gg

........'..e-

...T.. P i

%,...s...

i PAGE 47

+

-w'

-y r-w--

,yv,,,c

,r-., -

-,,#w

..-w m-

-w r,

y w

.r

,.w+,---ne vwg-,=,

y w

n e

8t 3DYd lI{

nr ts N

/

' w v..., J'.nx p., *t i

=

=

u.8 ;,:..

e se i

m

~3

< u s,7 s

-u 2

I

.,4..

5 2

x

-.i m

-z aa x

,? ' m.-

u n

1,

o

=

e

p.

_;r;3

c

,o Ez,Ea~l es ou n

sss U

3 I

p.ssg' y i

a u

-se q.,

] < 57 f(11 i

j 53 ss ggr g

2

'.,'. si IRB 4

(gg 4'

err 4

<=

o rrr m

4i n

.a ; ja

-~

.+.:

m

+-

e

-g 35

, m

. 33 3_ i! I2 N""N 3

7 3.1 saa5 a-

• -aa www i

I7 y Jj,.-; is

$$$a a

~p

f 23

.f

-35

e 2,,1 h-

~

2

,8g,,

-18 3

h m

3gi i7 111 N

te N

1 i

0 is

.T.F. F

,4 f*

13 3tW

?

-t2 ll3 m

gg je ~s III I"8a.:y' i

7 cre I

b. ;;;;;,s.i.s"I'L s

3

.i.~jj n

P

= N A..

- NN N~ N v W W W W. A.

O e N A O R @ N A@ 3 G N a @ @ @ N A C

(

s i

i 1

M=WM49-----NNNNNWWWWWAAA i

,1 M

- W m J e - W 0 *J W - W M *J W a W W l

u.

n ure 8 20 o

Bobbin Coll Amputude Dependence on Probe Wear Edcram Pmbe Wear StandairJ n Vertoed T@e tratum u-t sp

............<p.............g.8.............g..............p.1.............-l........

1 g..............l......

.....,\\.

........ r--[ "-

,........I.............l.............,...f<%...._\\

..............i.......

euan.ee e%mm i........;.....

H.

S t

i

....... i............ 3.. l

• j -t............,e. es, I.......

3 e'.,, L.

r-

.r a-............

g..J............

i.n J

..a........p g. m...

p.............

.............gk.............}g.......

...b...........

............q.....S.......,

.n.

7..

.............j.................... *!......

.............g.

.................R.......

.............l.....

p,

.............;t............l..............!.............t..........................q.e 5..

.......,.............g:..............I.............I.

!...........a....I........

Gs t

........q.....

i i

e nas em em pie. w., m an uns en Edcnm Probe Wow Standard hertal u.

...............I.............,

..........n Channehead sp

...1.....

sp............. 6.............,,4.............<I.........................;

............I.............:.........................4.............{..............i............,1 I.n.

..............:..............t........

..... 6 f a

.. 1 p..............t.3.-

-- e. - n.

1........... 9..........

t

p......... * ;,5,

_2............

............ 4..............

?,,, m....+;........... 1..............a..............

p..........e.*

e.w 1

i.....t............l.............{.

..n i

..u p.............

....!..............I.........

anos I...............................................................

1 I

6

-t t -..................

oses ses t

am ene. war m em _ _ a ams

_un Zatec Probe Weer Star *rd Hontortaln Char.W.e.4 u-

,.............t m

..............g.............I.............t............

7.............!.............j!...........

I t

u

.t.............;............

4..............;.............

4............ 4....

u.

.........a

% wa

7.... g...............p sw e.<,>.,s,a,me i

.........J S

. 4............. I.s............({

..........g..............l I

p I

e.es e..

e.M p

........t o.as

................g g........... 4..

.............a..............

F...............;.

B.88_

e.es

.....1.............,,.............;.............,

e.no

.... !i..............!

............ a e..............g............................ 4.............!..............!..........

1 p.

I g............

...........p.............

40g4-1

.....g...........

~

t............t......

.....q.............

1 4

Oms SM the PuskowarM SS WW SUS PAGE 49

Table 88 Channelhoad Mockup Probe Weat Standard Test Resuha -

Number of Dif ference > occurrences of Voltage Number No.

Probe

---

154 from New Probe (2)

Tube Test Replacement Mcation Repeats Chances (1)

Echoran Probe (3) tetec Probe (3)

.005.0075

.0

---

----- ---11

.0025.005

.0075 R8C92 10 100 0

0 0

0 82 96 R2C88 2

4 0

0 0

0 2

4 R33047 10 100 0

0 3

0 0

33 R3C45 2

4 0

0 0

0 0

4 R10C45 2

4 0

0 0

0 0

4 R23C44 10 100 0

0 0

R30C36 0

40-100 2

4 0

0 0

0 0

4 R3C16 2

4 0

0 0

0 0

4 R20C15 10 100 0

0 1

0 0

80 Notes:

1.

Number of testa permitting comparisons of 4-hole worn and new probes.

voltages between 2.

An occurrence of voltage ditforence > 154 is ecch occur absolute [(Vworn-Vnew) / vnew) is 15% for at le holes.

rence that e4 3.

Dimensions the probe ce(nter~ng devices.0.005, etc.) are reductions in radius (i PAGE 50 t

l t

1

. ~. - -.., _.. -. -,, - - - - - - -

FCure 3 21 VoR494 Vertabilby Due to BobbM Probe Wear

~*4Mi':ll1m'.T..':3 1

s-16 6s e-see m

9 me aim e.ee le 13a g

g

,g

-.-:.,. Q,

at 41

>O M

t tA

~

6

ikes; 46 A

~ 4 1:M W.'T,3,i.

i

$49h 45 MAsp

-..g i

iW Yeme 6N j

ie g) 1D 32 l 1D g,

• s>

e I

D Wa

.l

.1 1

t 44 44 M

to t

14 ham veser as,ume pa,aerens$

4=

eseensamme an amene

-M te ll".m. :::

i 3

D e

l.p e

at

$'u.

4 la Oftmer.no h M PAGE 51 4

ADoITIONAL NDE UNCERTAINTY EVALUATIONS EDDY CURRENT ANALYST VARIABILITY

SUMMARY

EVALUATION IN WCAP-12871, REY. 2 e

ANALYST VARIABILITY:

10% AT 90% CUMULATIVE PROR.

f EVALUATION FOR PLANT L 592 LARGEST BORBIN INDICATIONS (0.6 TO >3 VOLTS) e 6 ANALYSTS FOR EACH INDICATION e

ASSESSED ANALYST VARIABILITY AS DIFFERENCE FRO e

THE MEAN OF THE 6 ANALYSTS (592*6 = 3552 POINTS)

AT 90% CUM. PROS., ANALYST VARIABILITY IS 0.13 e

VOLTS OR 9.2% OF 1.41 AVERAGE VOLTAGE P

i

• 28

• 2 PAGE 52

1 r a s 22. Exampes of Anayst vcriabilty lor Farley.1 Vonage Measurements n

FARLEY UNIT 1 EVALUATOR SENSITMT(

21% Population,32 Readings V(>1.50) ja

. goo 12-MEAN A11.82 0-Dennee in Vens 80 I

g MEAN A21.81 Moon 041 70 8-sit o w. o.13 i

50 f

6-e

.g 4

30 2

2-2 20 4

1 1

1 1

1 1

10 E,E, E, E, E, E ""

0 0

i 0

0.30 0.15 0.05 0.05 0.15 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.50 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ANA1.YSTS (VOLTS)

FARLEY UNIT 1 EVALUATOR SENSmVITY 100% Population,151 Readings 80.

73 70 90 60 MEAN A1 1.15 omencein yons 80 l g, MEAN A21.14 Moen 002 40-std. Dw. 0.11 8

50 i

l 3o.

40 1

20-30 10 20 l

-0.30 0.15 0.05 0.05

.0.15 0.30 0.20

-0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.50 OlFFERENCE BETWEEN ANALYSTS (VOLTS) t PAGE 53 i

l l

. -,. - ~. -

Fen 6 23. Emanpes of Andrst Varumy W F%.2 VofHee Meaanmenu a

FARLEY UNIT 2 EVALUATOR SENSITMTY 9% Population,23 Readings, V (>1.50) 12

-100 10-90 unenA1 1.sco Devaan 40s 80 8-70 m e,% g,,

g 6-8 50 4-40 30 0-

'i i

i i

i i

0.5 4.15 0.05 0.05 0, 5 0.5,

i 0.25 0.1 0

0.1 0.25 0.9 DFFERENCE SETWEEN#M.YSTS MXTM FARLEYUNIT2 EVALUATOR SENSITMTY 100% Population,263 Reacings 140 100 120-ueen A1.ees Mean Dr. vans 40 2 80

<l#

u,,n n, sin ud DevDr.vansatses 70 g

80 8*

50 lo 40 30 3

20 10

-0.5 0.15 0.05 0.05 0.15

+0.25 0.1 0

0.1 0.25 0.9 DFFERENCE BETWEENMW.YSTS(VOLTM PAGE 54

a,c4 e de h,5. uJ 4 L

-m a 4 -ewSWw

&.4 44 4mean.-.E.-Jnm i 44 -mm%+h p W. 4 4n AA AwaW,h 6 W4Jh.shmJ-__AAsa-.Wdem A h-,4 shas.44 4 a.si a de -

dh 53.u mm Jm.Js 4 J.4 n a 6 rE-#Mr A;gr.,e4,4,

?

4 Distribution of

}vonage Indications Used lor EC Anet et t

1 1

PLANT L

.MEAN OF ALL'SIX ANALYSTS 120

" 0

~ 100 101 I60-90 r,,,,,,,,,,,

85 thht$

1,41 80

=4n u

w e.a J

70 80 8

50 g

30 20,

1 1

0,

[22 10

- 0.60 1.00 1,40 o1 1

1.80 2.20 2.80 3.00- 3.40 3.80 0.80 1.20 1,00 v0 2.00 2.40 2.80 3.20 3.00 VOLTAGES l

l PAGE 55

,e

,,.er-.,---.-ce,yw.,,,,,,,~,.mw

,-....:y,,----n,-.-

.,,.,--.,r..y

........ v.

....c..w..-., - - -.. ~ ~ - -. -

~ *, -

er,,--. -_.,.

-m

, m. _ _. _ _. _.

\\

Distritwtlon of Voltage Differences Betiveen Individual Ana s and Mean Values 4

PLANT L DISTRIBUTION OFAti DIFFEREN 1000-

,3 9@

, too 7

= ":,-

1 ;;t" MZ Ise g ~3..l sa -

.. w 700 3

e a -...

.,o se

-70 e01 5

u0, 400-415

-s0 h ae 40 a

i em 30 171 100-107 1

120 20 4 LO F.

g 74 72 l

5552I1 10

.i.oo 4.sb 4.26 4.i0 6.o6 6.16 656.sb io6

- 0.75 0.25 4.15 0.06 0.05 0.15 0.25 0.75 VOLTAGEDlFFERENCES PAGE 56

i FARLEY GROWTH RATES 100% BosaIN INSPECTIONS SINCE 1986 INDICATIONS AFTER EACH INSPEC INSPECTIONS TO UPDATE. GROWTH HISTORIE GENERALLY DECREASING VOLTAGE GR SIMILAR TREND FOR BOBBIN COIL DEPTH e

SIMILAR GROWTH RATES AND TRENDS SMALL AVERAGE GROWTH (<0.2V SINCE GROWTH RATES FOR B0C VOLTS >0.

THAN SMALLER INDICATIONS FARLEY-2 REPRESENTS FIRST USE OF CALIsRATED TO LAn0RATORy STANDARD Oven 2 NARROWER DISTRIBUTION, FEWER NEGATIVE GR e

VALUES AND FEW LARGE GROWTH CHANGES l

PAGE 57 muonm T

q w

p wr"t'

'T

~"1r-"W"W-

PW'W--#

Pr Wr-'w h &T1*T-'-w-WW4 M'r"u+W-4W-i1"?'--et'w'T3+wt---'7-p-M-M-r-7T'k-'

fr'

<---~'Y'A-rv'#vtr***'--=+*"?

1 t M --AP "P-T***r*

"T'P-t'

+'+'-

8 T"t'>'TWF-"-$-PCT +

--94'T-*

G15-**'

VOLTAGE GROWTH PER CYCLE FOR FARLEY BOC No AVERAGE AVERAGE AVERAGE UNIT / CYCLE INDICATIONS VOLTAGE GROWTH _

% GROLITH FARLEY-1 1985-1986 123 0.45 0.20 45%

1986-1987 274 0.48 0.28 59%

1988-1989 431 0.62 0.22 36%

1989-1991 499 0.70 0.16 23%

BOC <0.75v 306 0.51 0.24 48%

BOC >0.75v 193 1.01 0.08 8%

FARLEY-2 1986-1987 291 0.55 0.13 24%

1987-1989 316 0.49 0.20 34%

1989-1990 326 0.71 0.10 15%

BOC <0.759 207 0.52 0.16 30%

BOC >0.7by 119 1.04 0.13

-13%

1990-1992 308 0.73 0.11 15%

BOC <0.75v 233 0.58 0.13 22%

BOC >0.75v 75 1.19 0.04 4%

l l

i PAGE 58

, tutontsonm l

.-.-,.m-g

--y,v w~s i,e y-

Figur6 5-16 Historical Average Voltage Growth Trends in Farley SGs 90 80 N

70

! k 60 -

50-

1. ~

- h 30-c

~~~ ,

B n.

E c-10-p..--*- --

0

-s 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 /Ml i Beginning of Cycle. Year

---o---

Avera0e Growth Over Total BOC Voltage Range: Farley.

4.

Average Growth For BOC Volts < 0.75 : Farley.1 0-Average Growth For BOC Volts > 0.75 : Farley.1

--e -- Average Growth Over Total SOC Voltage Range: Farley.2 i

--* -- Avera0e Orcwth For 800 Volts < 0.75 : Farley.2

-- u--

Avera0e Growth For BOC Volts > 0.76 : Farley.2 i

5 I

i PAGE 59 e-..

m,.m e

Fgute S-6 Suppon Plate in6 cation Progresdon in Farley.2 SGs so

@g q 30-3 g

3o.. -. - - - - -

0-E - 10

.g, g

..-.m......

50 85 to 86 86 to 87 87 to 89 INSPECTONINTERVAL 89 to 90 L

W7 4

PAGE 60

Figure 515 Cumulalke Probability of Vohage Growth per Cycle k,t Farley Und J. M. FARLEY UNIT 2 90 89 100% POPUl.ATION,327 READINGS 60-

-100

$1 50 90 44 OtFFERENCE IN Vol.TS

$ 40-I, ooh $4s g

g 30' a

g vot.Tso 0.74 23 m 20-voi,7s, o rg 17 40 3o E

• 'I iiiiii 20

='

a 0

1.0o.0.25 o.oo 6.2o o.4o 6.ao 6 ao ' 2'

-o.so 0.10 0.1o 0.so o.so 0.7o 1

2.s DIFFERE14ES IN VOLTS J. M. FARLEY UNIT 1 91 - 89 100% POPULATION,499 READINGS 1 *-

l.904

,./

m,,,..

l m

_,.e _

=-

.,0 G

60 sTDDCvcJe 60 50s 8

50 5*

l2>

.:o 17 2d nii.0;

• g e

0.80 b.25 o.00 6.26

..b 6.86 6.8

'1'

.O.50 -0.10 0.10 0.3o 0.50 0.70 0.9 1,6 DIFFERENCES IN VOLTS PAGE 61

\\

Floure 514 CumulatNe Probabmty of Voltage Growth per EFPY lor Farity J. M. FARLEY UNIT 1 SUPPORT PLATE DEGRADATION PROGRESS I*"

II lIi lil l I !IWil I

IiliiI iill#

i F

IT't i

1 i

l i

//liI i

l Ih

[ ji l

It i

l i F;7il l l{

i

" II1llii l i l /l iliiii lI lIil l I 1/ !

j I

1 i

i i I.i i i

/l!

L IIi i

i ll l,1 l

i i18Iill i

I

" IIi ll l / i l

lt I

i

• ii1 I-l 1 M i l

ll l

F 3

• 4.o is aa.s.1.anassese.staan o;s o.s os' osl in a a 1

~

CHANGE NSIGNAL AAW'UTUDE #4PPV) r...,

J. M. FARLEY LNIT 2 -

SUPPORT PLATE DEGRADATON PROGRESSION soo 1

l

=

=

=

[

M~

l I

1i Il V4 i i

I i

i i

I i

iI I i f/ l

)

l-1 I

II i

I;[*

)

i i

I/f i i

I I

tii

//

I ii l ~l L

o Il l Al l I

I I

I

- l

~

l 7f II l--

1 I;[

l l

1

// ' IMete-Iff2 l l

I I!M/9 I

l II I-l e g,,,tr> l t

1 IIi I

I i

i i

4,,

3, 9

9 48 44 On 0.4 os-1.1 1s 2.0 CHANGE NSONAL AMPIRUDE NAIPM) i

.._ i PAGE 62' eS r,

<.-e n-r w

.er-

,,n

,,--v,

.r S-.-

F,tgure 2.

1992 Farley 2 Total Indications Found and L.efi in Servic e

J.MFARJYUNIT2. AL,3.Q's All1992 totbn hdcatons 2

W

-f 1 s

~

e 33 j

' f a

"h j>j 1

swho ss t,,

j l

I gp 14 p

l

?

i t

o a

f 4 3

5 <4 4

C'

.1.

.13 14 1.3 a.s 3A4

h. b 0.3

^

03 0.7 0.9 1

1.3 0.4 0.0 0A 1.0 12 1.4 1.0 1.0 L4 24 tottm votage J.M.FARJY UNTT2. ALL S.Q!s 1992 Bottan becatonsleRin seMoe Sc

,7 e

4

$r?ae 29 20" tt 14 1

4 4

C:

0 0

0 /,0

.13.

0.3- 0A 0.7 OA 1.1 1.3 1A Lt LS 3A4 0.4 0.8 OA 1.0 12 1.4 1.0 10 L4 1A bette Votage PAGE 63 c-y 1+evt--

p - 9 wig 'w w th w-i.-my,-gy rvw. q s-5

-.w--q'rM7e--

+t--r-w-tw-4~--

T9 e-

-T-

-ry-P-T

+ ---

f"

m___._

l Figere 4 Farley 2 Voltage Growtn*WGyrre'from 1990 to 1992 l

i si 7 r

ej g$g w.Y.,

nl~

"J;;,*

• j y

~m 3

iDa

,/

• O LAY

)

A bbE' a

t 1

4. -

,, u jo. j or,, u,,.. j..-,, i.. -

$shbri Vem,e Ome ek yeen 80 n

-s

2. *r.*

=1 Sb j

Y...m i e

,j 3P' g

i 1 VA d

11 1-1 e

4,.

.y.

48 4.1 0.1 0

g RF 14 11 "t2LYlM6W*

- = -

3>

Tw*""

"n g ik

=ames W.*

i dddda

-,j.qco-,,.r,f o co-a

m-takhsiVehgs M PAGE 64

~

.%,--o,.v,-,..

,-,.-.,---,,-,.e....

---r---,--,.--

<-,.,,---,w,4--. -,

.y-

--, -~.

w+.

80 1.

1 ua voer4as em

.70 -

-O O>

60-h50----C-4 g

40-...i '.,

M I

3o.

20-t yy+

4.....,

b 10-0 o

i 2

3 4

5 6

INITIAL BOBBIN AMPUTUDE, VOLTS O FME2Y 1 E FARutY.2 & PLANTF X PL# # H.1 Fgure 612. Average Percent Voltage Growth Rates for Farley, Plant F and PiarW H 1 Il-l l

PAGE 65 4

h

,. +.. - _., _.,

4 CONSERVATISMS IN SLB BURST ANALYSES SLB A P = 2650 PSI APPLIED COMPARED TO AC SLB A P OF 2560 PSI ASSUMES NO OPERATOR MINUTES BURST CAPABILITY EVALUATED AT LOWER 95 MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR ALL TUBES IN THE BUNDLE ALL TUBES ASSUMED TO BE UNCOVERED BY TS CORROSION OF TSPS EXPECTED TO PREVEN e

ANALYSES REQUIRE ZERO FRICTION AND SIG e

TUSE TO TSP GAP FOR UNACCEPTABLE TUBE DI EVEN WITN ZERO FRICTION, ONLY PERIPNERAL TURES e

UPPER PLATES ARE UNCOVERED DURING EVENT BURST PRESSURE VERSUS CRACK LEFGTH COR

. a.c A THRUWALL CRACK OF t

REQUIRED FOR TURE BURST EXCEEDS TSP THICKNESS OF 0.75" l

l i

PAGE 66

\\ otostsonm

e

SUMMARY

OF SLB LEAK RATES AND M EVAtuATED BOC '2.0 AND 2.5 volts AGAINST AND 3/4" DATABASES

SUMMARY

EVALU a

LAPGER MARGINS BASED ON 7/8" DATABA 0

BunsT MAnaINS o

AGAINST 34 P EVALUATED AT 90% cum. Paos. ON E0 (2.92 3.5 VOLTS)

B0C =,2.0v: MAnGIN oF'.

j ',

B0C = 2.5v: MAnGIN oF I 0

AGAINST SLB

]8 EVALUATED AT 99% CUM. Pn0s. ON E0 (3.5, 4.12 VOLTS) AND -99% PREDICTION B0C = 2.0v: INTERVAL FOR BURST AT JL MARGIN OFl,

' g 6

M.C. Paos.

L B0C = 2.5v: MAnGIN OF, = 4x10-C, i

N.C. Pnos.'= 5x10-s~,

l PAGE 67 i

a---

' ~ - -

--e--+

m e

---2-..ww.--e-,w-we.,mw-ir,-'.ewm-v

-m

.w g-e,-

y y.-e9

,.---y-w e r-g gw yy g-mm m.1.my--

-m--w~rr*=-2g.

9:

-4e--

r w

e-

SUMMARY

OF SLB LEAK RATES AND MARGINS AG SLB LEAKAGE e

BOC = 2.0v:

MONTE CARLO = 2.3X10-4 GPM PER INDICATION r

DETERMINISTIC =,,

79

)

-8 MINIMUM OF ~220 INDICATIONS FOR 1

MONTE CARLO ~4000 INDICATIONS FOR 1 GPM e

BOC = 2.5v:

MONTE CARLO = 5.2X10-4 GPM PER INDICATION t

DETERMINISTIC =

. J s

MINIMUM OF ~105 INDICATIONS FOR r

,,g MONTE CARLO ~1900 INDICATIONS FOR 1.0 GP

~

DETERMINISTIC AT +90% PREDICTION INTERVAL e

EXPECTED TO BOUND MONTE CARLO WITH POTENTIAL FUTURE INCREASES IN SLB LEAK RATE CORRELATION wrostion m PAGE 68

FARLEY UNITS 1 AND 2 DEPENDENCE OF SLB LEAK RATE MONTE CARLO ANALYSES LTAGE SLB LEAK RATE (GPM)EOC VALUES L

B3C

-VOLTAC,E

-7/8"+3/4" (~7/8") DATA BURST PROBABILITY i

-7/8" DATA 7/8"+3/4" DATA (3) 1.0 L4 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.6 L

J NOTES:

1)

!!,/ LEAK RATE AT 90% CUMULATIVE PRO 104 MONTE CARLO SAMPLES.

2)

ZERO REPRESENTS NO OCCURRENCES HONTE 5

CARL 0 SAMPLES.

whenm PAGE 69 y-w y

y-y

--,,y g-g

--w,g--

-e iw-'fg y

h-w.-

c

--w

f DETERMINISTIC SLB LEAK RATE AND BURST t

t i

7/8" DAT***SE PRELIMINARY 1

7/8" w 3/4" DATABASE 80C volts 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.5

.i GnowrN AT 90g) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 i

Cun.Paos. (

i t

IDE UNC. AT i

0.32 0.4 0.32 0.4 90% Cun.Paos.

t 1

EOC % Wes i

E 2.92 3.5 2.92 3.5 3

. 3i8. tux RATE (GPn)

~

o 390% ON MEAN i

I

}

e A9*t om enco. int.

7

'i i

volts rok 3AP i

AT -95% PaEn.

INTERVAL i

~

i Il0TE 1.

FAaLEY UNIT-2 ron 1989-1999.

In LAsr 5 Uurr 1 Ano 2 cycles. LAaGEST GROWTH AT 90%

i c.

3

?

DETERMINISTIC SLB BURST MA8tGIN EVALUA 1

7/8" DATA PRELIMINARY t

7/8 + 3/4" IATABASE BOC volts

2. 0 2.5 2.0 2.5 I

SaoWTH AT 99%

1.0*

1.0*

cum.Paos.

1.0*

1.0*

NDE UNC. (25%F 0.5 0.62 AT 99% cum.

0.5

-0.62 Pnos.

E0C volts 3.5 4.12 3.5-4.11 VoLis ron SLB Bunsi 1 1 AT -99%

Pata. INT.

EVEN APPLICATION HTSTORICAL FARLEY DATA WoOLD W oF MARGINS.

T SURsf l

l l

l L

L l

l PAGE 71 is M<ger yN-TvS c"&y? ?w T"-sr

+

a-y-,.

-w-y ww w-w,.i-f9-M-m-

my+p,g.,g-wa,w--w.g.pp,,,,,,gie

-,,g w,+, = - -

.-e y

m-

- ~

+-g

-G w,,

^tf-,aoi y

i t

PROPOSED INTERIN APC 1

4 80stIN INDICA 120NS TUse REPAIR.

Less THAN OR EQUAL TO 1.0 v0LT 00 NOT Rt0UIRt As0vt 1.0

VOLTS, noss!N FLAW SIGNAL $

NAVING CONFIRME0 RPC AND 2.0 VOLTS. INDICATIONS SHALL RE LIMITED TO 200 IN

+

ALL s0ssIN FLAW INDICATIONS A80v' e 3.6 v0LTS WILL st R EOC SLB LtAK RATE ANALYSIS IS NOT REQUIRED 1

LIMIT ON NUMBER OF INDICATIONS CON $tRVATIVrLY 0

LtAK RATE TO < 1. 0 GPM IN LOOP WITH POSTULATED PIPE RUPTURE.

i i

i r

4 PAGE 72 ws,-

.-,n.-

,-e,+~

v -- - -. -, - - + - - - -, - -

.---,~.,,,-,-.~,+mv-,,w.

---se,,--,neo,,-

-,w--.--,e------,,,,

e,w+i---

>rr-e,w,-

< r e v r-e, ys e g4

s p

A i

SCEEDULE IPC Meeting IPC Subelttal to Nac FMP Unit 1 27th cubge start 28th 25th 7/27

'8/3 8/30 8/24 8/31 9/7 9/14 9/21 I

i

~

i l

\\

o

(

>nm i

U i

I 3

SG EC Starts SG Repeir/

i 4

Plugging starts Sth 1

i 9/28 10/5 10/12 10/19 10/26 11/2 11/9 5

I t

1 r

j i

L 1

INTERIM PLUGGING CRITERIA BASED ON:

WCAP-13237, PRELIMINARY DATA ON VOLTAGE / BURST / LEAKAGE 3/4 OF INCH DIAMETER TUBING FOR ODSCC AT TSPS WCAP-128i.,

FARLEY APC REv. 2, t

PRESENTATION WCAP PAGE 74

_____~.s---

" - " - - ' - - ~ -

1 i.'

e QUESTION 14

$TATUS OF EVALUATION FOR 3/4" TuaE MODEL BOILER DATA COMPLETE PULLED TUBE-EVALUATION-IN PROCESS 3 PLANTS (BELGIAN E-4, R, B1) o-10 BURST INDICATIONS e

9 SLB LEAK RATE INDICATIONS e

PRINCIPAL ISSUES TO BE FINALIZED e

VOLTAGE RENORMALIZATION OF BE VOLTAGES TO APC NORMALIZATION AT 550/130 KNZ MIX ADJUSTMENT OF BELGIAN ROOM TE RATES TO OPERATING TEMPERATURE CON BELGIAN MODEL' FOR ADJUSTMENT e

REVIEWED-ACTIONS TO COMPLETE RESOLVE BELGIAN VOLTAGE' NORMAL e

RATE ADJUSTMENT EPRI TASK TEAM REVIEW e

'8082t078292 PAGE 75 o

f m-.,

..,.....~ - -,....

, _ _ _ _ ~__. _ _ _ _ _____ _ _ _ _ __,___- __

i

\\

SLB t rtA Ra te Versus Bobbin Vol tage 9

I em i

i l

PAGE 76 l

I l

BELGIAN VOLTAGE RENORMALIZATION.

BELGIAN FIELD IVALUATION EVALUATION OF 53 INDICATIONS INCLUDING 1992 4

PULLED TUBES MEASUREMENTS AT 300 KHZ WITH BELGIAN PR 4

EQUIPMENT AND BELGIAN NORMALIZATION 9

MEASUREMENTS AT 550/130 KHZ WITH APC NORMALIZATION AS WELL AS 300 KHZ WITH BELGIAN PROBE AND ZETEC EQUIPMENT VOLTAGE RENORMALIZATION FOR BELGIAN PROBE S

DETERMINED BY CORRELATING-550/130 KHZ WITH 300 KHZ SLOPE OF 4.93 FIELD DATA INDEPENDENTLY REVIEWED BY W o

WITH EXCELLENT. AGREEMENT WITH BELGIAN VOLTA CALLS PRINCIPAL ISSUE OF VOLTAGE RENORMALIZATION RATIO 0F 550/130 KHZ TO.300 KHZ OBTAINED WIT e

U.S. PROBES IS FACTOR O' 1.5 TO 1.75-HIGHER OBTAINED WITH BELGIAN PROBE.

BASED ON ASME~ STANDARDS U.S. PROBE AND LABORATORY TRANSFER STANDA B

PROVIDED 70 LABORELAC FOR INDEPENDENT EVALUA 1

turoazionm PAGE 77 a

--n e-e v-

e

.-4

,L

'l Ratio of U.S. 550/130 KHz to Belgian 300 KHz r

seemsnrF Kea __

g Prake Isme A9E seteten lgs

• tat.

Asa 4 tu flanggr(

g g

g g

g g,g2S 9.92F 9.04 4 su 3,2 %

SSO/tM 2etec sers-mag.

9.967 '.

SSe no teh 2.FS 2.42 4.13 4.54 389 i

3.93 3.14 4.1T 4.tr 4.1F le.t 8.M 3.M 8.H G.66 tS.F :

3.Se SSO/tN tc9te.

Reg-btes 0.52 158 Tee tab 2.0 "

2.75 2.51 4.11 4.81 308 3.86 3.9; 4.18 4.43 4.s4 3.F2 554/138 5.88 4.51 9.42 0.62 -

(che, mee blot SSe Tee 8.55 transfer 2.0 3

m.

2.M

-3.14 4.23 S.43 m

3.ar 3.42 4.31 S.22 S.11 38.4 rn

..a

..F2

,$56/930 4.se

14. 8 y

Setofm 08 SSO

• Vee

.. 3 2..

setelm 2.75 2.30 '

3,1T 3.63 3.89 300 3.S F 2.91 3.31 -

3.49 2.90 14.32 0.9%.

S.F2 8.79 8.FF 4.S9 9.14 Seale 154#130 (APCB to 338 W '~

2.8 Roter wase i

no tab b

3.39 4.e3 S.99 d.m iche.

Neo-bles Tee g,gg tab

,,gg 4.es 4.92 a.ae F.ps Ec8h*.

Ase-bles '

Tee g,yg teensfer 4.32 S.38 4.S$

F.82 Seletest ree 3.FS 9.3s golplan 2.93 3.4F 4.91 4.73 3,yg S.14 1AP200 tref 2192 y'

y

~

r

,e.e

9 FIGURE A2-1 g

l_

3,S/G:3 Evaluation of 1992 Voltage Ind. at TSPs 18

}' 16-i No. Data Points 53 EC Equipment-MlZ18 )

ag 14-1 j

3 g12 t

O N10 g

2

( Linear Regression 3 O

8-0

<c Slope 1.00 4

6-Intercept 0.07 Iy Std Dev.

0.004 o

4-R Squared 0.999 e

C8 2-

\\

to 04 0

2 4

6 8

10 12 14 16 550/130 KHz, APC Mix Norm, Belgian Eval

~

3 3

)

n 7

oi3 51 2

7. 2 9 ss9000 e4 g

d re p v. e 5

t r

s R

ee a 2

r ec u

P aprDq S

eo edS t

E l

nt nSiSR T

l U

a Ba

=

v t

E

(

(

d n

Gn 2ai

/I g

Se

.m=

e l

9 g

B

,a

~t l

2 o

==

m 2

V

=

r A

5. No E

2 R

1 U

G 9

a=

n I

9 e

F a

1 ig f

=

l o

e h

)

B no m

3

,z 5

8 n i

1 4

a H

[ta 1

u s

Zg K

i t

l l

nt l

nMe

=

0 a

i

=

0 oe B

v E

Pm0 3

p ai3 ta u1 De00 5

q/

50 0

o 'C 5 3 NE

(

(

6 4-2 0

8 6

4 2

2

, 0 1

1 1

1 ni Bi&

cHn EOz y 00<-c NIM oov-m c

g"=

4

.!i, i!!

1 l!

llll i

1

~

FIGURE A2-3 9

~

~

L S/G: B 3

Evaluation of 1992 Voltage ind. at TSPs 16 Tu 14-f 3

E No. Data Points 53 63 12-EC equipment T) 550/130 - MlZ18 m

- 10.

300

(

- MlZ18 )

E

=

f O

Z 8-( Linear Regression

.2s D

A 2

o 6_

Slope 4.67 e

n.

Intercept -0.64 8

4-

-y Std Dev.

0.06

( R Squared 0.991)

M o

2-e>cg o..

no.

0 0.5 1

1.5 2

2.5 3

3.5 1

300 KHz, Belgian Norm., Belgian Evaf.

.\\

, S/G: B Evaluation of 1992 Voltage Ind. at TSPs 10 N

U.S. Probes yx 9-unear Regression su Slope

.061 I

o

] [UnearRegressionBelgi n Probes ]

Intercept 2.94 am g

Std Dev.003

-[ Belgian Eval.

8 b

R Squared.985 as SW

.029 k

.M 55W130 MlZ18 Equip 2

300 KHz Belgian Equip Idag 2.34 7_

Sid Dev.001 j

g l

O.

Linear Regression R Squared.997 l

<C Slope

.027 s

N 0~

fntercept 2.37

\\

1 Std Dev.009 O

O

[

y R Squared.183

~

0 0

5-06'O

??

m m t B

O O

4-0 0

0

}

00 O

3-0 O

0

[

O O

O 2

0 20 3O 4O 5O do j0 8O NO 100 DEPTH (%)

m

Preliminary Correlation APC 550'130 to Belgian 300 kHz (3/4' Tubing) 16-c.

l4 "

7 3

Field Data toints e 45 I2' 3C equ13mment g

150/130. ICI510 300

. Selgia.a f 10-a

(

2 5s

{@ No"Te!wett, gi3,y g.gy,,,g,.

slope 3.5 R

a e

simpe 4.93 4

(388 M83 8*

3 I

g 2atercept 0.75 4

4-j[a 8

8 std Dev.

0.21 8

1 squared 0.927

(

)

ul J

=

0 0

0'.5 1

13 2

25 3

300 kHz, Belgian Norm., Belgian Eval.

Correlation APC 400/100 to French 240 kHz (7/8' Tubing) 70 60-r en Model no11er Data Points a 10 m

m1 - --

50-e

• x N

3 f

Linear negreeston e

@ 30- r,l,p,

7 slope 7.82 -

4,,

latercept 0 1stercept 3.25 h, 2a. nange 0 0.40 volta Std Dev.

0.34 a 40 u,,

- R Squared 0.985 v

J 4

4 i

3e 0

0 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

Volts. 240 kHz French Norm.

t Figure 6-5 voltage Renormalization Correlations for French /Balgian 7/8" Lata and Belgian 3/4" data PAGE 83

CONSIDERATIONS FOR COMBINING VOLTAGE ADJUSTMENTS ADJUSTMENT (1.36 FACTOR) FOR SC e

ASSESS WNETHER APPROXIMATELY o

EQUAL CRACK LENGTNS ARE OBTAINED FACTOR ADJUSTMENT FOR BURST CORRELATION e

ADDITIONAL ADJU)TMENT FOR NO LENGTN = (R+t) 8 INCREASES 3/4 VOLTAGES BY ADD FACTOR TOTAL VOLTAGE ADJUSTMENT FOR BUR COMPARISONS = 1.59 FOR LEAK RATE CORRELATION e

SCALING FACTOR OF 1,36 BURST PRESSURE ADJUSTMENTS 7/8" FLOW STRESSADJuSTMENTS F e

(147 KSI) i REDUCES 3/4" BURST PRESSURES BY F e

., g SLB LEAK RATE ADJUSTMENTS a

TEST AND ANALYSIS INDICATES 3/4" LE e

. GREATER TNAN 7/8" LEAK RATES FOR EQ LENGTNS 3/4" LEAK RATES REDUCED BY e

.g ANALYSIS RESULTS FACTOR BASED ON' i

P2082:072292 PAGE 04 4

=r

-. ~

m

. e

I' VOLTAGE NORMALIZATION FOR 7/8" AND 3/4" TUBING VOLTAGE CALIBRATION 4,0 VOLTS ON 20% DEEP, 0.187" 4 TW HOLE ASME e

STANDARD AT 400 (550)* KHz 2,75 VOLTS ON 20% DEEP, 0.187", 4 TW HOLE ASME e

STANDARD AT 400/100 (550/130)*- KHz 7/8" TUBING AT'400 KHz, 3/4" TUBING AT 550/130 KHz BOTH STANDARDS USE SAME, UNSCALED HOLE SIZE e

SCALING CONSIDERATIONS e

TUBE SIZE; FREQUENCIES-AND PROBE DIAMETERS ARE APPROPRIATELY SCALE PROBE COIL SIZE AND SPACING NOT SCALED - NOT e

EXPECTED TO BE ESSENTIAL SIGNIFICANT LOSS OF SCALING BY USING SAME HOLE e

SIZE ADJUSTMENT TO 3/4" VOLTAGES FOR HOLES SCALED F STANDARD VOLTAGE PROPORTIONAL TO HOLE DIAMETER SQUARED-4 CONFIRMED BY VOLTAGES MEASURED FOR SCALED TW HOLES 7/8" TO 3/4" DIAMETER RATIO -

.17 e

e 3/4" v0LTAGE ADJUSTMENT = 1.17

= 1.36 FOR COMPARING 3/4" AND 7/8" DATA tap 2063:072292 PAGE 85 3 '

r -

IIj 4

g'

[

e v

b~

t j

?!

~

w E

E w

ba i

l l

l~

CRACK LENGTH (in.)

Figure 3.5-11.

Leak Rate Versus Crack length at AP = 1550 psi for Nominal and Thinned Tubing PAGE 86 6955B:1b/082283 l

l

(.

L

SLB. LEAK RATE COMPARISONS CRACKFLO CALCua.4TIONS TUBE

~ AVERAGE UPSTREAM UPSTREAM BACK MEAN TuaE TueE-Watt NOMINAL ~

NOMINAL SIZE STRENGTH

• TEMPERATURE PRESSURE PRESSURE RaozuS-THICKNESS-(IN.)

i (KsI)

-(DEG. F)

_(PSIA)-

_(PSIA)

(IN.')

(IN.)

7/8" 68.8 577 2650 15 0.4125 0.050 3/4"-

77.7 577 2650 15 0.3535 0.043 7/8" 3/4" CRACK LEAK LEAK LENGTH RATE RATE DIFFERENCE

--(IN.)_

__(GPM)

_(GPM)

__(PERCENT) 0.1 0.2

- 6.38 0.3

-14.40 1

-21.02 0.5

-21.55

-20.95 I

• ONE-MALF or FLOW STRESS i

.i a

f

'f

k s-s s

s I

Q.lSTRIBUTION:

Docket file NRC/ Local PDRs l

PD 11-1 Resding

1. Murley F. Miraglia S. Varga G. Lainas E. Adensam S. Hoffman P. Anderson E. Jordan OGC ACRS (10)

J. Wechselberger 17-G-21 J. Richardson 7-D-26 J. Strosaider 7-D-4 G. Johnson 7-D-4 E. Murpt.y 7-D-4 H. Conrad 7-D-4 K. Karwoski 8-R-23 3

R. Jones 8-E-23 J. Cunningham 10-0-4 K. Eccleston 10-0-4 K. Campe 10-E-4 S. Long 10-E-4 E. Hackett NLS-217-C J. Muscara NLS217C L. Marsh 13-D-18 J. Stang 13-D-18 R. Assa 13-E-16 J. Winton 13-D-18 L. Plisco, EDO 10-A-19 N. Economos, R-Il E. Mershoff, R-ll cc:

Licensee & Service List

bbbOd, 1

_ _ _ _ _ _ _