Text

Enclosure 2 - Calculation Package, File No. 1801303.301, Cooper Nuclear Station Core Shroud H3 Weld Evaluation - 2018, Revision 0
	ML19122A474
Person / Time
Site:	Cooper
Issue date:	10/24/2018
From:	Jackson H, Walter M; Structural Integrity Associates
To:	; Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD)
References
	NLS2019028
	Download: ML19122A474 (55)
	v • d • e

NLS2019028 Page 1 of 55 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOCIATES, INC.

CALCULATION PACKAGE FILE NO. 1801303.301 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION CORE SHROUD H3 WELD EVALUATION -2018, REVISION 0 NON-PROPRIETARY

Attachment 2 1 of 54 File No.: 1801303.301 e

Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.

Project No.: 1801303 Quality Program Type: ~ Nuclear D Commercial CALCULATION PACKAGE PROJECT NAME:

Cooper Shroud H3 Weld Evaluation 2018 CONTRACT NO.:

4500215941, Amendment 1 CLIENT: PLANT:

Nebraska Public Power District Cooper Nuclear Station CALCULATION TITLE:

Cooper Nuclear Station Core Shroud H3 Weld Evaluation - 2018 Project Manager Document Affected Preparer & Checker Revision Description Approval Revision Pages Signatures & Date Sianature & Date 0 1 - 25 Initial Issue

~ /Jv~

A-1 -A-22 B B-4 C C-3

~ Matthew Walter Richard Mattson 10/24/2018 10/24/2018 flu~ -;,-r,~

Heather Jackson

10/24/2018 CONTAINS EPRI PROPRIETARY INFORMATION

Attachment 2 2 of 54 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION NOTICE THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS EPRI PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. SUCH INFORMATION IS IDENTIFIED IN THE LIST OF REFERENCES AND IS IDENTIFIED IN THE TEXT BY DOUBLE BRACKETS, A REVISION BAR IN THE RIGHT HAND MARGIN, AND RED, ITALIC FONT AS SHOWN IN THE FOLLOWING EXAMPLE: ((THIS INFORMATION IS PROPRIETARY. File No.: 1801303.301 Page 2 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 I) Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER Cai, slructint.com @

Attachment 2 3 of54 Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION

.......................................................................................................5 2.0         OBJECTIVE ..............................................................................................................5 3.0         LIST OF ACRONYMS ...............................................................................................5 4.0         METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 6 4.1         K-lndependent Flaw Evaluation Approach ..................................................... 6 4.2         K-Dependent Flaw Evaluation Approach ........................................................ 7 4.2. 1 Crack Growth for Fluence Greater than {(                                      }) ................................ 8 5.0         ASSUMPTIONS .........................................................................................................8 6.0         DESIGN INPUTS .......................................................................................................9 7.0         STRUCTURAL EVALUATIONS ............................................................................... 10 7 .1        K-lndependent Evaluation ............................................................................ 10 7.1.1  K-lndependent Crack Growth Rate .............................................................. 10 7.1.2 Inspection Uncertainty.................................................................................. 10 7.1.3 Added Ligament Due to Aligner Lug Weld Area ........................................... 11 7.1.4 Fluence and Failure Mechanisms................................................................. 12 7.1.5 Fracture Mechanics Evaluations .................................................................. 12 7.2         K-Dependent Evaluation .............................................................................. 12 7.2.1  K-Dependent Crack Growth Rate ................................................................. 12 7.2.2 Fracture Mechanics Evaluation .................................................................... 13 7 .3        Weld Residual Stress Considerations .......................................................... 13 8.0         RESULTS OF ANALYSIS ........................................................................................ 13 9.0         OPERATING EXPERIENCE .................................................................................... 14

10.0 CONCLUSION

S AND DISCUSSION ....................................................................... 14

11.0 REFERENCES

........................................................................................................ 14 APPENDIX A DLL OUTPUT Fl LES ................................................................................... A-1 APPENDIX B TECHNICAL BASIS FOR THROUGH-WALL CRACK GROWTH BASED ON WELD RESIDUAL STRESS ....................................................................... B-1 APPENDIX C

SUMMARY

OF BWR OPERATING EXPERIENCE FOR CORE SHROUD H3 WELD CRACKING ..................................................................................... C-1 File No.: 1801303.301 Page 3 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information SJ Structural Integrity info@structinl.com m 1-877-4SI-POWER e structinl.com @ Associates, Inc.

Attachment 2 4 of 54 List of Tables Table 1. Core Shroud Weld H3 Inspection Summary .......................................................... 16 Table 2. 2020 Flaw Distribution .......................................................................................... 18 Table 3. 2020 Flaw Distribution with Structural Credit for Aligner Lug Welds ...................... 19 Table 4. Summary of K-lndependent DLL Results .............................................................. 19 Table 5. 2030* K-Dependent Flaw Profile and DLL Results ................................................. 20 List of Figures Figure 1. General Configuration of the Aligner Lugs ........................................................... 21 Figure 2. Aligner Lug and Weld Dimensions ....................................................................... 22 Figure 3. 2020 Through-Wall Flaw Distribution ................................................................... 23 Figure 4. ~ormalized Stress Intensity Factor Distribution for High Fluence Welds .............. 24 Figure 5. K-Dependent Crack Growth for 1.5 Inch Thick Core Shroud ................................ 25 Figure 6. Assumed Flaw Distribution for K-Dependent Evaluation ....................................... 25 Figure 7. Weld Residual Stress Distribution for CNS H3 Weld .......................................... B-2 Figure 8. Weld Residual Stress Distribution for CNS H3 Weld .......................................... B-3 Figure 9. Standard WRS Axial Stress Distribution vs. TEPCO H3 Weld Axial Stress Distribution

                        ........................................................................................................................ B-4 Figure 10. BWRVIP-278 Plate Side Horizontal Weld Average Flaw Depth ....................... C-2 Figure 11. BWRVIP-278 Ring Side Horizontal Weld Average Flaw Depth ........................ C-3 File No.:* 1801303.301                                                                                                                       Page 4 of 25 Revision: *o                                                                                                                                   F0306-01R3

{J Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@structint.com .zi 1-877-45!-POWER Ci., structint.com {ffl)

Attachment 2 5 of 54

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) conducted visual testing (VT) examinations of the Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS) core shroud horizontal weld H3 during the fall 2018 maintenance outage (RE30). General Electric Hitachi (GE-H) was the inspection vendor who performed the 2018 VT examinations, which identified reportable indications on the ID [1, 2]. IHI Southwest Technologies, Inc (ISwT} performed ultrasonic testing (UT) on the H3 weld in during the fall 2014 outage. ISwT reviewed their data from 2014 and provided an addendum to the 2014 inspections in 2018 [3]. Furthermore, AREVA also performed UT of the lower side of the H3 weld in 2005. Indications from this inspection are also included in Reference [3]. NPDD has contracted Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. (SI) to evaluate the indications identified in References [1, 2 and 3]. The Boiling Water Reactor Vessel and Internals Project (BWRVIP) has provided inspection and flaw evaluation guidance for Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) core shroud circumferential welds in BWRVIP-76, Revision 1-A [4], BWRVIP-14-A [5], and BWRVIP-99-A [6]. This evaluation follows the general guidance outlined in BWRVIP-76, Revision 1-A [4], for plant specific evaluations with some added assumptions. These are described in Sections 4.0 and 5.0. This calculation supersedes SI calculation 1501658.301, Revision 1 [7] for the H3 weld. Evaluations for all other welds in Reference [7] remain valid. For the H3 weld, the end of the evaluation interval changes from 2024 to 2020. 2.0 OBJECTIVE The objective of this calculation is to provide a technical basis for a 2-year reinspection interval for the CNS circumferential H3 weld using a conservative treatment of current inspection data. 3.0 LIST OF ACRONYMS The following acronyms are used in this calculation: BWRVIP Boiling Water Reactor Vessel and Internals Project CNS Cooper Nuclear Station DEF Depth Evaluation Factor DLL Distributed Ligament Length DSE Depth Sizing Error EFPY Effective Full Power Years EOI End of Interval EPFM Elastic-Plastic Fracture Mechanics EPRI Electric Power Research Institute GE-H General Electric-Hitachi ID Inside Diameter IGSCC lntergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking ISwT IHI Southwest Technologies, Inc. LEF Length Evaluation Factor LEFM Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics LSE Length Sizing Error NPPD Nebraska Pubic Power District NWC Normal Water Chemistry File No.: 1801303.301 Page 5 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 13 Structilrallntegrity info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4Sl-POWER 0 structint.com @ Associa/es. Inc.

Attachment 2 6 of 54 OD Outside Diameter RMS Root Mean Square SI Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. UT Ultrasonic Testing VT Visual Testing WRS Weld Residual Stress 4.0 METHODOLOGY This section documents the methodology used to perform the flaw evaluations. Since the evaluations possibly require deviation from BWRVIP-76, Revision 1-A approved methodology, two independent methodologies are used in this analysis: one using K-independent crack growth rates and one using K-dependent crack growth rates. Using two independent methodologies gives additional assurance that the acceptance criteria can met using different assumptions. 4.1 K-lndependent Flaw Evaluation Approach The following plant-specific flaw evaluation methodology is utilized for the K-independent approach:

1. Tabulate all reportable indications and un-inspected regions for the H3 weld upper and lower sides from both ID and OD inspections, using the most recent shroud VT inspection data obtained during RE30 [1, 2]. Further, indications reported by ISwT using UT in 2014 [3] are added to the indications in 2018. This approach provides a bounding treatment of the inspection data based on both UT and VT testing from multiple outages. UT results from the AREVA inspections in 2005 [3] are considered in the final flaw distribution to ensure the circumferential locations of the known indications are included; however, these indications are not included in Table 1 since there is more recent UT and VT data that is acceptable to use based on BWRVIP-76, Revision 1-A required inspection coverage.

2. Assume all 2014 UT indications and 2018 VT indications are 100% through-wall cracks.

Assume all regions uninspected by VT are also 100% through-wall cracks for the entire uninspected region. This takes no credit for the statistical method outlined in BWRVIP-76, Revision 1-A [4, Appendix H] for uninspected regions.

3. Grow all indications in the circumferential direction, including the indications postulated in the uninspected regions, using the normal water chemistry (NWC) intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) growth rate of 5.0 x 10-5 in/hr [8] for stainless steel.

a. VT indications from 2018 are grown for 2 years (until 2020)

b. UT indications from 2014 are grown for 6 years (until 2020)

c. A 100% capacity factor is assumed for this evaluation with 365.25 days/year.

4. Treat all reportable indications, above and below the weld, to be in the same plane.

5. If applicable, combine the end of evaluation interval flaw distribution using proximity criterion from BWRVIP-158-A that two adjacent flaws closer than a distance of {t

                           }} must be combined [9].

File No.: 1801303.301 Page 6 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information SJ Structural Integrity info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER G structint.corn @ Assooiales, Inc.

Attachment 2 7 of 54

6. Apply structural credit for the top guide aligner lugs which are welded over the H3 weld and provide redundant structural support. The minimum shear area based on cracking above and below the H3 weld is utilized and is converted to an equivalent area based on the shroud thickness to be used in the evaluation. *

7. Obtain loading, geometry, and material type design inputs from the CNS shroud flaw evaluation design input compilation [1 O].

8. Obtain the bounding fluence on the shroud inside surface, at 54 effective full power years (EFPY) of operation from Reference [11],

9. Determine the appropriate failure mechanism and evaluation methodology, based on the fluence values determined above, using the guidance given in BWRVIP-100, Revision 1-A [12].

10. Calculate the available structural margin using the Distributed Ligament Length (DLL) computer program [13].

4.2 K-Dependent Flaw Evaluation Approach The following plant-specific flaw evaluation methodology is utilized for the K-dependent approach:

1. For this approach, rather than growing each reported indication in the length and depth direction then combining adjacent flaws, a conservative approach is taken in which 100% of the H3 weld circumference is assumed to be cracked to the depth of the maximum flaw depth at the end of the interval. The initial flaw depths are taken from the inspection reports given in Reference [3].

The uncertainties associated with each inspection are conservatively added to the initial flaw depths. As there are results from multiple inspections that took place during different intervals, the projected crack growth is dependent on the year in which the flaw was recorded. Since the maximum flaw depths reported by AREVA are deeper than those reported by ISwT, the maximum flaw depth is grown 25 years, or 12 years from 2018. This approach provides a bounding treatment of the inspection data from both inspection vendors. This approach also considers a longer interval than the K-independent approach since K-dependent crack growth rates are much slower than the K-independent rates.

2. End of interval flaw depths are calculated based on the K-dependent crack growth methods given in BWRVIP-14-A [5] and BWRVIP-99-A [6]. Since these methods are valid for flaw depths up to (( }} of the wall thickness, if the flaw depth is greater than (( }} within the evaluation interval, the appropriate K-independent crack growth rate (CGR) is used for flaw growth subsequent to the time at which the flaw was grown to {( }} through-wall. This final flaw size is then evaluated using DLL in order to confirm that the required structural margin exists.

3. Fluence is used to determine the appropriate crack growth evaluation methodology using the guidance given in BWRVIP-14-A [5] or BWRVIP-99-A [6]. For weld fluence lower than ((

                    }} crack growth rates from BWRVIP-14-A [5] are used, and for weld fluence greater than

(( }} crack growth rates from BWRVIP-99-A [6] are used. See Section 4.2.1 for more details.

4. Obtain loading, geometry, and material type design inputs from the CNS shroud flaw evaluation design input compilation [1 O].

5. Obtain the bounding fluence on the shroud inside surface, at 54 EFPY of operation from Reference [11].

File No.: 1801303.301 Page 7 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information I) Structural Integrity Associates. Inc. info@struclint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER G structint.com @

Attachment 2 8 of 54

6. Determine the appropriate failure mechanism and evaluation methodology, based on the fluence values determined above, using the guidance given in BWRVIP-100, Revision 1-A [12].

7. Calculate the available structural margin using the DLL computer program [13].

4.2.1 Crack Growth for Fluence Greater than {( )} The K-dependent crack growth rate for NWC in regions with fluence greater than (( }} but less than (( }} is obtained from Section 8.3.1 of Reference [6]. The crack growth rate is given by the following equation: (( }} (1) where: da/dt = Crack growth rate, in/hr K = Stress intensity factor, ksi.Jin Note: This equation is applicable to normal operation where the plant is maintaining conditions as specified to meet Action Level 1 of the EPRI Water Chemistry Guidelines [14]. 5.0 ASSUMPTIONS The following assumptions are used in this evaluation:

1. For the K-independent approach, all VT and UT indications are assum~d to be cracked through-wall.

This assumption is acceptable because it conservatively bounds the as-reported indication depths.

2. For the K-independent approach, 100% of all uninspected regions are assumed to be cracked through-wall based on 2018 VT data.

This assumption is acceptable because it conservatively takes no structural credit for the material condition in the uninspected regions. Furthermore, end of interval flaw distributions are compared with uninspected UT areas from 2014. If a region is identified as free of indications but was not inspected with UT in 2014, no structural credit is taken for that region.

3. For the K-dependent approach, the bounding maximum flaw depth is determined from the inspection data in Reference [3] and a 360° flaw with a depth equal to the maximum depth is assumed to exist in the weld.

This assumption is acceptable and conservative because it is bounding. Also per Appendix D of BWRVIP-76, Rev. 1-A [4], if the inspected length is greater than 50% of the weld length, the flaw depth of the uninspected region should be set equal to the average flaw depth of the observed cracks in the inspected region.

4. The bounding fluence at end of life (54 EFPY) [11] is used to determine the applicable failure mode and analysis methodology.

This assumption is conservative because it applies the maximum fluence projected at the end of the reactor license which results in the material condition with the lowest toughness. File No.: 1801303.301 Page 8 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information SJ Structural Integrity info@structinl.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER e structint.com @) Associates. Inc.

Attachment 2 9 of 54

5. Normal water chemistry (NWC) is assumed for all welds addressed in this evaluation.

This is conservative because NWC requires the use of higher crack growth rates.

6. It is assumed that IGSCC in the H3 weld will not extend in the aligner lug welds and that structural credit can be taken for a portion of the aligner lug weld area.

This is reasonable since there is little driving stress that would cause the horizontal cracks in the H3 weld heat affected zone to turn perpendicular and extend through the fillet or groove welds.

7. The Reference [3] UT data does not contain depth sizing for the top side (ring side) of the H3 weld. It is assumed that the UT results for the bottom side (plate side) of the H3 weld from Reference [3] bound any crack depth that may exist on the top side of the weld.

This assumption is supported by weld residual stress analysis outlined in Appendix Bas well as industry operating experience which has shown that the initial depth used in this calculation is conservative and bounds fleet data available in BWRVIP-278 [15] Also, GE-H performed VT of the OD of the CNS H3 weld in 2018 at 4 different azimuths for a total of 80' coverage and found no indications [2] This supports the assumption that there is no cracking on the OD of weld H3. 6.0 DESIGN INPUTS The following design inputs are used for this evaluation:

1. Inspection Data: Weld H3 inspection data from VT examinations performed by GE-H in 2018 [1, 2], ISwT in 2014 and AREVA in 2005 [3] are included in this evaluation. Table 1 presents inspection results from all inspections as well as end of interval (EOI) lengths based on an EOI of Fall 2020. VT data from 2018 is grown for 2 years while UT data from 2014 is grown for 6 years.

2. NOE Uncertainty: For the 2018 VT data, measurements in References [1, 2] were made by landmark. Therefore, the length evaluation factor (LEF) is:

LEF: (( )} [16, Table 3.1-1] For the 2014 ISwT UT data, measurements for the ring side (upper) in Reference [3] use UT Demonstration 63 from Reference [16]. Measurements for the plate side (lower) in Reference [3] use UT Demonstration 61 from Reference [16]. Both examinations were near side. The length sizing error (LSE), depth sizing error (DSE) and depth evaluation factor (DEF) values are: Upper LSE (RMS): (( )} [16, UT Demo 63] Lower LSE (RMS): (( )} [16, UT Demo 61] Lower DSE (RMS): (( }} [16, UT Demo 61] Lower DEF: {t )} [16, UT Demo 61] For the 2005 AREVA UT data, depth measurements in Reference [3] were obtained from near side UT based on Reference [17]. File No.: 1801303.301 Page 9 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information lJ Structural Integrity info@structint.com ~ l-877-4SI-POWER e slructint.com @) Associates, Inc.

Attachment 2 10 of 54 Lower DSE (RMS): {( }} inch [18] Lower DEF: {( )) inch [18] Based on Reference [19], no adjustment to the measured flaw size is required in the length direction since the LSE RMS values are less than {( }}. Since the DSE RMS value in the depth direction is greater than (( }}, a DEF is required for depth measurements. A DEF of {( }} inch is used for all UT depth measurements.

3. Loads: All relevant stresses were taken from the Design Input Compilation calculation [10, Table 9].

Service Level A/B Pm=0.355 ksi Pb=0.287 ksi Service Level CID Pm=0.910 ksi Pb=0.583 ksi Note that these stresses conservatively omit deadweight.

4. Material Type: Shroud base metal: 304 stainless steel [10, Section 3.1.2]

5. Fluence: 9.46 x 1020 n/cm 2 at 54 EFPY [11]

6. Geometry: Wall thickness: 1.5 inches [1 O]

Inside Radius: 87 .25 inches [1 O] Aligner Lug Dimensions: See Figure 1 and Figure 2 7.0 STRUCTURAL EVALUATIONS 7.1 K-lndependent Evaluation

7. 1. 1 K-lndependent Crack Growth Rate Each tip of each flaw identified by UT during the 2014 ISwT exa.mination will grow in the circumferential direction by 2.63 inches from 2014 to 2020, as shown below:

(5x10-5 in/hr) (6 years) (365.25 days/year) (24 hours/day) = 2.63 inches/ flaw tip Each tip of each flaw identified by VT during the 2018 GE-H examination will grow in the circumferential direction by 0.88 inches from 2018 to 2020, as shown below: (5x10-5 in/hr) (2 years) (365.25 days/year) (24 hours/day) = 0.88 inches/ flaw tip

7. 1.2 Inspection Uncertainty Each tip of each flaw identified by VT during the 2018 GE-H examination will include a {( J) inches inspection uncertainty [16, Table 3.1-1]. This applies for as-found flaws as well as flaws assumed in uninspected regions.

File No.: 1801303.301 Page 10 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Propdetary Information SJ Structural Integrity info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER G structint.com (@ Associates. Inc.

Attachment 2 11 of 54 Since the LSE RMS for the UT data is less than {( }}, no inspection uncertainty is applied to the UT data [19].

7. 1.3 Added Ligament Due to Aligner Lug Weld Area There are two aligner lugs that are welded to the shroud at the H3 weld location at 0°, 90°, 180° and 270° that serve to align the top guide in place [20]. These lugs are welded on all sides and cover the H3 weld and extend some distance on either side of the H3 weld. Figure 1 shows the general configuration of the aligner lug assembly and the relation to the H3 weld. Figure 2 shows a detailed drawing of one of the lugs based on dimensions from Reference [20].

In order to take credit for any load carrying capacity that the aligner lug welds may take, the following methodology is used:

1. Upper and lower examination boundaries are identified based on UT data from Reference [3]

which identify the distance from the weld centerline for each indication. The upper boundary is 1.20" from weld centerline and the lower boundary is 0.94" from the weld centerline.

2. It is assumed that the weld area in between the upper and lower boundaries is not available for structural reinforcement since there is the potential for a crack to exist at both boundaries, thereby causing a discontinuation of available ligament.

3. Available areas are calculated above the upper boundary and below the lower boundary.

The available weld area is determined by: Weld Area = r Weld Length x Weld Thickness For a Fillet Weld: Weld Thickness= 0.707 x Fillet Leg= 0.707(0.5) = 0.354" For a Groove Weld: Weld Thickness= Groove Width= 0.500" Available weld lengths are shown in Figure 2 with. ligaments shown as Dim A to Dim G For areas below the lower boundary Weld Area = LDimA. ToirriA + LDimB. T DimB + LDimC. T Dime

                                               = 1.06

0.354 + 2.00
0.354 + 1.06
0.500

                                               = 1.612 in2 per lug
                                               = 3.223 in 2 for both lugs For areas above the upper boundary Weld Area = LDimD . T DimD + LDimE . T DimE + LDimF . T DimF + LDimG . T DimG
                                               = 0.80

0.500 + 1.15
0.500 + 1.42
0.500 + 1.80
0.354

                                               = 2.290 in 2 per lug
                                               = 4:579 in 2 for both lugs

4. The weld area available is the minimum of the upper and lower bounded areas.

File No.: 1801303.301 Page 11 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information lJ Structural Integrity info@structint.com .!:i 1-877-4SI-POWER '9 structint;com @ Associates, Inc.

Attachment 2 12 of 54

5. For simplicity, this area is converted to an equivalent H3 weld length using a H3 weld thickness of 1.5" Equivalent H3 Weld Length = 3.223 / 1.5 = 2.149"

                                                                    = 1.40 degrees

6. For regions that have fully cracked H3 weld metal at 0°, 90°, 180° and 270°, the equivalent length of 1.40 degrees is added as "good metal" in the evaluation, centered at 0°, 90°, 180° or 270°, as appropriate.

7. 1.4 Fluence and Failure Mechanisms The fluence for the H3 weld is 9.46 x 1020 n/cm 2 at 54 EFPY [11]. Based on guidance given in BWRVIP-100, Revision 1-A [12], the applicable failure mode is (( }}. Both limit load and elastic-plastic fracture mechanics (EPFM) are considered in the analysis.

7. 1..5 Fracture Mechanics Evaluations Table 1 summarizes the as-reported indications in weld H3 for CNS. Table 1 also has end of interval (based on 2020) flaw lengths calculated using K-independent crack growth from Section 7.1.1 and inspection uncertainty from Section 7.1.2 included, as appropriate, for each inspection type. Table 2 summarizes the end of evaluation interval flaw distribution when combining overlapping regions. Figure 3 shows a visual representation of the end of interval flaw distribution from Table 2. Table 3 summarizes the flaw distribution when structural credit is given to the aligner lug weld metal from Section 7 .1.3. Detailed calculations are included in spreadsheet "Cooper 1801303 H3 Evaluation.xlsx."

The applied stresses for the H3 weld are provided in Section 6.0, Item 3. In performing the structural integrity analysis of the weld, both normal/upset and emergency/faulted conditions must be considered. Appendix A contains the DLL output used in this analysis. The output file contains an echo of the inputs used for the evaluation. 7.2 K-Dependent Evaluation 7.2. 1 K-Pependent Crack Growth Rate This section discusses the calculations performed to develop the stress intensity factor distributions and the crack growth rate curves. Per Section 6.0, Item 5, the fluence at 54 EFPY is greater than {(

         }} and less than ((                 }}; therefore, the BWRVIP-99-A [6] crack growth law will be used in this calculation.

BWRVIP-99-A [6] provides guidance for the determination of the stress intensity factor used in crack growth calculations for welds with fluence greater than {t ;J but less than (( }}. Section 8.5 of [6] recommends the use of a {t lj. The weld residual stress distribution is applicable to both inside surface and outside surface connected flaws. The membrane stresses given in Section 6.0, Item 3 are lower than (( H; therefore, it is conservative. The curve-fit expression for the normalized K1 distribution taken from BWRVIP-99-A [6], Figure 9-2 is: File No.: 1801303.301 Page 12 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information tJ Structural Integrity info@sfructint.com ~ l-877-4SI-POWER e slructinl.com @ Associates, Inc.

Attachment 2 13of54 (( (2) where

}}

The normalized stress intensity factor, K, curve and curve fit equation are included in Excel spreadsheet "K_VS_A_For_High_Fluence.xlsx" and are shown in Figure 4. To calculate the stress intensity factor for a given flaw depth, Equation 2 is multiplied by the square root of the shroud thickness (./t). Figure 5 shows the crack depth versus time associated with the K distribution from Figure 4. Note that the stress intensity factor remains positive throughout the shroud thickness. This behavior could result in through-wall growth of a flaw given a sufficiently long evaluation interval. The K-dependent crack growth calculation is performed in spreadsheet "Cooper K Dependent Flaw Calculation.xlsx" using an initial depth of 0.82 and a DEF of (( I} inch from Section 6.0, Item 2. For the K-dependent analysis, a total of 25 years of crack growth is calculated using an initial flaw depth of 0.963 inch. This growth is assumed to start in 2005, the date of the AREVA UT inspection data in Reference [3], which gives an end of interval of 2030. The end of interval flaw depth is 1.098 inches. 7.2.2 Fracture Mechanics Evaluation A 360-degree part through-wall flaw of 1.098 inches is assumed for the K-dependent evaluation. Figure 6 shows the geometry of this flaw case. The applied stresses for the H3 weld are provided in Section 6.0, Item 3. In performing the structural integrity analysis of the weld, both normal/upset and emergency/faulted conditions must be considered. The indication profiles are input into DLL to calculate the structural factors at the end of the evaluation interval. Appendix A contains the DLL output files. The output files contain an echo of the inputs used for the evaluation. 7.3 Weld Residual Stress Considerations Appendix B provides a technical basis for why an ID connected crack would likely arrest at or before 0.92 inches based on combined operational and residual stress K values. 8.0 RESULTS OF ANALYSIS Table 4 presents the results of the K-independent analysis which assumes through-wall cracking for a large majority of the H3 weld. The results show that the required structural margin exists for an interval to 2020 considering both limit load and EPFM analysis. Table 5 presents the results of the K-dependent analysis which assumes part through-wall cracking for the entire H3 weld circumference. The results show that the required structural margin exists for an interval to 2030 considering both limit load and EPFM analysis. File No.: 1801303.301 Page 13 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information

      '3 Structural Integrity                                          info@structinl.com m. 1-877-4SI-POWER C.,   structint.com @

Associates, Inc.

Attachment 2 14 of 54 9.0 OPERATING EXPERIENCE Appended C provides an overview of relevant industry operating experience for cracking in the core shroud H3 weld. Based on the industry operating experience in BWRVIP-278 [15], the CNS data is in-line with industry experience, and the assumption of equivalent cracking on the plate and ring side is reasonable.

10.0 CONCLUSION

S AND DISCUSSION Two independent analysis methodologies were performed to evaluate cracking in the CNS core shroud H3weld. The first methodology uses K-independent crack growth rates and conservatively combines all VT and UT data for the upper and lower sides of the weld, including uninspected regions, NDE uncertainty and crack growth. This analysis also takes structural credit for the aligner lug welds. This evaluation shows that the required structural margin is met, as shown in Table 4. The second methodology uses K-dependent crack growth rates assuming the deepest measured flaw, grown to 2030, adjusted for NDE uncertainty. This evaluation shows that the required structural margin is met, as shown in Table 5. Appendix B provides a technical basis for why an ID connected flaw will arrest much more shallow than the depth considered in the evaluation herein. Appendix C provides industry operating experience that further corroborates this.

11.0 REFERENCES

1. General Electric Hitachi INR CNS RE 30 IWl-18-07 Shroud R1, "Shroud H3 ID," SI File No.

1801303.201.

2. General Electric Hitachi IWI Data Sheets Cooper Nuclear Station, RE Fall 2018 IWI-BWRVIP, "Shroud OD," October 17, 2018, SI File No. 1801303.201.

3. Addendum #2 to Final Report, IHI Project #13-0305 (2018), "Automated Ultrasonic Examination of the Core Shroud at Cooper Nuclear Station RE-28," October 2018, SI File No. 1801303.201.

4. BWRVIP-76, Revision 1-A: BWR Vessel and Internals Project: BWR Core Shroud Inspection and Flaw Evaluation Guidelines. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2015. 3002005566. EPRI Proprietary.

lnfonnation.

5. BWRVIP-14-A: BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Evaluation of Crack Growth in BWR Stainless Steel RPV Internals. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2008. 1016569. EPRI Proprietary Information.

6. BWRVIP-99-A: BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Crack Growth Rates in Irradiated Stainless SteelsinBWRlnternalComponents. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2008.1016566. EPRI Proprietary lnfonnation.

7. SI Calculation 1501658.301, Revision 1, "Updated Flaw Evaluation for Cooper Nuclear Station, Core Shroud Circumferential Weld H1 through H7 and Vertical Weld V16."

8. BWRVIP Letter 2012-074 from Chuck Wirtz and Randy Stark to All BWRVIP Committee Members, "Superseded "Needed" Guidance Regarding Crack Growth Assumptions," dated March 22, 2012.

File No.: 1801303.301 Page 14 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 tr Structural Integrity info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER " structint.com (@) Associates, Inc.

Attachment 2 15 of 54

9_ BWRVIP-158-A: Flaw Proximity Rules for Assessment of BWR Internals. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:

2010. 1020998. EPRI Proprietary Information.

10. Structural Integrity Associates Calculation 1300350.308, Revision 1, "Cooper Nuclear Station Shroud Flaw Evaluation Design Input Compilation."

11. CNS Review of TransWare Calculations NPP-FLU-003-R-003, Revision 0, NPP-FLU-003-R-006 and NPP-FLU-003-R-007, Reactor Pressure Vessel Fluence Evaluation, Nebraska Public Power District Calculation NEDC 07-033 Rev. 1C1, August 9, 2011, SI File No. 1300350.207P.

TransWare Proprietary Information.

12. BWRVIP-100, Revision 1-A: BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Updated Assessment of the Fracture Toughness of Irradiated Stainless Steel for BWR Core Shrouds. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:

2016. 3002008388. EPRI Proprietary Information.

13. BWRVIP-235: BWR Vessel and Internals Project, BWR Core Shroud Distributed Ligament Length (DLL) Computer Program (Version 3.1). EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2009 1018251. EPRI Proprietary Information.

14. BWRVIP-190 Revision 1: BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Volume 1: BWR Water Chemistry Guidelines-Mandatory, Needed, and Good Practice Guidance. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2014.

3002002623. EPRI Proprietary Information.

15. BWRVIP-278: BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Technical Basis for Revision of the BWRVIP-76 Core Shroud Inspection Program. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2013. 3002000650. EPRI Proprietary Information.

16. TR-105696-R19 (BWRVIP-03) Revision 19: BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Reactor Pressure Vessel and Internals Examination Guidelines. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2015. 3002008095. EPRI Proprietary Information.

17. AREVA Report, 51-5058461-00, "Cooper Nuclear Station RF022 2005 Core Shroud Ultrasonic Examination." SI File No. 1501658.202.

18. Email from K. Thomas (NPPD) to G. Stevens (SI), "FW: Shroud Tool Instrument Uncertainties,"

January 24, 2005, 6:31 p.m., with attached document, SI File No. 1501658.205.

19. BWRVIP Letter 2004-426 From Robin Dyle/Tom Mulford to All BWRVIP Committee Members,

Subject:

"Consideration of NOE Uncertainty in Flaw Evaluations," Dated September 30, 2004.

20. Willamette Iron and Steel Company Drawing No E 854, Sheet 2, Revision D, "Shroud," SI File No 1801303.202.

21. Final Report, lsWT Project #13-0305, "Automated Ultrasonic Examination of the Core Shroud at Cooper Nuclear Station RE-28," November 2014, SI File No. 1801303.201.

File No.: 1801303.301 Page 15 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3

Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@structirH.com m 1-877-4SI-POWER" structint.com @)

Attachment 2 16 of 54 Table 1. Core Shroud Weld H3 Inspection Summary EOI EOI Region Start, End, Length, Length, Initiating Side of NDE Depth, Start3, End3 , Number Deg Deg Deg in Surface1 Weld Method2 in Deg Dea 1 1 7 6.00 9.22 ID Upper VT N/A -0.10 8.10 2 7 20 13.00 19.97 U-1 Upper/Lower VT N/A 5.90 21.10 3 17.57 26.30 8.73 13.41 ID Upper UT N/A .15.86 28.01 4 20 40 20.00 30.72 ID Upper VT N/A 18.90 41.10 5 24.10 27.78 3.68 5.65 ID Upper UT N/A 22.39 29.49 6 28.85 41.14 12.29 18.88 ID Upper UT N/A 27.14 42.85 7 40 48 8.00 12.29 U-1 Upper/Lower VT N/A 38.90 49.10 8 41.02 49.63 8.61 13.22 ID Upper UT N/A 39.31 51.34 9 48 70 22.00 33.79 ID Upper VT N/A 46.90 71.10 10 51.29 65.18 13.89 21.33 ID Upper UT N/A 49.58 66.89 11 64 67 3.00 4.61 ID Lower VT N/A 62.90 68.10 12 70 76 6.00 9.22 U-1 Upper/Lower VT N/A 68.90 77.10 13 72.05 80.85 8.80 13.52 ID Lower UT 0.24 70.34 82.56 14 74.09 77.12 3.03 4.65 ID Upper UT N/A 72.38 78.83 15 76 82 6.00 9.22 ID Upper VT N/A 74.90 83.10 16 79 83 4.00 6.14 ID Lower VT N/A 77.90 84.10 17 86 89 3.00 4.61 ID Lower VT N/A 84.90 90.10 18 91 96 5.00 7.68 ID Upper VT N/A 89.90 97.10 19 93.44 105.61 12.17 18.69 ID Upper UT N/A 91.73 107.32 20 96 111 15.00 23.04 U-1 Upper/Lower VT N/A 94.90 112.10 21 111 130 19.00 29.18 ID Upper VT N/A 109.90 131.10 22 117 119 2.00 3.07 ID Lower VT N/A 115.90 120.10 23 125.01 135.95 10.94 16.80 ID Upper UT N/A 123.30 137.66 24 128 130 2.00 3.07 ID Lower VT N/A 126.90 131.10 25 128.28 133.70 5.42 8.32 ID Lower UT 0.60 126.57 135.41 26 130 143 13.00 19.97 U-1 Upper/Lower VT N/A 128.90 144.10 27 138.74 146.34 7.60 11.67 ID Upper UT N/A 137.03 148.05 28 143 148 5.00 7.68 ID Upper VT N/A 141.90 149.10 29 156.68 163.08 6.40 9.83 ID Lower UT 0.70 154.97 164.79 30 157 165 8.00 12.29 U-1 Upper/Lower VT N/A 155.90 166.10 31 165 177 12.00 18.43 ID Lower VT N/A 163.90 178.10 See Next Page for Notes File No.: 1801303.301 Page 16 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 15 Structural Integrity info@struclint.com Bi 1-877-4SI-POWER C., struclint.com ~ Associates, Inc.

Attachment 2 17 of 54 Table 1 (Concluded). Core Shroud Weld H3 Inspection Summary EOI EOI Region Start, End, Length, Length, Initiating Side of NOE Depth, Start3, End3 , Number Deg Deg Deg in Surface 1 Weld Method 2 in Deg Dea 32 185 206 21.00 32.25 U-1 Upper/Lower VT N/A 183.90 207.10 33 206 222 16.00 24.57 ID Upper VT N/A 204.90 223.10 34 212.77 231.65 18.88 29.00 ID Upper UT N/A 211.06 233.36 35 222 229 7.00 10.75 U-1 Upper/Lower VT N/A 220.90 230.10 36 227.73 231.65 3.92 6.02 ID Lower UT 0.24 226.02 233.36 37 229 230 1.00 1.54 ID Lower VT N/A 227.90 231.10 38 229 244 15.00 23.04 ID Upper VT N/A 227.90 245.10 39 233.13 243.94 10.81 16.60 ID Upper UT N/A 231.42 245.65 40 244 255 11.00 16.89 U-1 Upper/Lower VT N/A 242.90 256.10 41 255 260 5.00 7.68 ID Upper VT N/A 253.90 261.10 42 257.41 261.15 3.74 5.74 ID Upper UT N/A 255.70 262.86 43 271.00 288.40 17.40 26.72 ID Upper UT N/A 269.29 290.11 44 274 275 1.00 1.54 ID Upper VT N/A 272.90 276.10 45 275 294 19.00 29.18 U-1 Upper/Lower VT N/A 273.90 295.10 46 281.28 284.43 3.15 4.84 ID Upper UT N/A 279.57 286.14 47 294 310 16.00 24.57 ID Upper VT N/A 292.90 311.10 48 304.97 322.18 17.21 26.43 ID Upper UT N/A 303.26 323.89 49 309 310 1.00 1.54 ID Lower VT N/A 307.90 311.10 50 309.37 316.91 7.54 11.58 ID Lower UT 0.24 307.66 318.62 51 310 317 7.00 10.75 U-1 Upper/Lower VT N/A 308.90 318.10 52 317 320 3.00 4.61 ID Upper VT N/A 315.90 321.10 53 327 334 7.00 10.75 ID Upper VT N/A 325.90 335.10 54 328.89 336.61 7.72 11.86 ID Upper UT N/A 327.18 338.32 55 329.99 340.96 10.97 16.85 ID Lower UT 0.28 . 328.28 342.67 56 333 337 4.00 6.14 ID Lower VT N/A 331.90 338.10 57 336 340 4.00 6.14 ID Upper VT N/A 334.90 341.10 58 338.33 345.75 7.42 11.40 ID Upper UT N/A 336.62 347.46 59 340 345 5.00 7.68 U-1 Upper/Lower VT N/A 338.90 346.10 60 341.39 344.04 2.65 4.07 ID Lower UT 0.36 339.68 345.75 61 345 359 14.00 21.50 ID Upper VT N/A 343.90 360.10 62 349 357 8.00 12.29 ID Lower VT N/A 347.90 358.10 Notes: 1. U-1 denotes uninspected regions based on 2018 VT data [1, 2].

2. All VT data is from 2018 [1, 2]. All UT data was taken 2014 and reanalyzed in 2018 [3].

3. 2018 VT data is grown for 2 years to 2020. 2014 UT data is grown for 6 years to 2020. See Section 7.1.

File No.: 1801303.301 Page 17 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 SJ Structural Integrity info@structinl.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER " slructint.com !ffl) Associates. Inc.

Attachment 2

                                                                                                   .* 18 of 54 Table 2. 2020 Flaw Distribution Region           Start,         End, Depth, in Number            Deg           Deg 1            0.00         84.10             1.50 2            84.10         84.90             0.00 3            84.90        149.10             1.50 4           149.10        154.97             0.00 5           154.97        178.10             1.50 51          178.10        183.90             1.50 7           183.90        262.86             1.50 8           262.86        269.29             0.00 9           269.29        323.89             1.50 10           323.89        325.90             0.00 11           325.90        360.00             1.50 Note:

1. This region was uninspected by UT [21] and will therefore be treated as a through-wall flaw.

File No.: 1801303.301 Page 18 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 SJ Structural Integrity info@structinl.com ~ 1-877-4S!-POWER e slructint.com @ Associates. Inc.

Attachment 2 19of54 Table 3. 2020 Flaw Distribution with Strudural Credit for Aligner Lug Welds Region Start, End, Depth, in Number Deg Deg 1 0.00 0.70 0.00 2 0.70 84.10 1.50 3 84.10 84.90 0.00 4 84.90 89.30 1.50 5 89.30 90.70 0.00 6 90.70 149.10 1.50 7 149.10 154.97 0.00 8 154.97 179.30 1.50 91 179.30 180.70 0.00 10 180.70 262.86 1.50 11 2 262.86 270.693 0.00 12 270.69 323.89 1.50 13 323.89 325.90 0.00 14 325.90 359.30 1.50 15 359.30 360.00 0.00 Notes:

1. This is a combined region of unflawed shroud and aligner lug welds.

2. Additional structural credit is not given for the aligner lug welds since the H3 weld is not cracked here and already provides full support.

3. This distance has been modified slightly based on the end of Region 8 in Table 2.

Table 4. Summary of K-lndependent DLL Results Required End of Minimum Strudural Margin Strudural Interval Marain Limit 4.79 (Service Level A/B) SF> 2.77 Load 1.74 (Service Level C/D) SF> 1.39 Tapp= 0.194 2020 Tapp< 40 (Service Level A/B) EPFM Tapp= 0.256 (Service Level C/D) Tapp<21 File No.: 1801303.301 Page 19 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3

Structural Integrity Associates. Inc. info@structinl.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER C.,, slnJctinl.com @)

Attachment 2 20 of 54 Table 5. 2030 K-Dependent Flaw Profile and DLL Results End of Service Level A/B Service Level CID Initial Flaw Interval, Flaw Evaluation End of Depth <1> Depth C2l Acceptance Acceptance Method Results Results Interval (in) (in) Criterion Criterion Limit Load SF= 38.99 SF> 2.77 SF= 16.56 SF> 1.39 0.963 1.098 2030 EPFM Tapp= 1.384 Tapp< 1268 Tapp= 2.022 Tapp< 915 Notes:

1. Maximum recorded depth in Reference [3] plus DEF of (( l}from Section 6.0, Item 2. See Assumption 7.

2. End of interval flaw growth is calculated using Equation 1.

File No.: 1801303.301 Page 20 of25 Revision: O F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information 13 Structural Integrity info@structinl.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER e structinl.com (@) Associates, Inc.

Attachment 2 21 of 54 Figure 1. General Configuration of the Aligner Lugs File No. : 1801303.301 Page 21 of 25 Revision : 0 F0306-01R3 e Structural Integrity Associates. Inc. inlo@structint.com m l-877-4SI-POWER " structint.com ~

Attachment 2 22 of 54 1/2" 1.42 (Dim F) 1/2" 1/2" l.80 (Dim G) Weld Areas - Top

                             .80 (Dim D)                                                                  3.00 Upper Exam Boundary T

l.20 5.00 4.00

1

            .94 H3 Weld Cen terline Lower Exam Boundary Weld
                                                                                      -i---

1.06 (Dim CJ Areas - Bottom 1.06 (Dim A) 1/2"

                                               - --   2.00 (Dim B)                         l/2" Notes: 1. Lug dimensions are taken from Reference [20].

2. Upper and lower examination boundaries are based on Reference [3].

3. Bottom and right welds are 1/2" fillet welds with a weld throat of 0.707*0.5 = 0.354".

4. Left, taper and top welds are 1/2" groove welds with a weld throat of 1/2".

Figure 2. Aligner Lug and Weld Dimensions File No.: 1801303.301 Page 22 of 25 Revision : 0 F0306-01R3 SJ Structural Integrity info@structint.com .!, l-877-4Sl-POWER e structint.com @) Associates. Inc. L

Attachment 2 23 of 54 Uncracked M e ta l C

       ...c
       -+-

Q_ (1) 0 Inside 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 Degrees around Circumference Uncracke d Metal

                            ~ l O Year Growth
                            ~ Uninspected by UT D As-Found Indication Figure 3. 2020 Through-Wall Flaw Distribution File No. : 1801303.301                                                                         Page 23 of 25 Revision : 0                                                                                       F0306-01R3 e

Structural Integrity Associates. Inc. inlo@structint.com m l-877-4SI-POWER e structint .com ~

Attachment 2 24 of 54 Figure 4. Normalized Stress Intensity Factor Distribution for High Fluence Welds [6, Figure 9-2] File No.: 1801303.301 Page 24 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information

Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@structint.com m 1-877-4SI-POWER C., struclint.com @

Attachment 2 25 of 54 Figure 5. K-Dependent Crack Growth for 1.5 Inch Thick Core Shroud [6, Figure 9-2] CT tt t t tt Figure 6. Assumed Flaw Distribution for K-Dependent Evaluation File No.: 1801303.301 Page 25 of 25 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information I) S/ructuraf Integrity Associa/es, Inc. info@structint.com ~ l-877-4SI-POWER e structint.com @)

Attachment 2 26 of 54 APPENDIX A DLL OUTPUT FILES File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-1 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 f1 Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@structint.com m 1-877-4SI-POWER " structint.com @t)

Attachment 2 27 of 54 DLL File for K-lndependent Approach DLL: DISTRIBUTED LIGAMENT LENGTH EVALUATION, REV. 3.1.2009.11 START OF THIS ANALYSIS: 10/19/2018 18:02:36 Summary Of Inputs: Title : H3 Cooper 2 year inspection interval Note : K-lndependent Through-Wall Crack With Lug Weld Area Flaw Type/Orientation : SHROUD, Distributed circumferential flaws Engineering Units : English Output Options : Detailed Upset Safety Factor, SF : 2.77 Upset Membrane Stress, Pm : 355 psi Upset Bending Stress, Pb : 287 psi Faulted Safety Factor, SF : 1.39 Faulted Membrane Stress, Pm : 910 psi Faulted Bending Stress, Pb : 583 psi Mean Radius, Rm : 88.00 inches Wall Thickness, t : 1.500 inches NOE Flaw Length Uncertainty : 0.000 inches NOE Flaw Depth Uncertainty : 0.000 inches Allowable Stress Intensity, Sm : 16950 psi Fluence : 9.5e+020 n/cm"2 Starting Ending Crack Material Angle Angle Depth Thickness Region (deg.) (deg.) (inches) (inches) 1 0.0000 0.7000 0.0000 1.5000 2 0.7000 84.1000 1.5000 0.0000 3 84.1000 84.9000 0.0000 1.5000 4 84.9000 89.3000 1.5000 0.0000 5 89.3000 90.7000 0.0000 1.5000 6 90.7000 149.1000 1.5000 0.0000 7 149.1000 154.9700 0.0000 1.5000 8 154.9700 179.3000 1.5000 0.0000 9 179.3000 180.7000 0.0000 1.5000 10 180.7000 262.8600 1.5000 0.0000 11 262.8600 270.6900 0.0000 1.5000 12 270.6900 323.8900 1.5000 0.0000 13 323.8900 325.9000 0.0000 1.5000 14 325.9000 359.3000 1.5000 0.0000 15 359.3000 360.0000 0.0000 1.5000 Adjusted Flaws Summary - for initial Limit Load Analysis only Region flaws adjusted for: Examination Uncertainty of 0.00 inches in Length Examination Uncertainty of 0.00 inches in Depth Start End Length Length Depth File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-2 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 tJ Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER e slructinl.com @)

Attachment 2 28 of 54 Flaw (deg.) (deg.) (deg.) (inch) (inch) 1 0.7000 84.1000 83.4000 128.0932 1.5000 2 84.9000 89.3000 4.4000 6.7579 1.5000 3 90.7000 149.1000 58.4000 89.6960 1.5000 4 154.9700 179.3000 24.3300 37.3682 1.5000 5 180. 7000 262.8600 82.1600 126.1887 1.5000 6 270.6900 323.8900 53.2000 81.7093 1.5000 7 325.9000 360. 7000 34.8000 53.4490 1.5000 Limit Load Results - Upset Service Level: Note: The following limit load results assume that the flaws take compression. Note: The limit load results have been rotated by -0. 7000 degrees. Alpha Moment Pb' Safety (deg.) (in-lbs) (psi) Factor Result 0.0 2.105e+008 5768 9.5379 --->Acceptable 5.0 2.055e+008 5631 9.3242 --->Acceptable 10.0 2.002e+008 5487 9.0998 --->Acceptable 15.0 1.948e+008 5338 8.8684 --->Acceptable 20.0 1.892e+008 5185 8.6287 ---->Acceptable 25.0 1.834e+008 5027 8.3826 ---->Acceptable 30.0 1. 776e+008 4866 8.1320 ---->Acceptable 35.0 1.716e+008 4703 7.8787 ---->Acceptable 40.0 1.657e+008 4540 7.6248 ---->Acceptable 45.0 1.598e+008 4378 7.3721 ---->Acceptable 50.0 1.519e+008 4162 7.0355 ---->Acceptable 55.0 1.483e+008 4065 6.8844 ---->Acceptable 60.0 1.430e+008 3919 6.6571 --->Acceptable 65.0 1.345e+008 3685 6.2930 ---->Acceptable 70.0 1.302e+008 3567 6.1084 ---->Acceptable 75.0 1.253e+008 3433 5.9003 ---->Acceptable 80.0 1.208e+008 3309 5.7079 ---->Acceptable 85.0 1.188e+008 3254 5.6217 ---->Acceptable 90.0 1.150e+008 3152 5.4627 ---->Acceptable 95.0 1.116e+008 3058 5.3168 ---->Acceptable 100.0 1.066e+008 2921 5.1026 --->Acceptable 105.0 1.041 e+008 2854 4.9982 --->Acceptable 110.0 1.022e+008 2800 4.9144 --->Acceptable 115.0 1.007e+008 2760 4.8518 --->Acceptable 120.0 9.975e+007 2734 4.8108 --->Acceptable 125.0 9.931e+007 2721 4.7919 --->Acceptable 130.0 9.939e+007 2723 4.7951 -->Acceptable 135.0 9.998e+007 2740 4.8204 --->Acceptable 140.0 1.011 e+008 2770 4.8676 --->Acceptable 145.0 1.027e+008 2814 4.9364 --->Acceptable 150.0 1.048e+008 2872 5.0263 --->Acceptable 155.0 1.074e+008 2943 5.1365 --->Acceptable 160.0 1.104e+008 3026 5.2662 --->Acceptable 165.0 1.149e+008 3149 5.4584 -->Acceptable 170.0 1.180e+008 3233 5.5889 --->Acceptable 175.0 1.214e+008 3327 5.7357 ---->Acceptable File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-3 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 tJ S/ruc/urat Integrity Associa/es. Inc. info@structint.com ~ 1-877-45!-POWER " slruclint.com @

Attachment 2 29 of 54 180.0 1.270e+008 3479 5.9720 --->Acceptable 185.0 1.327e+008 3635 6.2150 --->Acceptable 190.0 1.388e+008 3803 6.4770 --->Acceptable 195.0 1.442e+008 3952 6.7085 --->Acceptable 200.0 1.498e+008 4106 6.9482 ---->Acceptable 205.0 1.556e+008 4264 7.1942 --->Acceptable 210.0 1.615e+008 4425 7.4449 -->Acceptable 215.0 1.674e+008 '4587 7.6981 --->Acceptable 220.0 1.733e+008 4750 7.9520 ---->Acceptable 225.0 1.772e+008 4856 8.1176 --->Acceptable 230.0 1.832e+008 5020 8.3725 ->Acceptable 235.0 1.890e+008 5179 8.6192 --->Acceptable 240.0 1.944e+008 5328 8.8523 --->Acceptable 245.0 1.997e+008 5473 9.0778 --->Acceptable 250.0 2.048e+008 5613 9.2961 -->Acceptable 255.0 2.097e+008 5745 9.5023 --->Acceptable 260.0 2.142e+008 5869 9.6947 --->Acceptable 265.0 2.183e+008 5983 9.8720 -->Acceptable 270.0 2.221e+008 6086 10.0328 --->Acceptable 275.0 2.254e+008 6178 10.1758 ---->Acceptable 280.0 2.284e+008 6258 10.3000 --->Acceptable 285.0 2.308e+008 6325 10.4044 -->Acceptable 290.0 2.328e+008 6378 10.4882 --->Acceptable 295.0 2.342e+008 6419 10.5509 --->Acceptable 300.0 2.352e+008 6445 10.5918 --->Acceptable 305.0 2.356e+008 6457 10.6107 --->Acceptable 310.0 2.356e+008 6455 10.6075 --->Acceptable 315.0 2.350e+008 6439 10.5822 --->Acceptable 320.0 2.339e+008 6408 10.5350 --->Acceptable 325.0 2.322e+008 6364 10.4662 --->Acceptable 330.0 2.301e+008 6307 10.3763 --->Acceptable 335.0 2.276e+008 6236 10.2661 --->Acceptable 340.0 2.245e+008 6153 10.1364 --->Acceptable 345.0 2.210e+008 6057 9.9881 --->Acceptable 350.0 2.193e+008 6009 9.9122 --->Acceptable 355.0 2.151e+008 5895 9.7346 ->Acceptable Acceptable. Minimum Safety Factor= 4.7919 at 125.0 Degrees Limit Load Results - Faulted Service Level: Note: The following limit load results assume that the flaws take compression. Note: The limit load results have been rotated by -0. 7000 degrees. Alpha Moment Pb' Safety (deg.) (in-lbs) (psi) Factor Result 0.0 1.695e+008 4645 3.7208 --->Acceptable 5.0 1.656e+008 4537 3.6482 -->Acceptable 10.0 1.593e+008 4366 3.5340 ---->Acceptable 15.0 1.539e+008 4218 3.4344 ---->Acceptable 20.0 1.483e+008 4064 3.3313 --->Acceptable 25.0 1.425e+008 3906 3.2255 --->Acceptable 30.0 1.367e+008 3745 3.1178 --->Acceptable File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-4 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 tJ Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER G slruclinl.com @)

Attachment 2 30 of 54 35.0 1.307e+008 3582 3.0089 --> Acceptable 40.0 1.248e+008 3419 2.8997 --->Acceptable 45.0 1.199e+008 3285 2.8098 --->Acceptable 50.0 1.140e+008 3125 2.7025 --->Acceptable 55.0 1.084e+008 2969 2.5982 --->Acceptable 60.0 1.019e+008 2792 2.4797 --->Acceptable 65.0 9.751e+007 2672 2.3992 --->Acceptable 70.0 9.022e+007 2472 2.2655 --->Acceptable 75.0 8.744e+007 2396 2.2144 ---->Acceptable 80.0 8.293e+007 2273 2.1317 ---->Acceptable 85.0 7.779e+007 2132 2.0372 ---->Acceptable 90.0 7.406e+007 2030 1.9689 ---->Acceptable 95.0 7.167e+007 1964 1.9250 ---->Acceptable 100.0 6.875e+007 1884 1.8714 --->Acceptable 105.0 6.631e+007 1817 1.8265 --->Acceptable 110.0 6.434e+007 1763 1.7904 ---->Acceptable 115.0 6.287e+007 1723 1.7635 --->Acceptable 120.0 6.191 e+007 1697 1.7459 -->Acceptable 125.0 6.147e+007 1684 1.7378 --->Acceptable 130.0 6.155e+007 1687 1.7391 --->Acceptable 135.0 6.214e+007 1703 1.7500 --->Acceptable 140.0 6.325e+007 1733 1.7703 --->Acceptable 145.0 6.486e+007 1777 1.7999 --->Acceptable 150.0 6.696e+007 1835 1.8386 --->Acceptable 155.0 6.955e+007 1906 1.8860 --->Acceptable 160.0 7.258e+007 1989 1.9417 --->Acceptable 165.0 7.606e+007 2084 2.0055 --->Acceptable 170.0 7.796e+007 2136 2.0405 --->Acceptable 175.0 8.439e+007 2313 2.1585 --->Acceptable 180.0 8.689e+007 2381 2.2044 --->Acceptable 185.0 9.270e+007 2540 2.3110 --->Acceptable 190.0 9.788e+007 2682 2.4061 --->Acceptable 195.0 1.033e+008 2831 2.5056 --->Acceptable 200.0 1.089e+008 2985 2.6087 --->Acceptable 205.0 1.147e+008 3143 2.7145 --->Acceptable 210.0 1.206e+008 3304 2.8223 --->Acceptable 215.0 1.265e+008 3466 2.9312 --->Acceptable 220.0 1.324e+008 3629 3.0404 --->Acceptable 225.0 1.394e+008 3820 3.1678 -->Acceptable 230.0 1.453e+008 3981 3.2760 -->Acceptable 235.0 1.511e+008 4140 3.3821 --->Acceptable 240.0 1.565e+008 4290 3.4826 --->Acceptable 245.0 1.619e+008 4436 3.5807 --->Acceptable 250.0 1.670e+008 4576 3.6746 --->Acceptable 255.0

1.718e+008 4709 3.7633 --->Acceptable 260.0 1.763e+008 4832 3.8460 --->Acceptable 265.0 1.774e+008 4862 3.8658 -->Acceptable 270.0 1.812e+008 4965 3.9350 --->Acceptable 275.0 1.845e+008 5057 3.9965 --->Acceptable 280.0 1.874e+008 5136 4.0499 --->Acceptable 285.0 1.899e+008 5203 4.0947 --->Acceptable 290.0 1.919e+008 5257 4.1308 ---->Acceptable 295.0 1.933e+008 5297 4.1577 --->Acceptable 300.0 1.943e+008 5324 4.1753 --->Acceptable 305.0 1.947e+008 5336 4.1835 --->Acceptable 310.0 1.946e+008 5334 4.1821 --->Acceptable 315.0 1.941e+008 5318 4.1712 --->Acceptable 320.0 1.929e+008 5287 4.1509 --->Acceptable 325.0 1.913e+008 5243 4.1213 --->Acceptable File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-5 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 lj -

Structural Integrity Associa/es. Inc. info@struclint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER " structint.com @

Attachment 2 31 of 54 330.0 1.892e+008 5185 4.0827 --->Acceptable 335.0 1.866e+008 5115 4.0353 ---->Acceptable 340.0 1.836e+008 5031 3.9795 --->Acceptable 345.0 1.832e+008 5020 3.9722 --->Acceptable 350.0 1.783e+008 4887 3.8826 --->Acceptable 355.0 1.741e+008 4771 3.8052 ---->Acceptable Acceptable. Minimum Safety Factor= 1.7378 at 125.0 Degrees Adjusted Flaws Summary - for LEFM, EPFM and Crack Growth Analysis Region flaws adjusted for: Examination Uncertainty of 0.00 inches in Length Examination Uncertainty of 0.00 inches in Depth Start End Length Length Depth Flaw (deg.) (deg.) (deg.) (inch) (inch) 1 0.7000 84.1000 83.4000 128.0932 1.5000 2 84.9000 89.3000 4.4000 6. 7579 1.5000 3 90.7000 149.1000 58.4000 89.6960 1.5000 4 154.9700 179.3000 24.3300 37.3682 1.5000 5 180.7000 262.8600 82.1600 126.1887 1.5000 6 270.6900 323.8900 53.2000 81.7093 1.5000 7 325.9000 359.3000 33.4000 51.2987 1.5000 EPFM Results - Specified Margin On Load Method - Upset Service Level: Poisson's Ratio : 0.30 Elastic Modulus : 2.8e+007 psi Flow Stress : 77931.9 psi Yield Stress : 68517.6 psi C : 153.221 n : 0.514491 Original Flaws Flaw Half Crack Flaw Nominal Stress Applied Ductile Crack Depth Boundary Stress Intensity J-lntegral Crack Region Length Margin Factor Extension (inch) (inch) (deg) (psi) (psi-(in)".5) (KJ/m"2) (inch) 0-1 64.047 1.5000 0.7000 1778. 183973. 193. 0.0614 0-2 64.047 1.5000 84.1000 1778. 183973. 193. 0.0614 1-1 3.379 1.5000 84.9000 1778. 9241. 0. 0.0000 1-2 3.379 1.5000 89.3000 1778. 9241. 0. 0.0000 2-1 44.848 1.5000 90.7000 1778. 107344. 66. 0.0076 2-2 44.848 1.5000 149.1000 1778. 107344. 66. 0.0076 3-1 18.684 1.5000 154.9700 1778. 33627. 6. 0.0001 3-2 18.684 1.5000 179.3000 1778. 33627. 6. 0.0001 4-1 63.094 1.5000 180.7000 1778. 158083. 142. 0.0341 4-2 63.094 1.5000 262.8600 1778. 158083. 142. 0.0341 File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-6 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 tJ Structural Integrity Associates. Inc. info@struclint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER '9 structint.com !ffl)

Attachment 2 32 of 54 5-1 40.855 1.5000 270.6900 1778. 82798. 39. 0.0028 5-2 40.855 1.5000 323.8900 1778. 82798. 39. 0.0028 6-1 25.649 1.5000 325.9000 1778. 70125. 28. 0.0014 6-2 25.649 1.5000 359.3000 1778. 70125. 28. 0.0014 Original Flaws - Crack Extension Flaw Half Crack Flaw Crack .Depth Boundary Region Length (inch) (inch) (deg) 0-1 64.108 1.5000 0.6600 0-2 64.108 1.5000 84.1400 1-1 3.379 1.5000 84.9000 1-2 3.379 1.5000 89.3000 2-1 44.856 1.5000 90.6951 2-2 44.856 1.5000 149.1049 3-1 18.684 1.5000 154.9699 3-2 18.684 1.5000 179.3001 4-1 63.128 1.5000 180.6778 4-2 63.128 1.5000 262.8822 5-1 40.857 1.5000 270.6882 5-2 40.857 1.5000 323.8918 6-1 25.651 1.5000 325.8991 6-2 25.651 1.5000 359.3009 Original Flaws Plastic Adjusted Flaws Flaw Stress Half Crack Flaw Intensity Crack Depth Boundary Region Factor Angle (psi-(in)".5) (deg) (inch) (deg) 0-1 184157. 42.489 1.5000 -0.0886 0-2 184157. 42.489 1.5000 84.8886 1-1 9241. 2.202 1.5000 84.8981 1-2 9241. 2.202 1.5000 89.3019 2-1 107499. 29.460 1.5000 90.4400 2-2 107499. 29.460 1.5000 149.3600 3-1 33628. 12.190 1.5000 154.9450 3-2 33628. 12.190 1.5000 179.3250 4-1 158898. 41.659 1.5000 180.1205 4-2 158898. 41.659 1.5000 263.4395 5-1 82831. 26.753 1.5000 270.5368 5-2 82831. 26.753 1.5000 324.0432 6-1 70165. 16.810 1.5000 325. 7904 6-2 70165. 16.810 1.5000 359.4096 Original Flaws - Plastic Adjusted Results Flaw Stress Applied Intensity J-lntegral File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-7 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 tJ Structural Integrity Associales, Inc. info@struclint.com m 1-877-4SI-POWER G structint.com @

Attachment 2 33 of 54 Region Factor {psi-{in)".5) {KJ/m"2) 0-1 187621. 200.362 0-2 187621. 200.362 1-1 9258. 0.488 1-2 9258. 0.488 2-1 116474. 77.217 2-2 116474. 77.217 3-1 33892. 6.538 3-2 33892. 6.538 4-1 183786. 192.254 4-2 183786. 192.254 5-1 85749. 41.851 5-2 85749. 41.851 6-1 75343. 32.310 6-2 75343. 32.310 Incremented Flaws Flaw Half Crack Flaw Nominal Crack Depth Boundary Stress Region Length Margin {inch) {inch) {deg) {psi) 0-1 67.249 1.5000 -1.3850 1778. 0-2 67.249 1.5000 86.1850 1778. 1-1 3.548 1.5000 84. 7900 1778. 1-2 3.548 1.5000 89.4100 1778. 2-1 47.090 1.5000 89.2400 1778. 2-2 47.090 1.5000 150.5600 1778. 3-1 19.618 1.5000 154.3618 1778. 3-2 19.618 1.5000 179.9083 1778. 4-1 66.249 1.5000 178.6460 1778. 4-2 66.249 1.5000 264.9140 1778. 5-1 42.897 1.5000 269.3600 1778. 5-2 42.897 1.5000 325.2200 1778. 6-1 26.932 1.5000 325.0650 1778. 6-2 26.932 1.5000 360.1350 1778. Incremented Flaws Crack Extension Flaw Stress Applied Ductile Half Crack Flaw Intensity J-lntegral Crack Crack Depth Boundary Region Factor Extension Length {psi-{in)".5) {KJ/m"2) {inch} {inch} (inch) {deg) 0-1 193662. 213. 0.0750 67 .324 1.5000 -1.4338 0-2 193662. 213. 0.0750 67.324 1.5000 86.2338 1-1 10414. 1. 0.0000 3.548 1.5000 84. 7900 1-2 10414. 1. 0.0000 3.548 1.5000 89.4100 2-1 134950. 104. 0.0184 47.109 1.5000 89.2280 2-2 134950. 104. 0.0184 47.109 1.5000 150.5720 3-1 42113. 10. 0.0002 19.619 1.5000 154.3616 3-2 42113. 10. 0.0002 19.619 1.5000 179.9084 File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-8 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3

Structural Integrity Associates. Inc. info@structint.com m 1-877-4SI-POWER " slructint.com ~

Attachment 2 34 of 54 4-1 190622. 207. 0.0705 66.320 1.5000 178.6001 4-2 190622. 207. 0.0705 66.320 1.5000 264.9599 5-1 123420. 87. 0.0130 42.910 1.5000 269.3515 5-2 123420. 87. 0.0130 42.910 1.5000 325.2285 6-1 80475. 37. 0.0025 26.934 1.5000 325.0634 6-2 80475. 37. 0.0025 26.934 1.5000 360.1366 Incremented Flaws Plastic Adjusted Flaws Flaw Stress Half Crack Flaw Intensity Crack Depth Boundary Region Factor Angle (psi-(in)".5) (deg) (inch) (deg) 0-1 193890. 44.664 1.5000 -2.2636 0-2 193890. 44.664 1.5000 87.0636 1-1 10414. 2.312 1.5000 84.7876 1-2 10414. 2.312 1.5000 89.4124 2-1 135001. 31.074 1.5000 88.8257 2-2 135001. 31.074 1.5000 150.9743 3-1 42115. 12.813 1.5000 154.3225 3-2 42115. 12.813 1.5000 179.9475 4-1 190836. 43.984 1.5000 177.7962 4-2 190836. 43.984 1.5000 265.7638 5-1 123456. 28.275 1.5000 269.0151 5-2 123456. 28.275 1.5000 325.5649 6-1 80482. 17.680 1.5000 324.9204 6-2 80482. 17.680 1.5000 360.2796 Incremented Flaws - Plastic Adjusted Results Flaw Stress Applied Intensity J-lntegral Region Factor (psi-(in)".5) (KJ/m"2) 0-1 197785. 222.659 0-2 197785. 222.659 1-1 10444. 0.621 1-2 10444. 0.621 2-1 136720. 106.394 2-2 136720. 106.394 3-1 42870. 10.461 3-2 42870. 10.461 4-1 194593. 215.529 4-2 194593. 215.529 5-1 124864. 88.742 5-2 124864. 88.742 6-1 81084. 37.422 6-2 81084. 37.422 Final Results File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-9 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 tJ Structural Integrity Associates, /nc. info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER e structint.com @)

Attachment 2 35 of 54 Flaw J dJ da dJ/da T Delta A T Specified Applied Applied @ Material Margin Region J-Applied Achieved (KJ/m"2) (KJ/m"2) (m) (N/m"2) (mm) (Tmat > Tapp) 0-1 211.511 22.297 0.081 274120. 0.183 1.87128 38. Yes 0-2 211.511 22.297 0.081 274120. 0.183 1.87128 38. Yes 1-1 0.554 0.133 0.004 30983. 0.021 0.00002 10614. Yes 1-2 0.554 0.133 0.004 30983. 0.021 0.00002 10614. Yes 2-1 91.805 29.177 0.057 512259. 0.343 0.36951 85. Yes 2-2 91.805 29.177 0.057 512259. 0.343 0.36951 85. Yes 3-1 8.499 3.923 0.024 165322. 0.111 0.00362 807. Yes 3-2 8.499 3.923 0.024 165322. 0.111 0.00362 807. Yes 4-1 203.891 23.274 0.080 290457. 0.194 1.74249 40. Yes 4-2 203.891 23.274 0.080 290457. 0.194 1.74249 40. Yes 5-1 65.297 46.891 0.052 903731. 0.604 0.19055 118. Yes 5-2 65.297 46.891 0.052 903731. 0.604 0.19055 118. Yes 6-1 34.866 5.112 0.033 156934. 0.105 0.05628 213. Yes 6-2 34.866 5.112 0.033 156934. 0.105 0.05628 213. Yes EPFM Results - Specified Margin On Load Method - Faulted Service Level: Poisson's Ratio : 0.30 Elastic Modulus : 2.8e+007 psi Flow Stress : 77931.9 psi Yield Stress : 68517.6 psi C : 153.221 n : 0.514491 Original Flaws Flaw Half Crack Flaw Nominal Stress Applied Ductile Crack Depth Boundary Stress Intensity J-lntegral Crack Region Length Margin Factor Extension (inch) (inch) (deg) (psi) (psi-(in)".5) (KJ/m"2) (inch) 0-1 64.047 1.5000 0.7000 2075. 214691. 262. 0.1120 0-2 64.047 1.5000 84.1000 2075. 214691. 262. 0.1120 1-1 3.379 1.5000 84.9000 2075. 10784. 1. 0.0000 1-2 3.379 1.5000 89.3000 2075. 10784. 1. 0.0000 2-1 44.848 1.5000 90. 7000 2075. 125268. 89. 0.0138 2-2 44.848 1.5000 149.1000 2075. 125268. 89. 0.0138 3-1 18.684 1.5000 154.9700 2075. 39242. 9. 0.0002 3-2 18.684 1.5000 179.3000 2075. 39242. 9. 0.0002 4-1 63.094 1.5000 180. 7000 2075. 184478. 194. 0.0621 4-2 63.094 1.5000 262.8600 2075. 184478. 194. 0.0621 5-1 40.855 1.5000 270.6900 2075. 96623. 53. 0.0050 5-2 40.855 1.5000 323.8900 2075. 96623. 53. 0.0050 6-1 25.649 1.5000 325.9000 2075. 81834. 38. 0.0026 6-2 25.649 1.5000 359.3000 2075. 81834. 38. 0.0026 Original Flaws - Crack Extension File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-10 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3

      $5 Structural Integrity Associa/es, Inc.                                                           info@slruclinl.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER G    slruclinl.com G

Attachment 2 36 of 54 Flaw Half Crack Flaw Crack Depth Boundary Region Length (inch) (inch) (deg) 0-1 64.159 1.5000 0.6271 0-2 64.159 1.5000 84.1729 1-1 3.379 1.5000 84.9000

 .1-2    3.379 1.5000      89.3000 2-1   44.862 1.5000       90.6910 2-2   44.862 1.5000      149.1090 3-1   18.684 1.5000      154.9699 3-2   18.684 1.5000      179.3001 4-1   63.156 1.5000      180.6596 4-2   63.156 1.5000      262.9004 5-1   40.860 1.5000      270.6867 5-2   40.860 1.5000      323.8933 6-1   25.652 1.5000      325.8983 6-2   25.652 1.5000      359.3017 Original Flaws Plastic Adjusted Flaws Flaw      Stress        Half Crack Flaw Intensity      Crack Depth Boundary Region Factor            Angle (psi-(in)".5) (deg) (inch) (deg) 0-1         215083. 42.794 1.5000    -0.3940 0-2         215083. 42.794 1.5000    85.1940 1-1          10784. 2.203 1.5000   84.8974 1-2          10784. 2.203 1.5000   89.3026 2-1         125598. 29.557 1.5000    90.3428 2-2         125598. 29.557 1.5000   149.4572 3-1          39243. 12.199 1.5000  154.9359 3-2          39243. 12.199 1.5000  179.3341 4-1         186223. 41.886 1.5000   179.8941 4-2         186223. 41.886 1.5000   263.6659 5-1          96693. 26.810 1.5000  270.4804 5-2          96693. 26.810 1.5000  324.0996 6-1          81920. 16.850 1.5000  325.7502 6-2          81920. 16.850 1.5000  359.4498 Original Flaws - Plastic Adjusted Results Flaw      Stress       Applied Intensity     J-lntegral Region Factor (psi-(in)".5) (KJ/m"2) 0-1        220604. 276.999 0-2        220604. 276.999 1-1          10812. 0.665 1-2          10812. 0.665 2-1         140602. 112.521 2-2         140602. 112.521 File No.: 1801303.301                                                                Page A-11 of A-22 Revision: 0                                                                                    F0306-01R3 tJ S/ruc/ural lnlegri/y Associates. Inc.                             info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER e     structint.com ~

Attachment 2 37 of 54 3-1 39664. 8.955 3-2 39664. 8.955 4-1 215692. 264.802 4-2 215692. 264.802 5-1 101418. 58.545 5-2 101418. 58.545 6-1 90502. 46.620 6-2 90502. 46.620 Incremented Flaws Flaw Half Crack Flaw Nominal Crack Depth Boundary Stress Region Length Margin (inch) (inch) (deg) (psi) 0-1 67 .249 1.5000 -1.3850 2075. 0-2 67.249 1.5000 86.1850 2075. 1-1 3.548 1.5000 84. 7900 2075. 1-2 3.548 1.5000 89.4100 2075. 2-1 47.090 1.5000 89.2400 2075. 2-2 47.090 1.5000 150.5600 2075. 3-1 19.618 1.5000 154.3618 2075. 3-2 19.618 1.5000 179.9083 2075. 4-1 66.249 1.5000 178.6460 2075. 4-2 66.249 1.5000 264.9140 2075. 5-1 42.897 1.5000 269.3600 2075. 5-2 42.897 1.5000 325.2200 2075. 6-1 26.932 1.5000 325.0650 2075. 6-2 26.932 1.5000 360.1350 2075. Incremented Flaws Crack Extension Flaw Stress Applied Ductile Half Crack Flaw Intensity J-lntegral Crack Crack Depth Boundary Region Factor Extension Length (psi-(in)".5) (KJ/m"'2) (inch) (inch) (inch) (deg) 0-1 225998. 291. 0.1367 67 .386 1.5000 -1.4 740 0-2 225998. 291. 0.1367 67.386 1.5000 86.2740 1-1 12153. 1. 0.0000 3.548 1.5000 84.7900 1-2 12153. 1. 0.0000 3.548 1.5000 89.4100 2-1 157483. 141. 0.0336 47.124 1.5000 89.2181 2-2 157483. 141. 0.0336 47.124 1.5000 150.5819 3-1 49144. 14. 0.0004 19.619 1.5000 154.3615 3-2 49144. 14. 0.0004 19.619 1.5000 179.9085 4-1 222450. 282. 0.1285 66.378 1.5000 178.5623 4-2 222450. 282. 0.1285 66.378 1.5000 264.9977 5-1 144028. 118. 0.0237 42.921 1.5000 269.3446 5-2 144028. 118. 0.0237 42.921 1.5000 325.2354 6-1 93912. 50. 0.0045 26.936 1.5000 325.0621 6-2 93912. 50. 0.0045 26.936 1.5000 360.1379 Incremented Flaws Plastic Adjusted Flaws File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-12 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3

Structural Integrity Associales, Inc. info@strvclint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER G structint.corn @

Attachment 2 38 of 54 Flaw Stress Half Crack Flaw Intensity Crack Depth Boundary Region Factor Angle (psi-(in)".5) (deg) (inch) (deg) 0-1 226484. 45.006 1.5000 -2.6062 0-2 226484. 45.006 1.5000 87.4062 1-1 12153. 2.313 1.5000 84.7867 1-2 12153. 2.313 1.5000 89.4133 2-1 157591. 31.230 1.5000 88.6700 2-2 157591. 31.230 1.5000 151.1300 3-1 49150. 12.827 1.5000 154.3082 3-2 49150. 12.827 1.5000 179.9618 4-1 222905. 44.314 1.5000 177.4656 4-2 222905. 44.314 1.5000 266.0944 5-1 144103. 28.404 1.5000 268.8862 5-2 144103. 28.404 1.5000 325.6938 6-1 93926. 17. 733 1.5000 324.8673 6-2 93926. 17. 733 1.5000 360.3327 Incremented Flaws - Plastic Adjusted Results Flaw Stress Applied Intensity J-lntegral Region Factor (psi-(in)".5) (KJ/m"2) 0-1 232694. 308.192 0-2 232694. 308.192 1-1 12201. 0.847 1-2 12201. 0.847 2-1 160326. 146.306 2-2 160326. 146.306 3-1 50360. 14.435 3-2 50360. 14.435 4-1 228894. 298.209 4-2 228894. 298.209 5-1 146344. 121.899 5-2 146344. 121.899 6-1 94884. 51.244 6-2 94884. 51.244 Final Results Flaw J dJ da dJ/da T Delta A T Specified Applied Applied @ Material Margin Region J-Applied Achieved (KJ/m"2) (KJ/m"2) (m) (N/m"2) (mm) (Tmat > Tapp) 0-1 292.595 31.193 0.081 383494. ,0.256 3.51617 21. Yes 0-2 292.595 31.193 0.081 383494. 0.256 3.51617 21. Yes 1-1 0.756 0.182 0.004 42397. 0.028 0.00003 7918. Yes 1-2 0.756 0.182 0.004 42397. 0.028 0.00003 7918. Yes File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-13 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 {J Structural Integrity Associates. Inc. info@struclint.com m 1-877-4SI-POWER " structint.com @)

Attachment 2 39 of 54 2-1 129.414 33.785 0.057 593166. 0.397 0.72020 62. Yes 2-2 129.414 33.785 0.057 593166. 0.397 0.72020 62. Yes 3-1 11.695 5.481 0.024 230975. 0.154 0.00673 597. Yes 3-2 11.695 5.481 0.024 230975. 0.154 0.00673 597. Yes 4-1 281.505 33.407 0.080 416904. 0.279 3.26177 23. Yes 4-2 281.505 33.407 0.080 416904. 0.279 3.26177 23. Yes 5-1 90.222 63.354 0.052 1221043. 0.816 0.35722 87. Yes 5-2 90.222 63.354 0.052 1221043. 0.816 0.35722 87. Yes 6-1 48.932 4.624 0.033 141944. 0.095 0.10876 155. Yes 6-2 48.932 4.624 0.033 141944. 0.095 0.10876 155. Yes END OF THIS ANALYSIS: 10/19/2018 18:02:47 File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-14 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3

S/ruc/ural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@structinl.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER G slruclint.com @)

Attachment 2 40 of 54 DLL File for K-Dependent Approach DLL: DISTRIBUTED LIGAMENT LENGTH EVALUATION, REV. 3.1.2009.11 START OF THIS ANALYSIS: 10/19/201818:03:12 Summary Of Inputs: Title : H3 Cooper 25 year inspection interval Note : K-Dependent 360 Deg Part Through-Wall Flaw Flaw Type/Orientation : SHROUD, Circumferential 360 deg. Part through-wall flaw Engineering Units : English Output Options : Detailed Upset Safety Factor, SF : 2.77 Upset Membrane Stress, Pm : 355 psi Upset Bending Stress, Pb : 287 psi Faulted Safety Factor, SF : 1.39 Faulted Membrane Stress, Pm : 910 psi Faulted Bending Stress, Pb : 583 psi Mean Radius, Rm : 88.00 inches Wall Thickness, t : 1.500 inches NOE Flaw Length Uncertainty : 0.000 inches NOE Flaw Depth Uncertainty : 0.000 inches Allowable Stress Intensity, Sm : 16950 psi Fluence : 9.5e+020 n/cm"2 Starting Ending Crack Material Angle Angle Depth Thickness Region (deg.) (deg.) (inches) (inches) 1 0.0000 360.0000 1.0980 0.4020 Adjusted Flaws Summary - for initial Limit Load Analysis only Region flaw adjusted for: Examination Uncertainty of 0.00 inches in Length Examination Uncertainty of 0.00 inches in Depth Start End Length Length Depth Flaw (deg.) (deg.) (deg.) (inch) (inch) 1 0.0000 360.0000 360.0000 552.9203 1.0980 Limit Load Results - Upset Service Level: Note: The following limit load results assume that the flaws take compression. Alpha Moment Pb' Safety (deg.) (in-lbs) (psi) Factor Result 0.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-15 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 SJ Slruclural lnlegrity Associates, Inc. info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER C., structint.com '

Attachment 2 41 of 54 \ 5.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 10.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 15.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 20.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 -->Acceptable 25.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 ---->Acceptable 30.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 35.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 40.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 45.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 50.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptabie 55.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 60.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 65.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 70.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 75.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 80.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 85.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 90.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 95.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 100.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 ---->Acceptable 105.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 ---->Acceptable 110.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 115.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 120.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 ---->Acceptable 125.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 130.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 135.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 140.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 -->Acceptable 145.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 150.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 155.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 ---->Acceptable 160.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 ---->Acceptable 165.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 170.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 175.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 180.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 185.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 190.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 195.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 200.0 9.025e+008 24732 39.0760 --->Acceptable 205.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 210.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 215.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 220.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 -->Acceptable 225.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 230.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 235.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 -->Acceptable 240.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 245.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 ---->Acceptable 250.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 255.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 260.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 265.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 270.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 -->Acceptable 275.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 ---->Acceptable 280.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 285.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 290.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 295.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-16 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3

        '3 Structural Integrity Associates. Inc.                               info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER e     structint.com @

Attachment 2 42 of 54 300.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 305.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 310.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 315.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 320.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 325.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 ---->Acceptable 330.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 335.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 340.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 345.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 350.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable 355.0 9.004e+008 24675 38.9869 --->Acceptable Acceptable. Minimum Safety Factor= 38.9869 at 255.0 Degrees Limit Load Results - Faulted Service Level: Note: The following limit load results assume that the flaws take compression. Alpha Moment Pb' Safety (deg.) (in-lbs) (psi) Factor Result 0.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 5.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 10.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 15.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 20.0

8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 -->Acceptable 25.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 30.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 35.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 ->Acceptable 40.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 45.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 ->Acceptable 50.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 -->Acceptable 55.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 -->Acceptable 60.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 65.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 70.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 -->Acceptable 75.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 80.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 85.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 -->Acceptable 90.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 95.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 100.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 105.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 110.0 8.688e+008 23807
16.5555 --->Acceptable 115.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 -->Acceptable 120.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 -->Acceptable 125.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 130.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 135.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 140.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 -->Acceptable 145.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 150.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 155.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 160.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 165.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-17 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3

{1 Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@strucfint.com ~ l-877-4SI-POWER C., structint.com @)

Attachment 2 43 of 54 170.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 175.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 180.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 185.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 190.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 195.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 200.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 205.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 210.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 215.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 220.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 225.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 230.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 ---->Acceptable 235.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 240.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 245.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 ---->Acceptable 250.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 255.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 260.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 265.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 270.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 275.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 -->Acceptable 280.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 285.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 290.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 295.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 300.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 305.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 310.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 315.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 320.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 325.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 330.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 -->Acceptable 335.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 -->Acceptable 340.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 ---->Acceptable 345.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 350.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable 355.0 8.688e+008 23807 16.5555 --->Acceptable Acceptable. Minimum Safety Factor= 16.5555 at 200.0 Degrees Adjusted Flaws Summary - for LEFM, EPFM and Crack Growth Analysis Region flaw adjusted for: Examination Uncertainty of 0.00 inches in Length Examination Uncertainty of 0.00 inches in Depth Start End Length Length Depth Flaw (deg.) (deg.) (deg.) (inch) (inch) 1 0.0000 360.0000 360.0000 552.9203 1.0980 EPFM Results - Specified Margin On Load Method - Upset Service Level: File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-18 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 SJ Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@structinl.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER G structint.com ~

Attachment 2 44 of 54 Poisson's Ratio : 0.30 Elastic Modulus : 2.8e+007 psi Flow Stress : 77931.9 psi Yield Stress : 68517.6 psi C : 153.221 n : 0.514491 Original Flaws Flaw Flaw Nominal Stress Applied Ductile Crack Boundary Stress Intensity J-lntegral Crack Region Depth Margin Factor Extension (inch) (inch) (psi) (psi-(int.5) (KJ/mA2) (inch) 0-1 1.09800 0.00000 1778. 25130. 3.594 0.000027 0-2 1.09800 1.09800 1778. 25130. 3.594 0.000027 Original Flaws - Crack Extension Flaw Flaw Crack Boundary Region Depth (inch) (inch) 0-1 1.09803 0.00000 0-2 1.09803 1.09803 Original Flaws Plastic Adjusted Flaws Flaw Stress Flaw Intensity Crack Boundary Region Factor Depth (psi-(int.5) (inch) (inch) 0-1 25133. 1.10516 0.00000 0-2 25133. 1.10516 1.10516 Original Flaws - Plastic Adjusted Results Flaw Stress Applied Intensity J-lntegral Region Factor (psi-(int.5) (KJ/mA2) 0-1 25930. 3.827 0-2 25930. 3.827 Incremented Flaws File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-19 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 SJ S/rucluraf fnlegrity Associates, Inc. info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER " structint.com (ffl)

Attachment 2 45 of 54 Flaw Crack Flaw Nominal Depth Boundary Stress Region ,- Margin (inch) (inch) (psi) 0-1 1.15290 0.00000 1778. 0-2 1.15290 1.15290 1778. Incremented Flaws Crack Extension Flaw Stress Applied Ductile Crack Flaw Intensity J-lntegral Crack Depth Boundary Region Factor Extension (psi-(in)".5) (KJ/m"2) (inch) (inch) (inch) 0-1 32374. 5.965 0.000000 1.15290 0.00000 0-2 32374. 5.965 0.000000 1.15290 1.15290 Incremented Flaws Plastic Adjusted Flaws Flaw Stress Crack Flaw Intensity Depth Boundary Region Factor (psi-(in)".5) (inch) (inch) 0-1 32374. 1.16474 0.00000 0-2 32374. 1.16474 1.16474 Incremented Flaws - Plastic Adjusted Results Flaw Stress Applied Intensity J-lntegral Region Factor (psi-(in)".5) (KJ/m"2) 0-1 34343. 6.713 0-2 34343. 6.713 Final Results Flaw J dJ da dJ/da T Delta A T Specified Applied Applied @ Material Margin Region J-Applied Achieved (KJ/m"2) (KJ/m"2) (m) (N/m"2) (mm) (Tmat > Tapp) 0-1 5.270 2.886 0.001 2069715. 1.384 0.00143 1268. Yes 0-2 5.270 2.886 0.001 2069715. 1.384 0.00143 1268. Yes EPFM Results - Specified Margin On Load Method - Faulted Service Level: File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-20 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 SJ Structural Integrity Associates. Inc. info@structint.com ~ l-877-4SI-POWER '9 structint.com ~

Attachment 2 46 of 54 Poisson's Ratio : 0.30 Elastic Modulus : 2.8e+007 psi Flow Stress : 77931.9 psi Yield Stress : 68517.6 psi C : 153.221 n : 0.514491 Original Flaws Flaw Flaw Nominal Stress Applied Ductile Crack Boundary Stress Intensity J-lntegral Crack Region Depth Margin Factor Extension (inch) (inch) (psi) (psi-(in)".5) (KJ/m"2) (inch) 0-1 1.09800 0.00000 2075. 29326. 4.895 0.000049 0-2 1.09800 1.09800 2075. 29326. 4.895 0.000049 Original Flaws - Crack Extension Flaw Flaw Crack Boundary Region Depth (inch) (inch) 0-1 1.09805 0.00000 0-2 1.09805 1.09805 Original Flaws Plastic Adjusted Flaws Flaw Stress Flaw Intensity Crack Boundary Region Factor Depth (psi-(in)".5) (inch) (inch) 0-1 29332. 1.10777 0.00000 0-2 29332. 1.10777 1.10777 Original Flaws - Plastic Adjusted Results Flaw Stress Applied Intensity J-lntegral Region Factor (psi-(in)".5) (KJ/m"2) 0-1 30611. 5.333 0-2 30611. 5.333 Incremented Flaws File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-21 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 SJ Structural Integrity Associates. Inc. info@slructinl.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER C.,, slruclinl.com @)

Attachment 2 47 of 54 Flaw Crack Flaw Nominal Depth Boundary Stress R~~n Ma~~ (inch) (inch) (psi) 0-1 1.15290 0.00000 2075. 0-2 1.15290 1.15290 2075. Incremented Flaws Crack Extension Flaw Stress Applied Ductile Crack Flaw Intensity J-lntegral Crack Depth Boundary Region Factor Extension (psi-(in)".5) (KJ/m"2) (inch) (inch) (inch) 0-1 37780. 8.124 0.000000 1.15290 0.00000 0-2 37780. 8.124 0.000000 1.15290 1.15290 Incremented Flaws Plastic Adjusted Flaws Flaw Stress Crack Flaw Intensity Depth Boundary Region Factor (psi-(in)".5) (inch) (inch) 0-1 37780. 1.16903 0.00000 0-2 37780. 1.16903 1.16903 Incremented Flaws - Plastic Adjusted Results Flaw Stress Applied Intensity J-lntegral Region Factor (psi-(in)".5) (KJ/m"2) 0-1 40961. 9.550 0-2 40961. 9.550 Final Results Flaw J dJ da dJ/da T Delta A T Specified Applied Applied @ Material Margin Region J-Applied Achieved (KJ/m"2) (KJ/m"2) (m) (N/m"2) (mm) (Tmat > Tapp) 0-1 7.442 4.216 0.001 3023666. 2.022 0.00280 915. Yes 0-2 7.442 4.216 0.001 3023666. 2.022 0.00280 915. Yes END OF THIS ANALYSIS: 10/19/201818:03:20 File No.: 1801303.301 Page A-22 of A-22 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 e Structural Integrity Associates. Inc. info@struclint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER C., slructint.com @

Attachment 2 48 of 54 APPENDIX B TECHNICAL BASIS FOR THROUGH-WALL CRACK GROWTH BASED ON WELD RESIDUAL STRESS File No.: 1801303.301 Page B-1 of B-4 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 e Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@structinl.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER" structint.com @)

Attachment 2 49 of 54 Stresses in BWR core shroud welds consist of operational stresses and fabricated-related stresses. Operational stresses occur during normal plant operation. These are the Pm and Pb stresses in Section 6.0, Item 3 for Service Level A/B. Fabrication stresses consist mainly of weld residual stresses (WRS) resulting from the welding process of the shroud plates and rings. BWRVIP-14-A [5] contains extensive investigation into the WRS distribution on the core shroud, including through-wall distributions and H3 weld specific finite element models. The axial WRS for a circumferential weld has tensile and compressive portions at different locations through the shroud wall thickness. A normalized through-wall fracture toughness K distribution is taken from Table 5-1 [5] and adjusted for the CNS should thickness of 1.5 inches. This data was calculated using a 360° part through-wall flaw, which is directly comparable to the K-dependent approach in this calculation package (see Figure 6). The CNS adjust K distribution is shown in Figure 7. Figure 7. Weld Residual Stress Distribution for CNS H3 Weld Based on Figure 7,{ }}In order to determine if a crack will go into compression and arrest, operational stresses and K values must also be determined. The DLL file for the K-dependent analysis in Appendix A is modified to consider linear-elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM) by increasing the fluence to 1E23 n/cm 2

Multiple runs can be made with various part through-wall depths in order to get an operational load K distribution similar to Figure 7. Finally, a combined K distribution can be obtained by adding the WRS and operational load K values. Note that since only normal operating loads drive IGSCC growth, K factors for Service Level A/B loading are used from DLL.

File No.: 1801303.301 Page B-2 of B-4 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information lJ Structural Integrity info@strudint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER '9 structint.com (ffl) Associates, Inc.

Attachment 2 50 of 54 Figure 8 shows the WRS K value in Figure 7 with operational K factors calculated by DLL, and combined K factors of WRS + operational K values. Figure 8. Weld Residual Stress Distribution for CNS H3 Weld Based on Figure 8, combined operational and WRS K values become negative with a flaw about 0.92" deep. This means that a 360° part through-wall flaw is likely to arrest at or before 0.92" deep since the crack will be in compression. There are a couple of conservatisms in this analysis to specifically mention:

1. Deadweight loads are conservatively omitted in the Pm load calculation in Reference [1 O].

This is conservative since deadweight increases the compressive load the H3 weld experiences.

2. ((

}}

File No.: 1801303.301 Page B-3 of B-4 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information

Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@structint.com m 1-877-4SI-POWER G slructinl.com ~

Attachment 2 51 of 54 Figure 9. Standard WRS Axial Stress Distribution vs. TEPCO H3 Weld Axial Stress Distribution [5, Figure 4-2 and H-19] It can be concluded that, based on the weld residual stress in the CNS H3 weld, there is technical justification for why an ID crack would arrest through-wall and why the OD surface has significantly less tensile stress to drive crack initiation and growth. File No.: 1801303.301 Page 8-4 of 8-4 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information SJ S/ruc/ural ln/egri/y info@structint.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER C9 structint.com @) Associates, Inc.

Attachment 2 52 of 54 AP.PENDIXC

SUMMARY

OF BWR OPERATING EXPERIENCE FOR CORE SHROUD H3 WELD CRACKING File No.: 1801303.301 Page C-1 of C-3 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 l) Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@struclint.com m l-877-4SI-POWER e structint.com @)

Attachment 2 53 of 54 BWRVIP-278 [15] provides the most complete, updated fleet-wide data for core shroud cracking. Average flaw depth sizes for the H1 to H7 welds on the plate side are shown in Figure 10. Figure 11 shows the depth distribution for the ring side of horizontal welds, including weld H3. Two observations can be made from these figures:

1. For the plate side, the maximum extent of cracking at the H3 weld is ((

J}. So, 30% to 50% through-wall cracking on the plate side of the H3 weld, as seen in the CNS data [3], is not unprecedented.

2. ((

}}

Figure 10. BWRVIP-278 Plate Side Horizontal Weld Average Flaw Depth [15, Figure 3-17] File No.: 1801303.301 Page C-2 of C-3 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information e Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. info@slructinl.com ~ 1-877-4SI-POWER '9 slructint.com @

Attachment 2 54 of 54 Figure 11. BWRVIP-278 Ring Side Horizontal Weld Average Flaw Depth [15, Figure 3-18] Based on the industry operating experience provided in BWRVIP-278, the CNS data is in-line with industry experience and the assumption of equivalent cracking on the plate and ring side is reasonable. File No.: 1801303.301 Page C-3 of C-3 Revision: 0 F0306-01R3 ((This information}} is EPRI Proprietary Information SJ Structural Integrity info@struclint.com m 1-877-4SI-POWER e structint.com @ Associates, Inc.}}

NLS2019028, Enclosure 2 - Calculation Package, File No. 1801303.301, Cooper Nuclear Station Core Shroud H3 Weld Evaluation - 2018, Revision 0

Contents

Text

1.0 INTRODUCTION

10.0 CONCLUSION

11.0 REFERENCES

SUMMARY

1.0 INTRODUCTION

10.0 CONCLUSION

11.0 REFERENCES

Subject:

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

NLS2019028, Enclosure 2 - Calculation Package, File No. 1801303.301, Cooper Nuclear Station Core Shroud H3 Weld Evaluation - 2018, Revision 0

Text

1.0 INTRODUCTION

10.0 CONCLUSION

11.0 REFERENCES

SUMMARY

1.0 INTRODUCTION

10.0 CONCLUSION

11.0 REFERENCES

Subject:

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search