NRC 2004-0052, Letter from G. D Van Middlesworth, NMC, to NRC NRC Order EA-03-009 Relaxation Request Supplement
| ML050870326 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 05/14/2004 |
| From: | Vanmiddlesworth G Nuclear Management Co |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| EA-03-009, FOIA/PA-2004-0282, NRC 2004-0052 | |
| Download: ML050870326 (38) | |
Text
Committed to Nuclear Excellen, Point Beach Nuclear Plant Operated by Nuclear Management Company, LLC May 14, 2004 NRC 2004-0052 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington DC 20555 Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 Docket 50-266 License No. DPR-24 NRC Order EA-03-009 Relaxation Request Supplement
Reference:
- 1) NRC Order EA-03-009, "Issuance of First Revised Order Establishing Interim Inspection Requirements for Reactor Pressure Vessel Heads at Pressurized Water Reactors," dated February 20, 2004
- 2) Letter from NMC to NRC dated March 30,2004 (NRC 2004-0031)
In reference 2, Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC), requested a review for approval of relaxation from certain requirements of Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Order EA-03-009 (reference 1), for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1. That request was conditioned on a possibility that inspection of certain nozzles in accordance with the requirements of the Order may be unduly difficult.
As discussed during a conference call between NMC representatives and NRC staff on April 29, 2004, some specific limitations in inspection coverage of certain nozzles were experienced. Physical limitations preclude full compliance with paragraph IV.C.(5)(b) of Order EA-03-009 during the April 2004 refueling outage of Point Beach Unit 1. NMC believes that an alternative to the requirements of the order is appropriate. Therefore, NMC hereby requests relaxation from certain requirements of reference 1.
Enclosure I contains the basis for relaxation, which states that the proposed alternative for inspection of specific nozzles provides an acceptable level of quality and safety.
NMC proposes an alternative to the requirements specified in Order EA-03-009, in accordance with paragraph IV.F.(1), pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3).
Enclosure I also includes submittal of as-found detailed inspection results and its specific analyses and supporting calculations. NMC is providing NRC staff with detailed information regarding the extent of inspection coverage to confirm that it is bounded by the analysis provided in Enclosure I.
6590 Nuclear Road
- Two Rivers, Wisconsin 54241 Telephone: 920.755.2321
_zCigg Y,9-
Document Control Desk Page 2 This letter contains no new commitments and nor visions to existing commitments.
Gary D. Van Middlesworth Site Vice-President, Point Beach Nuclear Plant Nuclear Management Company, LLC
Enclosures:
I Justification for Relaxation 11 Unit 1 Reactor Vessel Closure Head Inspection Results III Illustrations of the Initial UT Scans of Nozzles 32 and 33 IV Assessment of Nozzle Stresses cc:
Regional Administrator, Region 111, USNRC Project Manager, Point Beach Nuclear Plant, NRR, USNRC NRC Resident Inspector - Point Beach Nuclear Plant PSCW
ENCLOSURE I NRC ORDER EA-03-009 RELAXATION REQUEST SUPPLEMENT JUSTIFICATION FOR RELAXATION POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT I INTRODUCTION Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC) requests a review for approval of relaxation from certain requirements of Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Order EA-03-009, for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1. NMC proposes an alternative to the requirements specified in Order EA-03-009, in accordance with section IV.F.(I),
pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3). This alternative includes use of deterministic structural integrity evaluations and probabilistic models to demonstrate the acceptability of limited non-destructive examinations (NDE).
In addition to a bare-metal visual exam, NMC attempted a 100% ultrasonic testing (UT) examination of the CRDM nozzles during the current Point Beach Unit 1 refueling outage (Ul R28). However, some limitations in inspection coverage were experienced.
The steep curvature of the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) at the outer row of control rod drive mechanism (CRDM) nozzles resulted in an inability to obtain complete coverage with the NDE equipment. Circumferential coverage limitations were found on two nozzles. Additionally, NMC was unable to scan one (1) inch below the CRDM J-groove weld of several of the nozzles.
Limitations in inspection coverage were also experienced during the previous Unit 1 inspection in 2002. During that inspection, thermal sleeves were removed from several nozzles to allow full access for material inspection with a rotating UT probe instead of a blade UT probe. This process of thermal sleeve removal and reattachment expended a large amount of personnel dose (approximately 3 rem/nozzle).
Following the previous Unit I inspection, NDE equipment was modified and full coverage was achieved on a subsequent inspection of the Point Beach Unit 2 CRDM nozzles. However, it appears that unit-specific differences between the two vessel heads prevented achieving similar results on the Unit I vessel head.
The information contained in this relaxation request supplements the information provided in reference 2 to include submittal of as-found inspection results and its specific analyses. These two submittals form the basis for specific relaxation of the requirements of NRC Order EA-03-09.
Page 1 of 10
COMPONENT IDENTIFICATION The affected components are the Point Beach Nuclear Plant Unit 1 reactor pressure vessel (RPV) head penetration nozzles.
APPLICABLE DOCUMENT The applicable document is Order EA-03-009, 'Issuance of First Revised Order Establishing Interim Inspection Requirements for Reactor Pressure Vessel Heads at Pressurized Water Reactors," dated February 20, 2004.
APPLICABLE REQUIREMENT Order EA-03-009 established interim inspection requirements for RPV head penetration nozzles, depending on their susceptibility to primary.stress corrosion cracking. The Point Beach Unit 1 RPV head is currently in the high susceptibility category.
Order EA-03-009 specifies the requirements governing inspection of RPV heads in the high susceptibility categories in section IV.C.(1), using the techniques of paragraphs IV.C.(5)(a) and IV.C.(5)(b). If ultrasonic testing is selected as the method of nondestructive examination (NDE), the following is required for each penetration.
Ultrasonic testing of the RPV head penetration nozzle volume (i.e., nozzle base material) from 2 inches above the highest point of the root of the J-groove weld (on a horizontal plane perpendicular to the nozzle axis) to 2 inches below the lowest point at the toe of the J-groove weld on a horizontal plane perpendicular to the nozzle axis (or the bottom of the nozzle if less than 2 inches); OR from 2 inches above the highest point of the root of the J-groove weld (on a horizontal plane perpendicular to the nozzle axis) to 1.0-inch below the lowest point at the toe of the J-groove weld (on a horizontal plane perpendicular to the nozzle axis) and including all RPV head penetration nozzle surfaces below the J-groove weld that have an operating stress level (including all residual and normal operation stresses) of 20 ksi tension and greater. In addition, an assessment shall be made to determine if leakage has occurred into the annulus between the RPV head penetration nozzle and the RPV head low-alloy steel.
BASIS FOR RELAXATION REQUEST NMC requires relaxation from paragraph IV.C.(5)(b) of Order EA-03-009, from the requirement to perform nonvisual NDE on the entire prescribed region of each of the RPV head penetration nozzles at Point Beach Unit 1. The justification for this relaxation request is based on the methodologies contained in Structural Integrity Associates Report SIR-04-032 (Enclosure II to reference 2), and WCAP-14000, Revision 1, "Structural Integrity Evaluation of Reactor Vessel Head Penetrations to Support Continued Operation: Point Beach Units 1 & 2". These documents were provided to the NRC on March 30, 2004 and September 27, 2002, respectively. The final basis for Page 2 of 10
relaxation from the Order is the analyses of as-found inspection results using these methodologies.
These analytical methods were discussed with NRC staff during public meetings on October 6, 2003 and February 19, 2004.
INSPECTION RESULTS Enclosure II contains the detailed results of the reactor vessel closure head (RVCH) inspection. Table 1, below, summarizes these results and identifies where relaxation of NRC Order EA-03-09 is needed. No unacceptable defects were identified during the RVCH inspection other than in Nozzle 26, which is being repaired.
An above-head bare-metal visual examination will be performed on greater than 95% of the surface area surrounding the PBNP Unit 1 vessel head penetrations (VHP). The primary inspection area around each of the CRDM penetrations is complete. The examination resulted in an effective visual examination that revealed no evidence of boric acid deposition or wastage. All RPV head penetrations were examined with no limitations. The surface area outside the vessel shroud has yet to be inspected. This area does not contain any penetrations.
Table I RVCH Inspection Summary Penetration(s)
Coverage Description 6-9, 34-37, 100%
Inspection coverage satisfies NRC Order. Rotating 42-49, & vent probed used. No restrictions or limitations.
32 100%
Inspection coverage satisfies NRC Order. A combination of blade probe and manual UT was performed.
1-3, 5,10,14,
<100%
Full coverage obtained except for 0.4" at OD of tube 17, 21, 23, &
bottom. Greater than 1" of coverage was obtained below 38-41 the toe of the J-groove weld. Stresses are < 20 ksi in unexamined area. Inspection coverage satisfies NRC
.Order.
Stress curves are provided in Enclosure IV 4, 11-13,
<100%
Relaxation of NRC Order is requested. Full coverage 15-16,18-20, obtained except for 0.4" at OD of tube bottom. However, 22, 24-25, less than 1 " of coverage was obtained below the toe of
& 27-31 the J-groove weld. Deterministic fracture mechanics was used to justify coverage.
33 83%
Relaxation of NRC Order is requested. A combination of blade probe and manual UT was performed. A 600 coverage limitation exists in and above the J-groove weld region. Deterministic fracture mechanics accompanied by probabilistic analysis was used to justify coverage.
26 100%
Nozzle 26 repair. Full coverage obtained.
Page 3 of 10
Nozzle 26 - Examinations and Repair During the performance of UT examinations, large indications were seen at the weld root of nozzle 26 (downhill location - 1800). The indications were initially declared crack-like in appearance. Further review of the UT data and previous inspection reports determined that the indications were likely a result of a fabrication-related defect in the nozzle.
A series of manual liquid dye-penetrant (PT) examinations were performed on the nozzle J-groove weld. The results of these examinations revealed surface defects.
Excavation of the defects was performed by manual grinding of the J-groove surface.
The flaws were not removed after grinding to a depth of approximately 3/16 inch.
Due to the high dose involved with further grinding, as well as industry experience with these types of defects, a conservative decision was made to repair nozzle 26 using the Areva ID Temperbead (IDTB) repair process. A revised relief request was submitted by NMC on May 13, 2004, to the NRC to conduct this-repair.
Nozzles 32 and 33 - Additional UT Examinations As shown in Enclosure II, nozzles 32 and 33 received a UT examination of less than 100% coverage. The lack of full coverage was due to weld distortion in the nozzle.
This weld distortion made blade probe access very difficult, resulting in coverage limitations. Enclosure IlIl contains illustrations of the initial UT scans of nozzles 32 and 33.
Similar coverage limitations were experienced during the previous Unit 1 refueling outage in fall 2002 (UI R27). The nozzle 32 and 33 thermal sleeves were removed during that outage to allow use of a rotating UT probe. 100% inspection coverage was obtained with at least one transducer of the rotating UT probe. No flaws were detected.
Replacement thermal sleeves were installed. A radiation dose of approximately 3 rem per nozzle was incurred during the thermal sleeve removal and installation processes.
Due to the placement of the thermal sleeve reattachment weld, an additional removal and reattachment of the nozzle 32 and 33 thermal sleeve would be very difficult. Dose estimates for this work are 3 rem per nozzle or greater. Based on this concern, an alternative to removal of the thermal sleeves was pursued.
NMC has therefore performed manual UT examinations of the CRDM 32 and 33 nozzle material below the J-groove weld. This manual UT process has been demonstrated on Materials Reliability Program (MRP) mockups at the EPRI NDE Center and is approved for use at PBNP. No indications were detected on either nozzle during this exam.
The combination of remote and manual UT examinations of nozzle 32 provided 100%
coverage. Therefore, no relaxation from NRC Order EA-03-09 is needed for this nozzle.
Page 4 of 10
The combination of remote and manual UT examinations of nozzle 33 provided 83%
coverage of that nozzle. The only unexamined area is a 600 vertical area in the J-groove weld and above. Relaxation from NRC Order EA-03-09 is requested for nozzle 33 as discussed below.
Nozzle 33 - Specific Information As shown in Enclosures II & III, NMC was unable to examine a 600 area in the J-groove weld and above on nozzle 33. Therefore, relaxation from the inspection requirements of NRC Order EA-03-09 is requested for nozzle 33. This relaxation is justified by a combination of deterministic flaw tolerance evaluations and probabilistic evaluations. Similar deterministic flaw tolerance evaluations were used to evaluate coverage limitations during the Unit 1 fall 2002 refueling outage. Those evaluations were provided to the NRC in PBNP Unit 1 Thirty-day Response to NRC Bulletins 2001-01, 2001-01, and 2002-02 for Reactor Vessel Head and Vessel Head Penetration Nozzle Inspection Findings, dated November 15, 2002.
Figure 2 illustrates the coverage achieved on nozzle 33.
Examination Circ Percentage Nozzle Area Length Axial Length 83%
33 Area of Interest 0-3600 00 2.57" above Area Examined 0-1420 &
weld 204-3600 2700
- 900, Area Not 143-2030 Examined 1800 Figure 2 - Nozzle 33 UT Exam Coverage Circumferential cracks that may be located in the nozzle material are the area of prime interest due to the safety concern arising from nozzle ejection and loss of coolant accident (LOCA). Therefore, a deterministic flaw tolerance evaluation was performed postulating a circumferential flaw in the area not covered by the UT exam. The assumed flaw in this evaluation was the maximum circumferential length in the area not covered by the UT exam (600 - reference Enclosures Il, Ill, and figure 2). Figure 3 illustrates the time required for the postulated 60° flaw to grow to a point of structural significance (3300) to be approximately 30 years of operation. Figure 3 is plotted as half the length of the circumferential flaw to account for both ends of the flaw growing equally. The evaluation uses plant specific stresses, operating temperature, and the Page 5 of 10
crack growth rate predictions in EPRI MRP-55, "Materials Reliability Program (MRP)
Crack Growth Rates for Evaluating Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking (PWSCC) of Thick-Wall Alloy 600 Material." Based on the UT inspection results and this evaluation, there are no concerns with the structural integrity of nozzle 33 from a postulated circumferential crack in the non-inspected area over the next operating cycle.
This flaw tolerance evaluation is documented in WCAP-14000, Revision 1 "Structural Integrity Evaluation of Reactor Vessel Upper Head Penetrations to Support Continued Operation: Point Beach Units 1 and 2 (Proprietary)". This report was transmitted to the NRC by Westinghouse Electric Company on September 27, 2002.
I I Wu.u 150.0 0
CB 120.0 C
e 90.0 0
CI 2
0 CRDM Mlozz Service Life > 30 EFPY I-Ann U.U 0
10 20 30 40 Years Figure 3 - Crack Growth Predictions for Circumferential Through-Wall Cracks In addition to the work described above, a probabilistic fracture mechanics (PFM) evaluation was performed based on the PBNP-1 RPV inspections. The PFM tool was developed by the PWR Materials Reliability Program (MRP). The PFM evaluation was provided to NRC as Enclosure II to reference 2. The evaluation used plant-specific parameters such as head geometry, number of nozzles, head temperature, plant operating time, and inspection history to determine probability of nozzle leakage.
The PFM analysis conservatively assumed only 90% coverage during the spring 2004 Unit 1 refueling outage. Actual UT coverage exceeded 95%. Figure 4 illustrates the results of the analysis.
Page 6 of 10
2.00E-01 1.80E-01
-No Insp.
1.60E e Part.Insp.Coverage
-e Insp. Per NRC Order 1.40E c 1.20E *> 1.00E pS 8.0E
/
\\
Planned Head c,
X
\\\\,
Repl. F-05 E 6.OOE 10 0-0 4.OOE-02 2.OOE O.OOE+00 0
5 10 15 20 25 EFPYs Figure 4 - Probabilistic Comparison of 100% and 90% Coverage During U1R28 The results indicate only a small difference in the probabilities of leakage based on the inspection coverage achieved, as compared to full coverage inspections. Such small differences do not warrant the additional radiation exposure that would be incurred to remove the nozzle 33 thermal sleeve in order to achieve full inspection coverage.
These results demonstrate that the inspection coverage achieved was acceptable.
Area Below the Toe of the J-groove Weld As shown in Table I and Enclosure II, seventeen nozzles could not be examined one inch below the toe of the J-groove weld on the OD surface. The amount of unscanned area is a function of the Areva blade tool and not a result of PNBP-specific nozzle geometry. The ID surface was fully examined. Figure 5 illustrates the limitation in coverage.
Page 7 of 10 c-O
Figure 5 - Examination Limitation (OD Thermal Sleeve Locations)
A deterministic flaw tolerance evaluation was performed for the limiting nozzle (nozzle 20). The height in the unscanned area is 0.4 inches (Lflaw) and is a function of the design of the blade probes used in these examinations. Figure 6 illustrates this dimension.
Figure 6 - Dimension Used in Flaw Evaluation Page 8 of 10 C ~J2-
Laxiai is the worst-case OD distance below the weld achieved on the down-hill side during the examinations. As shown in Enclosure II, the minimum coverage distance observed was 0.44 inch (nozzle 20). Accounting for instrument uncertainty
(+/- 0.03 inch), this worst-case dimension is 0.41 inch (Laxial).
Postulating a thru-wall flaw in the unexamined area Lfaw and calculating the time required for the flaw to travel through a distance of La,,xia demonstrates the acceptability of this condition. This assures that no leakage could result from the unexamined area.
Plant specific MRP-55 crack growth rate (CGRQ data of 1.98 x 10-03 (K-Kth)116 inch per year. Using a conservative value of 55 ksi-(in) 5 for K-Kth, yields a crack growth rate of 0.207 inch/year and is used in the calculation. This CGR is documented in Structural Integrity Associates (SIA) Calculation PBCH-09Q-302. This calculation was provided to the NRC as Enclosure IlIl to a letter from NMC to NRC dated May 13, 2004.
The following formula is used to calculate flaw propagation time.
Time = Laxeai / CGR The time for a worst-case flaw to travel through a distance of Laxiai is therefore calculated as 2.0 EPFY. PBNP operates on an 18-month cycle and will be replacing the RPV head during the next refueling outage scheduled for Fall 2005.
PROPOSED ALTERNATE EXAMINATION NMC proposes that the extent of ultrasonic testing required to be conducted on each RPV head penetration nozzle, in accordance with paragraph IV.C.(5)(b)(i) of Order EA-03-009, be modified based on the analyses of as-found inspection results.
The inspection coverage that was achieved, along with the corresponding justifications for coverage limitations as discussed in this submittal, provide an acceptable level of quality and safety. Additionally, compliance with the Order for the specific nozzles on which coverage was limited, would result in hardship or unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety.
Therefore, NMC requests that Order EA-03-009 be relaxed for nozzles 4,11-13,1 5-16, 18-20, 22, 24-25, 27-31, and 33, to only require the examination coverage that was achieved as shown in Table 1.
CONCLUSION In summary, NMC previously submitted the methodologies on which to base relaxation from paragraph IV.C.(5)(b) of Order EA-03-009, from the requirement to perform non-visual NDE on the entire prescribed region of each of the RPV head penetration nozzles at Point Beach Unit 1. Inspection limitations were found during the Unit 1 RPV head Page 9 of 10
inspection and NMC believes that an alternative to the requirements of the Order is appropriate. Therefore, detailed examination results and supporting calculations are being submitted to the NRC staff. Based on the information presented, and pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i), NMC requests approval of the relaxation on the basis that the proposed alternative provides an acceptable level of quality and safety.
PERIOD FOR WHICH RELAXATION IS REQUESTED The proposed alternative will apply only to the Point Beach Unit 1 inspections required by Order EA-03-009 for the spring 2004 refueling outage (Ul R28).
Page 10 of 10
ENCLOSURE II NRC ORDER EA-03-009 RELAXATION REQUEST SUPPLEMENT UNIT 1 REACTOR VESSEL CLOSURE HEAD INSPECTION RESULTS
A ARE VA Point Beach Unit I (U1R28)
RVH Extent of UT Coverage in RVHP Nozzle Material Min. Distance Coverage Weld Region Below Weld Minimum ID Distance Minimum OD Distance lMinimum OD Distance Io ft OD Distance is LESS Pen#
Nozzle Ring Above Up-Hill Above Weld Coverage Coverage Below Weld Achieved on Below Weld Achieved on Below Weld Achieved on than 1.0, what is circ Degree Weld Root Root (Theta)
(Theta)
(Theta)
Down-Hill Side Down-Hill Side uncertainty Extent LESS than 1.0e (Lis 0.0 0
3.11 360 360 360 1.514 1.120 1.090 1.0'obtained 2
19.4 3
3.80 360 360 360 1
1.504 1.110 1.080 1.0"obtained 3
19.4 3
3.48 360 360 360 1.594 1.200 1.170 1.0"obtoined 4
19.4 3
3.68 360 360 360 1.394 1.000 0.970 I.0" obtained 5
19.4 3
3.59 360 360 360 1.594 1.200 1.170 1.0"obtained 6
13.6 2
7.45 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe Full Coverage Obtained 7
13.6 2
7.40 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe Full Coverage Obtained 8
13.6 2
7.30 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe --Full Coverage Obtained 9
13.6 2
7.30 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe Full Coverage Obtained 10 28.1 5
3.51 360 360 360 1.654 1.260 1.230 1.0" obtained 11 28.1 5
3.20 360 360 360 1.394 1.000 0.970 1.0- obtained 12 28.1 5
3.60 360 360 360 1.074 0.680 0.650 110 13 28.1 5
3.60 360 360 360 1.124 0.730 0.700 17 14 31.8 7
3.8 360 360 360 1.494 1.100 1.070 1.0'obtained 15 31.8 7
3.39 360 360 360 1.394 1.000 0.970 I.0obtained 16 31.8 7
3.80 360 360 360 0.974 0.580 0.550 110 17 31.8 7
3.09 360 360 360 1.554 1.160 1.130 1.0'obtained 18 29.9 6
3.40 360 360 360 1.394 1.000 0.970 1.0' obtained 19 29.9 6
3.49 360 360 360 1.394 1.000 0.970 1.0'oblained 20 29.9 6
3.57 360 360 360 0.834 0.440 0.410 104 21 29.9 6
2.30 360 360 360 1.504 1.110 1.080 I.0" obtained 22 31.8 7
3.48 360 360 360 1.404 1.010 0.980 I.0"obtained 23 31.8 7
3.19 360 360 360 1.594 1.200 1.170 1.0"obtained 24 31.8 7
3.43 360 360 360 1.074 0.680 0.650 64 25 31.8 7
3.28 360 360 360 1.394 1.000 0.970 I.0" obtained 26 36.9 8
2.02 360 360
.360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe Full Coverage Obtained 27 36.9 8
2.90 360 360 360 1.344 0.950 0.920 50 28 36.9 8
3.01 360 360 360 0.924 0.530 0.500 95 29 36.9 8
3.85 360 360 360 1.164 0.770 0.740 99 30 36.9 8
3.24 360 360 360 1.174 0.780 0.750 100 31 36.9 8
2.89 360 360 360 1.134 0.740 0.710 70 32 36.9 8
3.81 360 360 99 Percentages cant be determined due to lack of data on Down Hill Side
RVH Extent of UT Coverage in RVHP Nozzle Material Min. Distance Coverage Weld Region Below Weld Minimum ID Distance Minimum OD Distance Minimum OD Diseance If OD Distance is LESS Pen #
Nozzle Ring Above Up-Hill Above Weld Coverage Coverage Below Weld Achieved on Below Weld Achieved on Below Weld Achxeved on than 1.0" what is trc Degree Weld Root Root (Theta)
(Theta)
(Theta)
Down-Hill Side Down-Hill Side Down-Hill Side w/ instExtent LESS than 1.0e (List Iuncertainty start - end) 33 36.9 8
2.57 300 300 57 Percentages cont be determined due to lack of dot a on Down Hill Side 34 43.3 9
4.10 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe --Full Coverage Obtained 35 43.3 9
4.16 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe *- Full Coverage Obtained 36 43.3 9
4.60 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe -- Full Coverage Obtained 37 43.3 9
3.95 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe *- Full Coverage Obtained 38 9.6 1
3.38 360 360 360 1.694 1.300 1.270 1.0 obtained 39 9.6 1
3.24 360 360 360 2.064 1.670 1.640 I.W obtained 40 9.6 1
3.40 360 360 360 1.494 1.100 1.070 1.0"obtained 41 9.6 1
3.15 360 360 360 1.694 1.300 1.270 1.0Wobtained 42 21.8 4
6.54 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe *- Full Coverage Obtained 43 21.8 4
6.61 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe *- Full Coverage Obtained 44 21.8 4
6.69 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe -- Full Coverage Obtained 45 21.8 4
6.83 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe -- Full Coverage Obtained 46 21.8 4
7.10 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe Full Coverage Obtained 47 21.8 4
6.80 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe *- Full Coverage Obtained 48 21.8 4
6.60 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe-Full Coverage Obtained 49 21.8 4
6.56 360 360 360 Data Collected using Rotating Probe *- Full Coverage Obtained I
I
AD AR EVA Point Beach Unit I (U1R28)
Extent of UT Coverage in RVHP Nozzle Material Min. Dista-ce Coverage Weld Rgo BewWld Minimum ID Distance Minimum OD Distance If OD Distance Is LESS than Pen Noze Rn bv pHl bv Wel Roergeo Beowveldg Below Weld Achieved on Below Weld Achieved on 1.0", what is circ Extent LESS e
. D c Weld Root RCoverage)
Coerage Down-Hill Side Down-Hill Side than 1.0" (in Degrees) 8 De r e Rn Ab vWedR oRo t(Percentage)
(Percentage P~
ge)
(Percentage)_
3 9.6 1I 3.12 100%
I 10070 100%
100%
100%7 38_
9.6 11 3.38 J
100%
1100%7 100%
J100%
100%
_0_
39 19.6 1 I I 3.24 1 100%1o 1007%
100%
100%
1 100% 0 40 9.6 1
3.40 100%
100%
100% J 100%
100%0 41 9.6 1
3.15 1007O 100%
100%
100%
100%
Ring Average:
10070 1007O 100%
100%
100%
6 13* 6 745 100%
10070 100%
Data Collected using Rot-ting Probe -Full Covergoe Obtained I
13.6 2
7.40 10070 10070 100%
Data Collected using Rotating Probe -- Full Covergae Obtained 13.6 2
7.30 100%
10070 100%
Data Collected using Rotating Probe -- Full Covergae Obtained 9
13.6 2
7.30 100%
100%
1007%
Data Collected using Rotating Probe -- Full Covergae Obtained Ring Average:
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
2 19.4 3
3.80 100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
3 19.4 3
3.48 100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
4 19.4 3
3.68 100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
5 19.4 3
3.59 100%
1 00%
100%
100%
I0I Ring Average:
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
42 21.8 4
6.54 100%70 100%
l 100%
Data Collected usingRotatingProbe-- Full Covergae Obtained 43 21.8 4
6.61 100%
10070 100%
Data Collected using Rotating Probe -Full Covergae Obtained 44 21.8 4
6.69 10070 10070 10070 Data Collected using Rotating Probe -- Full Covergae Obtained 45 21.8 4
6.83 100%
100%
100%
Data Collected using Rotating Probe
-Full Covergae Obtained 46 21.8 4
7.10 100%
10070 100%
Data Collected usingRotatingProbe-- Full Covergoe Obtained 47 21.8 4
6.80 1 00%
100%
100%70 Data Collected using Rotating Probe -- Full Covergae Obtained 48 21.8 4
6.60 100%
0 100%
100%
Data Collected using Rotating Probe Full CovergaeObtained 49 21.8 4
6.56 100%
I 100%
100%
I Data Collected using Rotating Probe-- Full Covergae Obtained Ring Average:
100%
100%
1007e 100%
100%
Extent of UT Coverage in RVHP Nozzle Material
- T rT Coverage WedMinimum ID Distance Minimum OD Distance IfDDstnesLSSha NozeMin.
Distance Abv ed Weld Region Below Weld Ieo edAhee r
Mnmr DDsac If OD Distance Is LESS than Pen Nozzle Rig AoeU-il AoeWl oergio ceowveldg Below Weld Achieved on Below Weld Achieved on 1I0" what is circ Extent LESS Degree Weld Root Root (Percentage)
(Percentage)
Down-Hill Side Down-Hill Side than 1.0" (in Degrees)
(Pe-c-ntage
_(Percentage)
(Percentage)_
10 28.1 5
3.51 100%
100% 0 100%
100%
100%
11 28.1 5
3.20 100%
100%
100%7 100%
100%
12 28.1 5
3.60 100%
100%
100%
100%
68%
110 13 28.1 5
3.60 100%
10070 100%
100%
73%
1 7 Ring Average:
1007.
1007%
100%
100%
85%
18 29.9 6
3.40 10070 100%
1007%
1 00%
100%_
1 9 29.9 6
3.49 100%7 100%
100%
1000 100%
20 29.9 6
3.57 100%
100%
100%
83%
44%
104 2 1 29.9 6
2.30 1 00%
100%
1 00%
100%
100%
Ring Average:
100%
100%
100%
96Yo 86%
14 31.8 7
3.8 100%
100%
100%
100%0 100%
15 31.8 7
3.39 100%
100%70 10070 100%
100%
16 31.8 7
3.80 100%
100%
100%
7 97%
58%
110 17 31.8 7
3.09 100%
1 00%
100%
100%
100%
22 31.8 7
3.48 100%
100%
100%
100%.
100%
23 31.8 7
3.19 10070 100%
100%
I100%7o 10070 24 31.8 7
3.43 100%
100%0 100%
100%
68%
64 25 31.8 7
3.28 100%70 100%
1 100%
100%
100%
Ring Average:
100%
100%
100%
100%
91%
26 36.9 8
2.02 100%
100%
100%7 l
Data Collected using Rotating Probe -- Full Covergae Obtained 27 36.9 8
2.90 100%
100%
100%
10070 95%
50 28 36.9 8
3.01 100%
1 00%
100%
927%
53%
95 29 36.9 8
3.85 100%
10070 100%
100%
77%
99 30 1 36.9 8
1 3.24 1 00%
100%
100%
10070 78%
100 3 1 36.9 8
2.89 100%70 100%
1 00%
100%
1 74%
1 70 32 36.9 8
3.81 100%
100%
l 28%
Percentages cant be determined due to lack of data on Down Hill Side 33 36.9 8
2.57 82%
83%
15%
Percentages cant be determined due to lack of data on Down Hill Side Ring Average:
987e 987e 98%0 7575 (Circ Blade Data only)
Extent of UT Coverage in RVHP Nozzle Material I.I I -
Min Distance Coeae Wl ego eo ed Minimum ID Distance Minimum OD Distance If OD Distance Is LESS than Pn Noz~zle Cig AoeU-il Aoveragel CoWeldRegon BloWl Beow Weld Achieved on Below Weld Achieved on 11.0', what is circ Extent LESS e
Degree R
A pHil AboveWeld coverage l
Coveg e Down-Hill Side Down-Hill Side l
(In D (P e ce n a g e (P rce tag ) ( erc nta e)(P e rce n tag e)
(P e rce n tag e) t a
. w ( n D g e s 987.
98%
80%
997.
807.
(Circ Blade + Rotating data) 34 l
43.3 l 9
l 4.10 10070 10070 100%
l Data Collected using Rotating Probe -. Full Covergae Obtained l
35 43.3 9
f 4.16 100%
10070 100%
Data Collected using Rotating Probe -- Full Covergae Obtained 36 43.3 9
4.60 100%
100%
100%
Data Collected using Rotating Probe -- Full Covergae Obtained 37 43.3 9
3.95 100%
100%
10070 Data Collected using Rotaling Probe -- Full Covergae Obtained Ring Average:
10070 100%
100%
100%
100%
I I
I
ENCLOSURE III NRC ORDER EA-03-009 RELAXATION REQUEST SUPPLEMENT ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE INITIAL UT SCANS OF NOZZLES 32 AND 33
A BLADE PROBE/ ROAT/NG UT DATA SHEET AR EVA RVH Penetration Number. 32 l RVH Penetration Type: E-CRDM E]-CEDM El-ICI El-Vent-Line Utility: Nuclear Management Corporation Plant:
Point Beach Unit:
1 Outage:
U1R28 Procedure No: 54-ISI-100-11 Procedure Title -
Remote Ultrasonic Examination of ReactorVessel Head Penetrations Essential Equipment Description UT System Make I Model l
SIN l
VH#
l Cal. Due Date I Remote Pulser I Receiver RD Tech / Micro-Tomo 63592 8168 01/16/2005 l VH#
N/A Cal. Due: N/A UT Cable Type e Length:
RG174 I 50 ft.
RG581 0 ft.
I No. of Connectors:
2 UT Data Acquisition I Version:
ACCUSONEXTm Data Acqusition I Calibration Version 6.5 / 6.5 (Acq. I Cal.)
UT Data Analysis I Version:
ACCUSONEXTm Data Analysis Software I Version 3.13 Calibration or Nozzle Scan Information: -
Rotating I Blade Probe Calibration Information:
Scan File Information:
I Total Number of Files:
4 Calibration Setup No.:
3 File Name(s):
D4119 12.23.58 D4119 13.29.54 Initial Calibration File:
A4119 01.32.40 (Blade 708)
D4119 13.40.54 D4123 07.39.08 Initial Calibration File:
A4123 04.40.42 (Balde 703)
Calibration Block ID:
02-5032568E01 Scan Start 0
-5 Scan End G
+365 Calibration Temperature:
N/A ° F
Scan Start "Z" 0.0 in. Scan End "Z" 10,0 In.
RVH Examination Temp.:
° F
-0 Increment:
3.0 ° Sync. Value:
0.05 Pyrometer SIN or VH No.:
N/A Blade Probe Offset Value: I N/A Pyrometer Cal. Due Date:
N/A Examination Coverage J-Groove Weld Search Unit Parameters Axial Extent Above Up-Hill Weld Root:
3.81 Transducer Manufacturer Couplant Axial Extent Below Low-Hill Weld ToeI:
N/A AREVA SAS De-Mineralized Water
'If Axial Extent Below Low-Hill Weld Toe < 1.0Ot N/A El Rotating Inspection Head Z Blade Probe TOFD Number of Degrees this Condition Exists:_________
Up-Hill Weld Root to Interference Fit Region:
N/A Chan.
Angle I Direction I Freq.
DB No.
I Model Examination Results 1
Circ. Blade TOFD I Axial /5.0 S0708 I
CN Data Sheet Intended For:
I Circ. Blade TOFD I Axial /5.0 S0703 I CN s
UT Examination Data OUT Calibration Data N.A N!A NA NMA A ED No Flaws Detected El Initial Calibration N!A N.;A N,'A N,'A El Axial Flaws Detected El Calibration Verification N!A N A NX A N/A al Circ. Flaws Detected El Final Calibration N/A NA, r
N.,'A N!A Leak Path Assessment Possible ED - Yes El - No NIA N/A N/A I N/A El Leak Path Detected Flaw Report No.
NIA N/A N/ANIA
/ N/A Remarks:
Limited UT examination coverage; Above weld root coverage equals 100% (360°)
Weld region coverage equials 100% (360°)
Below weld region coverage equals 27.5% (990)
Note 1: No final calibration performed due to blade probe failure; Probe function was acceptable prior to failure.
Analyzed By:
Pierre Wanders Level:
II Date:
05/02/2004 Reviewed By:
Kent C. Gebetsberger Level:
IlIl Date:
05/02/2004 Examination & Calibration Hyperlinks (forelectronic version only)
Examination:
Calibration:
Page 1 of 6
A AR EVA RVH Penetration No. 32 C-Scan UT Data Image C, 0?
Page 2 of 6
A AR EVA RVH Penetration No. 32 Coverage Plot A
FRAMATOME ANP Penetration 32 10.0 9.5 9.0 8.5 8.0 7.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.5
-5.0
- 4.5 4.0 3.5 -
1.0 -
2.5 2.0 1.5 -
1.0 -
0.5 -
L t
m I ----
Ii ----
I---------------------
I I----------------
0 60 120 L--- -- -- -----
I--
180 240 DIP" 300 360 Page 3of6 U
A BLADE PRoBE1/ROTATING UT DATA SHEET ARE VA RVH Penetration Number: 33 RVH Penetration Type: N-CRDM EI-CEDM El-.IC El-Vent-Line Utility: Nuclear Management Corporation Plant: Point Beach Unit:
I Outage:
U1R28 Procedure No: 54-lSl-100-11 Procedure Title -
Remote Ultrasonic Examination of Reactor Vessel Head Penetrations Essential Equipment Description UT System Make / Model S/N VH#
Cal. Due Date Remote Pulser I Receiver RD Tech / Micro-Tomo 63592 8168 01/16/2005 VH#
N/A Cal. Due: N/A UT Cable Type I Length:
RG174 I 50 ft.
RG58 / 0 ft.
I No. of Connectors:
2 UT Data Acquisition / Version:
ACCUSONEX' Data Acqusition / Calibration Version 6.5 / 6.5 (Acq. / Cal.)
UT Data Analysis I Version:
ACCUSONEXTm Data Analysis Software / Version 3.13 Calibration or Nozzle Scan Information:
Rotating / Blade Probe Calibration Information:
Scan File Information:
lTotal Number of Files:
3 Calibration Setup No.:
3 File Name(s):
D4119 14.38.43 D4120 00.01.22 Initial Calibration File:
D4119 01.32.40 (Blade 708)
A4123 00.41.28 Initial Calibration File:
D4119 19.23.14 (Blade 721)
Calibration Block ID:
02-5032568E01 Scan Start 9
-5 ° Scan End E0 l +365 ° Calibration Temperature:
N/A
° F Scan Start 1Z" 0.0 In. Scan End '2" 9.50 In.
RVH Examination Temp.:
N/A
° F 9 Increment:
2.75
- S nc. Value:
0.05 Pyrometer SIN or VH No.:
N/A Blade Probe Offset Value:
N/A Pyrometer Cal. Due Date:
N/A Examination Coverage J-Groove Weld Search Unit Parameters Axial Extent Above Up-Hill Weld Root:
2.57" Transducer Manufacturer Couplant Axial Extent Below Low-Hill Weld Toe':
NIA AREVA SAS De-Mineralized Water
'If Axial Extent Below Low-Hill Weld Toe < 1.0",
Nu e of Dxitentgreesthi/s Condition Exists NA El Rotating Inspection Head Z Blade Probe TOFD Up-Hill Weld Root to Interference Fit Region:
N/A Chan.
Angle / Direction I Freq.
DB No.
I Model Examination Results 1
Circ. Blade TOFD I Axial / 5.0 S0708
/ CN Data Sheet Intended For:
1 Circ. Blade TOFD / Axial / 5.0 S0721
[I UT Calibration Data 1
Circ. Blade TOFD Axial / 5.0 S0718
/ CN 1 No Flaws Detected El Initial Calibration N/A N/,A Al N A E] Axial Flaws Detected El[ Calibration Verification NWA N!A N A N t A E Circ. Flaws Detected El Final Calibration N!A N;A JPA N/
Leak Path Assessment Possible E -Yes El - No N/A N/A NIA
/ NIA El Leak Path Detected Flaw Report No.
N/A N
/A N/A I
N/A Remarks:
Initial Calibration File for Blade Probe SO718CN is D4120_23.04.31 Limited UT examination coverage; Above weld root coverage equals 83% (300)
Weld region coverage equials 83% (300")
Below weld region coverage equals 15% (57*)
Note 1: No final calibration performed due to blade probe failure; Probe function was acceptable prior to failure.
Analyzed By:
Pierre Wanders Level:
II Date:
05/0212004 Reviewed By:
Kent C. Gebetsberger Level:
IlIl Date:
05/02/2004 Examination & Calibration Hyperlinks (for electronicversion only)*
Examination:
Calibration:
Page 4 of 6
A AREVA RVH Penetration No. 33 C-Scan UT Data Image clo
Page 5 of 6
A AR EVA RVH Penetration No. 33 Coverage Plot A
FRAMATOME ANP Penetraton 33 10.0 9.5 9.0 8.5 8.0 7.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 e 5.5 5.0
'4.5 4.0 3.5 30 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 300 0
60 120 180 Npee 240 360 Page 6 of 6 cCOa
ENCLOSURE IV NRC ORDER EA-03-009 RELAXATION REQUEST SUPPLEMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOCIATES CALCULATION PBCH-09Q-310 ASSESSMENT OF NOZZLE STRESSES
U CFILE No.: PBCH-09Q-310 lq?
STRUCTURAL CALCULATION INTEGRITY PACKAGE PROJECT No.: PBCH-09Q Associates, Inc.
PROJECT NAME: Point Beach Unit 1 CRDM Top Head Analysis CLIENT: Nuclear Management Company, LLC (Point Beach Ul)
CALCULATION TITLE: Assessment of Nozzle Stresses Project Mgr.
Preparer(s) &
Document Affected s.p.nApproval Checker(s)
Revision Pages Revision Description Signature &
Signatures &
Date Date 0
1-12 Initial Issue H. L. Gustin C. R. Limpus 04/14/04 4/14/04 B. P. Templeton 4/14/04 1
1-12 Modified plots to use Outer Diameter H. L. Gustin C. R. Limpus Node as reference for inner diameter 04V1504 stresses.
041/44/15/04 B. P. Templeton 4/15/04 (Ka Page 1 of 12 F2001RI
r Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION
3 2.0 METHODOLOGY.............
3 3.0 RESULTS.............
4
4.0 REFERENCES
12 List of Tables Table 1: Node Numbers per [1]
.3 List of Figures Figure 1: 0° Azimuth Hoop Stress
.5 Figure 3: 9.60 Azimuth Hoop Stress for Downhill Side
.6 Figure 4: 9.60 Azimuth Hoop Stress for Uphill Side
.7 Figure 5: 28.20 Azimuth Hoop Stress for Downhill Side
.8 Figure 6: 28.20 Azimuth Hoop Stress for Uphill Side
.9 Figure 7: 43.5° Azimuth Hoop Stress for Downhill Side.10 Figure 8: 43.5° Azimuth Hoop Stress for Uphill Side.1
-C
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this calculation is to evaluate the nozzle stresses for the Point Beach Unit 1 top head CRDM penetrations. This calculation extracts the hoop stresses along the inner and outer diameter surfaces of the CRDM tube as a function of height beginning below the J-groove weld region. The stresses are extracted for the downhill and uphill sides for each of the four (4) CRDM configurations (i.e., 00, 9.60, 28.20, and 43.5° azimuths). This assessment is done with the stress analysis results performed by Dominion Engineering, Inc. (DEI) [1] specifically for the residual plus operating stress load step.
2.0 METHODOLOGY For each CRDM azimuth, the nodal file listing and results file listing were used from [1] to produce the residual plus operating hoop stress as a function of height along the tube surface. Load step for the residual plus operating stresses is at Time=4004 per [1]. The DEI analysis assumed a nozzle material yield strength of 60 ksi. The following files were used from the DEI analysis [1]:
00 CRDM 9.60 CRDM 28.20 CRDM 43.50 CRDM
- PBI-OA.nodelocs.txt and PBI-OA.results.txt
- PB1-9A.nodelocs.txt and PBI-9A.results.txt
- PB 1 -28A.nodelocs.txt and PB I -28A.results.txt
- PBI-43A.nodelocs.txt and PBI-43A.results.txt The following node numbers are used for each CRDM per Figure 5-1 of [1]:
Table 1: Node Numbers per 111 Tube Side Tube Surface Node Numbers Node Location Inner Diameter 1, 101, 201,301,401, Tube Bottom (1) and Tube Top Downhill 501, 601 Connected to Top Head (601)
(-90°)
Outer Diameter 5, 105, 205, 305, 405, Tube Bottom (5) and Tube Top 505, 605 Connected to Top Head (605) 80001, 80101, 80201, Tube Bottom (80001) and Inner Diameter 80301, 80401, 80501, Tube Top Connected to Top Uphill 80601 Head (80601)
(900) 80005, 80105, 80205, Tube Bottom (80005) and Outer Diameter 80305, 80405, 80505, Tube Top Connected to Top 80605 Head (80605)
Revision 0
1 V Preparer/Date CRL 04/14/04 CRL 04/15/04 Checker/Date BPT 04/14/04 BPT 04/15/04 File No.
PBCH-09Q-310 Page 3 of 12
3.0 RESULTS The node locations and stress results (Time = 4004) were obtained from the files of the DEI analysis
[1]. Figures I through 7 depict the residual plus operating hoop stress as a function of height along a tube surface for the downhill and uphill sides of all four CRDMs of Point Beach Unit 1. Only the 0° azimuth CRDM has one side, downhill side is equivalent to uphill side. These results are contained in EXCEL files PBCH_Ul-#A_20KLimit.XLS, where "#" refers to the CRDM azimuth.
Each plot denotes the nodes at the tube bottom and the tube top connected to the top head and below the J-groove weld. For the inner and outer surface of the tube, a length dimension is approximated from the tube top node number for where the hoop stress is at 20.0 ksi. This is done with the outer diameter (OD) node as the reference since the location is readily accessible for inspection as compared to the inside diameter (ID) node location. A vertical bar is shown on the plot indicating the location.
The hoop stress is interpolated for a location that is 1 inch below the OD tube top node location as well.
The 20.0 ksi stress limit information provided in the plots with respect to CRDM inspections is in accordance with the report by Materials Reliability Program - Generic Evaluation of Examination Coverage Requirements for Rector Pressure Vessel Head Penetration Nozzles (MRP-95) [2]. This calculation establishes the 20.0 ksi stress limit criteria (i.e., distance below the weld where 20.0 ksi stress is reached) for both the ID and OD surface hoop stress components to define the prudent inspection zone below the J-groove weld region. Details of this methodology are contained in Section 3 of Reference [2].
The plots are comparable to Figures 5-2 through 5-5 of [1].
Revision 0
11 Preparer/Date CRL 04/14/04 CRL 04/15/04 Checker/Date BPT 04/14/04 BPT 04/15/04 File No.
PBCH-09Q-310 Page 4 of 12
Point Beach U1 0 Degree Tube Hoop Stress For Residual Plus Operating Stress Condition Nodes @ Top Head Inner
/
Diameter, Height Value rx a.2 U) 0.
0 0
60000 682 1
ID Stress 1 Inch (64.826 Inches) 50000 below OD node is 19.7 ksi A3-6 342 40000 -
30000 ID Stress is 20 ksi at 0.996 inches below OD node oh4-/
Tube ID:
20000 -
--*-eTube OD:_
10000 -
63 64
/t65
\\66 6 i
-10000-
-20000-OD Stress is 20 ksl at 0.6
//000 Inches from top OD Stress 1 inch (64.826)
As-modeled Nodes @
below is 4.6 ksi
-40000 Tube bottom
-50000 Height (Inches)
Figure 1: 00 Azimuth Hoop Stress F
Revision 0
1 Preparer/Date CRL 04/14/04 CRL 04/15/04 Checker/Date BPT 04/14/04 BPT 04/15/04 File No.
PBCH-09Q-310 Page 5 of 12
Point Beach U1 9 Degree Tube Hoop Stress on Downhill Side For Residual Plus Operating Stress Condition 80000 -
00.
00 G
0.
0 0
E Nodes @ Top Head Inner 70000 a'Diameter. Height Value 64.605 ID Stress 1 inch (63.605 inches)
/
60000 below OD node Is 19.6 ksi 50000
\\
/
40000 '
64.728 30000-
^
f;+onilTueI 20000 ID Stress Is 20 ksi at 0.9
_Down_
Tube
/I inches below OD node lDownhill, TubeOD 10000 62 63
/
4\\656 10000 As-modeled Nodes@
V 20000 - -Tube bottom OD Stress Is 20 ksi at 0.5 inches from top 30000 OD Stress 1 inch (63.605) below is 6.1 ksi 40000 6
v Height (Inches)
Figure 2: 9.60 Azimuth Hoop Stress for Downhill Side Revision 0
1 Preparer/Date CRL 04/14/04 CRL 04/15/04 Checker/Date BPT 04/14/04 BPT 04/15/04 File No.
PBCH-09Q-310 Page 6 of 12
Point Beach Ul 9 Degree Tube Hoop Stress on Uphill Side For Residual Plus Operating Stress Condition Nodes @ Top Head Inner
- 1 WI
.Fm
.0V C,,
0.
0 0
Height (inches)
Figure 3: 9.60 Azimuth Hoop Stress for Uphill Side Revision 0
1 Preparer/Date CRL 04/14/04 CRL 04/15/04 Checker/Date BPT 04/14/04 BPT 04/15/04 File No.
PBCH-09Q-310 Page 7 of 12
Point Beach U1 28 Degree Tube Hoop Stress on Downhill Side For Residual Plus Operating Stress Conditi6n 100000 90000 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 -
30000 -
20000 ID Stress 1 Inch (56.013 Inches) below OD node is 11.5 ksl 57.013 "
ID Stress Is 20 ksi at 0.8
/
Inches below OD node
/
/Nodes
@ Top Head Inner Diameter, Height Value
- 1
/
I 0n 01 0
X Downhill, Tube ID
\\
Downhill. Tube OD j
I GURUu '
-1000
-2000
-3000
-4000!
-5000i
)0 55 56 I
57 S
G\\OD Stress is 20 ksi at 0.65 0
M-As-modeled Nodes @
I
/\\
inches from top 0 -lTube bottom
/
OD Stress 1 Inch (56.013) a I below Is 9.3 ksi B
1 Height (Inches)
Figure 4: 28.20 Azimuth Hoop Stress for Downhill Side Revision 0
1 V Preparer/Date CRL 04/14/04 CRL 04/15/04 Checker/Date BPT 04/14/04 BPT 04/15/04 File No.
PBCH-09Q-310 Page 8 of 12
Point Beach Ul 28 Degree Tube Hoop Stress on Uphill Side For Residual Plus Operating Stress Condition Nodes @ Top Head Inner Diameter. Height Value 70000 60000 50000 40000
., 30000 0.
E 20000 Co 0.
0x 10000 0
-10000
-20000
-30000 58.671 l
/
r-5886g6 ID Stress 1 inch (57.986 inches) below OD node Is 49.9 ksi Uphill, Tube ID ID Stress is 20 ksi at 1.8
-/-
Uphill, Tube OD Inces below OD node /_
I *
.. /
4 OD Stress is 20 ksi at 0.55 Inches from top
!54 Asmdld 55 X-_
56
/
57 58 59 606
- As-modeled/
Nodes @ Tube bottom
-bottom OD Stress 1 inch (57.986) below is -11.4 ksi Height (Inches)
I Figure 5: 28.20 Azimuth Hoop Stress for Uphill Side Revision 0
1 Preparer/Date CRL 04/14/04 CRL 04/15/04 V Checker/Date BPT 04/14/04 BPT 04/15/04 Fl N File No.
PBCH-09Q-310 Page 9 of 12
Point Beach U1 43 Degree Tube Hoop Stress on Downhill Side For Residual Plus Operating Stress Condition 120000 -
110000 -
100000 jr45.828
-- Downhill. Tube ID 90000 j
/
>\\ Downhill. Tube OD_
I00 OD Stress is 20 ksi at 0.8/\\
90000 80000 Inhe frmio Nodes @ Top Head Inner
\\
/
Diameter. Height Value 6 0000 -
OD Stress I inch (44.82)_./l G 50000 below Is 12.7 ksi v,° 40000 W
30000 0
o 20000 0
.100004j3 44 X, 45
\\
46 47
-20000 _As-modeled Nodes @
ID Stress is 20 ksi at 0.55 inches
-30000 Tube bottom below OD node
-30000/
/
ID Stress 1 Inch (44.828 inches)
.40000 -below OD node Is 6.0 ksi
-50000 Height (inches)
Figure 6: 43.5° Azimuth Hoop Stress for Downhill Side Revision 0
1 Preparer/Date CRL 04/14/04 CRL 04/15/04 Checker/Date BPT 04/14/04 BPT 04/15/04 File No.
PBCH-09Q-310 Page 10 of 12
Point Beach Ul 43 Degree Tube Hoop Stress on Uphill Side For Residual Plus Operating Stress Condition 700Che 600C 500C 400C 3000
-Srn 2000
- e 1000 0) cL 0
0xo u -
48.807 Nodes @ Top Head Inner 0-Diameter, Height Value ID Stress 1 inch (48.366 inches)
I--,
D0 below OD node is 60 ksi 49.366 10
_Uphill.
Tube ID_
ID Stress Is 20 ksi at 2.8 Inches below OD node Uphill. Tube OD
/
_O CD Stress is 20 ksi at 0.36 0
7Inches from top 4
1 I 4 3 44 46 47 48
/
49 50 51 52
/
-20000 l
-30000
-40000
-50000 As-modeled Nodes @
\\b m
OD Stress 1 Inch (48.366).
bbtbelow Is -31.3 ksi Height (inches)
Figure 7: 43.5° Azimuth Hoop Stress for Uphill Side Revision 0
1 V Preparer/Date CRL 04/14/04 CRL 04/15/04 Checker/Date BPT 04/14/04 BPT 04/15/04 File No.
PBCH-09Q-310 Page II of 12
m
4.0 REFERENCES
- 1. Dominion Engineering, Inc. Calculation No. C-4430-00-1, "Point Beach Unit I CRDM Stress Analysis," Revision 1, 12/08/2003, SI File No. PBCH-09Q-203.
- 2. Electric Power Research Institute Topical Report No. 1009129, "Materials Reliability Program:
Generic Evaluation of Examination Coverage Requirements for Reactor Pressure Vessel Head Penetration Nozzles (MRP-95)," EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2003.
Revision 0
1_
Preparer/Date CRL 04/14/04 CRL 04/15/04 Checker/Date BPT 04/14/04 BPT 04/15/04 File No.
PBCH-09Q-310 Page 12 of 12