ML20140E409: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
| Line 3,049: | Line 3,049: | ||
N q . | N q . | ||
ATTAC10ENT TO DC/DD NO. 188 DESCRIPTION OF DESIGN CHANCE: | ATTAC10ENT TO DC/DD NO. 188 DESCRIPTION OF DESIGN CHANCE: | ||
-2 Ref: Carboline letter dated October 26, 1976 with attached | -2 Ref: Carboline {{letter dated|date=October 26, 1976|text=letter dated October 26, 1976}} with attached | ||
$_ laboratory test reports SR-57 and 4-997. | $_ laboratory test reports SR-57 and 4-997. | ||
Li The referenced letter outlines the pain: =anufacturer's (Carboline) reco=endations as discussed in the October 15, 1976 =eeting with the Engineer. Based on this letter the following changes are requested: | Li The referenced letter outlines the pain: =anufacturer's (Carboline) reco=endations as discussed in the October 15, 1976 =eeting with the Engineer. Based on this letter the following changes are requested: | ||
Latest revision as of 17:47, 12 December 2021
| ML20140E409 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 11/30/1975 |
| From: | Chupak J, Hutchinson F GIBBS & HILL, INC. (SUBS. OF DRAVO CORP.) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20140E359 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-85-59 NUDOCS 8603270503 | |
| Download: ML20140E409 (19) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_
'8 01-277 159 TEXAS UTILITIES SERVICES INC.
COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION i USE OF INORGANIC ZINC PRIMERS IN PWR CONTAINMENTS NOVEMBER 30, 1975 i PREPARED BY: AP : , 4 / 3 Q. le. ' ~ -l: . l a . z .,... . , _h ~ - Ifof y-N X. CHUPAK F . W. HINSON, III E'= Senior Chemical Engineer Vice Presidant- - Power Engineering - I h Ov,e GIBBS & HILL, Inc. F.
?:
ENGINEERS DESIGNERS CONSTRUCTORS 6- _ _ . . . . _ _ ._ _ h,', ip y: c. 4 g , . . .g .g . . ' *i . " 8603270503 860224
~
., e .. ~
PDR FOIA CARDE85-59 PDR IEC'"fRYW~MIC
- r ' -< ~ 4 - *; ~- 'Y M' %' d'
c _ . _ .
. . . . . s. . g t
4 i T
~
01277 ISO USE OF INORGANIC ZINC PRIMERS IN PWR CNTAINMENTS I SECTION TITLE PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1
2.0 CONCLUSION
S AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2
2.1 CONCLUSION
S 2 l 2.2 RECOMMENDATINS 3 ,
- . 64 3.0 DISCUSSION 4 4.0 INDUSTRY CONSENSUS 5 5.0 OPEN LITERATURE 6 6.0 PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS 7 i
f-H I
**e .eme .
A ( * - - s',, e g $e[, g* j *al *
."y
- AM ,k e 4t. 4 .W P,8' * $ e ./,> d -b se , ,,
p , l,... .. .. :. . ~. -- -n_gg,47: ;,;,a ; , ,.,, " ; . . . ;.. .. , c
L
. e
**.=
' ,~
1.0 INTRODUCTION
01277 IGl Gibbs & Hill was requested by TUSI (per TGH-757, May 2, 1975) to conduct a study on the use of inorganic zine primers within the containments. This study was requested because of the unfavorable conclusion reported in a paper entitled "Protec-tive Coatings (Paints) for PWR and BWR Reactor Containment Facilities" by C. D. Watson et al. of Oak Ridge National Laboratories. The Watson Paper concluded that inorganic L zine primers downgrade the performance of epoxy systems. {~ V Since the cresentation of the Watson nacer at the ANS National Meetine at Los Anceles, California June 28 - July 2, 1970, two related ANSI standards were issued: ANSI N101.4 - 1972 " Qual-ity Assurance for Protective Coatings Applied to Nuclear Facil-ities" and ANSI 101.2 - 1972 " Protective Coatings (Paints) for Light Water Nuclear Containment Facilities" . In addition, another standard. ANSI N5.9 - 1967 " Protective coatings (Paints) for the Nuclear Industry" was revised and redesignated ANSI N5.12 - 1974. Testing of inorganic zine coatings by Oak Ridgd National Laboratory and the Franklin Institute Research Labora-tories in conformance with the standards has been initiated and several coating manufacturers products have passed. The results of this testing is reviewed herein. . In addition, G&H contacted coating manufacturers to ascertain the results of independent laboratory testing of their prod-ucts. Members active in the Utilities Nuclear Coating Work Committee (UNCWC), ASTM and ANSI were also contacted for their experience. Relevant findings f1;m these comm:nications are summarized in this report. . h' f I.' O N. E:,' C r.3 a y
=
N4 .
),'
d.. I h
*;l.
l r
- ,1 o '
t .f,l gi *[' , m. , y .
**+e, y g p g . y ;/fi g ge..c ,;,.g ql.ag Q g ,p ,, , ,,.4 /g. S s < , f.y.
E. . .- .. . .
.n - , 5y 7,,, _ ,. . c . g . .. :.- ,- . . . , u.c l
r; 7 I .i 2.0 CONCLUSIONS. AND' RECOMMENDATION l c.o 2612 - <7 1 l l
2.1 CONCLUSION
S 4 For PWR containments, a zine primer / epoxy topcoat is an' l acceptable system, specified and installed for the great majority of PWR containments. An all epoxy system has been ' used or specified for a minority of PWR containments.
- Most coatings manufacturers, who can supply both sinc and epoxy ,
i primers, recommend zine primers for PWR containments. No tech- !L i
! nical society, coating manufacturer, applicator or inspection P agency contacted recommends against the use of inorganic zine for containments. I:
- In general, material and labor cost between an inorganic zine i primer / epoxy topcoat system and an all epoxy system is a stand-off for an applied 3 mil DFT primer. When a thicker epoxy 1
primer coating is specified, total cost is usually higher for I the all epoxy system. I Evolution of hydrogen during a LOCA due to possible failure
'I of the topcoat in a zine-primed system is not a significant contributor to the total hydrogen generated.
As reported in the Watson paper, only certain coatings manu-facturers products failed when using inorganic zine primers; others did not fail. Untopcoated inorganic zine should not be usad in a BWR sup- L pression pool immersion service. Although there is satis-i factory experience for an epoxy topcoated inorganic zinc I' primer at some BWR's, general experience with untopcoated ( zine in BWR's is poor. 4 l ! Present thinking by many A-E's and Utilities is to use an all epoxy system for the BWR suppression pool in spite of reported H i l failures with the system. Additional operating experience is J considered necessary by Gibbs si Hill. T p ! Not all the test work performed by Franklin institute Research p Labs in the past is considered acceptable by some A-E's and s. ! coating manufacturers. Many coating manufacturers are cur- ,, i rently submitting panels to ORNL for testing because Franklin D institute does not have capability comparable with ORNL 5,' . r S k '
%. ~, I[ , N ap .
- N .- = y 9 88 g , . y ,g,ww ,.ax,g. .g".a ,.m;..
e g x _
.; , .pu
.4-, .,-. --..-___-# _ ~ . _ _ _ , , _ . . __ _m,___ ,m , . - _ - - , - , , , - c-,.,r
s . 1' 2.2 RECOMMENDATIONS 01277 163 G&H Recomends that -
'l . An inorganic zine primer be used in PWR containments, topcoated with an epoxy. .
- 2. The recommended coating manufacturer's product should be certified as passing the DBA (design basis accident) testing with topcoated inorganic sinc, as conducted by ,
an independent laboratory in accordance with ANSI stan-dards.
- 3. A review of the proposed coating manufacturer's experience ,.
in nuclear power plants be made.
- 4. A thorough review of the proposed coating applicator's experience and qualifications be made.
- 5. A coatings inspection agency's services should be used to inspect and verify that the coating has been applied in accordance with manufacturers recommendations and ANSI standards.
..f 9
- 6. All coatings applied to a given surface shall be the products of one manufacturer.
l L. E r [' r I.p a yv ' ' -
- r. .
P. t'.- t
. (x
. . r_
f;. .. .---j.spp ~"no r-3:psy m .. . 3. 2 _ s+g g.-gwyggp.m g a,ma . ,. . . :y+g ,,;.g.;. ,, ge;.
- c. m. .
y : m..s.
.w.
S
?,*
)
L I 3.0 DISCUSSION 01277 164 i C. D. Watson et al. (1) of Oak Ridge National Laboratory l reported at the Summer 1970 American Nuclear Society Meet-ing held at Los Angeles, that the use of an inorganic zinc
! prime coat appears to degrade certain epoxy or modified -
i epoxy coating systems. As phrased, this conclusion is mis-leading in that Watson neglected to clearly indicate that ; only certain manufacturers' systems failed while.other manu-facturers' systems did not fail. Ebetrapolating failures to l i generic systems.rather than singling out manufacturers allows no credit for the expertise of one paricipating coating manu-facturer over another. G&E does not consider it the intent of the article to preclude the use of inorganic zine since the Authors state "This does not mean, however, that an epoxy l inorganic system cannot be used." i As noted by Levy (2), Watson has, however, long. championed
- the need for improved requirements for coating work for i nuclear facilities and under his leadership, ANSI Standard i N5.9, " Protective Coatings for the Nuclear Industry" was
- ' issued in 1967. Unless a coating and its necessary surface ,
1 y, preparation pass the requirements of this " screening standard", (: r there is no need to further consider it for any work. (This standard was later revised and ren.2mbered ANSI N5.12 - 1974.) l >
- After the issuance of ANSI N5.9, Watson pressed for'even more
' stringent ~ requirements for coating work used directly in con- . I tainments. Under his guidance, ANSI N101.2 " Protective Coat-ints for Light Water Nuclear Containment Facilities" was issued ' i in 1972. Mr. Watson also chaired another ANSI Subcommittee < which produced ANSI Standard N101.4, " Quality Assurance for Protective Coatings Applied to Nuclear Facilities", which was , i issued in 1972. None of these standards obviates the use of inorganic zine primers. , on the contrary, in order to comply with the requirements of j these standards, Westinghouse (3) revised its corporate coat-ing specification for containments and limits the coatings for h application to metal surfaces to: E p
- 1. . epoxy - modified phenolic topcoated or
. . m
- 2. untopcoated self-curing alkyl silicate-base zine primer rf' i
l
%'f
?:
F D j u Q!
,/
j hp Q w
'. NW f- ;* v ?h *'$L. ? k~ 'Q M'{g , * *y q .a.sq d q & W,
,. . m h 5
, m.._ . . . , , - m s .
- - . - - _ _ , - . - . . . - _ . - . _ - - _ . , - . . - - - _ _ _ . . ~ _ - . . - - - _ . - - . .
~. .
s
'T 4.0 INDUSTRY CONSENSUS
/ -
01277 165 The Utilities Nuclear Coating Work Committee (IMCWC), of which G&B is a member, was organized in 1971 by Utilities, Architect-Engineers and Constructors, NSSS Manufacturers, Coating Manu-facturers, Coating Applicators, Inspection Agencies and Research Laboratories engaged in nuclear power plant coatings work. The committee is run by and for the Utilities: its prime purpose is educational and informational. UNCWC depends on the stan-dard preparing committees, SSPC, ANSI, ASTM and NACE to solve problems that the Utilities find in coating work for nuclear i facilities. An Architect-Engineer presentation was made at UNCWC Meeting No. 5 at Denver, Colorado, May 16, 1974. Each participating AE was polled as to whether their organization precluded the use of inorganic zine in containments. The response was unanimous in not precluding the use of inorganic zine. O . r b 5* s 1,. N G,
=,
W*
+'
[ P. r
. b.
- -m.
(e , f 'f*.} ~, [!f-9. e 4 3Q.g-a--
~
5
,..~~....".c..,~
~
* . M[ "p.e * * * ** ~ ~ .<*.* ;dZ.'.* e. - 7 iY MG* *4!*q$% 4 sha "f
-.n . p
- . :. e .
t ..:.. .,.
_ ::--m__ . _ _ I 5.0 OPEN LITERAW RE oi277 jgg j R. R. Myers and J. S. Long (4) reported "that an ethyl sili-cate inorganic zine with polyamide epoxy topcoat satisfac-torily withstood simulated DBA testing at an independent laboratory with no signs of blistering or other deleterious effect. Following this DBA testing by the Franklin Institute , in Philadelphia, the same specimens were sent by Mobil-Chemical Co. to C. D. Watson at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) for radiation testing (5) . The radiation testing was done in deionized water up to a level 10 9 Rads. This testing was begun en September 2, 1970, and was completed in November, 1970. The resulting report from ORNL showed that specimens were satisf ac-tory after these tests. Mr. K. B. Tator of Kenneth Tator Associates, a coatings inspec- g tion agency, also reports (10) that "despite the inherent nature of zinc-rich primer and sensitivity to topcoating appli-cation, techniques and methods presently exist to minimize or eliminate the coating problem". Samples containing topcoated and untopcoated inorganic zine i sent by Mobil Chemical Co. to ORNL for simulated DBA testing used in conjunction with both pressurized and boiling water ' reactors. The samples are not affected by the test as reported F. by L. T. Corbin of ORNL (15), p. f v k C k. k-V e h, C^ ( r.
-s- @
- y-7.
w
*eq "l w o- )
* ***N 5"ee w e' Q } A fe .N };, , ,
f om g _ r,9 ,-f X ,% ~ ,s'-
-ev .
;- . ..a...:. w ... ; -
.; :-r z .2- .449. ;w: , g .e .
m 6.0 PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS 01277 167 Mr. Gerald Goldberg of (6) ORNL was contacted regarding pub-lished information on DBA testing of coated panels containing inorganic zinc primers. He advised that 3 or 4 coating manu-facturers qualified, but since testing was sponsored by coat-ing manufacturcrs, the information is regarded as privileged ' and not for dissemination from his office. Mr. Kenneth B. Tator (7) of Kenneth Tator Associates, reported that he had ORNL conduct tests on panels using an inorganic
. zine primer. The client was Bagwell Coatings, a coating appli-cator organization. The panels passed the test, but Mr. Tator was unable to release the report and suggested contacting ,
Bagwell Coatings. Mr. Tator stressed the importance of sur-face preparation and the conditions of coating application. Mr. T. David Cohen of Bagwell Coatings (8) was contacted for t a copy of the test report submitted by Kenneth Tator Associates (9). Copy of this report (Bagwell report) received by G&H states, "DBA testing of mixed system coatings disclosed no lack e of adhesion or other failure under the test conditions (maxi- ' j mum hypothetical accident conditions for Davis-Besse Station) ." Twelve test panels were submitted for DBA testing as follows: l L Panel Desienation System
- l-31 through B4 Carbo-Zine 11 prime Sat Amercoat 66 topcoat B5 through B8 Carbo-Zine 11 prime coat Dimetcote 6 intermediate B (Inorganic zine)
Amercoat 66 topcoat B9 through B12 Dimetcote 6 prime coat p Amercoat 66 coat Q. r, . The Bagwell report further states "None of the test coupons y exhibited any sign of coating failure such as blistering, g peeling, cracking, or chalking. All test panels can be con- p sidenred to have performed satisfactorily under the test con- i ditions". I' O i [ . r V C." wr s ?. -. - . , . , . . Vb o ,:' _%**t ..~.
*'e.'.** :. m "*5 *, . , s* , .s ,,.n y ee r.rp p .. , , , , - . - -e~ -
cA . . . s, e, z y , ,7.ej. : ,;,,
It is interesting to note that in panels designated El.,thgo g B8 not only was Carboline Company's inorganic z$ d ba d -2ine 11 topcoated with an Ameron Corp. epoxy topcoat but also with Ameron's Dimetcote 6 inorganic zinc. For compatability reasons, ~ I the mixing of different manuf acturer's coatings is not recom-mended. It is also considered poor practice since coating manu-facturer's responsibility is difficult to resolve if failure occurs. , Dr. Dean M. Berger, Gilbert Associates, representative on UNCWC (11) advised that since the coatings used in contain- ; ments are not subjected to immersion service, Gilbert consid-ers an inorganic sinc primer best. He pointed out the fol-lowing DBA requirements for coating used in containments as incorporated in ANSI N101.2 - 1972 are stringent enough to ensure satisfactory service.
- 1. Flaking shall not be permitted.
- 2. Blistering shall be limited to a few, intact blisters, size No. 4 ASTM D 714, Standard Method of Evaluating Degree of Blisterong of Paints, Part 21.
e d 3. Heavy chalking shall not be permitted.
- 4. Delamination and/or peeling shall not be permitted.
- 5. Any other changes in coating properties which are not also associated with the separation, or the release ~
of coating from the substrate shall not be a cause for rejection. Mr. Albert M. Levy, Sargent and Lundy representative on UNCWC ' (12) noted that S-L approves the use of inorganic zine primer in containments. Advantages in their opinion include sand-blasting and priming in the shop and the tolerance for physical abuse in shipment and storage for extended periods of time. Prior to finish painting in the field, soil and contamination can be removed by vacuum blasting followed by touch-up. The i. expense, dust problem and time required for the initial sand- [-1 blasing in the field is thus obviated. f F Mr. T. J. Cullen, Chief Coatings Engineer, Bechtel Corp. (14) n, representative on UNCWC believes all coating work should be [ done in the field and is an advocate of inorganic zine primers, n'. . Fu [ T. Q-
-e- y.
IN W V;; . . . .: - c. - a. 4 i'; .6;r g . ,,, , 4 pr 74.,, .g,q;,,,;4, ,_ , , , _, . , , , _ m l v a
- a. ,. u .4. . ;,;
,i
__ - m . submit panels kbb wi@hjka~th ating manufacturers toaccordanceare independent ORNL in ystems con-v ll at Bechtel's parameters Bechtel has in itedobjective by Bechtel. cofor DBA is to find testing swith a t.his 5asor 6 fa xy mil epo meters set and thezine primer mperatures more ic of ANSI standards a BWR DBA involving i tetest should beDBA require-
- sisting of an inorganthat will pass Any systems passing th s stringent of Tnemec topcoat hich has less effortscoatings field.
high as 340F. adequate for a PWR w spoke favorably of theand Napko Corp. in the than Mr. Cullen Coatings ments. Company, Port by Franklin Institutefor the follo find the test work doneand Long acceptable ler Bechtel does not a Co facility, Research Labs for Kee which is reasons: out radiation tote testcoating panels d other
- 1. Franklinspent Institute fuel farms to irradiarealistic by Bechtel an ORNL uses considered more w used.
was and ho manufacturers. concrete state what the who made were made or 2 It does not w the panels
- 3. It does not state ho them.
- 4. Lack of docu:nentation. formation. d".
Lack of performance in of photos labeled " passe 5. i competition
- 6. Report is just a bunchcharged ORNL with unfa r installation.
Franklin Institute a hasctovernment 75 at San Francisco it wasd since OPE is gram UNCWC meeting, July 19 t Franklin Institutea proposed For rs. testing pro At the last on ORML . disclosed by Bechtel tharunwith test panels Bechtel's parametesending capability to accordance and Long is to be performed in ler 1, a PWR. these reasons, Kee which netted little, was used on Rancho Seco a test program were violated in that An all epoxy systemspent onCoating systems
$1,000,000 was if any, information.
+
O .
-~77. , u Kf.75' r'
, - = + ..
i. 6
.. .S -
t l Bechtel has invited coating manufacturers to submit panels for DBA testing this fall at ORNL in accordance wi@hl jEa7- l 6 0 meters set by Bechtel. Bechtel's parameters are independent of ANSI standards.and the objective is to find systems con-sisting of an inorganic zine primer with a S or 6 mil epoxy topcoat that will pass a BWR DBA involving ten.peratures as high as 340F. Any systems passing this test- should be more than adequate for a PWR which has less stringent DBA require- ' ments. Mr. Cullen spoke favorably of the efforts of Tnemec Company, Port Coatings and Napko Corp. in the coatings field. Bechtel does not find the test work done by Franklin Institute Rr: search Labs for Keeler and Long acceptable for the following reasons:
- 1. Franklin Institute farms out radiation to a Co facility.
ORNL uses spent fuel to irradiate test panels which is ' considered more realistic by Bechtel and other coating manufacturers.
- 2. It does not state what the concrete was and how used.
- 3. It does not state how the panels were made or who made them.
- 4. Lack of documentation. i.
- 5. Lack of performance information.
- 6. Report is just a bunch of photos labeled " passed".
Franklin Institute has charged ORNL with unfair competition - since ORNL is a government installation. At the last UNCWC meeting, July 1975 at San Francisco it was disclosed by Bechtel that Franklin Institute did not have the , capability to run test panels on a proposed testing program to be performed in accordance with Bechtel's parameters. For p these reasons, Keeler and Long is sending test panels to ORNL. g. An all epoxy system was used on Rancho Seco 1, a PWR. k'd
$1,000,000 was spent on a test program which netted little, y,,
if any, information. Coating systems were' violated in that g V. P.*; l
- :~
Uf. i ', % s k [t? l .. .? n+ l-i - e l (- <
~
e fc-41.Sg: , ...,..i., . g,. _ , g., g,4,7
-.' 9, g, 7.p.f. gw,,3,..,, --r- - - - - - - - - r. ,-,- , - , . , , . . - - , _ , , , , . , ,,_,n,,.,, , , - - - - n-... , ,e-..-., . , , - - . , , , _ ~ , - - , - ,
s .. different manufacturers were used to supply the prime coat and finish coats for the same surf aces of atructu](12 stjell 7 0 About 12 different paint suppliers were used, most of all unqualified for DBA conditions. Mr. Cullen was finally called in to rectify a bad situation. With regard to fis1d vs. factory application, Mr. S. J. Oechsle, Jr., of Metalweld, Inc., (13) a coating applicator, prefers constructing a job site coating facility rather than shop-priming. Shop-primed steel can become soiled prior to the application of a finish coat and requires cleaning and , touching up. He believes the sequence of application of the coating is extremely important. After the application of a zine primer in the field it is desirable to elevate the humi-dity with steam for a period of 24 to 48 hours and then test the hardness of the cured coating prior to topcoating. , Ameron corrosion Control Division (19) offers an all epoxy [ system as well as an inorganic zine epoxy system for contain-ments. Where shop priming is specified, they recommend inorganic zine only. If surface preparation can be performed in the field, either an epoxy primer or inorganic zine is offered. Should an all epoxy system be selected, there is a time limit between the application of the primer and the top-coat for optimum results. The difference in material cost between an inorganic zine primer and an epoxy primer is , approximately 1 cent per square foot higher for inorganic zinc. , Exxon Chemical Company (16) sent samples containing topcoated and untopcoated inorganic zinc systems for DBA testing to ORNI. and reports that fourteen samples passed. A brochure on Exxon's nuclear coatings system and testing data will be issued in the near future. Generally, after a coating specimen is subjected to simulated ; DBA testing, an exposure to gamma radiation is performed. . The question has been raised whether qualification of coating systems for reactor containment applications should require a i simultaneous exposure to gamma radiation, steam and chemical . spray instead of permitting the radiation to be conducted E P~ separately. P, p. cw k, e y 1 ew
=
l .
> ' .- " . ,. .+ .r. ,
,.. g y , , ; ., . , .,;> >j . , f q,Qg} ,n , , , , , , ,, _,- ,
.5; . - ..,. , ,
p i
?
I r In a summary report (17) preparedbyaspecialtag oup, o g UNOWC, the conclusion was that blistering was appre i./tfly the same whether the test involved simultaneous or sequen-tial exposure. Although blister formation within specified limits as defined in ANSI 101 2-1972, is acceptable under DBA conditions, it is interesting to note that blisters were observed for some systems using an epoxy primer and epoxy topcoat as well as for some inorganic zine primers topcoated ' with epoxy. The manufacturers of the specimens that did not show blistering for an all epoxy system or inorganic =inc/ epoxy were not divulged. Simultaneous and sequential exposure to gamma radiation during DBA testing has also been reported for topcoated inorganic zine primers by W. F. Oberbeck et al. (18). All of the coat- ' ings evaluated in this investigation were well within the required limits for blistering, delamination, and chalking. < During UNCWC Meeting No. 4 at Tampa, Florida October 16 - October 19, 1973. Mr. D. Labelle (20) stated in a NSSS seminar on containment coatings that Babcock and Wilcox has no policy as to the use of inorganic zine and will approve its use. When contacted in Nove=ber 1975, Mr. Labelle reaffirmed his position and pointed out that the testing B&W performed was old information. The epoxy topcoats that exist today were not available when they tested coatings and good results are being obtained with topcoated inorganic =inc.
?
Mr. G. Spires (21) of Stone and Webster specifies topcoated 6 inorganic zine for containment unless a client expresses preference for an all epoxy system. Mr. H. Eines (22) of Carolina Power and Light does not believe the hydrogen evolution problem is serious when an inorganic zine system is used in containment. Prior commitments to NRC (USAEC) forced them to go to an all epoxy system in 1972. Compliance with U.S. A.E.C. Regulatory Guide 1,54 " Quality Assurance Requirements for Protective Coatings Applied to i Water - Cooled Nuclear Plants" and scheduling for liner fabri- p.. cation were the controlling factors. An all epoxy system manufacturer offered compliance and a good price. Mr. Eines [*,. has nothing against the use of inorganic zine but will cen- [ tinue an all epoxy system in their newer plants because of r, - good experience with it. 0 b 0+ ;, [ s 9 f ."
;~; .g
_;,,[ '~~.~"
- - = .-- - - _. _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ ..
4
. t i
I i Mr. R. E. Moore, (23) and Constructors is not concerned with hydrogen (Phibii6nCoating Specia
~
when using inorganic zine as a primer. They specify manu-f acturers of both epoxy topcoated inorganic zine system and all epoxy systems. No position is taken on either system, J. S. Moore of UE&C, a structural engineer who has had good experience with an all epoxy system on structural steel, refuses to consider any other system. Mr. W. Haldeman (24) of Mobil Chemical pointed out problems , with shop-primed epoxy on steel liners. The burning off of the primer in field welding requires reblasting of all burned coating before repriming. This is not the case with inorganic zine. Mobil offers both an all epoxy and an epoxy topcoated inorganic zinc systems. South Carolina Electric and Gas, Virgil Su=mer Station, a PWR, will be using Mobil zine in containment. Gilbert Associates is the A-E. Mr. O. Hunter (25) of Brown and Root specifies topcoated inorganic zine for use in containment. At Houston Lighting and Power South Texas Droject, a PWR, inorganic zine will be used in containment. At Carolina Power and Light's Brunswick ^
% Plant, a considerable quantity of an epoxy white primer was required for adequate coverage.
Dale Bainard (26) of the Washington Public Power Supply System does not use inorganic zine for containment liners in PNR's because he does not feel it worthwhile getting involved in hydrogen evolution calculations required and also the require-ment for redundant recombiners and the effect on the purge system. He does not feel that humidity is a problem in a PWR containment and therefore warrants the use of an inorganic zine primer. He approves of the use of zine for galvanizing cable trays and conduits. He also feels inorganic zine primers are desirable in the vepor phase of the suppression pool for BWR's Which is the case for WPPSS #2. Mr. Joram Lichtenstein (27) of Ebasco Services (formerly with South California Edison Co.) avoids the hydrogen evolution L controversy and required sizing of recombiners. He endorses b the use of zine for galvanizing ductwork, cable trays and conduits. He recommends the use of a weldable preconstruction l zine primer for shipment and storage. , r [, k
" ' ' * ' ' ~ , ,
JQ,g IT ** ., .r-- , ,, , __
~.
6 6 f Mr. James Harris (28) of Virginia Electric and Powar stated that all iiners are topconted with inorganib ;I:go g7g Lnb .I-Inorganic zine was used as a primer because of outdoor storage. An all epoxy system is used on structural steel. For long tern storage, inorganic zine primer is used. For items requiring short term storage, an epoxy primer is used and finish coating is completed in 1 to 2 months. They did not experience any problems with any system. Mr. Harry Nichols (29) of WEDCO Corp., a Westinghouse engineer-ing branch office, stated that epoxy topcoated inorganic =ine , was used at Units 2 and 3 at Consolidated Edison Indian Point WR ' s . There were no peeling or delamination problems. Mr. Tony Graham (30) of Public Service Electric and Gas of New Jersey stated that an all epoxy system was used at their WR Salem plant. Problems occurred on application on concrete because of excessive moisture. Inorganic cine will be used in BWR Hope Creek in the drywell and vapor phase of suppression pool. Mr. Al Boehmer (31) of TVA stated that inorganic zine was used at Browns Ferry, a BWR, Watts Bar 1, a PWR and Sequoyah, They did not experience any problems. At Florida a WR. Power & Light's Crystal River plant, an epoxy primer had to be reblasted because rusting occurred on epoxy primed steel stored in the warehouse. TVA finds steel primed with inorganic zine held up very well in storage. Combustion Engineering is recommending inorganic zine for TVA's future nuclear plants X-24 and X-25. TVA has placed no restrictions on inorganic
=ine for PWR's non-immersed service in BWR's.
Mr. Ralph E. Frey (32) of Portland General Electric Co. stated [ that they used inorganic =ine in containment at their Trojan WR plant. They had typical minor but no major problems with surface contamination and different crafts interfering with one another. Mr. Walter Prather (33) of Pacific Gas and Electric Co. stated r, that they used inorganic zine shop-coated and epoxy finish - coat in the field at Diabolo Canyon 1 and 2. They experienced
- no problems. L o
N - y_ , .,,p ,,, FF' , ,
* ***/ /; p * '*r-,- , *' ,4 . a g, y + ,. = , ,,,'p,
I L
/f'
' Mr. M. Oliviera (34) of Ebasco Services reported o .repu y4 with topcoated inorganic rinc in a Mark II BWR. s bdu a for zine systems immersed in a suppression pool of a BWR were superior to all epoxy systems. Excellent results were obtained with inorganic zine for structural steel in storage.
Mr. D. W. Christofferson (35) of Chicago Bridge and Iron, a fabricator, stated that the cost difference between all epoxy and inorganic zine systems is a stand-off for a 3 mil dry film thickners. Where thicker coatings are specified for epoxy systems, the cost is higher than inorganic zine which is nor-l mally applied at 3 mils dry film thickners. Some coating manufacturers recommend 4 to 5 mils of epoxy as a primer: Inorganic zine dries faster and is not so susceptible to temperature and humidity conditions as epoxy. A coating applicator (36) who wished to remain anonymous stated that the labor rate -is .the same for both systems. Mixing time is equal. Loss of material is about 15 percent for both systems. Speed of application is the same. Some-times they quote lower cost for inorganic zinc. Mr. Roger Tegtmeyer (37) of Carboline company disputes any claim that inorganic zine primers will result in any addi-tional application labor cost, although there is a difference of maybe IC/sq. ft., in material cost. This is in agreement with Ameron as stated above. The suppression cool of Northern States Power Monticello Plant has performed extellently for over five years. The coating f, used was epoxy teocoated inorganic zinc. r, r 4
- l W
k Y O : 1 . n. 1 Q.~ ~"~7c , v . C , s~. - . .-,y m .- A y 9.,.f, . 7.- % .; c .:--
,. -----...,,-----.._.------,--.-,-.,-.-,,..,.,.~,...n-- , , , - , . . - - - - - - , - - - - -
_ .m._w_ j REFERENCES ,
- 1. Watson, C.D. et at. " Protective Coatings (Pa t ) or PWR and BWR Reactor Containment Facilities" ANS National '
Meeting June 28 - July 2, 1970, Los Angeles, California.
- 2. Levy, A.M. " Coating Work for Nuclear Facilities" SSPC Annual Meeting May 8, 1973, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
- 3. Westinghouse Process Specification PS 597755 or (83342 PA-PE) Revision E, " Application of Protective Coatings to Reactor Containment and System Co=ponents in the Reactor Containment" dated May 4, 1973.
- 4. Myers, R. R. and Long, J.S. " Treatise on Coatings" Vol 4, p. 53*a Mercel Dekker, Inc. 1975.
- 5. Letter by C.D. Watson.of Oak Ridge National Laboratories to M. J. Masciale of Mobil Chemical dated April 29, 1971.
- 6. Telephone communication between J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill Inc. to G. Goldberg of Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
' 7. Telephone co=munication between J. Chupak of Gibbs & Bill Inc. and Kenneth B. Tator of Kenneth Tator Associates.
- 8. Letter with attachments by Mr. T. David Cohen of Bagwell Coatings to J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc. dated May 21, 1975.
t
- 9. Kenneth Tator Associates " Adhesion Testing at Port Clinton Infrared Spectrographic Analysis of Amercoat 66; Design Basis Accident Tes tin ~ of Carbo-Zinc" Topcoated with Amercoat 66", August 30, 1974. r
- 10. Ta tor, Kenneth B. " Top Coating Zinc - Rich Primers" ,,
" Corrosion /75" The National Association of Corrosion Engineers, Torcnto, Canada April 14 to April 18, 1975.
- 11. Telephone coe=unication between Dr. Dean Berger of ..
Gilbert Associates and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
- 12. Telephone co=munication between Mr. Albert M. Levy of ,
Sargent and Lundy and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc. ; O
~
4
*&T ; 3 am , g -d-,*y","s e k ** C V T _ gp _g
- 4 is= . . * . ,
l- ,
. .s.
x .- , _ _ . . . . 2'
- 13. Telephone communication between Mr. S.'Oechsle, Jr. ,
of Metalweld- Inc. and J. Chupak of Gibbs (]yi}y,72nd.7 6
- 14. Telephone communication between Mr. T. J. Cullen of Bechtel Corp. and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
- 15. Corbin, L. T., " Report of DBA and Irradiation Testing of "*~
Mobil Chemical Company Paint and Coating Specimens" ORNL, March 26, 1974. ,
- 16. Private communication, H. M. Lee of Exxon Chemical Co.
to J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc. June 5, 1975.
- 17. Summary Report " Simultaneous vs. Sequential Testing of Coating Systems for DBA Conditions" Prepared by a Special Task Group of UNCWC, May 15, 1974. I
- 18. Oberbeck, W. F., Jr., et al. of Graduate Center for Materials Research, University of Missouri - Rolla and Lopata, J.R. et al. of Carboline Company " Simulated and Simultaneous LOCA Testing of Protective Coatings for Nuclear Industry" October 1974.
- 19. Telephone communication between E. W. Jarret of Ameron Corrosion Control Division and J. Chupak of Gibbs &
-g Hill, Inc.
7
- 20. Minutes of UNCWC Meeting No. 4 at Tampa, ria. October 16 -
October'19, 1973 NSSS Seminar and Telephone communication " between D. Labelle of Babcock & Wilcox and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc..
- 21. Telephone communication between G. Spires of Stone & -
Webster and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill.
- 22. Telephone communication between H. Ebas of Carolina Power
& Light and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
- 23. Telephone communication between R. E. Moore of United Engineers and Constructors and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
- 24. Telephone communication between W. Haldeman of Mobil !
Chemical and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc. l-
- 25. Telephone communication between O. Hunter of Brown & Root 7
- and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc. .
- 26. Telephone communication between D. 3ainard of Washington '-
Public Power Supply System and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, L Inc. , n. I L D'" . ,, _ ~, _. j. ; ,, , .. ,
,.,. 7
. J ' b.L . ' ,
r s
. -e _ .. .
.. t
~
. . i
- 27. Lichtenstein of E Telephone communication Services (Houston, TEX.) and between J. J.Chupakofjf}q}7&7Hi7,TInc.
- 28. Telephone communication between J. Harris of Virginia Electric & Power Co. and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
- 29. Telephone communication between H. Nichols of WEDC0 Corp. and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
o
- 30. Telephone communication between T. Graham of Public Service and Gas of New Jersey and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hil, Inc.
- 31. Telephone communication between A. Boehmer of TVA and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
- 32. Telephone communication between R. E. Frey of Portland General Electric Co. and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc. .
- 33. Telephone communication between W. Prather of Pacific Gas .
& Electric Co. and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc. L;
- 34. Telephone communication between M. Oliviera of Ebasco Services (New York) and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
- 35. Telephone communication between D. W. Christofferson of Chicago Bridge & Iron and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
- 36. Telephone communication between an anonymous coating applicator and J. Chupak of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
- 37. Letter from R. J. Tegtmeyer of Carboline Co. to H. A. Schlesinger of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
T, ( b I} - 7 l . t.- O . v c g. e F iw
'. * * '* e as' i -
- ._ , ~ s . . . , . f
~ y , , , - . , , . ,. ,
g .. - . - . . . . . . l.' . . . - ._ _ , , _ , , , _
,,/
O b ' s: s' - aost eacs so= a i OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY *"'"'""8*' ' o enns e, m m. cs. e.w.a. 3,s w s ac Septerter 18, 1984 i i Mr. Thomas A. Ippolito Project Director . 1 Comanche Peak ' Division of Licensing U. S. huclear Regulatory Comission l Washington D. C. 20555
Dear Mr. Ippolito:
The enclosed documents are being sent to you at the request of Mr. Jerry Arnold of Irperial Coatings. To confirm that these are copies of reports in our files we have initialed each page and signed the cover letters. Samples not requested have been deleted f rom these reports. l If there are any questions or we can be of further service please call on us. i Sincerely. T R b $ //p W. R. Laing. Section Head Analytical Chemistry Division , t O R. D. Brooksbank Chemist f nW R. E.bes Chemist WRL:1p Enclosure cc: Jerry Arnold w/o enclousre
- 9,--eyJfJhf a i ~, ., +. t i p w. 44-/ ..s,, c, . . . *". .~ 7 ~ ,r ,3,.Arg , g g g g,,g yg,y,, g ,:,t.+-;,,j- .,,,,; g g g ; g . m .u,
O
. . . . . . . - ...a.v.. . . . . . . .. . . . . , _
s
'f urc OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY opsnatto ov f
UNioM CARBIDE CORPORATION hyCl[ At OlvisiO4 Poif CFFICE 802 X CAK R6DGE. TEMMilit t 37E30 October 7, 1976 Mr. William J. Lomasney Vice-President Southern Imperial Coatings Corp. 4 P. O. Box 29077 , i hew Orleans, Louisiana 70129
Dear Mr. Lomasney:
Enclosed are the results of the Irradiation, Decontamination, and DBA tests we ran on your coated panels. If we can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely yours, ! L.T4d L. T. Corbin, Section Head i Analytical Chemistry Division LTC:d.w ((J f / cc: G. Goldberg MfW Enclosures .f. h [g Q f 9/ G - _. . .~ . . . , . . .= _ .
. ~ . _ _ .
.. -......a . -w . . . - . . . . . . . -.
r l t ,. l
. Analytical Chemistry Division !
Oak Ridge National Laboratory ! Date: Septent>er 15, 1976 ; l ,
-Report of Irradiation, Decontamination, and DBA Testing Southern Imperial, New Orleans, Louisiana )
The Irradiation, Decontamination, and Design Basis Accident (DBA) tests i are conducted, respectively, in accordance with Bechtel Corporation Standard l Specification Coatings for Nuclear Power Plants, Spec. It>s. CP-951. CP-952, and CP-956. The tests are designed also to meet the specifications set in l l both A.N.S.I. Report N 101.2-1972, Protective Coatings (Paints) for Light ; Water Nuclear Reactor Containment Facilities, and M 5.12 1974, Protective !! Coatings (Paints) for the Nuclear Industry. The DBA test spray solution and j ' the test conditions are listed in Tables 1 and 2. Af ter both the DBA and the l' irradiation tests, the coatings are examined for signs of chalking, blistering, cracking, peeling, delamination, and flaking, according to ASTM standards where applicable. All except the decontamination test panels are returned to the coating manufacturer. ; The irradiation tests are run using a spent fuel assembly, removed ! from the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at ORNL, as the source of radiation. These fuel assemblies are stored under 20 feet of demineralized water. The fuel is 93% enriched U"5 as U 0e combined with aluminum. The spent fuel as-semblies are removed after each 23-megawatt day period. Irradiation is done using the gama energy from the accumulated mixed fission products. This more readily simulates conditions around a reactor than does a cobalt source. Also, the higher gama activity affords shorter irradiation time to achieve ac-cumulated doses. The dose rate four days after removal of a fuel assembly from the reactor is 1 x 10' rads / hour. The fuel assembly is 20 inches high. A 20-foot long, 3 1/2-inch diameter pipe, with one end capped, is used for the air irradiation tests. The capped end is lowered into the four-inch opening of the center of the fuel assem-bly. The open end, above the water level, is covered with an "0" ring sealed flange to which is attached a steel cable and an. air outlet hose. The air inlet is located at the bottom of the pipe. The test specimens are connected pgJg, [SC Evaluated . % rt (9 sp age APPreved / , v443 pp v>u pp
- .3 .t-m. m.m #,a. m g u.a. m .m.m m . m - e. .
-- - ~ - - - . . . _ _ . _ . _ _ = _ . _ ,,_ _ , _
s . Analytical Chemistry Division Dak Ridge National Laboratory Date: Septerter 15. 1976 tothe bottom of the cable and lowered into the radiation field. Also at the center of the fuel assembly is a stainless steel clad cadmium tube used as e neutron absorber. This prevents contamination of the test specimens by induced radiation. The decontamination procedure is as follows: a mixture of fission product nuclides (aged greater than 90 days and less than three years) is neutralized to pH 4 and immediately applied to the test specimens. The spect-mens are previouly degreased in alcohol. After the contaminated spot is air dried, the activities of four of the nuclides are measured by counting with a Ge(Li) detector and a multichannel pulse height analyzer. The specimens are then suspended in a beaker of water at 25*C end washed by stirring for 10 minutes. The specimens are removed, the backs rinsed in water, air dried, ud counted as above. The ratios of the activities before, to those after the decontamination are reported as decontamination factors for water. The decontamination and courting steps in 25'C and 80'C acids are repeated, and the respective decontamination factors calculated. The " total overall D. F.* is calculated as the ratio of the total activity at the beginning of the test 7 to the total activity at the completion of the three washing steps. All activities are corrected for decay between counts. A computer has been pro-gramed to do all the calculations. l t N 8 Y Y84 Evaluated _ A,
~
W6 Y- Approved / fY bMxly 6Japy ,'" l T'&NAw : ...nu..;_.2,,ya w w;%5;l,;gg m ;og ,,g g g e g g ,-g g g g g a g .
O
- - _ _ _ . _ . _ ~ ~ - - - --= _ . . . _ _ _ , ,
s . Southern Irgerial Analytical Chemistry Division Manufacturer: Oak Ridge National Laboratory New Orleans, L4 Date: Septenber 15. 1976 4 Table 1. DBA Solution Composition. Distilled Water. 0.28 M boric acto (3,000 ppm boron) 0.064 M sodium thiosulfate Adjusted to pH 9.5 with sodium hydrcxide Table 2. DBA Test Conditions. Pressure (psig) Coments Time Temperature (*F) Autoclave preheated. Start 180 70 (10 sec) Steam injected. 20 seconds 340 70 Pressure maintained 6 hours 340 by relief valve. 30 Spray solution added 21 seconds 235 at 75'F. 235-250 30 10 minutes 250 30 4 days
-15 Fresh spray solution 20 seconds 190 added at 75'F after draining autoclave.
190-200 10 10 minutes i 200 10 3 days j End of test , Evaluated 4 hgf//4 . P/7/gp Approved YlX/Dp 9lil/21 enA.+ T: ... c .
,.,;;,9 4 ** N m z-Nei.m.ac.;vnnv ggg,g,,j- ,
i l'anufacturer: Southern imperial , Analf tical Chemistry Division
. Oak Ridge t'ational Laboratory New Orleans. U Datt: September 15. 1976 Decentamination Test Results:
These tests performed according to ORNL tlaster Analytical Manual 1:ethod rio. 2 0320 and Bechtel Corp. Spec. CP-952. ORN'. Log Book ho. A 7562; 8-12-6 . Decontamination Factor (DF) Percent of
,]
Sanple k'ater Acid Acid t; umber Contaminant 925'C 025'C 080'C Overall Activit{ Removed i 688 Ce-144 120 2.1 1.0 250 (1201) Ru-106 68 1.6 1.1 120 Cs-137 160 1.3 1.4 280 Zr-95 17 1.6 1.1 29 TOTAL 85 1.6 1.1 160 99.4 4 i l a
'Percentoftotalactivityremoved=(1-hg)x100 N W/8 Sf
,pprove, f y g l _ _
T d/IF 9//P/f V
- e. m. m. ,:m .,:. m =r
. ,_ m m,
- _ _ ~ . _ _ - - .
OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY I O*ERATED DV union CARBlDE CORPORATION NUCLE AR DIVISION O POST OFFICE 801 X OAK RIDGE, TENNES$EE 37830 June 6, 1977 Mr. William J. Lomasney Vice-President Southern Imperial Coatings Corp. P. O. Box 29077 New Orleans, Louisiana 70129
Dear Mr. Lomasney:
Enclosed are the results of the Irradiation and DBA tests you requested. O. If we can be of further assistance, please feel free to call on us. Sincerely yours, L,7W ~- L. T. Corbin, Section Head Analytical Chemistry Division LTC:drw Enclosures [ ((/g g ff n4r/ww T t. % /9 9/18/4 0 E 1 s zwg, sac u.e - r-- w . -
,____ _ _ ___ _ ._ ,,, g g y..; ,,,, _....c_ m_.
c . ._ _ m._ .. . . - _ . . . o Analytical Chemistry Division
. Oak Ridge National Laboratory Date: 5-31-77 Report of Irradiation and DBA Testing Southern Imperial, New Orleans, Louisiana The Irradiation and Design Basis Accident (DBA) tests are conducted, respectively, in accordance with Bechtel Corporation Standard Specification Coatings for Nuclear Power Plants, Spec. Nos. CP-951 and CP-956. The tests are designed also to meet the specifications set in both A.N.S.I. Report N 101.2-1972, Protective Coatings ~(Paints) for Licht Water Nuclear Reactor Con-tainment Facilities, and N 5.12-1974, Protective Coatings (Paints) for the Nuclear Industry. The DBA test spray solution and the test conditions are listed in Tables 1 and 2. After both the DBA and the irradiation tests, the coatings are examined for signs of chalking, blistering, cracking, peeling, de-lamination, and flaking, according to ASTM standards where applicable. All except the decontamination test panels are returned to the coating manufacturer.
The irradiation tests are run using a spent fuel assembly, removed from the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at ORNL, as the source of radiation. These fuel assemblies are stored under 20 feet of demineralized water. The fuel is 93% enriched U23s as U3 0s combined with aluminum. The spent fuel as-w* semblies are removed after each 23-megawatt day period. Irradiation is done using the gar:rna energy from the accumulated mixed fission products. This more readily simulates conditions around a reactor than does a cobalt source. Also, the higher gamma activity affords shorter irradiation time to achieve accumu-lated doses. The dose rate four days after removal of a fuel assembly from the reactor is 1 x 10e rads / hour. The fuel assembly is 20 inches high. A 20-foot long, 3 1/2-inch diameter i pipe, with one end capped, is used for the air irradiation tests. The capped end is lowered into the four-inch opening of the center of the fuel assembly. The open end, above the water level, is covered with an "0" ring sealed flange to which is attached a steel cable and an air outlet hose. The air inlet is located at the bottom of the pipe. The test specimens are connected to the bottom of the cable and lowered into the radiation field. Also at the center of the fuel assembly is a stainless steel clad cadmium tube used as a neutron absorber. This prevents contamination of the test specimens by induced radiation.
/[8g f/Sg Evaluated dbM ,
j 8 9 Approved W M / y 9/IO N \
- 1. mme--=______.m.um..mm-s i
. ~ _ _ _ _ . - -
-.. _. . . _ _ m_
s . Manufacturer: Southern Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory
,,, New Orleans, LA Date: 5-31-77 Table 1. DBA Solution Composition. Distilled Water.
0.28 M boric acid (3,000 ppm baron) 0.054 M sodium thiosulfate Adjusted to pH 9.5 with sodium hydroxide Table 2. DBA Test Conditions. Time Temperature (*F) Pressure (psig) Coments Start 170 - Autoclave preheated.
.g 20 seconds 340 70 (10 see) Steam injected.
6 hours 340 70 Pressure maintained by relief valve. 20 seconds 220 30 Spray solution added at 75'F. 20 minutes 220-250 30 4 days 250 30 20 seconds 170 -15 Fresh spray solution added at 75'F after draining autoclave. 25 minutes 170-200 10 3 days 200 10 End of test ORNL Log Book No. A7562; 4-29-7. gdf//8[M Evaluated cbd [ ////g(/ Approved, [ ~ k%K/sp 9/d/N v w = w n x..s =a w n .n. n . s ., .a:. - ., n . x x a . m .u -
a - Manufacturer:_ Southern Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division New Orleans, LA Gak Ridge National Laboratory Date: 5-31-77 System Ider.tification: Steel Panel X Concrete Block 115/11/1201 Radiation Tolerance Test Results: ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0921; Bechtel Corp. Spec. No. CP-951; ORNL Log Book No. A 7562; _ 4-29-7 Initial Dose Rate: 1.55-1.8 x 107 rads /hr Test Conducted In: X air water Cumulative Dose Rate: Comments Sample No. _1 X 10' rads 1 x 10' rads
-cL 2373
_ Coatinos intact; no defects. ! 2374 Coatings intact; no defects. I Additional Coments: I
@g pfp/y' Evaluated h % ' u . b, .-y f fffl p Approved _k.)}/, h ~
O u>u/ypun
--_ _..~._,_ ~ -- - - ~ ~-
b .
.r ...m. a_ .- _ m .. . . .
4 _
- Manufacturer: Southern Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division Dak Ridge National Laboratory New Orleans, LA Date:
a 5-31-77 System Identification: Steel X Concrete Block 115/11/1201 DBA Test Results: ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0922; Bechtel Corp. Spec. No. CP-956; ORNL Log Book No. A 7562; 4-29-7 Sample No. DBA Phase Comnents**
*2373 spray Coatings intact; no defects, all sides.
*2374 spray Coatings intact; no defects, all sides.
2375 sneav Contince intact- nn defecte. all eidae. 2376 spray Coatings intact; no defects. all sides. i I I l
- Irradiated. **(SA) = sand blast; (SH) = shot blast; (GR) = 9rit blast.
ps va/e Ap Sk/et- tM ah 9/d/!Y
~
Evaluated h9M Q. A .- Approved o a o wasi.cm3m ::-;..www;;.,;ncsss,wg-g.ymmmwaggyLaw,,,a . , . 4, .;,,uw,_ ,
=
o j
. ~ ,
3 .
. OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY l opsmatto ey ,
{ UNtoN CAR 8tDE CoRPoRATeoN h0CL[ AR DIY!$10h e POST OFFICE SON R CAE RIDGE. TENNE 11El 3T830 . February 5,1979
?
Mr. Gerald E. Arnold Imperial Professional ~ Coatings P. O. Box 29077 New Orleans, Louisiana 70189
Dear Mr. Arnold:
Enclosed are the results of the decontamination testing you requested. Please call on us if we can be of additional assistance. Sincerely yours, Iof L. T. Corbin, Section Head Analytical Chemistry Division LTC:dnw Enclosure M a e4r/r+ to.z.6/V 9/a/N
-_ m., . . _ . . _ _ _ . . ..
l t i Manufacturer: Imperial Professional Analytical Chemistry Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory , Coatings, New Orleans, Louisiana Date: Jan. 30, 1979
/
Decontamination Test Results: These tests perfomed according to ORNL Haster Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0920 and Bechtel Corp. Spec. CP-952. ORNL Log Book No. A 7562; A1-2-9 OI ' Decontamination Factor (DF) {C Sample Water Acid Acid Number Contaminant 925'C 925*C 880*C Overall Activit{ Renoved 4562 Ce-144 3.2 1.4 1.6 7.2 Ru-106 7.6 1.7 2.9 39 Cs-137 567 1.0 2.3 1282 Ir-95 3.2 1.5 1.2 5.5 TOTAL 11 1.6 1.8 33 96.9 4563 Ce-144 2.6 1.3 1.7 5.6 Ru-106 6.4 1.4 1.6 14 Cs-137 20 1.0 1.0 20
, Zr-95 2.5 1.2 1.1 3.5 TOTAL 7.5 1.3 1.3 12 91.9 4564 Ce-144 2.9 1.2 1.4 4.9 Ru-106 8.6 1.5 2.4 33 Cs-137 95 1.0 1.0 98 Zr-95 3.1 1.3 1.1 4.4 TOTAL 11 1.3 1.5 22 95.5 1
Ce-144 Ru-106 Cs-137 Zr-95 TOTAL Ce-144 Ru-106 Cs-137 2r-95 TOTAL iPercentoftotalactivityremoved=(1-h)x100.
,847 6 9/MN Approved l . $rr ,n.
~
g S p r N a Sveluat d % y U - 3 Pf#/ 9//2/tv
..... ..~. .= : = . _ x . n - n a = , _ . , , n . ,+ . ,. , . ..
a . ~ ;
- - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ J
- - -.w - ,.2.., .m. . s _; y gs m._ e ,_ , g ,, f ,y.
i OAK RIDGE N ATIONAL LABORATORY omanatto av UNION CAR 8 toe CORPORATION NUCLEAR Clyl$10N O POST OFFICE BOX X O AK RIDGE. T&NNillt t 37430 December 7, 1979 P.r. Gerald E. Arnold Te:hnical Representative leperial Professional Coatings P. O. Box 29077 fiew Orleans, Louisiana 70189
Dear Jerry:
Enclosed are the results of the irradiation and DBA tests recently performed for Imperial.
. If we can be of further assistance, please feel free to call on us.
Sincerely yours,
, y p L ,/- 4 e L. T. Corbin, Section Head Analytical Chemistry Division LTC:dmw Enclosures (24)
// Wr/SP to.f. Eg/Af 9//l/N .
i l O e eY
- A' e i ,="s .I 4 ,aa. e e' M &=s m ,A eq= 's ~5 )y ffh *g *e *" #; ap _
e&h)he hfq*] y
. . - - - . . . . . . .w.. .. . .~a Manufacturer. Imperial Professional _
Analytical Chemistry Division , Coatings, New Orleans, Louisiana 9N hidhationalLabratory Report of Irradiation and DBA Testing The irradiation and design basis accident (DBA) tests are conducted, respectively, in-accordance with Bechtel Corp. Standard specification Coat-ings for Nuclear Poxr Plants,- specs. CP-951 and CP-956 (or with modifi-cations as noted in Table 2. DBA test conditions). The tests are designed to meet the specifications set in both A.N.S.I. report N 101.2-1972. Pm- I te::ive Coatings (Paints) for Light Water Nuclear Reactor Contain ent Fa:ili-ies, and N 5.12-1974, Protective Coatings (Paints) for the Nuclear Jr.ias:ry. The DBA test spray solution and the test conditions are listed in Tables 1 and 2. After both the DBA and the irradiation tests, the coatin;s are examined for signs of chalking, blistering, cracking, peeling, delamination, and flaking, according to ASTM standards where applicable. All test panels are-returned to the coating manufacturer. The irradiation tests are run using a spent fuel assembly, removed from the High-Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at ORNL, as the source of radia-Q;,, tion. These fuel assemblies are stored under 20 feet of demineralized water. The fuel is 93", enriched U235 as U 0s 3 combined with aluminum. The spent fuel asser.blies are removed after each 23-megawatt day period. Irradiation is done using the gamma energy from the accumulated mixed fissien products. This more readily simulates conditions around a reactor than does a cobalt source. Also, the higher gaarna activity affords i shorter irradiation time to achieve accumulated doses. The dose rate four days af ter rer. oval of a fuel assembly from the reactor is 1 = 10s rads /hr. The fuel assembly is 20 inches high. A 20-foot long. 3-1/2-inch diameter pipe, with one end capped, is used for the air irradiation tests. The capped end is lowered into the four-inch opening of the center of the fuel assembly. The open end, above the water level, is covered with an "0" : ring sealed flange to which is attached a steel cable and an air outlet hose. The air inlet is located at the bottom of the pipe. The test speci- i mens are connected to the bottom of the cable and lowered into the radiation l field. Also at the center of the fuel assembly is a stainless steel clad cadmium tube used as a neutron absorber. This revents contamination of the test specimens by induced radiation. . g g g Evaluated / n_/ . [ Approved '2_N d '
/
cf.- v. f e. ~4" U. g f. . g f d[ y ' ,.%dQ
"* gyQ- f g j
' je {. ;
7
~
Manufacturer: _ Imperial professional Coatings Analytical Chemistry Division ! i Oak Ridge National Laboratory ;
.< New Orleans, Louisiana Date: December 7. 1979 ORNL Log Book No. A 7562; A11-14-9 i
Table 1. DBA solution composition, distilled water Reagent Concentration Boric acid. H B03 3 0.28 M Sodium hydroxide, NaOH Required to adjust pH to 9.5 Table 2. DBA test conditions Temperature Pressure Time (*F) (psig) Coments Start Autoclave preheated. 10 s 307 60 (10 s) Steam injected. 2 h 47 min 307 6G Pressure maintained by relief valve. 4.5 min 307-270 30 Spray solution added at 75'F. 25 min 270-250 30 4d 250 30 3 min 250-230 -15 Fresh spray solution added at 75'F after draining autoclave. 10 min 230-200 10 3d 200 10 End of test i i l 8k8 Evaluated ///j /
/M Approved , , ,
M 9//8/IY Z W.$l Y .* * ,* AR $ Yb*. her ,y,n*' e.$$r n , qhys,ri$fe[Qfk&lh0Qsh:Wgh", L y .E g& '. ?g, w .p . y. Q 4*ft p S$& ok
r..... -
,..,-.s....---,.u_
14anufacturer: Imperial Professional Coatings Analytical Cheinistry Division Dat Ridge I:ational Labort.torv ~ p tiew Orleans, Louisiana Date: Decocer 7,1979 U - System Identification Steel panel x Concrete block 115/11/1201 115/11/66 Radiation Tolerance Test Results ORI:L l4 aster Analytical Manual Method t;o. 2 0921. Bechtel Corp. Spec. No. CP-951. OPJiL Log Back No. A 7562; A11-6-9 Initici dose rate: 1 = 107 rad /h Tested cc-dacted in: x air water - Cumulative dose rate: coments Sample fio. 1x 10 rads 2x 10s rads 5443 Coatings intact, no defects. I l Evaluated / L,/ 8 Approved .. Lugg pp 9pt/M i W '".'N'S sh.$T.*j '.inI:** l. *> l*. **+.'r*-:??.c &L-El $5&k%).Sik$$N&V'&'k*&a *r.5D" .? -N'.&UO.iV%
- k'A4*95hY*$$U*
. . ..w_ . .. w :.: a .. :. - .~ -- . .
i Manufacturer: Imperial Professional Coatings. Analytical Chemistry Division
- A, Oak Ridge National Laboratory .
; New Orleans, Louisiana Date: December 7.1979 Svstem Identification Steel panel x Concrete block 115/11/1201 115/11/66 l
DBA Test Results l ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0922. ORNL Log Book No. A 7552; All-14-9 Samole No. DBA chase Comments 5442 spray Blisters #6 few, sidt: A / nd B. Coatings intact, no defects sides C and L 5443* spray Blisters #6 few, sides A and B. Coatings intact, no defects sides C and D. O. .
- Irradiated.
l t 86'f// Evaluated kl/I . ._[e W P k // h F Approved .fhk UMK/af 9la/H w m m . m m , a a n _ ,.x.w. . .+.,. _ ,,n a n ; _ .._.,.~ , ,
. . . . . - . . . ...w .-.- - . . . . . .. _.
Panufacturer: Imperial Professional Coatinos Analytical Chr.istry Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory New Orleans, Louisiana Date: December 7, 1979 System Identification Steel panel x Concrete block i 10/115/11/1201 (IM7) DBA Test Results ORNL P. aster Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0922. ORNL Log Book No. A 7552; All-14-9 , t i Samole No. DBA phase Comnents 5510 spray Coatings intact, no defects all sides. l 5513 spray Coatings intact, no defects all sides. 1 i l O l l hdV fl/hf Evaluated ,,, , s . /Ir g/)f,/gp Approved /. I192/4 9/itpt , ne+w w w;;wsuuw wa m .s.cnew m -> ~ wnw= m s=m ~ -
- _ . . n ._ _. .. .
OAK RIDGE N ATIONAL LABORATORY 4 ceceavco av union CAR 8 toe CORP 05 tiTioN hUCL[ AR CIV1110h e Post OFFICE aos x oAu mioct, Ttungsstt 37a30 May 26, 1981 Mr. Henry L. Lomasney President Imperial Professional Coatings P. O. Box 29077 New Orleans, Louisiana 70189
Dear Henry:
Enclosed are the irradiation test results on specimens submitted by Imperial. _ If we can be of further assistance, please feel free to call on us. Sincerely yours,
/ / !s L./ I. w L. T. Corbin, Section Head Analytical Chemistry Division LTC:dmw Enclosures .
cc: Mr. Doug Hayes fs W-4-B-88 Tennessee Valley Authority l' 400 Cormerce Avenue Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 f/g/gsjt AT 8d!/'/f' 01 &q yr 9ll2/li e > f E wad ' VMW MXY4!d'%%i s-s ?' L ' .E"A - u5hL"M&lb"-~k~'W2* WW'"M ~*M '
~
'~ *
' - #~
'- - w~ . .
Manufacturer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division
, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
/ hew Orleans, Louisiana Date: May 26, 1981 REPORT OF IRRADIATION AND DBA TESTING The irradiation and design basis accident (DBA) tests are conducted, respectively, in accordance with Bechtel Corpo*ation specifications CP-951 and CP-956 in Standard Specification Coatings for Nuclear Power Plants (or with m dtfications as noteo ... !.wie 2, DBA test conditions). Ine tests are designed to meet specifications set in both ANSI report N 101.2-1972, Protective Coatings (Paints) for Light Water Nuclear Reactor Containment Facilities, anc h 5.12-1974, Protective Coatings (Paints) for the huclear Incustry. The DBA test spray solution and tne test conditions a-e listed in Tables 1 and 2. Af ter both the DBA and irradiation tests, coatings are examined for signs of chalking, blistering, cracking, peeling, delamination, and flaking, according to ASTM standards where applicable. All test panels are returned to the coating manufacturer.
The irradiation tests are run using a spent fuel asse21y, renoved from the High-Flux Isotope Reacter at ORNL, as the source of radiation. These fuel assemblies are stored under 20 f t of demineralized water. The fuel is 93% enriched U-235 as U 30g combined with aluminum. The spent fuel as-semblies are removed af ter each 23-megawatt-day period . Irradiation is
,, done using the ganma energy from accumulated mixed fission products. This more readily simulates conditions around a reactor than does a cobalt source. Also, the higher ga.rna activity af fords shorter irradiation time to achieve acctrnulated doses. The dosg rate four days af ter removal of a fuel assembly from the reactor is 1 x 100 rad /h.
The fuel assembly is 20 in, high. A 20-ft-long, 3-1/2-in. -d iameter pipe, with one end capped, is used for air irradiation tests. The capped end is lowered into a 4-in. opening at the center of the fuel assedly. The open end, above water level, is covered with an 0-ring-sealed flange to . which is attached a steel cable and an air outlet hose. The air inlet is located at the bottom of the pipe. Test specimens are connected to the bottom of the cable and lowered into the radiation field. Also at the center of the fuel assembly is a stainless steel-clad cadmium tube used as a neutron absorber. This prevents contamination of the test specimens by induced radiation. F p ve/r <vaiuated[ A- lM / , $ ief Vn>Appre,ed 4 neb' ! w.2 %I4 9pr/tv
. - _ _ _ _ _ _ . = -
Manufacturer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division Oak Ridge N4tional Laboratory
; New Orleans, Louisiana Date: May 26, 1981
.y SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block 20/115/11/1201 l RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0921; Bechtel Corporation Specification No. CP-951; ORNL Log Book No. A 9675, Al-13-1 .
Initial dose rate:__ 1.3 x 10 7 rad Test conducted in: .x air water I nW, . Sample No. Cumulative dose Test results 7992 7 x 109 rad Coatings intact, no defects. Evaluated et M e
-i
# Approved /,/, h.
inLtl49pt)H O
_ . _ . ..._a___- . _ _ _
~
, OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY
,j oprnatro av union CARBlot CORPORATION -
hutilat CIVl510h e P05T OFFICE 80x 2 OAK AIDGE. TINNEllEE 37830 - May 26, 1981 Mr. Gerald E. Arnold Technical Representative Imperial Professional Coatings , P.O. Box 29077 New Orleans, Louisiana 70189
Dear Jerry:
Enclosed are the test results on your recently submitted specimens. If we can be of further assistance, please fee'l free to call on us. Sincerely yours, e . L. O L. T. Corbin, Section Head Analytical Chemistry Division LTC:dmw Enclosures ed tP
\g p 6 A t//E /W w ekAr
,e m . t.
(63 /9 9/d/ w 9
.. _x .m _ _ _ _ ._. ~ m _ .m._
4
. . - - - - - . _ - . . . 2.
Manufacturer: Imoerial Analytical Chemistry Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory hew Orleans, Louisiana Date: May 26, 1981 REPORT OF 1RRADIATION AND DBA TESTING The irradiation and design basis accident (DBA) tests are conducted, respectively, in accordance with Bechtel Corporation specifications CP-951 and CA-956 in Standard Specification Coatings for Oclear Power Plants (or with modifications as notec in Table 2. OBA test conditions). Ine tests are designed to meet specifications set in both ANSI report N 101.2-1972, Protective Coatings (Paints) for Light Water Nuclear Reactor Containment Facilities, and h 5.12-1974 Protective Coatings (Paints) for the Nuclear Industry. The DBA test spray solution ano the test conditions tre listed in
~ Tables 1 and 2. After both the DBA and irradiation tests, coatings are examined for signs of chalking, blistering, cracking, peeling, delamination, and flaking, according to ASTM standards where applicable. All test panels are returned to the coating manufacturer.
The irradiation tests are run using a spent fuel assembly, removed from the High-Flux Isotope Reactor at ORNL, as the source of radiation. These fuel assemblies are stored under 20 ft of demineralized water. The fuel is 93% enriched U-235 as U 03 8 combined with aluminum. The spent fuel as-semblies are removed af ter each 23-megawatt-day period.. Irradiation is done using the gamma energy from accumulated mixed fission products. This more readily simulates conditions around a reactor than does a cobalt
~
source. Also, the higher garina activity affords shorter irradiation time to achieve accunulated doses. The dos rate four days af ter removal of a fuel assembly from the reactor is 1 x 10g rad /h. The fuel assembly is 20 in, high. A 20-f t-long, 3-1/2-in.-diameter pipe, with one end capped, is used for air irradiation tests. The capped end is lowered into a 4-in. opening at the center of the fuel assently. The open end, above water level, is covered with an 0-ring-sealed flange to
- which is attached a steel cable and an air outlet hose. The air inlet is located at the bottom of the pipe. Test specimens are connected to the bottom of -the cable and lowered into the radiation field. Also at the center of the fuel assembly is a stainless steel-clad cadmium tube u;ed as a neutron absorber. This prevents contamination of the test specimens by induced radiation.
pg 9//8/8[ Evaluated bu. [ /-/
/ f f[f f Approved I h LOUpp 9pt/H O .m_. . _ . _ _ .m. _ _ . _ _
I
w -,_ _,7 s ' Manufacturer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory
? New Orleans, Louisiana Date: May 26, 1981 ORN' Log Book ho. A9675, A5-5-1 Table 1. DBA solution composition, distilled water Reagent Concentration Boric acid, H3B03 0.28 N Sodium hydroxide, NaOH Required to adjust pH to 9.5 Table 2. DBA test conditions Temperature rressure Time (*F) (psig) Comments St art 150 Autoclave preheated.
10 min 150-291 Steam injected at 260*F. 20 min 291 70 Pressure maintained by relief valve. 45 min 291-260 80 min 260 39 Pressure adjusted with N2-120 min 260-220 180 min 220 20 . 210 min 220-160 21 h 160 5 10 d 125 2 Placed in fresh spray solution in constant temperature bath. End of test M f/8[8f Evaluated 4-/h!. # . [ / [/7Y Approved . 2 PC/.Ap9//f/JV O e_ ._. - . _ _ _ . _ . = , _ .
-- . : . .- . .: :. ._ . .. _ . - ...-..a_;_'
s l Manufa:turer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory New Orleans, Louisiana Date: May 26, 1981 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel ,x Concrete block 115/1201 RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0921; Bechtel Corporation Specification No. CP-951; ORNL Log Book No. A9675, AS-5-1 . Initial dose rate: 1.0 x 107 rad Test conducted in: x air water
.~#A.e Sample No. Cumulative dose Test results A-32 2 x 108 rad Coatings intact, no defects.
M 8 f[/ Evaluated $ 14 / . / 2 !/
' Approved ., / ,
'WMF 9//a/fV
-- .. _. . . . . ._ _ s i c-Manufacturer: Irnoerial Analytical Chemistry Division .
A. Oak Ridge National Laboratory I
? New Orleans, Louisiana Date: May 26, 1981 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATIO_N Steel panel x Concrete block 115/11/1201 RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST ORNL %ter Analytical Mandal Method No. 2 0921; Bechtel Corporation Specification No. CP-951; ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A5-5-1 .
Initial dose rate: 1.0 x 107 rad Test conducted in: x air water O Sample No. Cumulative dose Test results A-83 2 x 108 rad Coatings intact, no defects. 248 f/// Evaluated f.ez -d [ ,, zi 1h4Z
~
A9 edr/w A,, coved IDU/tp 9ln/N O
, ..:.+_.-_.,_,-_,=.__
1- . . . . . . =_ _
.-._.L...
Manufacturer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division s Oak Ridge National Laboratory 9 New Orleans, Louisiana Dat e: May 26, 1981 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block 115/1201 DBA TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0922. ORNL Log Book No. A9675, AS-5-1 Seole No. DBA chase Test results A-32 spray
- Coatings intact, no defects, all areas.
A-34 spray Coatings intact, no defects, all areas, i A-38 spray Coatings intact, no defects, all areas.
*lrradiated.
/
Evaluated / . / Approved _ N! ,
'W22/09 9/d/N i O
e I
;. - wm.c . . ~; , e. , ..,._ w. e.mx.:..;;
..c ; .m., ;.g;,.g.gmyyz.;y.g.gww ,..
. Manufacturer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory 3 New Orleans, Louisiana Date: May 26, 1981 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block 115/11/1201 DBA TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0922.
ORNL Log Beck No. A9675, A5-5-1 Samole No. DBA phase Test results A-78 spray Coatings intact, no defects, all areas. A-83 spray
- Coatings intact, no defects, all areas. .
A-85 spray Coatings intact, no defects, all areas. O
- Irradiated.
Md Evaluated . 4 ./. 5 44
/ Approved ,/ [3- '
%%lt9 9pt/!V O
"y,
~
R&Q *h~ l S- . j U),)**}E h' l,)* &[ *
- h , ,] , p'S ' [(~ ~[ h I, 'f f?lf_s k fh&f~g}f '[Q h
~
_ _ , * ] }{ 9
.-_ : .i ..z.2..
h OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY _j optmafro or union cARBlot CORPORATION I huCLE AR CIVl310h l ED Post CFFICE 803 E OAK IllDGE, TENN[$$[E 37830 June 17, 1981 e Mr. Gerald E. Arnold Technical Representative Imperial Professicnal Ccatings P. G. Box 29077 New Orleans, Louisiana 70189
Dear Jerry:
Enclosed are the test results on your recently submitted specimer.s. Also included a-e the test data erroneously omitted
~
frcri report A5-5-1, dated May 26, 1981. ,
;P. If we can be of further assistance, please feel free to 01 - - call on us.
Sincerely yours. [f ~ L. T. Corbin, Section Head Analytical Chemistry Division LTC:dmw Enclosures 6 \ g} 20 U t//'/of A >VJ6(rP
. Y.x. Maa l1q9 9/alw e
O I l;~ ai :n.'uur .;- - r =.- ~.- -A ;,;~,-l~ i ?M~~ .a.' ,ypg.;:s-Q[f gyg ; D,4;pTQ%'ggq,;,g,R.qf f'f,.gjf','gegg., s
. _ l Manufacturer: Inoerial . Analytical Chemistry Division
. Oak Ridge National Laboratory
New Orleans, Louisiana Date: June 17, 1981 REPORT OF IRRADIATION AND DBA TESTING The irradiation and design basis accident (DBA) tests are conducted, respectively, in accordance with Bechtel Corporation specifications CP-951 and CP-956 in Standard Specification Coatings for Nuclear Power Plants (or with modifications as notec in Table 2 DBA test concittons). Tne tests are
. designed to meet specificati'ons set in both' ANS! report N 101.2-1972, ;
Protective Coatings (Paints) for light Water Nuclear Reactnr Contairment 1 Facilities, anc h 5.12-1974, Protective Coatings (Paints) for tne huclear Incustry. The DBA test spray solution anc tne test conditions are listed in Tables 1 and 2. After both the DBA and irradiation tests, coatings are examined for signs of chalking, blistering, cracking, peeling, delamination, . and flaking, according to ASTM standards where applicable. All test panels are returned to the coating manufacturer. l The irradiation tests are run using a spent fuel assembly, removed from ! the Hign-Flux Isotope Reactor at ORNL, as the soJrce of radiation. These l fuel assemblies are stored under 20 ft of demineralized water. The fuel is l 93% enriched U-235 as U 30g' combined with aluminum. The spent fuel as-semblies are removed after each 23-megawatt-day pe ri od.. Irradiation is done using the gama energy from accumulated mixed fission products. This
^"
more readily simulates conditions around a reactor than does a cobalt source. Also, the higher gama activity affords shorter irradiation time to j achieve accumulated doses. ' The desp rate four days after removal of a fuel assembly from the reactor is 1 x 10 rad /h. The fuel assemoly is 20 in. high. A 20-f t-long, 3-1/2-in.-diameter pipe, with one end capped, is used for air irradiation tests. The capped end is lowered into a 4-in. opening at the center of the fuel assembly. The open end, above water level, is covered with an 0-ring-sealed flange to which is attached a steel cable and an air outlet hose. The air inlet is-located at the bottom of the pipe. Test specimens are connected to the bottom of the cable and lowered into the radiation field. Also at the center of the fuel assembly is a stainless steel-clad cadmium tube used as a neutron absorber. This prevents contamination of the test specimens by induced radiation, gff cg/ f Evaluated 44 I. [ f/ggy . Approved bb 7 7U/1p 9pt/M - O
i, Manufacturer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division I Dak Ridge National Laboratory New Orleans, Louisiana Date: June 17, 1981 ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A6-2-1 Table.l. DBA solution composition, distilled water Reaoent Concentration Boric acid, H B03 3 0.28 M Sodium hydroxide, NaOH Required to adjust pH to 9.5 Table 2. DBA test conditions Temperature Pressure Time (*F) (psio) . Comments
,1 Start 150 Autoclave preheated.
0N^ 10 min 150-291 Solution injected at 260*F. 20 min 291 70 Pressure maintained by relief valve. 45 min 291-260 80 min 260 39 Pressure adjusted with N 2-120 min 260-220 180 min 220 20 210 min 220-160 21 h 160 5 10 d 125 2 Placed in fresh solution in constant temperature bath. End of test 1 Yb Nh h .? n ZiT2Z._ A"$d/M4 Appro.ed
$ T L3/1p gja)N e~.. .~. - , _ . :..;.. - a n _ _ _ w .
l i I Manufacturer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division
' ' Oak Ridge National Laboratory !
y New Orleans, Louisiana Date: June 17, 1981 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block 115/11/1201 DBA TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0922. ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A6-2-1 . Sample No. DBA chase Test results 8715 sp ray
- Coatings i'ntact, no defects all areas.
O
*!rradiated.
Evaluat d [fy/e / ', //-~ Approved 2 N '/ 4 8 . S
#/ 'd'A #
h 'MD/9 Spy 1y
- Y
- [NdY Y* ,5 g+,'; 4,[,,
E'
~
' a "h -
,. ,*f,Wo. .
. - - - . -.-axD ' '
-u-......._--
Manuf actu rer: Incerial , Analytical Chemistry Division
., Oak Ridge National Laboratory
;f New Orleans, Louisiana Date: June 17, 1981 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block 11/1201
**m
.; DBA TEST ORNL Haster Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0922. ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A6-2-1 . 4 Sample No. DBA phase Test results 8706 spray
- Coatings 16 tact, no defects all areas.
*lrradiated.
, Evaluated m M I Approved '. e '[
O Hu/9 9pp
, . e :.-m m ,u.m.n a. _ ,. ,,a,.,,, n
Manufacturer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division
- Oak Ridge National Laboratory i New Orleans, Louisiana Date: June 17, 1981 ,
l SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block 115/11/1201 ' l i DBA TEST I ORNL Haster Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0922. ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A6-2-1 . Samole No. DBA phase Test results 8703 sp ray
- Coatings intact, no defects after 28 h.
Blisters #8 few, side 4 at end of test. No other defects. OC
*lrradiated.
b
. Evaluated 2-d / /[
App ved I / . ,
& ' W 2 2 /rf /ta/ H 9
. ,* ($"[., te A
- e,k Q S eg h p,--- ,,. j4 [ (Ja%e gg*g;gg d,' h , j kW * } y,
Manufacturer: Imperial , Analytical Chemistry Division 1 Oak Ridge National Laboratory
/ New Orleans, Louisiana Date: June 17, 1981 ,
i SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block 115/11/1201
~
DBA TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 09L2. ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A6-2-1 . i f i Sample No. DBA phase Test results A-31 spray
- Coatings int'ct.,no a defects all areas.
A-36 spray
- Coatings intact, no defects all areas.
- Irradiated.
~
fogvfe/M Evalua'ted irja /,
, M. f.-
8 Approved h
- b
'M93pp 9/mW e m.... . . .mc m .mu. = _ __,m~ __ m.m.m _ c.. ..
- , - , . . , - . . - - . . - ~ - . . .
~'
. . .c. _ .
Manufacturer: Imoerial Analytical Chemistry Division g - Oak Ridge National Laboratory New Orleans, Louisiana Date: June 17, 1981 ( , L SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block 115/11/1201 RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0921; Bechtel Corporation Specification No. CP-951; ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A5-28-1 . Initial dose rate: 1.2 x 107 rad /h Test conducted in: x air water Samole No. Cumulative dose Test results A-31' 3.5 x 109 rad Coatings intact, no defects all areas. A-36 3.5 x 109 rad Coatings intact, no defects all areas. Y Evaluated //?:/,/ /
/*$-
Approved . . m g Hn/# 9mu i l i T' . -?; . , ~ ~~ 'rW TWRT.s.tl.s%n ne4'& sw ww n.:.u _ ip ;gn.,-,..; _, . _ g;&g ann..,,,, . .;,*',, % y+ ,muie s .
' ~
~ . . . -
~ .. '
Manufacturer: Imoerial Analytical Chemistry Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory si New Orleans, Louisiana Date: June 17, 1981 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block 115/11/1201
~
RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0921; Bechtel Corporation Specification No. CP-951; ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A5-26-1 . Initial dose rate: -1 x 107 rad /h Test conducted in: x air water Samole No. Cumulative dose Test results 8703 2 x 108 rad Coatings intact, no defects.
& V//8 fd f Evaluated 'sdf/
W/ Approved I. / . . Q 'ruly yapy r--w.mm.w=.=w:nnn, _. . x__., c,m. . . = .x . m +a..
~ -
Manufacturer: Imperial , Analytical Chemistry Division i Oak Ridge National Laboratory New Orleans, Lot.isiana Date: June 17, 1981 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Stee'l panel x Concrete block 11/1201 RADI ATION TOLERANCE TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual fiethod No. 2 0921; Bechtel Corporation Specification No. CP-951; ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A5-26-1 . Initial dose rate: 1 x 107 rad /h Test conducted in: x air water O Samole No. Cumulative dose Test results 8706 2 x 108 rad Coatings intact, no defects. fzd r/a/M Evaluated X<e/./L/_[,'-/ Affr/a/er Approved- [ s,/. [eb o Yi /1/3 M a W* *:N *.#* *'
=$'{%$* Y% A*SEiWN5W$T.5 $~* %%$'D NW&Y.W?Ws5he smew. '".,*N 5h "^kNv-sY ^%Ehk hE
~
i
- Manufacturer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division
. 's Oak Ridge National Laboratory j New Orleans, Louisiana Date: June 17, 1981 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block 115/11/1201 RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0921; Bechtel Corporation Specification No. CP-951; ORNL Log Book No. A9675 A5-26-1 .
Initial dose rate: 1 x 107 rad /h Test conducted in: x air water l t Samole No. Cumulative dose Test results 8715 2 x 108 rad Coatings intact, no defects. l N# M I Evaluated [ 4/ - ( [ Approved _ I_
-t .'- *
& %T$/1f 9ll8/8Y
- v. :me.wws,r.w. crn. w,..__, _.n... . x. x.7. ,a==,
---- . _ _ _ . a _- . . . .
t 4 OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY ortn&TED ev union CARBIDE CORPORATION hutit At DIYl310h e POST OP PICE 801 X OAK RIDGE. Trasaltlltt 37830 December 1,1981 Mr. Gerald E. Arnold Technical Representative Imperial Professional Coatings P. O. Box 29077 New Orleans, Louisiana 70189 f-
Dear Jerry:
Enclosed are ~ combined reports describing test results recently obtained on Imperial protective coat-f# ings. Your attention is called to the temperature-pressure anomalies of A9675, A10-8-1. If we can be of further assistance, please feel free to call on us. Sincerely.
. e 4 l> .5 +
L. T. Corbin, Section Head Analytical Chemistry Division LTC:dmw Enclosures 4/ \
//JA-6AA 9/a/n A"f edrA +
')r.t. 69
- 9/n///
O FmTN.W. .ii.v p.p;::.L 3.w.
. ia ,sm,wsyd gWW.h. , _ . ::. 5 ,g. ate. .6 @ G Z Z5iw. - 2
1
. l
- r t
g Manufacturer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division "N Oak Ridge National Laboratory New Orleans, Louisiana Date: October 29, 1981 REPORT OF IRRADIATION AND DBA TESTING The irradiation and design basis accident (DBA) tests are conducted, respectively, in accordance with Bechtel Corporation specifications CP-951 ' and CP-956 in Standard Specification Coatings for Nuclear Power Plants (or .! with modifications as noted in Table 2, DBA test conditions). The tests are i designed to meet specifications set in both ANSI report N 101.2-1972, Protective Coatings (Paints) for Light Water Nuclear Reactor Containment Facilities, and h 5.12-1974, Protective Coatings (Paints) for the Nuclear Indust ry. The DBA test spray solution and the test conditions are listed in Tables 1 and 2. After both the DBA and irradiation tests, coatings are examined for signs of chalking, blistering, cracking, peeling, delamination, and flaking, according to ASTM standards where applicable. All test panels are returned to the coating manufacturer. The irradiation tests are run using a spent fuel assedly, removed from the High-Flux Isotope Reactor at ORNL, as the source of radiation. These fuel assemblies are stored under 20 ft of demineralized water. The fuel is 93% enriched U-235 as U3 0g codined with aluminum. The spent fuel as-semblies are removed after each 23-megawatt-day period.. Irradiation is O); done using the gama energy from accumulated mixed fission products. This more readily simulates conditions around a reactor than does a cobalt source. Also, the higher gama activity affords shorter irradiation time to achieve accumulated doses. The dose rate four days after removal of a fuel assembly from the reactor is 1 x 108 rad /h. The fuel assembly is 20 in, high. A 20-f t-long, 3-1/2-in.-diameter pipe, with one end capped, is used for air irradiation tests. The capped end is lowered into a 4-in. opening at the center of the fuel asse21y. The open end, above water level, is covered with an 0-ring-sealed flange to which is attached a steel cable and an air outlet hose. The air inlet is located at the bottom of the pipe. Test specimens are connected to the bottom of the cable and lowered into the radiation field. Also at the center of the fuel assembly is a stainless steel-clad cadmium tube used as a neutron absorber. This prevents contamination of the test specimens by induced radiation. M Evaluated / R,[ / M Approved M1 O lof4ly9/n/1Y n w.m ..m x - - x. m - m m .v. .-wwww.n.m.m
' ^- '
u.. . - - i
. Manufacturer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division l 1 Oak Ridge National Laboratory i New Orleans, Louisiana Date: October 29, 1981 ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A10-19-1 Table 1. DBA solution co @ osition, distilled water Reacent Concentration I 1
Boric acid, H B03 3 2000 ppm ' Sodium hydroxide, NaOH Required to adjust pH to 9.5 s-Table 2. DBA test conditions Te m erature Pressure j Time (*F) (osig) Coments
. Start 168 - Autoclave preheated.
20 s 285 48 Solution added at 295'F. 5 min 285 48 Pressure maintained by relief valve. 5-7 min 285-267 48 Pressure adjusted with N2 ' ' l 13 min 267 48 i 13-53 min 267-215 48 Pressure adjusted with N 2+ 53-58 min 215-207 48-0 Pressure released at 0.15 psig/s. 58-167 min 207-150 0 2.8-27.8 h 150-135 0 End of first part of test. 8d 135 0 Specimens imersed in a constant-te@erature bath. End of test k f)f/pt/ Approved ,
/,& 4 Q Mupp 9pa/n v ., ~ ., n. a ~n .a. n. . n n . ~. . .. - ._.w. -
l s .
. .. 3 a- ,
~.: *
- _
~
Manufacturer: Imperial Ana1ytical Chemistry Division
.a Oak Ridge National Laboratory ,
-y New Orleans, Louisiana Date: October 29, 1981 -
ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A10-8-1 Table 1. DBA solution composition, distilled water Reagent Concentration Boric acid, H 3803 2000 ppm Sodium hydroxide, NaOH Required to adjust pH to 9.5 1 Table 2: DBA test conditions Tegerature Pressure Time (*F) (psig) Ceaunents Start 164 -- Autoclave preheated. O'" 20 s 285 48 Solution added at 290*F. 1.5 min 340 70 1.5-5 min 285 48 Pressure maintained by relief valve. 5-7 min 285-267 48 Pressure adjusted with N2~ 13 min 267 48 13-53 min 267-220 48 Pressure adjusted with N 2+ 53-58 min '220-210 48-0 Pressure released at 0.15 psig/s. 58-167 min 210-150 0 2.8-27.8 h 150-135 0 End of first part of test. 11 d 135 0 Specimens insnersed in a constant-tetyerature bath. End of test
- Gas that evolved from the specimens upon addition of the hot chemical solution resulted in a pressure and subsequent tegerature increase exceed-ing the specifications of the designed temperature-pressure curves.
hj$PkSk Eva1uated n ./ if [ #d Approved O r.t.x/9 9/mN
, _ . w ..u w n . _ _ . .a . - n _ _ .
t .- i I
' Manufacturer: Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division i
%N Oak Ridge National Laboratory -
New Orleans, Louisiana Date: October 29. 1981 I SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block 115/11/1201/1201 . RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0921; Bechtel Corporation Specification No. CP-951; ORNL Log Book No. A9675 A10-1-1 . Initial dose rate: 1.3 x 107 rad /h Test conducted in: x air water l 0 Sample No. Cumulative dose Test results A282 3 x 108 rad Coatings intact, no defects all areas. A284 1 x 109 rad Coatings intact, no defects all areas. P I i ( Evaluated 6/ // Approved / / . , y UW/i9/n/h' t 5 r.- f,s.+ .-.e . LIJ h > N ?'Ff/ N i f't vi;-s og ffdC,,,,,,, w j.G y J Q y' d Q & i ;, ._fy- g,gf, ; ]$,,4g'; ;. pg _ _ ,
~
- -a-- "^
9 - Manufacturer: _ Imperial Analytical Chemistry Division New Orleans, Louisiana Oak Ridge National Laboratory Date:__ October 29, 1981 _ SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION _ Steel panel x Concrete block 11S/11/1201/1201 RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No.orporation 2 0921; Bechtel C Specification No. CP-951; ORNL Log Book No. A9675 , _A10-2-1 Initial dose rate: 0.9 x 107 rad /h Test conducted in:_ x _ air _ yater Sample No. Cumulative dose Test results A79 3 x 108 rad A81 Coatings intact, no defects all areas. 1 x 109 rad Coatings intact, no defects all areas. M Evaluated en/ [ ; /, Approved / / (
/,
IU23/kr 9/NH . O ! n... ... - e _n. _ , . g -
~eng "
'g f *
. ... ,3,..
*
- t
. I i
2
, Manufacturer: Imoerial Analytical Chemistry Division j Oak Ridge National Laboratory i New Orleans, Louisiana Date: October 29. 1981 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block 115/11/1201/1201 j t
DBA TEST l ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0922. ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A10-8-1 . J-Samole No. DBA phase Test results A282 sp ray
- Coatings intact, no defects af ter one O day. Blisters, #4 few, sides A and B at end of test. No other defects.
A284 spray
- Coatings intact, no defects after one day. Single blister #4, sides A and B at end of test. No other defects.
*lrradiated.
4 J/)4&/sv Approved .
.- , .i i
$ W/9 9/@
- r. m n. w .s . c - 2. .re m - m m m.m.- _ , - ,.esm nusss
r b g- - - -
. r, , .
o
- b i, Manufacturer: Incerial Analytical Chemistry Division i
- / Oak Ridge National Laboratory New Orleans, Louisiana Date: October 29, 1981 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION Steel panel x Concrete block ;
1
~
115/11/1201/1201 l DBA TEST ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0922. ORNL Log Book No. A9675, A10-8-1 . Sample No. DBA chase Test results A79 spray
- Coatings intact, no defects after one day. Blisters, #4 few, sides B and C !
C3:?) at end of test. A81 spray
- Coatings intact, no defects after one day. Blisters, f4 few, sides B, C, and D at end of test.
- Irradiated.
9 Evaluated # 4, / /-
# g # # # e' Approved _ /- r 44 Z,'~
Q IUUpp 9/a/H
. x -.w-a wn=w.. -an.-o-a.-
m
I l
- m . _ . . _ . . .
g g. d
~y f -
.d l g ]l-TUSI SITE 2=t== " [
/ :r9 #$ .,
GTT / h AUGUST h/f AITENTION: J.T.MERRIIT/R.TOLSON JOB 2323
SUBJECT:
GIBBS & EILL PROCEDURE PRIOR TO PREPARING A NUCLEAR CONTAINMENT PAINT SPECIFICATION PRIOR TO PREPARING THE INITIAL VERSION OF THE SPECIFICATION, GIBBS & HILL JOB CHEMICAL ENGINEER DOES THE FOLLOWINGt
- 1. CONSULTS WITH TE GIBBS & HILL CORPORATE COATINGS SPECIALIST, WHO IS USUALLY A PRINCIPAL OR STAFF CHEMICAL ENGINEER. FOR COMANCE PEAK, K. FALK, THE COATINGS JOB ENGINEER CONSULTED WITH J. CHUPAK, WHO WAS TE GIBBS & HILL CORPORATE COATINGS SPECIALIST AND A STAFF CHEMICAL ENGINEER. THE GIBBS & HILL CORPORATE COATINGS SPECIALIST MAINTAINS HIS EXPERTISE BY:
A. MEETINGS AND TELEPHOE CONTACTS WITH VENDORS V B. MAINTAINING MEMBERSHIP IN AND ATTENDING UNCWC, NOW UCWC r (UTILITIES NUCLEAR COATING WORK COMMITTEE)L UNCWC U MEMBERS ARE NUCLEAR COATING. SPECIALISTS FROM A-E'S, UTILITIES, GOVERNMENT AND PRIVATE RESEARCH LABORATORIES, AND VENDORS. THE COMMITTEE HAS BAD MEETINGS ABOUT; TOUR TIMES PER YEAR FOR MORE TRAN 10 YEARS TO DISCUSS COMMON ' i PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS AND PRODUCT PERFORMANCE. )
, W. ,g ..M.- .
..........mc.
.*"**,-r. = **m;aph k " '. ' b b' D
~ .
, a a
;,,, .t.-
I
-s__ , weess.c== ,e - - _ -. - - - *===
i GTT-/O b
- C. EE EESSARL DIRECT C0mCT WIH UTILIH ED A-E COATINGS SPECIALISTS D. ATTENDING APPROPRIATE TECHNICAL MEETINGS RELATING TO COATINGS AND KEEPING UP WITH THE TECHNICAL LITERATURE E. IN SCME CASES, VISITING SITES HAVING A PARTICULAR COATINGS TECHNICAL PROBLEM.
- 2. CONTACTS VENDORS FOR PRODUCI DATA, INCLUDING DBA TEST REPORTS. '
- 3. REVIEWS VENDOR'3' DATA', INCLUDING DBA TEST REPORTS. SEE ATTACHMENT.
N
- 4. DISCUSSES WITH THE CLIENT (TEXAS UTILITIEis GENERATING COMPANY)
VENDOR PERFORMANCE AND POTENTIAL VENDORS TO BE NAMED IN THE
- SPECIFICATION.
R.E. /B.SCHLESINGER MTA_EBSM_ p s
,7. .
u s
& M Y.$ _ , , ,* ** h ^ *. ' ' ' **' % y ,,**,. = h
- 2 ~
^
~
.** 'l1*
MWt h %
',._n'
.h* s e,' *
{. ,,7 'f
. :- -- - + ~ ~ -
. p.._ .
- .* ~. . -,
..y;,. 9y2. ., '
,..,g ;s
- - _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - __--_____a
. m-,.__--.. - .- - - _ - . - -~_ . . . . _ . . _ _
i 6 l
; ATTACHMENTTOGTT-[f OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORIES AND COATINGS VENDORS DBA AND OTHER TEST RESULTS - REVIEWED PRIOR TO ISSUE OF GIBBS & HILL SPECIFICATION 2323-AS-31, " PROTECTIVE COATINGS *,
APRIL 15, 1977; FINAL SIGNOFF JUNE 7, 1977 CARBOLINE CCMPANY
- 1. REPORT OF DBA TESTING OF COATING SYSTEMS PROM CARBOLINE, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, - ANALYTICAL CREMISTRY DIV. ORNL, DICEMBER5 . , 1975.
- 2. SCMMARY REPORT - SR-49, FINAL REPORT 'NENTY MONTES",
CARBOLINE CCMPANY, APRIL 11, 1975. s-' 3. NUCLEAR COATINGS TESTING DATA - CARBOLINE COMPANY, MAY 1977. 'TEIS DOCUMENT INCLUDES
- A. CARBO EINC 11
SUMMARY
SHEET B. CARBO ZINC ll/ CARBOLINE 191 BB SCMMARY SHEET C. CARBOLINE 191 HB (2 COATS)
SUMMARY
SHEET i D. LOCA TEST PANEL DOCUMENTATION RECORDS F
- 4. REPORT OF IRRADIATION, DECONTAMINATION, AND DBA TESTING,
& [
CARBOLINE, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI - ANOLYTICAL CHEMISTRY '. DIV. ORNL, JUNE 22, 1976
- I
(- r O < L2
> =l 5s v.caz. .~ .~.sars. a +.- 4
{f$:c.t. g ;,. . - -
..: *pu: ., nrvy
... ;f:rv*.W$WhyW*".:(..p?.'cWTF n:.
%s;;,x e.n?.: . .. , .a .- e a.' G-i NP,*-7 v~~ **
i I e' 5. RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST RESULTS - CARBO ZINC 11, ' ANALYTICAL CBSMI$TRY DIVISION, ORNL, JUNE 16, 1976 6. RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST RESULTS - CARBO IINC 11 (2. 0-2. 5 MILS), ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY DIV. ORNL, AUGUST 11, 1976
- 7. RADIATION TOLERhWCE TEST RESULTS - CARBO ZINC 11 (6.0 - 6.5 MILS) , ANALYTICAL CEMISTRY DIV. ORNL, AUGUST 11, 1976 S. RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST RESULTS - CZll/191 HB, ANA.LYTICAL CHEMISTRY DIV. ORNL, DECEMBER 17, 1976
- 9. SAME AS B POR 195/191 HB, DECEMBER 17, 1976
- 10. SAME AS 8 FOR 195-305, DECEMBER 17, 1976.
- 11. CARBOLINE NUCLEAR COATINGS CUIDE, .SECTION 3, TABLE I -
- SD'. MARY OF LOCA TIST'RESULTS, AUGUST 1975
- 12. REPORT OF IRRADIATION, DECONTAMINATION, AND DBA TESTING, CARBOLINE, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY DIV., ORNL, DECEMBER 17, 1976
- 13. - .
LABORATORY TEST REPORT - TESTING PROJECT - 01308, FINAL REPORT - 30 DAYS ' CARBOLINE COMPANY, OCTOBER 15, 1974
- 14. LABORATORY TEST REPORT - TESTING PROJECT 993,
" CARBOLINE COMPANY, JCNE: 5, 1970 *
- 15. LABORA'N)RY TEST REPORT - TESTING PROJECT 4-997 CARBOLINE, COMPANY, JUNE ~5, 1970 '
h 1
- L; 6
[! I.
- 5. . .. . . a .. ,. - x: -
j-
.~ -ngw; 9.w.m.;
*.~'*:.** .qg
. -:: r
.r,
. ? e ~~
t ('
- 16. LABORATORY TEST -REPORT - TESTING PROJECT 01445, FINAL s
REPORT, 28 HOURS, CARBOLINE COMPANY, 3tstE 24,1976 A oos 6 SOUTHERN IMPERIAL COATINGL CORP. (SICC)
- 1. SICC MARCB 29, 1977 LETIER TO GIBBS & HILL SUBJECT -
SUMMARY
OF IMPERIAL NUCLEAR SYSTEMS QUALIFICATION TEST DATA 2. RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST RESULTS - SOUTHERN IMPERIAL 6/1201, ANALYTICAL CYEMISTRY DIV. ORNL, SEPTEMBER 15, 1976 3. DECONTAMINATION TEST RESULTS, SOUTHERN IMPERIAL, 1203, 1201 AND 555, SEPTEMBER 15, 1976 4. RADIATION TOLERANCE TEST RESULTS - SOUTHERN IMPERIAL 10/11S/11/1201, ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY DIV. ORNL, MAY 31, 1977. w
>9 O :
g.
.S .I, 4
- a s,mme
. . . ha ok g,*'
' ' . . * ' ' . - " W $**STP
'. '+ ' 't M N+'
j;agt, .
's . *
.a 4
E e w c ' - .so + , i . ,s h .. . ar .r m l s 4crj*C
. m we: &....ww,'
= r S. w..Hill.
m Prec ._ = w~ T,%i'.. m'%, _ms.
+- . -
' - - -*c tY6r 45*4 4 ' 2=f ~* GI .,t
-p
-l- . .IC.*g'EF-9 ;s- , pp , , , , , ,
.5 sp'.;
4 y_ ,.
,- ,.+$;t
_ , m.3 ** - . -y s* 7 .. 1 R E Herseerrer % sentc=5et 29 197 ' ,.? g
. 3 .
e :. . C6H - Jobsite fu -<<h'.
.' ~t ' , . . .I bM F ' J. J Moorheade ,r . 'f -
,,y
- ,.-;h, C&H - Jobsite y .
- COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECIF.IO FIAT!'.,9 r 'a 1980-82 2300 MW I N!; TALI.AT .*/ ?
CONTAIf0ENT LINER PAINTIN", FILE 0521* ,' M /f
/
- During the dry film thicknest testing o' the ILeactor No. I containment liner prime coat from elevstion 60S' 0" to i )N alevation 608' 0". several areas of low fiin builds were l
, .; . detected. It is proposed to recost these aream as outlined 4 e
k b' in the attached TLX-7142 to achieve the 3.0 minimus mili '
-5
%.- thickness. The portions to be recoated will be cleaned and
" L' solvent wiped using Carboline solvent prior to recoating. 4F
~ P.
Adjacent areas that presently satisfy the mill thickness /f'
%, . , requiressent will be screened of f se that the recoating, . s. -h
'=
.N operations will not adversely affw.c their mill thickness. .y .,,
7 -c . , L p- Your concurrence with the recocznended procedure as described '.'~I. is requaoted. -:A .:L'. 2
~
i ii
- ?* '. % iv e.
I ,',. h . -~
-? .
' - -;; -, ..:e . .,-s 4
-[- dhf[/ '~'a-'j W Moorhead ,5
'Q.e -
Resident Engineer g 9 {.
- - - * ~ ~ ~ *- ". i. . c JJM.0BJ:te f -
c; H. C. St.hmidt L L' 'I uv . 3H b"' _
~ y ..
E P V 4;:: 7.' 5. C. H. Catchall IL .. . ,. E' , ;._e_:.a p 1) . . .u
'V ','. ~_" j>,.*. ._ f f. ,3 * *C - * ; j * -f.~ . - & .y.G H. C. Dod6 1L . ,,
- 3 i dW ~ L. T. Van As4rongen IL ~
~
.Q i"y _ .,*7 *y.r.-% % *._** : hI N f. . . ...
.a, . . = c. J~. - a< ,
e m -
.. g w..<.s'. _ ,. ,
lp I r..h K . . c .. ; e .- 3,g. g . .. . ., wm., .q 4,.gg.g Wyy' % k' C%%%.*Cf 4
'.. & n QyQ '
y ;
.+~~+-.,-
.Q e n., . . aa
~ n .~" ' ' '
- Id, .- .
- n. . . .
. . . .n d **7 JIC.
f O t - k k
=* ***.'-#,g9ee **a ey *
, * * ',4.>*..' h ,, . y Ab7 #t'.
5-' 2 . W . j m(.i s . .s , p
. . e. c _ .; .. -
- - . .w. ~ : .. ,. - * .
1 s
- _ . . . . - e f.l$=.j":
' l. J..
.m
_ .. %.g s. . 7 j i eg% ,.~ g. . ~
,, YI , '.
l . ., . . , es
- dp
\ m'jle:: '
.. '$p*5.f p ,9
- l O. '
C' y* i ! -r ** (..'
-r
,r . .
i
, r- " '
- t j ;-
i ,. CM. '
.. TUSCD BRSE '_ ,
e - 8
'.Se 3 -
l S
...CT3stR 4 19 74
' T 913904440 *
' ._; STT= e.
i * ' ~
#4 W .
.3J.M03 M EAD -
JOS 3383 . I
.3 j
D NWutM7^
.4p*=g5GC' LINER PAINTING
.. 4 '.~ f _ W m MhtA%d .
. T. A ASPEC.2323- M AftMC 5t $
RttUI R ED to AN t rJ E Tit t > if t. Tf!C<SESS 5- 1 A. CW1 AT109 SM:29 Fun MtNIw tra TM I cot ' ' r WI IN-SE M 4TDIrf EN CI 9 EEH st.')V F. 1 EST S FJ n Ca'iF J N r.'? "' l l
-W.'B'MIt.3.' 101 4 EWE 1 L ' Wr CAMU2L I N E UTILI L ED CRf 71 L'*.Ts ! C ' J E b M t
x.v:~ :a. .: ! TS 0 P' CA3 MIL L NE 'S TES TO ARC Br! .V C C)4 F1 MM TTft! Pr O0%M s. . 954 5 45E W3.IIAS437. ACC8FT L ESS N AN 3 MIL MINIMIM TWI C4?J LO.~ StvCE
, WOM 7Qp.LISS TMAN .i MIL C3AT140 t$ 19 L F F EC T.
- l
.', i
%CERTT F! CAtt 09 Vit.L P E R tst". RED FJ P E 4CI CA5F !)
. e .,2 Tat.ty41DW8 - W AAAAS ARE T3 P E 50., VE4y1 Et A 4 D P r.C J A T!* C.
InfaK MCORA1E/K FJLM Ig
,v.c g u -- . ;
c'm g gggg = g , y + W J , FR M g rtt,i,; > x ,u
' s.
-;. e .. .
..r I iYr,,>e..,e e,r .,
E.' ,
M j E) Cub /C [ Vy ' .5 -ly , 4 ;3 i? ~:<%. ,
F. * :
# +
J.,. 6, ... sE n w rus...;, y y . -
~.
r .. < r- . .
' - ' *1.4,<, *. w i. .
e g. a~* . .
;4.F'
= ,; .
. ~ .
;, *; .~
4'
..'.e. .>
WB . ' p** l, k. . - po ?f,. j,f *. t; es . . . e fr' , **** * * . . ._..,,y *
- m. . ..
.p : i
# .. s
.#4 " ,
a .k: . *$v : s,. 9 ; n
- v !. * .c ,' J q '.g $ .. gen a
.. -.r
t.
s I r.
.' M. A..*C~
. 3 . .
. I
's ,'
- s s.N Y ,
,r . . '
- tr* , *. . )
' I
- h. *
.au N *~
, se , e*-
T's te e.
~ - - - . . .
L d,pyf 4Ae 6
', ,. ,' ""t, ,, :' *
% ~
- VV *
.,.,. r '==,;} kr}f . F D .74.* T.f;*!*3** % W6'*;,,. Y !n4'&b ' A .'v~p * * ,* .' .*--. :.A:'
.A* '**i'
s
' Page 1 of 4 ;
CPP-13'335 TEXAS UTILITIES SERVICES INC. UAeM OTTICE MEMOR ANDUM E' cl.n Re . Team. Aucust 15. 1983 To Distribution-PAINTING subsect MINUTES OF MEETING The subject of the meeting was to define design philosophy, design criteria, exchange infonnation and address problem . areas at Comanche Peak. There are three basic reasons for applying protective coat-ings inside containment. A) Protect against corrosion .
'B)- Provide an easily decontaminable surface C) Minimize debris generation that may impair opera-tion of the Emergency Core Cooling and containment spray systems.
Nuclear industry practice defines coatings system inside containment as nuclear safety related. Standards used
\
throughout the industry are as follows.
- 1) Regulatory Guide 1.54, Quality Assurance Require-ment for Protective Coatings applied to Water Cooled huclear Power Plants.
- 2) ANSI N101.2 Protective Coatings (Paints) for Light Water Nuclear Reactor Containment Facilities.
- 3) ANSI N101.4 Quality Assurance for Protective Coat-ings applied to Nuclear Facilities
- 4) ANSI N5.12, Protective Coatings (Paints) for the Nuclear Industry.
Per the Final Safety Analysis Report, the coatings systens at Comanche Peak used inside containment which are quallified to ANIS N101.2 will not create any solid debris due to radio-lytic and chemical decomposition at Design Base Accident (DBA) conditions. Coating systems must be durable to prevent the contribution of materials of significant size that would t. cause clogging of the containment recirculation sumps screen > (1/8 inch mesh screen on sumps). s I
* . kg ga d% M 4p g a g -
s M , , v.c ;a: - _m-m , ,, j
,, g , . ,
l,;
. Page z l
i Thru discussion it was detemined that CPSES is cor.sistant with the remainder of the nuclear industry with respect to
, design criteria.
- The industry and the NRC realize that it is not feasible nor practical to have 100t oualified coatings inside con-tainment. As a general rule unoualified coatings are ident-ified and cuantified on a case by case basis for impact on recirculation sumps.
Quantified imounts of unqualified coatings have been ident-ified by other A/E's in their Safety Analysis Report as specific square footage and discussing debris generated as insignificant. This amount has been determined by Ebasco for Waterford #3 as approximately 14,000 souare feet. The quantity,was re-Quested by the site for engineering acceptance (i.e. an as built case). The NRC acknowledged this amount but did not , accept or reject it. Engineering acceptance of ouantities of unqualified coating has been accepted by engineering judgement or analysis. Ebasco presented two doc ments NUREG-0897 Containment Emer-gency Sump Perfomance and Regulatory Guide 1.82, Sumps for Emergency Core Cooling and Containment Spray Systems. These are methods recognized by the NRC that could provide a basis for engineering analysis on quantities of unqualified coat-ings. Calculations are complex and include many assumptions. From the general discussion it was' evident the comon prac-tice is to achieve as high a quantity of qualified coatings as possible. Acceptance of unqualified coatings is strictly on a case by case basis only. Declassification of large amounts of areas to be coated is not accepted by A/E's or utilities and if done, problems may arise with the NRC. - Large cuantities of unqualified coatings could possibly cause operational maintenance problems. DISCUSSIONS - ATTACHMENT B 0F AGENDA Items
- 1) Eliminate the requirement for coating code nebers (QPf's) for installed miscellaneous steel, supports and attach-ments. F Resolution - Item closed - Working agreement between craft anc QC.
- 2) Inspections be performed or limited to no closer than
" arms length":
Resolution - Item closed - Criteria placed into inspection proteoures. E pW;f.g6.D*T~RP: sfMW m v;:~: <m - ; Oy.q.:* :wn -';"n:m,,V., eye %2M wc- [.,gr- , ,..%..<, ,
, , ,_,,g ; g . y, p ,_
- . . -_ ~ . _ ___ .. _ _ , _ _ _
Page 3 i
- 3) Primer and topcoat system which can be brushed applied. !
Resolution - Procedures are to be established to allow the use of Carboline 191 primer. Oliver B. Cannon & Son Inc. is to write the touch up and repair procedure. 4(A) Eliminate destructive testing of all supports and mis- ., cellaneous steel: Resolution: Adhesion of supports and miscellaneous steel has been suspended due to high rate , t of confidence level. ' See Resolution 4(B) for clarification on primer thickness verification by Tooke Tests. 4(S) Eliminate the requirement for primer and topcoat thick- > ness limitations on supports equipment and miscellaneous steel. Resolution - Thicknesses of primer and topcoat will re-Quire verification of the inspection agency. The present specified range of primer thick-ness will be broadened to dry film thickness from 2.0-6.0 mil average with spotchecks of 1.5-7.0 allowable on primer. Total system
,4 will range from 6.0-13.0 average with spot-checks of 15.0 allowable.
51 Eliminate the use of NCR's to denote unsat conditions: Closed - Unsatisf actory coatings are noted by unsat re-port.
- 6) Utilize only one color in containment rather than the established color scheme:
Resolution - DCA-18,330 issued to allow the use of " white" as an alternate color for any color specified. (
- 7) Utilize the same coating (topcoat) for concrete coatings, embeded plates and base plates:
Resolution - Topcoating primed steel with 1201 topcoat is acceptable. 0.B. Cannon Inc. is to write procedures for this activity. Due to possible ;
's difficulties arising from the use of 1201 over,
- Phenoline/CZ11 system a consnittee was esta- .
blished consisting of Keith Falk Tom Kelly and Mark Wells to establish the practicality ' of mixing systems. I. 3 8) Obtain air supply drier tank to supplement current systems. c. Resolution: Items are procured as required. , l l . tp' r h
'- ?"' *.* #d**. * ' " .
.A'f.ij*: ~. M h* .&, v> .;.: - ~
19;'..o : ??3 s I _ - . , _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Page 4 l Remove QC acceptance stickers from supports to complete w
,[9) total paint system.
- 10) Delete the req'uirement for 28 day cure of grout prior to coating: ,
Resolution - Procedures will be revised to reflect acceptability of coating grouted base plates 3 or equipment, limited to 3 square feet of exposed grout, may be coated af ter a 48 hour cure.
- 11) Relax present visual inspection requirement of abandoned anchor bolts.
Resolution - DCA-13,388 Rev. 5 and DCA-17,475 Rev. I renders coatings on anchor bolts N.N.S.. ,
- 12) Relax the requirement of weld areas from SSPC '5P10 to SSPC-SP6.
Resolution: DCA will be written to allow surface pre-paration of weld areas to be perforined with tools like, 3M clean-n-strip or flapper wheels, and obtain surface cleanliness equal to cleanliness of SSPC-SP6 surface. The are-covered by this preparation will be 1
.; inch each side of the weld.
New Items
- 1) Delete 1 mil minimum profile requirement.
Resolution: Procedures will be revised to delete the one mil minimum profile requirement for SSPC-SP-3 surface preparation. The degree of clean 11-ness will be stated and an example for tools utilized will be given, however, the tools e utilized will not be limited to the example. -
- 2) CPPE and G & H is to establish exemption list of coatings .-
and quantify unqualified coated surface. Resolution of all items should be in a maximum time frame of two weeks. g(1 h fjf & Ff /S.V & y R.M. Kissinger/
- Project Civil Engineer i.
(IMF F Q RMK/CRH/MW/sgr cc: Attendees u J.T. Merritt - Assistant Project General Manager ?
. J. Firtel - EBASCO ,
p N. f, , -- . ,-- ; y ,
, u .t;,_g,yp, ,, ,
7
- j. ,
(G ,. . ATTENDEE 5
- 1. Mike McBay - Manager of Engineering (TUSI)
- 2. C.R. Hooton - Civil Supervisor (TUSI)
- 3. R.M. Kissinger - Project Civil Engineer (TUSI)
- 4. David H. Wade - Licensing (TUSI)
- 5. Bob Dacko - Licensing (TUSI) .
- 6. 0.B. Jones - Civil Engineer (TUSI) ,
- 7. B.J. Murray - Construction Manager (TUSI) '.
- 8. Mark Wells - Civil Engineering (B & R)
- 9. Thomas Kelly - Corrision Engineer (EBASCO)
- 10. Robert C. Iotti - Applied Physics (EBASCO)
- 11. Tom Brandt - TUGC0 QA (EBASCO)
- 12. Jack Norris - Vice President (0.B. Cannon) ((
- 13. Joesph Lipinsky - QA Director (0.B. Cannon)
- 14. Robert Roth - President (0.B. Cannon)
- 15. D.C. Purdy - Advanced Tech. (G & H) ,
L
- 16. Keith Falk - Chemical (G & H) kC
- 17. S.M. Marano - Project Engineer (G & H)
- 18. M.A. Vivirito - Vice President: Power Engineering (G & H) s L--
g.... I, . kY L+ N. g O ,
, r.
3-
, e..
2.".
* 'L~ *
] A. 'p,Uys M: 'f *; my'.f e'gv ge a 'a ,gy. gy . . . _ , . , - {
. -y ,--
g ', , y ,,
"d Y.J* , ,
- t. .
, s,3 ;_ . . .
< t j .
AGENDA' B-9 83 MEETING t. PROTECT!vE COATING INSIDE REACTOR BUILDING
- 1) Design Philosophy ,.
~
Percentage declassification (hon Q) inside containment e,
- 2) Industry Standards b.
. ,~
Regulatory Guide 1.54 7-F" ANSI N 101.2 , ANSI N 101.4 e P ANSI N 5.12
- c. .
- 3) Coating Systems at Comanche Peak Y (See Attachment C) .P. ,
l' s.
- 4) Specific Questions (See Attactinent B) b
.n ,
C.
+
e , I.'l'. o L
~5 w'% 0 u.
F' .
.1 Cs 1,
'3' I
i b!_" q.y l l M,s l rp ry> y , n: , .w= -= .,.:w.sv.9.~.- ....;..~+,...
.. , t . - . , .,n ;. 2.g .,c- . . . rny. ...
l
. ;, .- _ c,.- ,
. p Q. ,
- CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES
. CCP30 CCP30A
) . Surface Preparation . SSPC-SP10 SSPC-SP10 Primer Carbonzine 11 Dimetcote 6 (Carboline) (Ameron)
Top Coat Phenoline 305 Phenoline 305 (Carboline) (Carboline) Specification 2323-AS-31 2323-AS-31 Primer Thickness 2-C mil Avg. 2-5 mil Avg. 1.5 to 5.5 spotcheck 1.5 to 5.5 spot check Total System Thickness 7-11 mil Avg. 7-11 mil Avg. 11.5 max spot check 11.5 max spot check DBA Tested to Yes Yes ANSI N101.2 L l SSPC-SP10 Steel surface preparation to near white metal blast with minimum of 1 mil surface profile per manufac-turer. r Purpose Coating systems provided to facilitate the control of contamination as well as to protect surfaces from corrosion. Design Criteria Per the FSAR, the coating systems used inside con-tainments which are qualified to ANSI N101.2 will not create any solid debris due to radiolytic and chemical decomposition at DBA Condition!, Coating systems must be durable to prevent the contribution of materials of significant size that would cause the clogging of the containment recirculation sumps , screen (1/8 in, mesh screen on sumps). '- t l [ p I '.e* L .',
*M.'
I L. P' {'. e U-l ATTACHMENT A , l r; i y: g%; ~. .3.. s, -x , , v .m.,,-+ ...;.
- w .y.s. - , 7 p.ge .. ,. y..# c ::g,ggg.<-.
l
._ . ,.;- .;, . g , ,, . g; .,g I
*' ATT ACH".ENT 11 s
The following listed items are requested by Painting Personnel in order to support Dec. '83 Fuel Load. q (1) Eliminate the requirement for coating code numbers (OP t's) for installed miscellaneous steel, supports and attachments. Resolution: OP numbers are now only required for items not installed in the building. Installed items will be documented by location or permanent I.D. numbers. . (2) Inspections be performed or limited to no closer than " arms L length". Resolution: Quality Control Procedures have been revised to reflect this criteria. (3) Primer and topcoat system which can be brush applied. r Resolution: Present topcoat may, at the option of craf t, be brush applied. Various " touch up systems" are to., be reviewed by engineering. Suggestions are Car-boline 191 Primer or Carboline 305 Primer both ; with the existing Carboline 305 topcoat. These N systems have DBA/LOCA Testing already performed. l' Procedures will be revised to include an alternate touch up system. Engineering to resolve week ending 8/13/83 - Procedure following week 8/20/83. (4) ( A) Eliminate destructive testing of all supports and miscellaneous r steel. Resolution: Adhesion testing for backfit purposes has been sus- i oended due to high rate of acceptance. Tooke Testing is still being performed until a resolution of the requirement for primer thickness is establish-ed. (B) Eliminate the requirement for primer & topcoat thickness limita-tions on supports equipment and miscellaneous steel. Resolution: Engineerirg is studing the feasibility of voiding this criteria. Presently testing is underway to i broaden the thickness range of primer up to 12 mil. See CPPA-31,575. ,
.(5) Eliminate the use of NCR's to denote unsat conditions: k.
Resolution: Conditions of coatings which are denoted as unsatis-factory and can be repaired per existing procedures, are repaired per those procedures without the genera- 35 p tion of an NCR. h-(6) Utilize only one color in containment rather than establish color b-scheme: 6-e. Resolution: DCA-18,330 issued to allow the use of " white" as an f:f, alternate color for any color specified. j i E.c y
.g..,
*0 *O. [r 9e [ ypy,. , , , , , , ,
y -ipyg g g y,,;. % ,, . g .
. . . .. g, - .-2.c- .
==- -~ ,, - ~ - ~ . . ~ . . . . . ._ ,
d I
, +
9 Utili:e the same coating (topcoat) for Concrete coatings, embed. (7) ded plates and base plates: There will be Resolution: Engineering is reviewing this request. no problem of topcoating primed steel with the top-coat utilized for concrete; however, the question arises of topcoating existing finish coated steel with the specified concrete topcoats and later repairs. There would be a mixing of coating systems which would be very difficult to control during construction Engineer-application and later operation maintenance. ing to resolve week ending 8/13/83. Ottain air supply drier tank to supplement current systems. (S) Resolution: Items are being procured as required. Remove Q.C. acceptance stickers from supports to complete total . (9) paint system. This item to be completed by 8/8/83. Resolution: Delete the requirement of 28 day cure of grout and pour back areas. (10) For the most part this criteria may remain; however, Resolution: engineering is presently looking at alternatives.Presentiy ab concrete patched per CEl-20 has a cure time of 48 hrs. Grout under base plates may become included in this
. criteria; however, pour backs and larger concrete areas probably will remain 28 days without the use of some product like Nutec 10 as a sealer. Engineering to re-solve week ending 8/13/83.
(11) Relax the pesent, visual inspection recuirement, of abandonedSee DCA-1 anchor bolts. Resolution: rendering anchor bolt coatings N.N.S. ; Relax requirement of surface preparation for weld areas in contain-(12) ment from SSPC-SP10 to SSPC SP6. Resolution: Engineering will review and resolve week ending 8/13/83. V k p ... r h.; y li':
. m y . n. e. . . . . . : .~ w . .
+.: . - -
. .. . . u. .
i MACHf%N f ' TSG-6305 TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPAhT i OFFICE MEMOR ANDUM ; O' To p. G. Tolson cien no.e. Texas sentomber 4. 1004
}
Subject Cp5ES Review DCA's for Protective Coatines File: 5277 The following is an explanation and the thought process for the justification of the listed DCA's as requested by the NRC TRT (Coatings) DCA NO REV. DISCUSSION - 12145 0 Procedural acceptance criteria for primer thick-ness was 2.0 to 4.5 mils, with spot checks be-tween 1.5 to 5.5 mils. This DCA applied only to the backfit inspection program. This pro-gram randomly sampled an already existing sys-tem. Normal thickness of protective coatings , is based on magnetic gauge readings on 3 spots in which the average of the 3 spots make up spot che:k reading. In the backfit program, a TOOKE gauge was used to obtain the spot check reading by the examination of one spot versus 3. Due to this sampling procedure, the procedural acceptance criteria for the spot checks on DFT measurement on primer was increased to 5.5 mils.
'i Carboline Test Report #01377 provides accept-able back up data for this decision.
12145 1 Revision 1 was issued to broaden the range on the lower end for spot check inspection during the backfit. Carboline Test Reports #01377 and 01406 provides acceptable back up data for this decision. 12145 2 Revision 2 was issued to allow the repair of coating areas which were inspected during the back-fit without requiring any additional engineering evaluation. The repair was to be done in accordance with the governing site procedures and specification using the DBA qualified system. 12145 3 Revision 3 issued as a result of a site meeting held on 8/9/83 involving persons representing site construction; site engineering; EBASCO, Corrosion Engineer; 0.B. Cannon, Protective Coatings Applica-tor; Gibbs & Hill, Inc., A-E of the specification for CPSES. Ranges specified were based on the recommended allowable deviations from the specified DFT of each coat as found in " Manual of Coating Work for Light-Water Nuclear Power Plant Primary 7 Containment and Other Safety Related Facilities" '
- M as prepared by the ASTM Subcommittee D01.43 on Coatings for Power Generation Facilities. p (Ref: CPP-13,338, GTN-67178)
L g y ;. . r . c. 5,
...gog ;a ppi;; 4y k pp'R',g.ypp.y' yagqqgh,. , y.. . gij.3g :,.
._ _ . - . 3- ._
. ., _ . . _ . . .. m _ = . _ . . . . . . ~ .
Page 2 !
. l ' I DCA NO. REV. DISCUSSION o
12374 0 DCA issued to allow the continuation of the same finish coat used on concrete to be used on exposed face of Richmond inserts. Imperial Technical Re-port #553-81 and ORNL Log Book No. A9675 provides acceotable backup data for the decision. 12374 1 Revision I allowed concrete coating system to be applied over the primed surface of the Richmond Insert when using a skim coat of Nutec 11 or 115. Imperial Technical Report #553-81 provides acceptable backup data for this decision. With the issuance of Revision 2 of specification 2323-AS-31, the items covered by DCA 12374 were added to the exemption log, item #30, as indeter-minate since the application and inspection re-Quirements as directed by the DCA were to be perfomed in accordance with the Non-Q Specifi-cation 2323-AS-30. 13156 0 thru 5 These series of revisions of the DCA were to docu-ment the engineering acceptance of nonconfoming conditions as identified during the backfit in-spection program in which the inspection identified conditions outside the limits of DCA 12145, Revision 0 thru 2. Carboline Test Reports #01377 and 01406-provide acceptable backuo data for these decisions. 13156 6 DCA no longer required since the identified non-confoming conditions would meet the requirements as specified in DCA 12145, Rev. 3. 17142 0 DCA issued to provide application parameters for the recoating of the crane with Phenoline 305. - 17142 1 and 2 Revisions recuired due to editorial errors. 17142 3 Revision issued to establish the application and insoection requirements of the recoat to be in accordance with the Non-Q Specification 2323-AS-30. This application was added to the protective coating exemption log as item #22 due to the application and inspection and no supporting DBA Test oualifying the final coating system. p. If we may be of further assistance, please advise. ,-
.55 R. M. Kissinger' _
Rf1K:K,!: pew Lead Civil / Structural Engineer - TNE . b
'}cc: ARMS J. T. Merritt L:
M. Wells f.i b, t.
.% * "m,F
. s ,a.~ d[d [g ' . N ,y E . jA .1- g e f ,, h,1m *8, 8"a e.y ,, .'e y < erf gy.r 2 - q .- v._... .._ ; ._x
_ g.p. .:,,, . .
(.=
\ }.' - OVER STEEL StESTRATES -
)! '!
4 SURIACC PREP. PRIMER SEAL COAT FINISH COAT TEST DATA / REMARKS A. SSPC-SP-1 followed Carboline (optional) Carboline SR-ll6 by SSPC-SP-10 Carbolinc 11 Carboline Phenoline 305 SR-149 1 to 3 mils profile 1.5 to 5.5 mils Phenoline 305 Total system thick- Carb Peport 4-993 , Approx. I mil ness: 7.0 to 11.5 mils 4 997 l l B. SSPC-SP-1 followed Carboline (Optional) Carboline SR-149 l by SSPC-SP-10 Carbolinc II Carboline Phenoline 305 Carb Peport 4-993 ' I mil minimum profile 1.5 to 7.0 mils Phenoline 305 Total system thick- 4-997 (no maximum) Approx. I mil ness: Less than 15 mils C. SSPC-SP-1 followed Ameron (Optional) Carboline Test Peport 01684 by SSPC-SP-10 Dimetcote 6 Carholine Phenoline 305 Date 8/11/78 1 mil minimum profile 1.5 to 1.0 mils Phenoline 305 Total system thick- SSPC-SP-5 l (no maximum) Approx. I mil ness: less than 15 mils Note: Ameron wrote Note: (a) All film thickness based on ASTM 001.43, Chapter 10. Table 10-1. (b) Many additional test reports lend support j to decision to change procedures. : I qy- - , . . s i l I ' fki R&-a l
. 6
, [ $'. .tn r-
' ;5 .' i
[ -[.- l
. t t
1 I l
m .- -_. _ _ . - _ . . _ . . - ._. . _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ . - _ . . . _ ._. _ _ _ - . __ ._ . _ , . . . . . _ . . _ _ . . .._. . _ _.. i 4 , re si : f 4 - OVER CONCRETE SUBSTRATES -- ; SURFACE PREP, SURFACER TOUCH-UP FINISH TEST DATA / REMARKS 1 Water blast at approx. Imperial 115 Imperial 11 Imperial 1201 ' Imperial report:(I75515I2) ; l D. 3 to 16 mils
, 4000 pst 10 to 35 mils 3 to 20 mils 549-81 ,
or . 495-81 l 167-77 j ! W-s ter/ sandblast 246-78-G *- ' j or Acid etch 346-79-G i All Imperial . tests over j *- or , I Sandblast blasted surface- other i Then steam clean TSP surface prep based on f
- wash, or detergent' wash adhesion test. (our file $ r
!' Power tools may also be i used. ! i 0 4 i 1* 3 i
.I t-
" L
+
J i
=* - emme,___
'g y - p ~'l 9 " 6 -=~vr-
(' w- , __ _ i i
O
. ._- -~ ~ -. .- - . - . . -
o ' - __ - _ _ __ ._ ____c- __ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . _
=
MEMO l GHF-424 Gibbe 8 Hill. Inc. I
/ larGshigas.og5 GhE41. CON $73'JC704$ (
New Yoon g, t - r- R. E. Hersperger De~ February 2, 1976
^. G&H - New York JOB NO. 35-1195 hor 6Tf1AN # ECEIVE p_ J. J. Moorhead 6 W /u M FEB 0 31976 i 3 G&H - Jobsite d '
Ao[ ECEIVEb COMA! Q' C .N
~*
- )
j ..
- v. - ., ..;y I'
. .t..A
[ 1:
-J RI - ..
t$ L.. . , . . __2'E ' - =l ' The initial stages of painting will cormence in the near future and the centractor has requested clarification in this area. See attached BRF-1875 and BRF-2028 which de-scribe questions which have arisen. It is requested thist you review the subject letters and advise of the preper interpretation or action which will allow painting to proceed in the most beneficial manner. Please advise if further input is needed from this office. W Moorne ad /
. pyg, gj Resident Engineer 4 D0D0 l JJM:MRM:te cc': R. W. Caudle 6L L L. Van Amerongen lL CI."JRISS l H. C. Dodd IL' C. H. Gatchell IL MIUO El' aussor.:NI l _
roictsri l _ sn .'.n l , ARMS INDEXED .s
'. 4' -
00N:
\, A., l
\T MSC: ,'
' ' I Dh 1'0- / FROM: I .'
I r.ise . ise g p
~
,- ,---n .-g..,,
.f*, k
- h h.h i;* N, f. 'h .
^
.. .c_'J. ': * *a* .'*"....,u-*
" w' n'_
=$ N*I l W .=[h ; #*l
.' ..f.b.WN,"S.YY'0
_ .. . , gr. .- 5 f ff/l*...;: . %' '$ Q )
-2. . A ,;, -;-~ :co;e
- w. p,.:n- r .m .= ~
.; W 6 % & y& g@.%-av v .- wW. i%s .. . :MwAv L u ris # si g M Ti & &c m m mn~. =.=x- w>~ f;&%e----
->:4. n: <.,w% =%-
, _ . . . . _ . _ . . _ _. ._. . 2. --
1/21/76 35-1195 g Brown &Roo inc. Post office eax 1001,cien nose, Texas 7eo43 xar Cggy b January 21 1970
%m
./4ff BRF-2028 Sy l PS2 Mr.' t."H'."ht'chel Texas Utilities Services, 4
004 [0-ic9hcp f[bd.Nyg & e -"% P. O. Box 1002 ! !7 C- C 777225)*, Glen Rose, Texas 76043 I M. ilf r a. 4-3%.; '
, 's , f Texas Utilities Services, ME!? D'"',' [ Dty-Comanche Peak Steam Electric S$ETon-- D'S !' C;"- ;
1980-82 2300 MW Installation ~ W C ! Painting '
,/ ,g / !c3
Dear Mr. Gatchell:
#'T f I.gy As discussed in the January 12 site progress review meeting, the exis .. ,
Gibbs & Hill specifications covering painting do not indicate what painting systems will be considered safety related - with the exception of the contain-ment liners. In order to facilitate the preparation of procedures and qualify potential I vendors, Brown & Root needs to know if painting of the following safety related items will be considered safety related.
- 1. Miscellaneous Steel
- 2. Structural Steel
- 3. Electrical and Mechanical Equipment
- 4. Piping
- 5. Pipe Restraints
- 6. Doors & Frames
- 7. Cor.: rete & Masonry Walls Also,ipTease inform if you anticipate painting being considered safety related on any items other than those listed above.
Very truly yours, BPSd R OT, INC f$ 0 H. C. Dodd, Jr. Project Manager HCD cc:
/ eke QA'f/ytM
/'
L. A. Ashley (lL)
-8 Vg;P P. L. Bussolini (1L) 4 5 / f j .
R. M. Caudie (6L) f"pd p ff, M. M. Fitch (lL) pp/gtd/ i C. H. Gatchell (0) l L. D. Pyeatt (1L) F[Ygf l .:
-ww wa +p -
-+
_pg- i-- emem em..
,. e y y : w .w:..x :=..t. w x.,z,. n . ..-: m r. v e.;. .r.a--
.. * *A YY'!1 *
;{ . i h Y .. f E-' !. '~O*
_' Y ? f* * .
.x
, <=,ss. n . __
- q. , . - ' *
- ~ s 12/17/75
. 35-1195 4"..
7 n .
',1 TCf5N, COL,EO. Post Office Box 1001, Glen Rose, Texas 76043 . .
M.qn: W'l .48# .
December 17, 1975 BRF-1875
- Mr. C. H. Gatchell Texas Utilities Services, 'Inc.
P. O. Box 1002
- Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Texas Utilities Services, Inc. '
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station . .. 1980-82 2300 MW Installation ' 2323-AS-30 Painting
Dear Mr. Gatchell:
After reviewing a preliminary issue of Gibbs & Hill painting specification 2323-AS-30, it was noted that apoendix "A" does not list Carboline as an tecept-able manufacturer of finish paint for stn:ctural and riscellaneous steel. This creates a possible conflict bet.-:cen specifications 55-163. 55-17 and AS-30. Specifications 55-168 and 55-17 both list Carboline as acceptable manufacturers-of shop coat materials; also, specification SS-16A does not eliminate the possibility of using Carboline for the snop coat. Since secticn 9.0 b of AS-30 does not permit using different manufacturers for shop and finish coats, this could create future problees for the paint systems if Carboline is not added as an acceptable manufaccurer of finish coating materials. . Upon reviewing all' specifications covering painting =aterials (55-14, SS-16A. 55-16B, 55-17), it appears Carboline can be core universally used than any cther manufacturer of shop coats. For this reason, it would appear that many advantages' could be realized by per::itting the use of Carboline for finish coating systems too. This would create the need for fewer manufacturers throughout the jobsite and should' eliminate many future problems. .. .
~
Please inform of your decision regardin'g this suggestion.
- Very truly yours, .
D ~B WM & w ,INC k , H. C. Dodd, Jr. k,, Project Manager HCD/DGS/ eke ,, cc: . L. A. Ashley (ll) .
, R. W. Caudle (6L)
P. L. Bussolini (lL)
- M. M. Fitch (iL)
C. H. Gatenell (0) L. D. Pyeatt (IL)
\
.v~ . : g n. .. . - - . : x . ~ ~ , w c.x.a. n :- .: . ~ . . . .
sizet WM ewse j .~ . r:_ . - s 4..d.=-. ..:4Wm4.w .ic046#fhd.MyFAAM+o .+ww '. 1, . . . . 01717 026 Gibbs S Mill. Inc.
......... ..... ... ..~.v.wcro..
JOB NO. 35-1195 e...cr o. 6 . .r. =.io n ECEIVE ,,,,, 760-4450 R kl5197 ECEIVE March 8, 1976 IIST. DATE , GTN-7303 DCO3 l- .. BC' TIN Texas Utilities Generating Cc=pany c-t-
- -a+es.e3 2001 Bryan Tower ifcCLINTCCI .
Dallas, Texas 75201 an33 ;ry; W3C Attention: Mr. R. W. Caudle, Project Manager - Nuclear Plants TIL;r.3 s Gentlemen: TEXAS TII.ITIES GCTERATING CCMPANY S . CCMANC E PEAK STEAM E:.ECTRIC STATICN l l 1980 2300 .W INSTALIATICN G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 05 277 PROTEC'"TVE CCA"'"P- - l REF: 1. 'GHF-424 f-. i
- 2. Qni-6763 N
$ Reference i forwarded copies of letters UsRF-2028)and 3RF-1875 g 1 which raised painting concerns requiring clarificatien.
. n 4 % By copy of this letter we are advising the contractor that
,' ,- there are two architectural specifications covering paint
- i. coatings, namely 2323-AS-3 0 and 232 3-AS-31. Specification h- $
ta g AS-30, wnereas
" Painting", is a ncn-safety related specification specifica tion AS-31, " Protective Coating" deals with painting systems which are censidered safety related.
e- Specifica tion AS-31 which was transmitted (Reference 2) for
% TUSI ce==ents requires, under S cepe of Work, tha t finish schedule l
9' m
; %) on drawin's be referred to for areas to receive protective has Ci E
l b $5 0; .n a tA g 2 ce et e
~
.. h k 5 '$ $ %hi',T s,i.s.;;f4:tyh :. h L.~
^
+; b ' b . ._ .
.Y . . . . .
-s.Y . .. ,
< n . _ _ .
w
..s-
'~
. 3
.; m.
^ ~1
,a
,I GTN-7303 March 8 0 ./
,19,7 7 027 Texas Utilities Generating Ccmpany coa ting. Thus the centractor's concern regarding require =ents for painting of miscellanecus safety related items will be eliminated by the- provisiens of specification AS-31.
With regard to use of Carboline we concur with the contractor's rationale as stated in BPE-lS75 and specification AS-30 will be revised to include Carboline Cc=pany as an acceptable paint manufacturer. - Very truly yours, - GIBBS & HILL, Inc. 0 f I
=Y ^
R.)E.Hersperger yy O RIH-NIH-NLG:jmc 1 Original + 5 Ccpies Project Manager cc: C. H. Gatchell (TUSI Site) 2L ' L. A. Ashley (B&R Ecusten) lL
-JH. C. Dodd (B&R Site) 2L
'J. J. Moorhead (G&H Site) lL j
4 l i V i i 1
a
!Q r* *TQT'_*;%':. c : v. .:.x y . m yr-~ cs n. r 3 g. u p , ,s.. , , , _ , ,
Qg. _,y x ); 'q
. ~~~,T M ;' . ; g.
- ,=5fp$4s 9. W 9?f M S a~f k J. Q f f ,3j ?~' 9 y & ( Q
\} g~. [ glig;- 1 _ . -[:,,k TEXAS UTILITIES SERVICES INC. 200 aRv43 rowrR . DAL.L AS. TE.M AS 75201 TCH-2239 July 30, 1976
- . JOB NO. 351195 --
ECEIVE E D Ist. DCE 4 Mr. R. E. HerspergerWm AUG - 51976 . DC? L Gibbs & Hill, Inc. :j j 3y;;3 i 393 Seventh Avenue ., c New York, New York 20061 ECEIVE y.nr.nss_ ih f.gG '.:7E's !- _B;lF4;L4 -
....... j COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATICN I
PAINT _EE~EE3-FILE NO. 05226 \
~
l
~
- a 1i
Dear Mr. Hersperger:
{ This letter is to advise you that Southern I=perial Coatings has been included on the bid list for the paint specification 2323-AS-30 and the protective coating specification 2323-AS-31. We request that you de-termine this =anufacturer's product names and nu=bers that correlate to the Type of Paint per Appendix A in both 2323-AS-30 and 2323-AS-31. If we can provide any additional infor=ation, please advise. Very truly yours, b 8/fff;t i 1 Robert W. Caudie M Project Manager-Nuclear Plants RWC/ RA:dib cc: R. E. Hersperger, 0, 3c C. H. Gatchell, 2c H. C. Dodd, 2c L. A. Ashley, le B. G. Bradley, le J. C. Kuykendall, 1c e-e- .%
'***' WP--d _
.y,y y >. e q 7;.9,-,-.,;; .- m ... _ ,. ._ , u .
lk
. :c.wcN9 - chpMi;g;-dr.gfgA;,y- g,wg-4g 3 .-;,gg _
. . , . f
- d. e85. - y
* :m- 1
~
. *4 v.
I
-7 L.XAS UTILITIES SERVICES IE
. s3 . .
OFrtCL MEMOR ANLUM 1 +- R & +? 9 i Ma, Tna e To_W. .btdell__ 3
? -
SuW _ . . _ _ - . f u nche Peak.Stean_tIcetr h N . .a . . . - . I
"' Faint j
n File No. [
- 5271 d
r j N. T. - i l '
- Please a4iv Brown & Root that the Exxon Cher. ira'. Ca., tbv TNTM C C er ny. Inc., and Stone % rd, tr.c. have ret t! reces-J" s.s ry prcr. , site testing requirements for nuc! car ;. r . * . ;is e w- l
[, costings a, att to be added to the bad list for Ai '.. , .? l j 6 Rect shis
- include these coM anies in their picH a I
5 qualifIrat- survey. l, 5 . , '1 1 % I. j 7.'. - w d.%% . v-. . _ _ > s t', l l H. C. Se r1di
- , a.d4 A
?,- .
8 HCS : ski
.,'.,f,
.f. - .s .
- t. . .
1 ..
. F. .
i gg 3..
,r, s
~
I 9'- ..
-.:a 7.:fu .. . o ry . .-
.C l- ,.
g
, g
-um.
--~s._
d, mye*
.e .
t ,,
,1 1
N:.
,m . ~
;.: b f
p - = e z w, S .,
-?.
d s 'n *
! 0 ,
O b 9 I t t ce- { i i i
,' ' . :R 'e v' , ,
- 1 l'
i l I
-- . ~-n.._-. _ _ _ .. _,
h
_____ -_ - - -- - _- . - - - - . - - - - . ~ . _. _ _ _ _ . - - - - . - - k
=
t[, l{fl.[
. m _.
-wg .
.u .. --. ~~. :
..J m
1 f_2 . .
- s. 4 - }.Q'* - '; .'
gg y
'$ f .'.*'s* *
- Telepheae Ceaveesetion Receed
**l .
osie: _lo-e-76 *
" i' B, 048, RIH, AMR/SS-14, REMcG, NLC, KF, AXJ, ho M0_hs N ' QJg JJno n
, ,-- 1 of 2 pages -
J1 ?? , 1 j
.I.l <. C&H K. Palk/J. Chupak og
., Cell by: cs ac
< s. W'.I
- b. -
1 i LW k $(' . Cerbolire *i
- A n g f,,, by- .E Wierre v -es rs of
., ec. w l m .
~~ I 1 <f ,-
mas crittries crsm?ING COMPA?!Y - C&H 2323A
'j N.
Ce n t r a c t H e: i F m etua ren con *mtuwnser t.Iwrn i
*1,. $wbject discussed:
I j; . s ..
.,: 1. Use of Thir Film Epoxy Coat To Seal Ptteer i .C, .
r a
,p 2. Requests from Field QA f
? tC. ' r, \
.5 (, y .
( u.:;.. w --- ,,---------------------------------------- :
- v. .
[.[, } c,. summany or oiscus.ica. occis4ons ano comentucats. d. G .,. " 1. Regarding Carboline's 1-14-76 letter on using a thin file of Phenoline 305 epoxy coating to seal primer coating until
' .ig .'~
final coat can be affected, Carbolir.e was asked whether such a three-coa, system had been tested in accordance with h*[ '*
] ANSI 201.2. Carboline said this system had notasbeer. testec. l Carboline agrer i to test the system for TUSI follows:
f'.
$ 1) use various surface preparations on stce1 test panels, s N' 2) apply 3-5 mils Carborine 11 primer, 3) apply appros . .
l
':- 1 mil Phenoline 305, 4) artificially age to simulata 6-12
( %: - months, 5) topcoat with 3-5 mils Phenol 19e 305, and 6) M, subject panels to ANSI 101.2 tests. Test will take at Icast 30 days.
.u . .
- 2. a) Reportr. and test data, which certify Carbolir.c products , i
'E meet ANSI 101.2 requirement including coating thtekness and surface preparations used, will be transmitted to the
(.. : jobsite. 3 N;.4s - b) Temperature, humidity, and contaminant control during coat'79 application are specifically defined on Application f' ' 2 - Instructions which accompany each shipment of products. c However, the following can generally be applied: Primer: Carborine 11-35-120 r/0-954 humidity Topcoat Phenoline 30$-50-120 r/0-854 humidity
'p.
e
- Thorough solvent vipe will usually eliminate mote
.. contaminants.
~
[. Myj IN0tgt ~~~j -
~u 7 e ye.i x - . i,_u.f
.~ WQ77nM/
u.
'5, p.assaae Cl.: -
[? *' T0MAC m, c - 7.,'j .(1ice [ r-!gQ; /p[.-- t i i i \ 3 5. M 95.x o.' . Op st 21 ;?75
.- _ _ . _ _ ~ ..
~^
' - , ~ - - - _ _ _
*w ' . gipw.:
j&en.x kq.:. w- x.:',sS$&.W
- e. ... . - - m~n 4 'a%%=54wk4swv.+. n -:. .~m. ~ugury :kY+%: 'm ' v: ^
"# Ki*-? ' s **
- k:~ O =: ~9 *>:-
e 55
.=
,.@$ y, .
M E M'O . I
- sQ GHF-989 Gibbe S Hill. Inc.
14 a~omias. oisic~eas. co~swucreas y .,.m ~ v. ~ 7,. C. H. Catchell A tober 20, 1976
-$ 3 TUST - Jobsite *
[ $
'4
..; JIVE r. <
\~
'B & R DCC DIST.
,, . 5.; 1 h g J. J. Moorhead #'I - "
g/ Ag 3 C&H - Jobsite EO ' htDREES_l/N
) COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION .B_@30'
'4 1
1980-82 2300 MW INSTALLATION SPECIFICATION 2323-SS-14 WELLER
- .M CONTAINMENT LINER MCO M_ }
y S MINUTES OF MEETING PAINTING L g // I/NI 1 FILE 05214 gg l/%1
- . l C N/ \ /W '
Forwarded herewith are minutes of the following =eetine 1/ 9 I 1 PLACE: CPSES Jobsite DATE: October 15, l Z p ATTENDANCE: i i TUSI TUGC0 G&H B&R CAR 30LINE M. McBay D. Deviney D. Fellinger W. Childress C. Rushing R. Fleck J. Dodd R. Tegt= eyer J. Moorhead D. Hansford T. Howard 31 W. McFarland G. McGee S. Miller M. Todd 2 PURPOSE: Review with Carboline representatives a list of out-standing questions as presented in a jobsite meeting on October 12, 1976. (Ref. BRF-3703) y
SUMMARY
OF DISCUSSIONS: G&H noted that Carboline's position on the various open items 2 as discussed herein must be formally presented in writing. ~
- 1. Need to have wider thickness range on the prits. coat. No tolerance is allowed Applicator. (Define use of 3-5 mils.)
Carboline feels that sufficient information is avail'hble to justify the following tolerances: G r.. . ii. / sj
. + cwnmv . w .m : - e. > ; . - ~
-e
' Q,Z @ @ y^ 3/$d4 4 d MNI' m % '.$;'42:14
, i 21'Q 3 g ym. m :. m n ,.- m y ww-hi. grg],1- gj.=gg n z,::,M, C ( %e .
t<
.g ~.--
J g GHF-989 October 20, 1976 a J: Page 2 a
.~
= A) The average of 3 readings on one spot shall be con-h 4.;;
sidered acceptable if the range is between 2.0 and 6.0 mils with any single reading as high as 8.0 mils.
+
d; B) The average of 5 spot readings with!n an area of 100 square feet, and as defined in (A) above, will be
- 1 acceptable, if the range is between 2.5 and 5.0 mils.
- 2. Need to have Insoector Thickness Gage Readings accepted without .5 mil thickness removed from readings due to tes-
, ing of sandblasted metal prior to application of primer with the same magnetic thickness gage that is used to te 3 the primed surface. Nace T-o3F sheet says this is not t recommended procedure.
- Carboline's position is that, as long as consistency is maintained once either option is accepted, There is no established preference. It was stated that the wider thick-ness ranges noted in item 1 above, if approved, would elim-inate this concern.
- 3. Need clarification of major and minor runs and sags both from the Engineer and Manufacturer. (Reference ANSI 101.4) i It is Carboline's opinion that a definition of " Major" and
~
" Minor" regarding runs and sags would be extremely difficult to develop - as a general rule, if a run or sag is visibly identified it must be removed and/or repaired. The guide-lines normally applied are:
A) A run or sag may be repaired by abrasion, removing the primer down within specified mil thickness range, pro-
, vided that good continuity exists after the repair.
I B) If the run or sag can be flaked to bare metal, or if after attempting a repair the resultant surface does not conform to established requirements, sandblasting to bare metr.1 is necessary. G&H stated that this would appear consistent with ANSI N101.4, Section 6.7.2.1. B&R noted that a revision to their procedure to allow brushing of runs should eliminate the major concern regard-ing runs or sags that would require sandblasting to substrate. (Note: Brushing is only acceptable if the area in question covers a maximum of 144 square inches.) 1
mm ' _ &en u a. w fi.- k.N w Mm 3iX:-u g 'is&wQwzQ wn w~ mm
--l,.-
M nWr&~c N W%
- .p.:' Es f__5 w$ .4 @e* $_N -
Ss;emas. wr+f & d % . w M _%q
,_ m q
- ax
'.)
J . .. w g d
.a GHF-989
/f October 20, 1976
,a Page 3 a
.g i
4 4. Need clarification of acceotable repair procedure that (High
- m. is acceptable to both the Engineer and Manufacturer.
and Low build, etc.)
?
.s
^ 'd Carboline's position is as follows:
c A) For areas below minimum mil thickness an additional coat, thinned 507. and applied to a properly cleaned and prepared surface, is acceptable. i B) For areas where the mil thickness exceeds the maximum allowable, the coating must be removed completely by sandblasting. It was stressed that Carboline must furnish specific and comprehensive substantiating data to the Engineer to justi-fy the addition of an extra coat to low mil thickness areas.
- 5. Need to have clarification from Manufacturer on mil thick-
,' nesses pertaining to " peaks" and " valleys" of blast-cleaned surfaces. (Blast Profile) i See item 1; no additional discussion undertaken at this time.
- 6. Need to clarify distance from edges of areas inspected pertinent to mil thickness gage manufacturer recot=:: ended.
Zor=co Electronics says no closer than 1 inch. Q.C. Inspector states as long as both points of gage are contacted to the surface. This question will be handled by B&R QA. No discussion undertaken at this time.
- 7. Need touch-up procedure detailed that is acceptable to both Engineer and Manufacturer.
B&R to develop repair and touch-up procedures with Carboline's assistance.
- 8. Need to have inspector tests taken in more than 5 areas on 100 s.f. using only 3 spot checks as basis for average.
(Take more reading, in lieu, of minimum). Provided minimum requirements are met, the Contractor can establish additional criteria. 1 i _ - . __ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ ~ _ . - e
- ._____________m_ ____..m. ___ _ _ _ . - _ _ . . ._ ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ ,,_.
n m.~;.
- , ge:>g WM: M$MpMyNC[-1T.4SMt
- -nze,wwe, ys.gy.grw.n...v$6"%g w. . $M13F r:,:.,.. M . =.:a.--+
'Qf M hy .. .M[-g .m m. g fu_ y M-~.y A .
. n'A :
4
.y:n "y.
h GHF-989 '
$? October 20, 1976 Page 4
.w
-g t'
-?
-d 9. Need to have more than 4 - 3 point spot checks of areas g- where edges are predominantly taken to be used for aver-iJe aging thickness for acceptance or rejection of coating.
See item 8.
- 10. Definition of "small area" relative to repair of low-milage.
3 Carboline stated that a definition of small areas has no bearing as it applies to low mil thickness if recoating {J ' is done by spraying. If recoating is accomplished by brushing, the maximum shall be defined as 144 square _' inches. N i On the subject of weld preparation, Carboline had the following comments: A) It is not recommended that sharp edges and/or corners be painted. All welds should be continuous and s=coth without defects with edges rounded (1/8" radius). B) Weld splatter is not acceptable. 11 a
!: 4 W r Moorhead /
Resident Engineer JJM:DAF:te
- cc: H. C. Schmidt 6L R. E. Hersperger IL 4 L. T. Van Amerongen IL H. C. Dodd IL*
P. M. Milam lL l a
l 9 1" , . . . . . . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ . . AREA COOC 314 . eaa.,ooo
,. , .p,..q..,.-.... .. . . .
** [p - - .t ___ _ _ _ _ , , i __ s hI ) caeLa CAR 8cCo.stLouis carboleine
=. I w .
s PROTECTIVE COATI N G S rop commossoN n ssisT ANct a w ATrnrmoor No e rinc emotecTioN
- nooriNo 350 MANLEY IN DU sTRI AL COURT S T. L O U I S , M O. 63144
' November 16, 1976 4
4 Gibbs & Hill, Inc. g 393 Seventh Avenue [hW h New York, New York 10001 Fil j h{
#<Ff S Attention: e- M"
& m REMc.C~
M
SUBJECT:
November 10 Telex to Brown & Root . s . y
REFERENCE:
Co=anche Peak Steam Electric Station Containment No. 1 Painting Qd]M) ,I[aN RE}lt.b U g 4 g f Gentlemen: pC,DE N ty R Enclosed are Carboline Laboratory Test, Reports 4-993 and 01308 documenting the excellent LOCA performance of two coats of
\ Phenoline 305 Finish over Carbo Zine 11 when tested to at least a ANSI N101.2-1972 PWR curve. Specifically, Report 4-993 deals f.M }
with repairability per ANSI N101.2-1972, i.e. overcoating finish adjacent to repaired area, where two full coats are evaluated. I Report 01308 documents performance of Carbo Zine 11/1 mist coat
}, Phenoline 305 Finish /1 full coat Phenoline 305 Finish. Order g of application, i.e. thin coat first or last, has no effect on performance, although overall film thickness may have an effect.
.Q Eowever, the telex recc= mends maintaining the specified dry film thickness range.
q- very truly yours, h, Roger J. Tegtmeyer h Nuclear Specialist r i RJT:rp i
) Enclosures /As stated ;'
W p-g % cc: Mr. Don Sutton, Brown & Root, Inc., P.O. Box 1001, Glen Rose, Tx. 76043 i s RECElVED l h
; NOV 171976
.- ' 9. s - T i
f~ 1 .f
'f ;' GIDBS to HILL, lee. .. ,
h \.,,.,, , l i CARBOLINE COMPANY e 350 HANLEY INDUSTRI AL court e ST. Louts. MIS 5ouRI 63144 g l b*
. ,. . ~ - se m- ~ s..
s79. 7,. 5 . ~ . . . - 7 ..,.: _: c . _m. .,-m . , .2. g wag,,gy,
. - ..a.; g.w y _. g g-.a; %., y .
E
~
s ' . .,
} v- %
. r , fg -
.% 55 LABORATORY TEST REPOR October 15. 1974 TESTING PROJECT: 01308 -
Final Report: 30 Days l
SUBJECT:
LOCA evaluation tests on sample coatings from the Midland con
- ment liner plate.
REFERENCE:
Mr. R. L. Castleberry, Mr. William Currlin. Bechtel: Consumers Power Company. Midland Plant. Job #7220. File #C-110: Mr. James R. Lopata. Carboline Company: Carboline Testing Project: 01~55 i PURPOSE: Loss of Coolant Accident testing of panels coated with Carbo Zine 11. Carbo Zine 11/Phenoline 305 Finish (mist coat) and Carbo Zine 11/Phenoline 305 Finish (full coat), all being samples of the Midland containment liner plate applied coatings, when subjected to the "DBA Environmental Test Curve' for the Midland Plants, Units 1 and 2. .,..-
?
CONCLUSIONS: At.this time it can be concluded that the Carbo Zine 11/ Phenoline 305 Finish panels (both mist and full coats) are exhibiting an acceptable / excellent performance after exposure T . to the complete 30 day test when evaluated according to the " I ANSI N101.2-1972. Section 4.5 guidelines for examining exposed test specimens. Please refer to "Reaulta". . OBSERVATIONS: The untopcoated Carbo Zine 11 Primer is exhibiting an acceptable performance after being subjected to the 30 day exposure. PROCEDURE: A. Test Coupons 2 3/4" x 6' x 1/4" sandblasted steel Source: Plate A-C111-38 B. Systems Tested Dry Film Thickness
- 1. le Carbo Zine 11 Please refer to 'Results' p
- 2. le Carbo Zine 11 le Phenoline 305 Finish p (Mist Coat)
C bO,( V n From the Carboline Research & Development Labort, tory
) '
p Th . ...*,,i..i 4... w e .w .4 6. ,n,. ,4 . . . .. .w. 6. .. . , u.. i.4, .. H . .. .
. . .e.......y 4. ... .,.. ,u.a. Km
{c ,.boIine]
- P g
L=r n,.,3,gp.-w ;. -n:n.: - - :. .- . ,
, - ~ ya-. a: y;,;g_,.,. .;;;:i % :. w < c = g s ic.s W=y h p V. . . . , . -
;- . i .. : .:. ;, :-stc .- .an. - ..w:ba=-
LABORATORY TEST REPORT
' [ October 15, 1974/Page 2 TESTING PROJECT: 01308 Final Reoort: 30 Davs -
PROCEDURE: (Continued) ,
- 3. Ic Carbo Zine 11 Ic Phenoline 305 Finish (Mist Coat)
. Ic Phenoline 305 Finish C. ; Cure Schedule -
Carbo Zine 11 - 72 hours at 68'F and 45% Relative Humidity ( Phenoline 305 Finish (Mist Coat) - 116 hours at 85'F and , 32% Relative Humidity F Phenoline 305 Finish - 24+ hours at 80*F and 70% Relative Humidity Final Cure, All Systems - Two Months at ambient . 3' conditions. D. Exposure DBA Environmental Test for Liner Plate Coatings, Midland Plant Units 1 and 2. Bechtel Job Reference No. 7220. Time-temperature pressure criteria dated November 23, 1973.
- 1. Water Chemistrv Demineralized water test solution containing:
Boric Acid - 13,000 ppm Sodium Thiosulfate - 18,000 ppm ,
- pH adjusted to 9.5 with Reagent Grade Sodium Hydroxide ;;-
. ;s .
- 2. Time-Temocrature-Pressure Profile h E
This test began at atmospheric pressure and was kept at saturation pressure
- throughout the esmplete cycle.
L V F m O.4e From the Carboline Research & Development Laboratory [ N } V R U Ti.. enha 6 I 4.. 5, i .h.d i . ,, .a d .u .. ,. *. b.., .t ha i.4,.. H.. .,,
.. . ... .# . neu, i . ,i . ., ... n.4.
(car *boIirie), k=-
?!
n..-...- $5 g,n g.. m ,~ .v. ~ : w .
. . .-w, ..w .; c_, ,. w . n.
. n.a. g _ m g_ .9 ,a, g t wn.3:
h LABORATORY TEST REPORT N - October 15, 1974/Page 3 TESTING PROJECT: 01308 , Final Reeert: 30 Davs PROCEDURE: (Continued,) D. Excesure (Continued) Total Time Laese Temocrature Pressure
- Initial Ambient -
0.1 Second 316*F 70 psig 25' Minutes 316*F 70 psig 4 Hours 280*F 45 psig - 1 Day 240*F 20 psig 30 Days ** 200*F 10 psig g
**The test coupons were evaluated after the initial 24 hours of exposure to the above profile for development of an interim report. They were then returned
' to the chamber for completion of the test.
All test coupons were partially immersed into the solution inside the test chamber,' , and scribed down to the steel substrate before being exposed. ,
- s COATING .
APPLICATION: Substrate: Carbon Steel, Plate A-C111-38, blasted to a white metal finish (SSPC-SP-5), 2 to 3 mil profile. Edges were not rounded. Carbo Zine 11: 6/28/74 - Date of Application b Batch # (Base): 4D5616
- Batch # (Powder): F-4-74-3 (
Phenoline 305 Finish (Mist Coat): 7/1/74 - Date of Application f Batch # (Base): 4B1890 .. Batch # (Catalyst): 401714 Phenoline 305 Finish: 7/9/74 - Date of Application U Batch # (Base): 4B1890 ,.. Batch # (Catalyst): 4C1714 f U
~
Please refer to " Cure Schedule' for detailed cures on all fr systems applied. [. p: s 3 V,
.C : From the Carboline Research 8 Development Laboratory r'
( ) f m e Th..whosui4...# ,.6.h.4s. ti-
,n,. 4.u .. ,h.6....#.- u i.4,..H.- . r
.. a .s .u,=y i . c ., 6.,4 6 4.
(car =tzo1Irie), !$ C.
+,
l5 LyQR' --.-. -
..-n.:
-~ y , g ys;,y.p.,~;p y *3 ;p.cgynap:s KHz g ~, .-; -
-a . . ';~ . - p-ip.&ft~ ww;gry,a:+:z.2, s.w c:a.twe r '. - ~-
_ . _ _ .. _ j LABORATORY TEST REPORT !,
.~ .a s
"I October 15, 1974/Page 4 TESTING PROJECT: 01308 ,
Final Reoort: 30 Davs . GRADING . PROCEDURE: The test coupons were evaluated for performance in the follow-ing areas:
- 1. Material flaking off ,
. 2. Dehmmation between coats and/or. peeling
- 3. Blistering of the topccat 4.; Chalking of tl.e coating
- 5. Excessive cracking Grading procedures specified in Report N101.2-1972 of the American National Standards Institute-Protective Coatings for Light Water Nuclear Reactor Contain-ment Facilities:
4.5 Methods of EvWnine and Evaluatine the Exoosed Test Specimens The dynamic 'and/or static elevated temperature pressure and irradiation test panels shall be evaluated within 2 hours and again after 2 weeks after removal from the test chamber for the following surface defects: flaking, delam-x ination and/or peeling, blistering, and chalking. Defects listed in Subsections 4.5.1 through 4.5.4 shall be dealt with as follows: 4.5.1 Flaking. ASTM D772. Evaluating Degree of Resistance to Flaking (Scaling) of Exterior Paints. Part 21 American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa. 19103. Flaking shall.not be permitted. 4.5.2 Delamination and/or Peeling. Delamination and/or peeling shall not be permitted. 4.5.3 Blistering. Blistering shall be limited to a few, intact blisters Size No. 4. ASTM D714, Standard Method of Evaluating Degree of Blistering of Paints, Part 21. American ~, Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa. 19103. l The numlaer and the size of blisters shall be recorded. 4.5.4 Chalking. ASTM D659, Standard Method of Evaluating I'c l Degree of Resistance to Chalking of Exterior Paints, Part 21, y American Society of Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa. . 6
- 19103. Heavy chalking shall not be permitted. , y.
L
' N.:
r. 1 From the Carboline Research & Development Laboratory h J Q '
] [.
G*
.ha i .I d. s,,,i.h.d i .a d ...w . i. *. bm .8 .* ha -l de. H.~.v.'.
.Th.
. m, . .e . .....y . . ,6..a ., ici. 4.
(car boiIne), --
~-
y ;. .e ' _z _.&
= -
'e '****t**,,'
. * *['. s r **l r **r m,-
. ~ . ~ . . . :. . - . . = , a . ,=
a
. t LABORATORY TEST REPORT October 15,1974/Page 5 TESTING PROJECT: 01308 Final Reoert: 30 Davs GRADING PROCEDURE: (Continued)
Any' other changes in coating properties which are not also associated with the separation, or the release, of coating from the substrate shall not be a cause for rejection. (December,1973) j ANSI N101.2-1972 Criteria (As interpreted by Carboline) Maximum Decree of Failure Allowable Flaking ASTM D772 10 (None) Delamination or Peeling None Blister Size Blister Density
- Blistering ASTM D714-56
' #2 None -
- NOTE: A blister is ng #4 Few
#6 Medium ,
intact when it has resulted in coating being separated #8 Medium-Dense from the test coupon. Chalking ASTM 'D659 8 (I.ight) NOTE: Flaking, blistering and chalking are all evaluated according to ASTM Standards, with a rating of 10 indicating that no failure was observed in the specific grading area. l .
. t g.
b F
^ From the Carboline Research & Development Laboratory L
- ;Q ~.
L-ih.b..,.t..,ka i.4,..H. r-Th. ev-i.h.46.,, 4....
. ...... ..,i. ... . .
P h i..i 4
.. ,n.d.
caeboIine . - bn
,. .
- I 94, t, .',*w e JF 9* g *
~
9*E@ ' f .- .
.::. .' . :: . =.x:La .m.v w+1-ws: =. . + . , - - -
I __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - ___ ___. __ _ _ ._ _ J
seveu
..I TESTING JECT: 01308 3 Octobtr .15.1974/Pcga 6 *,.
g Final R 30 Days : - h.y'.1 a w. . :..; a. 3 . . )
>s RESULTS: -
'Y . I Total Delam-
- a
.M, Coating Dry Film inntion
. 4 l
,, . System Thickness or Other Performance Performance * ! l '
Flaking _ Characteristics Evaluation *l andI.D. Range Peeling Blistering Chalking
- q.G
- s. r '
8 lA) Ic CZll 2.1-2.7 Note 1 None 10 10 Powdering of the top - Acceptable -
'. .l layer of CZll in the UlN -
liquid phase and at ! K the Interphase area. i
%:c ,,.- .
3.0-3.7 Note 1 None 10 10 Powdering of the top Acceptable l, (. '.j IB) Ic CZll
;. ]
layer of CZll in the l
, s liquid phase and at .
the interphase area. I. I' . .: ,s F 2A) Ic CZll 2.4-3.1 10 None 10 10 Powdering of coating Acceptable
- , f Ic 305F (mlet) at liquid / vapor Inter- ,
[ I phase. hyg . *;
- fh; 2B) Ic CZ11 2.6-3.7 10 None , 10 10 Powdering of coating Acceptable 1, J't[ Ic 305F (mist) at liquid / vapor inter-
- phase.
l ; 3A) Ic CZll 1/32" Undercutting i Ic 305F (mist) two sise back from scribe. l Ic 305F 6.0-8.1 Acceptable l 10 None f4 blisters, 10 One blister near the hf N l, possibly from edge had been re-moved probably
)
I,k
- particles in through physical
? ,. the 305 damage to the test r, !('h coupon 17 . 3B) Ic CZll two size 84 to 1/32' Undercutting j,]:o. Ic 305F (mlet) #2 blisters on back from scribe.
- ic 305F the sharp One blister had been Acceptable*
7.5-8,5 10 None 10 edge of the 3 removed by physical p
'W - coupon damage. >
fj.g[ Perfect Performance 10 None 64-08MD 8 (Light)
- Note: Coupon edges were not '
e. aweer uini 3. i o n s ,.n ,n,t,.,g nyt. 9 f.g . $5 V W :ww t.m 7,:.3.m. ' -
j
. .'.i.' .*.I . .
LABORATORY TEST REPORT
*[ October 15. 1974/Page 7 TESTING PROJECT: 01308 ,
Final Reeert: 30 Days Note 1 - There was a powdering of the Carbo Zine 11 which could be described as a flaking and a severe attack at the liquid / vapor interphase. However, the consistency of the Carbo Zine 11 coming off was that of a finely divided powder and flakes which should net compromise the emergency cooling
. ' systems . Thus, there is no downgrading in this category of the Carbo Zine 11 Primer and the coating is deemed,to be eybiting an acceptable performance.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS: The test coupons 3A and 3B had visible particles in the dried film. This most likely was from contamination of the wet Phenoline 305 F during application. The slight blistering of the Phenoline 305 F on coupon 3A is probably due to these particles and, thus, this was ignored in the evaluation of performance. , Slides of test coupons after 1 day and 30 days exposure are h available in the project record files. . .
~
Daniel R. Leritz, Group Le der Testing Department J rn F. Montle. Vice President R aearch and Development DRL:ph 7747/5415/020/936/937/929/931 cc: Mr. R. L. Castleberry, Bechtel , Mr. William Currlin, Bec ;'ci 5 ;- OR: Testing Department XC: SLL/HDT/JFM/EW".'Jt 1/ C4 1/SLS/JDP/JRL/ LAB GROUP LEADERS }, h i-
'l From the Carboline Research & Development Laboratory s ( ).
rr Th. .h.ie.i 4... t i.h.4 6. ,,.. 4 .u .. ,h. b.., .s , k i.4,.. H..revee, '
- n. , . .s . a .., i . . . .. ., i i . 4.
- a. [c ar*bolIrie) .
FgA -+ .(r, _y= ..+#-~ em oc j.;~ M-% ;.. w f1- .. . -;. . .g.nyw.qga,e;v.w-gy
,:>; - g >.9.y3,, gy .;s.;a.iy;,,3 , x;-w 3. - .. .-
em. . . ms % . . - . . .. l
. _p . / - .- .
..z.c.,,
e- LABORATORY TEST REPORT (
,' f. D June 5, 1970 TESTING PROJECT: 4-993 SUBhECT: DBA evaluation of Carboline materials.
REFERENCE:
Report N101.5-1970 of The American National Standards Institute - Protective Coatings for
. Light Water Nuclear Reactor' Containment Facilities.
PURPOSE: To determine whether certain Carboline materials ;. would pass standards for PWR nuclear facilities ; put down in section e and 5 of The American National Standards Ins,'tute's Report N101.5-1970 F concerning Protective Coatings for Light Water Nuclear Reactor Containment Facilities. P CONCLUSIONS: From the results of this test, it can be concluded that, all Carboline materials tested have passed (, all the standards set down for PWR in sections 4 and 5 of the above mentioned report. , Q PROCEDURE: A) Test Coueen - g As per Paragraph 4.3.1: - b-1) 2" x 5" x 1/8" sandblasted steel panels. [ k As per Paragraph 4.3.2: F
- 2) ,
L 2" x 4" x 1" concrete blocks'. E: l' B) Systems Tested
- 1) Over Steel Panels:
l a) Ic Carbo Weld 11 ic Phenoline 305 Finish L S, b) Ic carbo Zinc 11 le Phenoline 305 Finish E.~. f c) Ic carbo Weld 11 .a Ic Phenoline 368 Finish Fi L. h w. From the Carboline Research & Development Laboratory y x carboline e o m :=> ~ v L e
. S T. LO UI S. MISSoum 43144 ,
Rei L, 27* W[.[r'$' ' "*:" 1-' [Nhf.Y 2* * [yMf5h"* ~
- f. ? *M 9ff %~'T ' * - Cg j M -
': ? . . m L%'~. .; % 3 : :1W .2n:Eh: 5,(${:c,%.$9.:'r *.:
'-i1.1~. .. . c- - -
- ~~~
..,.A'.
,- ..,, ' ; g&' LABORATORY TEST REPORT
' .3 r Page 2
- June 5, 1970 g
TESTING PROJECT: 4-993 PROCEDURE: (Continued) B) Systems Tested
- 1) over steel Panels:
d) Ic Carbo Zinc 11 le carboline 3912 s) Ic Phenoline 368 Primer ic Phenoline 368 Finish f) Ic Phenoline 305 Primer ,'- ic Phenoline 305 Finish ,
, 2) Over Concrete Blocks:
a) Ic Carboline 195 surfacer p Ic Phenoline 305 Finish * ; t g
. b)~ Ic carboline 300 Surfacer ,
ic Carboline 300 White E.
. s c) Ic Phenoline 305 concrete Primer g Ic Phenoline 305 Finish {
C) Cure Time , P As per Paragraph-5.3.2: ,
- 1) Between coats - 24 hours @ R.T. ;,..
- 2) Final Cure - 2 weeks @ 150* F. t 5* F.
1 Repairability y D) As per Paragraph 5.3.2: f..: .
- 1) Remove 1/2 inch diameter of coating down to substrate P'
- 2) Paint denuded area with entire coating :.
system; .
- 3) Coat area around denuded area with over- 7 coating system; g P.
After completed, cure fortwo (2) weeks % 4) 9 150' F. 1 5* F. From the Carboline Research & Developme'nt Laboratory j
.g/
c. carboline M
.como ~v g=
. - -- ., e ni ia uiannumi sai44 W ..
L46 F6' r-W Gy
.-...-....s.,.,,,..
o
. a .:
;; x m . w _ g . w . , ,. .,,... .. ..
* '*"# e . ,a m ,,,_ ,
"Y* $'
s.+'- , LABORATORY TEST REPORT
..V .-
n . ( h Page 3
, June 5, 1970 TESTING PROJECT: 4-993 PROCEDURE: (Continued)
E) Excosure As per Table 3, Page 8:
- 1) 1 liter of water j 2) 20 gm Sodium Thiosulfate
- 3) 8 gm Sodium Hydroxide (:6 0.2 Normal)
- 4) 3 gm boric acid (2000 to 4000 ppm)
F) Test conditions , As per Figure 1, Page 6: Temperature - Interval Time at Interval RT - 285* F. 40 sec. 285*F. - 270* F. 4 min. 270*F. - 250' F. 11 min. 40 sec. , D Oc " :.. 250*F. - 225* F. 13 min. 20 sec. v 225'F. - 215' F. I hr. 57 min. . 215'F. - 175* F. 8 hr. 20 min. . i 175'F. - 160* F. 16 hr. 40_ min. r Total time in test = 2-7 hr. 26 min. 40 sec.
. Maxi =um Temp. = 290* F.
Minimum Te=p. = 150' F.
- i.
l RESULTS: As per Paragraph 4.5, there was no effect to any ( of the steel panels or concrete blocks used in r this test. That is, there was no flaking, de-lamination and/or peeling, blistering or chalking [., to any degree. t g l David L. Krombach g'c Testing Department r' ' DLK glw OR: Test Dept. N OR: JOL . , { XC: EDT . . E. g . From the Carboline Research & Developrnent Laboratory j , t, carboline 9:
.. . _ . . . . _ . . . c o u s=> ^ ~ v . . e v
S T. Louis, selsSOURI S3044 ha
. -y. ,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - . _ _ . _______ ___
i ry k..i@:&
- 55 %.. .,. v? "" - s.rg_g ,c.
- h. )..f.. f Y. . f. ?
- P+ W
. .. ,_M. g _. ,5.u. g 5 %,5.# r., .m. . ,, .
. . .. ..g.:
[
Q . ;.~.g Wig.: .~ ~ 9ps : . ', ...;-
.:-L-g&rp+&Qz??a-6.Q.r'acw2D,.:.~Ah&~ .isisiclk.Qf&&y .;< ws . .&-;' ~ .. M Q p;.xc Q n e b =*- %.!-s --: a:w.'-&i 4 . ' ~=- fxs : ' .-
9 4 3 Jp c-m
'G( ,
y -
... y a U
[ Q c i s s a e u iti. i n c .
- = =eens easionens coasraucross R.p ,
j fisis,veo4450 oinact oi.6 :=viasio=
,3
.m. , ,
j, M /, November 10, 1976 T-R V
^l GTN-13291 -
Texas Utilities Generating Company 2001 Bryan Tower Dallas, Texas 75201 , Attention: Mr. H. C. Schmidt Project Manager - Nuclear Plants
< Gentlemen:
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK ELECTRIC STEAM STATION 1980 2300 MW INSTALLATICN G&H PROJECT No. 2323 09410 DESIGN CHANGE / DESIGN DEVIATION REQUEST 05214 Enclosed please find copies of Design Change / Design Deviation Request No. 188 which was teleccpied to you on Monday, November 8, 1976. At1 recipients of this letter are advised that authoriza-tion from TUSI is required before proceeding with the action noted herein. Very truly yours, GIBBS & HILL, INC.
- d. M M. ht_,
l R.SE. Hersperger Project Manager REH/EJZ:al 1 Original + 5 Copies wr c: J. J. Moorhead (G&H Site) lL 1A l 399 stvtNfM avthut New vonM. N. V. 10001 Caste: Siegsmett, new vome
- _ .- - - --..e- . , . . - - .-
___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ . . _ . . J
- ar:~~. 7.,pp;. * . n.;.x '- -5.; : . .., . - : . - ~ n' ,:. - : ~ L i ~L .
r.'.pInd-Jd%ai;yMft?<-fG.Q.O.:.*-cWJ*.hy@hM r M-;igWv42.fid 1.n44%%Abj.jy.:G4*.westd k % Rj .s . 1; * ~
- " r ,,,
gy 3 Figure 2.7-2 L. i.x 3 0 l O R E O E;. v E D 1 :J , . . . t
,j CCMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION DESIGN CHANGE / DESIGN DEVIATION REQUEST I .h NOV 3- 1976 ,
;n j (Giggs & HILL,Inc.j __ _ _ _ _ Safety Related DC/DD' Request No. 188 7
]
-j 1.a ORIGINATOR: TUSI VENDOR X CONSTRUCTION Description of Design Change / Deviation Requested:
Applicable Spec /W c _-m-=acc 2323-SS-14 3 11-17-75 Rev. Issue Date j See Attach =ent. Justification: 9 See Attach =ent. g Request P r # by M [ g .# , vil Engr. Date 11-1-76 ' l.b TUSI RESIDENT MANAGER
' u Recommend Approval , [$tece end Disapproval
.. - / e/W.
TUSI Fesident Manager's Signat:.m, --- i f 9. rs..Date i
,'//
</
?.Ti //
,2 . DESIGN ORGANIZATICN **'
Design Engineer's Comments: (Changes / Deviation to be Made) See Attachment Schedule: Change / Deviation X Approved Not Approved
/ < l /
Engineer's Signature / '- . '/ ' . . --. -Title S uev . Encr Date 11/5 /76 Inder nde .t Desien Periewer's Ccrrents: Agree with. Design Engineer's comments and approval. Independent Design Feviewer's Signature .
- G!w Date 11/ 9 /76 Interdisciplinarf Peviemr ')'
Initials Date 3. 'IUSI (CAI.IAS) Initials Date Structural f Nuclear Responsible Engineer Mechanical '-
#i-5. < Project Engineer Electrical CA Other APPIGED FOR COECTIQh Proj. tigr.' *Itce/Jm Y '-
/D/f Datei//9~/ 'I -
- p. Project Manager's Signature Date
( Distribution: TUSI TUSI(Dallas) (Field) (6) B&R (Houston) (2) G&H-NY (2) I'sNxfFtW W 2) ( (2) B&R (Field) (2) G&H-Field (2)TsNx(W@7X i v
- - . n. ~~
. ,$$'i$?.,$ -;T$$
...a
~ . ?N u fisTi * ' ^ - -- ~
_ -1;g,;~.. r-&j.k.&-)b.a$A. =V:-52*AiY~$.w'e-jrx: i'N.N G*' d M *'"~""?'"=~Y S., $*' . . q9 . . . .
't'.,
,3 d ATTACHMENT TO DC/CC NO. 188 3
'j Design Engineer's Comments:
A
'] The manufacturer's affirmation that coatings applied in m
5 conformance with the requested changes have been satisfactorily 7 tested under DBA conditions and meet ANSI requirements for nuclear coatings is accepted.
=; t
\
e
.='
.Y' l 9
0 t
*4 e
6 k 1 e f g
. . . ~ - - . - - - . - ~ - - -
.;.-,~ - . _ y; . + ~ . z: x - . q: u =.; . _ - : .- ,
.. ._ , v _ ,
--> *g.- k ...*i;;, .Qu~&-&Q%% t & :hy?& f.,er:Z5lJ AL%,us ..~yyj _;,. %;;.3;% ,,gq: . . .4:..I;:4&C,l-Q '
.a w]
a > 4 -
.j .
N q . ATTAC10ENT TO DC/DD NO. 188 DESCRIPTION OF DESIGN CHANCE:
-2 Ref: Carboline letter dated October 26, 1976 with attached
$_ laboratory test reports SR-57 and 4-997.
Li The referenced letter outlines the pain: =anufacturer's (Carboline) reco=endations as discussed in the October 15, 1976 =eeting with the Engineer. Based on this letter the following changes are requested: 1 1) Request to change the specification section 9.2 and 9.4 to allow application ranges for dry fil= thickness (DFT) to be as stated by ite= 1 of the referenced letter. 2
- 2) Request to per=it application of an additional coat of inorganic zine pri=er in areas where dry fil= thickness
] has been identified as being below the specified =ini=u=.
The additional coat of inorganic =inc pri=er will be ap-E i plied as described by ite= 4 of the subject letter. . In addition, sec: ions 9.2 and 9.4 require that the primer and finish coat be applied in accordance with the =anufacturer's. reco==endations. It is requested that the Engineer confir= agree =ent with the application reco=endations =ade by Carboline in the subject letter. JUSTIFICATION: Ref: BRF-3703 The above changes and clarifications are needed by the Contractor to determine acceptable guidelines for contain=ent liner pain application. i i 1 - l
. -WW ;., -
~. .. ::Dgy::q: x .. - : mg;-:: ; ,: :;; - - . .< F ws-o-s% %ic- M p:4wanmWk ,-ws:ags n &. wm:3.smag *u A % M.-
a.m 3 . p-M .-,
..y 10-13-76 @"G 35-1195 (j . g Brown & Root,Inc. .
BRigg , cien sose Texas 7eo43 A ~
~
A%
OCT14 IS76 Oc ober 13, 1976 ^
- .O : "b TEXAS W IS c, E5
- -j Mr. C.H. Gatchell d Texas Utilities Services, Inc.
.y P.O. Box 1002 Dsi.e,SEs 1 Glen Rose. Texas 76043 Chc
% ,W i a._.
; Texas Utilities Services, Inc. %< /,
p Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station ** 1980-82 2300 MW Installation OH' % Containment #1 Painting -%a Problems Needing Resolutions ,,,,, Q[
Dear Mr. Gatchell:
b' As requested by TUSI/G&H in the October 12, 1976 Civil Jobsite Meeting, below is a list of paint-related problems which warrant resolution.
- l. Need to have wider thickness range on the prime coat. No tolerance is allowed Applicator. (Define use of 3-5 mils.)
- 2. Need to have Inspector Thickness Gage Readings accepted without .5
' mil thickness removed frem readings due to testing of sand-blasted metal prior to application of primer with the same magnetic thick-ness gage that is used to test the primed surface. Nace T-63F sheet says this is not a recommended procedure.
- 3. Need clarification of major and minor runs and sags both from the Engineer and Manufacturer. (Reference ANSI 101.4).
- 4. Need clarification of acceptable repair procedure that is accept-able to both the Engineer and Manufacturer. (Hi and Low build, etc.)
- 5. Need to have clarification from Manufacturer on mil thicknesses pertaining to " peaks" and " valleys" of blast-cleaned surfaces.
(BlastProfile).
- 6. Need to clarify distance from edges of areas inspected pertinent to mil thickness gage manufacturer recommended. Zoreco Electronics says no closer than 1 inch. Q.C. Inspector states as long as both points of gage are contacted to the surface.
- 7. Need touch-up procedure detailed that is acceptable to both Engineer and Manufacturer.
- 8. Need to have inspector tests taken in more than 5 areas on 100 s.f.
using only 3 spot checks as basis for average. (Take more reading, in lieu, of minimum). . GI -
/
fmtf
- -Ttlaff%'6:::."~~SW
-;; :-AyeUS:' ..:"'::,W4,3 4 X~ 'h i ' n+c +*RdS+:~
?!
% , .:. , ;;dwusa-, +::= %& nr-+4ehamn>MM: ++ b.
dL1
.w . .51 -
3 . [4'
.c.
BruwnTRoot.!nc. I BRF-3703
#9'
.u t[.1 9. Need to have more than 4 - 3 point spot checks of areas where edges are predominently taken to be used for averaging thickness for
. ;j acceptance or rejection of coating, i.)
e ,; 10. Definition of "small area" relative to repair of low-milage. v.J . Very truly yours,
$ BROWN & ROOT, INC.
Y
/ h w
" 'l.
C/ A H.C. Dodd, Jr. Project Manager HCD/G M/sn
~
cc: L.A. Ashley (ll) P.L. Bussolini (1L) e M.M. Fitch/L.D. yp eatt (ll) C.H. Gatchell (0, IL) H.C. Schmidt (6L) - Bill McFa'rland (lL} 1 i l I ,, i
.- m ..e
. 3:nb &:.s@,
_. mv .m 8 qw.
-TC.%:.OM'r.: . : .5 ..- 2 .:w. ,.-
~5* ' gir%<:-?chr-mC,k ,2+'%.; - Lo. '- ~ . .:.Jd.
. .. ~ . .
4 .s . -
,n n . .. .
s -s
- 4 B &^ 4..sW- -e t @lST.
.. . n . n . , . ;- .
, ly. , m. .a..
.> n _; -'"'% ._ % ~ ' .
?
Q .- F ym i'meqeg.CA A 9f'*"". .e- m.
% CaF t
1
="u.
C I T3 e i esiern==
,- .. - j,
'1 BUS 37 'N!
.JCS NO. 35-11N2 oTECTIVE CO ATI N G S y*,. g .- 3 l W :
E C E I V Eahosio~ assisr*~cc . w^rra acoriac . riac eaorec ". ' o cm- i. .~
< ,. f p ,w---
A; c. 35o ~^~'<v '~oustaia' coua'
.] b'i. - OCT 2 91975 l
{J s T. t.o u i s. M o. 6 314 4 ECEIVE October 26, 1976 Brown & Root, Inc. P.O. Ecx 1001 l Glen Rose,. Texas 76043 g Attention: M.r. H. C. Dodd, Jr., Project Manager
- - Subjec*- Octcher 15,. 1976 Meeting of h e-e ~"'4"s Chupak, . _
Keith Falk, Nick Gagliardo, Ralph McGrane, Henry Scatmary, Rcger Tegtmeyer and Seyncur Fiebach (Lccal Carboline Representative) at Gibbs & Hill Office, New York, N.Y.
Reference:
Texas U'411 ties Service Ccmpany, Inc. Ccm=anche Peak Steam Electric Station m Centainment Building il Painting Gibbs & Hill, Inc. New York, N.Y.
~ Gentle. men:
It was a applica~ greed tien precedures at abcVe andreferenced film thickness Gibbsreccmmendatiens
& Hill meeting that the presented in the Carboline letter to Gibbs & Hill of Octcher 21 (syncpsis of discussion at Brown & Rect meeting of Cctcher 15; reference Brcwn
& Root letter to Texas Utilities' Services of Cctober 13) wculd be acceptable for implementatien if proprir doct=entation of ecnformance with applicable ANSI standards is provided to the job site. This is that' letter of documentation.
The follcwing recc==endations for applicatic f Carbo Zinc 11 and Phenoline 305 Finish will meet the applicable ANSI criteria noted. i Specific peints are in crder of reply to the points of the Octcher 13 letter frem Brown & Root to Texas Utilities Services.
- 1. It is our recccmendatien that the ncminal dry film thicknesses for the specified system is Carbo Zinc 11 at three mils /Phenoline 305 Finish at four mils. However, the dry film thicknesses recc== ended as the specified minimum is 2.5 mils for Carbo Zine 11 and 3.0 mils for Phenoline 305 Finish. We recognice the following Allcwable Deviations frca Specified Dry Film Thick-nesses '(ASTM D 1.043 Special Technical Publication Chapter 10) :
i '
+ *r:,
f s. s
, 1 *
)m. eJe CARBcLINE CcMPANY
- 350 M ANLEY INcuSTRf AL CcVRT
- ST. Lcuts. MISScuRI 63144
, . .;g ..,,. . ~m CO.M , a . . . *.;-
.=Mw.: e:.E. k,' M ~U5pM5~ %rg CM9% ~.d."F u- 2 L -a-*x%w w a m g ,; y. u g g g ; a ,_._
.1
'"J
._'2 .
4
; car bollr1e p ,
Mr. H. C. Dodd, Jr. 4 October 26, 1976
. Page 2 e ,
vl
% Specified Film Spot Test Maximum Average Spot J'
Thickness Minimum Film Thickness
~
Test Maximum
-" 2.5 mils
- 2.0 mils
- 5.0 mils
- 6.0 mils
- 3.0 mils 2.4 mils A 6.0 mils 7.0 mi3s M
- Interpolated values As documentation of this recommendation, we have enclosed Carbo 2ine Laboratory Test Report 4-997 wherein Carbo Zinc 11 at three mils /
Phenoline 305 Finish at four mils passed the PWR/BWR LCCA of ANSI N101.5-1970 (currently ANSI N101.2-1972). The dry film thickness _ .
- 1 readings reported reflect an average value of both high and 1cw spot readings similar to that above.
~
^ ~2 . "It was agreed upon'in tee 3rc% d $ci.'Seeting of Octcher' 15 ~ ~
that if the dry film thickness readings are unifer=1y adjusted by the magnetic thickness gauge reading on the bare, abrasive blasted substrate, that this will not be a prchlem. Ecwever, the values for dry film thickness reported in Carboline Laboratory test reports of LOCA perfer=ance do not reflect
- this mathed of film thickness measurement since i~t is not so specified in ANSI N101.2-1972 and ANSI N512-1974. Figures should then be adjusted by the average reading over the 1-2 mil mils.
blast profile of our panels which is apprcximataly 0.5
- 3. Per ASTM D 1.043, Standard Technical Publication Chapter 10, ~
9.1.1 "where possible, runs and sags should be repaired by brushing out the excess wet material to give a smooth film of the specified thickness." However, in the cases that the runs and sags are identified in the cured film, ANSI 101.4-1972, sub-section typical 6.7.2 be remedial actions andtaken 6.7.2.1 . define "the folicwing should not be acceptable. If any do occur, they
. . major runs or sags shall be -
removed, by suitable means, to the bare-substrate or to the - ~ ~ previously acceptable coat, and then the areas shall be . recoated. Minor runs and sags that do not affect film quality and/or coating performance may be permissible." Runs and sags or in Carbo and perfor=ance Zinccan 11 be normally abradeddo off. not affect film integrity If there is a loss of integrity such as areas of muderacking, abrading will result in dela ination of the film frcm bare steel. Therefore, it is our rece=mendation that all runs and sags (by definitien ficws of excessively applied coating) "that were not repaired while wet shall be removed by suitable means such as sanding or grinding" (ASTM D 1.043 Standard Technical Publication
, 10.9.1.2). A major run or sag, then, would be a run or sag that whe-abraded results in delamination to bare steel and thus must be removed to bare steel and repaired as specified.
Runs and sags that can be removed without affecting the film can be censidered minor runs or sags and are permissible. i .
.-->-ew =*=e==-+- e.g._ . . . - - - - e==. -
1
w 3 3,. ,;vj g.:fG;w$:.mj"hv57@@'iSQ=';E'MNj:fK~ W~QrLiMS, . ~-n 6~v*~?iF.*.Q
" ~
_ n---
~
~w- - %--
------% 94 *w.w%.n.
-- u+ .'
4 % "ca6 cI!n e Z Mr. H. C. Dodd, Jr. j .g October 26, 1976 Page 3 la
]H 4. Where the dry film thickness has been identified as being below the specified minimum, the recc== ended procedure for repair in accordance with ASTM D 1.043 Special Technical
- t. e Publication, Chapter 10, Section 10.9.2.2 is to apply an additional coat of inorganic zine primer. In this case, special require.aents for this application consist of the existing prime coat being cleaned, i.e., free of oil, grease, di'rt, rust staining, cement, visible moisture, and other contamination, and the subsequent prime coat be thinned 50%,
i.e., two quarts of Carboline Thinner #33 per gallon of Carbo
~
Zine 11. Two coats of Carbo Zine 11, plus Phenoline 305 Finish has no effect en the LOCA performance as you will note on the enclosed Carboline Laboratory Test Report SR57. Where the dry f4 % thickness har Men identified as being ' above the specified maximum film thickness, the following recc==endations apply. Per ASTM D-1.043, Special Technical Publicatica, Chapter 10, Section 10.9.3.2 "1ccalized areas of excessive film thickness that are not acceptable may be treated as runs or sags." Therefore, at the applicator's discretion, areas of excessive film thickness may be re=cved by sanding, grinding er abrading with screen uire. The other alternative is to sandblast back to bare metal and reccat as specified. - It should also be noted that areas of dry spray should also be re=oved by abrading, =cr= ally with screen wire.
- 5. This problem is no longer pertinent as 1cng as problems 1 and 2 have been resolved.
- 6. Steel Structures Painting Council SSPC-PA-2-73T, Appendix A.6, Proximity to Edges requires a minimum of 1" frca any j .gec=etrical discontinuities unless the =agnetic thickness
] ; gauge is calibrated under precisely similar conditions.
- 7. Two conditions apply to areas requiring touchup. Where bare steel is not exposed, the dry film thickness shculd be checked and if necessary an additional coat be applied as the same for areas with film thickness below the specified minimum.
If bare steel is exposed, the area should be sandblasted and recoated per specification.
- 8. The inspection nethed of taking five spots of three readings each per 100 square feet is in accordance with Steel Structures Painting Council SSPC-PA2-73T was mutually accepted.
O I
, , ,, _ _y-.,. .
_ -N**W*"*"*
-e- c- - - - - , , . - - - - , .
r-- . , -- - - - . -,-- -- - - - - -
.~. .;
..,..;;-,. p g t y ,_. 9 p g x y x
- p.:g,,x;::;y;gggyw
, -w., 1 ..
e 3g9se,Q8y;ngc: . :~_ ,=mxp%gy;w:..a c, qg L';_4- .y.=. 2s..up.
. .. 3:,
. , . e-.
x.l j, lCadbcIlrie 29)
.M Mr. H. C. Dodd, Jr.
C] October 26, 1976
- 2) - Page 4
- : ,2
=
' . ~.;
- 9. The problem is handled by resolutien of number 6 and n"~her 8.
- 10. Since areas of less than the specified minimum film thick. ness 4 need only be recoated per n"-ker 4, no limitation is necessary q on the area relative to repair of low milage.
. 9 In addition to the above items, concern was also expressed as the 3 definition of s=all areas relative to brush application. The agreed upon size limit for brush application is one square foot or 144 square inches.
i 7 We believe the above to be satisfactory documentation. If there are any questions, please direct them to our Field Representative, Charles Rushing, or to this office directly. O Very truly yours,
*; f,s
" '. . ~ .
,': ? f.; .f e .....-;^ .
Charles J. Wiegers ' 9 Power Industry Manager CCW/ra 201
Enclosures:
CLTR SR57 & 4-997 occ: Messrs. Julius Chupak, Keith Falk, Nick Gagliardo, Ralph McGrane, Henry S at.ary Gibbs & Hill Inc., 393 Seventh, New York, NY 10001
.,)
i e a 4 e e e m e o e. . ee a l i i il 1 a.- = ,. p e- r y*-e - e _ ,. .-e- - . +- . .
- -c c:.w :G>:'n.;WW:G%m u~MM.: -,'s
- 4. '.~.C7.4
' .;6. w :.W Q '!/$ $ Q @ " Q h *'.i. .$$0i&>,'gi-MWL-y Ls.a :.YJ-U 3;g.r e T.m .
+
a - np .- q'. Jp.p c, .a .: 3+g [ ' . fM LABORATORY TEST REPORT
~8 .
January 14, 1976 )
- =
. 3, J'(
&' [St.W!ARY REPCRT:
Final Recore SR-57 a
'1 -
g" SU3 JECT: Data Sunmary of Weathered Carbo Zinc 11 and Carbo Weld 11 pri=ad
~
steel, following topcoating and exposure to Loss of Coolan:
.Q Accident testing.
tN.h
- REyERENCE:
Mr. C. J. Wiegers, Mr. R. J. Tegt= eyer; Carboline Tes:ing
-g Report: 4-1180
;; PURPOSE: To su==arize the perfor=ance da:a of pri=ed steel coupons which i
had received various surface trea:=ents, been recoated and
.5 exposed to both ANSI N101.2-1972, BWR-PL*R conposi: and 3echtel j
#4 PWR test criteria.
.} CCNCLUSICN: This selec:ed da:a indicates that weathered inorganic zinc pri=ers, when properly cleaned and topcca:ed, =ay be resistant :o
,, stringent Loss of Coolan: Acciden: exposures.
y CBSERVATICNS: All syste=s in this report exhibited an acceptable perfornance
- i for each of the, vo tes: exposures when evalua:ed per the ANSI N101.2-1972, See:1cn 4.5 cri:eria.
a-PROCE31*RE: A. 'IstCoueens Sp. , Q. , -
, 2" x 5" x 1/8" Sandblas:ed S: eel (SSPC-SP-5-63 L'hite Metal Subs::a:e)
Dry 711= Thickness B. Svste=s Tes:ed Ranee
- 1. le Carbo Zine 11 (Yeachered)
/ Surface Prepara:ica
')
ic Carbo Zine 11
, le Phenoline 305 Finish 9.5-10 nils i 2. le Carbo Weld 11 (Wea:hered) 1 .
Surface Preparatien
. Ic Carbo Zine 11 ic Phenoline 305 Finish 7-9 mils s
C. Cure Schedule Carbo Zine 11 and Carbo Wald 11 (Weathered) - Two and one half months exposure to Culf Coas: Wea:hering. t Carbo Zine 11 - Three days labora:ory cure. Phenoline 305 Finish - Extended laboratory cure. f . From the Carboline Research & Deve'lopment Laboratory
)
T h . .. . ;. . . : 4. .. i.,a i , w .4 i , ,,.. . ,4 . . { a . p. ,.. . .. . s . e . .. .., e , ; . .. . , m i e . , . . . ,. ,,, . 6 . . . a . . , s . . i . . , . . H . - . . ..,
.m_.._._
ggQ
. -e.e, - * * * * ~ ' ' ' * ' - * "
. FW . . . , ~ . . v w , i .,as .. ..= , ' O W c;m:, a: . - .:;. - h:h_ST.. . v, - : O % L f .~-2.;i.-f $_ Q QR&&[2_cv q;;. W> .['.' . . .e .Q ; - Qx % *;;r,.k Q o.l,5. &
. . .w ~
%xy ,
4 /. AN - f4 w LABORATORY TEST REPORT Rg
.h M
[ ' January 14, 1976/Page 2 3
/w 'Si20MRY RIPCRT: SR-57 N_M . ..-a Final Reece:
dj PROCEDURE: Continued "" L
% D. Exoosure - e, M I. ANSI N101.2-1972 PWR-3*lR Co: posit -
td [ Water Chemis:ry - De=ineralized Water Time Laose Temoerature' Pressure (Saturated)(1) 8 Initial 70*-90*F -
, 1 second 260*F 35 psig e 10 seconds 295*F 55 psig 2 - 1 minute, -40 seconds MO*' !?_psig 16 minu:es, 40 seconds __ 255*7 58 psig q 2 hours, 47 =inu:es 245*F 30 psig a 27 hours, 47 minutes 220*F 19 p:ig 5 days . IS0*F 17 psig
, 11 days, 2 hours, 40 minutes 150*7 16 psig z; .,y 71) Test was kept at saturation pressure throughout the 0
f;; complete :1=e-te=perature cycle. The values for psig vere obtained fres :he theoretical pressures given in ANSI N101.2-1972. II. Bechtel #4 P'.iR Alkaline Borate Spray Water Che=istry - Desineralized Water
. 0.28 Molar H 503 (3000 pp: 3cron)*
3 NaCH to pH = 9.5
. Tine Laose Te=cerature Pressure (Saturated)( }
Ini:ial 120*F
, 1 second 300*F 70 psig 30 minutes 300*F 70 psig 96 hours
- 250*F 30 psig 1
100 days 200*F 10 psig t
*The Bech:e1 #4 was terminated after 4 days and the coupons were evaluated for developnent of this report. They were not continued in tes: at that time.
(1) Sattiration pressure was in effect throughout the test. Values for psig vere obtained from theoretical pressures
- given in ANSI N101.2-1972.
From the Carboline Research & Development t. abo'ratory
]
rs. ...sa;..
- s. .. t.,a i .n .4 s . ,, . . .a 4 . . . ,,. . . ,. ,s . 6 . . . . i .., h a . - 1 43 . . H . . .. ... _m.. .
- a. ...,. ... .#....,..y i ... .,.. p..a.
, g 9 Q.
, ,. . mpr~m -- . M ".- f. +' ~- % 2 . .' ~ ~ ' W ~
e..,~..~--~.y, .~~ ' '
.hshhN3-2
- U N N S -i [ i ' M 'N ^ M N N M b 5 'ii'.5 M N,7**I~@ N'b-D
. c :]"
..~% --. ___ -
u . 1 (, HZ qa - LABORATORY TEST REPORT m: u VQ n.~
'T
[ January 14, 1976/Page 3 ) M *
. J; SW.N.ARY REPORT: SR-57
.e
..;~ 71nal Recor:
q - M PANEL
. t PREPARATION: Weathering - All test coupons were pri=ed with either Carbo Zine 11 Q
fj or Carbo Weld 11 and allowed to weather for 2 1/2 months on the Gulf Coast. The weathering racks are idl, . all at a 45' angle and situated so as to obtain the
/ max 1=um amount of Ultraviolet (UV) sunligh: available.
,i
,w 4 .
Side 1: Weathering and U.V. - This is the area of the panel h facing the sun, receiving both a =oist or wet exposure u
,' and an alternate drying of the surface by :he in:ense sunlight.
.M '
~
Side 2: Wea:hering - This side of the coupon is away fro = the sun. It receives a =eist or wef~eTposure, but does no: N' - experience either the direct U.V. sunlight er the washing (rinsing) effect produced by rain. A' Results for each coupon are differenciated as to the side
-j receiving the intense U.V. sunlight and the side facing away fros the sun.
' .5 PERFC.U!ANCE Q' EVALUAT!CN:
Due to the nature of this screening series, edge effects were not " considered in perfor=ance evaluation. Please note that s:andard 2" x 5" x 1/8" steel panels were enployed, and noe the 2" x 5" x 1/4" wi:h rounded corners and edges steel panels tha: J are no:: ally used in LOCA testing. Please refer to " Discussion of Results". r' CRADING PROCEO"RE: The test coupons were evaluated for perfor=ance in the following
; areas:
~
1; l'.aterial flaking off ~ ~ --
- 2. Dela=ination between coats and/or peeling
.3. Blistering of the topcoat 4 Chalking of the coating i
- 5. Excessive cracking t r l '.' Grading procedures specified in Keport N101.2-1972 of the A=erican National Standards Ins:i:ute-Protective Coatings for Light Wa:or Nuclear Reactor Con:ain-ment Facilities:
s 3 From the Carboline Research & Development Labcratory i Th. 0.. ;. . t 4... ro,a i . . 3. ,,.. .,4 . . a . . . ,. . . . . . s . . . .. . , 4 . i i . .. . , i. . i . . . . . . ,. ,s . 6 . . , . . . , k . . i . . . .. H . w . , e,, e f ,,g, p )
ag , . . m m m. ; y,
.- .,~ .
w% Q%.gi W % &g.t&.., . n _ .%=M b % ns 6n4s~+5 M m .x..
.u_ .
'. % fqt<-"? W S:&
.. m : . -
- kv Q ?
. $. .,ii __. - . _ . _ _ . . . . . -
e, . . . . . .._ 9 .. ~
,f
.fj . . "
-a LASORATORY TESi REPORT
. . w
^
January 14, 1976/Page 4 3 f *'CIARY 51 . REPCRT: SR-57
.j Final Recor q
'g CRADING PROCEDURE: Continued ...
,r;a y
9 4.5 Methods of Examinine and Evaluatine the Excosed Tes: Soecinons d The dynamic and/or static elevated tempera:ure-pressure and irradiation .
.;y test panels shall be evalua:ed vi:hin 2 hours and again af:er 2 weeks af:er
-f re= oval fron the test. chamber for the following surface defects: flaking, dela=-
.! ination and/er peeling, blistering, and chalking. " Defects listed in Subsections
. .J 4.5.1 thrcugh 4.5.4 shall be deal: with as follevs:
y-j 4.5.1 Flakine. ASD! D772 Evalua:ing Degree of Resis:ance :o Flaking g (Scaling) of Ex:erior Pain:s, Part 21, A=erican Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphis, Pa. 19103. Flaking shall not be per:1::ed.
^
. .. ~ . . .
.; 4.5.2 Delamination and/or Peeline. Dela=inacion and/or peeling shall 7
not be per:1::ed.
.m
- 4.5.3 311sterine. 311stering shall be 11=ited to a few, intact blisters <
1 Size No. 4, ASTM D714, Standard Method of Evaluating Degree of Blis:ering of Pain:s, Part 21, American Society for Testing and 9' Msterials, Philadelphia, Pa. 19103. The nu=ber and the size of blisters sfall be recorded. 4.5.4 Chalkin2 ASTM D659, Standard Meched of Evaluating Degree of J *
'Q Resistance to Chalking of Exterior Paints, Part 21. A=crican Socie:y for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa. 19103. Heavy chalking .
h1 shall not be persi::ed. Any other changes in coa:ing properties which are not also asscciated a with the separa:1cn, or :he release, of coa:ing frc= :he substrate shall not be a cause for rej ectien. (December, 19 73) ANSI N101.2-1972 Cri:eria (As interpreted by Carboline) Maxi =un Decree of Failure Allevable Flaking ASU'. D772 10 (None) Dela=ination or Peeling None '
- Blistering ASDI D714-56 Blister Size v2 BlisterDensihv None
*:!OTE: A blister is not #4 Fev intact when it has resul:ed
- d6 Medium in coating being separated #8 Mediu=-Dense from the tes: cc ;;:en.
Chalking ASTM D659 8 (Light) N From the Carboline Research & Development Laboratory
]
T h . .. .. ... a 4. ,. ro,. . .h e d , ,,. . .a 4 . . . ,. . . .. . 6. , . t .., h a . i . 4 .. . . . . .,,
- a. .....a... .p....,. 1 3,..... .,6,.n.4.
j F....__.____. 3
. a .- ,. . 2 - . ;.rggmy-;. ,;2 ;.7.;: .
.. s . . .g, .
- -- :a.a u.c.-=
_ , e d .-w%%'A,.'.J.-Q.
~ _-
xW.4 < "-%_.9 hl-1M, .y '#
. .'.; ML3.4.C5 n . . , ,_ . ,fm~pi.
ed M.
~
. . w. w.,. '-%2,
- + . - ,J ,e
- ti 2 -
,2 . - - - - _ _ . . . - - . .
..a t. -
..~ ~-
r.
-.ii W LABORATORY TEST REPORT
~
.. m
)
January 14, 1976/Page 5 3 i~ t; St02:AKY RIPORT: SR-57
.. ,1 Tisal Recorr l-
- CRADING .
.y FRCCIDURI: Centinued .
M I:0TE: Flaking, blistering and chalking are all evaluated according to
-;'.J; ASnf Standards, with a rating of 10 indicating that no failure was
; observed in the specific grading area.
m. 9 1 p. 4./ i r O
\ .
- m J
.)
From the Carbo!ine Research & Development Labdratory
]
ra . . . . >. . . . 4. . . r.,. ; . * .4 4 . ,,. . . 4 . . . . .. . ,. en . 6 . . , . s . ., s o . i . 4, .. H. ......
- a. , .,..... 5....,.ey Q__,....,_..[
;. 3,... .,. ,i. 4.
,g g m-.. -_
..... : 1n
, , , , n Di Ei: J E E5Y'Y"5' &' , a . ,,, g 3 hb
. D. , '
fN
* ., l> e -l
( *
; it '
Y%H l? 2 .
~
;f
(, '
$$ <,ib t January 14, 1976/Page 6 SUte!ARY REPORT: SR-57
~
fpd g,g 1 Final Report v.
- 6, i * * *
.Ju.
ANSI N101.2-1972 PWR-BWR Composit I. i - ,'s Vi Dry Filia i' ~d '
. Thickness Delamination i
- l Coating System and I.D. (mils)
Other Performance Performans 1 Flaking-- or Peeling Blistering Chalking Characteristics Evaluatios - V I IA)
. e g h3 - a s .i Ic carbo Zinc 11 3.0 10 Honc One, #8, 10 e ;,;f Detergent Rinse intact Side 1 'T/,
Acceptabl.-
, Ic carbo Zinc 11 , 2.5 Side 2 ' {/]
- le Phenoline 305 Fin [sh 4.0/9.5 10 None 10 10 -
gf, Acceptable- "
.~
'2A) 9,1"5' )
s
, Ic carbo Zine 11 3.5 10 None Less than 10 Side 1
$' q@t; i High Pressuro Water Rinse f6F __Acceptabl..
Ic Carbo Zine 11 2.5 4 Ic Phenoline 305 Finish 3.5/9.5 10 Hone 10 10 - Side 2 l p, Acc e p t a b l .- ,S[
+
3A) ,,s.. Ic carbo Ucid 11 1.5 10 None 10 10 No Preparation Side 1 i f. ' Ic Carbo Zine 11 2.5 Acceptabls .? .
.Ic Phenoline 305 Finish 4.5/8.5 10 Side 2 '
l None 10
} 10 -
Acceptab1c i; . ' f4A)
.(.
; Ic carbo Ucid 11
[UlreBrush 1.5 10 None 1(), 10 - Side 1 [
.g ,
iIc Ca: Iso Zinc 11 Acceptabl. -
- 2. 5 i i le Phenoline 305 Finir.h 4.5/8.5 10 Side 2 3.
Nonc _10 10 i - Acceptab le-i , i [. Perfect Performance 10 None a f4F to 18HD 8(Light) l
. ANSI N101.'2-1972 . ,
g.h
. ' i j; ,
. Side 1 = U.V. and Uenthering; Side 2 = Weathering , 'f-M],2
! 91; 4 b. ..921i' b
, o , u , .!I.
. .. c.'. ', t
' , s '. I4 w/ i Utt!ARY REPO SR-57 *
'inal Report * ,
. ); ' <
ESULTS: Continued .
' y ..
\. '. )
i I. ANSI N101.2-1972 PWR-BUR Composit ;i' l' 6 g '.7 < '.
, Dry Film .
Jd ;,
, Thickness Delamination Other Performance Performan- M;.
oating. System and T.D. (mils) Flaking or Peeling Blistering Chalking Evalua t io: Characteristics hu, f,,l. 'i l A) lc Carbo Ucid 11 1.5 10 None l3 10 f)',li l 10 - Side 1 . tears Clean
- _Acyp_rabh
. 'Q).
. I
~ c Carbo Zinc 11 2.5 Side 2 c Phenoline 305 Finish l 4. 5 /fl. 5 10 None ID 10 -
Acceptable : M 4)
- Carbo Ucid 11 1.2 r@:iI.!
$U 10 None One or tuo 10 -
Side 1 '681 i . Intact Acceptabl.. LM
!=terwithBrush Carbo Zine 11 2.5 blisters '
l
- Phenoline 305 Finish 3.3/7.0 10 Nonc 10 10 -
Side 2 l N. f"/j AcceptabisA h'M 1 j i
! A)
- hd:
Ic C.arbo Ucid 11 1.2 7'i l 10 None 10
~lctergentRinsc 10 -
Side 1 Y' ; l Acceptabir. " c carho Zinc 11 2.5 Side 2 !Lyd e Phenoline 305 Finish 4.8/8.5 10 None 10 10 - Accept.ibic b.YJ b,S o A) '
.j-4
- Carbo Ueld 11 1.2 10 None 10
*Igh Pressurc Water Rinse 10 -
Side 1 'F Acceptabl. 'fl
- Carbo Zinc 11 2. 5 Side 2 ~.'
I: Phenoline 305 Finish 4.8/8.5 10 None One, #4, 10 - Accep tab'It # l intact l I.
. . l , rfect Performance 30 None #4F to #8ttD 8(Light) ;iSI N101.2-1972 j
i - l Ide 1 - U.V. and Weathering; Side 2 - Weathering . . j, y
. r-
; l 1-y 1.s i
-. .u . llh ,'l. , _;)J .i A
.'N 'r .js l'/bN' $ky [.} .,
4 i O . G ._
$. <T
, ,;y;.
- Q! . ,
J. January 14, 1976/Page 8 ,
.c .
jor flARY REPORT: SR-57
- tal Report . ,
. , .J.-.,*.'
SIII.TS: Continued * {-h ']*.
'$r.
II. Bechtel #4 PWR Alkaline Borate Spray (4 Days) ffj
, :./
~
l .? Dry Film Thickness Delamination Other Performance
+
Performanc-f' fp ating Systen and I.D. (mils) Finking or Peeling Blistering Chalking Characteristics Evaluation { A 42
' 10 10 - Side 1 h Carbo Zinc 11 3.5 10 None di Acceptable *stcrCent Rinse
, : Carbo Zinc 11 2.5
~
Side 2 N
': Phenoline 305 Finish 4.0/10.0 10 None 10 10 - Acce pt ab t.:
fh'%
, .i ' !)
- Carbo Zinc 11 3.0 10 Hone 10 10 - Side 1 iI 'h)
Acceptable !
' ['
igh Pressure Jiater Rinse Side 2
- 2
- Carbo -Zinc 11 2. 5 4.5/10.0 10 None Three, #4 10 - Accentabis ! /-
- Phenoline 305 Finish ' 7
, p.f intact r,,
B) f- f 1.5 10 None 10 10 - Side 1 c carbo Weld 11 Acceptabic .j, o Preparation 2.5 Side 2 .I c Carbo Zinc 11 Acceptablo 4.0/S.0 10 tione 10 10 - e Phennline 305 Finich , B) Side 1 10 None 10 10 - -:;
'..c Carbo Ucid 11 1. 5 Acceptable ' */ )fireBrush 2.5 Side 2 .',
tic Carbo Zinc 11 lc PhenoIInc 305 Finish 4.0/8.0 10 None 10 10 - Acceptahl.* f.'l 3 In None , #41' to #8 TID 8(i.lgh t) );',
~1
.g .
. ,, Q - o -i. 4 _ __a ,;..t . .$ 'n 'Sb '
. . . . . . . . . .',Vs g,0:
.a
*t!!?tARY REP SR-57 '*-
Inal Repor in. . t }' 3' 1: - f - 1
' $$t!I.TS: Continued . . :" : :.'
I ,
.. t .
t- ,. II. Bechtel #4 PUR Alkaline Borate Spray (4 Days)
- r 1' Dry Film Thickness
- C'l A Delamination Other Performance
-.at ing System and I.D. (mils) Flaking _ Performancc. '* s or Peeling Blistering _ Chalking Chara'cteristics Evaluation ,[
iB) * (.i 1,
;lc Carbo Ueld 11 1.5 10 Honc by.
10 10
': team Clean -
Side 1 Q?
.c carbo Zine 11 2.5 Acceptahic
.- Phenoline 305 FintrJi 4.0/8.0 10 None 10, Side 2 I i 10 -
Acceptable j
'B) 8, te Carbo Ucid 11 1.5 10 None One. #6, F,i. .g !. iter with Brush 10 ..,.,.
intact Side 1 /?' e Carbo Zinc 11 2.5 Acceptable y
- e Phenoline 305 Finish 4.5/8.5 10 Hone 10 Side 2 '*
i 10 - Acceptable .E
- ,n)* t e Carbo Ucid 11 1.0 10 None
$l(1 l etergent Rinse One. #4 10 -
Side 1 intact c carbo Zinc 11 2.5 Acceptable - cp
- Phenoline 305 Finish 4.5/8.0 10 None Side 2 SQ 10 10 -
Acceptable
- n) ',
t, 0., c Carbo Ucid 11 1.2 10 None 10 3. 10 - Side 1 3;*y , 9tish Pressure Water Rint.c li b. ec Carbo Zinc 11 2.5 - Acceptable , ,
. e l'henoline 305 Finish 3.3/7.0 10 None 10 Side 2 ll 10 0 Acceptable :-
rfect Performance ' 10 None A. .
.,:!ST N101. 2-1972 #4F to #8HD 8(Light) h .'
.3
.tdc 1 = U.V. and Ucathering; Side 2 - Ucathering .
s t '
*}
i t.
z;;;pp:~ : : q c' :e m:- Pa ' :': ~ '":~ ggq.2Wis.,Q:4:ac:. ..4:' . .%%:Ro&;.k%Qshf+;::3,M%%:Wi%d 5 -w.- - . .
% .a4
~ u- -
- w _ _ _
x:3 n
. i sr , . 'G:
_Q
- 6.NJ
)* \ LABORATORY TEST REPORT (j, January 14, 1976/Page 10 D
,~ 3. 3 , - -
s.1 St.00:ARY REPORT: 52-37 w Final Recore
'd .
DISCUSSION - J1 0F RESULTS: Edge failure was ignored for all performance evluations in this
-j project. This was necessary since the test ccupen was one-half Jj the thickness of that specified for LOCA testing, and each side of g a test coupon was being evaluated independently. Edge failure, y if it did occur, would be =ost likely due to the thin, sharp edge 4 and it would be inaccurate to assign the failure to the coating
~ .:;
- on either or both sides.
~;
y K s s_
.a r
~
) L r:
Daniel R. Lerit: .C / N j New Products Manager M DRL:ph XC: SLL/EOT/Jnt/ dis /MJD/CSH/S:.S CO,/RJT/LA3 CROUP LEADERS
.e
,.-)
E. {
- tj a-a ,
~..
a
; l 1
r
,( .
W From the Carboline Research & Development Labore: cry a.........,...t-...4i......4....,...,.w.6...t..,6...r<,..s....... r 6. . . . w. . . . 4
.......,i.3....,.....
6 3 car'b o!!n c l .
. . . - - + . - - . - . .
. . , . ...---.:.e .. .. .
---. - ;+ ,
.. . ; : m ~ y '-
. p'?w.-
E - . . ..$ .1,'X. w k 5. _.-
- .r:.,)SNEE.
%. _ ;5 ./ L~$_' %'- _ S ? 'd EAHaA*O:- '* ";*% *;-?-
"'~
.-A .
. A, . .
. ?S -
- T .
- - , LA.".2 0 3..T0 R Y T.IC'i * ' T. '*m
. ; l'
.. s. -
( -
'EEd Junc 5,1970 kh
.1,p TESTI::G PRGJECT: 4 -9'J 7 o
..* H 4.N SU3 JECT: DBA evaluation of Carboline catcrials.
. -a
'a REFER :NCE: Report N101.5-1977 of 'ihe Americtn National Standards "d Instituta - Protective Coatings for Light Ifater Nucicar '
.g Reactor Containment Facilitics.
o J PURPOSE: To detcIr:ine whether certain Carboline materials would
' pass standards for F1- R and B11R nucicar facilities put '
I desn in sections 4 and 5 of "the American National Standards Institute's R: pert N101.5-1970 cencerni,n; Protective Ccatin;s for Light Ifater Nuclear Reactor
- . Centain:ent Facilities.
CONCLUSIONS: f From the results of this test, it can be concluded that, i all Carboline =aterials tested have passed all the
' standards set doen for P;1R and St1R in secticns 4 and 5 of the above cantioned report.
PROCEDU.5: - A) Test Coupen j '; j s :. 1) As per Pars;;:ph 4.3.1: j 2" x 5" x 1/8" sandblasted steel panels.
- 2) As per Pa'ragraph 4.3.2: -
2" x 4" x 1" concrete blocks.
. B) Systers Tested
- 1) Over Steel Panels:
a) I c Carbo Iine 110 3 =ils 1 c Phenoline 305 Fin. 0 4 mils
- b) I e Phenoline 368 Primer 3.5 mils 1 c Phenoline 368 Finish 3 3.5 mils
. 2) Over Cencrete 'Biceks:
a) 1 c Phenoline 305 Finish C 4 =ils l b) I c Phenoline 305 Primer 0 3 mils 4 - 1 e Phenoline 305 Finish 0 3 mils c) I c Phenoline 303 Pri: r 0 5 mils 1 c Phenoline 305 Finish 3 5 =ils
) d) 1 e Phenoline 305 Prir:or C .7.5 mils I c Phenoline 305 Finish 3.7.5 mils
< - From the Ccthe! ins *'.::sc.:h C: Ocvolop5 inULaborttory
)
L__.._._, - - . - . . f c .N.~:~? '*I*.b i
.m
..z .,a. , . . .;a~m.g . .7,.,...-.:.., ._..,,,.....w...m...:,....._
..: ..-- ? .
.... s - . ;. . . . ,g,. ,m ,. ,.
* ~ V '-.kNs 5Y kY:ct . h N$2 ?'YJ$~^ .b E **? *
^ - $$ "Y' .S E-S k.'%' ' '
~, A .
;- _ ~::
~ v .
.y t r. ..t....
s .-~ . '.Tr.* . 7 's .u yn.v~T vs..........~-*
~-*~. a N. .,
g.-
$y '
f . D y.3 Page #2 7 June 5, 1970 e
.'l .%
TESTING' PROJECT: 4-997
. :l -
,j PROCEDUP'.3: (Continued)
, ,' a B)
- Systens Tested
.4 "
9 -
- 2) Over Concrete Blocks:
~
~
.f --
e) 1 c Carboline 195 Surfacer a 10-15 mils 1 . 1 e Phenoline 305 Finish 3 4 =ils - s f) 1 c Carboline L-63-31 Surfacer 0 10-15 mils
] 1 c Phenoline 305 Finish G 4 cils C) Cure Time s As per Paragr:ph 5.3.2:
- 1) Between coats - 24 hours O R.T.
a
- 2) Fin:1 cure - 2 weeks 3 150 F. t 5 F.
D) Repair bility_ s As per Paragr:ph 5.3.2:
- 1) Rs=cve' 11 inch dia cter of coating d0un to sub-
~ C.* O!h strate:
.:2) Paint denuded area with entire coating system; y 3) Coat area around denuded a:ec with o'vercoating system;
- 4) Aftgr cc=pleted, curs for tue (2) weeks : 150 0 F.
s . 25 F.
. E) Execsure As per Tabic 3, page 8:
- 1) 1 liter of water
- 2) 20'gm Sedium Tniosulfate
- 3) 8 'gn Sodium Hydro.xide (i. 0.2 Normal)
- 4) 3 gm boric acid (2000 to 4000 ppm)
I
, Frc 1 the Carho!!. o I.:::crcis O. Dav:!. ; ..ical Labor:to.y 1- ..
, [ c:p. ;v. ... - . . .,xy .: . ..;) .
- , .+ . n.; . ,-n . ~ *
..~~9~
- .:. - -, ; .-;.m. . A. . . .m . m,. - ;;_m. > . ^ ~. , . .. . r.. ^'. 2. W~ !.?2: .
M ~J a C."Y q. .._S"N&$d.
," D"MYO'#*"""'NI
..r./gA w.# d S - kN. .'i- e.M.. .:.n ' ~ " #.-# .
! 'N .
a.4, r .: v ...,..,g.e.:
.'i i n.~.
y If:c;I s.- . .- :. v. . r . e. i .
.i..-g .
'D%
a. f..t. . . di'i . Page #3 G: June 5,1970 O a TESTIXG PROJECT: 4 997 9 _ 7, PROCEDURE: (Centinued) J ~$ F) Test Conditiens
'd n As per Fip:res 1 and 2, Pcge 6:
j , Tec eratur: Interval Tice at Interral RT - 2S5 F.
- 40 Sec.
2S5 260 F. 16 min. 30 sec. 260 - 250 F. 43 min. 20 sec. 250 - 240" F. I hr. '47 min. 240 - 235 F. 2 hr. q 0 46 min. 235 - 230 F. 5 hr. 34 min.
- 0 230 -
225 F. S hr. 20 cin. j 225 - 215 F. 8 hr. 20 min. 4 Total time in test = 27 hrs. <!S =in. 50 sec. M2::ic'.im Tc.7. tr:ture = 2000 F. Minicus Tecperatura = 2150 F. 4 s]. RESULTS: As per Par,agraph 4.5, there was no.cffect to any of _ _ . . the steel panels or cencrete blocks used in this
. test. 'ntat is, there was no flaking, delaminatien and/or pocli,ng, blistering or chc1 king to any degree.
?
..C 4
{,,.:.y.J,
. , /s . ..e '
L. Kroebach j-:.~m; 7 <+ - % David DLK:ep Testing Depart cat OR: Test Dept. OR: .J. O. Lea XC: HDT I
,A Fro..1 the Cttbe:in .7..e::..rch G D2vdc.c.v.iU'Lchsr :c:'.
Y
.....=...-=.
c ;;, >. . ?: J :~. : _ ,., ..._3..-....,. . ... ..
. . . . . . . , , .....y._ - -~ * * * ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
I
, , ~7 .r -z:., ., - . ~ , -
.. ~ --~ -
[My%. {&.' a . .-G T a- * . = '
, ]. h ..*yi ' .~ '*l ~,.?,__ .,l . . _
, rg.
.- ~. , ;, - , ;_r, l ,
s -
, s -, -
\
a v- - l
- l f, j
, i
, g
- i
-'+' ' 5
, 'q .
. Q f
fp '
~ '
a
,A. , . .. , . . . . . .
i
-1
; s-i :.... ... i-,.. . I t /.2y 74, TLA CM8sW% S/ &. A e.. a . 5 i i . . . t .. L. ....r ..
i S .% o t eens.-~.,e s..w s. 4a1
- 3 W (.Aoov" d
n i 71,, A go g g , . . . e. ! pmwv - 6 M'M l
- w. . . . . . , 4 . . -
.. i
)
m.e . , d.r Pr1C#cLt ** g. S oC g,y,1** acuws myo9 ed 8 .s . 31 . .r. l., ir . .4 . -i. i i,
. I t . MT .. . i R.o-- MimceTCKPATCD Sce r-accs.
i a n. . e.s > a wts . .. e stats : i.i e.tWTE Wac. vac W m:3 ate tw rt.<- so.i r ..cc , :,,tst c.n , .s % ,R RO A 2iP q 4 c w/cs 7y S/2 vchf'
. t . L '! . . c."...: * . By Of EtCo M u ou V t Tt4 O rets.) Che.7 CP 9t*Eg t440 '
i I
.s ts '. r i 18 .ei . 720% A 9dPCn g C hi Smw 3/bs g ., .e ,, p
. d It.t. *O4 . or r r.C4 Lcd4 e< tP ' * '
, a r
AnG.dr.r".Cs M (L CetAS. P.95 elate / $rletoo4 FiC8ece '
-t.., os. s > ,
,l (f 04- C5f ,/
'[l}InCD G25l I
i I j , i
/ l/Y
.n d h,
/ LAC d V* * .50 1
(
- C+
i j I TP xAF t!Ti f f T!*'e .i T 'J i t tT- !%. 1 -$
,' 1
.W, /,7% 4 ;,.g rq9 1
*f p.=* gh,1 -+s ,.4 -
... e t t c :; , -.. p g ! sr. 0 s pnN d
_ ,_ . y ,m
- :; dDZ - , , , .
,a c , ,pa .m r_ a
-- - - . . ~ . .. _ . . _ . , _ _ , _ , .
>-- qw- w--w-ercywew
1 6 5 h Nf4 .-{l . '~.{-lN l C d .:< ... :r ..s. ~:V. N. < C'
~
- 23 .
g . .. ..
. s -
.,fj TUGC0 GRSE L 11/23/76
, TLX CARBOLINE
. 9019
,z ATTEN BROWN & ROOT
')
TLX 9019 NOV 23 4:45 REF: COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION
. REGARDING THOSE AREAS OF PHENOLIN 305 FINISH CONTAMINATED ON
.J THE SURFACE WITH RUST STAIN FROM ADJACENT UNC0ATED SURFACES AND
.1 THE AREAS WITH MINUTE METALLIC PAP.TICLES PARTICLES EMBEDDED IN 4; THE SURFACE THESE AREAS MAY BE REPAIRED FOR COSMETICS BY SOLVENT WIPING FOLLOWED BY OVERC0ATING WITH A THIN COAT OF PHENOLIN 305 J FINISH. FROM A PRACTICAL STANDPOINT, SURFACE OF THE FILM WILL NOT AFFECT LOCA PERFORMANCE.
1 ROGER TECIMEYER CHAS. RUSHING /SEYMOUR FIEBACK TLX 9019
- 1802 EST 0,~.r TUGC0 GRSE e
e I
- , y , . - - _ , . . -
, .,.gy .: :. -
. . - ~ - -
. xwM.n . ?. . . - -i va.. w?: &.*2.4.* ,.
. ...= u .-c.c.. . n ,.?;... a . - -
' M. 4
. ta l d t' L., A ?, ', ; ; i_ ~ G . s ' " -
^ - ~ - ' ~~'~"'n~"'u<a-
~
- m- -
, .t p. _ _ _ _ . -
. ~
- GHF-1090 l . Gibba S Hill. Inc.
, ING4Ntf RS. OE54GNEAS. CONSTRUCTORS New Yoan Wd"
- : I ') C.
D.-9 . v~'e =I er' II 1976 r- C.H. Gatchell 3 TUSI - Jobsite ^ 'W 20 -,,So_ w
'l~'. . .--O- --- i .L V .;
'# ~./ * '
u Fr-- J.J. Moorhead - i .' ~ ' -
- p. C&H - Jobsite f ,i "UITE%6' COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION 1980-82 2300 W INSTALLATION
'i CONTAINMENT LINER PAINTING FILE 05214 -
REF: CARBOLINE TELEX 9019 a . 4 This will constitute engineering concurrence with Carboline's reco==endatiens for repair of conta=inated surfaces of Phenoline 305, as outlined in the referenced telex. This approval is restricted to the area between elevations 805' and 809', since it will be covered and aesthetics is no: a concern. Our cc==ents should be considered as supple = ental to DC/DD 193. 1 M 'ticor~neac
#[ ~~
Resident Engineer JJM:Dn :s: cc: H.C. Schmid: 6L B & R DCC DIST. R.E. Hersperge.r IL L.T. Van A=erdngen y l', H.C. Dodd IL P.L. Bussolini IL COCD l /~ P.M. Milam lL CHILDRESS l M BUSSCLINI -- l 19MS INCDED WELLER L
' TUGCO QA I wr.1 p" ; c .. e ' & :.; c - l ? 0 ,jyA q- i f
y !/$ 0 N b - b-:,, H2
~'~
-I
,. L/0 0E.s . I l 3 / /l .; L il . ' c.
( l I_ I
. g.or t is e r.ise . ua jgg f
. .. . .. ... -. .. . . .. W $ . . . . .
.:.Lqs e.. .. < .: = n . ~ < -. y.~
;~. . v z-~. . ...:7-ta~. .+-c'. .
* ,~A;25M.A r.s: ' ?)YM,MM'la .. .C ^. ; 1., r *2d.'kMdadMT%.* i : '. :L:-Q' & ~ ..*2 , '$$VCi% J
,,_ ). _
... ~- -. *
...~.
y e 10
\s Ole,71 13t
*1
\
l TUGC0 GetSE WU INFUMASTEd 1-U3U44dG325 11/23/7A TLX CANDULIN S TL A 9U19 ST LOUIS MISSOUnI NOV 23 T'4X 9106905 660 10GC0 G-3E - ATTEN Drt0 9.4 4 rt00 r
. . . +
.TLX v019 M O te dit 4: 45 g--,pws!h=LM Tir r L u.9M.VC., E F EAX S S I EAM ' EL).C Tat I C d f A T I O N MEGAMDgIMG Th0SE AnAs 0F enENOLINE 305 F I 41 sit CONIA.11VATED 04
- ThE SU *.F AC E '41 Th . TOST SfAIN Fn0M AUC4CE9 r U4CO A TIED SUnF ACES
,g AND S UrtF ThE AC E, .btEAS WI TH .*INUT E SIETALLIC F AdICLEs EMr F.DDEL IV ThE s
THESE ArtEAS MAY ME stEFAdEu kJrt. C0s/. L It.L L 3 c. SOL VE 91 ---
~41 PING FOLLOWEL df UVEdCUALIVG 911t 4 InI4 COAf OF Pn 2.4L I:J E 305 FINISH. Fit 0M a enf6CTICAL S1490r14!, dun > ACE OF inE FIL.3
' JILL NOT AFFECT LOCA rr :t F0rtMA NCE.
l l HOGEM TEG1MEYEd l 1 CnAS. rtOSr!!NG/ S E r .100:t F I E3ACr( TLX 9019 . 18U2 EST TUGC0 GHSE 2 7 : .so k, O yooryff q1-gQ - (
. ~. .+ . ...
s ..
#cn n. . , s. . u..i m ,u n m unz.ur, ,n s... o n.. , . n .:, o.u .. , i o ; e a e 3 - - , .- i u O.*(35-40) RECEIVED DATE d !'/ !/7
- 2. DISTR. OF REVIEWED CMC /DCA: b?$ ;C".C), C65 (DCA), TUSI DCTG
). M. c4 Jude
- 2. '(4-11) But/DCA NUMBER / b /4/.7 REVISION C .7.
- 3. FOR DCA: IS DCA CONSISTENT WITH DECD7: YES NO DECD NUMBER REVISION
- 4. FOR CMCs IS CMC CONSISTENT WITH DCA/DECD7 NA YES NO DCA NUMBER REV. DECD NO. REV.
- 5. IS A NEW OR REVISED CALCULATION REQUIRED?:
YES @
' NUMBER SET REV. DATE HAS CALCULATION BEEN COMPLETED AND APPROVED?: h YES NO
'6 . (16-31) G&H DOCUMENTS AFFECTED:
INCORP. REQ'D.: / _
/ F E NT E .Ti J IN NO INCORP. (NI): $PC-C U23. M S. 31. OEV l.
APR 0419E4 NOT APPLICABLE (NA): i OPER. i l 10. INTERDISCIPLINE REVIEW D MS-QA APPLICABLE?: YES APP REJ INFO INITIALS- DATEll l STRUCT W l llMECH I \ \ s# / ilELEC \ hf f l
- 8. DESIGN REVIEW REQ'D?: E lI&C i \/ N . / l V Ed/5 3 ISMI
^
ARCH - =
- 9. UNIT AFFECTED?: h COMMON
- CHEM SVCS L/ !
M Ir/n/fql O % lPBS A i Ul 2 il SPEC ANAL \ f l l APP MECH N f i ll BOTH A ;OA/OC ./ j644 JMrj l NUCLEAR fNAfa l 1 l l (4 -47) (51-5b) (4y)
- 11. ENGINEERING REVIEW -COMPLETE: APP COMM** Phb Pfa kEJ** NR (49) l[l VOID , l[lSUPERSEDEDBY ENGINEER / i h.'s *l JS O, DATE . 90. k
- 12. bESIGN' REVIEW COMPLETE: REJ'*
DESIGN REVIEWER (S) [ # TE 3/2(, kV
/
DATE
** ATTACH COPIES OF SITE NOTIFICATION AND REFERENCE DOCUMENT HERE: i DATE
/ JOB ENGINEEF.(S) Mc ,
BJ#,1 - LATE <S) 5 za I sc,
- 14. (13-56) ED'.Ahr S : A PPLICM;LE DJC, IS dS-31 I,E\/. l. Tsut WT 'rHG ,.bWG
~
ASIONtATO O SE cfIoO 3 A MCG 1. or % L W am . Mn.,: .....a. .
. . . :, ..:. . . , _ . . . . .g . _ _
.L. _
. SPEC HAH,TUCC0(2) AM(4) s .
~. Page'I Cr 7 j T'
f' CHANGE DOEX:OEI C m ANCHE PEAK S N E M CIRIC S*E ICN : II xx DESIGN GANGE AUI90RIA*ICN :III 95000) (WIII. NCTI) BE INCORPORATED IN DESIGN DOCDENT DCA NO. 17,142 Rev. 2 I. SAFEIT REULTID DOCLMDC: XX YES. 10
- 2. CRIGDULTOR: CPPE XX ORIGINAL DESIGNER
- 3. DESCRIPTICN:
A. APPLICABLE SREZ/DWWBOOD W T 2323-AS-31 REV. 1 B. DEmIIS THIS REVISION VOIDS AND SUPERSEDES DCA-17,142 Rev.'1. A
- _ _/f Reauest clarification of toccoatine reouired for theb=ipulator n crane W ~
(TEX-FHSCMC-01)1 9 EL. 860'-0" in Reactor Bldo. #1 which was receiv_ef wi*h a = xy_ 4
~ a coating from the vendor.
. SOLUTION: Patch adhesion tests were cerforined on the subject ecuipment oer Paragraph a
/ 9.2.2 of AS-31 in the above applicable soecification with applicable results. (See attached inspection recorts.)
Therefore, Phenoline 305 toccoat by Carboline Coro. shall be apolied utilizing acclicable site crocedures and the following. (1) After the existing vendor acclied coating is abraided to acceotable "non glossy" finish, the surface shall be wiped prior to aDolication of 305 tMt.t1 gi@ s(ylol u.onu nuec on eage z' RECENii MAY 24 ~993 - -
- 5. APPRCNAL SIGUm2RES: GY/sgr 5 b A. ORIGINATOR: M ,
MTE h20'83 B. DESICN REPRESENETIVE: DA2 6- b - N
- 6. VENDCR 'IRANSMI""X REQUIRED: YES NO XX-
. S'mNDARD DISTRIBUTICN:
ARMS (Original) (1) Peter Bush-QA Spec. Spyr. (1) DCA PORM 11-80 Quality. Engineering (1) Civil Engineering '(1) Ack:an. arv 7 TS for Crig. Design (1) Y Nes* W ite (1) I u.w m .-.-_ - w _ n.-nu_ ~.- ~
o _ _ . . _ . __.. ; .._ . . . . . . . . . _ . _.
)
e DCA-17,142 Rev. 2 Page 2 of 7 I l to remove loose particles. (2) Apply Phenoline 305 topcoat to achieve a dry film thick- l ness of 3 to 7 mils. Utilize WFT gauges during applics- l tion to deternine proper thickness and docunent results per applicable site procedures to avoid later destruc-tive testing to determine thickness of applied topcoat. l 0 0 0
*h h.Md *I .' 4b. ,1 *bs@ #6 "
S Mb O k h . *
..e. 'e b- -
I ge_s . W __ A, L i_ OC.* 17191 RL 3Of
)
! OOMANCNE PEAx 5 TEAM L.ETRIC 5TATICN w l or l IN.9ECTICN REPCRT e@\tf @M dC f Q%
sv8m* / sTawcTwat r N nca iTns xacmenca ihsrniich vr Swep PofuEO E00!PwENT e} m-FGmitanca
- ortvFr\
.u v me.
T- _ Rc8 owiT no.1
.m u.r. . cent.a c.
m arv. ;nur.ec ,xc.4aav.a p - =s cm AS-31 s I el0f-Op-11.A C Dev. 3' w2327 e
&dehon" " DemNet Eot O P,,ye,,,, W,uw, ,
CI"meYre-nYa JuSL RE3hA.75 O mesenan comuun , u usucam.: mus sarwaeron h sinlen Imancenom cowurun, unsemurem irne usun asum ,,
" INS #ECTICM ATTMISUTES a; QArg 379,g
- m. e
- 1. I Paten (Adhesion) Test iII I l l I I I al Adhesien test cede med to a_ minim e e7 ?OO es4 l
before failure. Record f ailure Point Acc pst J .1 l 6 l b) Adhesion test performed to a mimimum of 200 ost l' I i i i before failure. Record Failure Point 85C) osi ld l I i i l I l c) Adhesien test cede m d to a mimia.- of ?nn esi l before failure. Record Failure Point e25 psi l4 l 1 fde l l I I
- 9 I I
- 4. l Recair Work Comolet and Documented oer OI-OP-11.4-Y l l/
l l l l l I i i l I l l I I i h l II I i li i I I l I I 1 i l I l-l I . ! l I l I _ l l !i l l i Il I l 1 I ii i l i il 1 i ii t
.' I i lI i i
lemaan 3 ('hses, specs, ticJ MANiMTOR C 2ANE AT EGi. 860*, AZ 75 *- / OS
- I T B AS In S e ; e c n ci.u c t M y g g ,'[ g g .7p y pn9 POL ,( p;_p y g3
~
OC imSPtcr0R sg ( 8I- IM9 2,I r= 5 ,,g p p k' h*Imd' . g ] ' ,g_-pg d .= 3 geg
* "' - m ,m
'OCA 17/92 4 M )-
' OOMANCHE PEM, STEAM L.507RIC S TAT.CN l INSPECTICN REPCRT lmp g 7 - ~ -
. m aricanca e. at zw.aar.cn irza ocscairnon ihartsiiuh Ur -lsysTo < sTnaro SHOP 90Iuf0 E0t'!DufNT EO h O/~7 C'iW R C TS UN t~T NO \ 4 mar. ac. coc. a arv a cnaa.a ao. a.=t a .m g au * .cesT.ac.
etc.ac, acv. AS-31 s 1 e 01-09-11.a-9 Dev. 3 *2.32.5 e O I",,e;?5, c: OTdnco uno" 6Tnsit@ Q P,*.nene. P V,c no. , mER 4E344.73 O apacnon : mm.tTro , au. apucaats itnas sansracTemy b'"" Gll9 !G mare:non conesur to, unsatspac7cmT iTom usttn se.ow INSPEOTION ATTRISUTES U
; OATE am
,i er. a $ is
- 1. l Patch 4_ Adhesion) Test i II l l a) Admesion test eerfo med to a minimum of ?OO esi III l l
Defore failure. Record Failure Point 2 2 5 psi IM i l l b) Adhesion test per<ormed to a mimimum of 200 osi (~ l l l ! before failure. Record Failure point 4'75 osi lW l l I c) Adhesien tes t ree for-ed to a mimian2m of '/00 Ssi II l l before failure. Record Fatlure Potnt 425 psi ivi i I l ,.Fl l I l 1 e. l Recair Work Comolete and Documented oer OI-OP-11'.4-M l ld I I I II I I I II I I l ii i i I i l l i i l! l l I ii i i i ii i i i i i i ___
! I I i l i I I I I O l 1 l 1 1 I i l i i i l l l I I I I assanus ousa, specs,ErcJ MMe P0s-ATo2 ORNE AT ELEt 860, AZ 75*- / Ct5
- IT&iS tr4SFG'c.TED r#C/ oOE RA su guac ont rRou.LY PLATFcRM (c'4AruYCt 5[
PAAncam . ANO rouipmEsr, euca As rwo c A0wers . 1 m
- - is,w w m L aran aca =
' HC CL C.-8l-ol 3 Ut 2.1,s I l g ,- C
; art i
! oc m escToa ,.
h a cz _. a m. . ,. .>.m em m.e,w.m m - _,.. . .. ._ . , ,_ _x m
. .. -. - ...--..:-.~.
l CC4l')19d 1 8%$
;;MANCHE FC M STEAM E i;TRIC S TA Ts CN t e~
-)
I INSPECTICN REPCRT lan g g q g , irn ascainnon iertu;iun gr gsrsTr , sTaucn.,ag m.s~aanen s909 ontwEn Enen owruf d.conranca s.EUOomeraEcn user no. i . sPv e an. as.F ec. :oc. s a o a ca.aa t. no. w iau.*.ccT.ai g lwuxas ca
,2325 AS-31 s I ss0!-Op.11 .t o Rev. r ,
a=ocess g l=sisP=. ion O per instk.u n on @msTonoe vcnric.arica insetenc= C P=pectrom ins O Pac = set: ten tr , Jeep. NE3&E.Ts C ser'ECTIOe C tsPLKTED , a& L appuCAaLE ITDas SAtsFacTonT p I"l!5 5 baape: Tion Con.pt rTro, umaanspacTeaf irru usrto me.ow L Q NToa cATE to iTEas IE2, 8C INSPECTICN ATTRISUTES ; ,*, oarg ,,,,,,y ,,
, ,z s a
- 1. l Patch (Adhesion 1 Test l l l i I 3 i Adheficn te?! Se"#0 N d t0 ! minimum of 200 Ofi ! !! !
I before failure. Record Failure Point 700 pst lW l l I b) Adhesion test performed to a mimimum of 200 ost IIi l l before fatlure. Record Failure Point 700 est vl l l l c) .Adhetion test eeefermad to a mimimum of ?OO esi ll l l be f ore f ai lure. Record Failure Point 6500s: ; d l l l l ,wk l l 1
'i e. I Repair Work Comolete and Documented oer Ot-OP-11'.4-Y " 14 i .
I I II I I i i i I i I II ! I l !I I i l i i i l i l i i I i i i i i l i I I 1 l l 1 I I i i l l I j i i i i l i _ l I lI l i I I I l l l l l l ca s=ca, era mAm pumu ee^se Av a/_rv. 66c', a 7s - ios r tTEM$ g a.sP3CTED r>4cLuDC hoRt MW TROLLEY BEAMS (M Y 4YI5} e
- - sL.a run aca 'in
! Lg* g.,,g3g3 jM i siematuna f__ 01369 E.I es l Q. ' ' #C ""** 'Q" '8 m
j .- nw u .mwamemmn : . = _ _,- a. x.c . z ai n
. ----. .-- -. .- m. .. _
@ C, /j I ) / 4c121 3
~
OOMANCNE FEAx 5 TEAM E1 I:7Ric 5 TATICN g
\
1e .s INSPECTICN REPCRT jaa g ,-, p 7 ,
- a ar_s.aur.cn irzw asscaimoa udng ich ur lmrcr cai eEQUiPME:tW dsvsTm.,
Rc 8 t.AiTsuscrw No tt . SHOP PoluEn E00!DuEsr spec.:.c. arv. gau ac. soc. s uv- a enaw o. g=c.awasca . m w . ace r.ac. AS-31 s- i el0f-00-11 4 0 Dev .5 m ':L3 2 9 , O l",,,?,. g, O T,yc}nc,rio= o E gy.T, C &,,ye,,,, O T,v,,,,;,,, , . ms8L mesta.73 O i ecric= co ai.stro a.u waiicancz irnas sariaractoar
+
m, k-~ = ' = JIidas
=
i sr. e=1, .u ,-o r. mmo - ,, INSPECT 1CN ATTRISUTES ; Y gatg y e a es ;
.i '
- 1. I Patch (Adhesion) Test J l l I a) Admesica test re <o m o to a mi
- um of 200 esi I II I l
Defore fatlure. Record Failure Point a 00 ps t l uf l l l b) Adhesion test performed to a mimimum of 200 osi l' i l l l before dailure. Record Failure Point '750 esi ld l l l c) adhesica t es t ee-fe-ed te a mim4m"m e# 700 esi I II I l Defore f ailure. Record Failure Point r7ec osi lv4 l l 1 y so8'l l I I
^ e. I Reoair work comolete and Documented eer 01-0P-11.4 k I 14 I r I i i i i l l Il l i l ll I I i i1 I I I I I I i l I i l i - I I I I I I I I I I I I i i
! I i l l I i i l i I I lI l l l l l l I I l l l manamus (oses,3Mcs, treJ e4Mirh AM C dN1E @ Eh 64O, AZ 75*- / OS
- ITcM s mspccTro 4Newoc 2E^NJ M THE CR^^E (Z AND Y AYis).
Y { g* f a h31 M M E
'Q'. Q- 81-Ci 3#4 7. I is I - 8 i oc asPecica e m
/
===.vn.= ~ w ou.www w ..__% w . . _ . ma g ,,._m; .,__=.u,. .
. - _ _ . . . . - . ... :.a a - .. , _ _ . ~ . ....... .. .
D C.& 1314 2 RL 1 OOM AN CHE PGX STEAM E d TRic S TATICN l, l w > INSPECT 1CN REPCRT lm g/ ggg y , sysTue s sTuro sn .xsioaanca irtu st3caimca Horu.i aGN vr tj.cznancancamc.hh)fprMEAT .g RG unit No1 ..
$ @P DQ[ME9 E00IDWENT st no. arv. au ac, coc. a arv a cama.c mo. gwt en .m cw. cesT.sc.
AS-?I e i e Of-OP-11 3-9 cev '4 -t 2.3 25 e ocr55 unc O Per est OI"aw'"renca O Par 'as7ki tmaa Gv=7a'ecno=a' vowicarica insp O maa'menom
' ins samtenom ,
WIW. NE344.T3 C meecmse consitrTra , au. Meucaats irons sanwacTont % b 3D'If117
~ *~o= = r=
efi cnos. . - cr o., . u,1 0 - to trans me. I og INSPECTION ATTRISUTE3 ; ,,,,,,,,,
.i += Igarg a
- 1. l Patch (Adhesion) Test i li I l 'a i adhesion tes t cede-ed to a minimurn er ?OO eti l I l l l
Defore fatture. Record failure Point.TP S ps1 lW l l
! b) Adhesion test cerformed to a mimimum of 200 osi l' l i l l before failure. Record Failure Point W50 osi l-l l l l c) Adhetica test eeM'er ned te a minimum of 700 eti I II l
- l before failure. Record Failure Point.P7_r psi lM i i l ,. *# l__ l l l h c. l Gecair Work Comolete and Documented eer 01-0P-11.4 k i ld I l l l l l
' I I II I I i il l I I I I i
, I l !I I i l i I I l l l I i i i l Ii i l i Ii l i I I I I i l . l l I I I I I II I
- l l l l l f I I Ii l a==aa== <o===,-ecs, eu ms Nuvro.t eanE e esv ew, az. 75 -i os -
f7CMT 'NSP!~CTED INChuCC UEAMS M THE CRANE (y ggg} l w . aELATED mc8 M . ATE l jgiggg y
- 0 8.l- Ol3t!r 9.1 I
- e ac mesetcToa 4 l /
n w. - . v.mm: : - : : a:.!
.;,.s s...x:am.a. m :a,m m m wm:u-n<..x w Avs-A M -
, y w ~~~~ m main g.r w i m =w-~~- = -:- s .n,w~ n- 2 - n e. ~ - .: ,m up -
i j c' . M*.*. . C:nst4GC vbt:.*:C:\ ~CN C.sti.C.t S : FCr1 Cx' S .<da dA
- S - C:n ca rc. 2373
.' I. t03-40,1 n I'/C :ATI /.2- 2 d
- N .
L. ::3-a. ct rI!r.ic ::tc/:CA: i"5 :: tc) . I65 i:CA). OsI :C= ED BEZKOR GH/NY
- 1. ( 4-11) XUI /:CA NC:taE2 /f 8['f E/:5:0N /
- 2. rCa :CA: :s cCA C:Ns:sn:r: w: s CEC:2:
OEC3 NCMSE3 E1:5ICN
@ us ::C-
- 4. rC1 OtC: :S C:tC CONSI5mT WI 3 CA/::EC 7 : NA !!3 NC .
a QCA NCMBER ..3Z7. CEC 3 fC. 3rt. J. 23 A NE:i CR 3:7:3Z CAI.WCON RECC!1C7: TE3 NCt3Ea SET E/ . CA= ZAS CAf.WCCN 3EI:I COMPT.Z:ID AND AP??cII:,7 :
- i. (15-31) Gaa Occ .vC s ArrtC :::
@ !I3 NC --
13 CORP . 3ZC ' Q . : NC INCOAP. (NZ): G 00C. '2 3 7- 3 . A s - 3 i Rev.1 NCT'APPt!CA5!.I (NA): .
- 10. W. 3 Disc;2t.::lt wiirAs 3
(
" . 2hW5-CA APP t.2CA2:.I? : !Is @ STRUC-iAs ei.u J .:: Ioi*:4 :'": Al .i . cA I
.N . 6 e a MEG . N i
- i I E;,, c , 6N, i .
- 3. CE3 C. A.G!rA 3ZC' 07 : h NO Inc e e X e i A,G , , , s , ,
- 9. CNIT As s a .: J :
1 & COMHCN CEEM SVCSI e i Nt 6 f65 9 6 6N e 4 2 . SP EC AN AL I I t I \ t AJ P MEG 6 * - 6 \ e SC"'I C A/ CC e e i i Ni scr' u n e e o k i e e i i N e (4'- 7) (5 4 5EDI .U.433.N 1.L. CIC 3EI2:NG R.T.TA C*.M{t CZ: APP Coota 7tm Pfa T g lNGttA'MEM S MI -4 6) (49) C* 7CC l(( : ?t2 SCC ST Esc b M '
. cA;g /- M <8
~
L:.. ::E3!Ci RZ7:IN CatPd.IT : REJ OPiR. n .
- CESICI E/*.r4 Eats 3 _ A_d o
'.~,
CATI Is > s' "A':"."ACZ COP!IS Cf 5 T: NCT 7:CACCN AND RIGNiC"" CCC""ItE:I"?
, IIRE: C.CE
! il. JCB CIC: .EI2(5) /W 'I. CATIC$) / " *N
- 4. ( *.2-5 6 ) RE:tARIS : 042 32"'I 2... 4
- GM G g -
"**'*-'"*6-
, ym
' ' ' ' ' ~ --v= e
- m - ~
~ v = a m m a w a w w w w " "- ~ ~" - ' -
I .
~
. ~ . . -
*s
.sric n cco(2) b / QIC[lVE]
S 5aar m .; gs -- --M. . l . G , JAN 4 7"eo4 OEC 2 0 . . ,-!:0 3
,l 8'a & b .t N DE IIEUS EI]'? ~
N;E 1 CF 1
~
Cr*NCE PEAX S'LV1 ELECTRIC STATICt4
- Z5IC: CA ;C &"HCRt:AT:Ct4 DCA 20.18,489 Rev. 1 ,
)CHCIll (WIII tCO) SE OCPJCRATID C4 CESIC4 CCCC
- 1. SAFCY IEI/CED :DC.P.CC: VY YES NO
- 2. CRIGOIATR: C?PE vy CRIGD4AI. CESIC;ER DESCRIPTIO4: I
- 3. '
2323-AS-31 REv. 1 A. APPt.: Cast. sPe E-tStSgt4 THIS REVISION VOIDS DCA 18,489 Rev. O AND ALL REVISIONS
- s. ccAII.S THERETO.
f OU-113.) . O C O C t \/ C h
' JHitU4 ::'-
- 4. St*P9CCOG D"CF.DCA^!OI: '
Protective Coatings Exemetion tog Items 8-15 OCCUMENT CONTROL t APPR*VAI. SIG AI'JRES: MW/bwb
. 12-19-83 S.
A. CRICOIAZR: MM bb I . CA:t / 7-/ 8" 8_3 ,;
- 3. CES Ci REPRESCCA : t&l"^ [/I CATT /2-t.N3
,r , ..
"u cL E ' CA!! I ?'d ,
C. CCSIG4 PC/ Di FFlCR TO IS1'E: . I
- 6. VCCCR FI*.E:TD CJRCE vv 50 YES: P.O. ti.FEC1 _
i
- 7. STA; CMD DIS;?J30',r!OI:
AFra.S (CRIGOW ) (1) Mark Welch-QA Spec. Spyr. (1) CCAL:""f CGUTESIDG (1) Civil Engineering (1) CC:G ftR CRIG. CCSIC: (1) B.K. Bhujang-Civil / Structural IWW 6
- u > d Design Review Group (1)
CCA ftRi 9-33
/
5i
, . . ~
-..n .-.
o A
- . .t-
-C:sANGC vist37:c1 cr4 caccg._:S: FCr1 Cnc ' S Mc O CA
- S - Ct ts J C B t;c . 2323
$ 83
~
C- t23-40i P2 : I I'! C OAT E
- 1. C 3'"A. CT Rr/II*JC Jdif/ CA: 3M, 365 iCCal. -*:5I 3C
- ED BEZKOR GH/NY
- 2. t 4-11) JC;IW:CA NOM 3E2 18489 xEv:sICN o
- 3. PCA OCA: I5 CCA CONS!! TENT 'dI*2 DZ007:
DECD NUP.SE3 AEVISION h YES NO
- 4. ICA CMC: IS CMC CONSISTINT 'dI 2 CCA/DECD? : NA YES NO .*
DCA NUMSER llIV. DECD NO. RIV.
- 5. IS A NE'J CR RIVISED CAI.C :.A!!CN RrqUIRID?: YES @
NUMBER SET Rr/. CATI h55 CA!.CUI.ATION SEIN COMPLITID AND APPROVID? :
- i. (15-31) C;P. 00CC.MENTS Ati!C'"ID:
h YIS No INCORP. RIQ'O.: NO I.NCORP. (NI): S OPr. . 2.323- 46-3l ktV. 1 NOT* APPLICA3I.I (NA) ,
- 10. INTIRDISCIPE.INE RIVIYd:
~. RW.5-CA APPLICA2LI? : TIS h STRUCT e AP P i RIJ e INTO t INITI Al S i OATE (N & 4 e i MIG I \t i i t EI E8" t &\ l l e
- 3. DIS!CN RIV!rd KIQ'C?: YIS @ I& C AACE i
i e N t iN e s i
- 9. :Td!T ATTI0:I:7: i& Cc.~ .CN _CEI.M SVCS 6 , e Ni i PBS t A N I 2 SPEC ANALs a e i N 4
- APP MEC3 4 e i i \ t BCTI - Q A/ CC t : I N 6 NUC:2AR e e e i se e e i 6 6 '
(42-47) (51-56) 1491 Li. ENGINCI2ING Piv!I'd COMPL.OI: APP COMM** Fub Pfa RI"' NR (49) {"'l VCID - STPEPIEDED E! [G V- / g\ $ c40:N- I '_ .>V! CATI / 8.3 ': h L2. CIIICN RIV!rd COMP 5.ITI:v i.- 2 . 4' ", 5 [ g3 APP REJ p/g .,
.- des:cN rzv:reExt si N4 CATI Yp DA:I \
/dg.
"A:"." ACE COPIIS OF SITI NOT !ICATICN AND RI.73INCI DOCUMENT ZIPI: DATI
- 12. Jos cic:NEIxt s) A>A/bb2 cA:I(s) / + T4-
- 14. ( :.3-5 6 ) arMAPzs: c a s: r Ps v e n . .. s- ; . . . a _ m.a . . . .. ., .. _.wa ;_w .;- a.x _wa s.w -- --= - -
_ -- - J
!*LI,' H 9]
, , Telephone Conversation Reeord Date: 12/9/83
- ~
SMMarano/048, M0hiruvolu, KFalk, Outgoing, Tu, n: 11:30AM 865.18429 N GTN-68185 December 19, 1983 J. Call by: K. Falk ,{ Gibbs & Hill, Inc. (h") ( Ca*** r) An swer by: M- Wal ' m o{ TUSI - Conanche Peak (N *J (C c,,,,,,, g Texas Utilities Generating Co::ipany 11-2323-054 Subject d i s c u s s e d: DCA-18489, Revision 0 SUWW AFtY OF DISOU5510N. DECIS!aNS AND COWWITWENTS. TUSI agreed to void the subject DCA; the areas of coating referenced therein will be added to the coating exemption log. Approved by: h%.s Robert E. Ballard, Jr. Project Manager
'Kf:scf ARMS (B&R Site)
J.B. George (TUSI Site)
". nell. '~'USI Site)
P. Milam USI - N.Y.) ' t
- e. -
RAc;n.'.'.- .
;' n ' C '. . ,;y.,q FEB u~o ' 1954 1 3i I[h F.424,1948 b t.,1:? p . 6 ,s - s se, v- 'm;kO da' 4h s Mk.'I.' "
*'] --
"^ ,",,~"g-, ""r-
[ [k_ , - (M _
, 't i '
- r. . . - . . . , _ . . . _ . , _ _ . __ _
*-.. p
), SP EC.H AH ,TUGC0( 2) , AM
~ '
Page 1 & 1
'q CHACE DCEX:OEI
' : II
. CDMANCEE PEAK SIEAM ELE 0!RIC STATIO3 DESIG1 CE70GE ALT.DRIZATIOT III AA
.3 R.
- DCA 10. 18,489 (EIII) (WIIL }DI) BE DwuJ.% TID IN DESIGi DOC:EDE 3
j 1. SAFETY RE:JCE:f ECX1 EDIT: XX YIS 10
- 2. ORIGUMOR: CPPE XX ORIGDIAL DESIGIER I
~
- 3. DE5Ciur 131:
A. APPLICABLE SPEC /UnU,XXXI7EIR 2323-AS-31 REV. I [ j B. DE:AIIS In Reactor Buildine Unit 1. seven Protective Coatino Ins *oettion N Recorts (See attached 1 list areas which are below procedural allowances for soot
'1 d areas of orimer. These areas are identified as follows: PCR 00679, AZ 96* to N 98* 9 EL.1055' to 1056' , 1.5 so. ft.; PCR-00577, AZ 220' to 230' 9 EL. 1060 q ,,
sg to 1061, 7.5 so. ft.; PCR-00630, A2 227'-230' 9 EL. 1044 to 1045'-6", 4.5 so. ft. h and AZ 225'-227' 9 EL. 1045'-6" to 1046'-6", 2 so. ft.; PCR 00637, AZ 304'-306* 5 9 EL. 1048'-6" to 1051; 7.0 so. ft.; PCR 00640, AZ 21*-24' 9 EL. 1044'-6" to
% 9 so. ft.; PCR 00617, AZ 290*-300* 9 EL. 1053 to 1054, 7.5 so. ft.;
h 1047'-6", 0 PCR 00631, AZ 267'-271* 9 EL. 1038' to 1042' 16 so. ft. and AZ 266*-270' 9
*s EL. 1036' to 1037'6", '6 so. ft.. The above low primer shall be acceptable as is.
Ei s - , , , . , 35-1195 --
. m ..-"
t
- 4. SUPPORTDC IDCCMENTC'IO1: IE EllAl L'OlliEiG REGU V c u l-f AUG 2 3 '98 b Mitpc h e L ' ns e e etJ%2 522p c+
N l u - nne nvenT rnNTROL e, a , um au. aa - - - - - - - [j 5. APPR7/AL SIGMURES: Mk'/sgr 8-22-b3 A. ORIGDMDR:
~~
/V) ru l) YU %TE_6f E2/83 B. DESIGi REPRESDA : & bb m2 8 23! 3 ;
I., I
- 6. 10 XX
[] L'Ds:OR TRANSM.ITIAL REOGIRED: YES ' l <1 __
' 3. a 7. e M E DIE RIBLU G1:
0' AFMS (Original) (1) Peter Bush-QA Spec. Spyr. (1) ECA EURM 11-80 l t.; Quality ' sineerirg (1) Civil Engineering (1) Ac::an. Rev 7-82 y 'IS for Orig. Design (1) p Nestinghce.e-Rite (1) {~ .- . + -. . , . - - u -. . .wm-- a ,= ,. - . -
, .. _ _, . . . . .~_-_ - "- . -- - e 9 . . - v: D ' . - . . . . . g -.. .. m .
?. -
B. .g
,j c:ue.ucs .cx sTrau r:.r:7a:c s72 :en
'. . _ . . /
g' . INSPECT 1CN RE.:CRT r-m -r - i
+
g.
.m :uu.or.cn .
gu,r.r.s :.an .,s. j'g',.g g 7;CTICTIVE COATI E3 ,. /,r,u., n v.: sc. .w.. w. e :. :::. a ae,. a ca 'I>;" 4: :.
,4 - .!srs u s s:n::.As :ss.:,s-r. :.M./ /"S.ee E#u.cLq S\ '
{ AS-31 . / , QI-CP-11.4-23. Rev. F
.-r at ;a LI: cu . or. A
.! i_;' cre, /( /y, /9/A 3 e 9lx ==cetss '
,i
.:jl . . scM: ica m
- vcser m ins 2 ur::n G.=e ca .ca ::.u-:ca
' msst: o. C 7:ua. f ;:st tr- l
- y. .aa:P. Azr..;s maar: es asrt: en p de j j
. C. ........ :sset: : n c:=.e.m.: . au. u= casu: ims sar:sneren //)M $. pm 4/,/;.r" '
!.5I - GUOP: ten c:up -
e f: :, unsr grac en: 2 tws us t: sc.:w ae insste ca C
- tw ac.
g :41 g - et *
'C.
y msr-r: Ties arra:su Is / ' ,,,e g i.2 I
/ r,a; ;;
si ei : } , ,,.y stA!. cR FINIsa CcAT i lI i f1, . I i
- 7. .
- 7. 9 1. I I II i !
16 Perfor:: icoke tas; per cara. 3.1 to ce:e-::ine inicknessl l l l i ! 9 - in mils of cri::er and total systeci (document one se: l l i l l
)
of readings for each 100 sq. ft. when testing Centain- l l l l j
- d -- i "'"I II"'"I
$ IRECORD:
l II I I T' l l l l 1 1 1 2'l 3 l 4 l 5 l 1 l _ y__ . l l i l j 7 Hin. sect prime-: .. Q, Nax. sce: Primer: I? C I3 5ID 0 LC.inlD.5 ID WI i& I - I I S. S 13s- I t'o I ?.o I vgl 1.* I .I i;5
._1 IAve.- sce: Primer:
10 8-1.5.9 10.9 Io.2I f./1 i f.c + 1
$, __! hin. s:o: Tc:. Systea: FSs$17~SW'&f2"258 Di i i p l l.J- 1 !
Wax. see: Tet. system: lo.r> I 55.o I e c l f. o I/O. O I LA i ,, ,
$W i I lave. seet Tot. system fTD L /. CQhe.Cl 3 9 I I l . ?'
l I 7 o _-J.,- I l
! i 2. I ou2 <A/ 4#4f I I i i 7e 'eri Adhestea tes: cer ears. 3.2. '
W [.9 3 _-- I I RICORD: Adhesien Test streneth in est: I I l ! i i l i l I , b1 Collv #1: 4'd C Oc11y #2: -M7 Dolly f3 4 C d 14.a i cg ,_ j ! - i D
*< l l -
i l ! 1 f3 l i l l ' l
! i l i 5.1 I I l_ l i i l i
[ . =swer.: I i l i i
% ' S & /t reA C ';;c:<= IC Q ,sn::,
~ pgc c :J@),,4 e //; e.fc - ' E./ /c5./ -/c~ w fcyc ' '
oye - is ? 9g C 4 f80 f/ MS q /C =; f *- yet I f*) M srLed "L ac .pr .Le.< '", s .
~
.R l I n:s sc "'
.k.
lFC ~i.;C.5-(-e a r =. g,t..t 1.i. C' 03E
~ .' ' * :::u **
4 -- t
- a ,
- v st: :. .,
'4, 48
, , . . . .. . , . m , 3 c : D.: tmi V. -
s::w.r,.ws.; 6... w; hssw M* :wA.-~" ~I - - ' " - ' ' ' " " " '** ^
. ~ . .. . .- ,x, w .
g. 4 -.. . . . . . . - T.f.o
)
lP \ COM AN CHE FE.AK STEAM E:.I: TRIO S TA'".CN /
.. . . . -s . m -r
,;} p p.,
INSPEO~l0N F.E?CRT d .m Ou wna PRCTIC IVE COATINas gl cr2,, r.r.c s . .ea.>/.,6e J ._ ,l3;sm , 5:wc r.u ;4.a.en_r.c.,xcd-/ /Sae B,,4,_.
.7
-l 7 ;.c e i r.. ;w. e:. :::. a ar . . u.asa ., . g.a u sa rar uws. ac41. a; p ,
AS-21 .I / .I QI-CP-11.4 23. Rev. C j pp , p g j ff_1_ 5 ". C 1"7CPT _d. M .=8 O PV rCtF1C. i inzate;m n.:.ar:cu g iM375:*.CN ar e en ~ an C pIM3p{;-*0M C par en eMSP{OOOM gg A 'O. nu u3 - ,
, b 88T:~0' N -- _? . C AP".:cAat,.: t?cas SAT:5FA07 gT [g), jW, /[./f.g
.s, e4,., =~ -- =. - m ,m. usm ss.. .
= - = = g =
,e.
, i ITDs MC. 6 gg
> r INSFECTION ATTMl!U"E5 / -
g ga;g g.,,
); . _ , ,
/r
- E **
k l SEAL CR FINISH CCAT l l l l l s. l . l l I l l g 1. I Perfer: Tocke test per para. 3.1 to ceter :ine taickness! l l l l
$ l in mils of cric>er and total system (dec.: ment one set l l l l l h
n . - . . j cf readings fer each 100 sq. ft. when testing Centain- l l l l l y __ i ment liner) i II I I V- , mI cRo: i II l I 1 e I l 1 1 -2 l 3 1 4 l 5 l l l i i i p( - = - .._ , _ . l/.f l(/.dlJ-ol#-olJ.o M ) I M"'
~
hin. Soot Prime-: l l Hax. Sect Prime-: lS.fid.fl3.fl3.ol F'5'l ~ 10 1 I .l i
% lAvg.' Sect Primer: l f?. ~7 l /.9 l c'?.~r l G.S' l J. a-l k -T l l l 6 ._
hin. Sect Tet. System: 147d) ['v3 l @.c]Ml l 14 - l ! N har. seet Tet. syste-:: I 7.ri /o.s~l t ri 7 5-l fr s I l<l i ! st Y (Ave. Seet Tet. System: M 74li W LM VI i 17 l l fn l l 7'2'k?te. <,m- fw a/vs.e .e .;2./gg 2 i ii i i
-l w
l 2. I Peder= Adhesien test eer eara. 3.2. I ! ! I i g . . . - -l l RICCRD: Adhesien Test Strength in esi: I l l ! I h l l Dolly 81: 40d Delly f2:" 4C Dolly #3 ddd l J--i l ! f.., ...I ! ! I i ! l pp i i . I i i i c-1 i l i i l ! ' i .- l i . I i l l i 3-c
! I I i i i !
e m a a c u ar,3,t:s. e u o Gsr@ pu ac- /ou W,-<<- %.-. ,
. ;; & A 'E. / $~C'
- o 5 T~ 0 fr2 5BC + c & *L O#'2i y ICt-Q'40 lC41
} Et jo gg- Q " lc /063 '~$ OMe'* mM "Les~s S e 0 l
.., i
~ :
.Q *
". J [ *
-d 5 bi= = .,:., .c- ? / - o j5; 7- P. /. ! ,^ "..-- . , g.
.un . . m ., ,
-- i ec :Mut: :n 4j,
.i _
+
RJ k ,-( ., O-' i . ,.--
, ,.f,_.g f f. ( I ', ,,__.4,.4 ,s .i L
U2 b?akMc. .di -hia%W ' ^ ~ L ' "^ " - ~ _
'iuL.r. X '. . z. .,;a . ain . :GL
..._ :- . _. . :- _g ,
h.)A -~. a _ - ._- 2 7 . ( ,
.I D CO?.t AN CHE FE.AX STEAM ELCOTRIC STATICN j j
- } '
W -r I N S':,.,, .,,71 C N n:..- C ,,n _. l.gj g ,, anu :11an:n . g: w ..: r.c.w . 1 s i i svu :r.u u.a.a.ur.::,
- 4 4 PROTECTIVE COATIN15 v /_ f v f:- N.o /p_ ,!:i:f_R / (__( g 6 f.a pig M ,*.
a a: sc. w. c.:. :::. a uv. . ca.c ., . u a .u. s w. m. nc. .
] ,
AS'-31 ,l e.. / OI-QP-11.4 23. Rev. 5~ y/ 7 00. /9'J.7,19/1
,, ,l 11 g P m:s:: m:ss,. a ==ve:ssta ri nce: u ma guews
- .:.me,, - : wcme,
- .32:. l 3 _ . .
==. O = o=rt=cs es- g m . n:1 . s >
' /
.', _ _ _ . . G w e =...:
3 c:u=.r::: . u.:. u=.::As ..r trzxs sar:=ra:::n
. ._ ///41/- .
Jc4.a, f #-Jb-f _, 21NPC:-'.:n ceu*. .. . casetsra cay artus i.:s z: ar_ow ** * * " * " "'* s i - Q ,e TEM nc. - - # g/ - IN37E0*1CN /.TTRIEUTES / ; 3 gA;g 3; E n;3g h .
" / n E c i ..
1 SEAL OR FINISH CCAT I ll l
.: l .
I II I A . l r
? 1. l Pe-fem Tooke test per para 3.1 te catemine thickness l l l l .l s.- I in mils cf CMeer and t:tal system (d::.:=ent one set l l l l l
[ l cf readings for each 100 sq. ft, when tasting Centain- l l-l - -l -
-l f .,
I ment liner) l l l l l R . _ . IRECORD: IlI i l h, .I l 1 l2l3 1 4 l 5 l l l'i i
- d. .. hin. Seet PMeer: 1.7.o l O c 1.2.O G.'s)l d_c l cal l* I y .
Nax. Soct Frirer: l.9. 'fl 616 l 3 7l 4/.fl 4.o l l4 l .l !
@ _ , , . . ,_,_ l Avg. 5:: t Pricer: l57.3 le7 3 14. (. @S1l l l# l l y _ , _
l Min. 5: t Tet. Syste=: G5")l N L5"'5)L'Td I i +- l ! N hax. Smet Tet. System: I 7.s'l So l $5'-l y.5 9 5-' l o t- 1 i ! f (Ave. Sect Tet. Svstem:l'Y. 1 l r.3 M I'[>' M 7.0'. l l &4 I h l ~7'c.e be. o.nc . sid e2iOG ~2 _ l l l l l G L 2. I Pe #cm Adhesion test eer cara. 3.2. l !I l l' p d ..l l RECORD: Adhesica Test Stren;;h in csi: l l ! l l
'r]
l Dolly #1: 406 Delly f2: Sfd Colly !3 / Cod l#l l l 9- ! I I I I ! ! % I i 1 II i i ' l t l i l I l l 1 I i l I t i i O
" l l l l l 1 !
C ~ I-f
-0 $ /$~~b~ hS f f.') Y
, ,,,, o . f hhf.'ed'i.D A?.;l41~r' 8 /N tt as e t- 4 fe A .9 /4)*':'=
- a .230' 21 tcyaf! q jr.,,<tS s < L h ,
$l /0$l' j@ & l050, & 4Tr .PD Y -A3'~ il /C*/ S* Q * - /WN '-6 "
l
+
.T l
pW pr n c - ., = uc. d -f's - C/ Q.? R.( r. l I g" ,.;* *,,,s'
- - i crI --- - - ;gi:32.g,g j
y , I
~ ~ "'
.O !
c: nM; :' sI
- .3 V.I m< .--- . - .*
a __....;,.n
. . - -a
,.n .- - - -. -o. .. -. s.. Y E- 4' [-J2D'-g e.4 w 3?'ag.'Mk.~' 'a'r k F " ~" ' "~ " " ~%' ,m Ag - , - ~ , p * , .,ssa7.ri #p Amw
I ~ j.f . .- - _ . - . . _ . . . - . _ . .. .
-a 1
s . COM AN OME F#_AX STE.AM ELE:"RIC 37ATICN / /
. . . . . _ .. *-- -r
, IN5'ECTICN REPCRT . j<. g q an ecs. mar.ca r
.j P uT : Ivt ccAT scs 2 1.c.c r. rara aee me.w4Jsrs pec /f sm's.c t ca.a.wraee he G.:
me. ,*..
,l
- m. u m
/ .I OI-QP-11.4-23. Rev. <~
. . . . .w. m a J /.:pf, /ff/,7,'6.;1,E74 cw.m.a f,y.. ,
AS-31 4 a 2 ClaIN3Ps;
**e NOMIs: r-"FrVCmM;;ca
- ras n.:.ar:en gf-3pe,; m c.- 3cq r::n - g pwa:. O PWSPC c rs-"3M .
g , ,, mSPC- !ON p
. SEP. RE3Ul.73 U
h __ . U "'E '*" C#9. . c Wum.c :T a s,,sA w g ons _ h- " *### fm g-J-7p 4q . . . Ix*PE: x:n comau. tm. unsetsra: car rTrks usTt: sr_ow n.a[ 'M3P ,e
- a nc. s , -c -
h. INSPECT 1CN ATTR!S:JTES p h}g ,'8 3
. /s7 e e p . .
I SEAL OR FINISH CDAT l l l l 1-g l . . l. I I i ! - Ia 1. I Perfer= Toote test per para. 3.1 to determine thickness l _ l l l 1 w
.g ._
l in mils cf crimer and total system (docment one set l l l l l
,t1 n .-.
l cf readings for each 100 sq. ft, wnen testing Contain- l l l l l s_ . . . . _ I ment liner) Iil i i H g .. tREccc: 1 Il l 1 e a - I l 1 12l3 1 4 Is I i !i i i Ty _ kin. seet primer: 14.5 i /.5 l /.fi /.rl45 DbGI 1.P l I h- . Max. Sect Primer: 14'o lc/.fi e/.fl S o l 3. n l I#l 1 1 Ij , , _ _ (Avg. sect Primer: l 8. / l 3. / l 3.T l e7./ l J. A l . lQ l l i hin. seet Tet. system: C5.ogF,.57f ftiSds-~Pb I l a P' I I b . _ kax. seet Tet. system: Ifr-O I 9.5l/3.o 7.01 7.51 1.-r I i ! h (Ave. seet Tet. system: D i?.(-. ! 'F:6/' . M l l4# l l A l ~72:oke aeX64/ .3/oKsF.,:veWr 1 Ii l i h l 2. I Per'ere Adhesien test oer oara. 3.2. *-l ! I l I (;j l l RECORD: Adhesien Test Strength in esi: l l l l i
$ , _ _ _ l l Dolly #1: Voo Dolly #2: US S- Dolly #3 (-W l#1 l l
$ l I i i i l I h.
f,f I I I l I I iI II i l l l 5 i i ii i i f I l ll I l h **" "' W s"** c'=' i @@ w o;-4x.>priwe s-t ,4ppnos. G & A5 8/5# c2%2o3 n soyo-scs o;_1 softW ioSy' R C/so3Yi/O - /050, Aes hrebed "kw &ik g., ._. v .
+ .;,
= = = = =
- _7-9-/-O/67- % E. / rr I i u. C. se "' ,
- 8 urt ,-.
' cc arm".: sm 5, l
Cr ,
- r. . , ,. . -
. m .,.
?.... , s + . . i ..s. .
5 ' g g g Q y gf~ M 1.m --- ._,d. ,
,, g 4.g g_
. ..z. . _ _ . ._ - _ _ . . .
m i . L . . a *
.'.3
- COM AN CHE PE.*.X STEAM C.Z: TRIO $7AT1CN f-/
. . . . . _ , . . e INSPECTICN RE?CRT ~
O.) 4m. ces m nen . Iac. M. 2 0 D 6 ' O . PA/ (_hc.w.
~i PRCTEC !YI CCATINGS /f m h.cr.str..ar.c.hw4 ,lsrs:w s a n.as a.a.c.or.:aA Jg ('B) ,l m,c.
g AS-31
' g..
.I /
- m. u a :. . .n. . m .,c.
.I CI-CP-11.4-23. Rev. 5 "
y'/799 c /f/,2. /9/;2 ..a
,i o .
I; ain ==e::ss aper ms a:.umn ;;;3e a ura u O per w g , ,, 58 PC."'DCm VEutFl"Anom
. sm3PE
- TOM g p=ngs. e t;*tcM utsPt.-r:oM 5 l
e asp. nzsv r: . - - . g h __ G ' ism =::a coe cn , u.:. m.ica.c crum sumeron d)6. yw 4. )/.gb. [ .
,[=sPe: ion c= c c, unsc srac one irem urt = ac.a. ** '"*** " **
(J s irxx ac. a
*f INSPECTION ATTRIBUTE 3 / a g carg
/ .r, =; s
, 79,g e
( . , 1 SEAL OR UNISH COAT l l l l l l ll h - I l
'] ,
- 1. l Perfo m Tocce test per para. 3.1 to determine thickness l l l l l
l in tils cf primer and total system (doc: ment one set l l l l 4 l of readings for each 100 sq. ft. when tasting Contain- l l l h .-. l l _ , , I ment liner) l l l l l h( ,._ , tricom: 1 Ii i i E 1 1 1-2 l 3 -l 4 15 l
, l l i I (
, @'_ kin. soot Primer: CO. 's-) l /# 1/,r' /f J.o G Dep l # l l Nax. Sect Primer: % l J,f l g.<; I fa ; S,0 l41-l .l l f,_ ,,_ IAvg. Sect Primer: l4.df L .2..,2. Q2,3 l3.(/ l3f l d-t- l l l h _ kin. soet Tot. system: O 5b W@ 7,V4.# I lJ. I I d ._ kax. soet Tet. system:(WL54 A <;- 9.o 95 9.s'L . i 1 J- l : I kve. seet Tet. system: ' M kP.dG D17-4 1 ff.M i 14 " l l E l '750/4. am W , Wim/vK' l Ii l i b 2. l- Per'ers Adhesion # test oer oara. 3.2. 1 I l l l h ! RECCRD: Adhesion Test Strength in esi: l lI i l l $ l E Dolly #1: 4// M Dolly #2: #ho Dolly #3 (./ K le. F i l i I l I II I i 1
'd I !
1 i i I l
$ i I . I il l i4 l l- l 1 l l ;
fj i l I Ii l i y y;y;pg n es AE <P/ m- c3Y# w.-m Zf ./0WG /0<f7'V -
& gy 79 3.. qi_jo - jo go ' M*f.+ M+A2 k,ad VJ.n,.) ,ilefne, "
~
4 . k'
- c. .,
% a u aca n t tn sc: cI i"n iricu ups e
_ d. Si-a_ c. . :2 4./eI - : i oc mse.: :n
=.C
*$b E. ; . w. ,.. . . .w . . M .- ' . . .:*'.. . . .u. .w . .:: x.: .' .: : 2
- '%. .: v .
.~ L * % .
-2.'--~. w .
h m 'u. g.G gpf ?_- ~ tM s Ti __h'
^ "
- TQgM*gdQ .g*"-~4d 'c.g ,*hi.sy a':.---_.2 mil - - se ,, w,p gM M r'MS*We . . 3 ,
l _. .. . _ > . .. . _ _.J : - -.8-- - __w. .
]
F
;;u:ncut FC:.x $ 7t.au E t;~RIc 5i:TiCN t j
. . . . -s - s. t "~ -c
] INSP E 0""lCN F.E.:CRT F gg g.g
'} . u :es= mot:n .
? PROTECTIVE C*.ATINC5 einksg.as.,r.n :.:.a y#4 .!sq i i si.n: .as w.a.c.::.AcS-/ (See 2sawerl.s M .:
1 e.: sc. iac.. g.u.:.r. :::. a ac.. a :na.w.t sc. g4sas:a rur s: .e. .:cu. a . . q AS-31 ,] ) ,l QI-QP-11.4-23, Rev. $ ~ 1sfy . / r/ 2,/ 9/ a ei 0 Q ix:NaPt:tca :tzs O part '=s Au anen g.ncsm.: :.2, ten C p.am. (; p t rs- l vtwican a insst: ca ' insse: : s .aset: ca o AEP. AZA%:3 h _,
.U =8'.5: :". ceae.::c . u.:. 4, ve2au: tm u .sneren //)k /td //.,er.k>
a , c<,,=,. =,. m=. _ . - um=sm " ->=:=
. g= ,_
t, artw ac. - ce ins 7E:T:CN ATTRI5!J"Es / ; yca;g g
/ ,e i
sianar at
.c n a si e j
I SEAL OR FIN!sH COAT I ll l l E. . . I - 1 l l l l
@ l 1. I Perfer= Toete test per para. 3.1 to determine thicknessi - l l l l h .,
I in mils of crimer and total system (decument one set l l l l l I cf readings fer each 100 sq. ft. when testing Centain- l l l l l p . . _ l ment liner) l II I I
# .._.. IRECcRD: 1 l l l i 1
l 1 1 2 -l 3 l 4 l 5 l l l i ! i k _ Win. seet Primer: 15.o h.$ / I G )lp.e is.e E W l.4' l l Naz. Sect Primer: l S.f J. f'l d-Oi 3 o l S.o l l -l I .l l lAvg. Sect Primer: l t/d) :'j]D{'T5"')l S.fl 3.4./ l l l t'" l l I l .-t" l[.l g 1 hin. seet Tet. System: 4 /,.o)MM'd,'c)! hax. sect Tet. Syste: I k~l9.0174 l hcl 8'.o l 1. r I l i i 4 (Ave. seet Tot. systeat: l ~f. V E6.4X 6. O S. M l l -P l l
$) l i ~~T3->ha- Oees. 6A/ ,W43./-J/fkt.l lI I I II l 2. I Per':rm Adhesien' test eer ca-a. 3.2. I ! I l I
/s I I RECCC: Adhesien Tes Strencth in esi: i l 1 ! :
d ._ . l I
- Dolly #1: 6'.2 5" colly f2: 600 Dolly f3 #/5d IA l l l ! : i l .r i,b .
. , ,i I i f 1 I 9 I !
(1 l l l l l : i i i i # l I 8 i i$
~
l ! ! I .1 i !
*c' Ann ( % c:. set:1. t :2 6 ) H 9 7 C e t o P S ') ff /0$0' fc sc S$".:6 "
h 5 .Aro" d' ICW Nimer" M n ,;14c%,5g' 51 jogy' ha ic5'f ' b y . ir=es n e k d. "u a % sr " - ] g t n: - pc = =ca u 2-d-
** IC YI- c/S47 . R. I .. ; , , '- . , .,
.:r
,3,.u , , ,
. :: ,s.t: :. .,,
r., - h e
.- . e. , . . .. .:........ ,, ... ...".c. -
. ,: . A . . w . .-.m.-a-s.e ,j.,,.a.y. m-. . .y, . v.,.;
- .q,,.- e..:r. ,w .. e.
w
..,z ",
i K.g , ykh~ 4 %, j UE' -~A
-l h ,, -- g - ,,,
_7". _ _ Y,
. .y'
. , . . _ . . - . . - . , . - - . . - . . . . - -., .. m . _ . . _- . . . .
g _ _ _ __ . . . . . . . _ r[' 00 MAN HE FEAx sTIAM ELIcTaic STATION n e'- y
-e
/
i
'/ ,
INSPECTION RE?CRT P g g,p , 4~na cIs aier.cn . 17s i W. PROTICTIVE CCATINGS h.eiir.r.;.7 ., .se.1.Jer2. h/ e J w.w / sii x r. At ,;.4.a.: i .r.c;.-r<.v cs.s e 1. es .- s, .:..s;. u :. . : .. .:c. . . . lm. c.:. =:. . .. . e.,me., ;t . N.< , , , , AS.31 ,l4c../ , QI-CP-11.4-23. Rev. 5~, - / pf. /cA, JS/ y y ClN**C:Tss OPar ins 2:.: an:n pre _ste. na:. Opar rs- . r.EPEcton vcuecanen insit :CN C 7: ins 7t: ten msPt.~O n p
! L% 7 RI.3*.t73 .
.C. INsPtN COMP' r".T3. A::. Apsygaggg g7ggs gAnsp2: gny // f / @d . ' / dd."%"*L
.)
~
2"iIn~sPE: ten c:up' r I:. uns.:nsra: car itt.ws us r. sc.:w **'"*'5"** **T'
.{j .
Q s:
"C
.. irtu ac.
INSFECTION ATTR!!U"'E3 [ .- *t- '8
/ r1 W- .r
= Cd*a;g 3:Ch aTURE ,
n
- 3 -
l SEAL OR FINISH COAT l ll l l
~
dn . 1
- 1II I l g
- 1. l Perfcm Tcota test per para. 3.1 to detemine thickness l l l l l N ,,
I in cils of oricer and total system (decu=ent one set i ll l l l [,'.j l of readings for each 100 sq. ft wnen testing Contain- l l l l l 0 , , . I ment liner) l l l 1 5 tRECOR3: 1 Il l . I,: % __.. I 1 I l.2 l 3 14 i 5 i l l i l l s M .., . Win. sect Primer: I ,0.o M /.f 19.o l /.5~ l'Oml Isk l l T hax. Scot Primer: l 'd-C l c/ O 13 C l 35-l 5o le.d' l .l. I i lAvg. Sect Primer: l .O c/ (fE)
. f l p.3 l .).3 l cp.T l l l*+- l l hin. s=ot Tet. system: IZ..ol TE DI T &l Cdbl A l Q[
$ I l+t- I l kax. seet Tet. system: I 7.5'l ?,5-l P,7 I9.< 1 6_ 91 l 1 -P- I !
j (Ave.SectTet. System: IbSM'd1N 7": Y kI~2Dl l l# l l d I %cf.e. o, w -54/ o?/ 94.'t i II I l b 2. l Per'erm Adhesion test' oer eart. 3.2. I ! i I l h l RECORD: Adhesien Test Strength in esi: l l l l l [ _ , . , I Dolly #1: SOC Dolly #2: ~-7-d.5" Dolly !3 %25~l4 i l I l l l , d - , a i i ! i i i !
! I I i j.
l d I l % l 1 1 I i t S l i l 1 i l l 9 l j menAac (eves, sat:s, ti:/ gg 4g,g ,rc J,o,,; pn ,er .+,w js E,dee.d5 ? i f@ & .9& t.VI'?O30 ic) ed W G LI lo.4*C* ~ /O*/J ' A h 3& 7' al.~/Iv l h El ja3ef '-/O " + c> /C50 ' Q EH t6Su'- l23 y * &" A g EMS'.- d "rC , 1
^ -
- ? {
7js ss
.c .,cm . .
,c, .- .= _ . ;., j d.<e/ 0/$~{3"A [ f .., ,*,' m" w i : - f!71: ~ ~ 't ;g ;
1
,; . I g
A 4'_
""'2".'.~..# .*-
j .J,f ...;..,_'-- ' mV'
*I ~,
..u,.,',E~,,"'...+.~.,
g_,. , : . .'..i,. .r3 .,'.U.. .; ,A. el-~. %. a, x,,,.
/
' [
- M.._ c, ' , 3.* *'.. .*-
g c, .j. P ',r> - ' *',d.f-~ , K"S ? ~ _ _ ~ $4 Es.'.famobergo. W.mw'<.",pe,%i . Z . .u a,;&,,$k.O L
-~
^---~'-"M*u -~~ g{1,nyp yg,el.f. [jQ*'.pg .g., y
, . p y n s- ~ ,. y w ~ m m + y . m m y r. q e w w m v 3 :-~ ~ s- ,. - n . s .~ A AE k c( b: N OTE.5 To b tE
, , D w_._ : _._t o____ h_ e ., 8 4 ____._ .. = =___..--
__ _ __ ___ _.m._____- _ . b __ . .. ELLS . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _
. [. _. - Resie w _Tof.~ lic Me E_.~_ DM7-sT.. D ATA sn O ~~ ~ t. tswc_ as_~T&t-iksi~,iEC3Rombe nI _i n -T d 6.c 6
~
T.sTSWE8ETmemo_KTssEUsicct:_ ____T'T T~~ _
.s N -nlAT .MGMo- (RESPONbE. - _ TO - - _ .!)_ - - _ _Td6CD
_ _ U2Nkd -5AT .3[sl DN TE6T. kEfb(T.b W UttM ~ COMFiRy\ _TM _ . Ac_c.EPTA65Lt tY -.OC . CfdEb ITMAdtA ~~ coATNU 6 Wie AS
~ ~~
7gs ,Wjisif'PAcrasesY iCffAJ6660 jE C PfA- 7 36 7, l Mk$[0 3_5 J CNb- 2 2 i2 lN., ANI)$ CAkOUN1E Y bomb
~~ELW . o ~: roico - _
rnsisA,w N reprAoy T 3 5E5 _ U GE ND 5CTMs___ TRTZKNDT}-UNDZSAN'TlN 6- _ _ . .1__~._
~ ~
h ls c?iN6iss Z+=FtE~T2.aAC8+h- T~ . E T . ~- 1 2 n w % e s iwrTc ~T , +ae 3 see8 e _ _M %O _t5._"AiTAOlmENT 70 $TT -_10'f-OY W 4t Ed ~~ Ld7b i 06A.T,ssTE Retr #6CT66ss~4~~~~ssT 6csDieu_ tRicIL
^ ' ~40^ ~_ ~ l_ tSSu G _ OF T. Ef Et"l AS- 5 \ . }W] ~3b~n i~N . OF TME _
l 8. iW oN 'T %T uST T/ dNLY TWd O F- T 4 G-
~
EL.RUeRemeD rtri- REPcATS TARE ~~ *CI-uSE-j) iw r 4t-i IO s- wo,-r ew_rc ae mestw% __ DATEO _l 7 Oec. % ~( WHiCA Sdod A t.t. CR N L tr.5T5
~'~ ceE CE-il 4< 2_-s t mius DFT ,4~o w pemoe.c ann O r%, w cot cz-n <_ n To si ms nM -o omeo s om vo ( watca sms Ceescuse 'ee recs Goa 0 2 -\\ A- 3 mius D PT siw P-305 a r 4. wts D FT).
l\ i
--..w nw wnm~.~-mm.__--_ _.-----t ,%--=
w n *saTx t_M s ' AM. 2%e* ** _?sm ** ' ' *"T *'M D+ n %= 2.****** na bb Q_ _.- __ _ _ = = = _ . _ . . = _ w t _ ~ 1s- m s c_ b h TOR T D ES U k [#LT [Y [ g _. E+ Aus %
@ LLTC&n.66soKW~Gi&6~Fi-~OssiK+,- i6 +d) ~.~~ *Tm s
--~~~f 6W0e3 1 CAasouseZDn -43EC... TEAen war
?
___ Aso-~~~PRsssuG_ RisATs -_i on___K373EShiti oG ._ mm ma m ! T -s_ _ ,m o . _ .,-
^
! zoux__rew raz'% e mt._ E n i~ena ~ciue' _ J.lifamoe:0 TeACGee_1 -+sl36clitR.Tf-- C&u v -r#
-~2__TR C UKEDZi4E6Au t sRErl__rmsimAs
~
_ net . __jiML_.lW6 AC' _ F s t.c).. _
.l T~~~
~
L46simcey 'Ma,
~
r '. ~4 % Tai.s ~
= % z m ,-w=e <.<, . =
L _ Tucs incuaws rwe F casssuai.L coK ~c 2=il; ~ ,4
~ P-305 b5f ." coo W %D EP ,3of_T reecoAd~f r-e0L A
-rarnt. . L svsrAE1-ra,Qs W 6 6618.s4J~.--
__ _T+ va, A_ss a cwo . Tuna-r Cmoum6 SR-WD (6Aw38 %i % L UMC h ct h Ct Lt W
~
ORNL (e*-P+Pe.essosuy) fort C E-1l ~ (1.~ 2. ) +i us
~im._P-Sor G u-3.8 n,2) , aoe nnr
#veR$tOrd 06 . ruts REPofLT IN WE "o MtiA[ f \ LE $4W3 C:2 -ti ( 1 - b us) w . w monte -te9cmr (COL -+P. e e m . n ui) -
w sau
, . . -. ~ . . . - .
LABORATORY TEST REPORT YTesting Project: 01445 August 24, 1976 3 FINAL REPORT - 28 Hours
SUBJECT:
LOCA Testing of Carbo Zine ll/Phenoline 305 Finish at various film thicknesses. REFERLNCE: Toledo Edison, Davis-Besse; Mr. John F. Montle. PURPOSE: To determine the perforr.ance of le Carbo Zine ll/lc Phenoline 305 Finish and le Carbo Zine 11/2c Phenoline 305 Finish at various film thicknesses when exposed to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Long-Term Containment Temperature Response for the 3.0 square feet DBA Break, and evaluated according to ANSI N101.2-1975, Section 4.5 as interpreted by carboline. CONCLUSIONS: After the 28 hours of the test curve, all the systems and thick-nesses tested exhibited acceptable performances. (Please refer to "Results.") PROCEDURE: A) Test Coupons 2" x 5" x 1/4" Sandblasted Steel coupons with rounded edges and corners. B) Svstems Tested Drv Film Thickness
- 2 1) Ic Carbo Zine 11 4 to 5 mils 4 le Phenoline 305 Finish 6 mils
- 2) le Carbo Zine 11 4 to 5 mils le Phenoline 305 Finish 8 mils
- 3) Ic Carbo Zine 11 4 to 5 mils Ic Phenoline 305 Finish 10 mils
- 4) Ic Carbo Zine 11 4 to 5 mils 2c Phenoline 305 Finish 6 mils / coat
- 5) Ic Carbo Zine 11 4 to 5 mils 2c Phenoline 305 Finish 7 mils / coat
*For measured dry film thickness, please refer to "Results".
C) Cure Schedule Carbo Zine 11: Overnight at high humidity and 100*F (38'C). f Phenoline 305 Finish: 4 days at ambient temperature (75'F, 24*C), plus 4 hours at 160*F (71*C), final cure. ( From the Carboline Research & Development Laboratory j Th. e.ch.ie.1 d
.. . . .. e,.......,i.....,i..i.. tv,. i s h .d i s .. d .c.e w... e. eh. b . ., e t .., k. .-l .d e.. H.-. ,
,,g M .m; O + k * .e.. . . . .~~ t .. s ,.4g,w 4 a h, a "j . eseJh
,hhMhhhgML%-?,(e@tfheksh WPed.#W"* ~"
\. . _ . . . . .. LABORATORY TEST REPORT i ' ( ( Testing Project: 01445 August 24, 1976 FINAL REPORT -- 28 Hours Page Two PROCEDURE: (Continued) D) Excesure l Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Lgng-Term Containment Temperature Response for the 3.0 ft' DBA Break Curve.
- 1) Ti=e-Teeperature curve
- Time: Temperature:
Initial Ambient (75'F, 24*C) Initial to 10 Seconds 225*F (107'C) 10 Seconds to 5 hinutes 260*F (127'C) 5 Minutes to 1 Hour /20 Minutes 215'F (10l*C) 1 Hour /20 Minutes to 28 Hours 180*F (82*C)
*Syste= vas held at saturation pressure throughout test.
- 2) Water Chemistrv 0.28 Molar H3B03 (3000 p.p.m. Baron)
~*
0.064 Molar Na S 02 2 3 (1.01% Na S0) 223 NaOH to adjust pH to 9.5 at 75*F in de-ionized water. GRADING PROCEDURI: The test coupons were evaluated for performance in the following areas:
- 1) Material flaking off '
- 2) Dela=ination between coats and/or peeling
- 3) Blistering of the topcoat
- 4) Chalking of the coating
- 5) Excessive cracking Grading procedures specified in Report N101.2-1975 of the American National Standards Institute-Protective Coatings for Light Water Nuclear Reactor Containment Facilities.
4.5 Methods of Exacining and Evaluating the Exposed Test Specimens The dynamic and/or static elevated temperature-pressure and irradiation test panels shall be evaluated within 2 hours and again af ter 2 weeks after removal from the test ena=ber for the following surface defects: flaking, delamination and/or peeling, blistering, and chalking. Defects listed in Subsections 4.5.1 through 4.5.4 shall be dealt with as follows: ( From the Carboline Research & Development Laboratory j The technical dote farnesaed is true end ocevrete to the best of our knowledge. However, no guerentee of ocevrocy is geven er emplied. gg
, . e c. ..
hA, J .- . .;_ .e;..,s u.abtJi*.vcrumm + N
- N T -~~ ~
i LABORATORY TEST REPORT r 3 Testing Project: 01445 August 24, 1976 FINAL REPORT -- 28 Hours Page Three GRADING PROCEDURE: (Continued) 4.5 Methods of Exacining and Evaluating the Exposed Test Specimens (Continued)
4.5.1 Flaking
ASTM D772, Evaluating Degree of Resistance to Flaking Scaling) of Exterior Paints, Part 21, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA 19103. Flaking shall not be permitted. 4 5.2 Delamination and/or Peeling: Delamination and/or peeling shall not per itted.
4.5.3 Blistering
Blistering shall be limited to a few, intact blisters, Size No. 4 ASTM D714, Standard Method of Evaluating Degree of Blistering of Paints, Part 21 American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA 19103. The nu=ber and the size of blisters shall be recorded.
4.5.4 Chalking
ASTM D659, Standard Method of Evaluating Degree of Resistance to Chalking of Exterior Paints, Part 21, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa 19103. Heavy chalking shall not be permitted. Any other changes in coating properties which are not also assoc ~iated with the separation, or the release, of coating from the substrate shall not be
.) a cause for rejection.
ANSI N101.2-1975 Criteria (As interpreted by Carboline) Maximum Degree of Failure Allowable Flaking ASTM D772 10 (None) Dela=ination or Peeling None
- Blistering ASTM D714-56 Blister Size Blister Density
#2 None
- Note: A blister is not #4 Few intact when it has resulted #6 Medium in coating being separated #8 Medium-Dense from the test coupon.
Chalking ASTM D659 8 (Light) NOTE: Flaking, blistering and chalking are all evaluated according to ASTM Standards, with a rating of 10 indicating that no failure was observed in the specific grading area. ( From the Carboline Research & Development Laboratory y T h . ..c hn i e.1 d.,. tv,n i s h .d 6. ,,v. .n d . . . .. . ,h. b. ., .i .., kn .- l .4, .. H .-.. ,
- n. ,ve r.n e .i . . . ..y i . ei ..n ., .. ,i ..d .
-.-v...-
- n. .- -
+ i a.. . man -- w weru n a a,. .~. . -.- -_% n --- - - -A.. -m ' en:.
t Testi ject: 01445 August 24, 4 FINAL RE RT -- 28 Hours Page Four { ! k RESUI.TS: i.
?
Dry Other Coating System Film Delamination Performance Performance and I.D. Thickness Flaking or Peeling Blistering Chalking Characteristics Evaluation
?
4 1A* P Ic Carbo Zinc 11 4.5 mils 10 None 10 10 Less than 1/16" Acceptable , i Ic Phenoline 305 6.5 mils UCA at the scribe I [ Finish 11.0 mile IB Ic Carbo Zine 11 4.5 mils 10 None 10 10 1/16" UCA at the Acceptable Ic Phenoline 305 6.5 mils scribe Finish 11.0 mils 2A* Ic Carbo Zinc 11 4.7 mile 10 None - 10 10 Less than'1/16" Acceptable Ic Phenoline 305 8.3 mils UCA at scribe Finish 13.0 mils , 2B i
.lc Carbo Zinc 11 4.9 mils 10 None 10 10 -- Acceptable 1
1c Phenoline 305 8.1 mils Finish 13.0 mils 3A* 1 Ic carbo Zinc 11 4.3 alls 10 None 10 10 Less than 1/16" Acceptable Ic Phenoline 305 10.7 mils UCA at the scribe Finish 15.0 mils 3B Ic Carbo Zinc 11 4.7 alls 10 None 10 10 Less than 1/16" Acceptable Ic Phenoline 305 10.3 mils UCA at the scribe Finish 15.0 mile l Perfect Performance 10 None #4F to #8MD #8 (Light)
- Panels supended t ANSI N101.2-1972 in chamber.
[ UCA = Undercutting due to loss of adhesion. t v
+ -
g
I August 24, {l 1 Testi ,y ject: 01445 FINAL ^y O.T'-- 28 Hours
-U* / Page'Five V .
j j; RESULTS: (Continued) I ij Dry Other Coating System Film Delamination Performance Performance , i and I.D. Thickness Flaking or Peeling Blistering Chalking Characteristics Evaluation
. c
] 4A* Ic Carbo Zinc 11 4.7 mils 10 None 10 10 -- Acceptable , j tl Ic Phenoline 305 7.3 alls ) I Finish [
, ( Ic Phenoline 305 3.5 mils , ! Finish 15.5 alls 4B Ic Carbo'Zine 11 4.7 alls 10 None. 10 10 Less than 1/16" Acceptable Ic Phenoline 305 8.3 mils UCA at scribe f Finish Ic Phenoline 305 3.0 mils l Finish 16.0 mils i SA* [
Ic Carbo Zinc 11 5.0 mils 10 .None 10 10 Less than 1/16" Acceptable 1, I j Ic Phenoline 305 8.0 mils UCA at scribe Finish i J 0 Ic Phenoline 305 3.8 mils Finish 16.8 mils I SB Ic Carbo Zine 11 4.7 mils 10 None 10 10 Less than 1/16" Acceptable. l Ic Phenoline 305 8.3 mils UCA at scribe j Finish Ic Phenoline 305 4.5 alle Finish 17.5 mile i f Perfect Performance ANSI N101.2-1972 10 None #4F to #8HD #8(Light)
- Panels suspended in chamber n ,
UCA = Undercutting due to loss of adhesion. { Patrick D. Fisher hn F. Montle g Developmental Engineer V ce President r-- Testing Department Research & Development f.h. e PDF:pm cc: Mr. Ken Tator
!!I xc: SLL/HDT/JFH/EWS/MJD/SLS/DRL/JDP/CJW/RJT/ Lab Group Leaders kg.
U . b f
g _ _ - . . . . . .,. . .. _ .s ..m- . . . .
~
Anta coot asa ( , 644.tooo
. . - .. . .; - ~w,
.w '- : . ~ s..
. - . a a . ;, . -
N
- casta C A RBoCo.st Louis ear b oli n e e
>I
. .s PROTECTIVE COATI N G S FOR CORROSION RESIST ANCE o W ATERPROOFING e FIRE PROTECTION e ROOFING September 13, 1983 Mr. Tom Kelly Ebasco 10175 Richmond Ave.
Houston, TX 77042
Subject:
Carbo Zinc 11/Phenoline 305 Mist Coat / Phenoline 305 Full Coat
Dear Tom:
I am sorry for the delay in getting~this data to you. Between the uwo of us, we have been running our Testing Department ragged looking up reports. All kidding aside, I think you will find the enclosed test report useful for your situation. As you can see, the Phenoline 305 Mist Coat had a 116 hour cure at 85'F prior to the full coat application. The exposure curve is a little higher
, than your requirements, however.
If you have any questions on the report, please call. Sincerely, 1 e 4V4s. . A W(.<4'W Steven J. Harrison Power Industry Specialist jag /l/616/ kelly /091283
Enclosures:
Test Report 01308 cc: Mr. Seymour Fiebach/Mr. Charles Rushing Mr. Keith Falk Mr. Mark Wells Gibbs & Hill Comanche Peak Sta. l 11 Penn Plaza P.O. Box 1001 New York, NY 10001 Glen Rose, TX 76043 Mr. Jerry Firtel Ebasco
#2 World Trade Center Few York, NY 10048 G
CARBOLINE COMPANY
- 350 HANLEY INoVSTRIAL court
- ST. LOUIS. MISSOURI 63144 e4_- b*. 's*.'*..I w= d .deurg/ #h de 'n M $8%ph=* - "'
.dhp.m.m e w
- b *
, v...
.n _q LASORATORY TEST REPORT g ( October 15, 1974 )
TESTING PROJECT: 01308 Final Reoort: 30 Davs
SUBJECT:
LOCA evaluation tests on sample coatings from the Midland containment liner plate.
REFERENCE:
Mr. R. L. Castleberry, Mr. William Currlin, Bechtel: Consumers Power Company, Midland Plant, Job #7220, File #C-110: Mr. James R. Lopata, Carboline Company: Carboline Testing Project: 01255 PURPOSE: Loss of Coolant Accident testing of panels coated with Carbo E Zine 11, Carbo Zine 11/Phenoline 305 Finish (mist coat) and Carbo Zine 11/Phenoline 305 Finish (full coat), all being samples of the Midland containment liner plate applied coatings, when subjected to the "DBA Environmental Test Curve" for the Midland Plants, Units 1 and 2. CONCLUSIONS: At this time it can be concluded that the Carbo Zine 11/ ] - Phenoline 305 Finish panels (both mist and full coats) are exhibiting an acceptable / excellent performance after exposure to the complete 30 day test when evaluated according to the l ANSI N101.2-1972, Section 4.5 guidelines for examining exposed test specimens. Please refer to "Results". OBSERVATIONS: The untopcoated Carbo Zine 11 Primer is exhibiting an acceptable performance after being subje .d to the 30 day exposure. PROCEDURE: A. Test Counons 2 3/4" x 6" x 1/4" sandblasted steel Source: Plate A-Clll-38 B. Systems Tested Drv Film Thickness
- 1. Ic Carbo Zine 11 Please refer to "Results'
- 2. Ic Carbo Zine 11 Ic Phenoline 305 Finish (Mist Coat)
{
. v. A Frorn the Carboline Research & Develoornent Laboratory bN } i Th. ... hoi..: 4. . som i . h .4 . . ,,.. 4 . . . ... ,h . 6. ., . # .., ii n .. i .4. . . H . -.. ,
a . . . ..a e.. . s . . . .,.cy . . . . . ., . ,6. .. . fm,ggg e - _ h
- f 'S *4M M 8 .M1P #" -
88' #
- ____ ___ _-____ _ _ _ _ 1
( LABORATORY TEST REPORT October 15; 1974/ Pag *e 2 1 TESTING PROJECT: 01308 Final Reoort: 30 Davs PROCEDURE: (Continued)
- 3. le Carbo Zine 11 le Phenoline 305 Finish (Mist Coat)
Ic Phenoline 305 Finish C. Cure Schedule Carbo Zine 11 - 72 hours at 68oF and 45% Relative Humidity Phenoline 305 Finish (Mist Coat) - 116 hours at 85'F and 32% Relative Humidity Phenoline 305 Finish - 24+ hours at 80*F and 70% Relative Humidity . Final Cure, All Systems - Two Months at ambient
~O conditions .
D. Excesure_ DBA Errironmental Test for Liner Plate Coatings, Midla.nd Plant Units 1 and 2. Bechtel Job Reference No. 7220. Time-ten.perature pressure criteria dated November 23, 1973.
- 1. Water Chemistry Demineralized water test solution containing:
Boric Acid - 13,000 ppm Sodium Thiosulfate - 18,000 ppm pH adjusted to 9.5 with Reagent Grade Sodium Hydroxide
- 2. Time-Temocrature-Pressure Profile This test began at atmospheric pressure and was kept at saturation pressure
- throughout the complete cycle.
From the Carboline Research & Develoornent Laboratory The technecel d
.. . .. e.. .. ate furnished is trwe e d ceveete to the best .I our knowledge. Howevee,
..e.... .s ,.. ..... ..d.
g,,,,,, q .
. .. , ~ . .
E s w h6'JWea.ehw.a "h- " i."9? ~ --- _ dim Qib ^ ' " " l-rM+~ wL4 . jim "*'"'N-
. ~~ . ... .. . I LABORATORY TEST REPORT [ October 15, 1974/Page 3 TESTING PROJECT: 01308 Final Recort: 30 Davs PROCEDURE: (Continued) D. Excesure (Continued) Total Time Lanse Temuerature Pressure
- Initial Ambient ---
0.1 Second 316*F 70 psig 25 Minutes 3160F 70 psig 4 Hours 2800F 45 psig 1 Day 2400F 20 psig 30 Days ** 2000F 10 psig
**The test coupons were evaluated after the initial 24 hours of exposure to the above profile for development of an interim report. They were then returned to the chamber for completion of the test. ,
All test coupons were partially immersed into the solution inside the test chamber, and scribed down to the steel substrate before being exposed. COATING APPLICATION: Substrate: Carbon Steel, Plate A-Clll-38, blasted to a white metal finish (SSPC-SP-5), 2 to 3 mil profile. Edges were not rounded. Carbo Zine 11: 6/28/74 - Date of Application Batch # (Base): 4D5616 Batch # (Powder): F-4-74-3 Phenoline 305 Finish (Mist Coat): 7/1/74 - Date of Application Batch # (Base): 4B1890 Batch # (Catalyst): 4C1714 Phenoline 305 Finish: 7/9/74 - Date of Application Batch # (Base): 4B1890 Batch # (Catalyst): 4C1714 Please refer to " Cure Schedule" for detailed cures on all systems applied. I From the Carboline Research 8: Develooment Lacoratory Th....hai .i4.e.v. i.h.4i. ,,.. 4 ....,... ,h. b..,.i...ko..i.d ..H.... ,
- a. ... a,.. .# .......y 6. ... .,. .i. 4. ,
[, L n __._ ,., ,a % ,. ECG% L.&.tada% %w1%@2 m , ~ = w ..:a : m - ,:1 L L Er&N
. . .- -a - - - . - ~ ~ < - ~ -
'a - ' LABORATORY TEST REPORT ~
, October 15, 1974/Page 4 TESTING PROJECT: 01308 Final Remort: 30 Davs GRADING PROCEDURE: The test coupons were evaluated for performance in the follow-ing areas:
- 1. Material flaking off
- 2. Delamination between coats and/or peeling
- 3. Blistering of the topcoat
- 4. Chalking of the coating
- 5. Excessive cracking Grading procedures specified in Report N101.2-1972 of the American National Standards Institute-Protective Coatings for Light Water Nuclear Reactor Contain-ment Facilities:
, 4.5 Methods of Examinine and Evaluating the Exoosed Test Specimens ! The dynamic and/or static elevated temperature pressure and irradiation
- test panels shall be evaluated within 2 hours and again after 2 weeks after i removal from the test chamber for the following surface defects
- flaking, delam-ination and/or peeling, blistering, and chalking. Defects listed in Subsections 4.5.1 through 4.5.4 shall be dealt with as follows:
4.5.1 Flaking. ASTM D772 Evaluating Degree of Resistance to Flaking (Scaling) of Exterior Paints, Part 21, American Society l for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa. 19103. Flaking l shall not be permitted. 4.5.2 Delamination and/or Peeling. Delamination and/or peeling ! shall not be permitted. 4.5.3 Blistering. Blistering shall be limited to a few, intact , blisters, Size No. 4. ASTM D714, Standard Method of l Evaluating Degree of Blistering of Paints, Part 21, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa. 19103. The number and the size of blisters shall be recorded. 4.5.4 Chalking. ASTM D659, Standard Method of Evaluating Degree of Resistance to Chalking of Exterior Paints, Part 21, American Society of Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa. 19103. Heavy chalking shall not be permitted. Frcm the Carboline Research & Develooment 1.aboratory n . ...s. .. i 4... o....,.....e......,..,,..,,,,,,i.......,.,s.6..,....6,,..i....s..... e.,o i .s .4 i . .... . . .
,% j r2_mm.-__-=m.mm---
,..: a. -
.o
-ant LABORATORY TEST REDORT j October 15', 1974/Page 5 TESTING PROJECT: 01308 Final Reoort: 30 Days GRADING PROCEDURE: (Continued)
Any other changes in coating properties which are not also associated with the separation, or the release, of coating from the substrate shall not be a cause for rejection. (December, 1973) ANSI N101.2-1972 Criteria (As interpreted by Carboline) Maximu= Decree of Failure Allowable Flaking ASTM D772 10 (None) Delamination or Peeling None
- Blistering ASTM D714-56 Blister Size Blister Density
#2 None
- NOTE: A blister is ng #4
- Few intact when it has resulted #6 Medium in coating being separated #8 Medium-D ense from the test coupon.
Chalking ASTM D659 8 (Light) NOTE: Flaking, blistering and chalking are all evaluated according to ASTM Standards, with a rating of 10 indicating that no failure was observed in the specific grading area. l From the Carboline Research & Development Laboratory Th . ...hn i e.1 4. .. to, i .h .d i . ,,.. . d .... . . ,h. b . ., . a .., ha .. i .4 .. M . ....,, n . . .... .# e co,.ey 6. ,6. ., . i . 4. [g7;3,.oogg,,,j:. _ _ _ ..,.;_;__..-. ,,, .;gua;, maau. . _ m.am w , _ g.
~ u TES ROJECT: 01308 October 15, 1974/Page 6 fL Fina 2 rt: 30 Days .j, Total Delam-f- Coating Dry Film ination f System Thickness or Other Performance . Performa nce* . k and I.D. Range Flaking Characteristics Peeling Blistering Chalking Evaluation i IA) Ic CZll 2.1-2.7 Note 1 None 10 10 Powdering of the top Acceptable [ layer of CZll. in the [ liquid phase and at the interphase area. I IB) Ic CZ11 3.0-3.7 Note 1 None 10 10 Powdering of the top Acceptable + l layer of CZll in the
}. liquid phase and at
[ the interphase area.
; 2A) Ic CZll 2.4-3.1 10 None 10 10 Powdering of coating Acceptal$le t,: Ic 305F (mist) at liquid / vapor inter-h phase.
2B) Ic CZ11 2.6-3.7 10 None 10 10 Powdering of coating Acceptable p Ic 305F (mist) at liquid / vapor inter- [ phase. k 3A) Ic CZll 1/32" Undercutting g Ic 305F (mist) two size back from scribe. g Ic 305F 6.0-8.1 10 None #4 blisters, 10' One blister near the Acceptable { possibly from edge had been re-g moved probably g, particles in through physical L
- the 305 damage to the test hy coupon t
r-F 3B) Ic CZll two size 84 to 1/32" Undercutting Ic 305F (mist) #2 blisters on back from scribe.
-.k Ic 305F 7.5-8,5 10 None the sharp 10 One blister had been Acceptable f
y: edge of the coupon removed by physical damane. I. { . Perfect Performance '10 None f 4-88MD 8 (Light)
- Note: . Coupon edges were not i 7 ;
f
.. . -2_n - _
( LABORATORY TEST REPORT
- October 15,1974/Page 7 t
TESTING PROJECT: 01308 Final Reoort: 30 Davs Note 1 - There was a powdering of the Carbo Zine 11 which could be described as a flaking and a severe attack at the liquid / vapor interphase. However, the consistency of the Carbo Zine 11 coming off was that of a finely divided powder and flakes which should not ecmpromise the emergency cooling systems . Thus, there is no downgrading in this category of the Carbo Zine 11 Primer and the coating is deemed to be exhibiting an acceptable performance. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS: The test coupons 3A and 3B had visible particles in the dried film. This most likely was from contamination of the wet Phenoline 305 F during application. The slight blistering of the Phenoline 305 F on coupon 3A is probably due to these particles and, thus, this was ignored in the evaluation of performance . Slides of test coupons after 1 day and 30 days exposure are
, available in the project record files.
. N Daniel R. Leritz, Group Le er Testing Department J n F. Montle, Vice President R earch and Development DRL:ph 7747/5415/020/936/937/929/931 cc: Mr. R. L. Castleberry, Bechtel Mr. William Currlin, Bechtel OR: Testing Department XC: SLL/HDT/JFM/EWS/JDB/GHD/SLS/JDP/JRL/ LAB GROUP LEADERS From the Carboline Researen & Development Laboratorv Th... hai..I4...# ,a6.h.46. ,,...aa..
a.....#.......,i....,.,,,,,,n....,.,h.b..,.#..,k..i.4...H...., . g,.mdM. e
%8 W%'M584.u w 'c. . . i.: d &hdaDNo.s .3m - ^ -
- ddmIb ' -
N i $ *
. _; y.ry c h . ~ ~ ~g'..c;: .. ,:- . , . .
m.,,y n . s .p ,,, ..
..a. - . ..
4%5f:MW- N~2's .'AWsCh.4 .& _,..wL.,;@.j;;;@.gpQ[<;,QCfle iW;; ., g'ff,,MJy
-:$Xl%Q%.?'5RW; ' %T?c.%,4:..%kyno .n4% gat.dggs-p-r,---.gypfg,mlp..g ,p,*;g'q.
t,a . _ _ .
* . _ - - . _ . ~. . - - . . - . ..
s+ . . . . _ __ 7 ._ . m - .
. 3
'j
- .s 0123.7 150
. .H t- :
2.j i .!GCO Getsi. TUCCO GatSE A NO.I DECEMBEn 2, 1976 J.V. 7.00RHEAD/F.L. MCALLISTEA God v0a N0:2323
, e -
. $UdvECr: itESPONS E TOf~I'ex - 4 5a7 I TE:' L FLt. uISC.USS IONS ~SETVEDI IhE. F IEI.D AN b OUn an. d. FALA thE PLAS5IC _}
(
~
.) . TIS 304 WILL .VOT 0E ADME5IVEd SINCE Tite MIDuGN IS VO T A udES I t/E'
'WD ONLY. A EMPUdAdY ITEM LT Tn'fII~'IUT' ' re.uu I riE' C ED.J.I'O t"AN D7CO n rDr'
- 1 C ERTI F ICATI J.
2 I II.M 2 : , A93I N101 2 15 A DETAILED 3CMT.IVIVG AND 1ESTING dTAVDAMD Fod
'UTALIF Y IMG CO AT ING SYSTE.d5 F0.s USE I1bluI nEACTOM C 0 9 T A I V M E.4 T .
IME COAII.'JG USED 01 Tnt EXTEnIOn CF IdE CC'. DEA 1 EACdsNGEn hAs JEE'J Q.1;LIFIED Si id*:. CO A11.4G ?.aNiiF 4C t fl.tE.1 TO M F.Ei A J51 V101 2 dE UInF.- MENrs WnE.4 USED IV ACCor.0ANCE VITn DIS e n0C El."J:t Es F0n AriLICATION AND nEPAin. FI ELD I C UC h -i f e art 00LD ThEdEF 0nE C0.WL( *WIIn thE C OArI4G MA4UF ACTCAEn *3 tuuCn-U1- AND nEr A!.4 en0C EDUnEd. PLEASE JOTE THAT 2323-GS-9uu .ILL UVCEdGO nEVISIC'I AFTEd IUSI APPROVAL OF'2320-AS-31 1 d.E. H EdS P EdGCd/ X. FALA GI533 AND HILL NE's (OdX
- 1GCC Gns E .' -
- . . . ~ ' '
05 E?lG 'I $ ' l* N. (, G .c ... ./_ 1 ..
.. ..n-w
..e-. . . . .y y. .
' % i O '7 ._ u '.
C. ... .(..
}sQ - - . .
- m. .e - - .
- p
- J 9a y TEXAS UTIIJrIES SERVICES INC.
B & R DCC DIS.T. m - - c w = .o - n u . m oi
'T 2-4093 . February 3,ry377 1 JOB NO: 351195 -
/
Mr..R. E. Eersperger Gibbs & Rill, Inc. ECE1VE MWss . f/ l Q'..- gg SUSSOL!NI i/ 393 Seventh Avenue " g7 ,. Naar York, New York 10001 ,,3 /
._i---
bb ECEIVE *0@!/ LEH \ 't FROM: PROIENGR' COMANGE PEAK STEM ENC STATION l
, QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR PAINT g/' #// REF: GTN-14434 CIVIL 'gl FILE NOS. 5043.2 & 7043.1 E .ECriticAt [
Y [l[ MECHAMCAL. W .t 01 6 W- l/ 3CHdcag Ds: g r_ lersperger: EaTIMAllNG r Tim ab ve referenced letter stated that painting of piping CO# v Lgbin the couraiment building is classified as a "Q" OC. CONTROL f actier and should be applied in accordance with ANSI N 101.4.
~ heapn that the painting inside conta1= ment is quality related;
/h'- yy
- alin we have not committed to ANSI N 101.4 nor do we intend comply with it.
1 CIVIL ENGR, As currently written, the nuclear piping specifications only rc. quire that painting be applied in accordance with the coatirg FROM: G. McCI: manufacturer's recommendaciens. In addition, it is necessary. TO : tric to comply with ANSI N 101.2 and be applied in accordance with MOCHEL approved procedures. It is necessary to revise MS-43A & 433 - to imple=ent these requirements. JOHNSON g COLE _ Please also note that PSAR Sect 1on 6.2.3.6.3 requires that KNOWLTON paint inside conta1==ent be applied in accordance with a DJEAS quality assurance program. This presents a problem for non- CILBTJ:ATH nuclear equipment inside conentr-ent since it is not produced CHAMBERLIAN under a QA program. k'e request your i==ediate attention to FRENCH i this matter and appropriate corrective action be taken to resolve the problem for both piping and other non-nuclear courponents inside containment. L. In regard to the service water piping discussed in your letter, please note that only buried portions of the pipe will be coated with Kopper's Bitu=astic No. 70B and will not receive a finish coat. Above ground portions will be pri=e coated per MS-43A or 43B and will receive finish coating per AS-31 where the piping is not insulated.
t
~.g n e -c m .e
, - tu i --
+:p.-
u '
, - -~. -- ~ ~
~ :m-~:.m gy- -
.e z:c.,a,,ne.> -
~ . w.~
-~ , l TGH-4093 February 3, 1977 O,n. .
If you have any questions or comments, please contact this office.
~
. Very truly yours, H. C. Schmidt Project hnager-Nuclear Plants BCS/DHW:skf cc: R. E. Hersperger 0,3c C. H. Ga chell, 2c H. C. Dodd, 2c L. A. Ashley, Ic
. L. F. Fikar, Ic J. C. Kuykendall, Ic 1
l l I I i A
\ j)
I G l l L
- M E M 'O GHF-1343 Gibbs S Hill. Inc.
e~c.~eins. ois,o~ .s. co~st~ reas NEw Yomm , B & R DCC DIST p C. H. Gatchell '"
' _ [i . Februa: . 1^77 i g, TUSI - Jobsite Dvau '
JOB NO. 351195 CHILDRESS / ECEIVE eussouN! l g J. J. Moorhead ! EB 171g7 WELLER / A- G&H - Jobsite TUGCO _QA L .,,, L COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION L gg \ j' 1980-82 2300 MW INSTALLATION SPECIrTrATTnN 2323-AS-31
~
~
FILE 05277 ggi j
)
v This letter is to request that all parties involved in th: rrla g process of both Specification 2323-AS-31 and the proposed Eddendum
'to tne specif'i h wu mus.ac In expediting cae neieasec ror Con-struction" issue of these two items. The consequences of further delay in the release dates are outlined below; also included are additional conflicts in protective coating requirements that need to be resolved as the revision process continues.
Scheduling Requirements: The proposed addendum to AS-31 was planned to eliminate the refer-g ances to ANSI N 101.4, and to provide the quality assurance guide-(Lines that would satisfy PSAR Section 6. 2. 3. 6. 3. Therefore, this
@x3 affice has discouraged further references to ANSI N 101.4 in B&R E
N J. quality and construction procedures, and has taken steps to delete n the references in other specifications. This was done so that re-Ah hisions of the quality and construction procedures would not be i i mecessary. k D tC t q Iowever, field progress now dictates that several of these construc-g (i -
; : ion
% ent" procedures (such as PCP-7, " Painting Piping and Nuclear Equip-N.n ,
" Coating Miscellaneous C rotective Coating Operations") be issued to support normal con-Steel", and QCP-2.10, " Inspection of q
s K ;truction activity. Protective coating work in progress follows q cs :CP-30, "Coatf.ng Containment Liner", and 0.CP-2.18, " Inspection of gy 9 :ontainment Liner Coating Operations", both of which reference y f $dSI N 101.4, and an extensive amount of documentation is required
,y v q uo satisfy the ANSI document. Field fabrication of nuclear piping e- h.s scheduled to begin in March, 1977, the containment liner coat-E g ung has been in progress since September, 1976, and the field coat-g e
..l Q..
-5M E ng of miscellaneous steel items should commence in early May, 1977.
M'
,. '. 2; all I
these unirsued procedures involve a lengthy procedural review process in addition to the time recuired to have AS-31 and its addendu= released. To avoid the costly documentation required under quire immediate issuance. ANSI N 101.4, it is obvious that the two specifications re-F-168 ,11-66
o , d GHF-1343 February 15, 1977 - - r- - bI 'e #
- Page 2 '
General Protective Coating Questions The following are general protective coating questions that should be resolved: (
- 1) TGH-4093 on 2-3-77 stated that since non-nuclear equipment in the Reactor Building is not produced under a QA Program, there may be a conflict with the PSAR, Section 6.2.3.6.3 which re-quires all paint inside the containment to be applied in accordance with a QA Program. (TGH-4093 and GTN-14434 are attached.)
- 2) TGH-4093 also stated that Specification 2323-MS-43A and 43B be revised to require that protective coating be applied in accord-ance with approved procedures. The as AS-31 and the proposed addendum. procedures should be listed
- 3) GTN-14434 stated that the exterior service water piping did not require protective coating. Please clarify the interior coat .
, ing requirements (also see BRQ-352, attached).
l 4) GTN-14434 stated that the only "Q" piping are those inside the containment. AS-31, Section 1.1.b, states that all exposed sur-faces of the buildings and equipment which will be exposed to radiation will receive protective coating. Please clarify the extent of protective coating required for piping as it is greatly preferred to protective coat only those areas as necessary. If piping will receive protective coating outside the contain-ments, the location of the protective coating areas will need to be fully depicted.
- 5) QA has requested.that the proposed addendum to AS-31 include clarifications on the calibration program required, the testing frequency for concrete protective coating, the degree of inspec-tion intended, and the amount of documentation required.
These items have been left for interpretation in the past and
- have consequently involved considerable differences of opinion on the degree of compliance necessary.
- 6) Note 2 on Drawing 2323-Al-0528 states that the walls will be protective coated to 6' 0" in the applicable rooms. Are the miscellaneous items in these rooms to be protective coated to 6' 0" also? Please clarify the requirement as ducts, piping, etc. will be above 6' 0" in many areas.
O
.~ . . . .. .
GHF-1343 February 16, 1977 Page 3 y ',., u , s-7)- Consistent terminology should be adhered.to: 1.e. " Protective Coating" for items requiring a QA Program on the inspection, and " Painting" elsewhere. For example, Section 14.2.a.5 stated that the' exterior service water piping would receive protective coating. This was re-vised'per GIN-14434,.but a specification revision should also change the " Protective Coating" terminology to either " Coating" or " Painting System". Specific Questions Concerning AS-31
- 1) Section 1.0.b.6: Will equipment be the only item in the SWI Structure to receive protective coating?
- 2) Section 1.1.b: See General Question No. 4.
- 3) Section 1.1.d: A. primer should be specified for the. tie coat as the* Contractor will not usually have the primer information available on G&H or Westinghouse supplied items. A universal
- primer should suffice.
4)' Section 8.2.d: " Surface" should be " Surfacer".
- 5) Section 8.2.g: This does not allow for uncertainties in. test-ing DFT on concrete surfaces.
- 6) Section 9.2.9: " Calibrated" should be " graduated".
i
- 7) Section 9.2.b: Minimum and maximum DFT should be per the manu-facturer's recommendations.
- 8) Appendix 'A': The asterisks should be accompanied by the applicable specification in the " Notes" section.
- 9) Appendix 'B': The color choices are difficult to match up with other manufacturer's protective coating systems. This-list should be expanded to include other bidder's colors.
j The importance of h' aving 'Specificaticn AS-31 and the addendum to 1 AS-31 released for construction is reemphasized. If we may be of assistance, please advise. I i k OAI W oorhead ' JJM:0BJ:te cc: H. C. Schmidt 6L L H. j/' C. Dodd IL Resident Engineer R. E. Hersperger lL P. M. N11am lL L. T. Van Amaronten lL l
. m 9
MEMO GH?-1348 Gibbs 8 Hill. Inc. 97 sacmaus.assicaus.causrauc cas New Yomst { g (' ) y (, [ [ p C. H. Gatchell JOB NO 351195 o Februan 17 1977 (- 3 TUSI - Jobsite EIVE , BT R DCC DIST. FEB18p
- 3. J. Moorhead c giV E F- DODD l/
- f. G&H - Jobsite CHILDRESS /
EUSSOLINI COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION 1980-82 2300 MW INSTALLATION WELLER l/ SPECIFICATION 2323-AS-31 pun-er -rm- ens--u- _ TUGCO QA l REF: @itQ-343,[BRQ-3 % 345 ) /_.8// . /. s u.r : ua s./ 7 The questions raised in the referenced letters have been for-warded to the responsible parties for response. The stai.w of each is as follows: 27ME d ANSI N101.4 will not be applicable. An addendum Adl v BRQ-343: to protective coating specification 2323-AS-31 will be prepared by TUSI/ Dallas to specify the Q.A. documentation required. Issue of this addendum was again--requested via GHF-1343. on - - - - --. 2/16/77.
^
BRQ-344: DC/DD No. 255 has been initiated to remove the finish coat requirements from SS-17, and to substitute the ANSI N101.4 section with the
$4 AS-31 addendum. GHF-1343 has requested an g %
early release of AS-31. A reply to the S)G di=etcoce primer question will be handled by g. y a FFAR. s y$ g i - BRQ-345: TGH-4093 on 2/3/77 stated that ANSI N101.4 was 7 not applicable, and GHF-1343 requested that 8 )q the addendum to AS-31 be substituted. GHF-1343 k (i Z. further requested that the extent of protective t & v coating for piping be clarified. y 4 LO N ;o r Release of AS-31 and the proposed addendum, approval of DC/ED, and the response to GHF-1343 should complete the clarification b 9 d requested. E E A C k &%
\ W!f-5%y\5 hS CPf ~ W J. Moorneaa / 5 - -
[ JJM:0BJ:ss Resident Engineer [ $ $ *.:.a , ( cc: H. C. Sch=idt 6L :E, ; ) vH. C. Dodd lL E - ' I R. E. Hersperger lL, lA L. T. Van A=erongen lL, lA; P.L.Bussolini lL; P.M.Milam lL r.m . ii.e4
t l
-MF?MMW5?m_w.4-N% ^t &* -' ~'fisyne -s -sne,.m x ., . .. - -- -
y 7. . - 1 l - .
+ -
'. ;.*s..
r. l pc I 9 .'~ ' ' - - I .3 :. . t s-i j < d. , i TEXAS UTil.! TIES SERVICES INC. 4 I
- 2. m mm . o ute t u- m,..
j ' ,' TII-2304 April 26 1917
.a-b: ' Mr. Jay Leanse j
i Institute of Applied coatings i e g&rg,* F. O. Box 32080
.DJ Washington, D.C. 20007 N' c =.
.Y -
@O.
', c. s'.*1'. ' . , CDMANCME PEAK STEkt ELEC PIC STATION
- 2. - COATUlG UtSPECIVRS COLT _SE y;
FILE NO. 5277
;;v
. R .
- .s w
Dear Mr. Leanse:
r .; J' . D' Please find attached check for $960.00 covering tuttion for , 7 ..
'fd Jim Ainsworth and Bennett Jones to attend the Coating Inspettors l l I' .7,n - course in Houston Texar. May 9-13, 1977. t l
t .k.-L I j -~ Very truly yours. N.
< **l
~r s .
. M.//A ~ g,h *& * * ,f-"
! W.
N. C. Schmidt
' r,$ *. . y Project M u ager-Nu:Icar i!'et> ,
o ; { ,' HCS/JEA:skt i I , w j i i 4 ;t - r [, ' f 8!. P Dit(r) . 1 (. I ( L l ~) A f J j )( - (if q*'t
)
-T + : i:: 2 - --. ;;
- lK;- o ' M)2 .L..:. m ,
u~~.. -
- e. . . . -
?a?*:
'd '..
[t* ri. j 4 ,.,e I . t ,ir. .. t 1
- i
.'a.C j ,+-5 4
sf . i, *?- , I L' v. t t I, k*., s,, 2
' I t ) '
i i I .
& t.
- IUI
.ir.) f f , .. nu.o y '
1- I're a u - hi n i o f ir3 .;)
- u .. ,,, w,...... ?! ;
i
, wp.=; seevy v.* ;~~mm:w m u -
3 m c.ar u.~. m scry p w u n . - s ~ y m .-. m. ,,p - g,. ; REH/AM KRH/h 43A, EH, Aman, CFS, DBM, MVG, 3
.ast,/860.256',> KF, NIH/JJ, TPY/WBC, B, OUTGOING o ,, *$lRo i GTN- 19904 July 8, 1977 I Texas 2001 BrUtilities Generating Company 9 Dallas,yan TexasTower 75201 -
i 35 1195 Attention: Mr. H. C. Schmidt, R E C,E l V E D Project Manager - Nuclear Plants
, Gentlemen:
,- og,4 TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPAN1 DOCUMENT CONTROL COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION 1980 2300 MW INSTALLATION G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 09410 DEVIATION REQUESTS SPECIFICATION 2323-MS-43A&B, MS-44A&B USING OF MARKING INK WITH CARBO-ZINC II Change Request Number S-256 Enclosed for your review is a copy of Design Engine cognizant personnel. disposition of this request so that we may advise thePlease inf j
t i rization the action noted herein. from TUSI is required before proceeding withAll recipien i very truly yours, 1 GIBBS & HILL, Inc.
.. REH- KRH : sko 1 Original + 5 Copies 6A R. E. Hersperger Project Manager cc: J. J. Moorhead d (G&H Site) lL, lA m
ses sevent= ave nue n e w ve... , .. . . . . . . .
. qsygegry.angs:.psy w.yys-.; A *v gr. W W w y JyriC# p MT F #-C MM.yT
-m.> ,' , n
- - - -~
*. }
. j, DESTCN/ ENC f NEEftf %'C CHANCE /DTVf ATf CN RECUE5*
NUCLEA R SA Ff-Y 'tE* ATT*J fTT*MS Camage/Deviatt:a C & H Job. No. 11-2323-001 Requested By: Criginator Ref. No. OaM E Client C Field C Caange/ Deviation Request No. S-256 Correspondence Requesting Change / Deviation Tc- s 17 dee l,e l.-< Ic.Her J, fed S-14 -77 (a Hac 8 cJ) i DESCR!P*!CN CF CMANCE/DEvfA?fCN REQUu . i.e I Add new paragraphs, as shown on attached sheets, to clarify that
} mrking inks shall not be applied to piping which is primed with
- Carbo-sinc 11 and must receive a topcoat.
t 4 l
' ENGINEERINC Jt*S- fr*CATICN FCR ABCVT: G&B has reviewed Carboline's re-commendations for marking steel coated with Carbo-Zine 11, as stated
- in' the referenced telecon and letter, and agrees with the fact that marking system.
inks may act to contaminate the piping and impair the coating NA CHANCE /DEV!AT:CN REQUEST PREPARED BY: M. V. Ga ro falo
- Title Assoc. Engr. Date 5-25-77 -
DISC:Pf.JNE JCB ENGINEER'S CO*.:.!ENT3: Is change reportable under 10 CTR 30 Para. !!e. YE3 C 'NC 3 0 4 H Documents Affected: 2323-MS-43 A&B 44A&B Cther Documents A!! acted:
; CHANCE /DEV!AT:CN REOCEST: %scroved S Nct Asptgved C f Detta:tse:wwer arvirus I taas.et e l c.ee ' I J.E. N' //am I d Date I~ /U-/7) < '
' * * *"' ' -- I i - e QA Dessen verificatien j
ca oA /OC Chem. e LX)k e, _ _ _ i I //--#X l F, ,4 _
&f $/1ss'rY '
I AC roved Design Review Eng
. t"
/ h['
Not Approved . f Date C/&Y U ff yj Services
- Project Manager: ADgreved Not At roved S!s.* ature [ 4Date 7!/ 7 How is Change /Devia:!on tr::lemented M//>rs *Mel/ T/de M IALo -c M2"D//2MP.
v Coriolete C J.E. Date
!":SI (D AI.:.AS ) - APPRCVAI.,
Responsible Engineer (Initials) Date Project Engineer (Initials) / Date Project Manager (Signature) Cate Revised Febrturv 21. "10'f'r
, - - , , , - , ,,- - --,--,-,,,,y-- - - -- ---,-w-- - - - -
. e A wr217.7ME.e$.wtre 2W7 W-4'."a e chtmv r.cem:MT.WrWEyrJt:wce r.wwew.+w-;
', ^
1 ,,.
.O. ,
ATTACHMENT TO DE/CD # S-256: Add the following paragraph to the Specification shown:
" Marking inks shall not be applied to piping which has been primed with Carbozine 11 and requires a topcoat as 1
delineated in paragraph of this specification." Specification Added Paragraph Referenced Paragraph MS-43A 3.13.5.d 3.14.2.a.2 MS-44A 3.9.5.d 3.10.2.a.2 MS-43B 1.13.5.d 1.14.2.a.2 MS-44B 'l.9.5.d 1.10.2.a.2
. 4., e 9
h e l e-
- . . . . . _ . .. n.. - -- . . _ . ,
- - - ,-. ,...-y .c- --. .y , - -. - - -- -y
JetT.E. * ' , yfNQQf,_'.SQQWA!QQ&?4WW>W $ y':KQ.}l.;&g Q:. lQ1} .J f ge'
* ~
- A8CA Coot 314 '
p, m l carbo 0ine *^ = " ?.tre-
@ P R OTECTIV E CO ATI N G S
. .,e FOR CORROSION RESISTANCE e W ATERPROQFING e PIRE PROTECTION e RQQFtNG t
1 May 26, 1977 15 g
; / G bs &
Mr li sill
.upay Inc . ; 337 Avenu j ew York, New *k 10001 s e- m. =~,J.v .
1 This letter is in reference to our telephone conversation of May 25, 1977, concerning suitable material for stenciling steel coated with inorganic zine primer. Our recommendation for stenciling or. numbering steel coated with carboline Carbo Zinc 11 would be the use of Carboline X1000-190. This is an inorganic material that would be compatible with both the Carbo Zinc 11 Primer and any recommended topcoats. We would, however, like to point out that the film thickness should be kept . s below 0.2 mils otherwise adhesion of the topcoats would be impaired. This material is available in green, yellow and red. If we can be of any further assistance, please feel free to contact
. us. .
Very truly yours s
&,a,. $ '
Lawrence M. Mcdonald Technical Service Department LMM/ra 403
. cc: Mr. Seymour Fiebach/Mr. Brian. Mills /Mr. Paul Litzsinger/ File I
i s CARSCLINE COMPANY . 350 MANLEY INDUSTRIA4. COURT . SY. LOUIS. MISSOURI 4314 we,e m -e . , , - , , . . -
1 i h l i
- h. .;
I T TC-345 ' 4 Telephone Con = eese ssen .R e c esd p a i. : 7/15/77_ I 8- C42 REH PKSw KRH/95C.256 EH KP JXC RE%;" Time. 2:30 PM l l 1 STC MVC. JWM RAF - e* Lew M-Allister g C6H, EL81te 4 e t ; b y. ,cn , ,:- l
~>
i ,/ .' , !
-i l
y An s w e r by. den Hooks y C6H [ ' l Ce n t r e e t N o. Texas t tilitics Generatinct cor.pany C6H 2 32 3-001 l Sub i ece disenssed; n ne rarha etn. 11 .na u r k i n er vnh. REF: C*'N- 19 9 0 4 , 7/8/77 (DE/CD S-256) a
- O,
, Q, ', ~ _
TN __.'Ct__________.._____________________.................' sv..a., or o seession occasio , a.e ca..,v r.,s. i{ I 2v has reviewed DE/CD S-256, concerning the use of markin., i paste trather than ink) on surfaces coated with Carbo Zine 11. be has the folAowing problems with the content. of the DE/CD: ;
- 4. . .
- 1. If it is to be ir pleriented, we rnast provide sorte. r eecem nda t ion s '
i c.ancerning appli ction of an 0.2 mil thick merking on surfaces i f ! ; under field conditions. I
- 2. The requirement to use the marking paste should apply to all *
. specifications under which Carbo Zine 11 r.ay be applied (i.e. MS-100, MS-101, ES-100, instrumentat. ion and structaral ;
V. specifications), neat just the piping specifications. j i i r.- ! KRHa er . I
. - . . . j l l ect PSI (6)
Lew McAllister (C6H, Jobsite) l
-1 7
- l l
1
;.~..-.. .
... ,;) .-Q
- i
. . c: C r7 7C# I P,,,( .' jf 5/ . ,
. 7. .
i . . .s.-.,,,,..- xana.g: g - ,
- ,._. p .
-g. 1__._.h. !
4
, t i
f I I Ib.v. - ... ... .. ,, .,f,., ..,. .;,,,.,
i
- - ~ ~ . -.a __. . _ . .. __
f - - - . - -- - .. pMs= - y?a,. ' hf ..... 't ; .
- 4 qq
. :. ek y. ,
4 R *
- r. .s
- ( W . ' . .-( . .-
M,M [, . .,7 . _ .
~TC; yl0. y,; . -Q c ,, ;
; g'f. ,
.. .,?;K ...
'.Lll
.- - : , ' < . - *8 '.. ,s
. Ag g ; '. a - -_ .
,$f ,N O ~-
4;. : M 8 HN. htt2. . .
=~ ev e
.c +
s.o eeen e...e e. ce w e w s.. s-
; h - :,
y, O.. c, e... s en ...e. O '" If, s's n+ 4450 h,, : -* 1 . , , j
#,., ;,. August 17, 1977 2
.+.e .
,f . . .
. :g .' . f.,
~
(
. .:~ . .
g~ f. ,.,' q93s 207E2 - n'
'i>EC. l- .2001'sryan Tazas Utilities Generating Compavy ,.
Tower
+.;
,h ' . . ')v Dal.las Taman 75201 i
Q.'; . . s.- d. .s . # g $'F / g O "' 4k
.t
( g .6 Attention: Mr. FrojectE. C.Manager Schmidt- Nuclear Plants ,. pggj:.ir
- j. s
~.r*;} ' .',;- '
'& -- :t
' - - Gentiement'
^., sT W*t % ,. . ..
'j: ',.:
4, .- TEIAS UTILITIES GENERATDiG COMPAin (f}'. y
'.CONANCHE FEAK S';EArt EI.ECTRIC STATION
- h. 7uN' [4 . n'. t
-# '.1980 2300 MW IRSTALLATION .. 'h8g l 2323
*'.'! $ 7
' h . , '53, h r..~ G4E PRG7.ECT'WO. :c, J.h*M"'
. p. . ;. -89410 IIETIATTOtt 1tECUESTS' c '.I '
a
~
t,c.M S y; c 6DE/CD'
@.L %g ~ 9V 9( i-
.! % c ?" '.; . AIF t. : TCE-5134
+,.),. .;3 .r. -:: .
5-319T CEANGES*TO
. . . - . ~ -
3FECIFICATION 2323-AS-31~.
.# j I
g,gk*jamalosed y for your. review is .aus-of which was telecopied to your Please inform copy'of Design Engineerin your dispositica . l ge c h.-efdices.ca- ,Otsege: Request Number 3/16/77 K. ; S-319
.6
.d.Q.ii@?Ioff this-request. ' -
- '.4 - ' . , - 'h-y
%... ;,y ;S .! .h' %!< JL1.L. recipients of this letter are advised that authorization d
'% g[ktress TUSI.is. required before proceeding with the action note
. ; . .(=
';ep,. = -. .
herein.. T'.: eg m y M *: ,i., c : 3. rn;truly t very yours, , y.Mw ve e. &.} "
~ -
GIsss s nII.L, Inc. -L t
~
-w
,%gu MP. r -e t1.127W hrH- N % *
=
, . g.
' 'N WAS/75ft:5 i 88"MI# { .&
. m. ..rs,e,,e, pc-e s m w m u ac s w e a %r
." - . i Project Manager
._,.y t
.~*. =/
i'.7.)4,% >5 - N sg,l'@
.,. .EE9 O_ .1MR - -:sho?,- < -- , ' ' M,'
*; ;
- 21' Original + 5 Copies (EA) 'l Y e. CCP--J..J4 Moorhead (G&k Site) IL. 2.A1L, 1A' h'fl AF...<,n e.9 R m c ,y: 3; ..ge110tay (G45, Dallas) . *. '4 -1
; .,p t'i.on., . ..
. {
au , . .
* $id * , ', . ?Y
** * 'l..
y < .a ./*~ " 1sg.* s.s'..?i,;.+; ,
~',s.+
- f. . "G.,~-*
. , t e$'; t ..$", f' % *
- n. new ,oe, -
-: , f *. -- .#
y , & . n.OM l', *ne've ese... ,mr;- M / eew. ' ees. . a6 v. eseen see ga. e.eee N NI@. 3 sW; I 4.Af.e.'7f ';',' $i' t
' A ',' ,'f# .a ,g,.Tj '6* g.:}*$ jg.,,h.~,, .
a
?*
.. - .W 't a .,+ .' . . ?e
~ .
t . , s ;.,
- . ~.$G M.
;Qe ., .
,,,*y,h[hy$.m'2,i,F.;.'*
s'
- 'C
;. - * ~ '
j"/. g _fs _
- y. y,;. .. y ,.g.; . ... s, q,. ~ . . . . ...,, ., ,e . gmg gg.y m .m... ;. , .cz ., ..
. _ _ _ . .. _ _ =-
ARMS TUF-3812 1EXAS UTILITIES SERVIC,ES INL. INDEXED OFFICE MEMOR ANDUM 7, H. C. Schmidt GI.n Ro , Tex, October 14, 1977 subject COMANCHE PEAY STEAM ELECTRIC STATION JOB NO. 351195 1980-5z z!00 MW INSTALLATION c u a a v r. t CONCRETE C0ATING -- r *7 , . ,
' IS ,' ,'
j' i SPECIFICATION FILE NO: 052772323-AS-3} jiECEIvE s A site meeting has been scheduled at 9:00 a.m. on October 24, 1977, for a discussion on concrete coating as outlined in appendix C, , section 2.5.b, of specification 2323-AS-31. Attendance is requested , for the following off-site personnel: Keith Falk (G&H), Jim Ainsworth (TUSI), Kenneth Trimbler (Kenneth Tator Associates), and representa-tives of Southern Imperial Coating Company. The meeting agenda is as follows:
- 1) Required documentation for shipping, receiving, and storage of coating materials as outlined in specification 2323-AS-31.
- 2) Review preliminary draft of concrete coating construction procedure by all parties. !
- 3) Discuss levels of acceptance or rejection of the coating y
work, and degree of inspection.
- 4) Clarification of specific questions and definitions from all parties.
- 5) Field demonstration of surface preparation and coating application by the coating manufacturer to establish conformance with the project cpecification.
I After the site meeting has concluded, agreements reached will be incorporated into the project specification. The concrete coating , construction procedure will be finalized, and a trial concrete coating operation will be conducted in a non-safety related area by B&R to determine any unresolved problem areas. B & R DCC DisT. 8# - -D000 '/
- 0. B.!dones U HOGG /
Civil Engineer gggggL,y,; j OBJ:akh cc: J. T. Merrittil HANCOCK l / H. C. Schmidt OL, 2L, Tucco'QIl / R. E. Hersperger IL K!RKLANO l [ g R. E. Hol.loway ll W 7 L. T. Van Amerongen IL ARMS l l- - J. J. Moorhead lL l H. C. Dodd IL R. G. Tolson IL AW / y=im.m. :.s.;-ar:2,Y-n w w.mv cbW b 'n > =uxm1mun* ohm 1
p.e. & ' , pp (3 Gibbs B Hi!!. inc.
#ygcjED C .. 8 .... .....~... .O .T. 70.. _
tAtt DI.tCT DsAL EXTEN. TON
' JOB NO. 351195 <* '*o 4450 E C ElV E OCT 201977 October 17, 1977 GTN-21877 B & R DCO DIST.
Texas Utilities Generating Company 2001 Bryan Tower Dallas, Texas 75201 DODD l/ - HOGG l/ , Attention: Mr. Homer C. Schmidt, BUSSOLIN! l / Project Manager - Nuclear Plants ' HANCOCK l / ~ Gentlemen: TUCCO QA l / - KIRKLAND l / TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY 4ay3 l/ CCMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION 1980 2300 MW INSTALLATION l l
- G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 '
05276 & 05277 PROTECTIVE COATINGS i (MINUTES OF PAINTING MEETING) REF: TUF-3632, 9/26/77 6fg / Regarding the Minutes of Painting Meeting transmitted by the referenced letter, we hereby offer the following co==ents (by item number):
- 1. The table referenced will be issued as an addendum to Specification 2323-AS-31.
2 thru
- 5. These items were discussed and resolved at the meeting.
Any further action en these points will be by TUSI or B&R.
- 6. G&H has the following reccmmendations:
- a. It will not be possible to meet ANSI N5.12 standards i
on equipment and piping located outside the contain-I ment due to the variety of primers being used on equipment manufactured for CPSES. Careful checking with coating suppliers shows that using a " universal ! primer" or " barrier coat" and a compatible topcoat
*g will yield a radiation resistant, chemical resistant, and decentaminable surface. This approach is recom-393 StvthtM avtNut m.w vo.k. h- Y 1000t CASLE: O'R e t MILL, N t w YO.P.
i l
' October 17, 1977 g,,
1
+ Generating Company .
I
~s
/ '
/ r mended for use en all shop-primed items located
> outside the containment and is reflected in G&H
/ Specification 2323-AS-31.
, j' .<
" Virgin" (not shop-painted) materials, such as b.
/
/- concrete and certain steel items, if painted in
'y /. accordance with the criteria in G&H Specification 2323-AS-31 will =eet the ANSI NS.12 requirements where necessary outside the containment. It is reco= ended that the requirements of the specifi-
cation be followed to avoid possible future extensive maintenance of improperly coated surfaces -- and subsequent removal of contaminated materials.
- 7. The suggested corrections to Specification 2323-AS-30 presented by B&R and TUS: to the G&H representative have been reviewed for compatibility of the coating systems reco= mended. Only the following changes should be made:
Surf. Paint No. Item No. Name Touch-Up P r:.mer Finish j Prep. Non-Category I SP-6 P-5 P-5 F-2 Sj 3 3 2 Crane - 25 Tens .
& Over SP-1 -- P-3 F-3 Suu Visible Interior 3 2
of Ducts These changes can be implemented by DC/DDA. These items were discussed at the meeting. TUSI and B&R B&9. agreed to resolve them. If there are any further co=ments, please contact us. Very truly yours, GIBBS & HILL, Inc. N'
/ /
5 " tills
& C,. , CSVdd- -
REH-KRS-EH-JXC-KF:s=m R. E. Hersperger 1 Original + 2 Copies Project Manager cc: J. T. Merritt (TUS: Site) - 2L L. A. Ashley (B&R, Houston) - 1L
- H. C. Dodd (B&R, Site) -
2L
' K. C. Kuykendall (TUGCO Site) - lL J. R. Ainsworth (TUS! NY) - lL 6
7
, ., #. t g [k .
' " T'7'=Y Y' W % 4.ip*;@
-
- I a a
. : v.gq: 5 #S;9%.
a f *
;;i,T _5. - - .$,' .
f(*,Q&' 3,;2n; ; e= iQ, 3.. m. a q & v 5:Ya%& Jfy +y:v u n.w L :,. Qh:, ,J ~ ~ ~m vw .. ,.Q. J.9 .. ~ = - .
^
' N O N
Ll Vh;.. 4 r: . ,-- ,l. . -
.,.- * , ,,ge.;,y.p-y pg p,. ,,,g,
- - - - - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _
{ MEMO ARMS cuy.209] Gibbe S Hi!!. inc. INDE)(ED ENGihEERS. DEStGNE45. CONSTRUCTORS New YO8HL DAQ - 3 J. T. Merritt November 17, 1977 g, A. TUSI-Jobsite E C E ji E ] 4 . __8 & R DCC DIST. NC'! , _1977
"~ J.'J. Moorhead --
A. C&M-Jobd te kECEIVE d) DDDD l / HOCG l / BUSSOL!Nil COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION HANCOCi 1981-83 2300 MW INSTALLATION / REACTOR BUILDING EQUIPMENT SUPPORTS PAINTING TUGCO,QA l, REF: NCR-M-798 FILE NO: 03208.1, 05277 KIRKLAND l [ ARM 3 _ l/ The referenced non-conformance. report outlined the di screp- I ancies in the prime coating for the Steam Generator e nd - ; Reactor Coolant Pump column bases, the Reactor Vessel _sup- l ports, and the shim bars received from Westinghouse. By g- copy of this letter to B&R, the following action will-he &, / __t taken. Upon acceptable completion of this repair work, the non-conformance report should be closed out.
- 1) The shim bars which are to be embedded in concrete will be sandblasted to remove the prime coat.
- 2) The bottom of the column bases will be sandblasted, but concrete. will not be coated as the bottom vill be in contact with
- 3) The rest of the column bases will be sandblasted and prime coated.
The prime coat will be applied per the applic-able sections of B&R procedure 35-1195-CCP-30, Rev. 4, and will satisfy the coating quality requirements of Appendix 'C' of G&H specification 2323-AS-31.
- 4) The shim bars located on top of the colur:n bases will be repaired as necessary to satisfy the requirements of G&H specification 2323-AS-31.
I
%e J. J. Moorhead U Resident Engineer JJM:0BJ:akh ec: H. C. Schmidt LL
% R. E. Hersperger IL R. E. Holloway lL
" i L. T. Van Amerongen IL 1 H. C. Dodd lL R. G. Tolson IL i P. L. Bussolini lL !
r.ise . % h,; .1 --;"36; *s- .u -- s -
- i4- *
- ^*' M *~ **'- *~ '~
<- ~ ' ' ' ' ' "
ARMS MEMO INDEXED . GHF-2229 Gibbs S *-fill. Inc. = i 6 vs iisias u s.cc u u: :=s DATL - New Yoon T. J. T. Me h De JOB NC. 331195 3 TUSI-Jobsite ,
, g.;7;jt g, d l! ij V.
=" C2C : W 77 5 i Fmm J. J.Moorhead ,*YQ g g' g l y g g.'
?
3 G&M-Jobsite COMid4CHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION . 1931-83 2300 If,4 INSTALLATION PROTECTI W., COATING PlF : NCR-C-823 FILE NO: 05277 This will constitute Engineering concurrence with the "use as is" disposition noted on the re.erenced NCR. [r y,WLW
. = nead Residen: Engineer JJM:03J:akh cc: H. C. Dodd IL P. L. Bussolini lL R. G. Tolson lL 78 & R DCC Olsy, R. E. Holloway lL q R. E. Her:perger IL L. T. Van Araerongen lL M /{
HOGG / BUSSOLINIl ~ DLL.- StcaQA / MKLANO -----.
'.A, R M S l
I -
\
I - 1 iAHf I/ 3 I l g w;.w.; .. a . . < . ; .
. > : -; x ,; m & ;.;..k .:. s % 5 a k . a i . w. s a s k
MEMO GRF-2230 , Gibbs E Hill. Inc. l*G'Ne tRS. 041sGes145. ComSTaWCTQ45 New Yoaa 3 J. T. Merritt D.- December 5, 1977 3 TUSI-Jobsite yh J. J. Moorhead 3 C&M-Jobsite i
, COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION 1981-83 2300 MW INSTALLATION
. N CONCRETE COATING REF: BRF-7364 N FILE NO: 05277 k, We have reviewed B&R construction procedure number 35-1195-CCP-40, ks
( Rev. O, dated 11-29-77, titled, " Protective Coating.of Concrete Surfaces", and find it acceptable for approval. This issue of the concrete coating procedure has incorporated the comments transm:.tted by the Imperial Coating Company letter of 11-21-77, and contains. [i Imperial's response dated 11-11-77 to the questions raised in the jobsite meeting on 10-27-77. 3 By copy of this letter to B&R, Imperial's approval of the 11-29-77
/ issue of the construction procedure must be solicited. Also,
' two items discussed in the concrete coating meeting on 10-21-77 .
re=ain unresolved: 1) Imperial is to provide guidance on coating over marking materials. b 2) The. concrete coating system required above 6'-0" on block valls-tn' safety-related areas needs N to be final h-ed (TUSI/G&H to clarify). Please advise if additional inf.rmation is required. Y cA J. J. Moorhead
~
nA Q Resident Engineer N W gi JJM:OBJ:akh cc. J. T. Merritt lL ,, R E C ElyED T. E.'Hersperger IL - g R. E. Holloway lL l
.N L. T. Van Ameronge. lL f DEC 8 1977 H. C. Schmidt lL l R. G. Tolson lL l P. L. Bussolini lL UISBS & Hil.L,lucJ.
~
- . - . . _ . . . .. .... - . . - - . - - . - . _ .. -- . . - -- -- - - - - - ~ . * * = =
- k 3 2' g , g-- E",, %MIW g"7 y- ggy
,aB.J h94 "k S
y .8 'e a ,,d[. 7 Mj ,.t g y ;.
- p g [] *[g h,
*j #. . , g*
a_
- My
- e. gj( h,
I' F
^ ** y V .
;t y^ .!Q T' 'f,'
Y Y,.559 : . 9 - Qb ~*'
.M M 3 N( Q Q N- ' '#
Yh ; . y ~ $_,, , ::# y V[, y, u,.,, 4." .g ._
- h . , f f -
l G Fb2>5 62 k W / * ~ 5..
- a. t* .' g .4- ~ '. % . ,
3 % ,.
- y. - . u {. I; .
r .gb . 1 .-- E
- 'V
. hiW,*i%C%.4 p .
s & ~ Pj(fy;g i g e.: 3,,,.by",. . .. ; 3
,- .f. r .-..
[f.hT*f f; l
..C,-- ' -'
.< y*gU' v[
> > .'. ,,g t . -
&. $.%j&hh'h& ~ ' l f*-
' ~
.f N,. f l- ,
h5 t c.;N$$& ~ .';.YA :,N. ,
, % Q w
,. -3. r. At, . 7x ,.,9 . . + w1 .
,- . t t" ' '
CbMANCRE PEb STEAM ELECIE!C STATIOfi . O a.h. E.g q g ", f 1981-63 2304 3G'*n;$TALUTION
- f"f
'N J .* .. _COXCnftE CDAT CC i r ,- %' nni:- Ar p - n k s ,i -
. - /- s 1
~s, .
.F,15, .ator. ,4)277 .
. . T '. .
- 4 j.f, .
$% hh.s'$_kr.lekkh %k construt. tion Meddre nu:aber
- h:. / W ,7 .'4L. A+, .
l 35-1195-tC*-t.D(hs f '"
=
- M .. W 8ca. l.ha. @ Opdated 2her h29%77,' tiel aFi*"Troceteive Coat Leg of re pt, t y
E s' Su:f aces", 'and ttsd conera:s coatisg ya._ K ;, _:4 ble for # val. Tais issue of phe.' '. y.g., f r'.s-errpora d t he coments .trema,.t ck g' (' by toe Isperial#rmaMu letterlof 11-21-77, and wnhir s . [ t
- m. Is:pe:-14.L's respegsdi, dated 1A.-17 'to h questions ral=ed . m uie +- - [- .
~
, f . ': . ,
.) ,4 $h
- ( . 3y topp.EJ J T.ttia Iithu..to TM, Impa tip1 's app roval o L tha 11-2P-7N,d 7
',- ' ?Mjl:ht cqmt 4:t- Frocadu.re mas be eo1iciced. Alt a. 1E
- 'agit'wo T*. east dbe % ~dhe co6cr tilng saat ing onJ0 ,21-J 7 ,-'3 provid#g'h*
.-r<,s>- Af} 9WW gn'd-r- M A.
g.,-,=-; q*f =7 < *~' -'_
""g% jje ,
R.
',' ;~ *'# 'above 6* -@M.?'M$,tk*walN'.in
.@mte Qg Irystem required f j' safyecy=e alated mens 'na.d: -Q 1
as r '; - ~ 'tcr-wte f 47-1td(TV5ItCETA. w s- t.o. w clpf7) '~2. , ' - y
.s ,
M ve ,,
' y# *11eass' Lf A$vtso' abdtt lle'
; ?.-j . f+ e m&. .[ Nh. ;f> y [.W.,p n.,
[f?.,R
- ='." Teq *7uLryd .' ,.,'~
. .x ,
?. ,. . ,. t g
E -6 ; .q'
- &p
- '
' M Wv
,)
~
~~ ~T ~.J m .:.>rt r h ad ' ' j ' '
b. t Rasident Eagtmeat N & C2ff .. r. - .. " , .fJH C5J r akh
;. T. N rridt:11.
, /~')g fe: ; v, (i ,,. R L Herspepgsc IL . < tir'
P. . E. No.llowty lL - '+ ' L T Var AAstonsen It i
'V- M. C. $ctc: tdt :lL ' N !8N *'O
..x-.g .c.tyel- - M: .^ '
p t - ggagr,,--wn.jrpjr -- . __ F - ____- T h; . __.5 $ CE $$U&RW.& Y = = v-J At .*e 1 u nM! wm trrn m[~' .,s
^e '&
p , 5 SM ,. _ ..,,,s y,. . s .; .'N,
, .- -..( -
.. - -
- f,
,,y_ _
5,, L i k' *-
-+
- \ . . . . e
" ;-M F ' W-- ~ ~ ~ n' * - -
,'T ' -
1 _ ___ _ m ... .r .,-i e ev.r1- 1, n -s mL _s. ' t '( fA 4 -
' U '.; =%S 13[
. 7 .'.:ch.g." - W% - *' 3'
ARMS s INDEXED Gibbs 8 Hill. Inc. _ thSINEER$ Ot$6SNE48 f.0mSTRUCt0ms Osm E CT Osak g at t u sson JOB NO. 351195 ,,,,, ,. 4450 rs E C EIV E u j, DEC 091977 December 8, 1977 GTN- 2306 6 Texas Utilities Generating Company 2001 Bryan Tower DODD I / Dallas, Texas 75201 '/., _HOGG BUSSOLINI / . Attention: Mr. Homer C. Schmidt, ~ Project Manager - Nuclear Plants HANCOCKi /~ ' Gentlemen: TUGCO QA l i KIRKLAND l [ TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY #EM8 l[ COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION 1980 2300 MW INSTALLATION l ' ' G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 05277 PROTECTIVE COATINGS ' IMO Y/ SPECIFICATION NO. 2323-AS-31 , ',~ ff/W li By copy of this letter to Brown & Root, Plantsite, we are forwarding ten (10) copies of S,pecification 2323-AS-31
" Protective Coatings", Addendus: 1 to Original Specification dated October 11, 1977, for construction.
Very truly yours, ,, GIBBS & HILL, Inc. [ R. E. Hersperger
\'.2" '7 ' Project Manager REH-NLG-KF:sem 1 Original + 2 Copies - 6A cc: J. T. Merritt (TUSI, Site) - 2L J. C. Kuykendall (TUGCO, Site) - lL L. A. Ashley (B&R, Houston)- - lL, 2A H. C. Dodd (B&R, Site) - 2L, 10A -
J. R. Ainsworth (TUSI, NY) - lL, lA R. E. Holloway (G&H, Dallas) - 2L, 2A J. J. Moorhead (G&H, Site) - lL, lA -; > ,) r I t 893 Sivtw?w avtNut NEW vo c at. N. Y, tocot CAB LE' 488 8S"8bb mf w 70mm e e "r*e
. ,.... _ ". ,. n ._ _ w g g_ , ,
.g g.
1 s s -q;- , i
..y. ..
.u
( r
- cc% B, 04 8. REMcc, W:4, KF, KRE/AS-31, JJmo, JRA1 7000g. ,
k.. , ,
~
. Teleynene Coseerseelen Receed Dete: N T,= e- 10:15 AM__
- ar
- e. .
- 02277 Il4 .
1..'v;. i Keith ralk & Cibbs & Mill -
- M..). CefI by: cs
,; ;f 9 >.- '
=
e =* *c===* ep
*Q: ' .L g.
.y G Answer by: o. m. Jones et N h,s.:' . . .
'.:m ,
. *e oc===v' h..
f*'s% i
.17,.-
Jf
. ' .,n-
-, Mk$ Ce n t r e e t N o:
11-2323-001 ' p,
- n. y. .
.q, gy: . ,nmeem umas seblect discessed: ,
g/M -, ,
- . - s. . - ca , . .
' [3') T. j v .- . ., i e x.yg.- .
- p. : ,
u ' , .,-
- h. . ..
i , ,, , Q.7,':.................,...,...................".....,q.3.,g
- ,' w . .: - - ); , . ,'- . - .- ,-
- : q ',. p. A . ,. g.
..-u. .,. e sesoami,or seec=esen.yceuseus amo eamarenames. :. ,= ' O .;. - .
O.g ,
- .g-
-rg - . , , m . -- nz.c .:- -
Tt2EI'was advised that for,. areas an equipment.1amosesibts'..~7 6<,@J-
~ .
, .. a w . i t ;-
$' ;y;2"!V,V .-;.
. . .,after asseshlye the primer and, top coat should be appliae ' ; ; 'J i s -Y< ' * ; prior to assembly. J. The same - tagic con 14 he usec tor "!- ,.% !
*^ '
$ ;* ~. ? '.v.eiscellanhoss f -..' @0 7.. ; steel.M; t .y . ; .s~;/.;'.' .> y.- . 7. Mi.' u/8. J'os.';%:*:e.3 y M .'. ,Aq.*,'
l
*QU p.?<- 7 '-
t , 2. M was adriaaA.that ta cases idhere'steetitems. mere ~ ' ~
. , attached';to : concrete'isalls, .sdhich-required .aestings, IJ - ', 'y.J ** f i
'.'f, J the um11%ederaseth; the stas 14 4fl mot moeted ' prior.2e. ' ,. ^" t ..
.. ,. $#?:J w5.E 55 . ' ~ - ' measures' 7
steel installation, .'amed mot be esetad and.ac.ap==a mi .- . meed De taksa:.(such as.ohemiking).te*psetant that . . .7 , w W. . M- (.L . . Pequipeantt W . .- ' .?.
. . . . . . Y. , _% *v ,
J'. "1fFor- top' aost it w.W-ogtd. - . ..h.i h. .; . yment, TtI57 wee. advised that'c h ." ' .* 4 s 4 mot,be.aisassembled.to apply costinge in-
- h. wh. # ,. h ..~b,; " :. _. .
, ,l: T . -
I i u M,yg;li C :. 4',' inaccessible eroaa.c"Also,
. e eemip===t,which mar mot'.=*et standares for see.imates' .r " by no attempt'to.topooat or reooat e i *y ;
+
;-c..ff.c 6 montainamet tekee an .insiptificantUeurtees, eggs 4 %' la;13ve19ed.
- O. 7,'.'.T.g9 .
ea/?'a,*,(i.e,-7 a'a ,e A.c . . po.lari;cseee)/ a.- m. , M 4V3 N. ga 5 ;** . . . ,.*.4N A-r !the
=+ . . .f 'm bones a -t -, . .
_s : ",$# ' f.k.Y'.k.b" g*,d.' 7,,[.ffA,h ,** , ; f }; . k'. . f h , *i . '* *,( ' n, . .- .w.
.;p -~,~. j.;,...u,~. *- ,;, ...:,..;,
. ,. . . ~- _. 'y g,19;
.. 3 g ... .-4 . , .
. (;*. s*. -m. ., ; , ~ y, .
.g . ....;:, s y gh, .
7 g e . - .! ,, ,rp a ,. < g,+g ,, t , - 3., g sg. -y * . 4 4.. , ],e.f'. . . - V. . 1 - ' ' ( f., ;
. 3 ss.$'A n . - ,
. j. n ,
p
- k)
.y-
. 4d '
pus tason
,...4.,,..
' g[, g* a '
'y
'a'.-
-' f h ::;a, h.'? = - $', l wln. [.W~!*' l'WW** N :
- r m -ne hww - we r' - ' n' 5:2 m:n W$bch0 &.' '
c..p. s. w s,. 5 , : ~1ttp64ed99t'T'st3l-Qh@CNW' th' E. . ' - ;,1f: -?$h(/& W g.f~h ..f l i a~... ,
. s. M #.Ali - ! .
, g's,
- '.* m' Usa >e.,*g,,*,,3'a.,-J';
c s/; , t; p > ' " -
.34 Q J,y, .. y. 3, .v.. ". y .. :A(,g .g g +4 . ,, p -e ,
, 3 , -. -
- . ., o .. . . . ,. :. ..
.t -
.s ,
**- '9 *
- eqh*N * . ,$ah {,,, ," *Q.m_ ,
hgjA .. h h&
- p qn$-A
& f he' ,
- i
. _ e .... .... . .., ,
-w --
- - ARMS
. INDEXED oArE JOB NO. 351195
- E C E.I V E .
TUG 00 GdSE
- . . JAN201978 ECEIVE SO. 2 .-
JAN 11, 1976 * - v10e90e660 - . GTT-1925' -l ~ G133S A.9D nlLL, I NC.. (SI1E) , GLEN ROSE,' TEA AS , , J3 N00dnEau ATI ,
' ~
SUB8 SPECIFICA1109 23-23-4S-31, dEVIS104 0
~
. / . _ . _. .. . ~_- P_ .9,0 f EC II V E CO AT. I N G S ,
TVX-1241,' 1/12578 nEFr ' WE COMCUd VITA YOUd PHOPOSED DESIGV CriAi4GES OF InE *SOVE: dEF EdE.90 E . IN ITE'.M 2 OF THE RE:-EnE4CE, 11 In ASSUMED In'Al' TnE N09-SAFETY DESIGhlION . MEA 95 TnA1 Int INSrEC110M.n nEOU1nE-- - . ,
.MENIS Or AS-J1 WILL 40 f ArrLY TO 160SE dUnF ACES. ints nESr04dE ,
nAS SEE4 DESIG4 dE' VIEWED AND APen0VED SY M. CrinUV0s 1J n.a. n0Cd/N.L. GA3LIndDJ/K. rAL4 1 GiddSnILL, i. f . JJs .dr TELE.x8 d.E. n0LLO4sf - G A9D n DALLAS - vloe674764 .-
, ~
/-po-v 7/ .
- x. l
-. t 6
l l b -
..n wsq.ig.;t. . .g g,0.;,;. g.L g g g g 4 W j:p g,, fag g.,,j ,,,.4.y c._,, g .
,. n ;- .,,, m..
~9% ,a mm.*f t,m -
. .:n,
, n, , .,nm:epr.m.p
._.g a m;-e rm, < .M i s c L: . ' p..,,
,.;. y g.m,
,.-- . c .
1 u. .
, g . ,,. ;Q 3 %,,,g ,.g . 3 p 3.': 2
- O q%r7MNS ggg,
;+ Gibbs 8 Hill. Inj B No. 35 1195 INDEXED '
- cm ENSINgant DElleManS CONStay s
ECEjy% ,.
%0 61S78 ,,m,c,...,,,,,,,,,,,,
ECEIy g " 4 4 5 0 March 3,1M@ -&-..H Odd Cl$7* l GTN-24935 PROJECT m, lf 9 PROJECTCl0R.' Texas Utilities Generating Company l{ Post Office Box 1002 Glen Rose, Texas 76043
-@# Il PROJECT CCNT,150R.l [
Attention: Mr. B. J. Murray, TUGC0 QA 'i i ir i Engineering Supervisor PROJECT GL't ut,1, [ } Gentlemen: ARMS iI I 8
! TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CCMPANY l
COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION 1981 2300 MW INSTALLATION G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 - 05277 TESTING OF TOPCOAT PAINTS FOR MA/ i
/b
- , REACTOR BUILDING ENVIRONMENT
-i ! G&H was requested by TUSI Jobsite to help in determining what i
topcoat paint (s) could be applied over different primer coats i
! already applied to equipment which is located in the Reactor Building (Containment). Mr. K. Falk of G&H has discussed this requirement with Messrs. C. Weigers and D. McBride of Carboline Corporation, who have indicated that Carboline Phenoline 305, on which some environmental tests are presently being conducted, may satisfy TUSI's requirements. Carboline has offered to con-j ' sider including in their present testing program (at no cost to ' TUSI), environmental parameters which would be representative of CPSES post-accident containment environment. , By copy of this letter to Carboline Corporation, we are forward-ing copies of FSAR Figures 6.2.1-1 and 6.2.1-2 which represent the containment pressure and temperature transient following a LOCA. The.e curves are for Carboline's use in testing the i
following protective coating systems: Primer Touchup Topccat 1 - Ameron Dimetcote 6 Dimetcote 6 Carboline Phenoline 305 2 - Ameron Dimetcote 6 Carboline Carboline Phenoline 305 Carbozine 11 3 - Mobil Mobilzinc 7 Carboline Carboline Phenoline 305
, Carbozine 11 393 SEVEN?M AVENUE NEW vo m K. N. Y 10001 C A BLE. Sig8SMsLL NEW voeu
y.m_ . ry.cc_p~;-~ .. w , c..v - . - er..
. . f-wyr c gaggw- --- ypa,y . s --- ~s. __
g 3 . t GTN-24935 March 3, 1978 Texas Utilities Generating Company The spray solution will be boric acid (2000 ppm as boron) with sodium hydroxide added to attain a pH range of 8.5-10.0. Forced curing shall not be used in preparing the sample panel. The preferred priority for testing these combinations should be in the order listed above. It is our understanding that each test requires about one month from inception to final reporting; Carboline is therefore requested to start at the earliest avail-able date. Carboline is also requested to forward to TUSI and j G&H the results from any similar testing currently available. I If there are any questions, please contact this office. Very truly yours, GIBBS & HILL, Inc. Harvey R. Rock u Project Manager HRR-PKSw-KRH-KF:s=m 1 Copy cc: ARMS (B&R Site) - Orig. L E. G. Gibson (TUSI Dallas) - lL J. T. Merritt (TUSI Dallas)- 2L J. C. Kuykendall (TUGCO Site) - lL U. D. Douglas (B&R Site) - lL J. R. Ainsworth (TUSI NY) - lL R. E. Holloway (G&H Dallas) - 2L C. Weigers (Carboline) - lL, lA D. M. McBride (Carboline) - lL, lA S. J. Fiebach (Carboline) - lL, lA i i i DWDe @ .* -
- _ _ _ _ W -
MNWM
R .cWw m,s: - .n.___
= ~ n : W rr.s
- M x w sti m yy & g t.:r:57-7_ fw , m.T*'.~~ y,_,r m m -w-n . .
.- ._, , AA4tS
&4'4 Z.
Gibbs S Hill. inc. ARMS
- =einssas assiemens consrauctons OkD NTasero oi 6 sata =sio. ^.
' JOB NO. 351195 ,,,,, ,so. 4 4 5 0 E C ElV E APR 241978 April 18, 1978 ECEIVE GTN-26194 8 & R OCC 01S~.
l Texas Utilities Generating Company PR0jEC7 MOR. #' ' 2001 Bryan Tower / Dallas, Texas 75201 PROJECT ENOR. -lp
- OA CI' I/
Attention: Mr. E. G. Gibson, Project Engineer PROJECT CONT. ENGR.l / Gentlemen: E EA 'I PROJE3 GEN MOR. [ TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION
#E' [.
1981 2300 MW INSTATLATION 6A6/gppc f/g G&H PROJECT NO. 2343 / 05277 PROTECTIVE COATINGS SPECIFICATION NO. 2323-AS-31 REF: DALM 322 g j By copy of this letter to Brown & Root, Plantsite, we are
, forwarding ten (10) copies of Specification 2323-AS-31 I " Protective Coatings" Revision 1, dated March 15, 1978, for construction.
The following DC/DDA's have been incorporated into the t above revision of the specification which has been design reviewed:
?
DC/DDA - 588, 667, 694, 732, 733, 877, 882, 887, 893, 907, 964, 1011, 1012, 1028, 1313, 941, 1313, 1460 l In addition, the following documents have been considered and incorporated as applicable: TUF - 3865, 4102, 4300, 4192, 4188, 4180, 4160 t i GHF - 2097, 2230 TWX - 1094, 1241, 1060 ses saveur= avenue new ve = =. = v. icooi caste: mie ss aitt. =ew voa.
'4 m:g* 34ryq-+m.v.**.vwmweg;ferq37;;pp 77 yqy ~: mw-
. j -
..-w p
i . i .. ; k- GTN-26194 April 18, 1978 Texas Utilities Generating Company GTT - 1735, 1925 Telecon - 1/9/78 (JXC/So, Imperial) 1/9/78 (KF/O. B. Jones) 1/19/78 (JXC/So, Imperial) Carboline Telex dated 10/3/77 GTN-22679 Very truly yours, GIBBS & HILL, Inc. . ,
~
~.
.- Harvey R. Rock Project Manager
[ HRR-NLG]KF:s=.:- -
-,i 1 Copy + 6A cc: ARMS (B&R Site) - Orig. L + 10A J. C. Kuykendall (TUGCO Site) - lL, lA J. T. Merritt (TUSI Site) - 2L, lA L. A. Ashley (B&R Houston) - lL, lA J. R. Ainsworth (TUSI NY) - lL R. E. Holloway (G&H Callas) - 2L, 2A I
i 1 1 8
*+*- -- <~ -...-_.4.
/ x
* -N-e ^- _ , TV9E _
fYN5kN YE'
- d
- 1 anFA CCUL 314 1
,,,. , s44.tooo
! .$ 3 %'M l P
- 6 $ bl b ' 4 k' { 4 ' J .1 3 ,
~
=
.t . .
$ ji .
t , u.. . carboline j:--i,.,s... .
**"st"" c =~
PROTECTIVE COATIN GS f'OR CCRROSION RTS4$1 ANCE o WATERPMOOFING
- Fl#F. PROTECTION
- 900 FIN C.
=
May 24, 1978 Mr. Keith Falk Gibbs and Hill, Incorporated 393' Seventh Avenue New York, New York 10001 Dear Keiths Carboline's Test Project Report 01651, which evaluates the LOCA performance of Phenoline 305 Finish over Ameron D-6, Mobil Zinc 7 and Carbo Zinc 11 at 11 to 12 mils is enclosed. The results, when evaluated in accordance with ANSI N101.2 as interpreted by Carboline are:
- 1. Ameron D6/Phenoline 305 Finish .
- Unacceptable.
- 2. Mobil sinc 7/Phenoline.305 Finish - Acceptable.
- 3. Carbo zine 11 at 11-12 mils /Phenoline 305 Finish - Unacceptable.
Please let us knew if we can assist you further.
- Very truly yours, CARBOLINE COMPANY
<te$h Dan M. M srid.
Nuclear Market Specialist enc occ: Mr. Don Sutton: Brown and Root,.Inc.; c/o Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Station; P.O. Box 1001; Glen Rose, Texas 76043 cc: Mr. Charles Wiegers/Mr. Seymour Fiebach/Mr. Charles Rushing l f CARBOLINE CCMPANY
- 350 HANLEY INDUSTRIAL COURT
- ST. Loul5. MIS $CURf 63144 l
,y+ y w m e n r w ?~r*~ = m v.- m W gemtW; rwa 9r,- M y & M y y . W W W ':2s'>uptyp
( .: . vi I
, k .1 I
aasa caos v. em .io n i carboIIne e,
. .m....._
U 1 PROTECTlyECOATINGS Pon cogiggp nasesTAuca . Peas enovactioN e W ATE RPn OO PING
'h.h % %h:
;w:- ,
- h. ,$h.~ ' . -'
r[ C * **i *- '
- August,18, 1978 .
g- [ Mr. Don Sutton,. y ~ f,:: Jc% HL&j % R
.g w 4 Brown & Root,.Inc. , '. '
c/o Cananche Peak Nuclear Station P. O. Bot.1901-Glen Rose','. Twas 76043
Dear Don:
We are pleased to enclose a copy of Carboline Test Project Report 01684, showing acceptable perfomance of Phenoline 305 Finish over Ameron D-6, when tested to the Cemanche Peak FSAR curve. We trust this will allow the use of Phenoline 305 Finish over Ameron D-6, on miscellaneous equipment, etc. please let me know if you have any questions on this test report. Very truly yours, C7.RBOIJNE COMPANY 4twh , Dan W. McBride Icwor Market Specialist DWMadl/501 oes Mr. Keith Falk
; Gibbs a sill, Inc.
; 393 Seventh Avenue
! New York, New York 10001 cc Mr. Charles Rushing /Mr. Sey:acur Fiebech
- c44
.h k-
,c - '
4* y,. .,. T.. 5%. K. V .
~
l l l ARBOLINE COWANY
- 350 HANLEY INDUSTRfAL COURT e ST. LOUIS. MISSOURI 63144 I
.-.r...- .,,,- . . . - . - - - . - - - - . . - . - - - , - - .
. F a .,:x,.&. _
^^ G-~"'"P"**'**TW*"tK . .%%"-NWu*t*-FeWAD*'-**"WWG=t
.f l%,.'MXCU%".5,';i4:.1k:! .%lh' . .@.W-$X. ^.-4& .h ,:.%.h , ~' 'M:-4 ?.
A -b 7 Y ?. W C ' & & {'t :
, e *, - w. 5:M. , , :. y . ._ .. E .... ..;
1 0 .= r .3 .4
.m
+
. ~ . - .
1 i w.V
- o. ,,
Y hm ' v.a;,;.y.a 2t':$'$ w%. ?hN. lh.gh,4:ggc,.4.. u.MQ- h. W5'y 2 % k.,lh * .Y $ p:BBS' E-MILI,h.s.DarM.NA)p;.g. f.O ; .E.C EiV E .. ,. h.,: M...-s GI
. W.. :,W .
'9-
.~
~.'
f W.@'. h": r'.J i*9 '~ATTW
- +TE. M ;
9[' . AUGUST.Q,'.
&. ;W.k.*Q.2R
*S--
I 97 Sc- .u c%,*;:g.'j,. ,.,i + -
- s. -.
5J.- ;$Qg@g ., ,
.R E.- HOI.COWAY - G G"- MOVINKEIi -
m' ; 1
. .,-2 .,:.. , .;, + . n. 2 2 ,wc. . %. . .'. e 7- ~.....
,. 4.,-f,.
. .y. . }a. : ., s . ., c.:.,...c<.
- . .tn: .. g.,r.it.-mp1,,O . c..'.:
. .,y.. w.<.
.,.;q.;.n. 3..> .,.n.3,n. . , , . .2 .
1837 . M.g . w':T.N.0 , q
< ,a y TWZ J--4; w 4. ,e r ; - y ..- (. '
} .
L C f. 'ly D . . :a: l . . . . , f ;- , . .
*.'..L - s
. w -j. :.. w-e.e t ' / . -? :c... :
PAIw.NTED.e'g...I,PM EQU
.,W. ; s - - s .
s
- ,J:"SUB. JECT..*
,,.~ ... , . ..
- 9. . NT 'Is CONTAINMENT'-
,.g. . . ,w , p , ,.,.t .,- e
,. 3 3 .. ..' , .. .
~.~m v.....u .+. w ..v:-ge,.. s. . O M. m.a
.e
.g. q,. v. :.:. g.,.~q. .,.. . ~. a. ,; .. ., .
w m.=.~%.,9. . t.. . .
.f - PER FSAR., SECT..ON -6 4 2 2.'3;3 , PARAGRAPH 8' (PAGE 6 2. -5 6 ), A FEW-. '. .
. ~ r , L ,, q ,.. c:y.~.>,..;,,,..<.:.....,,.,.
. n. .
e q., .
,; r. .y ,, _ .
. .;s. . .,. '/SMALL NOM-SAFETT: BELATED- PIECES *0F EQUIPMENT UILL BE INSTALLOD ,
,Q @.7.', v.7. N?5.-p)6. e,%:WWa%%."' '.4. ./ . - s .3 . ? ;o - , ,) .
t f;l:CzsSIDE.'THr.CONTAINENT.BUILDIN6;.WITH NON-SAFETY RELATED COATING .
,, 4
- *?4 w .9 n.+ m e.w w <+ n.. w m:Mm:. : -
.a.
. .. .THE I >
v :.J ;.. .a. . a . ... s <
..w ,.g.';. , :.. FOLLOW
\
y&g ING . ITEMS HAVE' gg.y:gq.;:.g.g. .,.y....MM . ; .. ,( ' RECEIVED
, . ON' SITE .
,- WITH
., .,. PRIMER;. .f;?- .j .
.g.,...q.,....p.......y.m.,,,....
s ,
..,..- ..,.-...t. - . r ..; .~ .
" 17i REFUELING .CAVITT SMIMER/ PUMP-TAG NO CPI-SFAPRS-O L
.-A ' q ..,.. f.M':f 9"i V y:.5/c!O T . ~ ..
% 2*PfCCW D U E NGC CPL-CCAPDP-03,-0A . :-, . -
- -. .;. .q ,. ..w.. . .E,A w.IF.,P. a. ..--~~
. ..MP -..n,.TA 1- ., ,
p n x.+y p :. .,,.:m-% - 2
,.. ~nu.2. r .. ..,.m.a.
.n -
. . .m.~ . .
- ~s- '02 -
n" .in" 3 P.:.~RC .v.VBAIM.:pTANK PUMP-TAG ~ NCO TBX-WPAPRD-O t, r.-
- . s . 3. . ; - .- v. . .. , e r -J; .y ;r,._. 1,-l.Q . . . . . t. p. m%, .p,.
~-h.:., 4a.gey:., .,,, -c. b :s.,w u . -
r-: p.:. y': : 3,.~
. .s .,
.. , - m 4. :. .: . ~. y _- ,
.. REQUEST YOUR CONFIRMATION .THAT. -... ,.
THESE ITEMS ARE IIRLUDED IN THE ,
, . . - . . . , , . . < ...e'..r. -
1 f. ,,.
. /
. . .c, . EQUIPMENT: ACCEPTIBLE 'FOR' INSTALLATION IN THE CONTAINMENT WITH 9 L f ' ;. Q ? q ;G C c:.L & :,t g C ' N g: . . .
,\* J. . .{NON-SAFETT BELATED COATINGS.h. REPAINTING THESE ITEMS TO MEET, . . ,
- .. . s .. . . . .;, ...
. . p. . J yv . .n., .,::.m-p. ..;.n, y%s....ze .. nr:-v, . ,. ..r.n . .. e, w. r,
- :.:, :y~.: ~ -r , .
'.h...: .fW. '.A. 5. 31 BEQUIREMENTS.,WO. ULD,91NVOLV.E C.O..MPLETE DISASSEMBLY OF THE s 6
['
'.j.Qy.2.T ;*' . $. - - Q..,f.y[g. w.0. ;J;C ,.
.w . . f.,< .y..$t.)"7,. .~Q.4;.;7.K:,Q. .
-. PUNPSe. . ... %., ,
.'M
~
&ze-A
?.5^f2f $G+QlhohV-E &x~'W.. : b.'.'.'. 5 ) m_.' . . ' ' '~,
, Y.
q q,7Ev,s,%'5{$.;e.'-?
). m. e.- p~. m . . .
wi .
. W.>n .s-m. ., .m-y.. . . ?~ .;y>m, .w_y.;w - e. z. s ,
. -^ -
F - , * .. c. >
, t
. d.MWNErn;DATE -
roat ~ BESPONSE - ri .bgs,%. :i. S ,9/8/78%@%.
& ;"f.5;:ih .:x ,-n- "". k. n. . . - . -
*.M.p '$. 't"9T.D. s -
. A. ~.dM.W:-fg%.$,1.s'U,- . g.
m.xq+OMip;$<.;p,W: > ^ J. ,,,. t .M.
.m k,
.. . .f. r,.J4-@:-,W.m.. 'M ^ 2., @m . M.. .
.s..+.. 4. .;.f. s.
,_7 , . M../..,.
>c '." . ..-. - ' ~ ..~
.+-- n J ,Jn MODRHEAD.
. . .: .- v ,
-/V.M.r + m Ml. .: ? .'M js W ^ . -C .'[ '
~#-
} %
- M'cq.i :.,M /.I w B T J.r.S rk. .: .M P. . W ;.%. fyD'? "
O. x.. r. M. x. M. r. .. m. t; ?. c.. ; ;~ .- A , (, -m.: y-x m.A:L z .r..r. g
. -w: . - - . -
.r..-Y - .. %
, V i %' .leCCt.. E-E .ROCKL KM FAULK,"4. r.. ,.a..,M < e,6'. ',~ r; - ..
+g .!
.-t *.W q;,r,!:w.v:&vw:p ;;~.w s-
<t,. .v. .u.:a .:' ;,-
/, . \
4 :,,; sn.s. : .t-.*
.D Y, y ,w:.w $ u ,h@.6,-ng;+';c. ~ .
. ' 1-~
S h . . ." 6@p c- nu 'hh:5%DJ.MTM8-
, O, . .
g;.$[$"W % Zr.+.W W'.S tJi.ZA*&Jm.'pl$~'lu. '.1 W' W
' . ' ' ' ..* C
,ia'/~% ,ti.*M%%.r . r. J.
'* :-:? . %. - .
u.
' % o' '*-
J., g+ Q :e:vY W h.s
- M Y G k. V51*P'a't' r;:
.a , .e. y Aw.'f'.1,***lM.y. .3 w, ,..- ;~..-.. '~:D.m..'.. #.u m,, , : ,
.. . ,, n ::.
. - .s g d,m,j l*> .. . f 7%m A c -
- f. 5 - ..a - -
- . .-~ ~.
A . ,.
'~
.%.; ? h.. Y }~W,Y
- f f. ;.-;. .w N .b g~ L '*
, .. .s .,MW.WMu$y;,,n y,fN.&S-D. ..-... ...;.:"' Aw. .M :p ... .; ,-&$. . . n._ .,s P,-r.i...:',%
l \
.'- . .. .ri
a , .. .Y.~. ?%e.
. stBaS nLLt.:DAL:p-%;c,M: . g e
'. ' ,' t.rp'. , .
.t.
+,r,p ' t k.:
M. ,. .~ea.f y:w. - .r *WW .. ; .b s: gA.,:g,F. 4 ~ W , . w . . . ' vg ' A . .- qu. . . R h ' v
% .a e m m m e n m e ' m M' .kNe m'm l
l
1
, s ,- l TH ?}-**.?(qQQ*: .'.' ..
w 3_ - _
-~*5M's
%* Li"~*"W -_-= - --_, - m .s i._RTRCffQ~*'B%y'R*bk}
. . . . . . . . .. ~ - . . . . . ... . . . . . ,
.,.-,.A. ..
e .* .
.k 1 . ,._ .
. ,t*>.
9 ' ..,',
- .~ .
. <.m . y. .
. . c
' ARMS -
1 9 .TUGCO bRSE ,
. >lNDE.XED .
s
, . JOB NO. 35.u95 ,
E-C E I V E N'O.s . ,
. .- -l ,
AUGUST 30, 1978 - SEP 51978
~
,-GTT-2693' ' '
' ~ *
- c. ECEIVE TUSI SITE
.Z. WUm ,
ETTENTION8 w-v. ..em.- s/0 8. JONES
\ ~
(,
SUBJECT:
PAINTED EQUIPMENT IN CONTAINMENT
.h BEFERENCEI TVX-1837,.S/22/78 .
. s
' - , L, .
' ITEMS ~ RECEIVED ON SITE AS NOTED IN THE REFERENCED TII.EX MAY BE
- INSTALLED IN CONTAINMENT. AN EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE DY THE FIELD TO DETERMINE THE MANUFACTURER AND PRODUCT NUMBER OF THE PRIMER USED ON EACH PUMP. WHEN THIS HAS BEEN DONE, SUBSEQUENT . INTER- -
MEDIATE. AND FINISH COATS SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM AS-31, ,
~RADICACTIVE AREA REQUIREMENTS. /
'j. .c; ..
s .
.* ,e
-- . .e . . , , , , ,
H.R. ROCK -- -
* ~
-G. IBBSHILL NY. .
- - s y ., . - ,
", s ' '
HRR/EH/NLG/JCH/KF' . TUGC0 GRSE o .. GH ENG NY i - 9
~
. ferrt A. .
o i t l i I,
'-- - w ee w - e e g .us..p.m.4 h_as.ne, a w- -v.
.%v+7 qmegymyterv.T m9wwwwemme%werem n . - .
.m. .
g . .r-ARMS % INDryg . y - TuGCO GRSE -
. tog yO. 35-1195 ! - NO. 4 g C E I V E $w p
AUGURT 31, 1978 SE?
. . . 5 1973 ll.
9108908660 , . ECggVEa,,k TUSI SITE ,
" G TT-2652 .
i- , , . , ATT * - B'. J. MURRAY. . ... ' . , SUBS ' PAINTED EQUIPMENT IN CONTAINMENT .. 1' REF TWX-10128 , IN ACCORDANCE WITH AS-3L , APPENDIX C,- QA REQUIREMENTS FOR PAINT
, r. APPLIED INSIDE CONTAINMIINT , THI C0ATING CONTRACTOR SHOULD HAVE
--- - RECORDS.-DETall.ING -TMit -PRIME 5- AND FINISH COATS OF ALL EQUIPMENT ~ .
INSIDE THE CONTAINMENT. .THE LIST OF EQUIPMENT INSIDE THE , CONTAINMENf WHICH, DOES NOT CONFORM TO ANSI N 101 2 , REQUESTED BY THE ' REFERENCE, CAN READILY_BE MADE BY C'OMPARING THE CONTRACTORS RECORDS TO THE C0ATING SYSTEMS NOTED'IN AS-31 APPENDIX A,
. TABLE-A-2 ,
i H.R. ROCH . 3 G IBBSHILL, N . Y. , , I HRR/NLG/JC/HF
~.
T ELEX TO : J.J. MOORHEAD/0. B. JONES 9108908660 TUSI SITE i r- TUGC0 GRSE . l
$/ dss /-
fY h ' G H ENG NY
' A- \ - .
~
C G.gi ',@gyw , .'. %Pb -' *. " , - - m-- V'
- J*****'T I d * *3 Q W J 8 QtF %.WGNWg* er.;.f .
e TUuCU uns _
'~
b* ' '
-=
~
' JOB NO. 35-1195 E . I ECEIVE 1% '
AMS TUGC0 GRSE - O6 NOV 201978 INDEXED
* ~
NO., i. ECElVE
~
NOVEMBER 17, 1978 ,
'GTT-3106 t
/ .
_ ~ ATTENTION: J.T. MERRITT/0. B. JONES SUBJECT
- PROTECTIVE COATINGS REF DCDDA NO. 2932 - -
.THE REFERENCED, DCDDA NO.'2932, IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AND WILL , ,,-1 NOT BE INCLUDED LN SPECIFICATION AS-31 G&H DOES NOT CONCUR THAT LETTING SANDBLASTED STEEL STAND OVERNIGHT IS A SOUND PRACTICE. WE REFERENCE CARBOLINE CORP. *S NUCLEAR COATINGS ' PROGRAM LITERATURE WHICH STATES; NO SANDBLASTED STEEL.
SHALL BE ALLOWED TO STAND OVERNIGHT
- IN THEIR SURFACE -
PREPARATION RECOMMENDATIONS.
# H . R. RO CK 7.5- ' -~-~'-~-~~ ~-
'(
G IBBSHILL NY .
'f--
HRR/NLG/JC/KF .. i V'Of t / A _. l /l l 9
- e. ,.
t
==
6
, es y m m s ,c;7:rgg g G y g g>*ng g g _ m . .y _ ,._. w ;r W M M C r '"; w r- w %ersep+ g JOB No. 35-1195 , aECEIV(. e one Conver:otion Record Do, - 1/24/79
- l ARMS n B6 19I9 t ""
EH/JJK, 176, B, OUTGoruG, Ti" *: 3'
~
IND3ED
*E' --
GE I V U r-
$ M. Stevens Carboline Call by: of (Ne==) (Ceaweny) e4 w J. J. Koziak G&H e
2 An swer by: of ( c-, w t u e-.i
.a o
TUSI G&H 2323-001 e, Controet N a: r-S Subject d i s c u s s e d: FSAR NRC O 022. 9 z. C-CORROSION RATES FOR PAINTS C INSIDE THE CONTAINMENT suwwany or oiscussion. ocers cus an= cowwirucuts. Marian gave me a new date for the transmittal of test results from Carboline to G&H. G&H should raceive them in week of Ieb. 5, 1979. This delay will have an impact on Westinghouse scheduled date for completion of a response to NRC Question 022.9.
*/
M e dK':[ f cc: ARMS (B&R Site) lL R. E. Holloway (G&H Dallas) 2L J. C. Kuykendall (TUGCO Site) lL I J. T. Merritt (TUSI Site) lL H. C. Schmidt (TUSI Dallas) 2L D. Dominicis (WNES Pitts.) lL j D. McBride (Carboline) lL i A. T. Parker (WNES Pitts.) 3L JOB NO. 35-1195 q""S E C E I V E Q b8 M. E3 0 0 137.; 4 J B ; rt ECEIVEW
. . F.J A fo M __. _ --
1 -
~ sywmem??Sm.sQ3L_ a=r v.~_ w.g .,._,- &=Mm"' r. ' " ymm w: a>
c ~.. , . . .. .. . n m' l -
$fg ,
,TUGC0 GRSE r -
808 NO. 35-1195 ECEIVE7
- NO. 1 .,
9{ - JUL 19 1979 Jt.LY 19, 1979 TuSI SITE '
' i ECEIVEd TWX NO. ~ 910890866,0
- s' G TT-4015 ,
~
- ~'
ATTt J.T. MERRITT/R.E. HEIM/G. D. MC PHAIL . TJ2 ' DRIMER FOR NUCLEAR VALVES INSIDE CONTAISMENT UN1.
- AND 2. -
REFI TWX-11,242 , INFORMATION REGARDING MANUFACTURER AND PRIMER TYPE FOR VALVES 1 ~ AND ,0THER SHOP PRIMED MECHANICAL ' EQUIPMENT IS NOTED IN TABLE A-4 ~ ~ ' - OF APPENDIX A TO SPECIFICATION 2323-AS-31, REV.' 1.' INFORMATION PRESENTED IN THIS TABLE CAN BE~ CHECMED AGAINST VENDOR DESIGN DOCUMENTS RECEIVED WITH THE EQUIPMENT, SINCE THE TABLE HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE SEPT, 1977 THE TABLE - W AS DEVELOPED . USING INFORMATION AVAILABLE AT THAT TIME IN THE FORM OF VENDOR COATING PROCEDURES RECEIVED BY G AND H OR BY TELEPHONE CONTACTS. a l H.R. ROCX ' G IBBSHILL, N.Y.
. q MRR/AM/M. FALK % b 0
\
~
;, , . Gh
,"^ q' Q s 1U TthGC0GRSE GH ENG A NYK 1
l 1 l l
3 nw./3 nst:Mt'"g7="+,3 "-m-m" ma-w ump sp;,,a- ~s ~~. negg ywm. .cy- .-.m -~ . l
,./f.f~. ' W .p m 2 2P;;+ h5bhNk.
>r $ CL W .%Ehh O'
*!g[.y w a A d Q. h;XLh L% &~iM*S$@n.~77 .h h> .h,< ' _'
s . ,k 5 ' AhM Y . S'."
%e-{ &:%(.*: w 7JU M AF t?f,$. Q hs.ds:.;,W.y . CNn.4# }.
i /
.9
..w @.s.,.e.'.
. ;; : . / .:. r ~q p' c+.
c.;? M ,,;. N. w'4. .Q**59-
- : 9.q:;e9.
.- . ..7 n..
%V.g' L.
Nr#...w%v.b.$ W; _ ,.,j : n. .p~p.
%-t. .e;;
F47 . ~.. ti
' *'*A.* .: Ty
..;7 .
w..y.d .- y:fW.
, w.
~ m; r .h; W:.,.%
,.Ll.. 9
- m
%. u
-i....- 'd.
, . . - . . s .u
+1-* '; * $*y ...v. Ig.A; ..
,y3 a s Y - s,~y-R.: y.- W i, ..,., w
.,,+t
.oqM,:t Re:. - : . .b Q~..-*'
.' ly ~* )
T. 7 'c,. A ..
.::G;Y-Q; y , ? ,ps. .
.y-n :
?* ' 'GH'.E5 .N NiH , h T5'h. W, .g,,, ~
, !h'.Y: $~ 8 / s h
,f.l i
1 . .. - 2 . . f : .. ; h .- / .-;4. f 4 yi .D . . . . ,' . . / . . ._ IUGC0 '6 RS E ~ .% -.
.. '".. ' '^ ** $; ... . a, .., 7. ? ../ N..
~
.Y. ..I. '.l i.. ." I 7 .k .
(* *. . '.'
. " '~ ~. 5 #. m a .
b
h*N
,' h. '[ b
' OCTOBER 22 O 979 [' -
&.~.T:M a. 2";'O- 1I.* h '(,
i : ,- 2.': ". ..,
.1 TWXs' II,50S T '. -
1 FALK .' %.* ** ':..' ." &p.';. '. ~ ;., ,;':y~* & $$ ATTN i * .He R.! R C'H /H' ? 5' --
. '2 ' ' ..h.'. .':.;.o; j.hQ,Q#v'h *. -G.* ; ' - g.".'L-g: l, .;G.;t,q
' ~
. ...;' e 2 . .u.. l
. . SUB L S PRO. TECTIVE . COAT LC. A D.HES IOM. %.~.-u. ~ C. 'v' :W.u..'.-.' 's.?-.w.' .'cN,-s i
'g
. . i' -
"J.-
-_~
.a :. . . . - .
%;..m.R. m:n .
. . - s' ..
k,- .; Q
;. ' GIBBS &l HILL SPECIFICATI'ON '2323-AS '31,' JSECTION 9'.'2 2, P' ART A, YO'
- ' ;- STATES *.
THAT. *200 P.S. I SHALL BE THE MINIMUM EXCEPTABLE ' ' ' IDM-h/ %- M _, . STRENGTH PER . TEST" .FOR ? ADHESION' 0F < PROTECTIVE COATING TENSILE . ' N N .k M; -
-.- STRENGTH 70l THE STEE1. SUBSTRATE-; CASES EXIST INSIDE REACTOR '
;. ' BUILDING Jl, WHERE IN IT.IAI ADHESIOM' TESTS -I'NDICATE ~ HIGHER. ~
.'~'h' . $'E N,~N. M M5 ADHESION THAN REQUIRED' BY AS-3 L STANDARDS OVER STEEL
- l~I N-
' SUBSTRATES -ON Af CRANE. THAT HAD. QUESTIONAB AND MISC.: COATING . DEFICIENCIES- %DURING THE EXPECTED LIFE SPAN .. ;
b
' " .N U OF THE PLANT, NILL BE GENERICITYPES _0F- COATING MATERI AL '
5 _ (AMERON D-6' PRIMER AND CARBOLINES. 30S TOPCOAT) ' LOSE ANY . $*DO APPRECI ABLE ADHESIO,N 'DUE,.TO . ZINC: SACRIFICING 70. THE STEE.. .~ ' A.. .ve.
*7. ya. s.,.,.,g.g
.w. ' V v .,
. ? 2; -
SUB ST.R.ATEt e.~ +.. .. s y ' ;. ~. . dc. -
... . .. or.s . .w: ..s. . . e, ., c,.
..<.. )3 ' ep. .;; y;; +..'f.r.a .- ,.
m.cw. .e,Aw . __ .c.. , ;s w a.s..:.. ., qQ&p-
- . e. s,
,: . .:,w;..,7,,~...~-
g, ,. ; ,,a y...e .
. s.
x ..
.y PLEASF(,d DVISE. ;~J RESPO N...'s ,.<9~~.'..e,.m. - +< ? .. ' . '.'. J. ,,,,s -
; SE r. c. 1.URG E.,NT e
. ,;, . :, ; ; -n. .<. . ;. . u. . . + n -. , + .a .
a.s.q.~. 9c q.c %., r.s.
. '. . ;*I $ h. .. .. .;.a.cl
- . ,: > ..-c .. .
RESPONSE DA TE- .r '0'CT'. '26, d 9E$g.[N*"Ed~.
. .. .. ANU.9 ~ m ,, .'hN; c R. E.. HE ItNG . D. MCPHA IL '- ' '
- c. ,
.~.
; Nr'N @,
L ' .p' D. -i ". . 4'9' - " ';, ' CPSES JOBSITE ~^.- '
' - i- 'Yt.
;c ?'W d .
REH/G DM/JG l .s E.i' w?.'Y, Y i '*.
~'
O., ' .:%.V.W' Mp CORRECT ION * . FIRST-. .PARA -P.. 7.'$.".*$
.SAME PARA. NIMTH LINE.E.IFTH WORD'SHOULD BE.
. S THE.
' ?b!b.
. e ,..SEVENTH. .v , .. - r' ~ , .LIN
. ., n. :. . v. -
-- - w..
...~~.a. : , ~. . c;
.. .. x. -
.. .. ., .. a. ....
Qs GH ENG A NYH7 : Q '3.> .ly .' l.a la. . . ;C 'W, . s' .%. ~^*.. .W. .C' .', l 4 ? , , . .
- .& .: ^~ **N.( '
" ./-~ L-a ;-4 R ;.' A .E3'+I h [ O N M D .MI':3E.di.D;E ;.;f;." N., ,,'['. . . , <.,$ )',$'#-
,g -*%
4 e ( *$ e l 4
..e . . m - - - e em. .-a.-- - - - .
.. n,.,,,na,,w e_.
-n ., --s-- .. , - w - .m w m--n ,,-. c. . ~ ~ . w ~ ----.- - ,-
K -- - .
~, . w- m.cv QM~k.,h .&.i A . .x.$ ~ m %.k W Q 6FG d g.k
'78 fE @'7Fi'-l t
'-M::szi W~ %
'h.'"W.
y&. fTUGCDP.GRSEg( 9%r.;s& ~~m ~
#k'vh d fWitoufTverrWorwas;
& h M :394 E N:A REvn. .M g%'WiD sAastt: . F E
@.13 n S WED2Pt NW REPEAT d/g ' yyMj Y8 N fis.u.--taANMs EM Mdfd::%. a .s .
D sm$$dM-MDEMf9_G.3d'.h.f..?>
.- .a e.- . . s e.
4
. ?-I45 dd p e. l'. e-gYq.;M,4Y-I.~$.
k,,:dN..',kOY.4.~6..+&E,a,v.sD6fM.r.u@pm$.kM,.[:
. . . . . E.r..:ik n : .s.a .
.d.EAd. ..-. ./.T. - .
l , SN.r
; +. ~.ee-,0ta.c~ma.v. e.e t;\%. . , _.
t.ec.s..c,,s,. cm.w.,c. : .
...-wm.
,3 . ; s. .x..
- . .- e c. - .. ~.
- .t . w . , . . . -
.. . . - w M'18.r. 4 :,,, %. g ,,,9 9. ~ . - . ' Joe No. 35-1195. ...
2
...., M %.:i G,;,m . G. -R. 3 4.
<.,gf .
,E, .
. M..ic. i.
V.. g
. i_':. + J ~ ~
- ..u .E C E I V.E %. -2 o.. . - - .
- ' ^
- ^
??*.
; .- .J : r..-l-
, s. W y &m --.,.-;. : . .- .& 5 ... Ww.--
i-l 5 i .fn-:9.: r T .- 0CT 231979 -
;,..(- g- - .: . _ --
?-..., n
'< - f.,.J.~
. ~.- 4..-{;
..,: b M
- w. Jy'. Si.'.
,.rs a w. e 4.-g' ,y,. J's /? p.o e -
f
. . .- A .: g,.
. ,. : . P....;v.p.. 3i. g ..y;y M7 z:,b i.M a c g g .? in : f. ~ ' .,
E:C E lV E .
'^"'-
.- e TUG C O' G RSE.M.' . ~.s .. , .,, .: &. . . m%., v, s,c;;I'Y+^ * #, 'd,. n ,' .
...'.&,_~ .6. '*
' .. . .YO.UR TW X DTD 10./ 22 ATT rn / M.R. 5 HOCK /M . FALM.
*^
- .. + . o,
. , ;. ,.- >. A :; - t7.-m, - - ;.W. ..9.'. .' .'
- 4, B:, . V.,.......f.<:.
<~~~
.r
.4. pq,.
r
- TWX.N,.L I .,5.-z 0 5: P, R. EC.V,.,D. E.A REJ IER<,T,:HIS..AFTERN00 0 .' . . . - ..;, . ,
.:..... - ..O.y
. .h .n n yn '.9.. T'. .n,.;.., .my.v .? - . . . . u ,.,
; -W --- r 1- .,,, , p. - '
- - . .g l- N - Y{.WAS.RECUD GARBELED)Pt.S. REPEAT * !T AGA IN : TMU - ' . , ' ...d,:re, , *, f.N. ~H .;M r4s
. .<>. . -- 3.7 - weg. J . . ? ~ ~ .; ~' ~. - ~ . ' * ; . -J'..' . , ..
. ' h. '-> . - ',%-..-2 ..;*.-, '.
.. , w.':% y. .
- s..y;r.,.vm.y;.d.%;
V. .
. m sgd f n.-;,.sg ,w. rimCpr:: ,?-:.v;Q,
; +O&.%,.aco.,;a.
- w. .
a
,- , s :: - .
. M,. 4M, ,;,@.z.,.. ; -, '# - . .
-. . - ',. M. -Q r T~ .#r
.;.- v e. . - ;:- . -
- ' . is,,,GM W.ThiL ENG~I5' G IBB5HIL.L. '. <<- % J.-%...*:1" NG..W'
.- A NYM -
- 4. . . ,
s
- .n . .J . .;-'...',>.
~ *
~
_B LB l.r,.
,_-*,.,,e,.-
,,,,,,p*,,.
x..,..,.4,.*.,..
.e. -
. i.- -___~e-> -Y.r .,.-u_.,__- - _ .. - ,
'-l-Y I
J
- e e
e e e I 1 o O I j .
. /
J l
. s t
y E- - . ~ - _ _ . . . . . .- - h a ccer OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY mr oreca som n omato e, uaan manera s casv smus c September 18, 1984 Mr. Thomas A. Ippolito Project Director Comanche Peak Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulation Commission Washington D. C. 20555
Dear Mr. Ippolito:
The .:,losed documents are being sent to you at the request of Mr. Yuly Korobov of Carboline Company. To cor. firm that these are copies of reports in our files we have initialed each page and signed the cover letters. , Samles not requested have been deleted from these reports. If there are any questions or we can be of further service please call on us.
'.e Sincerely, T c. % /& ,
W. R. Laing, Section Head Analytical Chemistry Division R. D. Brooksbank Chemist [ R. E. Jones Chemist WRL:1p Enclosure cc: Yuly Korobov w/o enclousre O ,w ce, 1 A cm H p a "q v g a -~ , L. - . . --
. . . . - . . __. . -- : c%u m3/.Aih.M.%sseer,zmusmem ' " = '~ r w 4.
. -...a...-.=:.-- '
- -. w :- . . . . . . . . - -
OAK RIDGE N ATIONAL LABORATORY OPERAftD SY UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION NUCL[ At OlVI$10N O POST OFFICE 80X X OAK RIDGE. TENNE 55EE 37030 June 24, 1976 Mr. Charles J. Wiegers Power Industry Manager Carboline 350 Hanley Industrial Court St. Louis, Missouri 63144
Dear Mr. Wiegers:
Enclosed are the results of the Decontamination, Irradiation, and DBA tests we ran on your coated steel panels and concrete blocks. The three separate DBA tests (i.e., tables of test condi-tions, results) are identified by the three different dates noted at the upper right-hand corner of the report sheets. The photographs of systems CBCS 1, 4,12, and 13 and of the de-L contamination test panels will follow shortly. If we can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely yours, L. T. Corbin Analytical Chemistry Division LTC:dmw Enclosures cc: G. Goldberg f0 9N7/8 Y
/J'W 947/r+
W tt & >l 4 9ln)N ! O t I i sa _ . - . ._. ~ _ .
.=- m.m.m.m _ m.
. ~ u :. - Analytical Chemistry Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory O Date: June 21. 1976 V Report of Irradiation, Decontamination, and DBA Testing Carboline, St. Louis, Missouri The Irradiation, Decontamination, and Design Basis Accident (DBA) tests are conducted, respectively, in accordance with Bechtel Corporation Standard Specification Coatings for Nuclear Power Plants. Spec. tbs. CP-951, CP-952, and CP-956. The tests are desig'ed also to meet the specifications set in both A.N.S.I. Report N 101.2-1972, Protective Coatings (Paints) for tight . Water Nuclear Reactor Containment Facilities, and N 5.12-1974, Protective Coatings (Paints) for the Nuclear Industry. The DBA test spray solution and the test conditions are listed in Tables 1 and 2. Af ter both the DBA and the irradiation tests, the coatings are examined for signs of cha'lking, blistering, cracking, peeling, delamination, and flaking, according to ASTM standards where applicable. All except the decontamination test panels are returned to the coating manufacturer. , The irradiation tests are run using a spent fuel ~ assembly, removed from the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at ORNL, as the source of radiation. N These fuel assemblies are stored under 20 feet of demineralized water. The fuel is 93% enriched U2 " as U 0. combined with aluminum. The spent fuel as-semblies are removed after each 23-megawatt day period. Irradiation is done using the gama energy from the accumulated mixed fission products. This more readily simulates conditions around a reactor than does a cobalt source. Also, the higher gama activity affords shorter irradiation time to achieve ac-cumulated doses. The dose rate four. days after removal of a fuel assembly from
. the reactor is'l x 10' rads / hour.
The fuel assembly is 20 inches high. A 20-foot long, 31/2-inch diameter pipe, with one end capped, is used for the air irradiation tests. The capped end is lowered into the four-inch opening of the center of the fuel assem- ' bly. The open end, above the water level, is covered with an "0" ring sealed flange to which is attached a steel cable and an air outlet hose. The air inlet is located at the bottom of the pipe. The test specimens are connected I g 9pp[gf Evaluated uo J2 n.A u
,.p
. [ /7 Approved NYyp 9/n/N n _. m.~am a ce a m ,ww.ccausa w w w w c.mws.c
Analytical Chemistry Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory Date: June 21. 1976 to the bottom of the cable and lowered into the radiation field. Also at the center of the fuel assembly is a stainless steel clad cadmium tube used as a neutron absorber. This prevents contamination of the test specimens by induced radiation. The decontamination procedure is as follows: a mixture of fission product nuclides (aged greater than 90 days and less than three years) is neutralized to pH 4 and innediately applied to the test specimens. The speci-mens are previously degreased in alcohol. After the contaminated spot is air dried, the activities of four of the nuclides are measured by counting with a Ge(Li) detector and a multichannel pulse height analyzer. The specimens are then suspended in a beaker of water at 25'C and washed by stirring for 10 mi.iutes. The specimens are removed, the backs rinsed in water, air dried, and counted as above. The ratios of the activities before, to those ahee the decontamination are reported as decontamination factors for water. The decontamination and coanting steps in 25'c and 80*C acids are repeated, and the respective decontamination factors calculated. The " total overall D. F." Ub is calculated as the ratio of the total activity at the beginning of the test to the total activity at the completion of the three washing steps. All activities are corrected for decay between counts. A computer iias been pro-grammed to do all the calculations, l M f////B f Evaluated O e r e
'Wf A,p,ove. ,
j 9ln/M i Linh w h M W eL M A.;A~ J7:r.MSt' ht&CIJVZL 221*+A." ~ GJAiG1. c?;< .Edh,2 cwaw,,2GS a
F i-
* ^
- j. - -
1 Manufacturer: Carboline Analytical Chemistry Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory ( Date: June 15,1976
% )'
Decontamination Test Results: .
' l These tests perfomed according t'o'ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0920 and Bechtel Corp. Spec. CP-952.
ORNL Log Book No. A 7562; 4-23-6 Percent of I Decontamination Factor (DF) Sample Water Acid Acid Number Contaminant 025*C 025'c 080*C Overall Activit{ Removed O l 810 Ce-144 5.9 10 >24 ->1500 CZ-11/ Ru-105 16 1.7 1.7 44 305 Cs-137 >480 6.2 2.2 ~
>6500 Zr-95 -3.6 13 2.0 94 TOTAL 9.6 5.1 , 2. 2 110 99.1
' Percent of total activity removed = (1 - h) x 100. ,
#4yg; Approved 71 //49 /n/N 1
L swAshism:JSmcm-eswm--w.m ,,w wa.2u s, ;,;g,g,,, ,2g_,m ,
. .. .._...___.-a....
OAK RIDGE N ATIONAL LABORATORY optmatto av union CARBloE CoRPoRATloN NUCLEAR DIVI $lCN O POST OFFICE 80K X OAK RIDGE. TENNESSEE 37830 August 17, 1978 Mr. Dan W. McBride Nuclear Market Specialist Cerboline 350 Hanley Industrial Court St. Louis, MO 63144
Dear Mr. McBride:
Enclosed are the results of the irradiation, decontamination, and DBA tests you requested. The conditions of the two DBA tests were identical and are listed in Table 2. If we can be of further assistance, please feel free to call on us. Sincerely yours, b* L. T. Corbin, See' ion Head Analytical Chemistry Division LTC:dmw Enclosures Y 90 7/8f ff f/IWtf ; We AS /9 9/n/tv 9
I Manufacturer: Carboline Analytical Chemistry Division
- St. Louis, M0 Oak R Wge National Laboratory Date: Aug. 16. 1978 Report of Irradiation, Decontamination,'nd a DBA Testing
- The irradiation, decontamination, and design basis accident (DBA) tests are conducted, respectively, in accordance with Bechtel Corp. Standard Specification Coatings for Nuclear Power Plants, spec. Nos. CP-951, CP-952, and CP-956 (or with modifications as noted in Table 2, DBA test conditions). !
The tests are designed also to meet the specifications set in both A.N.S.'I. report N 101.2-1972, Protective Coatings (Paints) for Light Water Nuclear Reactor Containment Facilities, and N 5.12-1974, Protective Coatings (Paints) for the Nuclear Industry. The DBA test spray solution and the test conditions are listed in Tables 1 and 2. After both the DBA and the irradiation tests, the coatings are examined for signs of chalking, blistering, cracking, peeling, delamination, and flaking, according to ASTM standards where applicable. All except the decontamination test panels are returned to the coating manufac-turer.
.a. The irradiation tests are run using a spent fuel assembly, removed from
' the High F16x Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at ORNL, as the source of radiation.
These fuel assemblies are stored under 20 feet of demineralized water. The fuel is 937, enriched U23s as U 30s combined with aluminum. The spent fuel assemblies are removed after each 23-megawatt day period. Irradiation is done using the gam.a energy from the accumulated mixed fission products. This more readily simulates conditions around a reactor than does a cobalt source. Also, the higher gamma activity affords shorter irradiation time j to achieve accumulated doses. The dose rate four days after removal of a fuel assembly from the reactor is 1 x 108 rads / hour. - The fuel assembly is 20 inches high. A 20-foot long, 3-1/2-inch diameter pipe, with one end capped, is used for the air 1rradiation tests. The capped end is lowered into the four-inch opening of the center of the fuel assembly. The open end, above the water level, is covered with an "0" ring sealed flange to which is attached a steel cable and an air outlet hose. The air inlet is locat'ed at the bottom of the pipe. The test speci-mens are ;onnected to the bottom of the cable and lowered into the
,8th$ 9//hvaluated CCt, M/ Approved ' , k HW[f y/7//Y ~~.--: ._m~.r ,.n,a n _ n: -
l
b . - L - -
.~
Manufacturer: Carboline Analytical Chemistry Division St. Louis, M0 Oak Ridge National Laboratory Date: Aug. 16. 1978 radiation field. Also at the center of the fuel assembly is a stainless steel clad cadmium tube used as a neutron absorber. This prevents contami-nation of the test specimens by induced radiation. The decontamination procedure is as follows: a mixture of fission product nuclides (aged greater than 90 days and less than three years) is neutralized to pH 4 and immediately applied to the test specimens. The specimens are previously degreased in alcohol. After the contaminated spot is air dried, the activities of four of the nuclides are measured by counting with a Ge(Li) detector and a multichannel pulse height analyzer. The speci-mens are then suspended in a beaker of water at 25*C and washed by stirring ; for 10 minutes. The specimens are removed, the backs rinsed in water, air dried, and counted as above. The ratios of the activities before, to those after the decontamination are reported as decontamination factors for water. The decontamination and counting steps in 25*C and 80*C acids are repeated. and the respective decontamination factors calculated. The " total overall O.
- D.F." is calculated as the ratio of the total activity at the beginning of the test to the total activity at the completion of the three washing steps. ;
All activities are corrected for decay between counts. A computer has been programmed to do all the calculations. I l l e n 9//p g Approved ,b. U e't4 ,
~
W/xpp9ln/H
. --maeme-sm.=_=m._ w _ ,
j
- ..- - . . . _ w. ..-.:.. .
Analytical Chemistry Division Manufacturer: Carboline Oak Ridge National Laboratory i
- St. Louis. M0 Date: Auo . 16. 1978 ',
Table 1. DBA solution composition, distilled water 0.28 M_ boric acid (3,000 ppm boron) 0.064 M_ sodium thiosulfate Adjusted to pH 9.5 with sodium hydroxide l Table 2. DBA test conditions
- Time Temperature (*F) Pressure (psig) Comments OU h* & /fb 4 EdQ start i30 10 seconds 307 60 Steam injection.
2 hrs 47 min 307 60 5 minutes 307-280 60-30 Injected cold spray. 20 minutes 280-250 30 Adjusted pressure. 4 days 250 30 3 minutes 250-230 10 Drained; injected cold spray. 15 minutes 230-200 10 Adjusted pressure. 3 days 200 10 End of test
*These data are taken fran recorder charts on permanent file at ORNL.
ORNL Log Book No. A7562; A7-17-8 M 9 97//df Evaluated 4 M '4 9 Approved / ./ 6 MS }9 //7/8Y Y EJ5*%+m:5sS%%.dCUgaucwdiEum;aam:hh/4&waggaM6'%%z :-K;; 4Ja4W.s ;
" " ' ' ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~
l l Manufacturer: Carboline Analytical Chemistry Division St. Louis, M0 Oak Ridge National Laboratory ! Date: Aug. 16, 1978 System Identification: x Steel Concrete Block CZil/305 Fin DBA Test Results: ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0922; ' ORNL Log Book No. A 7562; A7-17-8 Sample No. DBA Phase Coments** S6-105 spray _(SA) Few blisters. #6 sides A. B. 56-108 . spray _(SA) Side A: few blisters. #6. Side B: coatinas intact, no defects.
- S6-110 _ spray
_{SA) Coatinos intact, no defects, sides A. B. 56-112 spray _(SA) Coatings intact, no defects, sides A B. t _ $6-115 _ spray (GR) Coatings intact, no defects, sides A, B. S6-116 spray (GR) Coatings intact, no defec'ts, sides A, B. 56-119 spray _(SH) Coatinos intact. no defects. Sides A. B. S6-120 spray (SH) Coatinos intact. no defects, sides A. B. g **(SA) = sand blast; (SH) = shot blast; (GR) = grit blast.
@ Ev a d me
<46.Ct s
Approved ,[ *
. , . - wgng
i, Manufacturer: Carboline Analytical Chemistry Division St. Louis, M0 Oak Ridge National Laboratory
. Date: Aug. 16, 1978 i System Identification: x Steel Panel Concrete Block CZ11/305 Fin l
Radiation Tolerance ' Test Results: ORNL Master Analytical Manual Method No. 2 0921; Bechtel Corp. Spec. No. CP-951; ORNL Log Book No. A 7562; A7-17-8 Initial Dose Rate: 1.5 x 107 rads /hr Test Conducted In: x air water Cumulative Dose Rate: Coments Sample No. 1 X 10' rads 1 x 10' rads 56-101 Coatings intact, no defects, sides A, B. 56-102 Coatinas intact, no defects, sides A, B. l l Additional Coments: l g7p74p Evaluated M
^"Q pf7/ty Approved f..Y/Z A:
O W2A)ep %ln/aY TX 4901 4/78 rnr.A.ims:R.: sKe a.aaaa.r,am er.,ma,caus2gwaw.#m.--.esensewe.+ a. wsm. , -
A A A A A DE . . . . , E G . d d d d V A d. n n I P r n n I I E f I I CT ,3
,3
, 3 , 3 , 3 E N 3 8 3 8 R E 3 8 3 8 3 8 8 /
8 8 / E T U C M
/2 1/
8 1 2
/
8 I/ I
/ I 2 I
/
/ 1 2 1
/ 1 2 1 A O / / / / / / / / / /
0 1 0 1 0 1 0 DD 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
- 1 1 R E , f ,f ,f ,f E Ct ,f 2 o 2 o G J 2 o 2 o 2 2
o 2 2 E 2 2 L O' 0 r 0 r 0 r 0 r 0 r L S - e4 - e4 - e4 - e4 - e5 3 t 5 t 5 t 3 t 3 t A 8 t . 8 t . 8 t . 8 t . 8 t .
- e g - e g
- e g - e g - e g 4 L p 4 L p 4 L p 4 L p 4 L p E
T E s E L L P U M DO E C H C S N E P a O e N O Y A D s R E i O L S T E G t E ' P T ' 1 T R T 1,R T T 1 T R T I T R T 1 T R T 4 A 7 aC C
-1 R
O ,
/. GO rN N 5 8 5 9 5 5 5 E I 4 1 0 1 0 4 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 4 1 2 RT - 4 - - - 4 - - - 3 4 - -
M O O O - O OO OO - CE O - - O QQ 0 Q QQ QQO S A T Q O Q A A A A A A A A A A A A S RS A A A A A A A A O T Y
' R S C
E
- T A
D
/
N B O I E F * *
- C N * *
- R O U C O
S N O N A S U T A T S
/
N OI T C A t E g L n T i I t T s n
- e w l B t t o I
_ U o n Z S A n k
- n C 6 4
W g u D O t n d r e e r e r - T I t ici e v e A e n f v o v G r ei o o E c u q e c 5 1 0 5 L n e p 0 2 L o S s 3 1 0 3 - A C o K 3 QS . 1 2 4 5 AT ANO t ' i i i fl ;
)
Iljli _ 4 8
/
1 3
/
DE E G A5 A 5 A 6 A 6 A 7 V A d g d g d g d g d I P n p n p n p n p E I 'l I I In CT ,3
,3
,3
, 3
,3 E N 3 8 3 8 R E 3 8 3 8 3 8 M 8 / 8 / 8 / 8 / 8 /
E U /1 1 / 11 / 1 / 1 / 11 T :X 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 _ A D - R E E C G R E U N / 1 1 1 2 o 2
,f
/
0
/ /
1 0 1 1 2 o 2
,f
/ /
1 1 2 o 2
,f 0
1
/ /
1 1 1 2 o 2
,f 0
/ /
1 0 1 2 o 2 1
, f 7 L O 0 r 0 r 0 r 0 r 0 r L S - e - e - e - e - e6 . A 3 t 5 t 3 t 5 t 3 t 8 t 8 t 8 t 8 t .
8 t e g
- e - e - e - e 4 L p 4 L 4 L 4 L 4 L
_ E T E E L L P UM DO E C H ..y C S N . E P O s N D O Y A I R E T O L T T T T E G T L E
- 1 R 1 R 1 R 1 R i R P T 8 T T T T T MAC -7
( C 1 R O
/. GO F N N 9 9 5 8 9 5 8 9 5 8 9 .
E I 4 2 0 4 0 4 2 0 4 2 2 3 0 4 1 2 2 3 0 R T M - - 4 - - 4 - 4 - 3 4 - - 3 4
- O O0A0 CE O O - 0 OO - O O - - -
S A T Q Q 0 0 QQO Q Q O Q O Q0 S RS A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A OT Y
- 2 R S C
E . T , A D
/
N , B D I E F C N * * *
- a
,H O t C o
S N O . N A S U T A T S .
/
N O I T C A t s s E g e L n e c T i u a I k d f T n a i r
- ig l s c u D F e a s ,
U e r l z d S r d
- o n d n
e N f a f o l O a r o I d g e o T e s n s m s r t A d t i wi t G d c k or a e r E e e c d p o m e L b j a a ci s L mb r h f 3 p r o A E o C S o P hS kT N K A O
. 6 7 8 4
9 0 1
, e _
r IllI 4 + l E
4 8 , , ,; , , , . .
/ A , H 1 t 1 A 8 A 8 A 9 H F p 3 D E . . . . . . . . . . e ,
/ E G d g d gd d .d d D ,
7 v A d g n l P n p n p In p n n d n ,3 I , nI I E I I
, ,I 3, i 3 .
C T ,3 ,3 , 3 , , 8 ; , ;8 g E N 3 8 3 8 3 4 3 / 1 ; 1 4 3 / p R E 3 8 8 8 0 ,2 8 M 8 / 8 / 8 / 8 E U / 1 / 1 / 1 / . / / 0 8 . . . 1
. g g g/ e T C 2 1 2 1 2 1 4 g 2 9 -
/ / / / 2 p / 5 . gp p p0 c A O / / f 8 d p n D D 1
1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 108/ 1 0 1 1 o 4- n ,0 0 4
,1
, d e
R E ,f ,f ,f ,2 ,t I,2 1 2 2 6 n E C 2 n ; 2 o G R 2 o 2 o 2 o1 2 0 . 2 e2 3 . . . 0 p E U 2 2 L O 0 r 0 r 0 r0 h 0- me -1 8 / ch ch ch c5 h -e s A L S - e - e - e - c 3 t 4 a a a a8 r m A 5 t 3 t 3 t 5 a 8 t 8 t 8 t 8 t 8 a . 2 t t t t - r o
- e - e - e - t - t g/ t t t t 4 ot 4 L 4 L 4 A 4 S p8 A A A A 0C I 4 L E
T E E L s L P UM D O E C H C S N E P O N D 0 O Y A I R E T O L T T T T E G R 1 R 1 R L E ' 1 R 1 T T P T T T M A 7' O C -1 C R O
/. GO F N N 5 8 5 8 9 9 3 4 1
1 1 2 3 5 1 2 2 9 2 E 1 2 0 4 2 0 4 l 2 9[4 l R T C E S A T S R S M A 0 O A A
- O Q
A A A A D 4 - - - O OO QQQ0 A A A A A A 3 O A 0 0 A A A A A O Q O A A O T Y 3 R S C E T A . D
/
N B D I E F
- C N * *
- R O U C
' O S N O
N A S U T A T S *
/
N OI T C A t E y L d T t I e i n _ T t v a
- r e a B e r C f U m c f S i n e o-
- r o r n
N p c o _ O I s s s g C r ig S g T l t
- n A i n o G
E m imi t t c si t L 5 2 a a 'R L 0 o e CN w ir A 0 1 c R K 2 3 4 S . 1 1 1 A O 1 1 T N
4 7/31/84 h TASK SOURCE CROSS REF./OR COMPLETION TRACTING CATEGORf SCHEDULE ALLEGER-DATE RECEIVED NO. ALLEGATION-SUB-TITLEt ACTION / STATUS ANON CONFID BN/DATE SYSTEM NO. 1-7"" LEAD OPEN COMPLETE SOURCE DOCUMENT PAGE 15 CZ-11 or 191 over 305 *}}