ML20126B930

Rev 3 to Technical Data Rept 388, Mechanical Integrity Analysis of TMI-1 Once-Through Steam Generator Unplugged Tubes

ML20126B930
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	05/11/1983
From:	GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML20126B295	List: 05000289/LER-1981-013, Forwards LER 81-013/01T-0 Re Leaking Found in Steam Generators.Event Reportable Per Tech Spec 6.9.2.A(3). Supporting Documentation Encl IA-84-897, Forwards Safety Evaluation Re Increase in once-through Steam Generator Primary to Secondary Leakage Rate,Per NUREG-1019 & Suppl 1.Rate Acceptable ML20126B293 ML20126B302 ML20126B316 ML20126B321 ML20126B337 ML20126B342 ML20126B358 ML20126B376 ML20126B390 ML20126B412 ML20126B435 ML20126B467 ML20126B475 ML20126B493 ML20126B504 ML20126B513 ML20126B520 ML20126B560 ML20126B563 ML20126B585 ML20126B592 ML20126B610 ML20126B618 ML20126B623 ML20126B635 ML20126B639 ML20126B648 ML20126B650 ML20126B656 ML20126B658 ML20126B667 ML20126B670 ML20126B684 ML20126B688 ML20126B701 ML20126B708 ML20126B716 ML20126B719 ML20126B739 ML20126B751 ML20126B758 ML20126B766 ML20126B784 ML20126B797 ML20126B806 ML20126B825 ML20126B831 ML20126B879 ... further results
References
FOIA-84-897 388, 388-R03, 388-R3, NUDOCS 8506140251
Download: ML20126B930 (49)

Text

F .

~

-Ma- T

, t I g g -

TDR NO. 388 REVISION NO. 3

. BUDGET TECHNICAL DATA REPORT ACTIVrrY NO. 120012 PAGE 1 OF 25 DEPARTMENT /SECTION Eng'g & Des./Eng'g Mechanics IMI-1 OTSG

• RELEASE DATE REVISION DATE D CUMENT TITLE:

Hechanical Integrity Analysis of TMI-1 OTSG Unplugged Tubes .

ORCINATOR SIGNATURE DATE APPROVAL (S) SIGNATURE DATE A / . A l b duW W clnfn u

/VLL v- -

M g.,,.ps h \

APPRJpVA/. FOR EXJ(RhhtdTRIBUTION DATE

$N - T.II 8S o DISTRIBUTION AssTRA PURPOS D

R. O. Barley.

• Sm . circumferenti deft,ts have been identified in P. R. Clark

• ma! m generator tub . A Yracture mechanics evaluation D. K. Croneberger $a conducted to st *f n the stability of tube cracks F. S. Giacobbe der ster.dy-state an tdipatedtransientconditions.

M. J. Graham ek opening disp lit menp (COD) for thr ugh wall cracks H. Hukill

• also identifi . Sa permits the ca e lation of leakage J. Moore

• rates.

J. Sipp *'

D. G. Slear RESULTSt J. Tangen

• C. VonNieda Cracks t ave escaped y ECT vill not P. S. Walsh jeopar ( ube integrity durih go 1 cooldown unless J. Wetmore thes ra are greater t R BD Qin extent. Large non-R. F. Wilson t cracks that E eepardize tube integrity ar n pected to evol ec se in axi-symmetric tensile (tto e vall ields cracks prop ga_e preferentially through the rather than around the circumference. Tube i'nte rity can be demonstrated for mid-span tube regions j and for the transition region as well. ,

j The as-repaired transition geometry is a design no less adequate than the original. % e as-repaired condition represents an improvement in che state of stress due to mechanical and thermal loads as compared to the original.

J 8506140251 850125 PDR FOIA DETJEN84-897 PDR

• i I '

' .- /39- l W.JVP.6 P AG E ONI.T Apogeg3 7,g g j

3,.. -

., ,, g-TDR No. 388

..- R y. 3

~

i_ ' Page 2 of 25~

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page .

~

Abstract 1

- 1.0 Results 2.0 Bases and Methods

. Mechanical Integrity Evaluation 3 2.1.1 4

2.1.2 Axial Membrane Loads Bending Loads (FIV) 7 2.1.3 2.1.4 Crack Propagation eture Mechanics V '

7 2.1'.4.1 5treas'Intens 9

2.1.4.2 Threshold tensity 2.2 m Leakage c>

Creek opening Displacement ( 11 2.2.1 12 2.2.2 Leak Rate Calculation 2.3 Comparison of As-b ' an -repaired Tr i 13 Region Geometrie 2.4 Residual Stre Ca ed by Formatio f .

18 Transition 19

'2. 5 Main Steam Li reak (MSLB)

- 24 2.6 Net Section Collapse

• 25 .

3.0 References W

e h

n 4

e 4

pv 6

T-

.t 4 s

[ }j ggg SPECIFICATION NO.

TDR No. 388 TITLE Mechanical Integrity Analysis of THI-1 OTSG Unplugged Tubes REV

SUMMARY

OF CHANGE APPROVAL DATE

' O- '

1 This revision incorporates many additional analyses performed since the release of Rev. 0 2[ g/n 2 Reworded statement of results on abstract page. L[f[

$ s 3 Abstract p ie; Section 2.3 completely rewritte , %Q r[,./n New Section 2.4 added.

O.

0 y O

e

+ 0

. wow 2. j

. :- }

' TDR No. 388 Rev. 1 Page 3 of 25 to RESULTS With reference to Figure 1, line segment @ for a (AK)g = 4.0 KSI M.

40 years of stable crack growth can be anticipated. Only heat-up and eus shut-down cycles propagate cracks. Line segment @ represents of initial crack sizes that will propagate through the wall ube in a stable manner. Leakage occurs at 100% through-wall ex tube will he postulated MSLB den. ntercedes, not part into two pieces unles line segment $ or, if the ery large, co down ads to ductile failure, @ . Curves apply to tubes I t e center of the o at point fl. Th s int represents the tube bundle. Leaks ch will potential p he tube in two during a HSLB through-wall crack n the interest conser-Statements concerning tube rupture a n strain contr led p lems. This vatism. Rupture is not likely is the manner of OTSC loadin circumferenti len is shown in Figure 2.

Leakage as a function f Leakage will not be a b because parted faces o rough wall cracks do not Cracks will propa-fully close becaune of plastic strain at the crack tip.

r l

l

• gate circumferentially as indicated in Figure 1 by increasing are length at

! 100% through wall extent. Atpoint#2,withintersectionoflinesegment@ ,

' tube integrity is jeopardized by an interceding 100*T/hr shutdown cycle.

f 10 Bases and Methods

f. i ( '

Hechanical Integrity Evaluation Tube mechanical integrity is evaluated by conservatively establishing the sechanical and thermal loads acting on the OTSO tubes during anticipated l

l, 4

0 D. MAX ARC-LENGTH 2.00

, M*

NET SECTION \ 'g g COLLAPSE LINE *1 g

. (1107 lbs) .

\*

1.75 -

MSLB *\ 2 E C T --*- . (1408 lbs) ,

\

\

3 W' i MSLB \. I

• 3 1.50 -

LINE M, I (3140 lbs) \ l 1 P

\. i o%

$ \ \

ki Z 1.25 -

\

! cib

\

b -

g' ECT + 9 g g (\

\ l g 1.00 -

y I

~

.7, 0

z

% s g)

(

.50 - "

ALLOW 40 YRS (. 0'F STABLEMAX INI l 4N STABLE l

) CRACK PROPOG ATION. CRACK AKth=4.0 a GROWTH

~

.25 - .

l l l 1

-0 20 40 60 80 100 i . DEFECT DEPTH IN % WALL THICKNESS FIGURE 1

• t",Tjd - ' l, ':

_. r?.0 . \

O  % -----

-- . - m. < :. :4: ; .:.i :. :3t=

1

. . . .. . I ....;

pl :.

ti. pp.

.. . ).. .

L . .

.  : 3 i

. <  :  ; l ! 1.l :. .

-:.+ite : i::.:.

4- -

.  : . i:r :i? - -

8 i-  :-l - :l~ .. ----

. i ..

.~... . . . . . . . . . s . . a. . .:-. ..j : - "

p: 43. iip.

-l

i. :.i.

i. : -.

.i ,

g. g ..

. j... .

., .L . . .. .

s. x...l~ - l~ . .-

s

:. i:i ..  : p:

' l i i .. .. . -

1~ J ,

. t:i ?:-

"l.

.i ' . .  : . .

.. - . 1.

6

?

e

i . .. -. . . . . ..

ls. .] , .

l.t..

g ' g . !...-

q... . , ,

g  !  :

. . . . .. g ...- r i. .i.. l  ! .. i . .

..i , g . .. - . _......l e :1 1 -. :.. . - - . _ _

q:.. i .- .:.:7... - : T l.e 1! . .

.p

. i..

p- i1- t .l.. 2 1 ..

-l .

.~. y . .: .. .:

i.

. ..: .;. _.1...  :

..l. .

l

.l..: .u.:1,. . . 4.

i-

!e .!m ww t

.' J ici . . !. . .

i 91. l -j A 1  ; .  ::

t . . . 3 *q

. 1. i.. l . i  : ic. .! .

1- i-

.t..

{. 3.{&M .i .

i . . I ; j ! i :t '

i i .

l  ! .i .: . .i . h

_ Nr .!

e. . . -

8 t . :1.-

.} - : 4; }: . p  :,V4;- .! . .:  ;

! l .j y\ f(). .( i "l ~

p* g,

.l" -' it i- ei .

i  :

j  :.

ia l

. .s. . . s ..

..t ..

i

l.  : :1 .) .

.; "l: WN[A.. I

-  :- .l -  :;.l.:- ;4: /A W i- l": 'i ~. -

di-

,i  :

}. ! < ::ht .:t"

{. (

. .. 5 i.. Qf$:j? :l

• i@!.. "t"W.N" i / j..-  !! %:

.: ::p.

. . . .. . \ . O.,  :! A-l V if l' 1: "l .: .~. ::-

. . . . . .i (& 8

,l

.A.

I" i- "

.i.:i:

g, h :n N@ .I . I i Nb } l i-W M I" /l' I"' l; i.- - -

.4% , , . P T id .l; L

. . .\ x! ;- ( .p: .t- ..il .. ! .e ...  ::

v .i..

..l .

4

. f, . . .l . i .: ..

.- O O - / ..  : a

. : . __ j (N: s.,

4 -

v .l /

- a s

l'< _A . XIT  :.  ;;lf .: -

.- '.iii .rl:i-  : l:.. c  :.. ::

~" * .-

j. j N'I i . , . .!:!: .pl ..

f.  : .:

j+ .p/ ) L.;.f. ":l A .:@.: ,

i a .

i . ._ l g:. y"l : g.it:.

,. I

. . . , - . ... ! . . . . . . .]. . : ,, ,,. g, o+- -

y. .. mi n n d

1. wirine ..e. r

- a "l".; .xe

.. " el:;" "I

.- - .t ,  : 3  : . .:l.a f

.{ s_ i;gija .:. l5407,::p:i-l;i: . : . : i. : ::

j

j. :: :q(. I ii. c) ;; .:  :: .i f: .jp  :.

fy,eg-y -

4i -

,:: @i: Ny.: 1" "f .: l/ . .:  :-

.i...

. . . 4 . .. .

... .! ff-

i .U

. . .tij :. K. . '~i . N .t . t f l~. . !: a. . a

• ~~

.j .-l / l. ' O p. 4/.- 8:4:.. *.i -

..t.".

i , Q  : .:. .

J :-

.:l .-

II- )g lli \,I'  : it'-

II;-

. . }.. . . -

:- 'L /i %:)

j ,

i dr N l'i-

: 4:

i /: sngV i iil,:" [ "' a - -

ti!"  :

id9 f .:.

I e

• bN'".;:i'!- M : pp :ii: .. .. ) :-  ::ii' * .i y:  :-

• t' :- Hi- a'j.l.: .

p-

. l.:, I."* . c". p"g. i- .i ; 4F .:t .i .:r

,. . .:... V -[- ,  :  : b .:

i ..

.j .

l . .:. ri- "

.9: p i . p. :.: "

..  :  : i s/

. .: - a .

s r

{ .

l  :- s '.; G.! :i:i .

"  ;:i: .: .; f  !!i! .p; dii :t .

. .i l

.I

.g-

4. "i .

a

n :al::- ::: l::

. .. , . . !. . ..;.. . . . . . J. .

l 5:~.i~'s  ;.lz. .: .. .  ::  : l::. en cc r: .  :  :: id.

l,

. .l

,t

!' :q : . c .!

. ] .. a: ..

p':

.a .>1 ..: .- a. 4 h Qia at". . })Ot. .

. .. ig. g.O j :. I- . ::.

a nj".:.-

4... o,w .

e.4:.la i

u .. . .

p n; -

. :r -r.

. p.i %jf. . t. . .. 6+.  : r. . ..1. .

. 2.. . . . . .

3.q.

l~; .

l-s n d g. y - ..;.ip;."

- . l ,,

- l r;; g.4,,7.pp. G.. M ., Q,.) ... , .a.! i

.)sl.: :

ic

. i .... . . , .. .

- ::- in. a. ..l

e. .

e . - .

..7...... i ) .:. l ..

7, l

.i .

~ ,

.g.i .u :qi

.  ::e ::Su: .i' e

• a '

. til..iis .

. .p -- ..

.........t

• 11 .

t l .. . ..

q> .)

. a: ..

~

l

;, l*- .

M4-qM Mr-+--hq

. . - a g l

~ ..!.. bpfC

~

M,h .,

.,1CWfa;tL.- ' '

• b I I}. '-

l s. .................I... -

fcMg

}

t

-: . . q"

~,-.

I g g

" ~--+"

l.. p. ..... 1 ..r . . ~a "3

-. w

- l

% V.. gM*i l Y.

~

--w----.----_.,-.n_-. ,_,, ___ ,, __ _ _

. ,. m ._ . . . - , .. . . . . . _ . . _

o ,, . ' .

.s . ..'

TDR No. 388 Rev. 1 Page 4 of 2c transient.and ste'dy-state conditions. Possible in-dwelling cracks are interacted with the stress fields due to these loads by means of fracture .

mechanics to determine the impact that the propagation of these cracks has l.

on the structural integrity of the tubes.

OTSG Tube Loads f

LI.t .

Axial Menbrane Loads e

The maximum possible tube to differential er G expansion of shel1~and tube, pressur e e , and the effect e pretension is 585# _

a, and Ib). A i*m\uof 195# can be expected for peripheral tube s

~

al' to the developme n analytical model used to for core tubes.

establish these values was that een i ambient tubesh t deflection predicted was identical.to that rt by B&W. This con Q was met. A y

parted tube of TMI-1, B 22-30, s ow a spring back imately 0.090". This indicates a ub pre-load of 290#, s that the tube -

doesn't " hang up" aft a duction due t e i un contact pressure. f The analytical mod re4 ts a tube preload # for a peripheral tube -

and 460# for a tube at he unit center-line. One measurement for a  ;

The peripheral tube does n'ot prove or disprove the analytical model.

spring-beck distance will be remeasured in order to establish the validity [

of the analytical model.

i-Certain 'other facts are necessary to establish the tube operatng load.

EPRI, NP-2146,' Static Strain Cauge Measurements for TM1-2 OTSG Tubes

~

i Re f. 2) , shows th at for plant heat-up to 530*T a compressive load of 265#,

i as a average, will develop. The strain gauges do not reflect preload since

g. .

' - TDR No. 388

~

Rev. 1 Page 5 of 25 they were attached after generator fabrication. Additional compression can ,

be expected in going to 0% power conditions. The increase is small and can be shown in NW calculations (Ref. 3). Both the strain gauge measurement -

and the M W calculation include pressure effects, such as Poisson's contrac-tion of the tube, shell elongation due to' secondary side pressurt "on, and g i

shell-to-tube temperature differences. Each neglects prelo

_h An additional experimental data point comes from EPRI NRI , Vibration _

Analysis of TMI-2 OTSG Tube 4). The natural r b ncy of peripheral lane tubes increased 16 f 0-97% power. a clear trend. Tube natural frequency will er se as increasin ia load is applied. The p ro teately 400# in the direc-trend correlates V ial load changes o I- tion of increasing tension. This tr an error band s isted in the __y manner of tube end fixity. A tug t z could be in axtai g nsion of _

400d. =

=

I '

The' strain gauge data r.g.sen b s he fact that ue see compressive loads during heat-up whic re rly the same as a %4ower. The trend is clear that increasing power b ngs with it significant tension loads. Using the y' a

i factual strain gauge data for heat-up and the preload calculation the repre- a sentative tube load during operation can be identified: _

=

i 5'

850v** Calci, for tube pre-load, max. 460*Cale. from pre-lod, min. '

4 Heasured,.from heat-up 9 -

-265 -265 585 # ' Max. 195 Min. I

^

t S

2

TDR No. 388

' Rsv. 1 Page.6 of 25 ne additional compresion' at 0% power and the trend to increasing tension at higher power are taken as approximately compensating trends, while the bias is toward tension. .

In addition, a first principle evaluation (CPUN Calc., Ref. 5) e blishes a load of 480-507f tension for peripheral tubes during full powe o ion and 200f tension for core tubes. h is analysis takes int ec u t pressure

~

e tubesheet, affects, rhell-to-tube temperatures differences, fle r and preload of 290f taken f measured spring a of tube B-22-30.

n e mechanical analysis of integrity which f cvs uses as a conservative upper bo do 00f as the tub ^exia loading during steady state operation.

m Tube axial loads for an anticipated /hr cooldown an gheHSLBare taken from a generic design ba s ument (Ref. Sa). es loads are 1107f tension for the l'00*F/hr e nd 3140f for th 5 .

oad cycle (see Fi ) st reflect the mean load, An accurate m'odel o t on which the flow in aq,ed vibration (FIV) load is superimposed. An axial tension of 500f was chosen as a reasonable and conservative approximation.

In fracture mechanics R = Kg /K .- As the axial load is increased the R value approaches 1.0. From Fig 4. Ref. 6, at R=1.0, crack growth l A higher rate," da/dN, is greater and the (AK)g is lower than for R=0.0. i On the other hand, R value yields more conservative mechanical analysis.

use of very large axial load will introduce error ir. leakage based on crack opening displacecent (COD) which is a function of axial load.

w .

l

~o .

OTSG Loading Cycle for Tube Mechanical Evaluation

-1100 FIV - 2.4 X 10s CYCLES /YR.

HEATUP

' [ s 500 - - - - -

g -

p f

g

\

g s

m C00LDOWN 100* TS LIMIT g, NORMAL DPS H ,/'N \

100 \ \

,/ g i 01 A QN n s

\

x

\

\

I M E -+-

L

. e FIV ALTERNATING LDAD, REGION I ~ c 550 ?:11, .003" M AX. DISP.

l e HEATUP/C00LOOWN,6 CYCLES /YR.

e 40 YEAR LIFE l

e MAXIMUM AMPLITUDES l

l .

. f(6. 0 ,

TOC- S I?

p- (tu. s Y . . - : . - _ - . - - - . . . . _ _ . . _ . . . . . - _ . - . _ - .

a ,

9-0 9

ICADff=3 (Foraan's Fole'- .

~

R I j >0 A=0 c . 3,, .

c ce" ..

i / i un c a r.) /

/ s

,/ /

E /

/

/

W k/ j

s. .

/ /

! /

. s y /

1. o O

LoS (DK)

O f:= _

pc.:.tt-

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

ty . . i

t .. * *

, a- .

TDR No. 388 Rev. 1 ]

Page 7 of 25 fL/.3 )

Bending Loads (FIV)

~

The OTSC, while a counter current heat exchanger, has several regions of cross-flow. The most significant of these is the tube span between the 15th lateral support plate and the upper tubesheet. At this re ' , uper- -

heated steam turns into the steam dome annulus prior to exi

• he main-steam nozzle.

Turbulent wake shedding pr e vide spectrum of ex

• tion frequency..

Lateral deflection is d t rather than dr gCf es. The tubes select their natural frequ n

• a the spectrum f ci ation.

~ NP-1876 provides measured' tube deflec ign,p THI-2 (Ref. 4) 'g. 5. At 97%

e.

full power,1 mil (RNS) was measuftd is corresponds to , s peak displacement. Using Fig. S./ i o def. 4, the be '

ss can be estimated to be + 540 psi.

f./.4 Crack Propagation b a re Mechanics

t. t. 4. t Stress Intensity Stress intensity is used when evaluating stable crack growth. It is an analytical convenience, a parameter. The severity of the crack is measured in terms of' stress intensity, in the following form (Ref. 7): .

where K = stress intensity, KSI Eq. 1 K=TQ

• C' = stress, KSI Q = shape factor i

a = crack depth, in. -

4,m'4

% *N*m--,Ty--ir---s 6-7 ws % e-e+=rg *e'-w -w' A --

r-Nm,rw--Tsa-=vve-r-----ww-W-qqu y w- --

p -w-w-9-- -mwereeMw--ew'er-w'?gyerg--w -g--neM'y 'y -W= =wwF v ,9wwrey=wvypg--=

j f,.-

1 F

)

1 l

. l l

i TMI-2 FIV INSTRUMENTATION RES'ULTS - STEADY ' -

STATE TANGENTIAL DISPLACEMENT 1.1 l

1.0 -

l 57% PO f

s e.

- i i

e j O.7 -

(.:n.s -

n lj g.5 - 75% POWER l

U . 8.4 g -  :

I'

• M '

E .O.3 -

n O.2 - ,

40% POWER I '

, NN .

OTSG h 15 30 h a { 45 - 3 a 80 50 35 30 . 1g 41 LANE TUBE LOC T10 N HES (ARROWS SHO A . TUBE LOCAT10NS')

o STEADY STATE DEFLECTION FOR FRACTURE MECHANICS ANALYSIS = 3'x MAX RMS VALUE = 3 MILS.

o ONE CAN SAY WITH A CONFIDENCE LEVEL OF 98% THAT FOR A GAUSSIAN DISTRIBUTION THE

~ ~~

- MAXIMUM AMPLITUDE WILL NOT EXCEED'THREE TIMES THE RMS. ,

. FIG. G e '

7 QS ?. t 9 D.x.c . \

_ _.__m. m.

l

.- I ' '

TDR Ns. 388 Rev. 1 l Page 8 of 25 j

. 1

- - Stress intensity reflects the state of stress at the flaw, the flaw size, and the relationship of the flaw to the boundaries of the body. Stable crack growth can be described by the following equation: .

l da/dN = C GLK)4 where da/dN, crack. extension, in/ cycle l C, a material property JbK, stress intensity ra ,

l p., a material pro 27

-l ess intensity range Crack growth can be c y integrating th over the number of o es. The EPRI li e elastic fracture mechanics ode 'BICIF' (Re performs this tas . .

-The stress intensities used her .. are express 1 for I cracks in tubes. No approximate solut* involved . The e ntensity i solution admits of the c 'n d loading from four

~

po'nents: axial membrane load, bendin ~Te pressure loads, nd e internal pressure actingontheparti(gfc of the crack.

l Table 1 identifies the final stress intensities used. The results of this evaluation 'for GkK)Th = 4.0 is shown in Fig. 1, line segment QD (Ref. 9).

1

- l l

I c

e

• s l 8P*--

.. ,.-p.s.- -

., .r. __m.-.,.-,.,,,_..3, .pwy., n, w....,w-,. ,,,e,-,,y

(* . . . . :-

" ' - TDR No. 388 Rsv. 1 Page 9 of 25 1.f. 4.. e Threshold Stress Intensity, (AK)Th There is a point at which small in-dwelling cracks have no effect on fatigue resistance (the endurance limit). The value of the stress intensity below which cracks do not propagate is the stress intensity threshol ure 6 establishes this threshold for INCO 600. Data from two inv s is plotte'd in the figure showing a common trend and identifi '

ee' pointing away from linearity. The intercept at the is

• s the threshold for propagation. To the 1 is value there i n ack propagation.

• while to the right ther o agation. A valu % K)Th =4.0KSI[is conservatively tak n used to link O ondition under whi the

y. An ef fective (&K)Th threshold is identified experime tu ly the R ratio under a ied loads, in the following manner:

. ef f. (&K)Th " ^ - -  % >Th (Ref A

R,, rat'o t which (AK)g is defined, usually R ,= 0.05 R , rati,o under applied loading A , constant for titanium or steel, = 1.41 Applicable to nickel alloys, by inspection O

e 9

"m .

a- . .: . ,

e da/dn vs Ak for INCO 600 .

10-4 A 75' JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MATERIALS CURVE .

O 600* JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MATERIALS CURVE O 77' MIT CURVE 0 554' NilT CURVE 10-5 -

0 -

l O -

2u -

.e 6 ,.

=

R ' .'

E _

k 10-6 -

- . l 4

. 1 l

1 A

608' POINT BORATED WATER k-- ' ' ' ' '

10-7 l 1 ' ' ' 'dx!1'0 100 AK Ksid F/G.6

" -%e M ':

_ Qw i

\.. .

TDR Ns. 388 Rev. 1 Page 10 of 25 Table 1 The stress intensity factor ratio K 1/6 min the tube containing an inner .

circumferential semi-elliptic crack, and subjected to a uniform axial membrane stressm6 , OD = 0.625 in. h = 0.034 in. ;s

- w' r 1,o/h a/h 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 . 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.115 0.161 0.1 0.215 0.231 0. O. 9- 0.255 0.293 2.0 0.118 0.173 0 258 0.290 19 .336 0.354 0.428 D 0.526 3.0 0.119 0.177 0 0.279 0.323 63 0.392 0.421 4.0 0.119 0. 0 6 0.291 0 34 .393 0.433 0.473 0.608 5.0 0.119 0.240 0.29 . 0.414 0.463 0.514 0.678 6.0 0.119 0.182 0.243 0.3 7 0.430 04 0.548 0.740 7.0 0.120 0.182 0.244 . .374 0.443 0.507 0.577 0.794 8.0 0.120 0.182 0.2 . 0.380 0.4 0x523 0.602 0.842 9

O e

s

.N ,

's

. c. . .

... > . r..._._..,.._.--

. l

.s.

f ,.

.. . . .. . i

... _...... _ . _ . ... u. _. .I.

. i.

e -

i. ...i e

.I.

.. . .I .

... ... .l . . . .... _ .. .. .. ... ...... . . .

. I

e. . 4 .

. ... . . ,.._._i .

..a 1

I.. q .. ,. _.

_. . .e :_. ; .

.t.

l

. .3.._,/ .

. i i ,. ./ ,

e.

- . _ . . . . _ . s

. ( .t / ..

&{p.+ .

. e

s. .

J i

i . '

s. .s

._ . . _. . s . . _ ..._. _ . . . . .

I t l . .

e. ..I

.e .

..e _

t . ... ., ..* . . _ . ,. jj >

q, 4 :i (C.0 D)<. . - .

/0 ._.. .. ... . . _ _. .. . . . _ . .

Y*

o ._

{ -

6 -

(,. Le. :..,q. . .

, . 1 . . ..

N', .

. . . . . . . . e.... ,

O. .. ...

. . . . 1

.=.O.0..3._ _ . _ .

-.i. ,c3 _. . ..

\. .

j

.. . . 6

2. . . . . . . _ . . .

s m

.g f.

i . f . .. ,, .._

, t t . .

n. _.

. . . , . . . ... r . . . . . . ... ...... ,

. . . . i.. . .

.i

. s. _a..._.. .

.. )

.i .

g........ _.... ......

...q.....

. . .. . .J. .. ..... .

. . . ... . . . . ....i... .. ... ._ . .

. d u-M u h*

<~.=...:2.., _;%

1."

~ 'I .. _. F t . 7 (. C 0 D . , e h...

p' . . . . . ..

t_.'

jb2.d.4[,.e. d. . .

_.....i_

1 s 4e"

l. - l . A r a 6; & s .

w.2. . - . .

\ I

[.; _ . . ',

w k . _. ,j. t :

,o . 6e. .2 k.

. i.

.: 1 l

y  :

n _ . -.. -

~.

. \.

.e. .... u b c

}

. . . j

TDR No. 388 R2v. 1 Page 11 of 25

%.I.

Leakage- .

El1 -

.E.9?

Crack opening displacement increases linearly at first, up to where the -

membrane stress is about 22.5% 'of the flow stress, then non-linearly until becoming asymptotic at 40 to 60 percent of flow stress dependi ack circumferential extent (Fig. 7. from Ref. 8).

In the neighborhood of a certain value of f,, a smal e in F ,

causes a large increase in ysically this can b terpreted as the onset of ductile fractu s ility. nis pro self-limiting because'real world o i put grips on t b en that form restoring bending monument in the following fi is. 8.

y-hM

~_ \. .

- %y ,. -

~ . j L.. T Wso#K78 C4 l- #8Mfat i

• J 30tTAot.6 post L.DAO

. G R.It EMD Cc6L8meiM.E (oNT4.oct.AD FKcSLEM PR.oviDEL AsSTD m.las(a -

. MD MCNTS 1D WC3RI*4(e TEN 3 s oA4 Ar cA4 cJe FTP, F/G. K R.' .

y= .

1 7..

.7 -

.' TDR No. 338 Rsv. 1 Page 12 of 25 An axial load will move the cracked tube laterally to line up the ' centroids of the unaffected and cracked cross-sections. n is tendency is limited by the end conditions of the tube. COD is reduced and section ultimate -

strength is increased. - Fig. 8 shows this increase in section ultimate strength per grip end conditions (Ref.10). Very large C0D oc a higher C ,.

Lt.f Le'ak Rate Calculation n e N3AC/EPRI analysis Ref s that a phase e an ecurs for leakage through the crack, n I analytical met o7

• supported by matching

' experimental data t k atte11e (Ref. 8)

P Pressure drop is due o

1) Entra'nce affects: fo 1 jet in vena contract .

2) Acceleration of fluid vaporization

• th ack: decreased density forces ve y to increase withz s y flow conditions.

3) Acceleration d due to area e nge decreased throat area at crack exit ces velocity to increase within steady flow conditions..

7 4) Friction: surface roughness may be 25% of the throat dimension.

L -

Leak rate is shown as a function of crack are length in Fig. 2, Ref.11.

D e axial loads acting on the crack are 500f during steady-state operation and 1107'i during an anticipated 100*F/hr cooldown.

r

4G -

COD]d h ap (1+g) 30 -

. G = E/2 (l+y)

K = ( 3- y)/ ( l+v) 77=7 ,

20 -

c/h =

f Exp. -

The . I

~,

1 IO -

1

~

- To/Jr l t t t l t t I r i o o.2 - o.4 Figure 5. Nonnalized CDD vs. stress ratio e

- ,2 te . t C ,

, W 9 EO. 368 Ev. 3

+.

. PAGE 13 of 25

~ 2.3 Comparison of As-built and As-rspaired Trrnsition Region C*om7tries.

The object of this evaluation is to compare the as-built and as-repaired transition geometries in order to determine if the repair represents a design no less adequate than the original, and Soreover, that the as-repaired transition represents an improvement in the state of stress as compared te the original.

With the assistance of Prof. A.-Kalnins, Professor of Mechanics, Dept. -

of Mechanical Engineering and Mechanics, Lehigh University, a detailed stress' analysis of the transition region has been performed for both the as-built and as-repaired geometries. The computer code "K ",a general purpose structural analysis program for shells o ion developed by Prof. Kalnins, was.used to perform the eva .

Model The model of the transition zone is shown in Fi r , & c, for three load cases. Results are linearly superi sablVsince stresses are first order with 1 The model captur transition geometry' rt 007 Figure 2, f.12 ), for the 30

• as identified in Top bevel on the plastic for the as-rep ondition. Upper and lower boundary c are the same for ad cases. The upper boundary condition permit tical reaction h .1 ral freedom. The lower i boundary condf i e to analytica place the lower section of tube'that

, was cut awa /. e tion can move y freely but no slope change can ,

take place, s type of behavio e expected for free span regions of long, flexib1 bes. A vertic ac on is also'pe tted at the lower end.

One additional boundary conditi nds application " ring-spring" shown in Figure 9,b. The " ring-sp " ffers radial- istan. while permitting structural rotation at t poi of contact with e. The " ring-spring" boundary condition was when conside n cific loading condition, the pressure differe p, cross the tub 1. 'Bere a unique structural response was antici It was recognized he tube wall might lift off ly inward) und a tion of the Ap. "KSHELL" the tubesheet (mov output identifi at his motion occu ( cussed below).

Load Cases Three load. cases were considered: 1) contact pressure 2) A P, and

3) axial load. Contact pressure is the compressive radial pressure exerted by 'the tubesheet on the tube as a result of plastic deformation of the tube and elastic rebound of the tubesheet to capture the tube as a result of the f abrication process, be it mechanical or kinetic (Figure 9 a). The contact I pressure for the as-built condition is 3350 psi as per TR007 (Ref.12 ), and that fer the as-repaired condition is 1123 psi, by virtue of a 6" contact length for the latter and a 1" contact length for the former.

D D

I '

. TDR No. 388 '

R2v. 3

-  ! . Pcg2 14 cf 25 i 1

i

)

The Ap load case .(Figure 9b) treats the pressure gradient as I applicable only away from the contact length. No pressure gradient exists across the wall where the tubesheet is in contact with the wall. During operation a 1300 psi pressure drop acts across the wall while during 1000F/hr cooldown there is no primary-to-secondary pressure difference. The MSLB 6p is 2500 psi. _

The axial load case treats tube axial load as evenly distributed'on the circumference of the cut lower section. The normal steady- i state operating load is 500#, that for the 100 F/h oldown is i 1107#, and that for the MSLB is 3140#, l Transition Stresses and Structural Response "KSHELL" shows significant advantage of t ired transition  ;

over the as-built transition in terms of s during a MSLB will all factors considered, Table 2 ngi inal bending and.

membrane stres re shown, with str uponents identified

• in Figure 10 cation of maximum tehe.on at the ID is in the upper o the transitio re where the radius of ,

l curvature e ds to the contact 1 n , shown at cut A-A, Figure 9  ; l The i f the 6" cont n , as-repaired, appears when co stresses with the tact length, as-built. The stres are reduced by th s. Further bAnefit is gleaned

~- --- f rom th longer trans e on which substa'niially reduces  !

bending stress when axi abare ( oad is applied. 4HB'rd l stresses due to ax reduced fr m 628)q MSLB maximum Upsi to 50742 psi. l The as-repaired t on is 0.5 in. lo (, as iven in Ref. 12, Fig. 2-12. Th a transition 1 06 n. long. The total 1 stress, from f rs, is reduce ,

om 91209 to 73712, in j the as-repai ondition. During 1 cooldown, the maximum l stress for t repaired trans i ess than the code allowab . BPVC, Sect 11 , Ap dices , 1980) .

The s u response mentione ove (under Model), namely that the tube fts off the contact zone due to the p in the ,

l neighborhood of the highest stressed region can be seen in the i "KSHELL" output. The inward displacement is about 0.1 mil. The use of the " ring-spring" boundary condition in "KSHELL" permitted this response.

\

i

/

e Lk gw

EV. ' 3 PAGI 15 or 25' sokTACT 7'A L SS UM umr t oe s

^

=

klDAR 1 lRJf%.$

.__D

. e.w

~. .

=2 / .

k .%? !*- %

' I

.g

. c.

r 4

x- -

- l L t ww te, wc. c. f Ca) .

y .

- smi newt-; . ,

i

, .- .../.,

1

. 1 I

A N '

l

=

=.q i

t

=.

.< 4.4 (b

Axl A L LC4O

. ? .\ . y.m' e

S s

., l h -

I

r. A A . J gy ris'. . 9,.n.:,: .

+ Y

'~: ,

mLG DV~~8-b

.. - -- P.~:V. 3 PAGE 16 or 25 I

bl \

n E

s' MPHI'EFm y

% 8 \ Mminiou4c Ax,.s m

D Lonservom 70 s A s.l.s ,

g Fi c. .

btSPLAC

• b .Lc A DIN to CNVELD  !~'~

e -, .

O v  !

~

. s O l 0

. l

)

~

m

- , r. -

i

-~

TABLE 2 LOAD CASE .AS-BUILT AS-REPAIRED COMMENTS iA ' G4,wt ( A. E( g

1) Contact Pressure +8586 -8586 +2865 -2865 Aa-repaired joint has 6" contact length as opposed to 1" for as-built.

2) Ap +19792 -19060 +20105 -19372

3) Axial Load I n) Unit Load, +20010 +111 0 Ii +16160 +14990 6%= 19840; significant bending occurs in 1000* j -built condition b) MSLB, +62831 34979 50 47069 9 . 49738; pronounced bending occurs in j

3140 a s-built condition 7333 73712 2 As-repaired 9 , < as-built 9 4;,

Suinmation 91209 9 = 75500 pp for as repaired < f .

100"F/hr Cooldown

' ** * ** * " P """** '*"- ""

1) contnet Press. +8586 -8586 +: 8 -2865 load case should not include Ap term.

ti

2) &p I

3) Axini Load 22151 12332 - 17 1 i j

= 3 950 psi l Summation 100 F/hr. 30737 3746 20754 3729 Pg 4.67S g Pb+Pf g cooldown i1 i

\

l W l'l El P.iH. "

M "' 5 E b, o

3

, _ ~ ;. . . _ ._ . _ _ _ _ __ . _

E TDR No. 388 h.

• Rsv. 3 PAGI; 18 or 25'

. I2.4- Residual Stresses Caused by Formation of the Transition Zone.

- Tube expansion causes residual meridional bending stresses. It can be shown.(below) that compressive stresses pertain at the center-line.

This is advantageous because compressive stresses arrest cracks.

Consider the following bending stress distribution achieved at the end of the expansion process Fig. 11. -

7 g_

A*

+ ) .

-l 4 _ , . .

2

(+). I b

i . .

te.) --

f TM ll

% 4 ,

f r

<s <

Q 3

s. - +

/,-\  ;

y- .o Av ,

- n, r

& .rld. If

When the, applied. load is remo) , for either the or as-repaired

~

condition, plane sectio r in plane. appli moment ~is equal to the unloading The stress di , after unloading, will be linear (Figu , n). The su o on of the two stress lar while unloading distributions, rectg y ar ile loading a is (shaded area), represe s the stresses whi n in the tube after unloading. From e ium, after uni , he sum of moments on the section

- must be zero, sh(1

&ded areas (Figu 12 rovide that equilibrium and are the res'idual t s.

.i Tibers at the n ral axis will have a residual stress equal to yield

- while the outermost, fibers will have a residual stress equal to Cyp. This development.is substantiated by evaluation of unloaded curvature as described-in Timoshenko, Vol. II (Ref.13) . .

These residual stresses are consistent with x-ray defraction measurements (TR007,Ref. 12).

The presence of the residual stresses does not jeapordize the region during a MSLB. Application of~a membrane stress at the near yield stress, as from

- the MSLB load, would not result in the entire section having a residual stress

-equal to yield. This conclusion is evident by linear superposition of stresses

. within the condition that the material is approximately elastic-perfectly plastic when. loaded. .

Compression at aid wall is advantageous because it is a crack arrest condition-with respect to radial propagation. Circumferential propagation r-could occur without radial propagation but at a very slow rate.

___We e -- . . , , _ _ - , , _ , , , , , , , _ , _ . , , , , , , , , _ , _ _

l -

PIV. 3 3

PAGI 19 or 25

{

h' - *-. 77 . , . /'

., < s > (

h/. . ... ..

• r b s.) -

~d p .- + . ..

L' W

N,,

FN. 13 This_can be qualitatively demonstrated in the foll y. Figure 13a, depicts a part through-wall crack arrested rd compression.

Circumferential propagation occurs as the era tangent to the compressive field; down tension is th cis ng force. The alternating throug esses are as a of residual stresses e from transition fa , as repaired s-b t.

V .

The. severity o: is a function of.t length of the propagating edge,-

among other thi or tangential r as tion the circumferential .

. extent of. is no longer IE>T te. The depth b' is the propagati e. Since the comp saivA field will occur before mid wall ificantly less circumferential extent, 2a (Fig.

h' will be .

r M tress intensity the decreasing y 13 a_& b). agnifying eff ligament size remaining befo Irack goes throes all. This magnifying effect does not occur for e rential propagat o . ,

Relative shallowness,^s (1' dimension, re 't stancy of stress intensity, because t ou 411 dimension w t nerease, are factors which mitigate cir ential greoth rat 2.5 MSLB ,

~

The followi n is is based on wo formed by MPR associates (Ref. 14).

Free Span A flawed section will move laterally under an axial load in order that the c.g.'s of all sections line up to reduce the induced bending moment generated at the flaw.

9 6

TDR No. 388

- Rev. I Page 20 of 25 induced f _-

F applied

'Yreaction, flawed sectio e = eccentricity Mbduced i =F(e-$)"

(ref. 14) S = deflectio e'd section Several spans away, this reacted by co les eated at the lateral -

support plates. Unife characterizes e re.

. l p,--

A k / *.

w b -

l4* L 3P IS The restoring moment and ing tube stiffener s et permit e = & .

Eence the tube loo @

4

/,f 8 = [.133 in/23 in] radians G = .00578 radians radians j f=20=.01156 e, .

Q 0.IW a

7 '

' ;['f 2 *1,*. '

' TDR No. 388 K2v. 1 Page 21 of 25'

\ Fori fixed / fixed conditions, half the tube is treated separately. ' Uniform bending pertains to this length.

Therefore, from beam theory.

2 d 2 = n_

EI

'h2 ,

Since the M is constant along the span,

' g = S = -- g 2 ~ and y = g2 da El

2EI Thus [ . g2

• 2EI p q . and' =F(e*$ <

-: Solving-gives = l' (3130 lb)(23 in A 13 in) lb)(23 in) 2

" 6 *

(2)(30.1x10 8 283 in') 2N.1x10 lb )(.00283 in )

. ik y .. s p

6 O o

o k

y

+e.,--n- - - , - . -

I - ." TDR No. 388 R2v. 1 Page 22 of 25 i i

h = 0.1206 in .

Thus M = F (e-$ ) = (3130 lb)(.133 .1206) = 38.8 in-lb. .

l d2 = !O., , (38.8 in-1b.)(23 in.) 2 = .010 t n EI 6 (30.1x10 lb 2 (.00283 in') I in p = 2(.0105) radian ,

= .021 radian (1.2032') .

9 Tube specimen A-13-63 r .I-1, containi a2 area flaw,. exhibited a l 1.5' rotation whe ke failure (Ref is is the limiting condition. <j It will be assumed that the st n the plastic hin e location of

'the crack is absorbed over ver ort length, 0 c Hence the stra'in is i dF = Axial Crowth = (Hin'ge Rotation) (Dist from Feutral Axis to Extr. Fiber)

.1 .1 e

e 6

1. s s a

kM%

(, . :.

' TDR No. 388 Rsv. 1 i Page 23 of 25  !

f n e distance from the neutral axis to the extreme fiber at the cracked '

section'is-a s- N.A. YA = 1/2 Da sin 25' ~

_ 8-.O I,

,\ = -1/2 (.625 in.)(.423) = .132 in.

Ya = 1/2 (.625 in.) = .3125 in.

YB - neut axis = .3125 .133 = 0.1795 in.

Yneut axis - A = .133 - ( .132) = 0.265 in.

Hence use 0.265 in.

= (.021 radians)(0 = 0.0557 = 5.  %

U.  ! ,

%ea 5.57% bending in is added to 7 v erain from the membrane load, r .-

-the total strain is-12.6%. This cor pon s to a stress af-8 KSI. This is ,

a stress increase above flow s s o i 85-75.5 = 0. .6%

75.5 n erefore, in order o exceed the flow stress, the intact area require-ment is increased by 12.6%. The intact area required becomes 72% of the total, ne defect size is .52".

e a

, , - - .n-+ n ..,,.,--,,,,,-,----r,-. ,,-,~w.,n.-,e---,,--,,-r,,--w-e.e,--en - - - - - - - , , - , - , , - . , - - , ,, ,,~-,,,.-e

1

,1

.' TDR Ns. 388 Rsv. 1 Page 24 of 25 l

Results are shown in Figure 1 for a peripheral tube (3140#) and for a core l

tube at the centerline (14084).

1.5 -

Net Section Collapse Net section collapse has as its failure criteria the formation o a hinge at '

th in th flawed elevation when flav stress, C' ( fj = Cgy) is reach tension and compression. 2. l It is arrived at (Ref.16) very conservatively. tJnlike t for MSLB, previously discussed, no account is made of the fact that se on moves

^'

• laterally at the flaw. The section bending moment is x . Results l are shown in Fig.1 for the 100*F/hr normal cooldown d 0,*F/hr adminis-trativelylimitedcooldown.g .

t l

---

.--.-,-.-,--.,.,,.-.----.-----w--m,,..v -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , - ~ - e - -,--- - - - - , - -

TDR No. 388 f,' : . ,

. R:v.-3

- Pega 25 of 25

'f

3.0 REFERENCES

1 la. Letter from D.'A.'Steininger.to D.-K. Croneberger, Operating Axial Tube Stress in OTSG's, 2/11/83.-

lb. Failure Analysis Associates An Engineering and Probabilistic Analysis of Tube Cracking Performance .in OTSG's, Vol.1, EPRI Research Project 5151-1, Final Report, 12/82. -

2. EPRI-NP-2146, Static Strain Analysis of THI-2 OTSG Tubes, December, 1981.

~

3.. B&W, IOM, Saville, T. A., to Baker, R. J., Operational on ern - OTSG Tube Leaks,' 1/18/83.

4.. .EPRI-NP-1876, Floh Induced Vibration Analysis of TM 0 Tubes, June 1981.

5.

-GPUN. EM Calc. No. 1101 - 5320 - A'49A & A49B S. Leshnoff (A) &

C. L. Lehmann-(B).

• Sa. 'BAW-10146, Dete' f Minimum Requi Wall Thickness for 177-FA OTSG, 10 a

.6. EPRI-NP-838 IT-Practure se Code for Structures.

7. Harvey, J. essure Componen n etion, Van' Nostrand Reinhold,

. 1980,.p. 298.

8. F. Erdogan, Fraction Analy o eam Generator T rt II, Stress Intensity Factor and COD t t ons, Prepared GPU uclear Corp.,

Parsippany, NJ.

9. Babcock & Wilcox Cal . -114050-1-00.

- 10 .~ F. Erdogan, The 1 Experimental ud o racture in August, 1982, Pipelines ng Circumferen alF3vs,FinalReport,U.S.~

Department of an g rtation, Research pecial Programs Administra-tion, Washingt . D.T. 20590.

11. Letter from T. J. Griesbach to S. D. Leshnoff, Calculation of Leak Ra'tes from Circurferential Cracks in OTSG Tubes, 3/4/83.

12.. GPUN Topical Report-007, Babcock & Wilcox - 1760, Rev. 1, TMI-l OTSG Repair, Kinetic Expansion Technical Report, March, 1983.

'13.- Timoshenko, S.. P., Strength of Materials, Vol. II, p. 377, Van Nostrand, Third Edition.

14.- MPR Associates Report, TMI-1 Tube, Cracking Versus Design Basis Steam Line Break Load, 12/8/82.

15. Letter from S. J. Weems, N R_ Assoc., to S. D. Leshnoff, 3/2/83.

16. TDR 388, Rev. O, Mechanical Integrity Analysis of TMI-1 OTSG Tubes.

GD GP ra10H1TT ATTshT10N.RdyUIRhD MokNING MEF0kT - wag 10N 1 PR10317Y ATTENTION RhQUIREE bs S 5-13-e3 eg e N

To: J ames 814 ba , Chie f, Prog r am S uppo r t D ranc h, 1E GD FH Cn : James n. 4114 , segLon 1 9 Licensec/ Fa ci lit y Notif icatio n/Su bjec t Le scri p tion . o f items or beents D PH P 2 -

f Thr ee Mile Is land Faz from R1 5/12 Unce Th' rough Steam Generator (UTSG) Tube Repair process 9 Unit 1 01SG Tube Repair Update. The licensee is in the process of evaluating D N 50-2 89 P roce ss drip and bubble test data conducted on both OTSG's.

( i*

1hese tests were pertotmed to veriff the leak tightness of 9 the Kinetic Espansion process, new tube plugging and stabilisation repair. The drip ased bubble test are being

' performed to supplement Eddy Current Testing (ELT) data. 9 Ereliminary data indicated approximately 30 tubes (by the drip test) and 40 tubes (by bubble test) are leaking. The video tapes of f #* the bubble tests are being reevaluated for correlation with G the delp tests and ECT data. The licensee is identifying small pin hole leaks that ate below the threshold for ECT detection.

( After' final evaluation, it is espected that tubes with 9 indications of leaks will be removed from service. A final tutule and drip test will be performed to verif y these rapairs.

( e

( ,0 e e

(

f 9

( O 9

f' .

A J

J

's ,

/

GENERAL PLBLIC UTILITIES OTSG REPAIRS DATE 5/18/83 DATE ITEM DESCRIPTION RESPONSIBILITY- REQUIRED

1. Restoration Secondary Side

. Tenp. Chem. System S. Levin TBD

. Remove Flush System S. Levin TBD

. Remove Air Conpressor S. Levin TBD

2. Ops OTSG Status x

. OTSG Level "A" 511"

. OTSG Level "B" 519"

~

3. Drip Test a "A" 5/18

4. Eddy Current Test 5/13

, m , * ,. t

5. Tube Plugging & Stabilization TBD .:

. Issue FCA B&W 5/19 .

. Issue DRF for Repairs T. Furctions 5/20

}

8

6. Miscellaneous Items to Resolve L

. Hydrogen Peroxide Tube Soak (TMM) 5/2 -

. Decon of Equip In Progress .-

. Revised Spec for Flushing Rev. 5 g

. Dissolved 02 Analyzer TMM TBD 7-

7. Waiting Documentation '

MNCR Responsibility -. .

215-82 Plug Exploded at WIong A m a of Tube QC 426-82 Wire Brush B6-1 QC 094-83 Weld Repairs in "A" QC 091-83 Feltplug Blowing QC  :

111-83 Misplugged Tubes QC -3 119-83 Misplugged Tubes QC  ?

8. Rad Con Exposure Data (Based on SRDs) as of 5/13

. Total OTSG Exposure since 1st Blast - 953.LMan Rem 1

. Total OTSG Exposure since Nov 1981 - 1138..y Man Rem e

. Final Estimate Exposure Since Nov 1981 - 1204 Man Rem

9. Antlicipated Jungs F Date Description Responsibility 4-5/18 A - Upper -

A - Lower - Q Levin / Catalytic 9

5/18 B - Upper -

B - Lower - p

/

b

)3b

GENERAL PlBLIC UTILITIES OTSG REPAIRS DATE 5/20/83 DATE ITEM DES mIPTION RESPONSIBILITY REQUIRED

1. Restoration Secondary Side

. Temp. Chem. System S. Levin TBD

. Remove Flush System S. Levin In Progress

. Remove Air Conpressor S. Levin TBD,

2. Ops OTSG Status

. OTSG Level "A" 511" w

. OTSG Level .

a"B" 751@9" #9 io v 2

3. Results of Dri Tes "A & "B" 5/18 m . Snoop Test' 5/20 4

ps+'# 4. Eddy Current Test h 5/13

. Resolve Blocked Tube in "A" 17-59 g n

a6-sa.

a. ; -

Q 04 eO % .9 5.' [AStabilization  % TBD Tube.. IssuePlugging FCA  %==y B&W 5/19

._ Issue DW for Repairs T. Functions 5/20

. Issue New J.O. & IP G. Kull 5/23

6. Miscellaneous Items to Resolve

. Hydrogen Peroxide Tube Soak (TMM) 5/2

. Decon of Equip In Progress

. Revised Spec for Flushing Rev. 5

. Dissolved 02 Analyzer TMM TBD l0 p udkk3uM.Ma

7. Waiting Documentation MNCR Responsibility 215-82 Plug Exploded at Wrong Area of Tube QC 426-82 Wire Brush B6-1 QC 091-83 Feltplug Blowing QC 111-83 Misplugged Tubes QC 119-83 Misplugged Tubes ,

QC

8. Rad Con Exposure Data (Based on SRDs) as of 5/18

. Total OTSG Exposure since 1st Blast - 955.5 Man Rem

. Total OTSG Exposure since Nov 1981 - 1132.1 Man Rem

. Final Estimate Exposure Since Nov 1981 - 1204 Man Rem

9. Anticipated Jumps Date Description Responsibility 5/20 A - Upper - AmdM Levin / Catalytic A - Lower - 0 5/20 8 - Upper -

B - Lower -

/ % _--

';l '

~.5 f-IIbl~ Iz -0 50 j (b lo 96f/F3 A TTAOfMEN T. 1 Phn7 Val (6)

OTS& Q Rsw. TuSE DEFECT LOCArtoN c.No (f.q . of 7,y ,

I 5% 4 (l.) US+0i TC

. . A. +I T (Q . u.t-0.x . 40

3. ,4l 7 (Q 4 Hop to Y. .Yl I (L) 4J -04 7f T. 100 la ~ (L) 41~0 ff' .

L. 11 0 $ UH 02- to 7 /27 L (L) ur+o fr e

e O

e e

~'

/37

r .,

-n-SP-1101-12-046 s.[a

,, Ji . AttachmInc I Page 2.of 2-5/16/83 OTSG B ADDITIONAL TUBES -TO BE PLUGGED WITil WESTINGHOUSE ROLLED PLUG ,

Eddy Current' Data ,

~ Item .. Row- Tube Elevation %IW Volts Plug Location

-1 13 47 US+06 95 3 Both UTS &'LTS 2 38 8 US+06 80 2 Both UTS & LTS 3 55 15 US+07 95 1 Both UTS & LTS.

4- 58 12 ~US+06 95- 2 Both UTS-& LTS

.5 -99 10 US+06 95 3 Both UTS & LTS 6- 32 6 US+01 95 1 LTS Only-7 41 -5 US-02 40 -1 LTS only-8 41 7 US+04 50 <1 LTS only

-9 41- 8 US-02 95 2 LTS Only

10. '100 6 US-0 '95 2 LTS only

11 ;127- '2 US 95 5 LTS only 12 110 6- .US+02 50 <1 LTS only.

13 13 48 US+05 95 2 coils Both UTS & LTS 14 51 -16 US+05 95 1 coil Both UTS & LTS o

O ,

e s

4 9

Mv m 'i

• l If-IIo I-Ix - 03 o n4v. 11 %K/r3 )

ATTACH MEN T 1 I

PART VH (A)  :

~ Ab'DITIONAL 70(3C-C- To GE StABILI EEb A FTER BUB B LE TGSTS

- 07S % A Rbw Tggg, .QGESCT LocArtoM 0.No H.fr. ,% r Q I- -x T us-a t. 29-to L. Y .- 59 It #+ll 9C

3. 7o Iz9m ta + o3. vi-n. 9!/tr

4. 73 /R4 ('t w34 o g tr C. 29 1%.4 ( L) t4 54 02. 6[

il . it 4I u.1- t o to I 7- I09 tal (') u!**4 TE 8 I.to 100 uf a ct , # oy. W ~

' J. 14 0 10] useet 9[

lo. . /AL . 9V ut-to k[

l!. 139 5 (L) ,

W.J 401 if it. /R 4 14 ut +o3 t I~

I3. 180 9% U S -t z. 9C

' I +. __ l40 _

b2. Ut -03 80  ;

I[. I 4-1 5'1 us+ox 9T ll. 1%8 1 (L) ut+04 1r

^

I]. 148 37 (L) u t -o f , - ex 1C it ' l+9 L IT 4 0 x, ff nv4 vrs

$$. . Y k (l$403,t$$ IO/[0 CULY \

i e

l

. . - _ _ . _ , - _ . . . u

s i '.

)

. . ).' SP-1101-12-046 Attachment I Page 1 Of-2 *h4/53 e

OTSG A' ADDITIONAL TUBES TO BE PLUCOED WITH WESTINGHOUSE ROLLED PLUG Eddy Current Data LItem Row Tube Elev. %TW .No.'of Coils Plug Location

1. 5- ~40 15-3 40 1- Both UTS & LTS

2. 35 41 14-3 50 1 Both UTS & LTS 3.

64 2 01-20' 50 1 BOTH UTS & LTS 09+05

4. 72 59- 06+0 90 1 . Both UT.S & LTS

5. -126- 86- 'S+6 U 50 1. Both UTS & LTS

6. 126 5 (L) US+7 95 2 Both UTS & LTS

7. 125' 88 (L) US+5 95 2 Both-UTS-& LTS

8. 127 91 (L) US+5 95 2 Both UTS & LTS

9. .- 140 52 (L) US+5 95 i Both UTS & LTS

=10. 2 7 US-02 28-50 1 LTS only.

'11. 5 39 15+13 95 1 LTS Only

12. 70 129 (L) .US+03-12 95/35 1 LTS only 13.- 73- 122 (L) US+04_ 95 'l LTS Only

14. 79 126 (L) US+02 65 1 LTS only

-15. 98 31 US-10 50 1 LTS only

16. 109 106 (L) US+04 95_ 2 LTS only-

17. 120 100 US+02+04 95 1/2 LTS only

18. 120 107 US+02 95 2 LTS only-19.- 126 94 US-10 25 1 LTS only

20. 139 54 (L) US+02 95 1 LTS Only.

21. 126- 92- US+03 95 1 LTS Only

. 22. 130 92 US-12 95 2 LTS only .

-23. 140 62 US-03 80 2 LTS only

-24.- 147 37 US+02 95 1 LTS only

'25. 148 7 (L) US+04 95 2 LTS only

26. 148 37 (L) US-01-02 95 2/1 LTS only

27. 149 6 15+02 95 1 LTS only

28. 4 4 US+03+05 60/50 1 LTS Only 1 i

)

i l

l

1 GENERAL PtELIC UTILITIES .

'~

OTSG REPAIRS DATE 5/23/83 DATE ITEM DESCRIPTION . RESPONSIBILITY REQUIRED

-l.- Restoration Secondary Side -

. Teg. Chem. System

. S. Levin -TBD

. Remove Flush System - S. Levin In Progress .R

. Rinnove Air Cogressor (% AgeJ) S. Levin TBD l

2. 1 Cps OTSG ' Status : ,

I

. OTSG Level "A" 511" * ** A '

. OTSG Level "B" 519" -

-3. Results of Snoop-Test a "A" & "B" '5/20 l A

.B -

- 4. . Eddy Cutzent Test --5/13

. Resolve Blocked Tubes in "A" 17-59; A5-9 flub

- 4 A,t; le do a ng mme E "B" 122-7; 148-23 .!

Loud ~

, l

5. . Tube Plugging & Stabilization 5/23 i

.-Issue Final FCA B&W 5/20  ;

. Issue DAF for Repairs T. Functions 5/21-

.. Issue New J.O. & IP G. Kull 5/23

6. Miscellaneous-Items to Resolve

. Hydrogen Peroxide Tube Soak (TMM) % ]M 5/2

. Decon of Equip- In Progress

. Revised Spec for Flushing Rev. 5 "

. Dissolved $2 Analyzer TMM TBD

. RCS/STSG Pressurizat' ion TMM

7. Waiting Documentation

- MNCR - Responsibility- l

-215-82 Plug Eiploded at Wrong Area of Tube QC 426-82' Wire Brush 86-1 QC 091-83 Feltplug Blowing QC

-111-83 Misplugged Tubes QC 119-83 Misplugged-Tubes QC

8. ' Rad Can' Exposure Data (Based on SRDs) as of 5/19

. Total OTSG Exposure sirce 1st Blast - 956.5 Man Rem -

. Total OTSG~ Exposure since Nov 1981 - 1132.7 Man Rem

. Final Estimate Exposure Since Nov 1981 - 1204 Man Rem

9. Anticipated Jumps .

Date Description Responsibility 5/23 A - Upper -

pI L1 LevirvCatalytic A - Lower -

5/23 8 - Upper ~- ,

B - Lower -

, 5,ug :k ?., . LU M #~ j3l

GENERAL PLBLIC UTILITIES OTSG REPAIRS- DATE 5/24/83 DATE ITEM DESCRIPTION RESPONSIBILITY REQUIRED

1. Restoration Secondary Side.

. Tenp. Chem. System -S. Levin TBD

. Re. move Flush System S. Levin. In Progress

. Remove Air Corrpressor S. Levin TBD

2. (ps OTSG Status . f5cco

. OTSG Level "A" 500" 7 " #Y

. OTSG Level ."B" 451" - 76 nQ @

3. .Results of Snoop -Test 8 "A" 5/23 h ,= c_+b ,

4. Eddy Current Test 5/13

. Resolve Blocked Tubes in "A" 17-59; AS-9

. Resolve Blocked Tubes in "B" 122-7; 148-23

5. Tube Plugging & Stabilization 5/23

. Issue Final FCA B&W- 5/20

. Issue DFF for Repairs T. Functions 5/21

. Issue New J.O. & IP- G. Kull 5/23

6. Miscellaneous Items to Resolve

. Hydrogen Peroxide Tube Soak (TMM) 5/2

.'Decon of Equip In Progress

. Revised Spec for Flushing Rev. 5

. Dissolved 02 Analyzer TMM TBD

. RCS/0TSG Pressurization TMM

-7. Waiting Documentation MNCR Responsibility 215-82 Plug Exploded at Wrong Area of Tube QC M 426-82 Wire Brush B6-1 QC 091-83 Feltplug Blowing QC ebaJlll-83 Misplugged Tubes , QC 119-83 Misplugged Tubes QC

8. Rad Con Exposure Data (Based on SRDs) as of 5/19

. Total OTSG Exposure since 1st Blast - 956.5 Man Rem

. Total OTSG Exposure since Nov 1981 - 1132.7 Man Rem #3A E

. Final Estimate Exposure Since Nov 1981 - 1204 Man Rem Gy

9. Anticipated Jumps Date Description Responsibility l 5/24 A - Upper - W A d [ Q j, A - Lower -

Levin / Catalytic

-5/24 B - Upper r A A B - Lower -

- \

/J9

C GENERAL PLBLIC UTILITIES OTSG REPAIRS

~

DATE 5/26/83 DATE ITEM . DESCRIPT' ION RESPONSIBILITY REQUIRED

-1. Restoration Secondary Side

. Tenp. Chem. System S. Levin TBD

. Remove' Flush System S. Levin In Progress

. Remove Air Conpressor S. Levin TBD

'2. Ops OTSG Status

.- OTSG Level "A" 540" .

. OTSG Level "B" 450" ,

3. Eddy Current Test 5/13

. Resolve Blocked Tubes in "A" 17-59; A5-9 M oldnA

. Resolve Blocked Tubes in "B" 122 ,7; .148-23 d

4. Tube Plugging & Stabilization 5/23

. Issue New J.O. & IP G. Kull 5/25 yupne @ 7 asA "*"A 4 48^ h h 84 W s t G

5. Miscellaneous Items to Resolve

. Hydrogen Peroxide Tube Soak (TMM) Plt. m int. Being Fab.

. Decon of Equip In Progress

. Revised Spec for Flushing Rev. 5 T. Functions TBD

. Dissolved 02 Analyzer TMM Plt. Eng. TBD

. RCS/0TSG Pressucization TMM Plt. Eng. TBD

. GAP Growth Measurement STP Plt. Eng. 5/24

6. Waiting Documentation -

MNCR Responsibility 215-82 Plug Exploded at Wrong Area of Tube QC 091-83 Feltplug Blowing QC 119-83 Misplugged Tubes QC 1 l

~

7. Rad Con Exposure Data (Based on SRDs) as of 5/24

. -Total OTSG Exposure since 1st Blast - 960.8 Man Rem 10 l

. Total OTSG Exposure since Nov' 1981 1137 mn Rem 8'31

. Final Estimate Exposure Since Nov 1981 - 1204 Man Rem )

8. Anticipated Jumps Date Description Responsibility 5/26 A - Upper - hk.Mes Levin / Catalytic I

. A - Lower -

5/26 B - Upper - @

B - Lower - @ ,

l 6 don.

., ,m _ _ . _ _ _ - .

p-GENERAL PtBLIC UTILITIES

-0TSG REPAIRS DATE 5/31/83

.DATE ITEM ' DES mIPTION- RESPONSIBILITY REQUIRED

1. Restoration Secondary Side

. Tenp.' Chem.' System S. Levin 6/3

. Re, move. Air Conpressat S. Levin TBD

2. ~ @s OTSG Status

. OTSG Level "A"J540"

..OTSG Level "B" 450" ,

3. Drip ~ Test a "B" 7 y 3 fare 4 A O O A M 5/31 t.90 & W Aoun .

4. -Eddy C wrent Test 5/13

. Resolve Blocked Tubes in'"A" 17-59; A5-9

15. Tube' Plugging & Stabilization 5/23

.-Issue New J.O. &'IP G. Kull 5/25 Luedt # A .6

^

'6. Misc'NNous e Items to Resolve

.. Hydrogen Peroxide Tube Soak'(TMM)

Plt. Maint. Being Fab.

. Hydrogen Peroxide Tube Soak (STP) F. Paulewicz TBD

. Decon of Equip G,Gul In Progress

-T. Functienc -

. Revised Spec fw Flushing Rev. 5 TBD

.! Dissolved 02 Analyzer TMM f.ms-uPA) Plt. Eng. -

TBD

. Dissolved 02 Analyzer STP F. Paulewicz TBD

. RCS/0TSG Presswization TM Plt. Eng. TBD

. RCS/0TSG Pressurization STP OPS TBD

. GAP Growth Measwement S1P Plt. Eng. ~5/24

7. ~ Waiting Documentation MNCR Responsibility P 215-82 Plug Exploded at Wrong Area of Tube QC 091-83 Feltplug Blowing QC 119-83 Misplugged Tubes QC a2 -83 mihee i

. 8. - Rad Con Exposure Data (Based on SRDs) as of 5/26

. Total OTSG Exposwe since 1st Blast - 967.5 Man Rem

. Total OTSG Exposure since Nov 1981.- 1143.7 Man Rem

. Final Estimate Exposwe Since Nov 1981 - 1204 Man Rem

9. Ant'icipated Jumps Date; Description Responsibility 5/31 A - Upper - G i~ ,y ph w g) 'LevirVCatalytic A - Lower - t erwx.d (8 y 5/51 B - Upper - J.j/ > y fg N. ,.-f, ,i .

' } .N kt%4% }g B - Lower - d,ql L ' * *?

fu,

/4/

c -

. _1

-GENERAL PLBLIC UTILITIES

.OTSG REPAIRS- DATE -6/1/83

- DATE ITEM . DESCRIPTION RESPONSIBILITY REQUIRED

$ L1. ; Restoration Secondary Side.

. Tenp. Chem. System S. Levin 6/10_ l

. Remove Air Compressor S. Levin TBD j i

2. - CDs OTSG Status F- . OTSG Level "A" 570" e- . OTSG Level "B" 590"

3. - Results of Drip Test S "B" 5/31

~ 4 1Results of Snoop. Test S "B" 6/1 5.. Eddy Current Test -5/13

. Resolve Blocked Tubes in "A" 17-59;'A5-9 ,

In.-t -

6. . Tube Plugging & Stabilization g au 5/23

, @. AA sq g _ g -

7.~ Miscel] s Items to Resolve

.gw n swb -. Hydrogen Peroxide Tube Soak (TMM) Plt. Maint. Being Fab.

.-. Hydrogen Peroxide Tube Soak (STP) F. Paulewicz TBD

. Decon of Equip In Progress

. . Revised Spec for Flushing Rev. 5 G. Reed TBD

. Dissolved 02 Analyzer T M Plt. Eng. 5/31

. Dissolved 02 Analyzer STP 4- dnty me6 F. Paulewicz TBD

. RCS/0TSG Pressurization TM tun Plt. Eng. 6/1

. RCS/0TSG Pressurization STP (90 OPS 6/2

.g . GAP Growth Measurement S1P Plt. Eng. 6/2

8. Waiting Documentation MNC.R Responsibility 215 82; Plug Exploded at Wrong Area of Tube QC 091-83 Feltplug Blowing QC 119-83 Misplugged Tubes QC 142-83 Documentation Discrepencies (glac 4est) QC 143-83 Documentation Discrepencies QC

9. Rad Con Exposure Data (Based on SRDs) as of 5/27

. Total OTSG Exposure since 1st Blast - 967.8 Man Rem T%l

. Total OTSG Exposure since Nov 1981 - 1144.0 Man Rem ll($,

. - Final Estimate Exposure Since'Nov 1981 - 1204 Man Rem

10. Anticipated Jumps [S Seep Date- Description A '- Upper - 9 . a,IMA lie se a*/

[ slabliM**

Responsibility Levin / Catalytic

• " g4 g0 4g 6/1 A - Lower - >

6/1 B - Upper - any ted Gamm4 B - Lower.- daig /%

9 NA

l

' GENERAL Pt.BLIC' UTILITIES l OTSG REPAIRS. DATE 6/3/83- '

l DATE i ITEM . DESCRIPTION RESPONSIBILITY REQUIRED 1

-1. Restoration Secondary Side j

.-Tenp.: Chem. System -S. Levin 6/3' l

. Remove Air'Cospressor S. Levin TBD i

.2. Ops OTSG' Status

. OTSG Level "A" 570" m3._v qq '

.. OTSG' Level "B" 470" ,

3. . Mylar Light Test e "B" - 6/2

. SM M

4. - Eddy Current. Test

~

5/13

. Resolve Blocked Tubes in "A" 17-59; A5-9

. Resolve Blocked Tubes in "B" 103 5. Tube _ Plugging & Stabilization 5/23 4

6.

.tMiscellaneous 9 PJL iQ t Mto Resolve beak d M

-p . Hydrogen Peroxide Tube Soak (TMM) Plt. Maint. Being Fab.

' p . Hydrogen Peroxide. Tube Soak (STP)

F. Paulewicz 6/6

.. Decon of Equip In Progress

-Revised Spec for. Flushing Rev. 5 G. Reed TBD

' M I) % M issolved.D 2 Analyzer TMM Plt. Eng. 5/31

. Dissolved 02 Analyzer STP G. Reed TBD

. RCS/0TSG Pressurization TMM

. RCS/0TSG Pressurization STP 2 QA Plt. Eng.

OPS 6/1 6/2~

.G Growth Measurement STP g 34D Plt. Eng. 6/2'

.7. Waiting ation

. MNCR Responsibility

,215-82. Plug Exploded at Wrong Area of Tube QC 091-83 Feltplug Blowing QC 119-83 .Hisplugged Tubes QC 142-83 Documentation Discrepencies QC 143-83 ' Documentation Discrepencies* e-^f M

. QC 146-83 B&W Plug Leaks (127-2)

8. Rad Con Exposure Data -(Based on SRDs) as of 6/1.

c

. Total OTSG Exposure since 1st Blast - 976.7 Man Rem (20, 5

.' Total OTSG Exposure since Nov 1981 - 1152.9 Man Rem 11 %.?

. Final Estimate Exposure Since Nov 1981 - 1204

9. ' Anticipated Jumps rs -

Man so Re &m

-Date Description Responsibility

'6/3 A - Upper - WN[ Levin / Catalytic I'

6/3 A - Lower - to e@

B - Upper - st7-r. W/ _ __ ty B - Lower - 6' M Tei b A GTSCr) 0 h Tomen Mr

g is m A ng Jy -

nk -

MR .

~

sw ws-z Subd askA+zh y t

M  %

.W M /u '

)

etu.ud% dam.n/4 x .

e e

I l

I e

l, ' -

i I

I c

GENERAL PlBLIC UTILITIES-OTSG REPAIRS DATE 6/6/83

. . DATE .

ITEM DESORIPTION - RESPONSIBILITY REQUIRED

1. Restoration-Secondary Side..

. Temp. Chem. System S. Levirl 6/10

. Re, move Air Compressor S. Levin TBD

2. Ops OTSG Status .

. OTSG Level "A" 570" A-

. OTSG Level "B" 470" 5

3. Mylar Light Test S "B" 6/2 h rnorte. mglw M 4.. Eddy Current Test . 5/13

' Resolve Blocked Tubes in "A" 17-59; A5-9 .

.-Resolve Blocked Tubes ~in "B" 103-1

5. Stabilization 6/5 Tube Plugging 3'ioc 4 q't. A ee-6.. Miscellaneous Items t$ Resolve

. Hydrogen Peroxide Tube Soak (STP) F. Paulewicz 6/6

. Decon of Equip In Progress

. Revised Spec for Flushing Rev. 5 G. Reed TBD

. Dissolved D2 Analyzer TMM Plt. Eng. 5/31

. Dissolved 02 Analyzer STP G. Reed TBD

. RCS/0TSG Pressurization TMM Plt. Eng. 6/8

. RCS/0TSG Pressurization STP OPS 6/2

. GAP Growth Measurement STP Plt. Eng. 6/2

7. Waiting Documentation MNCR Responsibility 215-82 Plug Exploded at Wrong Area of Tube QC 091-83 Feltplug Blowing QC 119-83 Misplugged Tubes QC

.142-83 Documentation Discrepencies QC ^

143-83 Documentation Discrepencies QC l 146-83 B&W Plug Leaks (127-2) QC l l

l

8. Rad Con Exposure Data (Based on SRDs) as of 6/2

. Total OTSG Exposure since 1st ihast '- 980.5 Man Rem NT l

. Total OTSG Exposure since Nov 1981 - 1156.7 Man Rem 8161 l

. Final Estimate Exposure Since,Nov 1981 - 1204 Man Rem

9. Anticipated Junps )

Date Description Responsibility

]

4/6 A - Upper - g, g Q g g Levin / Catalytic A - Lower -

6/6 B'- Upper - klk H T (tsr0 % S B - Lower - n l

(vsDJ k en. u)

/ __

GENERAL PtBLIC' UTILITIES-OTSG REPAIRS DATE 6/7/83 DATE ITEM DESCRIPTION RESPONSIBILITY REQUIRED

1. Restoration Secondary Side

. Temp. Chem. System S. Levin 6/10

. Remove Air Compressor S. Levin TBD

2. Ops OTSG Status

. OTSG Level "A" 575"

. OTSG Level "B" 456" .

3. Snoop & Drip Test a "A" . 6/10 ,

4. Eddy Current. Test .

5/13

. Resolve Blocked Tubes in "A" 17-59; A5-9

-5. Install Permanent 2nways 8 "B" 6/7

6. Tube Plugging & Stabilization 6/5 s i 4, 4, 942,6

7. Miscellaneous Items to Resolve

. Decon of Equip . In Progress

. Revised Spec for Flushing Rev. 5 G. Reed TBD

. Dissolved 02 Analyzer TMM Plt. Eng. 5/31

. . Dissolved 02 Analyzer STP '

G. Reed TBD

. RCS/0TSG Pressurization TMM Plt. Eng. 6/8

. RCS/0TSG Pressurization STP OPS 6/2

. GAP Growth Measurement STP Plt. Eng. 6/2 -

8. Waiting Documentation ER Responsibility 215-82 Plug Exploded at Wrong Area of Tube QC 091-83 Feltplug Blowing QC 119-83 Misplugged Tubes QC 142-83 Documentation Discrepencies QC 143-83 Documentation Discrepencies QC 146-83 B&W Plug Leaks (127-2) QC

9. Rad Con Exposure Data (Based on SRDs) as of 6/6

. Total OTSG Exposure since 1st Blast - 984.7 Man Rem TT5

. Total OTSG~ Exposure since Nov 1981 - 1161.0 2 n Rem il 7 t,s

. Final Estimate Exposure Since Nov 1981 - 1204 Man Rem

10. Anticipated Jumps Date Description Responsibility 6/7 Levin / Catalytic

.AA -- Lower Upper - i- ) g g h ,

6/7 8 - Upper -

- B - Lower -

D l

16 ,