ML080450172

Fourth Ten Year Inservice Inspection Interval Request for Relief No. 07-ON-002

ML080450172
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee
Issue date:	02/11/2008
From:	Baxter D Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Power Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
07-ON-002
Download: ML080450172 (151)

Text

Duke DAVE BAXTER Vice President Oconee Nuclear Station Duke Energy Corporation ON01 VP/7800 Rochester Highway Seneca, SC 29672 864-885-4460 864-885-4208 fax dabaxter@dukeenergy.

com February 11,2008 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001

Subject:

Duke Power Company LLC d/b/a Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke)Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Docket Nos. 50-269 Fourth Ten Year Inservice Inspection Interval Request for Relief No. 07-ON-002 Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(iii), attached is a Request for Relief from the requirement to examine 100% of the volume specified by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code),Section XI, Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components, 1998 Edition with 2000 Addenda (as modified by Code Case N-460).Request for Relief 07-ON-002 is to allow Duke Energy to take credit for sixteen (16) limited ultrasonic examinations on welds associated with various systems and components described in the attached request. The ultrasonic examination coverage of the subject Unit 1 welds did not meet the 90% examination requirements of Code Case N-460. The obtainable volume coverage for each weld examination is indicated on the attached requests.

Achievement of greater examination coverage for these welds is impractical due to piping/valve geometry, interferences, and existing examination technology.

Therefore, Duke Energy requests that the NRC grant relief as authorized under 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i).

If there are any questions or further information is needed you may contact Corey Gray at (864) 886-6325.Very truly yours, Dave B xter Site Vice President Enclosure www. duke-energy.

com U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission February 11, 2008 Page 2 xc w/att: Victor McCree Acting Region II Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth St., SWW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, GA 30303 L. N. Olshan, Project Manager, Section 1 Project Directorate II Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 xc(w/o attch): D. W. Rich Senior NRC Resident Inspector Oconee Nuclear Station S. E. Jenkins, Section Manager, Division of Waste Management Bureau of Land and Waste Management SC Dept. of Health & Environmental Control 2600 Bull St.Columbia, SC 29201 Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 1 of 40 Relief Request 07-ON-002 Proposed Relief in Accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(iii)

Inservice Inspection Impracticality Duke Energy Carolinas Oconee Nuclear Station -Unit 1 (EOC-23)Fourth 10-Year Interval -Inservice Inspection Plan Interval Start Date = 1-1-2004 Interval End Date = 7-15-2013 This Relief Request has 16 welds for which relief is being sought.The ID's and Item Numbers/Summary Numbers for the 16 welds are as follows: List Number Weld ID Item Number/Summary Number 1. 1-PZR-WP15 B03.110.001

2. 1-PZR-WP34 B03.110.002

3. 1-PZR-WP33-3 B03.110.003

4. i-PZR-WP33-2 B03.110.004

5. I-PZR-WP33-1 B03.110.005

6. 1-51A-18792-1-V-2 B03.150.001

7. 1-51A-18792-1-V-6 B03.150.002

8. 1-53A-02-68L B09.011.015

9. 1-LST-HD-SH-2 C01.020.004

10. I-SGA-W128 C02.021.002

11. 1-53A-01-29L C05.011.033

12. 1-53A-02-64L C05.011.039

13. 1LP-210-72 C05.011.076

14. 1LP-210-73 C05.011.077

15. 1LPS-746-2 C05.011.078

16. ILPS-751-16 C05.011.085 Attachment A contains the inspection data for these sixteen welds.Items in this relief request were examined during August, October or November of 2006.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 2 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Pressurizer Reactor Coolant System Lower Head to Surge Nozzle Weld Weld ID = I -PZR-WP 15 Item Number/Summary Number = B03. 110.001 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda Ill. Applicable Code Requirement IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-D, Item Number B3.1 10 Fig. IWB-2500-7 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I IV. Impracticality of Compliance The pressurizer lower head material is SA-212 Gr. B carbon steel and the surge nozzle material is SA-508 CL. 1 carbon steel. This weld has a diameter of 15.250 inches and a wall thickness of 4.750 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 56.92% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 450 and 600 shear wave scans perpendicular and parallel to the weld in one axial direction and two circumferential directions and 0'longitudinal wave scans covered 6 1.34 % of the base material from the head side. 45' and 600 shear wave scans perpendicular and parallel to the weld in one axial direction and two circumferential directions and 00 longitudinal wave scans covered 52.49% of the weld volume from the head side. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the surge nozzle would have to be redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical, There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I.

Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.

No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 3 of 40 VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Grantinig Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for item number B03. 110.001 was conducted using personnel, qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda. Ultrasonic procedures complied with the requirements of ASME Section V, Article 4 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as amended by Section XI, Appendix I.IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-P System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed each refueling outage provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken.Specifically, system leak rate limitations imposed by Technical Specifications 3.4.13,"Reactor Coolant System Leakage," as well as reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provide additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 4 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Pressurizer Reactor Coolant System Pressurizer Upper Head to Spray Nozzle Weld Weld ID = 1-PZR-WP34 Item Number/Summary Number = B03.110.002 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI.Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-D, Item Number B3.110 Fig. IWB-2500-7 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I IV. Impracticality of Compliance N The pressurizer uipper head material is SA-212 Gr. B carbon steel and the spray nozzle material is SA-508 CL. I carbon steel. This weld has a diameter of 7.750 inches and a wall thickness of 4.750 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 67.48% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: : 450 and 600 shear wave scans perpendicular and parallel to the weld in one axial direction and two circumferential directions and 0'longitudinal wave scans covered 59.96 % of the base material fiom the head hide. 450 and 600 shear wave scans perpendicular and parallel to the weld in one axial direction and two circumferential directions and 0' longitudinal wave scans covered 75% of the weld volume from the head side.. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the spray nozzle would have to be redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, whichis impractical.

There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-J.

Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.

No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 5 of 40 VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Grantin2 Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for item number B03.110.002 was conducted using personnel qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda. Ultrasonic procedures complied with the requirements of ASME Section V, Article 4 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as amended by Section XI, Appendix I.IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-P System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed each refueling outage provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken.Specifically, system leak rate limitations imposed by Technical Specifications 3.4.13,"Reactor Coolant System Leakage," as well as reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provide additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 6 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Pressurizer Reactor Coolant System Pressurizer Upper Head to Relief Nozzle (Z-W Quadrant)

Weld Weld ID = 1-PZR-WP33-3 Item Number/Summary Number B031110.003 II. 'Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-D, Item Number B3.110 Fig. IWB-2500-7 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I IV. Impracticality of Compliance The pressurizer upper head material is SA-212 Gr. B carbon steel and the relief nozzle material is SA-508 CL. I carbon steel. This weld has a diameter of 6.875 inches and a wall thickness of 4.750 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 62.80% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 450 and 60' shear wave scans perpendicular and parallel to the weld in one axial direction and two circumferential directions and 00 longitudinal wave scans covered 52.5 % of the base material from the head side. 450 and 600 shear wave scans perpendicular and parallel to the weld in one axial direction and two circumferential directions and 00 longitudinal wave scans covered 73.1 % of the weld volume from the head side. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld the relief nozzle would have to be redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There was one recordable geometric indication found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I.

Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.

No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 7 of 40 VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for item number B03.110.003 was conducted using personnel qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda., Ultrasonic procedures complied with the requirements of ASME Section V, Article 4 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as amended by Section Xl, Appendix I.IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-P System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed each refueling outage provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric and pressure test), there are other activities wbhich provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken.Specifically, system leak rate limitations imposed by Technical Specifications 3.4.13,"Reactor Coolant System Leakage," as well as reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provide additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 8 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Pressurizer Reactor Coolant System Pressurizer Upper Head to Relief Nozzle (X-Y Quadrant)

Weld Weld ID = 1-PZR-WP33-2 Item Number/Summary Number = B03.110.004 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-D, Item Number B3.1 10 Fig. IWB-2500-7 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I IV. Impracticality of Compliance The pressurizer upper head material is SA-2 12 Gr. B carbon steel and the relief nrozzle material is SA-508 CL. I carbon steel. This weld has a diameter of 6.875 inches and a wall thickness of 4.750 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 62.80% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage reported represents the aiggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 450 and 600 shear wave scans perpendicular and parallel to the weld in one axial direction and two circumferential directions and 00 longitudinal wave scans covered 52.5 % of the base material from the head side. 45' and 600 shear wave scans perpendicular and parallel to the weld in one axial direction and two circumferential directions and 0' longitudinal wave scans covered 73. 1 % of the weld volume from the head side. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the relief nozzle would have to be redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I.

Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.

No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 9 of 40 VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for item number B03.110.004 was conducted using personnel qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda. Ultrasonic procedures complied with the requirements of ASME Section V, Article 4 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as amended by Section X1, Appendix I.IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-P System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed each refueling outage provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken.Specifically, system leak rate limitations imposed by Technical Specifications 3.4.13,"Reactor Coolant System Leakage," as well as reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provide additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the comnponent.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 10 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Pressurizer Reactor Coolant System Pressurizer Upper Head to Relief Nozzle (W-X Quadrant)

Weld Weld ID = I-PZR-WP33-1 Item Number/Summary Number = B03.110.005 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-D, Item Number B3.110 Fig. IWB-2500-7 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I IV. Impracticality of Compliance The pressurizer upper head material is SA-212 Gr. B carbon steel and the relief nozzle material is SA-508 CL. I carbon steel. This weld has a diameter of 6.875 inches and a wall thickness of 4.750 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 62.80% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: : 450 and 600 shear wave scans perpendicular and parallel to the weld in one axial direction and two circumferential directions and 00 longitudinal wave scans covered 52.5 % of the base material from the head side. 450 and 600 shear wave scans perpendicular and parallel to the weld in one axial direction and two circumferential directions and 00 longitudinal wave scans covered 73. 1% of the weld volumne from the head side. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the relief nozzle would have to be redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I.

Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.

No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 11 of 40 VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Grantinig Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for item number B03.110.005 was conducted using personnel qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda. Ultrasonic procedures complied with the requirements of ASME Section V, Article 4 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as amended by Section XI, Appendix I.IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-P System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed each refueling outage provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken.Specifically, system leak rate limitations imposed by Technical Specifications 3.4.13,"Reactor Coolant System Leakage," as well as reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provide additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 12 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Letdown Cooler High Pressure Injection System Letdown Cooler (tube-side)

Inlet Nozzle to Channel Body Weld Weld ID = 1-51 A- 18792-1 -V-2 Item Number/Summary Number = B03.150.001 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-D, Item Number B3.150 Fig. IWB-2500-7 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I IV. Impracticality of Compliance The channel body material is SA- 182 Gr. 316L stainless steel and the inlet nozzle material is stainless steel. This weld has a diameter of 3.00 inches and a wall thickness of.875 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 60.60% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 450, 600 and 70' shear waves and refracted longitudinal waves scans perpendicular to the weld covered 52.6% of the weld and base material from the channel body side. 45' shear wave scan parallel to the weld covered 68.6% of the weld and base material in two circumferential directions from the channel body side, weld and nozzle side. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the inlet nozzle would have to be redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I.

Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.

No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 13 of 40 VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for item number B03.150.001 was conducted using personnel qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda. Procedure used was in accordance with the requirements of ASME Section XI, Appendix I1I, of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda.IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-P System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed each refueling outage provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken.Specifically, system leak rate limitations imposed by Technical Specifications 3.4.13,"Reactor Coolant System Leakage,'

as well as reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provide additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 14 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Letdown Cooler High Pressure Injection System Letdown Cooler (tube-side)

Outlet Nozzle to Channel Body Weld Weld ID = 1-51 A- 18792-1 -V-6 Item Number/Summary Number = B03.150.002 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code,- 1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-l, Examination Category B-D, Item Number B3.150 Fig. IWB-2500-7 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I IV. Impracticality of Compliance The channel body material is SA- 182 Gr. 3 16L stainless steel and the outlet nozzle material is stainless steel. This weld has a diameter of 3.00 inches and a wall thickness of.875 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 60.60% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage reported represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 450, 60' and 700 shear waves and refracted longitudinal waves scans perpendicular to the weld covered 52.6% of the weld and base material from the channel body side. 450 shear wave scan parallel to the weld covered 68.6% of the weld and base material in two circumferential directions from the channel body side, weld and nozzle side. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the nozzle would have to be redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I.

Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.

No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 15 of 40 VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for item number B03.150.002 was conducted using personnel qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda. The procedure used was in accordance with the requirements of ASME Section XI, Appendix III, of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda.IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-P System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed each refueling outage provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken.Specifically, system leak rate limitations imposed by Technical Specifications 3.4.13,"Reactor Coolant System Leakage," as well as reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provide additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 16 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Class I Piping Weld Low Pressure Injection System Pipe to Valve ICF- I I Weld Weld ID = 1-53A-02-68L Item Number/Summary Number B09.011.015 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement RWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-A Item Number B9.1 I Fig. IWB-2500-8 (c), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume C-D-E-F IV. Impracticality of Compliance The valve material is A35 I GR. CF8M cast stainless steel and the pipe material is SA 376/TP 304 or 3 16 stainless steel seamless pipe. This weld has a diameter of 14.00 inches and a wall thickness of 1.250 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 36.70% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 450 shear wave circumferential scans, both clockwise and counter-clockwise covered 50% of the weld and base material; 45' and 60' shear wave scans perpendicular to the weld covered 46.6% of the weld and base material from one axial direction.

A supplemental scan using a 600 refracted longitudinal wave search unit covered 100% of the valve side from one axial direction but was not included in the percent of coverage.

The limitation was caused by the taper on the valve side of the weld and the cast stainless steel valve body material which prevented scanning from that side.In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the valve would have to be replaced with forged stainless steel and would have to be redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volumeC-D-E-F.

Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 17 of 40 V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests Radiography (RT) is not a desired option because RT is limited in the ability to detect expected degradation mechanisms such as thermal fatigue cracking and stress corrosion crack initiating at the pipe inside surface. Additionally, Radiography has not been qualified through performance demonstration.

VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for the item number B09.011.015 was conducted using personnel, equipment and procedures qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VIII Supplement.

2 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as administered by the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). in the case of this piping weld NRC has imposed requirements for coverage of stainless steel piping welds in IOCFR50.55a (b) (2) (xvi) (A) (1). This requires scanning of the weld and adjacent base material from four orthogonal directions.

If this requirement cannot be met then the NRC will not allow credit for coverage on the far side of the weld unless a demonstration test is passed with all flaws being on the far side of the weld. The demonstration requires detection, length sizing and through wall sizing of flaws with the sound beam passing through the austenitic weld metal. Performance demonstration qualifications for cast stainless steel (Appendix VIII, Supplement

9) is in course of preparation and current qualifications for piping do not address cast stainless steel components such as the valve body. Therefore credit for ultrasonic coverage is not claimed. Use of radiography (RT) to achieve more coverage has been evaluated and discarded because RT is less sensitive to service induced cracking and has not been subjected to the performance demonstration requirements in a manner similar to the ultrasonic method. While RT could in most cases provide more coverage the loss of sensitivity and lack of performance demonstration militates against its use.In addition to the B09.011 weld that relief is being requested for limited volume coverage, there were 15 additional B09.01 I welds that surface and volumetric examinations were performed on. The examinations didn't identify any recordable indications and 100% coverage was obtained on each of them. Twelve of the fifteen additional welds were from the Reactor Coolant System and three of the additional welds were from the Low Pressure Injection System.IWB-2500, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-P System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed each refueling outage provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 18 of 40 In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric, surface, and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken. Specifically, reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provides additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric, surface, and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 19 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Letdown Storage Tank High Pressure Injection System Letdown Storage Tank Lower Head to Shell Weld Weld ID = 1-LST-HD-SH-2 Item Number/Summary Number = C01.020.004 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-A, Item Number C 1.20 Fig. IWC-2500-1 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume A-B-C-D IV. Impracticality of Compliance The Letdown Storage Tank head and shell material is SA 240/T-304 stainless steel plate.This weld has a diameter of 96.0 inches (ID) and a wall thickness of .375 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 80.26% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 60' shear wave circumferential scans, both clockwise and counter-clockwise covered 80.26% of the weld and base material; 60' shear wave scans perpendicular to the weld covered 80.26% of the weld and base material from two axial directions.

The limitation was caused by four equally spaced-pads for support legs that prevented scanning in these areas. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the support legs would have to be removed to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume A-B-C-D. Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.

No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 20 of 40 VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for the item number C01.020.004 was conducted using personnel qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII f the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda. The procedure complied with the requirements of ASME Section XI, Appendix IIl, 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda.In addition to the C01.020 weld that relief is being requested for limited volume coverage, there was 1 additional CO1.020 weld that a volumetric examination was performed on. The examination didn't identify any recordable indications and 100%coverage was obtained on it. The additional CO 1.020 weld was the Letdown Storage Tank upper head to shell weld.IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-H System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed once each period provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric and pressure test), there are other activities

'Which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken.Specifically, system leak rate limitations imposed by Technical Specifications 3.4.13,"Reactor Coolant System Leakage" provide additional assurance that any leakage would be detected.prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations.

performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 21 of 40 I. ASME Code Component Affected Steam Generator I A Main Steam System Steam Generator IA Main Steam Nozzle to Shell Weld Weld ID = 1-SGA-W128 Item Number/Summary Number = C02.021.002 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-B, Item Number C2.21 Fig. IWC-2500-4 (a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume C-D-E-F IV. Impracticality of Compliance The main steam nozzle and steam generator shell material is SA-508 CL. 3a carbon steel.This weld has a diameter of 36.0 inches and a wall thickness of 5. 125 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 85.66% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 450 and 35' shear wave scans perpendicular and parallel to the weld in one axial direction and two circumferential directions and 0' longitudinal wave scans covered 73.14 % of the base material from the head side. 45' and 35' shear wave scans perpendicular and parallel to the weld in one axial direction and two circumferential directions and 0' longitudinal wave scans covered 98.17% of the weld volume from the head side. The limitation was caused by the nozzle design which limits the base material coverage in the parallel direction.

There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume C-D-E-F. Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests Radiography as an alternative is not feasible because access is not available for film placement.

No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 22 of 40 VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for the item number C02.021.002 wasconducted using personnel qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VII of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda. The procedures used complied with the requirements of ASME Section V, Article 4 as amended by ASME Section XI, Appendix I, 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda.In addition to the volumetric examination with limited coverage, Duke performed a surface examination (code required) on this C02.021 item and achieved 100% coverage.The result from the surface examination was acceptable.

IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-H System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed once each periodprovide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric, surface, and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken. Specifically, reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provides additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric, surface, and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 23 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Class 2 Piping Weld Low Pressure Injection System Pipe to Valve ILP-48 Weld Weld ID = 1-53A-01-29L Item Number/Summary Number= C05.011.033 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWC-2500, Table lWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-F-I, Item Number C5.1 I Fig. IWC-2500-7(a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume C-D-E-F IV. Impracticality of Compliance The valve material is A35 I GR. CF8M cast stainless steel and the pipe material is SA 376/TP 304 or 3 16 stainless steel seamless pipe. This weld has a diameter of 10.0 inches and a wall thickness of 1.00 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 37.50% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans perlormed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 450 'shear wave circumferential scans, both clockwise and counter-clockwise covered 50% of the weld and base material; 60' shear wave scan perpendicular to the weld covered 50% of the weld and base maiterial from one axial direction.

A supplemental scan using a 60' refracted longitudinal wave search unit covered 100% of the valve side but was not included in the percent of coverage.

The limitation was caused by the taper on the valve side of the weld and the cast stainless steel valve body material which prevented scanning from that side. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the valve would have to be replaced with forged stainless steel and would have to be redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee lnservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume C-D-E-F. Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 24 of 40 V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests No alternative examinations are planned for the-weld during the current inspection interval.

Radiography (RT) is not a desired option because-RT is limited in the ability to detect expected degradation mechanisms such as thermal fatigue cracking and stress corrosion crack initiating at the pipe inside surface. Additionally, Radiography has not been qualified through performance demonstration.

VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for the item number C05.011.033 was conducted using personnel, equipment and procedures qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VIII Supplement 2 of the ,1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as administered by the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In the case of this piping weld NRC has imposed requirements for coverage of stainless steel piping welds in IOCFR50.55a (b) (2) (xvi) (A) (1). This requires scanning of the weld and adjacent base material from four orthogonal directions.

If this requirement cannot be met then the NRC will not allow credit for coverage on the far side of the weld unless a demonstration test is passed with all flaws being on the far side of the weld. The demonstration requires detection, length sizing and through wall sizing of flaws with the sound beam passing through the austenitic weld metal. Performance demonstration qualifications for cast stainless steel, (Appendix VIII, Supplement

9) is in course of preparation and current qualifications for piping do not address caist stainless steel components such as the valve body. Therefore credit for ultrasonic coverage is not claimed. Use of radiography (RT) to achieve more coverage has been evaluated and discarded because RT is less sensitive to service induced cracking and has not been subjected to the performance demonstration requirements in a manner similar to the ultrasonic mnethod. While RT could in most cases provide more coverage the loss of sensitivity and lack of performance demonstration militates against its use.In addition to the volumetric examination with limited coverage, Duke performed a surface examination (code required) on this C05.011 item and achieved 100% coverage.The result from the surface examination was acceptable.

->, In addition to the six C05.011 welds of this relief request, there were seventeen additional C05.011 welds that-surface (PT) and volumetric examinations were performed on during the outage. The examinations didn't identify any reportable indications.

100% coverage was obtained on all the surface examinations, fifteen of the volumetric examinations obtained 100% coverage and 97.20% coverage was obtained on two of the volumetric examinations.

Two of the seventeen additional welds were from the Low Pressure Service Water System and fifteen of the additional welds were.from the Low Pressure Injection System.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 25 of 40 1WC-2500, Table- IWC-2500-l, Examination Category C-H System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed once each period provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric, surface, and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken. Specifically, reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provides additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure to the component.

The coimponent weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric, surface, and the pressure testing VT-2 exaiminations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 26 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Class 2 Piping Weld Low Pressure Injection System Pipe to Valve ILP-47 Weld Weld ID = 1-53A-02-64L Item Number/Summary Number = C05.011.039 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IwC-2500, Table 1WC-2500-1, Examination Category C-F-1, Item Number C5.1 I Fig. IWC-2500-7(a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume C-D-E-F IV. Impracticality of Compliance The valve material is A35 I GR. CF8M cast stainless steel and the pipe material is SA 376/TP 304 or 316 stainless steel seamless pipe. This weld has a diameter of 10.0 inches and a wall thickness of 1.00 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 37.50% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 450 shear wave circumferential scans, both clockwise and counter-clockwise covered 50% of the weld and base material; 60' shear wave scan perpendicular to the weld fr-om the pipe side covered 50% of the weld and base material from one axial direction.

A supplemental scan using a 60' refracted longitudinal wave from the pipe side covered 100% of the examination volume on the valve side in one axial direction but is not included in the percent of coverage.

The limitation was caused by the taper on the valve side of the weld and the cast stainless steel material which prevented scanning from that side. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the valve would have to be replaced with forged stainless steel and redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There were no recordable indications found during'the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume C-D-E-F. Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 27 of 40 V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Radiography (RT) is not a desired option because RT is limited in the ability to detect expected degradation mechanisms such as thermal fatigue cracking and stress corrosion crack initiating at the pipe inside surface. Additionally, Radiographyhas not been qualified through performance demonstration.

VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. I Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for the item number C05.011.039 was conducted using personnel, equipment and procedures qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VIII Supplement 2 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as administered by the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In the case of this piping weld NRC has imposed requirements for coverage of stainless steel piping welds in I OCFR50.55a (b) (2) (xvi) (A) (I). This requires scanning of the weld and adjacent base material from four orthogonal directions.

If this requirement cannot be met then the NRC will not allow credit for coverage on the far side of the weld unless a demonstration test is passed with all flaws being on the far side of the weld. The demonstration requires detection, length sizing and through wall sizing of flaws with the sound beam passing through the austenitic weld metal. Performance demonstration qualifications for cast stainless steel, (Appendix VIII, Supplement

9) is in course of preparation and current qualifications for piping do not address cast stainless steel components such as the valve body. Therefore credit for ultrasonic coverage is not claimed. Use of radiography (RT) to achieve more coverage has been evaluated and discarded because RT is less sensitive to service induced cracking and has not been subjected to the performance demonstration requirements in a manner similar to the ultrasonic method. While RT could in most cases provide more coverage the loss of sensitivity and lack of performance demonstration militates against its use.In addition to the volumetric examination with limited coverage, Duke performed a surface examination (code required) on this C05.011 item and achieved 100% coverage.The result from the surface examination was acceptable.

In addition to the six C05.01 I welds of this relief request, there were seventeen additional C05.01 I welds that surface (PT) and volumetric examinations were performed on during the outage. The examinations didn't identify any reportable indications.

100% coverage was obtained on all the surface examinations, fifteen of the volumetric examinations obtained 100% coverage and 97.20% coverage was obtained on two of the volumetric examinations.

Two of the seventeen additional welds were from the Low Pressure Service Water System and fifteen of the additional welds were from the Low Pressure Injection System.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 28 of 40 1 IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-H System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed once each period provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric, surface, and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken. Specifically, reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provides additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based off the coverage and results of the volumetric, surface, and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 29 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Class 2 Piping Weld Low Pressure Injection System Pipe to Flow Restrictor Weld Weld ID = 1LP-210-72 Item Number/Summary Number C05.011.076 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998,Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWC-2500, Table 1WC-2500-1, Examination Category C-F-1, Item Number C5.11 Fig. IWC-2500-7(a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume C-D-E-F IV. Impracticality of Compliance The flow restrictor material is SA 351 GR. CF8 cast stainless steel and the pipe material is SA 376/TP 316 stainless steel seamless pipe. This weld has a diameter of 10.0 inches and a wall thickness of 1.00 inches.During' the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 37.50% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 450 shear wave circumferential scans, both clockwise and coLunter-clockwise covered 50% of the weld and base material; 550 shear wave scan perpendicular.to the weld from the pipe side covered 50% of the weld and base material from one axial direction.

A supplemental scan using a 60' refracted longitudinal wave from the pipe side covered 100% of the examination volume On the far side of the weld but is not included in the percent of coverage.

The limitation was caused by the flow restrictor geometry and cast stainless steel material which preyented scanning from that side. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the flow restrictor would have to be replaced with forged material and redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There was one geometric recordable indication found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume C-D-E-F. Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 30 of 40 V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Radiography (RT) is not a desired option because RT is limited in the ability to detect expected degradation mechanisms such as thermal fatigue cracking and stress corrosion crack initiating at the pipe inside surface. Additionally, Radiography has not been qualified through performance demonstration.

VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for the item number C05.011.076 was conducted using personnel, equipment and procedures qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VIII Supplement 2 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as administered by the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In the case of this piping weld NRC has imposed requirements for coverage of stainless steel piping welds in I0CFR50.55a (b) (2) (xvi) (A) (1). This requires scanning of the weld and adjacent base material from four orthogonal directions.

If this requirement cannot be met then the NRC will not allow credit for coverage on the far side of the weld unless a demonstration test is passed with all flaws being on the far side of the weld. The demonstration requires detection, length sizing and through wall sizing of flaws with the sound beam passing through the austenitic weld metal. Performance demonstration qualifications for cast stainless steel, (Appendix VIII, Supplement

9) is in course of preparation and current qualifications for piping do not address cast stainless steel components such-as the valve body. Therefore credit for ultrasonic coverage is not claimed. Use of radiography (RT) to achieve more coverage has been evaluated and discarded because RT is less sensitive to service induced cracking and has not been subjected to the performance demonstration requirements in a manner similar to the ultrasonic method. While RT could in most cases provide more coverage the loss of sensitivity and lack of performance demonstration militates against its use.In addition to the volumetric examination with limited coverage, Duke performed a surface examination (code required) on this C05.011 item and achieved 100% coverage.The result from the surface examination was acceptable.

In addition to the six C05.011 welds of this relief request, there were seventeen additional C05.01 I welds that surface (PT) and volumetric examinations were performed on during the outage. The examinations didn't identify any reportable indications.

100% coverage was obtained on all the surface examinations, fifteen of the volumetric examinations obtained 100% coverage and 97.20% coverage was obtained on two of the volumetric examinations.

Two of the seventeen additional welds were from the Low Pressure Service Water System and fifteen of the additional welds were from the Low Pressure Injection System.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 31 of 40 IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-H System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed once each period provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity..In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric, surface, and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken. Specifically, reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provides additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric, surface, and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 32 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Class 2 Piping Weld Low Pressure Injection System Pipe to Flow Restrictor Weld Weld ID = I LP-210-73 Item Number/Summary Number = C05.011.077 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-F- 1, Item Number C5.11 Fig. IWC-2500-7(a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume C-D-E-F IV. Impracticality of Compliance The flow restrictor material is SA 35 1 GR. CF8 cast stainless steel and the pipe material is SA.376/TP 3 16 stainless steel seamless pipe. This weld has a diameter of 10.0 inches and a wall thickness of 1.00 inches.During.the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 37.50% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 450 shear wave circumferential scans, both clockwise and counter-clockwise covered 50% of the weld and base material; 55' shear wave scan perpendicular to the weld from the pipe side covered 50% of the weld and base material from one axial direction., A supplemental scan using a 60' refracted longitudinal wave from the pipe side covered 100% of the examination volume on the far side of the weld but is not included in the percent of coverage.

The limitation was caused by the flow restrictor geometry and cast stainless steel material which prevented scanning from that side. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the flow restrictor would have to be replaced with forged stainless steel material and redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There was one geometric recordable indication found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume C-D-E-F. Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 33 of 40 V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Radiography (RT) is not a desired option because RT is limited in the ability to detect expected degradation mechanisms such as thermal fatigue cracking and stress corrosion crack initiating at the pipe inside surface. Additionally, Radiography has not been qualified through performance demonstration.

VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for the item number C05.011.077 was conducted using personnel, equipment and procedures qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VIII Supplement 2 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as administered by the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In the case of this piping weld NRC has imposed requirements for coverage of stainless steel piping welds in IOCFR50.55a (b) (2) (xvi) (A) (1). This requires scanning of the weld and adjacent base material from four orthogonal directions.

If this requirement cannot be met then the NRC will not allow credit for coverage on the far side of the weld unless a demonstration test is passed with all flaws being on the far side of the weld. The demonstration requires detection, length sizing and through wall sizing of flaws with the sound beam passing through the austenitic weld metal. Performance demnonstration qualifications for cast stainless steel, (Appendix VIII, Supplement

9) is in course of preparation and current qualifications for piping do not address cast stainless steel components such as the flow restrictor.

Therefore credit for ultrasonic coverage is not claimed. Use of radiography (RT) to achieve more coverage has been evaluated and discarded because RT is less sensitive to service induced cracking and has not been subjected to the performance demonstration requirements in a manner similar to the ultrasonic method. While RT could in most cases provide more coverage the loss of sensitivity and lack of performance demonstration militates against its use.In addition to the volumetric examination with limited coverage, Duke performed a surface examination (code required) on this C05.011 item and achieved 100% coverage.The result from the surface examination was acceptable.

In addition to the six C05.01 I welds of this relief request, there were seventeen additional C05.01 I welds that surface (PT) and volumetric examinations were performed on during the outage. The examinations didn't identify any reportable indications.

100% coverage was obtained on all the surface examinations, fifteen of the volumetric examinations obtained 100% coverage and 97.20% coverage was obtained on two of the volumetric examinations.

Two of the seventeen additional welds were from the Low Pressure Service Water System and fifteen of the additional welds were from the Low Pressure Injection System.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 34 of 40 IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-H System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed once each period provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric, surface, and pressure test), there are othe.r activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken. Specifically, reactor building normal sump rate monitoring, provides additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric, surface, and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 35 of 40 1. ASME Code Component Affected Class 2 Piping Weld Low Pressure Service Water System Pipe to Valve ILPSW-1062 Weld Weld ID = ILPS-746-2 Item Number/Summary Number = C05.011.078 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-F- 1, Item Number C5.1 I Fig. IWC-2500-7(a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume C-D-E-F IV. Impracticality of Compliance The valve material is SA I 82/TP F3 16 stainless steel (forged) and the pipe material is SA 312/TP 316L stainless steel seamless pipe. This weld has a diameter of 6.0 inches and a wall thickness of .432 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 62.50% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage represents the aggregate coverage fr-om all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The coverage from each scan was as follows: 450 shear wave circumferential scans, both clockwise and counter-clockwise covered 100% of the weld and base material; 60' shear wave scan perpendicular to the weld from the pipe side covered 50% of the weld and base material fr'om one axial direction.

A supplemental scan using a 700 shear wave from the pipe side covered 100% of the examination volume on the far side of the weld but is not included in the percent of coverage.

The limitation was caused by the taper on the valve side of the weld which prevented scanning from that side. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the valve would have to be redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of this weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume C-D-E-F. Therefore, the available coverage will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 36 of 40 V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Radiography (RT) is not a desired option because RT is limited in the ability to detect expected degradation mechanisms such as thermal fatigue cracking and stress corrosion crack initiating at the pipe inside surface. Additionally, Radiography has not been qualified through performance demonstration.

The ultrasonic (UT) techniques, though limited in coverage by virtue of the requirements in IOCFR50.55a, have been qualified through performance demonstration and are considered superior to RT for this application.

Although the PDI does not offer a single sided qualification for stainless steel piping, circumferential flaws on the far side of stainless steel welds were detected during the performance demonstration.

VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for the item number C05.011.078 was conducted using personnel, equipment and procedures qualified in accordance with ASME Section X1, Appendix VIii Supplement 2 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as administered by the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDi). In the case of this piping weld NRC has imposed requirements for coverage of stainless steel piping welds in 10CFR50.55a (b) (2) (xvi) (A) (1). This requires scanning of the weld and adjacent base material from four orthogonal directions.

If this requirement cannot be met then the NRC will not allow credit for coverage on the far side of the weld unless a demonstration test is passed with all flaws being on the far side of the weld. Therefore credit for ultrasonic coverage is not claimed. The demonstration requires detection, length sizing and through wall sizing of flaws with the sound beam passing through the austenitic weld metal. Although the PDI does not offer a single sided qualification for stainless steel piping, circumferential flaws on the far side of stainless steel welds were detected during the performance demonstration.

Use of radiography (RT) to achieve more coverage has been evaluated and discarded because RT is less sensitive to service induced cracking and has not been subjected to the performance demonstration requirements in a manner similar to the ultrasonic method. While RT could in most cases provide more coverage the loss of sensitivity and lack of performance demonstration militates against its use.In addition to the volumetric examination with limited coverage, Duke performed a surface examination (code required) on this C05.01I item and achieved 100% coverage.The result from the surface examination was acceptable.

In addition to the six C05.011 welds of this relief request, there were seventeen additional C05.01 I welds that surface (PT) and volumetric examinations were performed on during the outage. The examinations didn't identify any reportable indications.

100% coverage Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 37 of 40 was obtained on all the surface examinations, fifteen of the volumetric examinations obtained 100% coverage and 97.20% coverage was obtained on two of the volumetric examinations.

Two of the seventeen additional welds were from the Low Pressure Service Water System and fifteen of the additional welds were from the Low Pressure Injection System.IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-H System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed once each period provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric surface, and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken. Specifically, visual observations performed during operator rounds, provide additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric, surface, and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 38 of 40 I. ASME Code Component Affected Class 2 Piping Weld Low Pressure Service Water System Flange to Pipe Weld Weld ID = ILPS-751-16 Item Number/Summary Number = C05.011.085 II. Applicable Code Edition and Addenda ASME Section XI Code -1998 Edition thru the 2000 Addenda III. Applicable Code Requirement IWC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-F-I, Item Number C5.11 Fig. IWC-2500-7(a), 100% Volume Coverage of Examination Volume C-D-E-F IV. Impracticality of Compliance The flange material is SA 182 GR. F316L forged stainless steel and the pipe material is SA 3 12/TP 3 16L stainless steel seamless pipe.. This weld has a diameter of 6.0 inches and a wall thickness of .432 inches.During the ultrasonic examination of this-weld, 62.50% coverage of the required examination volume was obtained.

The percentage of coverage represents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and adjacent base material.

The, coverage from each scan was as follows: 45' shear wave circumferential scans, both clockwise and counter-clockwise covered 100% of the weld and base material; 600 shear wave scan perpendicular to the weld from the pipe side covered 50% of the weld and base material from one axial direction from the pipe side. A supplemental scan using a 70' shear wave from the pipe side covered 100% of the examination volume on the far side of the weld but is not included in the percent of coverage.

The limitation was caused by the taper on the flange side of the weld which prevented scanning from that side. In order to scan all of the required volume for this weld, the flange would have to be redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.

There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of thig weld.The Oconee Inservice Inspection Plan allows the use of Code Case N-460, which requires greater than 90% volumetric coverage of examination volume C-D-E-F. Therefore, the available coverage.will not meet the acceptance criteria of this Code Case.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 39 of 40 V. Proposed Alternate Examinations or Tests No alternative examinations are planned for the weld during the current inspection interval.

Radiography (RT) is not a desired option because RT is limited in the ability to detect expected degradation mechanisms such as thermal fatigue cracking and stress corrosion crack initiating at the pipe inside surface. Additionally, Radiography has not been qualified through performance demonstration.

VI. Implementation Schedule and Duration This request is for the duration of the fourth inservice inspection interval, currently scheduled to end on July 15, 2013.VII. Justification for Granting Relief Ultrasonic examination of the weld for the item number C05.01 1.085 was conducted using personnel, equipment and procedures qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VIII Supplement 2 of the 1998 Edition with the 2000 Addenda as administered by the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI). In the case of this piping weld NRC has imposed requirements for coverage of stainless steel piping welds in IOCFR50.55a (b) (2) (xvi) (A) (1). This requires scanning of the weld and adjacent base material from four orthogonal directions.

If this requirement cannot be met then the NRC will not allow credit for coverage on the far side of the weld unless a demonstration test is passed with all flaws being on the far side of the weld. Therefore credit for ultrasonic coverage is not claimed. The demonstration requires detection, length sizing and through wall sizing of flaws with the sound beam passing through the austenitic weld metal. Although the PDI does not offer a single sided qualification for stainless steel piping, circumferential flaws on the far side of stainless steel welds were detected during the performance demonstration.

Use of radiography (RT) to achieve more coverage has been evaluated and discarded because RT is less sensitive to service induced cracking and has not been subjected to the performance demonstration requirements in a manner similar to the ultrasonic method. While RT could in most cases provide more coverage the loss of sensitivity and lack of performance demonstration militates against its use.In addition to the volumetric examination with limited coverage, Duke performed a surface examination (code required) on this C05.01 I item and achieved 100% coverage.The result from the surface examination was acceptable.

In addition to the six C05.01 I welds of this relief request, there were seventeen additional C05.01 I welds that surface (PT) and volumetric examinations were performed on during the outage. The examinations didn't identify any reportable indications.

100% coverage was obtained on all the surface examinations, fifteen of the volumetric examinations obtained 100% coverage and 97.20% coverage was obtained on two of the volumetric examinations.

Two of the seventeen additional welds were from the Low Pressure Service Water System and fifteen of the additional welds were from the Low Pressure Injection System.

Relief Request 07-ON-002 Page 40 of 40[WC-2500, Table IWC-2500-1, Examination Category C-H System Leakage Tests and VT-2 visual examinations performed once each period provide adequate assurance of pressure boundary integrity.

In addition to the above Code required examinations (volumetric, surface, and pressure test), there are other activities which provide a high level of confidence that, in the unlikely event that leakage did occur through this weld it would be detected and proper action taken. Specifically, visual observations performed during operator rounds, provide additional assurance that any leakage would be detected prior to gross failure of the component.

The component weld was rigorously inspected by volumetric NDE methods during construction and verified to be free from unacceptable fabrication defects. Based on the coverage and results of the volumetric, surface, and the pressure testing VT-2 examinations performed, it is Duke's position that this combination of examinations provides a reasonable assurance of quality and safety.

REQUEST RELIEF 07-ON-002 ATTACHMENT A Total Number of Pages = 108 Pages 1-10 are for weld 1-PZR-WP15 (B03.110.001)

Pages 11-19 are for weld 1-PZR-WP34 (B03.110.002)

Pages 20-30 are for weld 1-PZR-WP33-3 (B03.110.003)

Pages 31-39 are for weld 1-PZR-WP33-2-(B03.110.004)

Pages 40-48 are for weld 1-PZR-WP33-1 (B03.110.005)

Pages 49-56 are for weld 1-51A-18792-1-V-2 (B03.150.001)

Pages 57-64 are for weld 1-51A-18792-1-V-6 (B03.150.002)

Pages 65-67 are for weld 1-53A-02-68L (B09.011.015)

Pages 68-72 are for weld 1-LST-HD-SH-2 (CO1.020.004)

Pages 73-79 are for weld 1-SGA-W128 (C02.021.002)

Pages 80-84 are for weld 1-53A-01-29L (C05.011.033)

Pages 85-89 are for weld 1-53A-02-64L (C05.011.039)

Pages 90-94 are for weld 1LP-210-72 (C05.011.076)

Pages95-100 are for weld 1LP-210-73 (C05.011.077)

-_Pages 101-104 are for weld 1LPS-746-2 (C05.011.078)

Pages 105-108 are for weld 1LPS-751-16 (C05.011.085)

AT1ACHM~iff PAGE I F* JOB Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: BO Workscope:

UT Vessel Examination 1 3.110.001 Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-640 3 1677947 Outage No.: ONSI-23 Report No.: UT.06-494 Page: 1 of I ISI Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

B-D- /B3.4 10.1 Location:*

Drawing No.: ISI-OCN1-002

==

Description:==

Nozzle to Head System ID: 50 ComponentlID:

B03.1 10,001/1 -PZR-WP1 5 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

4,750/ 15,250 Limitations:

Yes- See Limitation Report Attached with UT Report 495 Start Time: 1010 Finish Time: 1028 Examination Surface: Inside LII Outside [ Surface Condition:

GROUND FLUSH Lo Location:

9.1.1.1 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 54 'F Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-519 Angle Used 0 45 45T 60 60T Scanning dB 44.0 Indication(s):

Yes Li No 0. Scan Coverage:

Upstream [] .Downstream Li CW Li CCW _i Comments: FC 06-04 See Attached Coverage Plots Results: Accept [] Reject E] Info L]Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No -56,92% Reviewed Previous Data: Yes Examiner Level I-N Si .Date Reviewer Signature Date Griebel, David M. -11/12/2006

.-Examiner Level Il-N Signature

.Date Site Review Signature Date Tucker, David K. 11/12/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date t/ I-A11ACHMENT A PAGE ;. OF /ob Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No,: BO Workscope:

UT Vessel Examination I 3,110,001 1 Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No,: NDE-820 151 2 1677947 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-495 Page: I of 3 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat/Item:

B-D- /B3.1 10.1 Location: Drawing No.: ISI-OCNI-002

==

Description:==

Nozzle to Head System ID: 50 Component ID: B03.110.001

/1-PZR-WP15 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

4,750 /15.250 Limitations:

Yes -See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 1030 Finish Time: 1130 Examination Surface: Inside F] Outside [] Surface Condition:

GROUND FLUSH Lo Location, 9,1.1.1 .Wo Location:

Centerline, of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL 11 Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 54 °F Cal, Report No.: CAL-06-520, CAL-06-521 Angle Used 0 45 45T 60 60T Scanning dB 66.0 66.0 72.5 Indication(s):

Yes F] No [- Scan Coverage:

Upstream F Downstream f] CW 7v CCW [Comments: FC 06-06 See Attached Coverage Plots Results: Accept [/ Reject F] Info __Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%; No -56.92% Reviewed Previous Data: Yes Examiner Level Ii-N , , ignJe Date Reviewer ,,Signature

.Date Griebel, David M. 11/12/2006

-, .-Examiner Level 1IN.N Signature Date Site Review SIkjan re bate Tucker, David K. _ 11/12/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date N/A -"

-AIIACHMENTA PA6E 3 OF i08 DUKE ENERGY COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #: B03.1 10.001 Component ID I-PZR-WPI5 remarks: Z NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION SURGE LINE NOZZLE-- LIMITED SCAN l Z 2 Z 1 Z 2 Z cw Z ccw WELD FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO C/L to BEYOND ANGLE: Z 0 Z 45 Z 60 other FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG-- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION[-] LIMITED SCAN 1 [ 2 E] 1 -2 7 cw F ccw FROM L toL L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: E] 0 E] 45 E 60 other FROM DEG to DEG-- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION-LIMITED SCAN ]1 -2 D 1 -2 [ cw El ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: El 0 El 45 El 60 other FROM DEG to DEG El NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION E]LIMITED SCAN El1 -12 1 l2 [ cw -- ccw FROM L " to L INCHES FROM WO to

• Sketch(s) attached ANGLE: El 0 El. 45 El 60 other FROM DEG to DEG Z yes El No Prepared By: 'Dave Griebel .2§ Level: ii Date: 11-12-2006 Sheet 2 Reviewed By:

AIIACHMENT A PASE 4 OF tob RASE METAL COVERAGE CALCuLATiONS SCAN ANGLE BEAM AREA AREA PERCENT AREA DIRECTION EXAMINED REQUIRED COVERAGE C-D-E-F 45 S2 15.63 15.63 100 C-D-E-F 60 S2 15.63 15.63 100 C-D-E-F 45 CW 15.63 15.63 100 C-D-E-F 45 CCW 15.63 15.63 100 C-D-E-F 60 CW 15.63 15.63 100 C-D-E-F 60 CCW 15.63 15.63 100 C-D-E-F 0 STRAIGHT 11.88 15.63 76.00 A-B-G-H 45 S2 5.63 10.21 54.16 A-B-G-H 60 S2 6.37 10.21 62.40 A-B-G-H 45 CW 1.69 10.21 16.56 A-B-G-U 45 CCW 1.69 10.21 16.56 A-B-G-H 60 CW 1.69 10.21 16.56 A-B-G-H 60 CCW 1.69 10.21 16.56 A-B-G-H 0 , STRAIGHT 0.00 10.21 0.00 BASE METAL TOTAL AGGRRAGATE COVERAGE 61.34 WELD METAL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS SCAN ANGLE BEAM AREA AREA PERCENT AREA DIRECTION EXAMINED REQUIRED COVERAGE B-C-F-G 45 SI 0.00 8.54 0.00 B-C-F-G 60 SI 0.00 8.54 0.00 B-C-F-G 45 S2 7.34 8.54 85.95 B-C-F-G 60 S2 7.50, 8.54 87.82 B-C-.F-G 45. CW 6.37 8.54 74.59 B-C-F-G 45 CCW 6,37 8.54 74.59 B-C-F-G 60 CW 6.37 8.54 74.59 B-C-F-G 60 CCW 6.37 8.54 74.59 B-C-F-G 0 STRAIGHT 0.00 8.54 0.00 WELD METAL TOTAL AGGRRAGATE COVERAGE 52.49 TOTAL BASE/WELD AGGREGATE COVERAGE 56.92 ITEM NO.WELD NO.INSPECTOR DATE 5c)3 .- l,,. nJ.l Page "3 of_.2_.

~.~-Z. .O\05-zY mf. C-ý C-. --k,5,ý3 x.50.5-7Z& ~~Th'%~w~ -~. ~ Tz

,tv 3ý..21. -" C--3'3 t4t~ r-L--,?-L4~ ~ -C-- ~ ~2~-,o (,'4 ,0 -5,"53 z,-',(.tL 9 0 0= lc)lzqlq7

-

o.'7 -7 z L4 7 7 i o.-tp-b 2ý -, II >-LL4 A ~$.3 -~2 14 'S.0 U: fol Z'4 ki ru -~LJ~

I -F F -F ,2-'-p-73,4 L7L~2m.w -M 75 12 001.0-A:

W PISJ-* .51 A--43 , a, _-4*~I-~kt?<-I~

N 7/~Tj w I..-4-C-, 01 A I ACHMEIT A PAGE 01 OF 1.66 Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: BO Workscope:

UT Vessel EAamination 1 1 3.110.002 Procedure:

Procedure Rev,: Work Order No.: NDE-640 3 1667947 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-406 Page: 1 of I ISl Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

B-D- /B3.110.2 Location: Drawing No.: ISI-OCN1-002

==

Description:==

Nozzle to Head System ID: 50 Component ID: B03.110.002

/1-PZR-WP34 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

4.750 /7.750 Limitations:

Yes-See Limitation Calculations attached to Report UT-06-407 Start Time: 1152 Finish Time: 1201 Examination Surface: Inside [] Outside D] Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.2.3 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 88 °F Cal. Report No., CAL-06-413 Angle Used 0 45' 45T 60 60T Scanning dB 37.6 Indication(s):

Yes [] No [ Scan' Coverage:

Upstream D Downstream R] CW W CCW [Comments: FC 06-04 Results: Accept [] Reject D] Info D_Percent Of Coverage Obtained>

90%:. No-67.48%..

Reviewed Previous Data: " Yes Examiner Level II -Date Reviewer Signature Leeper, Winfred C. .10/13/2006 S (o -a Examiner Level Il-N Signatur Date Site Rev~w Signature Date Tucker, David K. --10/13/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Rev Signature Date N/A .,/// 4/

AIIAC I4ERI A PAGE i1. OF /68 Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: BO Workscope:

UT Vessel Examination 1 3,110.002 ISI Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-820 2 1667947 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: K,,UT-06-407 Page: 1 of 8 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

B-D- /B3.110.2 Location: Drawing No.: ISI-OCN1 -002

Description:

Nozzle to Head System ID: 50 Component ID: B03.110.002

/1-PZR-WP34 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

4.750 / 7.750 Limitations:

Yes-See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 1202 Finish Time: 1220 Examination Surface: Inside F] Outside [] Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.2.3 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.:. FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770.

Surface Temp.: 88 'F Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-414, CAL-06-415 Angle Used 0 45 45T 60 60T Scanning dB 64.5 64,5 72.5 72.5 Indication(s):

Yes [] No [/ Scan Coverage:

Upstream [] Downstream ov CW F.] CCW []Comments: Results: Accept Reject D] Info D-]Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No -67.48% Reviewed Previous Data: Yes Examiner Level II g re Date Reviewer Signature Date Leeper, Winfred C. 10/13/2006 Examiner Level II.N Signature Date Site Review Signature Date Tucker, David K. 10/13/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANI Signature Date N/A _ ___ ___ __

AI1ABHENI A PAGE /3 OF log DUKE ENERGY COMPANY _ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #: B03.110.002 Component ID 1-PZR-WP34 remarks: Z NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Due to Nozzle Configuration

[-- LIMITED SCAN E-] 1 2 Z -1 2 M cw Z ccw FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO 1.75 to Beyond ANGLE: E 0 Z 45 Z 60 other FROM o DEG to 360. DEG I-I NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION D LIMITED SCAN -i1 i-2 i 1 -2 i-I cw [ ccw FROM L to L _INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: [] 0 [] 45 [] 60 other FROM DEG to DEG iI NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION--LIMITED SCAN [i 1 -2 D- D2-']cw [-ccw _FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO -to _ANGLE: [] 0 [] 45 Li 60 other FROM DEG to DEG L] NO SCAN L-- LIMITED SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION D D1 2 -Cw -ccw[D1i1 D-2 FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: E] 0 El 45 [--]6 0 o ther FROM DEG to DEG Sketch(s) attached[fyes .LI] No Prepared By: Larry 8 Reviewed By: Q t 1 ATTACHMENT A PAGE /i cF /OF PZR SPRAY NOZZLE ONS I EOC 23 Item # B03.110.002 Component ID I-PZR-WP 34 Weld Coverage Scan Angle % of Coverage SI 45 95.1 S2 45 0 S1 60 96.3 S2 60 0 CW 45 96.3 CCW 45 96.3 CW 60 96.3 CCW 60 96.3 0 98.8 675.4 675.4/ 9 =75%Base Metal Coverage Scan Angle % of Coverage SI 45 79.6 S2 45 0 SI 60 88.3 S2 60 0 CW 45 74.2 CCW 45 74.2 CW 60 74.2 CCW 60 74.2 0 74.9 539.6 539.6 / 9 = 59.96 %Aggregate Co erage: Weld + Base / 2 = 67.48% Coverage Insp. Dt Reviewed By: Date I0Ifo., ANJ Review 1,1k Date W 66 Page 3 of b 1 Qb÷+* JJk-zj/t&1<I/A 4 1 2 , 4 _q, q ". , ., (- .2, o iL /i. /i 1-__<I.h Su-!AD/ 8-ef sr)-X io " i 1,8i-5 1 x /.,I P' l ol "= -6 U- ( .N, 2 c~v+-QlAi S0ptJC I SOAL,6 J,O" -: 1,0" CA,~7/ 7/6 SCALE 0=CP c<-1/oD/A I QS " L- +? ~ k /9 C3/,~6~ A A Losh 2/s-r /~4 cC Vi ý L- ()'2??A <6 e //Jcl 2 (A A cE J ia f ý7 ",'Vl-ts)951/NJ 17Zý's 3 Ile, I I:,'- IN ..,d,u ".I ,811 ( ;, " X,/'0 +/- -r', X "/ ,," <,78X _ .,<- AL 0 1 C,, -c4 , ,'1-c ?l/, ,.. ý' -1 1. ýr /)..- A -g ,7 I % k 0)/J tý-r r, -'fp /I --I ,., !Cl K c? u 4 CE-2 I-Fl/I/.!0,: o.43 , D/A7.\- ~Su(?~j 1~(~~ I-I IýSck( /.0"?,

o LAL C ,7-6C + Z * ;/,a~~ vc."+," L 4c, A JS" J-a"-4 ----------.,x¢/ 6,4_ __ ___ __c D__ __ 4 2/K~)P t-i2o -f)"?2 oLc 6h iec -n-73A -7j ( /A!doo'z21j/-, , .7//ill I I/7L7D MA T ,or ".* 0.J275.= O. coo- A 0c-:5-L~Q\3_z 4t)-~ ~.i~ \~-5-'N C Y S. -o&J(?///~&

A.3ACE 1, -/, o "

ATIACHMENT A PAGE ab OIF 168 Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: B0 Workscope:

UT Vessel Examination 1 3.110.003 Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-640 3 1667947 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-408 Page: 1 of 1 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat/Item:

B-D- /B3.110.3 Location: Drawing No.: ISI-OCN1-002

==

Description:==

Nozzle to Head System ID: 50 Component ID: B03.110.003

/1-PZR-WP33-3 Size/Length:

NIA Thickness/Diameter:

4.750 / 6.875 Limitations:

Yes -See Limitation Calculations attached to Report No. UT-06-409 Start Time: 1202 Finish Time: 1207 Examination Surface: Inside [ Outside [ Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.2.3 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 88 °F Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-413 Angle Used 0 45 45T 60 60T Scanning dB 37.6 Indication(s):

Yes D NoW[ Scan Coverage:

Upstream 0 Downstream

[] CW 0] CCWI[]Comments: FC 06-04 Results: Accept [] Reject D] Info [_Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No-62.8% Reviewed Previous Data: Yes Examiner Level II-N 5, gigna3 e Date Revie Signature te Mauldin, Larry E. 10/13/2006 Examiner Level II-N zig ,na Date Site Review Signature Date Griebel, David M. 10/13/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Revi Signature Date N/A 24d AIIACBMENI A PAGE a/ flF 16s Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: B10 Workscope:

UT Vessel Examination 1 3.110.003 Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-820 2 1667947 Outage No.: ONSI-23 Report No.: UT-06-409 Page: 1 of 10 ISI Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

B-D- /B3.110.3 Location: Drawing No.: ISI-OCN1-002

==

Description:==

Nozzle to Head System ID: 50 Component ID: B03.110.003

/1-PZR-WP33-3 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

4.750 / 6.875 Limitations:

Yes-See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 1208 Finish Time: 1228 Examination Surface: Inside [] Outside nv Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.2.3 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 88 'F Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-414, CAL-06-415 Angle Used 0145 45T 60 60T Scanning dB 64.5 64.5 72.5.. 72.5 Indication(s):

Yes [] No n Scan Coverage:

Upstream [] Downstream W CW W CCW R]Comments: Results: Accept W Reject D] Info D_Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No-62.8% Reviewed Previous Data: Yes Examiner Level I,-N Si nat re Date Reviewer " Signature--

Date Mauldin, Larry E. 10/13/200613'006

/: (Examiner Level II-N. ,gn,, 9 Date Site Review Signature Date Griebel, David M. 10/13/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date N/A __ _ _ __ _ __

A11ACHMENT A PAGE aa Df/o8 Site/Unit:

Summary No.: Workscope:

Ultrasonic Inaication Report Oconee /B03.1 10.003 IsI Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-820 2 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-409 Page: 2 of 10 1667947 Search Unit Angle: 60 Wo Location:

Weld Centerline Lo Location:

9.2.3 O o Piping Welds () Ferritic Vessels > 2"T o Other Wo wa CL Wi W2 MID Metal Path Wmax Distance From Wo To. S.U. At Maximum Response RBR Remaining Back Reflection Wl Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)L. Distance From Datum W2 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)Comments:

After reviewing previous data and plotting indication, it was determined that indication

1. 1 was geometric., This was due to inner radius geometry.--------------

DIAM Scan Indication

% W Forward Backward Li L L2 RBR Remarks# No. Of Max Of Max Of Max Of Max Of Amp.DAC W MP W1 MP W2 MP Max Max 1 1 50% 5.2 8.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 19.5 N/A N/A 360° Int. Indication Examiner Level II-N i nat re Date Reviewer Signature Date Mauldin, Larry E. 10/13/2006

/6) "n t-Examiner Level II-N ý,atU,2 Date Site Review Signature Date Griebel, David M. 1 0/13/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date AN)I Review Signature Date N/A_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __V..-

A 11 AtCMENT A PAGE OF/0 8 DUKE ENERGY COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #: B03.110.003 Component ID 1-PZR-WP33-3 remarks: Z NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Due to Nozzle Configuration F- LIMITED SCAN 2 Z -1 2 Z cw Z ccw FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO 1.75 to Beyond ANGLE: X 0 Z 45 Z 60 other FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG D-1 NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION F-- LIMITED SCAN L-- 1 --2 [- 1 [-112 [- cw --ccw FROM L toL L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: [j 0 [] 45 [1 60 other FROM DEG to DEG-- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION[F- LIMITED SCAN i1 112 -i1 [-12 I-cw [1]ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 0 0 [1 45 [1 60 other FROM DEG to DEG-- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION-LIMITED SCAN .1 117 2 --i 1 -2 [D cw 0 ccw FROM L to L -INCHES FROM WO to Sketch(s) attached ANGLE: E] 0 0 45 []0 other _ FROM DEG to DEG 1 yes E- No Prepared By: Larry Maul in Level: 11 Date: 10-13-2006 Sheet 3 of 10 Reviewed By: Date: Authorized 1n Date,~71 ý 0)_ & L ATIACHMENT A PA6E OF ioýA~ZZ I1ý 1ýr-"oJ. /ý/O cOD-,,AL,o3 ,,,.0 3 " /-) ~ Vj AIIACHMENTA MASE A5 OF ,o8 PZR RELIEF NOZZLE ONS I EOC 23 Item # B03.110.003 Component ID 1-PZR-WP 33-3 Weld Coverage Scan Angle % of Coverage S1 45 93.7 S2 45 0'SI 60 96.2 S2 60 0 CW 45 92.4 CCW 45 92.4 CW 60 92.4 CCW 60 92.4, 0 -98.7 658.2 658.2/ 9 =73.1%Base Metal Coverage Scan Angle % of Coverage S1 45 74 S2 45 0 S1 60 78.4 S2 60 0 CW 45> 63 CCW 45 63 CW 60 63 CCW 60 63 0 68.1 472.5 472.5 / 9 = 52.5%-Aggregat overage: Weld + Base / 2 = 62.8% Coverage n .Date1((6 6 Reviewed By: " Date a,(., ANII Review Date/Page ':5 of I c)

LLJ-IA 1 -5 C '/0/ N F~~( G Y(D-CoH I ~~~ ~ 1 8*. 5ý3 4Se la,~~uZ.3y,.- 2 ,_ _ _ _ _ _ 00'2 1ý Ir 2..2 78, IA N Pt/t S.

• - ~,-=3.. -JhsP~J'D/J c/&2~4c~6~JOR / aF + zc b 43 D CI -///C4&7YX 1, o "X.2.)V 0Q<Z)1AC SA~ ~YIAr&i~L

-Ak~-~ 6-! LOSS /,V,~C7&.O A,2~C'CLI4Ll C--AC 2 I I-N1/ z 7.S/A QV7/o~I I/I LJ~J~(I -Zc) So,-03 ,ý -r Ly e-2.0" ,2.'7"- , x 7,o1 -5.o lY'r4 -A..ASL W ArE1J2 tL -A ~-.0zI-ý sz:fNsIO Pcýf(7 rl 4at 7, 1 _ _"\AinLb 77?-rslc()

C- 1-) VE-I fW~),-o 2 1 I/I vQ~-w -: I j'Se I I<I!//<'l', ThkJ2A- r ~ f Fj- i ss A cfC 6-6 A a/' 79 t~ -,5 7, 9 "=- .s{ --7. 9 sU w. _ _ _ _ .. -z ro1, II /),0 "

IN, LAJ~9-/ 0 *. -n sPý pc_-r"/ o 1výZ. A c-A -2 F MC (/- ,, .04 s)d I -ro (ýq-f3 f ( C.. C G ".4- EfC,& y I I c3up -6 te, 2 I!I 0 XL -7 7. ! 7, 6)/A//q/- C L)-j-3&I.I I I I////1 I .

i?i~~7SIN6oý-

Ci /%lS o I4/Vs'-ZASE A4f E /)Ae/qf ;(,ý 12eA 6--ý ýý-s )2 Cb + C- C /- G/ý -SFG k C# 14-2r,1~. -A + "T Sjn ) -/ Pt. , Lo.+" : p'°' cT--,°e .Aio' f o 2- n 1/4-o 7-N/ CCO_ , 6./'V I//I.-/ (A( -Tn l-. 74& togs :& cr( ,.I ..63 .'/ qs ////c I..I I/.7/I ,//I' ATIACAMENT A PAUE 31 Of /o8 UT Vessel Examination Site/Unit:

Oconee / 1 Summary No.: B03.110.004 Workscope:

ISI Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-640 3 1667947 Outage No.: ONSI-23 Report No.: UT-06-410 Page: 1 of 1 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

B-D-/B3.110A4 Location: Drawing No.: ISI-OCN1-002

==

Description:==

Nozzle to Head System ID: 50 Component ID: B03.110.004/1-PZR-WP33-2 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

4.750 / 6.875 Limitations:

Yes -See Limitation Calculations attached to Report No. UT-06-411 Start Time: 1208 Finish Time: 1213 Examination Surface: Lo Location: Inside 9.2.3 Outside []Wo Location: Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Surface Temp.: 88 0 F.Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.MCNDE32770 Cal. Report No.: Angle Used Scanning dB Indication(s):

CAL-06-41 3 10 45 45T 60 60T 37.6 YesD No 0]Scan Coverage:

Upstream F Downstream W CW o CCW Fl/Comments: FC 06-04 Results: Accept [] Reject D] Info D]Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No-62.8%Reviewed Previous Data: Yes A11ACKMENT A P A 6E ?,c 0 flfo8 Site/Unit:

Oconee / 1 Summary No.: B03.110.004 Workscope:

IIS UT Vessel Examination Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-820 2 1667947 Outage No.: ONSI-23 Report No.: UT-06-411 Page: 1 of 8 Code. 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

B-D- /B3.110.4 Location: Drawing No.: ISI-OCN1-002

==

Description:==

Nozzle to Head System ID: 50 Component ID: B03.110.004/1-PZR-WP33-2 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

4.750 / 6.875 Limitations:

Yes -See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 1218 Finish Time: 1236 Examination Surface: Inside D Outside []Lo Location:

9.2.3 Wo Location: Temp. Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.: Cal. Report No.: Angle Used 0 45 45T 60 60T Scanning dB 64.5 64.5 72.5 72.5 Indication(s):

Yes [ No [Comments: Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 88 'F CAL-06-414, CAL-06-415 Batch No.: 05125 Scan Coverage:

Upstream D] Downstream W CWR C.W W Results: Accept [] Reject D Info D]Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No-62.8%Reviewed Previous Data: Yes A11A hMENT A PAGE ý3OFlo DUKE ENERGY COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #: B03.110.004 Component ID 1-PZR-WP33-2 remarks: Z NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Lifting Lug F-- LIMITED SCAN Z1 E 2 1 r cw t]lccw FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO 7.0" to Beyond ANGLE: [ 0 Z 45 Z 60 other FROM 150 DEG to 210 DEG Z NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Due to Nozzle Configuration 0 LIMITED SCAN 0 'Z 2 Z l 2Z cw Z ccw FROM L N/A to L N/A -INCHES FROM WO 1.75 to Beyond ANGLE: E11 0 Z 45 Z 60 other -FROM o ..DEG to 360 DEG El NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION F-- LIMITED SCAN F- 112 -1 [1 2 [-] cw --ccw-FROM L toL L _INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: El 0 [D 45 31 60 other FROM DEG to DEG E- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION[-I LIMITED SCAN El 1 [2 Eli 2 i-1cw -] ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to Sketch(s) attached ANGLE: d l 0 0 45 -,60 other FROM DEG to DEG El No Prepared By: Larry Mauldin Level: Date: 10-13-2006 Sheet 2 of 8 Daate-Reviewed By: Date , Auth I p Date o/I V I ATTACHMENT A PA6E 3 OF io PZR RELIEF NOZZLE ONS I EOC 23 Item # B03.110.004 Component ID I-PZR-WP 33-2 Weld Coverage Scan Angle % of Coverage S1 45 93.7 S2 45 0$1 60 96.2 S2 60 0 CW 45 92.4 CCW 45 92.4 CW 60 92.4 CCW 60 92.4 0 98.7 658.2 658.2 / 9 73.10%Base Metal Coverage Scan Angle % of Coverage 51 45 74 S2 45 0 51 60 78.4 S2 60 0*CW 45 63 CCW 45 63 CW 60 63 CCW 60 63 0 68.1 472.5 472.5 / 9 = 52.5 %Aggregate Coverage Weld + Base / 2 = 62.8% Coverage Insp. DateLQ 6 Reviewed By: Date ANII Review __Date /____Page 3 of 8 00-JALS P EC /IOMJ H~CT~A 3 /'/M V 1,0L: A~ 4(2 -5" 2.7')/.7sn tE + F T-H)+ "(2. 4- (1 5%3.~i9 ox 0 21 3/IL /.1,/u 10- /c'L fDPl, Kf4/SPJ6</DL~~

Co~2~4C-'

AS 2FiCbA I Z'GI+C//I F #Z2cyt. 4T ZO"Z) C,'9 ~ ~ ~ 6 i,'& 2 __ 0-<~$,& S~ R~~f~(~C -2 7r~ xes JAP7 43 I/6r.4C A'~&- tre~~2 Ej oI~ ~//L-5,/6Ec-rcf-e 449eW 7'~S 3 X 1 oV~-Mcc/L I

• AS 459A c o SiJ <0 S., 4-+ 2-7. A .0 7. 1s /,-Z,-3~/(l I,, V I I I I I/ý9,Ac 4s&.7fl n A1LU A e- Ar &16 Los- I ic'r6J A vu --/ s/~~1 sf&~x z..'~,/" A-ýe- M r iiA --1g -oS k-7.9 +/-L ol I (-40-SQ.AL&o 1o'I I/I/I/1.6"

ý? o *. -l In PL_-C(/ D /V I 3C-- P IA 0ot- ., /-SP -XO ivS d ý -ro S,2 C,- ,o -+ C 7- E 2 j I--

A,/2~ -c2 .~ % A f E i- 4 / r )/ c /s 3/A 1( O L 4 1 d? A1ý,c>- o ix'. -._( .o ,- -7. ,- , ._, s /_,,_ _",/ S-r 1 o &i_ l'o Loss/ , D- ./ -5 o I/I I/II 7s o ý o *f ýe, /! -c rov /V rL IJ (,( Ly i/V3J~cgs cQLJ4(OW'CZA'se ,QAIIIu,'?2: (A 12e A 0-/ 1ýý-S )I+(b+C- G// F t -I S .-..S5/,. I.o T. r XI. ol ,oeo". /:0 0 2 k -/007-/O'7'3,','

-_C /7._ l_/ ~6~CL~ OJ-A AS/I'V?4 A(E.I I I I I ii6Li ?7 ,Af'f.AL , 7/, J9 / ' ////7,9/3 Co/\/CAe , i///p, AIIACHMENI A PAME q HFio8 Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: BO0 Workscope:

UT Vessel Examination

.1 3.110.005 Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NOE-640 3 1667947 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-412 Page: 1 of I Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

B-D- /83.110.5 Location: Drawing No.: ISI-OCN1-002

==

Description:==

Nozzle to Head System ID:. 50 Component ID: B03.110.005

/1-PZR-WP33-1 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

4.750 /6.875 Limitations:

Yes -See Limitation Calculations attached to Report No. UT-06-413 Start Time: 1214 Finish Time: 1217 Examination Surface: Inside f] Outside [] Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.2.3 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 88 'F Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-413 Angle Used 0 45 45T 60 60T_Scanning dB 37.6 Indication(s):

Yes D] No nl Scan Coverage:

Upstream Li Downstream

[EJ CW [] CCW R]Comments., FC 06-04 Results: Accept [] Reject LI Info __Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No-62.8% Reviewed Previous Data: Yes Examiner Level II-N Signa- Date Reviewer, C Signature D Date Mauldin, Larry E. .10/13/2006 " ( " 'O2" Examiner Level II 1_ i ur, Date Site Review Signature Date Leeper, Winfred C. 10/13/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signturt ANIISignature Date N/A _eve___/ADate._

_

Site/Unit:_

Oconee Summary No.: BO Workscope:

UT Vessel Examination ATTACHMENT A PAGE q 1 DF/o8 1 3.110.005 Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-820 2 Outage No.: ONSI-23 Report No.: UT-06-413 Page: 1 of 8 ISl 1667947 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

B-D- /B3.110.5 Location: Drawing No.: ISI-OCN1-002

==

Description:==

Nozzle to Head System ID: 50 Component ID: B03.110.005

/1-PZR-WP33-1 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

4.750 / 6.875 Limitations:

Yes-See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 1222 Finish Time: 1240 Examination Surface: Inside D] Outside [] Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.2.3 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 88 'F Cal. Report No.. CAL-06-414, CAL-06-415 Angle Used 0 45 145T 160 60T Scanning dB 64.5 64.5 72.5 72.5 Indication(s):

Yes No Scan Coverage:

Upstream Downstream W CWW CCW Comments: Results: Accept [ Reject D] Info D_Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No-62.8% Reviewed Previous Data: Yes Examiner Level Il-N ignat re Date Reviewer 4 , / Signature Date Mauldin, Larry E. .10/13/2006/5 0(-" Examiner Level II grture Date Site Review Signature Date Leeper, Winfred C. , 10/13/2006 N/A Other Level N/A -ignatule Date ANII ( Signature Date N/A _ _,.___ __t II I -/I t AIIACHMENI A PAGE O OF 168 DUKE. ENERGY COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #: B03. f 10.005 Component ID I-PZR-WP33-1 remarks:[ NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Due to Nozzle Configuration Li LIMITED SCAN 1i Z 2 i1 i2 i1 cw [-ccw FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO .5 to Beyond ANGLE: ;K 0 Z 45 Z 60 other FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG i NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION-ILIMITED SCAN i] 1 i2 [1 i 2 i-[ijcw [ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: L] 0 FLi 45 Li 60 other FROM DEG to DEG Li NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION F-- LIMITED SCAN i-] F1 I2 i- 1 Ei 2. [I cw IcCw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: Li 0 II 45 Li 60 other FROM DEG to -.DEG Li NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION i-1 LIMITED SCAN Lii Li2 L i2 LiL cw i ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to Sketch(s) attached ANGLE: Li 0 1] 45 Li-O other FROM DEG to DEG L" yes LiNo Prepared By: Larry Mauldin Level: Date: 10-13-2006 Sheet 2 of 8 Reviewed By: Date: .Autho: /j")~ V/

AT ACHMENJ A PA6E q,3 VF io, PZR RELIEF NOZZLE ONS I EOC 23 Item # B03.110.005 Weld Coverage Component ID I-PZR-WP 33-1 Scan SI S2 SI S2 CW CCW CW CCW Angle 45 45 60 60 45 45 60 60 0% of Coverage 93.7 0 96.2 0 92.4 92.4 92.4 92.4 98.7 658.2 658.2 / 9 = 73.1 %Base Metal Coverage Scan SI S2 SI.S2 CW CCW CW CCW Angle 45 45 60 60 45 45 60 60 0% of Coverage 74 0 78.4 0 63 63 63 63 68.1 472.5 472.5 / 9 = 52.5 %Aggregate C verage : Weld + Base / 2 = 62.8% Coverage Insp. 670,/4Z Date _____Reviewed By: ( Date ANII Review Date 44L~Page __ of

-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F --GH~2"+." 1=.+ed//( ~ ' )+ --( 2. ________L M I+1o -i? 4 A C .\JL.M 6kAI LS(2dL1~:

"1 I CL '9,4 7-fW6. os=?_ac7, leA < X-,- ~~~~~ ~ ~ 8 6n s/ L<cs E. ,"d3oX " '6g *i dtos) 4Z ._,~0.</L &z-7 //2A i ' Ls- .Ix -- c ./"-I~! /1... IC

• 5 4/v _7 s~oE c o,(DC.2 4-0-C -t4 + :F (S+ 2 "nx 2.7-'4- -s'r ' ',4fL (7.o- A ji +/- 7r/\1 -I 3-//I I./k ~ T hklrpij_,D( -Ag._i Los / AcirIC1CEDD~O , "c"A/ -7.9 > -.5.,, -:7. 1/ ' "/J. 00 .v,,0 o iiii "" .ciY Yý -I~/";i lo0 LaJ 4C-ýoj. I.fs pLc_-,/o /V dI -ro ._%-/.,o2 Y. "'2 "/-4,e (A ,L6-, 6- L s 1/(Pe-rrýDA 2t4<' -2t Y&&e ENi~c e6 L-c\fj 0 0~",60///c~4Act 2 I I I I//7o-h ao/v, -.45 r=o iK- 7.5- ; 'IA t-S./ 7---- -- -/, _. " I I/,/.7 4S70 ý ic c rlo /V s (f ýj ý (' 0 ýd~I~c~K~3As3EL AAl"f~l/(A 12e A 0 --ý ýý -S )~Cb ÷ /7 C/J7 2 Ox .2 ÷ ,.,"lt .+ r t° "k '" O o?2~ /L£5N. 3 T ) I ..O 5(~ tl- lew/,-/7.2 ~%Y~/-4 '&vs 6?KiW~3oi-5 0'N j ~AIE./I K5' X/: " 2' 2 k.-"

• 39/ * "---"1 t,ý ,: Cll C"'AeL/SJL ~o ~I Iý ... 'I ,,

Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: 80 Workscope:

UT Vessel Examination ATTACHMENT A P A 8E 417a 0 F10, 1 3.1 50.00 1 Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-3630 0 1667950 Outage No.: ONSI.23 Report No:: UT-06-450 , Page: 1 of 8 IS'Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

B-D- (B3.150.1 Location: Drawing No.: 18792-1

Description:

Nozzle to Channel Body System ID: 51A Component ID: B03.150,001

/1-51A-18792-1-V-2 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

.875 / 3.0 Limitations:

Yes -See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 0845 Finish Time: 0910 Examination Surface: Inside [] Outside [] Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

• Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 70 F Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-474, CAL-06-475, CAL-06-476, CAL-06-477, CAL-06-478 Angle Used 0 45 45T 60 60T 70L Scanning dB 52.0 56.4 54* 55- 50*Indication(s):

Yes [ No [] Scan Coverage:

Upstream [ Downstream

[ CW W CCW R Comments: FC 06-02*Lo = CL of nozzle adjacent to Circ. Weld. Previously recorded indication of nozzle ID Radius not in area of interest,*Scanning dB's reduced from reference

+14 to maintain 2:1 signal to noise ratio.Results: Accept F] Reject D Info F _Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No -60.6% Reviewed Previous Data: Yes Examiner Level ,Il-N nature Date Reviewer Signature Date Eaton, Jay A.. 10/2712006

/0 f/t;&zq /0 Examiner Level Il-N Signature Date Site Review / Signature Date Cochran, Lonnie D. 'Q_-..._.-,.

10/27/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date N/A Al 1ACHMENT A PA6E ý5-6 OF /06 Let Down Cooler -Nozzle to Channel Body% Coveraqe Calculations Weld No. : 1 A- 113-9 t 1 P- I-V-, 0 = 8.625" Or = 0.875" Weld Length = 27.1'Axial Scans Along Axis of Pipe = 100% of the Length x 45.2% of the Volume = 45.2%Along Radius of Pipe 100% of the Length x 60.0% of the Volume = 60.0%Average = 45.2% + 60.0% / 2 = 52.6%Circ. Scans Along Axis of Pipe = 100% of the Length x 55.5% of the Volume 55.5%Along Radius of Pipe = 100% of the Length x 81.7% of the Volume = 81.7%Average = 55.5% + 81.7% / 2 = 68.6%Total (52.6 = 68.6 ) /2 = 60.6% Aggregate Coverage Inspector~~~~

I) Dae1iA 7--7aelo h Inspector

/ Date: Page Z_ of "-

ATTACHMENT A PAGE / OF log Letdown Cooler Nozzle to Channel Body Weld No.: \-i5 A- vhlcQz- \ -N-2 Item No. : 'B 62. .c \Total Exam Area = 2.72 sq. in.Scale: 1" = 1"'r: I OJVIJOL.

Letdown Cooler Nozzie to Channel Body Area Examined -Axial Scans AT I ACHMENT A PA6E 5'ý -O /Weld No. : \-5kA- ,oo2 --.- v- -7 Item No. : So3. \5o. oo\Area not Examined = 1.49 sq. in.Area Examined = 2.72- 1.49 / 2.72 x 100 = 45.2%Nozzle S2 14.49 sq. in-.i 11 Channel Body -S I 700 I 600 450 Scale: 1" = 1" (4 o~

Letdown Cooler Nozme to Channel Body Area Examined -Circ. Scans AIIACHMENT A PAGE 5-3 OF 168.Weld No.: *-5flQ- is--v-.7 Item No.: * &3. Iz-o.oo\Area not Examined = 0.81+ 0.40 = 1.21 sq. in.Area Examined = 2.72 -1.21 / 2.72 x 100 ='Channel Body -SI 55.5%sq. in.Nozzle S2l 0..40 450 450 450 Scale: 1" = 1" 450 K AT IACHMENT A Letdown Cooler Nozzle to Channel Body (Radius ViewE 5 V OF /o 8 Weld No.:

• 5-\A- t- V- V-;Item No. : .) 5-. o,\Total Exam Area = 2.30 sq. in.Scale: 1" = 1" to vi ATIACHMENT A Letdown Cooler Nozzle to Channel Body ( Radius ViewAE S 0F jo Area Examined -Axial Scans Weld No. : k -'a,2-V-\1-a Item No. : S103. 15"-.p c0 \Area not Examined =0.92 sq. in.Area Examined = 2.30 -0.92 / 2.30 x 100 = 60.0%700 60O 450 Scale: I"= I POu~ 1 -

Letdown Cooler Nozzle to Channel Body ( Radius Area Examined -Circ. Scans View)Weld No. : i-s'kq- i-zu- t-v-Item No. : SG-3. 00 ko Area not Examined = 0.42 sq. in.Area Examined = 2.30 -0.42 / 2.30 x 100 -81.7%450 450-.4 a,~0 C,'0 Scale: 1" = 1"?AL~ 8 ore:S li 01 I'D (-~

~Duke ivEieroy.Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: B0 Workscope:

UT Vessel Examination AIIACHMENT A PAGE 57 OF /0(9 1 3.150.002 Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-3630 0 1667950 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-451 Page: 1 of 8 ISl Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

B-D- /B3.150.2 Location:'

Drawing No.: 18792-1

Description:

Nozzle to Channel Body System ID: 51A Component ID: B03.150.002

/1-51A-18792-1-V-6 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

.875/ 3.0 Limitations:

Yes -See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 0845 Finish Time: 0910 Examination.

Surface: Inside E] Outside F] Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp.Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 70 °F Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-474, CAL-06-475, CAL-06-476, CAL-06-477, CAL-06-478 Angle Used 0 45 45T 60 60T 70L Scanning dB 52.0 56.4 54* 55* 50*Indication(s):

Yes 7 No 7] Scan Coverage:

Upstream 7] Downstream 7 CW W. CCW W Comments: FC 06-02" Lo = CL of nozzle adjacent to Circ. Weld. Previously recorded indications of Nozzle ID Radius not in area of interest.* Scanning dB's reduced from reference

+14 to maintain 2:1 signal to noise ratio.Results: Accept W Reject D] Info f_1 Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No -60.6% Reviewed Previous Data: Yes Examiner Level III-N nature Date Review Signature Date Eaton, Jay A. 10/27/2006

/1/1/Examiner Level Il-N .S,Snature Date Site Review V Signature Date Cochran, Lonnie D. 4" A-/- 10/27/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date N/A /litY>

AII ALhMENT'.A Let Down Cooler -Nozzle to Channel Body% Coverage Calculations Go3. So. 0oo0Z Weld No.: I-S$lA- ISqd- I-V-(o 0 = 8.625" Otr = 0.875" Weld Length = 27.1" Axial Scans Along Axis of Pipe 100% of the Length'x 45.2% of the Volume 45.2%Along Radius of Pipe 100% of the Length x 60.0% of the Volume = 60.0%Average = 45.2% + 60.0% / 2 = 52.6%Circ. Scans Along Axis of Pipe = 100% of the Length x 55.5% of the Volume = 55.5%Along Radius of Pipe = 100% of the Length x 81.7% of the Volume = 81.7%Average = 55.5% + 81.7% / 2 = 68.6%Total = ( 52.6 = 68.6 ) / 2 = 60.6% Aggregate Coverage Inspector/Date:

l)lE \°7-'1o(, Page -of ATIACHMENT A PAGE 5-Y Of /06 Letdown Cooler Nozzle to Channel Body Weld No. : 1- 5-1 A- e-1 9 A.- \ --(o Item No. : 303. \Yo, ooo Nozzle S2 Total Exam Area = 2.72 sq. in.Channel Body -S I 2.72 sq. in.Scale: I" = 1" PAL"Cr, 3 0e Letdown Cooler Nozzle to Channel Body Area Examined -Axial Scans AT IACHMENT A PAGE 6o Of /Oi8 Weld No.* \-.50- 'B-'9- i- v- (Item No. : 3 03. 15(70 Qo 2 Area not Examined = 1.49 sq. in.Area Examined = 2.72 -1.49 / 2.7 2 x 100 -45.2%700 600 Scale: 1 "= 1" 450 Letdown Cooler Nozzle to Channel Body Area Examined -Circ. Scans AT ?ACHMENT A PA6E, 6 F1 Weld No.: '\-5"-Ii-Ic 92 -L- V-(-, Item No. : 3o3. \so. oo.Area not Examined = 0.81+ 0.40 = 1.21 sq. in.Area Examined = 2.72 -1.21 / 2.72 x 100 =Channel Body -S I 55,5%Nozzle S2 i* in.0.40 450 450 0 sq Sc r I I 11 I 450 Scale: "= 1F=450 Pa~ 'v, 501 Letdown Cooler. Nozzle to Channel Body (Radius View )Weld No.:

• B- 879A.-\-\JI6 Item No. :~~3c3 00 z5.Total Exam Area = 2.30 sq. in: Scale: 1" =1" Letdown Cooler Nozzle to Channel Body Area Examined -Axial Scans (Radius View Weld No.* \-5\- \-,4-(: Item No. : ,3. Area not Examined = 0.92 sq. in.Z Area Examined = 2.30 -0.92 / 2.30 x 100 = 60.0%450 Scale: 1" " 700 600 N C?A c'- 70r-Letdown Cooler Nozzle to Ckannel Body ( Radius Area Examined -Circ. Scans View!Item No.": Bcý3. 5\O. c, ;-Weld No.: 1-5-t1,- vq9 Z.-k-V- K Area not Examined = 0.42 sq. in.45°Area Examined = 2.30 -0.42 / 2.30 x 100 = 81.7%450 C"-M Scale: 1"= I" Site/Unit:

Oconee Summary No.: B0 Workscope:

PAGE OF UT Pipe Weld Examination 1 9.01-1.015 IS'Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: PDI-UT-2 C 1668805 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-436 Page: 1 of 3 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

B-J- /B9.11.15 Location:

,_Drawing No.: 1-53A-02(3)

==

Description:==

Pipe to Valve (1 CF-11)System ID: 53A Component ID: B09.011.015

/1-53A-02-68L Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

1.250 /14.0 Limitations:

Yes -See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 1427 Finish Time: 1533 Examination Surface: Inside [] Outside [0, Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.1.1.1 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld: Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: D.A.S Serial No.: MCNDE32796 Surface Temp.:' 63 0 F Cal, Report No.: CAL-06-452, CAL-06-453, CAL-06-454 Angle Used 0 45 45T 60 60L Scanning dB 32.2 32.2 49 76.5 Indication(s):

Yes -] No " Scan Coverage:

Upstream [ Downstream El CW [ CCW [Comments: Counterbore below recordable level Results: Accept W Reject D Info D Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No -36.7% Reviewed Previous Data: Yes Examiner Level II-N ,jgnat Date Reviewe,, Signature' Date Tucker, David K. .10/21/2006 ,J ./- , Examiner Level iii,-N Signature Date Site Review / ' Signature Date Stauffer, Lester, E. /,----7 10/21/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Revie .- /,/ Signature Date N/A /_e_

A ITACHMENT A PA E e tir -DUKE ENERGY COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #: B09.011.015 Component ID 1-53A-02-68L remarks:[ NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Due to Valve Configuration E- LIMITED SCAN 1 -E] 2 1 N 2 [] cw -ccw FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO C/L to Beyond ANGLE: D 0 Z 45 Z 60 other 60L FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG* NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Due to Branch Connection Z LIMITED SCAN 1 Z 1 D 2 [Dw C -0ccw FROM L 31.5 to L 34.5 INCHES FROM WO C/L to Beyond ANGLE: E 0 Z 45 Z 60 other 60L FROM DEG to DEG-- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION-,LIMITED SCAN -1 [D1 2 D 1 E 2 [ cw -ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: D 0 D 45 D 60 other FROM DEG to DEG D NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION D- LIMITED SCAN Li D2 [D 1 D 2 D- cw -- ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to Sketch(s) attached ANGLE: 0l 0 El 45 El 60 other FROM DEG to DEG Z yes E- No Prepared By: L. Stauffer --Leve.: 11, Date: 10-21-2006 Sheet 2 of 3 Reviewed By: /6/0 Authorize Date: /ti//7 -,. /( 11 Item No. B09.0.11.015 Weld.No. 1-53A-02-68L 60' RLWave 600 Shear Coverage Claimed = 50%AIIACHMENI A PAGE 67 OF/o0 No Coverage Claimed Supplemental coverage.with 600 RL Wave Only.See Note: Scale: 1". 1" Note: 60' RL scan not included in percentage coverage due to requirements of I0CFR50.55a(b)(2)(xv)(A)(l).

Best effort scan with 600 RL obtained 50% coverage i,*one axial direction.

No axial scan for,3" of the weld length due to a branch connection on the surface 2 side of the weld. The total % of weld length examined in the axial direction from the surface 2 = (44 -3)/44 x 100 93.2%.Pipe 0 = 14 Valve = Surface 1 Pipe = Surface 2"t" & 1.25 1/3 "I' = 0.42 Weld Length =Weld + 1/4" ea. Side =Total Weld Volume (Weld + 1/4" ea. Side) x 1/3 "'T x Weld Length 44.0 36.04 inr 3 1.95 Aggregate Coverage Calculation S1 = Valve 0%S2 = Pipe 46.6 %S3= CW .50%S4 =CCW -50%Total= 146.6 4=( 0% of the Length x 0% of the Volume)( 93.2% of the Length x 50% of the Volume).( 100% of the Length x 50% of the Volume)(100% ofthe Length x 50% of the Volume)36.7% Aggregate, .Coverage'Inspector

/ Dat ý---" , Page ATIACHMENT A PAGE 68 OAF/o&Site/Unit:

Oconee / I Summary No.: C01.020.004 Workscope:

ISI UT Vessel Examination Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-3630 0 1682337 Outage No.: ONSI-23 Report No.: UT-06-475.Page: I of 4 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat,/Item:

/ Location: Drawing No.:

Description:

Letdown Storage Tank Lower Head to Shell System ID: 51B Component ID: C01.020.004 1 -LST-HD-SH-2 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

.375/0.0 Limitations:

Yes -See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 1021 Finish Time: 1101 Examination Surface: Inside [ Outside F .Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.2.1 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: D.A.S Serial No.: MCNDE32798 Surface Temp.: 79.0 "F Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-504, CAL-06-505 Angle Used 0 45 45T 60 60T Scanning dB 64.7 64.7 Indication(s):

Yes [] No ]J Scan Coverage:

Upstream [ Downstream W CW W CCW R Comments: FC 06-02 Results: Accept [ Reject [J Info Li Initial Exam Percent Of Coverage Obtained >.90%: No -80.26% Reviewed Previous Data: No A11GCE MENT A PAGE if? Of /0 DUKE ENERGY COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #: CO 1.020.004 Component ID I-LST-HD-SH-2 remarks:.NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION 4 equally spaced pads for legs I-I LIMITED SCAN Z 1 Z 2 Z 1 Z 2 Z cw Z ccw 15 In. each FROM L

• to L INCHES FROM WO CL to -Beyond (Dia. 8'3/4")ANGLE: El 0 El 45 Z 60 other FROM N/A DEG to N/A DEG[- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION L-i LIMITED SCAN [-1 1 [-l 2 El 1 0l2 cw t ccw FROM L ._ _to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 7l 0 El 45 El 60 other FROM DEG to DEG El NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION DLIMITED SCAN l1 i ] 2 El 1 E20cw 0 ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 0l 0 El 45 El 60 other FROM DEG to DEG El NO SCAN'LIMITED SCAN SURFACE-- 1 E-- 2 BEAM DIRECTION l1 i -- 2 -cw El cCw FROM L ANGLE: to L El 0 El 45 E[-60 other INCHES FROM FROM Wo to DEG to -DEG Sketch(s)E- yes.attached Z No Prepared By: Larry Mauldirn Date: 11-02-2006 4.Reviewed By: e v " V/

A.ITACHMENT A PAGE 76 aF/oq 3k Dike Fwnew~y_Determination of Percent Coverage for UT Examinations

-Vessels Site/Unit:

Oconee / 1 Summary No.: C01.020.004 Workscope:

ISl Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-3630 0 1682337 Outage No.: ONSl-23 Report No.: UT-06-475 Page: 3 of 4 O deg Planar Scan 45 deg Scan 1 Scan 2 Scan 3 Scan 4% Length X% Length X% Length X% Length X% Length X% volume of length /100 =% volume of length /100 =% volume of length / 100 =% volume of length / 100 =% volume of length / 100 =% total for 0 deg% total for Scan 1% total for Scan 2% total for Scan 3% total for Scan 4 Add totals and divide by # scans =% total for 45 deg Other deq 60 Scan 1 80.260 % Length X Scan 2 80.260 % Length X Scan 3 80.260 % Length X Scan 4 80.260 % Length X Add totals and divide by # scans =100.000 % volume of length / 100 =100.000 % volume of length / 100 =100.000 % volume of length / 100 =100.000 % volume of length / 100 =80.260 % total for 60 deg 80.260 80.260 80.260 80.260% total for Scan 1% total for Scan 2% total for Scan 3% total for Scan 4 Percent complete coverage Add totals for each angle and scan required and divide by # of angles to determine; 80.260 % Total for complete exam Note: Supplemental coverage may be achieved by use f other angles / methods. When used, the coverage for volume not obtained with angles as noted above shall be cal ulated and added to the total to provide the percent total for the complete examination.

Site Field Supervisor:

Date: \'j "- 0(,'

WE-oullo WergyAIIACHMENT A PAGE 7/ OF/oe Supplemental Report Report No.: UT-06-475 Page: 4 of 4 Summary No,: C01.020.004 Examiner:

ResorJames H.Examiner: Other: Jones, Russel E.Level: II Level: I-N Level: II Reviewer:

., .Site Review: N/A , ANII Review: :____6V " Date: 6, Date: Date: Comments: Comments: Sketch or Photo: Z:\UT\lI DDEAL\ProfileLine2.jpg W4 t>L (' o O.JLL(. .Sh49LAJ&u

~D ~JA. ~g 41m) TA7A m 44 O2f Ali-1-_ _ I- I-- I CT2-ar_V*1 I., 4 j'1*1~ *~p 2 I-- *4.-4'4--I H- -- 'E---Ims'4'42.IMom , , ý,;i! le A) ACHMENT A ME6 73 OF e Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: CO Workscope:

UT Vessel Examination 1 2.021.002 ISI Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No,: NDE-640 3 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-497 Page: 1 of 1 1668823 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

C-B- /C2.21.2 Location: Drawing No.: OM-201.S-000.1

==

Description:==

Nozzle to Shell System ID: 3 Component ID: C02.021.002 11-SGA-W128 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

5.125 / 24.0 Limitations:

Yes- See Limitation Calculations attached to Report UT-06-498 Start Time: 0910 Finish Time: 0921 Examination Surface: Inside [ Outside F,-- Surface Condition:

GROUND Lo Location:

9.1.1.1 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 58 °F Cal. Report No.: CAL.06-524 Angle Used 0 45 45T 60 60T Scanning dB 38.8 Indication(s):

Yes D] No [] Scan Coverage:

Upstream [ Downstream CW [ CCWf[Comments: FC 06-04 Results: Accept [] Reject D] Info D_Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: -Reviewed Previous Data: Yes Examiner Level Il-N Sign, ure Date Reviewer,.

Signature Date Griebel, David M, .. 11/14/2006 Examiner Level Il-N Signature Date Site Review / Signature Date Tucker, David K. 11/14/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review .Signature Date N/A ATTACHMENT A PAGE 7 f OF/66 Site/Unit:

Oconee I Summary No.: C02 Workscope:

UT Vessel Examination I.021.002 Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-820 2 1668823 Outage No.: ONS1 -23 Report No.: UT-06-498 IS'WorOrdeNo 168823: I aof 3 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

C-B. IC2,21.2 Location: Drawing No.: OM-201.S.0001

==

Description:==

Nozzle to Shell System tD: 3 Component ID: C02.021.002 I1-SGA.W1 28 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

5.125/24.0 Limitations:

Yes -See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 0922 Finish Time: 1000 Examination Surface: Inside [ Outside o- Surface Condition:

GROUND Lo Location:

9.1.1.1 Wo Location:

Centerfine of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg'.: FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 58 *F Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-525, CAL-06-526 Angle Used 0 45 45T A060 -6eT-1 35T1 9k) 41-Scanning dB 60.3 60.3 61.7 61,7 Indication(s):

Yes (. No [ Scan Coverage:

Upstream R Downstream

[] CW CCW []Comments: FC 06-06 See Attached Coverage Plot Results: Accept []j Reject [_ Info r7.Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No -85.66% Reviewed Previous Data: Yes Examiner Level 11-N S' t!;atu Date Review., Signature Date Grlebel, David M. ... ý 11/14/2006 JA-a,. OL Examiner .Level uI.N SnurDate Site Review Signature Date Tucker, David K. 11/14/2006 NIA Other Level NIA Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date[N/A Z fc Al 1ACHNENI, A PA6E 75- OF /66 DUKE POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Component/Weld ID: I-SGA-WI28 Item No: C02.021.002 remarks: N' NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION NOZZLE.CONFIGURATION

-100%-- LIMITED SCAN -' 1 Z 2 Z 1 E' 2 E- cw [- ccw COVERAGEOBTAINEDUSING FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO o to 360 BOUNCE.ANGLE: 0' 0 Z. 45 -- 60 other 35 FROM o DEG to .360 DEG" NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION NOZZLE CONFIGURATION Z' LIMITED SCAN Z 1 --2 El 1 [ 2 Ecw ccw [I__ _ _FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO i.oo to Beyond ANGLE: Z 0 '-]45 El 60 other FROM o DEG to 360 DEG-- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION NOZZLE CONFIGURAION SCAN l1 Z 2 El1 2 Z cw Z ccW FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO i.o to Beyond ANGLE: [] 0 Z 45 El 60 other 35 FROM o DEG to 360 DEG E-l r-l NO SCAN LIMITED SCAN II SIURFA ther CE BEAM DIRECTION.

2 1 El 2 -Cw INCHES FROM WO _ to FROM DEG to FROM L ANGLE: to L D-'0 [- 45 D 60 o ElCcW DEG* Sketch(s) attached-yes[I No I Prepared By' -David Zimmermar Date: I 1/16/06 Sheet 2 of 3 Reviewed By:)ate: Authorized Inspec Dat ATIACHMENT A PAGE 76 GF/08 ZVI, BASFIWELD METAl. COVERAGOCALCULAT]ONS SCAN ANGLE BEAM AREA AREA PERCENT AREA DIRECTION EXAMINED REQUIRED COVERAGE BASE 0 STRAIGHT 2.98 5.77 51.65 _.BASE 35 S) 5.77 5.77 100 BASE 35 S2 5.77 5.77 100 1 BASE 45 SI 5.77 5.77 100 BASE 45 S2 5.77 5.77 100 BASE 35 CW 2.98 .5.77 51.65 _BASE 35 CCW 2.98 5.77 51.65 [BASE 45 CW 2.98 5.77 51.651 BASE 45 CCW 2.98 5.77 51.65 I TOTAL BASE METAL AGGREGATE COVERAGE 73.14 1 WELD 0 STRAIGHT 3.045 3.14 96.7_WELD 35 SI 3.14 3.14 100 1 WELD 35 S2 3.14 3.14 100 WELD 45 SI 3.14 3.14 " o100 _WELD 45 S2 3.14 3.14 1o00 WELD 35 CW 3.045 3.14 96.7 t WELD 35 CCW 3.045 3.14 96.7 WELD 45 CW 3.045 3.14 96.7 _WELD 45 CCW 3.045 3.14 96. 96.7 _TOTALIbtW-METAL AGGREGATE COVERAGE 98.171 TOTAL BASE/WELD AGGREGATE COVERAGE 85.66 C r7. 3?A..ITEM NO.-WELD NO.-INSPECTOR DATE I -<CvA -, J IZ 9 Irage__O__

of -

(ýo / Qo'D- --S ,,-' ( -...d.5 _._ ...... :.-..>.........

.rZ. ..\.L >av O IL,_ ,_ _..A u .:,. ... 3 .. .. 19 -I, 461'l-<LL3~v.'4-J 11/-4C-1,I L--

OO~~L 2 IC~Z ~f~-(-) u~s Nl r (-) do z, L*ý_~v1. LL~(Lj* C~\J~-~A(1~'-

-CA.AI (&...A/4 .C- ý_ , " --.I On~-ItIzz-ILI 4ýý<1+/-L~4,.~ELO.~Z~#L2L~

5.%.,j YO -2 F-- ýC-3 C-n 00 I5 l (f 6 --ý. o -ý-/ -o o ýý-1k&(Cs evfLg< "(0 7 LL £(\V/~L ,c *~,JO t~f~C-, 3m N./LJ// -~,61j(ýt I .C-UT Base Meta .amination A ITACHMENT A PA6E eo OF /x3 Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: CO 1 5.011.033 Procedure:

NDE-640 Workscope:-ISI Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: 3 Outage No.: ONSl -23 Report No.: UT-06-442 Page: 1 of .2 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

C-F-1/C5.11.33 Location: Drawing No.: 1-53A-01 (2)

Description:

Pipe to Valve (1LP-48)System ID:. 53A Component ID: C05.011.033

/1-53A-01-29L Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

1.0/10.0 Limitations:

None Start Time: 0935 Finish Time: 0940 Examination Surface: Inside El Outside Fv Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.1.1.5 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: FISHER Serial No.: MCNDE32770 Surface Temp.: 67 -F -Scanning dB: 59.9 Cal, Report No.: CAL-06-469

% Amplitude Position One Position Max Position Two Ind.No. Loss 0/% -Remarks Back Wall Full Screen Li Wi W2 MP LM Wi W2 MP L2 Wi W2 MP NRI Comments:

FC 06-04 Results: Accept j Reject []} Info F]Percent Of Coverage Obtained->-9O0%:

Yes-100%Initial Section XI Exam-Reviewedl-Previous-Data

-No-MILAUM-A rAwgiiiw-SupplemetadI Report Report No.: Page: ATTACHMENT A P.AGE8/ OF /08 UT-06-442 2 of 2 Date: Date: Summary No.: C05.011.033 Examiner:

Houser, Gayle E.Examiner:

Stauffer, Lester,.s-~

--Other: -N/A Level: I-N Level: III-N Level: N/A Reviewer:

.,1 o.J22: Site Review: N/A V ANII Review: Comments:

~Sketch or Photo: Z: \ T\lI DD E AL\ Prof i Ie L n e2. j pg\1 (3q I-,( --e-0 rýI I t Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: CO Workscope:

UT Pipe Weid Examination AITACHMENT A PAOE 6a OF/o8 1 5.011.033 ISl Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-600 17 1668911 Outage No.: ONSl -23 Report No.: UT-06-446 Page: 1 of 3 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

C-F-1/C5.11.33 Location: Drawing No.: 1-53A-01 (2) 'Description:

Pipe to Valve (1LP-48)System ID: 53A Component ID: C05.011.033

/1-53A-01-29L Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

1.0 / 10.0 Limitations:

Yes -See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 0954 Finish Time: 1013 Examination Surface: Lo Location: Temp. Tool Mfg.:, Cal. Report No.: Angle Used 0 Scanning dB Indication(s):

Yes D]Comments: Inside [7]9.1.1.5 FISHER Outside [] Surface Cor Wo Location:

Centerline of Serial No.: MCNDE32 CAL-06-470, CAL-06-471, CAL-06-472 ndition: AS GF Weld 770 Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Surface Temp.: 67 OF Batch No.: ROUND 05125 45 45T 60 60L 41.6 48.7 56.6 No /Scan Coverage:

Upstream W Downstream E]CWI~ & CCW o Results: Accept [] Reject R Info D Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No -37.5 0, Initial Section XI Exam Reviewed Previous Data: No Examiner Level II-N Signature, Date Review r Signature Date Houser, Gayle E. 10/26/2006

/ ,-' , L.Examiner Level Ill-N .gnature Date Site Review y Signature Date Stauffer, Lester, E. :5 Z-- ? --- 10/26/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review Signature

/ Date Nt/A4/ <

ATTACHMENT A---IAW .u : 3 V-,J rUt / DUKE ENERGY COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #: C05.011.033 Component ID 1-53A-01-29L remarks:[ NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Valve Configuration II! LIMITED SCAN 1 F-1 2 D1 2 [E cw Z ccw FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO CL to Beyond ANGLE: 0 0 Z 45 Z 60 other FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG-- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION L-- LIMITED SCAN -- -2 1 0 2Ecw El ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: F] 0 El 45 0l 60 other FROM DEG to DEG F-- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION D LIMITED SCAN E 1 --2 El 1 F-] 2 [-] cw [- ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: El 0 El 45 El 60 other FROM DEG to DEG El NO SCAN El LIMITED SCAN SURFACE El1 El 2 BEAM DIRECTION El 1 2 D cw ccw-FROMNL to L-NC`HES-FR-OM-W0 to-Sketch (s)-attaehed ANGLE: [- 0 El 45[5A60 )other FROM DEG to DEG[ yes El No Prepared By: Gayle H(10-26-2006 1 Sheet 2 of 3 Reviewed By:)ate: 1 AuthorizedýW,,Vr Date :4/ /ff 1/ .1'////

Weld No. 1-53A-01-29L Item No. C05.011.033 I ATIACHMENT A PAGE 64' OF /o6 No Coverage Claimed I Supplemental coverage with 6001 RL Wave Only See Note: Coverage Claimed = 50%Scale: F"= I" Note: 600 RL scan not included in percentage coverage due to requirements of 10CFR50.55a(b)(2)(xv)(A)(1).

Best effort scan with 60' RL obtained 50% coverage one axial direction.

in Pipe 0 = 10.75"t."= 1 1/3 "t" = 0.33 Weld Length =Weld + 1/4" ea. Side Valve = Surface 1 Pipe = Surface Total Weld Volume= (Weld + 1/4" ea. Side) x 1/3 "t" x Weld Length 18.96 in 3 ,2 33.8 1.70 Aggregate Coveraqe Calculation S1 =S2 =S3 =S4 =Valve Pipe CW CCW Total =0%50 %50 %50 %150 +4=( 0% of the Length x 0% of the Volume )( 100% of the Length x 50% of the Volume)( 100% of the Length x 50% of the Volume)( 100% of the Length x 50% of the Volume )37.5% Aggregate Coverage K~Inspector

/ Date: OI 27io(0c'PA ý- 3 C>'-3 J VVI I UT Base Met ..amination ATTACHMENT A PAG-E9S- OF /o Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: Co Workscope:

1 5.011.039 ISI Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-640 3 1668904 O6tage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-438 Page: 1 of 2 Code: :1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

C-F-1/C5.11.39 Location: Drawing No.: 1-53A-02(2)

==

Description:==

Pipe to Valve 1LP-47 System ID: 53A Component ID: C05.011.039

/1-53A-02-64L Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

1.0/10.0 Limitations:

None Start Time: 0940 Finish Time: 0944 Examination Surface: Inside [] Outside [] Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.1.1.1 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: D.A.S Serial No.: MCNDE32796 Surface Temp.: 63 °F Scanning dB: 56.0 Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-465

% Amplitude Position One Position Max Position Two Ind.Loss % Remarks No.Back Wall Full Screen L1 W1 W2 MP LM W1 W2 MP L2 W1 W2 MP NRI Comments:

FC 06-04 Results: Accept [] Reject D] Info FD Percent Of Co verage-Obtained__9.0%:

Yes_100%Initial Section Xl Exam-Revi ewedc-Previo us-Data:--_ No Examiner Level i r Date Reviever / Signature Date Leeper, Winfred C. , 10/26/2006 7 /Examiner Level S"ignature Date Site Reiew Signature Date Jones, Russel E. 10/26/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date N/A/

FWwnry AI1ACHMENT A PAGE g6 OIF 1613 SupplemerLal Report Report No.:. UT-06-438 Page: 2 of 2 Summary No.: C05.011.039 Examiner:

Leeper, Winfred C.Examiner:

Jones, Russel E.Other: N/A Level: II Level: II Level: N/A Reviewer:

I Site Review: N ANII Review: Date: 4/4 Date: Date: Comments: Sketch or Photo: Z:\UT\I DDEAL\ProfileLine2.jpg e~jt 4-0 -a 0 0 0 i A11ACHMENT A UT Pipe Wewd Examination PArE8Z JF/o0 Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: CC Workscope:

1 5.011.039 ISl Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-600 17 1668904 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-440 Page: 1 of 3 Code: 1998 thru-2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

C-F-1/C5.11.39 Location: Drawing No.: 1-53A-02(2)

==

Description:==

Pipe to Valve 1LP-47 System ID: 53A Component ID: C05.011.039

/1-53A-02-64L Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

1.0/10.0 Limitations:

Yes -See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 0950 Finish Time: 1014 Examination Surface: Inside D Outside Fv Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.1.1.1 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: D.A.S Serial No.: MCNDE32796 Surface Temp.: 63 0 F Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-466, CAL-06-467, CAL-06-468 Angle Used 0 45 45T 60 60L Scanning dB 45 47 50 Indication(s):

Yes n No F] Scan Coverage:

Upstream F] Downstream El CW W CCW W Comments: Results: Accept F] Reject E] Info E] Initial Section XI Exam 351. '/Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No -.5,b,. o Jc1.,-l Reviewed Previous Data: No Examiner Level II ur Date Reviewe Signature Date Leeper, Winfred C. (}J 10/26/2006 A / /1 .,,.Examiner Level II Signatur Date Site Review Y Signature Date Jones, Russel E. 10/26/2006.

N/A Other Level N/A 0- Signature Date ANII Review /,' / Signature Date tN/A _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

AIIACHMENT A PAGE 88 OJF /08 DUKE ENERGY COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #: C05.011.039 Component ID 1-53A-02-64L remarks: Z NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Due to Vavle Configuration

[1 LIMITED SCAN Z 1 [ 2 ['- 1 Z 2 Z ccw FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO CL to Beyond ANGLE: [1 0 Z 45 Z 60 other , FROM DEG to DEG[- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION[l LIMITED SCAN [-1 [] 2 [1 [] 2 Lilcw Liccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: [1 0 [7 45 [1 60 other FROM DEG to DEG[-- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION-]LIMITED.SCAN

[-1 [22 2 [] cw t-ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: II 0 [1 45 [] 60 other FROM DEG to DEG[1 NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION[-1 LIMITED-SCAN

[0 1 [- 2 [- 1 [- 2 [] cw [- ccw-FROM-L to-L_.INCH ES-FROM-WO to --SaSketch (s)-attached ANGLE: E] 0 [ 45 [1 60 oth,,,e, _- FROM ZDECto DEG DE yes. [- No Prepared By: Winfred Leeper evel" 11. Date: 10-26-2006 Sheet 2 of 3 Reviewed By: -!ate: Authorized 1 .Date-I //Vi Col Item No. C)5.011.039 Weld No. 1-53A-02-64L 600 Shear _Pipe ValyeILP-47 S2 verage Claimed = 50/ No Coverage Supplementall with 600 RL j Scale: I"= " See Note: Note: 600 RL scan not included in percentage coverage due to requirements of IOCFR50.55a(b)(2)(xv)(A)(l).

Best effort scan with 600 RL obtained 50% coverage in one axial direction.

i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ....e ....................

...1 ..... ........ ...... = s ri c l i~pe .... ... .ui.;a..POipe 0 =ý 10.75 Valve = Surface 1 Pipe =Surface2...... .. ... --- -- ---"t" = 1 .i!Total Weld Volume!. .. .... ... ..... .......... i .... ...........

-.... ......... ..... ....... i" ...............

... .1/3 "t"= 0.33 ' =;(Weld + 1/4" ea. Side) x 113 't" x Weld Length i~ el Len th .33. .............

... .:T : .........

.+ ........ ;....................

..........

MWeld Length 33.8 189i.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. .-... ........Weld + 1/4" ea. Side 1.70 ..i .. Ag-gregate Coverage Calcu lation...... .. .........

........... " "t .- ,-.. ......,......................

SI Valve 0 % .........

(0/0 of the Length x 0% of the Volume).... .P..pe... -of --the ---$2 Pipe 50% '1( 100% of the Length x 50% of the Volume... .. ..-..... ................

....... ..S3 =CW 50so %( 100% of the Length x 100% of the Volume).... .---- ------- -...... ........S 4 =_ ICW............

I ........ ....... ...".........

.... .... .... -.... ... .. ..4- =-I.C W- 50 % i( 100% of the Length x 100% of the Volume).... ... ..... ... .. ......... ...........

.+ ..... .. .....r .........

.. ...... ++. .. ........-. ....... ...... ..... ...i I Total= 150i+ 4 -37.5% Aggregate Coverage........ ...... .. -...........

--- ------------

.- .... ...........

... .... ---.I ...--------j ..........3 .........i i .. ..... L .............i.,.__: ..£:..?x........ _ L_.[.J ,_/./I..............

..........

.. ...IlInspector/IDate: ,-7-0-2 i .......rfAIOMIN1 A PAPE? SWF /08 ilaimed coverage ave Only 3,-U (U I e,4ý5 10/ YO 7 AT IACHMENT A PAGE ?6f OF /18 Site/Unit:

Oconee / 1 Summary No.: C05.011.076 Workscope:

ISl UT Pipe Weid Examination Procedure:

NDE-600 Procedure Rev.: 17 Work Order No.: 1668903 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-462 Page: 1 of 5 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

C-F-1/C5.11.76 Location: Drawing No.: 1LP-210

Description:

Pipe to Flow Restrictor System ID: 53A Component ID: C05.011.076

/1 LP-210-72 Size/Length:

N/A Thic Limitations:

Yes-See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 0935 Examination Surface: Inside E] Outside 7. Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.1.1.1 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Temp. Tool Mfg.: D.A.S Serial No.: MCNDE32796 Surface Temp.: 63 OF Cal. Report No,: CAL-06-487, CAL-06-488, CAL-06-489 Angle Used " 0 45 45T 60 60L Scanning dB 45.5 50 55 Indication(s):

Yes 0] No [] Scan Coverage:

Upstream [] Downstream ED CW W CCW kness/Diameter:

1.0 /10.0 Finish Time: 1025 Batch No.: 05125 W Comments: Results: Accept [] Reject D]Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: Info E]No -37.5%

ATTACHMENT A PASE 9/ OF *-BAY.Ultrasonic Inaication Report Site/Unit:

Oconee Summary No.: C05 Workscope:

1.011.076 Isl Procedure:

Procedure Rev,: Work Order No.: NDE-600 17 1668903 Outage No.: ONSl-23 Report No.: UT-06-462 Page: 2 of 5 Search Unit Angle: Wo Location: Lo Location: 60L CL of Weld 9.1.1.1 ( Piping Welds Q Ferritic Vessels > 2"T C) Other Wo Wnao MP Metal Path Wmax Distance From Wo To S.U. At Maximum Response RBR Remaining Back Reflection W1 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)L Distance From Datum W2 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)Comments: Scan Indication No.Of DAC W Max Forward Of Max Backward Of Max L1 Of Max L Max L2 Of Max RBR Amp, I + + 1~W MP W1 MP W2 MP S2 1 60% 1,5 1,8 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0-.25 0+0 0-.25 N/A Geometric Reflector Examiner Level Il1-N Signature Date Revieweý A.,9 Signature Date Eaton, Jay A. 10/29/2006 11- 2-o6 Examiner Level 1-N Sign re Date Site Review Signature Date Day, John, C. 10/29/2006 N/A , Other Level N/A SignatVe Date ANII Review '/A _ /- Signature Date N/At_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _I P) a -6, Supplemental Report Rep'A1IACHMENT A PAGE 9?. OF 108 rt No.: UT-06-462 Page: 3 of 5 Date: Date:_ _ Date:_ _ _, 0 Summary No.: C05.011.076 Examiner:

Eaton, Jay A.Examiner:

Day, John, C.Other: N/A-Level: Ill-N Level: II-N 7 Level: N/A Reviewer:

A 9 ;.#Site Review: N/A ANII Review:........ * -,w.Comments: PLOT AND RESOLUTION SHEET IND. 1: Geometrical indication off the weld root I.D. Signal would not skew. 70* shear produced less t WSY-70 and plotting of indication supports this determination.

RT film was also reviewed.Ian 50% amplitude.

4A, j -L.O K K SI s&z -P PC,'N E> I AtIACHtMEKI A PASE 7,3 lFl' I DUKE ENERGY COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #: C05.011.076 Component ID ILP-210-72 remarks:[ NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Due to Flow Restrictor-LIMITED SCAN Zi 1-2 1 Z Zcw Z ccw FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO CL to Beyond ANGLE: [] 0 Z 45 Z 60 other FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG I- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION F-1 LIMITED SCAN E] [7 2 E-] 1 E] 2 L- cw Elccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: [1 0 7 45 [1 60 other .. FROM DEG to DEG[- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION-LIMITED SCAN -] [-2 -' 11 2 L-lcw cCw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: [] 0 [7 45 [160 other FROM DEG to DEG[- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION FLIMITED SCAN i] [1 2 Ei ] 2Dcw -C ccw ,FROM-L -_toL-L k. INCHES-F ROM-WO- to Sketeh(s)-attache d ANGLE: D0 45 [-6 4her FROM DEGto DEG Z yes [- No Prepared By: Ja Eaton. .Level: Date: 10-29-2006 Sheet 4 of 5 Reviewed By: J _/ EatnA I Date: Authorize r Date: 4//./-,2.-661 fo/

Weld No. lLP-210-72 Item No. C05.011.076 600 RLWave 60' Shear Flow Restrictor S1 At IACHMENJ A P A 6E 5/V OF10 Pipe S2""ýv Coverage Claimed = 50%No Coverage Claimed SupplemIental coverage with 60' RL Wave Only See Note: Scale: l'= 1'Note: 600 RL scan not included in percentage coverage due to-requirements of IOCFR50.55a(b)(2)(xv)(A)(]).

Best effort scan with 600 RL obtained 50% coverage one axial direction.

in Pipe 0 = 10.75 1/3 "t" = 0.33 Weld Length Weld + 1/4" ea. Side Flow Restrict.=

Surface 1 Pipe = Surface Total Weld Volume= (Weld + 1/4" ea. Side) x 1/3 "t" x Weld Length.8 18.96 in 3'2 33 1.70 Aaareaate Coveraae Calculation S1 = Valve S2 = Pipe S3 = CW 4 = CCW Total =Inspector

/ Date: 0%50 %50 %50 %150 +4=( 0% of the Length x 0% of the Volume)( 100% of the Length x 50% of the Volume)( 100% of the Length x 50% of the Volume)( 100% of the Length x 50% of the Volume)37.5% Aggregate Coverage Jý10 I z q I b3,k I a I?c~L¶E1. ;oF Site/Unit:

Oconee / 1 Summary No.: C05.011.077 Workscope:

ISI UT Pipe Weed Examination AT TACHMENT A P A 6E 9%#5 D 0 Procedure:

NDE-600 Procedure Rev.: 17 Work Order No.: 1668903 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-463 Page: 1 of 5 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

C-F-1/C5.11.77 Location: Drawing No.: 1LP-210

Description:

Pipe to Flow Restrictor System ID: 53A Component ID: C05.011.077

/1LP-210-73 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

1.0 / 10.0 Limitations:

Yes-See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 0935 Finish Time: 1025 Examination Surf Lo Location: Temp. Tool Mfg.: Cal. Report No.: Angle Used Scanning dB Indication(s):

Comments: ace: Inside D 9.1.1.1 Outside []Wo Location: Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 D.A.S Serial No.: MCNDE32796 Surface Terr CAL-06-487, CAL-06-488, CAL-06-489 0 45 45T 60 60L 45.5 50 55 Yes [] No E] Scan Coverage:

Upstream Downstrearr P.: 63 0 F W[CW R] CCW W Results: Accept [] Reject FD Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:ýInfo E]No -37.5%

AI1AUAW~ A AW61. Imm" pp=;Y-Ultrasonic Inaication Report Site/Unit:

Oconee */Summary No.: C05 Workscope:

1.011,077 Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-600 17 1668903 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-463 Page: 2 of 5 Isl Wo CL Search Unit Angle: Wo Location: Lo Location: 60 CL of Weld 9.1.1.1 ( Piping Welds 0 Ferritic Vessels > 27T (" Other MP Metal Path Wmax Distance From Wo To S.U. At Maximum Response RBR Remaining Back Reflection Wl Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)L Distance From Datum W2 Distance From Wo At Of Max (Forward)Comments:--------------------------------------------

---

DAUXM.. .-.... ... ..- L, .,b-- Wi WmxW Scan Indication

%0 W Forward Backward L1 L L2 RBR Remarks 4 No. Of Max Of Max Of Max Of Max Of Amp.DAC W MP Wl MP W2 MP Max Max Sl 1 60% 1.5 1.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0+0 N/A N/A 360' Intermittent Geometry Examiner Level Ill-N gnature Date Revie r A // Signature Date Eaton, Jay A. 10/29/2006 1 :16 / 11-.2-- 1 1.Examiner Level 11-N Sgnature Date Site Review Signature Date Day, John, C, 10/29/2006 N/A Other Level N/A /ignature Date ANII Review " Signature Date N/A f/6 1 i/6' ,'I ATTACHMENT A PAGE 7)' V 15, Mkftft r#-Tgmw-Supplemental Report Rer oit No.: Page:/2L Summary No.: C05.011.077 Examiner Eaton, Jay A.Examiner Day, John, C.Other: N/A Level: JIM-N Level: II-N Level: N/A Reviewer: Site Review: ANII Review: UT-06-463 3 of 5 Date: II. -0 I.Date: D atIe: /0/&_,&,- A yxo'ýWA Y 11 1 /Comments: PLOT AND RESOLUTION SHEET IND. 1: Geometrical indication off the weld root I.D. Signal would not skew. 700 shear produced less WSY-70 and plotting of indication supports this determination.

than 50% amplitude.

TZC(,S1Y4 (CMk-ATTACHMENT A DUKE ENERGY COMPANY.ISI LIMITATION REPORT Summary #: C05.011.077 Component ID 1LP-210-73

]remarks: NO SCAN i-- LIMITED SCAN SURFACE D1 Z2 BEAM DIRECTION Z 1 El 2. Z cw Z cow Due to Flow Restrictor FROM L N/A to L N/A ANGLE: IJ 0 Z 45 Z 60 other INCHES FROM WO CL to Beyond FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG-- NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION F-- LIMITED SCAN -- 1 [- 2 -- 1 -1 2 0 cw 0 ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: 0 0 F145 D 60 other FROM DEG to DEG-I NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION D LIMITED SCAN I- 1 D 2 E]i 1 2 E cw D ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE: j] 0 7 45 Fj 60 other FROM DEGto DEG FD NO SCAN D-- LIMITED SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION ED1DEl2 E- 1 F 2 *-] cw F ccw-FROM-L to-L ANGLE: DOE 0 ] 45 D 60 INCHES--FROM-WO

-- to FROM DEG to DEG Sketch(s)-attached Z yes[] No Prepared By: Date: 10-29-2006 Reviewed By: Z_Date:/

Item No. C05.011.077 Weld No. ILP-210-73 AIIACHMENT A PA6 E 7? OF/o8 600 RLWavec 60' Shear (Measured Angle -550)Pipe SI N"< Flow RestrictOrs No Coverage Claimed Supplemental coverage with 60) RL Wave Only See Note: I-'I Coverage Claimed 50%Scale: " = 1'Note: 600 RL scan not included in percentage coverage due to requiremnents of 10CFR50.55a(b)(2)(xv)(A)(1).

Best effort scan with 600 RL obtained 50% coverage in one axial direction.

Pipe 0 = 10.75"1t" = 1 1/3 't" = 0.33 Weld Length =Weld + 1/4" ea. Side Flow Restrict.=

Surface 2 Pipe = Surface Total Weld Volume= (Weld + 1/4" ea. Side) x 1/3 "T' x Weld Length.8 = i -18 1in 3 1 33.1.70 Aggregate Coverage Calculation S1 =S2 =S3 =S4 =Valve Pipe CW CCW 0%50%60%150 +4=( 0% of the Length x 0% of the Volume)( 100% of the Length x 50% of the Volume)( 100% of the Length x 50% of the Volume)( 100% of the Length x 50% of the Volume)37.5% Aggregate Coverage Total =Inspector I Date:'!6!ýZWc (2i$ AY P9 4,5z 5 AIIACHMEIL FA~f /oo DF rA Ioej DUKE POWER COMPANY ULTRASONIC BEAM ANGLE MEASUREMENT RECORD I I <f(5 5c9,' 0 )/ 7 7 tan 9 =(d/2)t 1' Take thickness measurements between wedge locations.

2. Place search unit on straight run of pipe, and peak the signal.3. Measure distance (d) between exit points.4. Calculate beam angle with formula as shown using measured wall thickness.

5. Use the measured beam angle to determine coverage and when plotting any indications.

Pipe size: 1 ----Pipe Schedule:)CA 4 0 measured angle=.._deg measured angle= 5 deg measured angle=--deg

.EN For thin wall pipe use 2nd Vee path tan = (d/2)"2t Nominal 45 deg: d=______Nominal 60 deg: d= -Aq; t= -O;/ýlominal 70 deg: d-- _; t= -----I Level Date Date MUT Base Met Lamination rwkergly.A11ACHMENT A PA6E/161 OF 1689 Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: CO0 Workscope:

1 5.011.078 Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-640 3 98768431 Outage No.: ONS1-23 Report No.: UT-06-257 Page: 1 of 2 IS'Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

C-F-1/C5.11.78 Location: Drawing No.: 1LPS-746

Description:

Pipe to Valve 1LPSW-1062 System ID: 14B Component ID: C05.011.078

/1 LPS-746-2 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

.432 / 6.0 Limitations:

None Start Time: 1035 Finish Time: 1040 Examination Surface: Inside D Outside F] Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.1.1.4 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: D.A.S Serial No.: MCNDE32819 Surface Temp.': 86 °F Scanning dB: 60 Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-308

% Amplitude Position One Position Max Position Two I nd.Loss % -Remarks No.Back Wall Full Screen Li W1 -W2 MP LM W1 W2 MP L2 W1 W2 MP NRI Comments:

FC 06-04 Results: Accept [ Reject D] Info D Initial Section Xl Exam Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: Yes-1 00% Reviewed Previous Data: No Examiner Level i1-N .. Signature Date Reviewr ,,. Signature Date Brown, Tho ! 2 ,,, 8/1/2006 .._A M ,(Examiner Level N/A Signature Date Site Review Signature Date N/A N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review Signature Date N/A 6~2 P A-ý-)Enwgy-Supplemental Report Report No.: Page: A11AICHMENT4 A PAGE /f62 OFt/8 UT-06-257 2. of .2 Date: Date: Date: Summary No.: C05.011,078

-Examiner:

Brown, Thoma , j --..Examiner:

N/A Other: N/A Level: I-N Level: N/A Level: N/A Reviewer: Site Review: N/A ANII Review: Comments: Sketch or Photo: Z:\UThlDDE A L\Protil eLine2.jpg

?&C- J-i.3.-0 (A N C 00 i m I I AIACHMENT A D.jce UT Pipe Weid Examination 6E /63 OF 168 Energ Site/Unit:

Oconee I Summary No.: Co Workscope:

1 5.011.078 ISI Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-600 17 Outage No.: ONSl1-23 Report No.: UT-06-263 Page: 1 of 2 98768431 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

C-F-1/C5.11.78 Location: Drawing No.: 1LPS-746

Description:

Pipe to Valve 1LPSW-1062 System ID: 14B Component.

ID: C05.011.078/1 LPS-746-2 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

.432 / 6.0 Limitations:

Yes -See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 1116 Finish Time: 1130 Examination Surface: Inside -Outside n. Surface Condition:

GROUND Lo Location:

9.1.1.4 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: D.A.S Serial No.: MCNDE32819 Surface Temp.: 86 -F Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-311, CAL-06-312, CAL-06-313 Angle'Used 0 45 145T 1601 70 I Scanning dB 50 52.2 60 Indication(s):

Yes H No [ Scan Coverage:

Upstream {] Downstream

[ CW [ CCW n]Comments: Results: Accept De Reject 0 Info [ Initial Section XI Exam Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No -62.5% Reviewed Previous Data: No Examiner Level 11-N Signature Date Reviewer./

Signature Date Houser, Gayle E. 8/1/2006 Examiner Level II Signature Date Site Review" Y Signature Date Jones, Russel E. K 8/1/2006 N/A Other Level N/A -' Signature Date ANII ReviewSignature Date N/A Item No. C05.011.078 Weld No. 1-LPS-0746-2 AT TACHMENT A PAME /oy GF IoS 70' Shear 600 Shear Pipe -Si Coverage Claimed 50%-4-Flange @ Valve -S2 No Coverage Claimed Supplemental coverage with 70' Shear Wave Only See Note: Scale :"= I " No scan with the 600 shear from the Surface 2 side of the weld clue to flange configuration.

Limited 0' to 360° from the weld C/L and beyond.Note: 700 shear scan not included in percentage coverage due to requirements of 1OCFR50.55a(b)(2)(xv)(A)(I).

Best effort scan with 70' shear obtained 50% coverage in one axial direction.

Pipe 0 = 6.625"t" = 0.432 Flange = Surface 2 Pipe = Surface 1 Total Exam Volume 1/3 "t" = 0.14 Weld Length. 20.5 Weld + 1/4" ea. Side = 1.20= (Weld + 1/4" ea. Side) x 1/3 "t" x Weld Length= 3.54 in 3 Aaareqate Coverage Calculation S2 = Flange S1 = Pipe S3 = CW S4 = CCW Total =Inspector

/ Date: 0% ( 0% of the Length x 0%50 % ( 100% of the Length x 5'100 % ( 100% of the Length x 1 100% ( 100% of the Length x 1 250 + 4= 62.5% Aggr of the Volume )0% of the Volume)00% of the Volume)00% of the Volume)egate Coverage (pr Report No. UT-06-263 Page 2 of 2 UT Base Met. Lamination Am. .lie UBseMe ATTACHmENT A PAB6E 16S- DF X068 Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: Co Workscope:

1 5.011.085 Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-640 3 Outage No.: ONS1-23-Report No.: UT-06-259 Page: 1 of 2 ISI 98768439 Code: 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

C-F-1/C5.11.85 Location: Drawing No.: 1LPS-751

Description:

Flange to Pipe System ID: 14B Component ID: C05.011.085

/1LPS-751-16 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

.432 /6.0 Limitations:

None Start Time: 1025 Finish Time: 1030 ExaminationSurface:

Inside [] Outside [ Surface Condition:

AS GROUND Lo Location:

9.1.1.1 Wo Location:

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: D.A.S Serial No.: MCNDE32819 Surface Temp.: 86 "F Scanning dB: 60 Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-308

% Amplitude Position One Position Max Position Two Ind.Loss % ...Remarks No.o Back Wall Full Screen Li. W1 W2 MP LM W1 W2 MP L2 W1 W2 MP NRI Comments:

FC 06-04 Results: Accept [R Reject D Info D Initial Section XI Exam Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: Yes-1 00% Reviewed Previous Data: No Examiner Level 11-N Signature Date Review Signature Date B r o w n , T h o m g Z Z ,' d 9 = 8 /1 /2 0 0 6 S ig n at u re. Da Examiner Level N/A Signature Date Site Review Signature Date N/A N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review .,. , Signature Date N/A__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

P Duke r00HIeA Suppleme, tal Report Report No.: Page:

A PAGE 'OE F UT-06-259 2 of 2 Summary No.: C05.011.085 Examiner:

Brown, .,_/Examiner:

N/A Other: N/A Level: II-N Level: N/A Level: N/A Reviewer:

I A ,,, Site Review: N/A ANII Review: Date: Date: Date: __. ___Comments: Sketch or Photo: Z:\UThl DDEAL\ProfileLine2.jpg

-?%jc -S->Z.rLAM~~. -U,)0 C 00 c~ q*/(7 I t I I V A11ACHMERT A PAGE 167 0F /08 DueUT Pipe Weid Examination Site/Unit:

Oconee /Summary No.: CO Workscope:

1 5.011.085 ISl Procedure:

Procedure Rev.: Work Order No.: NDE-600 17 98768439 Outage No.: ONSl -23 Report No.: UT-06-262 Page: 1 of 2 Code:. 1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:

C-F-1/C5.11.85 Location: Drawing No.: 1LPS-751

Description:

Flange to Pipe System ID: 14B Component ID: C05.011.085

/1 LPS-751-16 Size/Length:

N/A Thickness/Diameter:

.432 / 6.0 Limitations:

Yes -See Attached Limitation Report Start Time: 1100 Finish Time: 1116 Examination Surface: Inside [_ Outside 0] Surface Condition:

GROUND Lo Location:

9.1.1.1 Wo Location:'

Centerline of Weld Couplant:

ULTRAGEL II Batch No.: 05125 Temp. Tool Mfg.: D.A.S Serial No.: MCNDE32819 Surface Temp,: 86 0 F Cal. Report No.: CAL-06-311, CAL-06-312, CAL-06-313 Angle Used 0 0 45 45T 1601 70 1 7 Scanning dB 50 52.2 60 Indication(s):

Yes [. No [] Scan Coverage-Upstream W Downstream

[D CW W CCW p/Comments: Results: Accept [ Reject [] Info F] Initial Section Xl Exam Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%: No -62.5 % Reviewed Previous Data: No Examiner Level 11-N gnature Date Revier Signature Date.Houser, Gayle E. 8/1/2006 le/-, 9 Examiner Level ii gnature Date Site Revi Signature Date Jones, Russel E. 8/1/2006 N/A Other Level N/A Signature Date ANII Review Signature -Date N/A Item No. C05.011.085 Weld No. 1-LPS-0751-16 700 Shear 600 Pipe -S2 F Coverage Claimed = 50%AI1ACHMENT i PAGE /08 OFt /Flange -S1 No Coverage Claimed Supplemental coverage with 700 Shear Wave Only See Note: Scale: 1"= 1" No scan with the 600 shear from the Surface I side of the weld due to flange configuration.

Limited 00 to 3600 from the weld CIL and beyond.Note: 70' shear scan not included in percentage coverage due to requirements of IOCFR50.55a(b)(2)(xv)(A)(1).

Best effort scan with 700 shear obtained 50% coverage in one axial direction.

Pipe 0 = 6.5 Flange = Surface 1 Pipe = Surface 2"tr =0.432 Total Exam Volume 1/3 t"T 0.14= (Weld + 1/4" ea. Side) x 1/3 1" x Weld Length= .3.54 in 3 Weld Length =Weld + 1/4" ea. Side =20.5 1.20 Aggregate Coverage Calculation S1 = Flange S2 = Pipe S3 = CW S4.= CCW 0%50 %100 %100 %(0% of the Length x 0% of the Volume)(100% of the Length x 50% of the Volume (100% of the Length x 100% of the Volume (100%. of the Length x 100% of the Volume)Total =250 + 4 =62.5%Aggregate Coverage'gL IV'j7..L~oI.o Inspector

/ Date: Report No. UT-06-061 Page 2 of 2