ML14345B039

Catawba, Units 1 and 2 - Transmittal of Industry High Density Polyethylene (Hdpe) Test Results

ML14345B039
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	12/08/2014
From:	Henderson K Duke Energy Carolinas
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
CNS-14-129
Download: ML14345B039 (117)

Text

Kelvin Henderson S DUKE ev.ee,.Vice President ENERGY. Catawba Nuclear StationDuke EnergyCNO1VP 1 4800 Concord RoadYork, SC 29745CNS-14-129 o: 803,701.4251 f: 803.701.3221 December 8, 2014U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention:

Document Control DeskWashington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy)Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2Docket Numbers 50-413 and 50-414Transmittal of Industry High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) TestResults to NRC

Reference:

Letter from NRC to Duke Energy, "Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1and 2, Relief 06-CN-003 for Use of Polyethylene Material in BuriedService Water Piping (TAC Nos. ME0234 and ME0235)",

dated May27, 2009 (ADAMS Accession Number ML091240156)

The reference letter approved the use of a proposed alternative of HDPE material inlieu of steel material in Nuclear Service Water System piping associated with theemergency diesel generator jacket water coolers.

The letter documented aregulatory commitment made by Duke Energy as stated below:"Techniques to ensure the structural integrity of the fusion joints are still evolving.

There is no performance or operating history regarding the use of HDPE piping innuclear safety-related applications.

The licensee made the following regulatory commitments to address this issue:1. Prior to submitting the Catawba 1 and 2 fourth 10-year ISI interval plan, thelicensee will submit information obtained from the above referenced testingprogram to the NRC staff If the information supports operation of the HDPEpiping using the PE 4710 material for the remainder of the plant life, then thisinformation will be submitted to the NRC staff for information only.2. If the results from the testing program do not support the use of HDPE pipingwith PE 4710 material for the remainder of the plant life, this information will besubmitted to the NRC staff as a part of a subsequent request for an alternative tothe fourth 10-year ISI Interval."

Ac-7www.duke-energy.com U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2December 8, 2014In accordance with this regulatory commitment, please find attached summaryresults in the form of report abstracts or summaries concerning the industry testingprogram of HDPE material.

It is our understanding that the NRC staff has access tothe reports cited in the attachment.

Duke Energy has reviewed the information fromthis program and maintains that, taken collectively, it supports the continued use ofPE 4710 material in the approved Catawba application for the remainder of the plantlife, including applicable life extension.

Therefore, this information is beingsubmitted to the NRC staff for information only prior to submitting the Catawba 1 and2 fourth 10-year ISI interval plan.There are no regulatory commitments contained in this letter or its attachment.

If you have any questions concerning this material, please call L.J. Rudy at (803)701-3084.

Very truly yours,Kelvin Henderson Vice President, Catawba Nuclear StationLJR/sAttachment U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 3December 8, 2014xc (with attachment):

V.M. McCreeRegional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

-Region IIMarquis One Tower245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE Suite 1200Atlanta, GA 30303-1257 G.A. Hutto, Ill, Senior Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Catawba Nuclear StationG.E. Miller, Project Manager (addressee only)U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop 8 G9AWashington, D.C. 20555 Attachment Transmittal of Industry High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) Test Results to NRC IEIRI2lTechnical Supporting Paper for ProposedPolyethylene Pipe Code Case1009663 0.Technical Supporting Paper for ProposedPolyethylene Pipe Code Case1009663Technical Update, December 2004EPRI Project ManagerJack SpannerEPRI -3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 -PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303

• USA800.313.3774

-650.855.2121 askepn@epd.com www.epd.com ABSTRACTThe purpose of this project is to provide technical support to the ASME Boiler & Pressure VesselSubcommittee XI to develop a polyethylene replacement pipe Code case to be used as analternative to repair / replacement for Class 3 piping. This is an interim report that documents some of the technical justifications for proposing the code case. The replacement of carbon steeland stainless steel pipe with polyethylene pipe is an economical solution.

The labor costs toinstall polyethylene pipe are ten times less than that for carbon steel. Historically the ASMECode has not actively supported non-metallic piping in power plants. However, it has beensuccessfully used in non-safety related systems.

The technical justification will likely need toaddress the following potential issues and considerations:

seismic, design changes, examination of fusion and coupler joints, personnel qualifications, procedure qualifications, code allowable stress values and development of an acceptance standard for flaw size acceptability.

Most, butnot all, of these issues are addressed in this document.

.V IfII.ECT21C POWEReIRESE ARCHP INSTITUTE Technical Support for ProposedPolyethylene Pipe Code CaseEffective December 6, 2006, this report has been made publicly available In accordance with Section 734.3(b)X3) and published In accordance with Section 734.7 of the U.S. ExportAdministration Regulations.

As a result of this publication, this report is subject to onlycopyright protection and does not require any license agreement from EPRI. This noticesupersedes the export control restrictions and any proprietary licensed material noticesembedded In the document prior to publication.

5"Technical Support for ProposedPolyethylene Pipe Code Case1011628Final Report, December 2005EPRI Project ManagerJ. SpannerELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hilaiew Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1395

-PO Box 10412, Palo Alto. California 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

• 650.855.2121

• askepr@epd.com

-www.epri.com ABSTRACTThe purpose of this project is to provide technical support to the American Society ofMechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) Subcommittee XI in order todevelop a Code Case for polyethylene (PE) replacement pipe that can be used as an alternative torepair/replacement for Class 3 piping. This is a final report that documents some of the technical justifications for proposing the Code Case. The replacement of carbon steel (CS) and stainless-steel (SS) pipe with PE pipe is an economical solution.

The labor costs to install PE pipe are 10times less than that for carbon steel. Historically, the ASME Code has not actively supported non-metallic piping in power plants. However, it has been successfully used in non-safety-related systems.

Seismic design changes, fusion joint examinations, joining procedure qualifications, Code-allowable stress and fatigue values, and the development of an acceptance standard forflaw size acceptability are potential issues and considerations that this technical justification addresses.

vii "7IESEARCH INSTITUTE Design and Qualification of High-Density Polyethylene for ASME Safety Class 3 Piping Systems1011836 Design and Qualification of High-Density Polyethylene forASME Safety Class 3 Piping Systems1011836Technical Update, December 2005EPRI Project ManagersA. MachielsD. MunsonELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1395

-PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

.650.855.2121

-askapd@ epd.com

• www.epri.com REPORT SUMMARYThis report identifies the activities necessary and recommends a plan to gather needed data toestablish design and qualification methods that will serve as the basis for ASME and regulatory approvals for allowing the nuclear power industry to use high-density polyethylene for SafetyClass 3 applications.

Background

High-density polyethylene (HDPE) has many advantages as compared to metallic pipe. Theyinclude lower cost, lighter weight, higher resistance to seismic loads (particularly with regard toburied piping applications),

and no tendency to corrode, form corrosion

deposits, or hosttubercles.

Use of HDPE is permitted by the ASME B3 1.1 code, and has been applied for non-safety applications, but is currently not addressed in the ASME Section III code for safety-related applications.

Objective V To identify the activities necessary to obtain ASME and regulatory approvals for use ofHDPE for nuclear (safety)

Class 3 applications, and" To formulate a plan to achieve this goal as related to structural and seismic issues.ApproachA joint ASME Section III/Section XI Plastic Pipe Project Team (which includes members of theresearch team) has been formed to develop two code cases to allow HDPE to be used in nuclearClass 3 applications.

One code case will be for below-ground pipe and one will be for above-ground pipe. The ASME Code requires that appropriate and sufficient rules be developed forGeneral Requirements, Materials, Design, Fabrication, Non-Destructive Examination, Testing,Over-Pressure Protection, and Records so that the material will behave as intended in itsenvironment.

The research team has met and participated with the ASME Project Team and held discussions with numerous individuals and organizations with expertise in HDPE. The research team hasalso reviewed the meeting minutes of a nuclear plant owner that met with the US NuclearRegulatory Committee for preliminary discussions on submitting a Request for Regulatory Relief to allow use of HDPE for a specific ASME Class 3 application.

Gaps in currentknowledge, data and technology as related to structural and seismic requirements have beenidentified.

This activity has included design analyses of two sample piping systems (one below-v I0ground and one above-ground).

Each analysis identified gaps that have been associated withorganizations that are best positioned to resolve them. These organizations include ASMEProject Team members' organizations,,

other industry organizations, and EPRI.ResultsThe recommended EPRI activities have been organized into three phases:-Phase I -Obtaining ASME and regulatory approvals for the first specific application of thelead plant (a specific buried-pipe design).-Phase II -Obtaining blanket ASME and regulatory approvals for use of a specific HDPEmaterial in both below-ground and above-ground applications.

-Phase III -Extending the knowledge and data base of HDPE to allow:" Use of a wider range of product types (e.g., more types of piping components and otherproducts such as valves)." Use of a second HDPE material" HDPE to be used in environments where fire resistance is required.

" Additional repair options and technology in cases of damage to the product.EPRI Perspective HDPE appears to be an attractive option for repair or replacement of service water piping that isdamaged by corrosion.

The work identified in this plan should provide sufficient data to fill thecode and regulatory gaps as related to structural and seismic issues.KeywordsService water systemsPolyethylene Below-ground pipingAbove-ground pipingReplacement Safety gradevi

/IIFI.=I21E'CTRC POWERI=rai I RESEARCH INSTITUTE Nondestructive Evaluation:

Seismic Design Criteria for Polyethylene Pipe Replacement Code Case1013549Effective December 6, 2006, this report has been made publicly available in accordance with Section734.3(b)(3) and published in accordance with Section 734.7 of the U.S. Export Administration Regulations.

As a result of this publication, this report is subject to only copyright protection and does notrequire any license agreement from EPRI. This notice supersedes the export control restrictions and anyproprietary licensed material notices embedded in the document prior to publication.

Nondestructive Evaluation:

Seismic Design Criteria for Polyethylene Pipe Replacement Code Case1013549Technical Update, September 2006EPRI Project ManagerJ. SpannerELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hilivlew Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

-PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

• 650.855.2121, askeprI@eprl.com

• www.epri.com

/3ABSTRACTEPRI sponsored this report to provide technical support for a Relief Request and an AmericanSociety of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Case to allowmedium- and high-density polyethylene (PE) pipe to be used as an alternative for repairing orreplacing buried Class 3 piping.The replacement of buried carbon steel pipe with polyethylene pipe is an economical solution.

The labor costs to install polyethylene pipe are 10 times less than that for carbon steel. TheASME Code has not historically actively supported nonmetallic piping in power plants.However, it has been successfully used in non-safety-related systems such as water mains andnatural gas pipelines.

This document proposes the analyses and allowable limit of all modes of failure of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) piping made from PE 3408 resin. The methods comply with ASME PowerPiping Code B31.1-2004 and Section III of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code.Extensive use was made of industrial

research, data, and experience for 40 years of use of HDPEpiping. Specifically, information was compiled from the Chevron-Phillips Chemical Company's 2003 Performance Pipe Engineering Manual [1]. ASTM standards and previous manuals onHDPE piping are also referenced.

Allowable stresses are based on published data for design andservice levels A to D.Bending fatigue data for this application must be obtained so that the fatigue evaluation fromseismic loading can be conducted more accurately.

At present, there is no known extensive bending fatigue data on HDPE available in the open literature.

A test program has been fundedby EPRI. Material and specimens for that program were ordered in March 2006, and data will beobtained this summer. Preliminary testing on HDPE piping indicated that cyclic failure strainsare on the order of 20,000 to 25,000 giin/in.

Because of these large strains, bending fatigue fromseismic excitation on buried pipe should not affect system design. However, these data areneeded to understand the dynamic behavior of this material.

If approved as a Code Case, these design recommendations should be incorporated into NCA-2142, NCA-3252, ND-3 100, ND-3600, Non-Mandatory Appendix B, and Non-Mandatory Appendix N of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC),Section III.vii I -ELECTRIC POWERI RESEARCH INSTITUTE An Integrated Project Plan to Obtain Code andRegulatory Approval to Use High-Density Polyethylene in ASME Class 3 Piping Applications 1013572Effective December 6, 2006, this report has been made publicly available in accordance with Section 734.3(b)(3) and published in accordance with Section 734.7 of the U.S.Export Administration Regulations.

As a result of this publication, this report is subjectto only copyright protection and does not require any license agreement from EPRI.This notice supersedes the export control restrictions and any proprietary licensedmaterial notices embedded in the document prior to publication.

Is'An Integrated Project Plan to ObtainCode and Regulatory Approval toUse High-Density Polyethylene inASME Class 3 Piping Applications 1013572Technical Update Report, October 2006EPRI Project ManagerA. MachielsELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hilview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, Callfornia 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

• 650.855.2121

• askepri@epri.com

.www.epri.com 4rABSTRACTDegradation of service water systems is a major issue facing nuclear power plant owners, andmany plants will require repair or replacement of existing carbon steel piping components.

It isalso desirable to improve the safety and reliability of the raw water systems for new nuclearplants. Selection and use of improved materials for these systems would be a significant milestone to meet this goal.In both the United States and in Europe, high-density polyethylene (PE) has been used in nuclearplant non-safety service water systems and found to perform well. However, high-density polyethylene is not currently included in the ASME Section III Code for use in safety-related systems; and the NRC does not currently permit its use in such systems.The NRC has indicated that they want industry in general and the ASME Code in particular totake the lead on the issue. ASME is currently in the process of developing and approving CodeCase N-755 for buried Class 3 piping systems and will soon undertake a similar effort to developand approve a Code Case for aboveground Class 3 piping systems.Three EPRI organizations are currently supporting the development of the two Code Cases.Nondestructive examination (NDE) has responsibility for installation, inspection, and qualityassurance issues. The Repair and Replacement Application Center (RRAC) has responsibility forsupporting the development of a fusing standard and qualification of methods to repair damagedPE pipe. Balance of Plant (BOP) Corrosion has responsibility for design and seismicqualification issues. This report is a Project Plan for the BOP Corrosion activities.

v 1"7Fatigue and Capacity Testing ofHigh-Density Polyethylene Pipe andPipe Components Fabricated fromPE47101015062Final Report, December 2007EPRI Project ManagerS. FindlanELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

• PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

° USA800,313.3774

-650.855.2121

• askepri@epri.com

-www.epr.com (SABSTRACTFor low-temperature piping systems subject to corrosion, such as service water systems innuclear power plants, replacement of buried carbon steel pipe with high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe is a cost-effective solution.

Labor costs to install polyethylene pipe are less thanthat for carbon steel, and HDPE pipe has much greater resistance to corrosion.

Until recently, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code has not accommodated use ofnon-metallic piping in nuclear safety-class piping systems.

However, HDPE pipe has beensuccessfully used in non-safety-related systems in nuclear power facilities and other industries such as water mains and natural gas pipelines.

This report presents results of fatigue and capacitytesting of PE 4710 (cell classification 445474C)

HDPE material and piping products.

Thisinformation was developed to support and provide a strong technical basis for the stressand fatigue capacities used in the design and analysis of HDPE piping systems in nuclearsafety-related applications.

The data also may be useful for applications of HDPE pipe incommercial electric power generation plants, chemical plants, process, and wastewater plants.vii 19C , ,POWERRtESEARICH I NSTIT"UTE.

Fatigue and Capacity Testing of High DensityPolyethylene Pipe Material1014902lUNDER THEI1NUCLEARJ Fatigue and Capacity Testing of High Density Polyethylene Pipe Material1014902Technical Update, April 2007EPRI Project ManagerS. FindlanWork to develop this product was completed under theEPRI Nuclear Quality Assurance Program.ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hiltview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

• PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

• USA800.313.3774

-650.855.2121

• askepri@epn.com

-www.eprd.corn ABSTRACTFor low temperature piping systems subject to corrosion, like service water systems in nuclearpower plants, replacement of buried carbon steel pipe with high density polyethylene (HDPE)pipe is a cost-effective solution.

The labor costs to install polyethylene pipe are less than that forcarbon steel and HDPE pipe has a much greater resistance to corrosion.

Until recently, theASME Code has not accommodated the use of non-metallic piping in nuclear safety class pipingsystems.

However, HDPE pipe has been successfully used in non-safety related systems innuclear power facilities and other industries such as water mains and natural gas pipelines.

Thisreport presents the results of fatigue testing of PE 4710 HDPE material, and the load deflection characteristics of a 4710/3408 pipe flange. This information was developed to support andprovide a strong technical basis for stress and fatigue capacities to be used in the design andanalysis of HDPE piping systems in nuclear safety related applications.

The data may also beuseful for applications of HDPE pipe in commercial electric power generation plants, chemicalplants, process, and waste water plants.vii EL,2 1 CTIC POWERRESEARCH INSTITUTE FatigueTesting of High-Density Polyethylene Pipe and Pipe Components Fabricated from PE 4710- 2008UpdatePREPAREDUNDER THENUCLEAR0PROGRAM Fatigue Testing of High-Density Polyethylene Pipe and PipeComponents Fabricated fromPE 4710 -2008 Update1016719Final Report, December 2008EPRI Project ManagerS. FindlanWork to develop this product was completed under theEPRI Nuclear Ouality Assurance Program.ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hiliview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

-PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

• 650.855.2121

-askepri@epr.com

• www.epri.com ABSTRACTFor corroded piping in low temperature

systems, such as service water systems in nuclear powerplants, replacement of carbon steel pipe with high density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe is a cost-effective solution.

The labor costs to install polyethylene pipe are less than that for carbon steeland HDPE pipe has a much greater resistance to corrosion.

In Code Case N-755, the ASMEBoiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section 1I1, Division I currently permits the use of non-metallic piping in buried safety Class 3 piping systems.

Additionally, HDPE pipe has beensuccessfully used in non-safety-related systems in nuclear power facilities and other industries such as water mains and natural gas pipelines.

This report presents the results of fatigue testingof PE 4710 (cell classification 445474C and 445574C)

HDPE piping components.

Thisinfon-nation was developed to support and provide a strong technical basis for the fatiguecapacities and stress intensification factors to be used in the design and analysis of HDPE pipingsystems in nuclear safety-related applications.

The data may also be useful for applications ofHDPE pipe in commercial electric power generation plants, chemical plants, process, and wastewater plants.vii ELECTRIC POWERRESEARCH INSTIIUTE Tensile Testing of Cell Classification 445474CHigh-Density Polyethylene Pipe MaterialEffective June 10, 2009, this report has been made publicly available in accordance with Section 734.3(b)(3) and published in accordance with Section 734.7 of the U.S.Export Administration Regulations.

As a result of this publication, this report is subjectto only copyright protection and does not require any license agreement from EPRI.This notice supersedes the export control restrictions and any proprietary licensedmaterial notices embedded in the document prior to publication PREPAREDUNDER THENUCLEAR Tensile Testing of Cell Classification 445474C High Density Polyethylene Pipe Material1018351Final Report, December 2008EPRI Project ManagerS. FindlanWork to develop this product was completed under theEPRI Nuclear Quality Assurance Program.ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hiltview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

-PO Box 10412. Palo Alto, Califomia 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

• 650.855.2121

• askeprf@epri.com

• www.epri.com ABSTRACTFor corroded piping in low temperature

systems, such as service water systems in nuclear powerplants, replacement of carbon steel pipe with high density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe is a cost-effective solution.

The labor costs to install polyethylene pipe are less than that for carbon steeland HDPE pipe has a much greater resistance to corrosion.

In Code Case N-755, the ASMEBoiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1 currently permits the use of non-metallic piping in buried safety Class 3 piping systems.

Additionally, HDPE pipe has beensuccessfully used in non-safety related systems in nuclear power facilities and other industries such as water mains and natural gas pipelines.

This report presents the results of standard tensiletesting on cell composition 445474C HDPE material.

The objective was to provide sufficient tensile test data of cell classification 445474C HDPE to support and provide a strong technical basis for stress capacities to be used in the design and analysis of HDPE piping systems innuclear safety related applications.

The report provides values for yield stress, yield strain,ultimate strain, and elastic modulus.

Material test data were obtained by conducting standardtensile tests on material tensile test specimens.

The testing was conducted consistent with therequirements of ASTM D-638-03.

Specimens were cut in the axial and hoop direction from cellcomposition 445474C HDPE piping spools. Both new material and thermally aged specimens were tested at temperatures ranging from 50°F to 180'F. The results of the tensile test data areprovided in this report. In addition, the results are compared with the cell classification 345464CHDPE material results presented in EPRI Report 1013479.vii ar~rai I ESEARCH INSTITUTE Nondestructive Evaluation:

NDE for High DensityPolyethylene (HDPE) Pipe for Cold Fusion2009 Emerging Issue1019141 Nondestructive Evaluation:

NDE for High DensityPolyethylene (HDPE) Pipe for Cold Fusion2009 Emerging Issue1019141Technical Update, November 2009EPRI Project ManagersJ. SpannerC. ParsnowELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

• PO Box 10412, Palo Alto. California 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

-650.855.2121

-askepri@epri.com

• www.epn.com REPORT SUMMARYBackground Over the past several years, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has been investigating nondestructive evaluation (NDE) techniques to volumetrically examine butt fusion joints in highdensity polyethylene (HDPE) piping. The interest in this comes from AmerenUE's CallawayPlant and Duke Energy's Catawba Plant both submitting relief requests to the U.S. NuclearRegulatory Commission (NRC) for using HDPE in place of carbon steel piping in Section III,Class 3 systems in accordance with Code Case N-755. Carbon steel piping in service waterapplications is prone to fouling, corrosion, and microbiological attack. In comparison, HDPEdoes not rust, rot, corrode, or support biological growth. Although volumetric examination is notcurrently required for carbon steel Class 3 applications, it is believed that it might becomerequired for other installations of HDPE piping as Callaway was required to do for its reliefrequest.

The development of a volumetric examination technique was driven by a concern forcold (that is, partial) fusion or lack of (absence) fusion. Therefore, Structural Integrity Associates has developed a technique for examining butt fusion joints in HDPE using ultrasonic phasedarray-an alternative technique to the more commonly used time-of-flight diffraction technique.

Twenty-seven 12-in. (305-mm)

diameter, 1.25-in.

(31.75-mm) thick butt fusion joint samples,some containing cold fusion, were examined using the ultrasonic phased array technique.

The27 samples were fabricated and provided by EPRI. This report documents the findings from thelaboratory testing.Objectives

• To fabricate HDPE butt fusion welds containing cold fusion flaws" To examine the samples using a 2-D matrix phased array ultrasonic inspection technique ApproachUsing recent industry experience, butt fusion welds were made outside the acceptable joiningparameters set forth by the nuclear and plastic pipe industries.

Three variables were altered toprovide possibly flawed samples in order to produce cold fusion. Cold fusion is a new issue inthe nuclear industry and is still in the early stages of definition.

It essentially creates a visuallyacceptable fusion weld while lacking the integrity to maintain operating pressures for the entiretyof its design life because of incomplete cross linking and entanglement of the polyethylene chains across thejoint faces.The unacceptable fused samples were examined using a newly developed phased array technique that allows for acceptable coverage of the weld and provides the capability of detecting artificial flaws less than 0.1 in. (2.54 mm) in diameter.

The results of the examinations would help the industry to explore possible methods to reliablyinspect HDPE volumetrically, and the samples would be destructively tested to confirm, deny, orreveal integrity issues in the weld area that would indicate the presence of a molecularly unreliable joint.V 31ResultsA total of 27 samples made up the scanned sample set, including samples that were fused underacceptable circumstances.

The only condition that produced indications in the majority ofsamples was subjected to the longest amount of cooling time before pressure was applied tocreate fusion. Two other samples exhibited indications; this might be the result of variations notaccounted for during the fabrication of the welds.The 2-D matrix phased array technology was demonstrated to be a feasible technique before theproject was started and has continued to provide reliable and accurate

results, which will beconfirmed by the final destructive tests of this sample set.EPRI Perspective The investigation of the use and application of HDPE pipe in the nuclear industry is in itsinfancy, and every experience provides valuable data for all parties concerned.

The development and fabrication of the samples used in this project are indicators that we have yet to accurately define an unacceptable joint using volumetric examination, when unacceptable parameters areused to make joints as indicated by the fusion machine data logger. Each sample in this set wasspecifically made to look visually acceptable;

however, the operation of the fusion process wasaltered with the intent to challenge the integrity of the fusion weld. Research to demonstrate aninspection technique that can detect welds with flaws indicative of an improper weld willcontinue as the implementation of this material grows throughout the nuclear industry.

KeywordsCold fusionHigh density polyethylene (HDPE)Phased arrayUltrasound vi

ELECTRIC POWERESEARCH INSTITUTE Repair of High Density Polyethylene Pipe1019172NOTICE: This report contains proprietary information that is the intellectual property of EPRI. Accordingly, it is available only under license from EPRIand may not be reproduced or disclosed, wholly or in part, by any licensee toany other person or organization.

33Repair of High Density Polyethylene Pipe1019172Technical Update, November 2009EPRI Project ManagerA. PetersonCosponsors RRAC Steering Committee ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 USA800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepd@epd.com www.epd.com 31t.PRODUCT DESCRIPTION Degradation of service water systems is a major issue facing nuclear power plant owners, andmany plants will require repair or replacement of their existing carbon steel piping components.

High-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe has been used in non-safety service water systems formore than 10 years and has performed well. Recent applications of HDPE pipe at Duke Energy'sCatawba Station and Ameren's Calloway Plant have encouraged the nuclear industry to considerusing this type of pipe as an alternative to steel in low-energy applications.

This action has beenfacilitated by the issuance of American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code Case N-755, Use of Polyethylene (PE) Plastic Pipe,Section III, Division I and XI. The results described in this report are intended to support the nuclear industry by providing additional repairtechniques for use on HDPE pipe. When these results are used in conjunction with a Request forRegulatory Relief, a nuclear plant operator will have a viable option for replacing a conventional steel Class 3 system with HDPE pipe; alternative repair techniques for that system will also beavailable should they be needed.Results and FindingsThe repair methods described in conjunction with those already available-including saddlefusion repair, electro-fusion patch repair, electro-fusion spool repair, mechanical fitting repair,repairs with solid sleeve, and flange adapter spool repair-should provide sufficient options formost scenarios.

Also of note is that the new techniques-tapered hole and plug repair and cavityrepair-require practice.

For example, the amount of time to heat the sidewalls of the hole or theamount of pressure applied to the plug will likely vary with the size of the component.

A review of the testing yields several conclusions:

• Sufficient heat must be applied using both techniques in order for the process to work.* When using the tapered plug method it is critical that the angles machined for the plug andhole allow for full contact." Grinding or sanding a flaw out of the pipe wall for purposes of filling the cavity with HDPE"filler" material should be done such that the heating tool has easy access to all walls andcorners.* Mechanical testing confirms that the tapered plug method of repair is a viable option thatmaintains structural integrity.

Challenges and Objective(s)

The objective of this research was to apply two new techniques-tapered hole and plug as wellas cavity repair-to the repair of HDPE piping. The challenge in repairing plastics is that meltedpolyethylene does not "flow" or behave the same way as molten steels, and new training withplastics is often required.

Applications, Values, and UseHDPE materials will offer significant economic benefits to utilities.

The primary savings comesfrom the short installation time of HDPE piping compared to the weld times currently requiredV for steel piping. While current rules only allow for HDPE piping in buried piping systems, thebeginning stages for aboveground use are already being drafted.EPRI Perspective Three separate EPRI groups have provided technical support for implementation of Code CaseN-755-Balance of Plant (BOP), Non-Destructive Examination (NDE), and Welding and RepairTechnology Center (WRTC). BOP staff has focused primarily on design and seismicqualification requirements.

NDE staff has primary responsibility for examination issues. TheWRTC has investigated potential repair techniques that could be employed in the field. All ofthese areas will need to be considered for future ASME Code Case development.

Additional information about HDPE piping is available in the following EPRI reports:

AnIntegrated Project Plan to Obtain Code and Regulatoiy Approval to Use High-Density Polyethylene in ASME Class 3 Piping Applications (1013572, October 2006); Design andQualIfication of High-Density Polyethylene for ASME Safety Class 3 Piping Systems (1011836, December 2005); Tensile Testing of Cell Classification 345464C High Density Polyethylene Pipe Material (1013479, December 2006); and Fatigue and Capacity Testing of High DensityPolyethylene Pipe Material (1014902, April 2007).ApproachAfter repairing several coupons using tapered hole and plug and cavity repair methods,investigators sectioned the samples to examine the integrity of the repair. They validated successful fusion by destructively examining repaired samples via sectioning, visual observation, and tensile testing.KeywordsHigh Density Polyethylene (HDPE) PipePlastic pipeFused jointPipe repairASME Code Case N-755vi I (.ELECTRIC POWERr IRESEARCH INSTITUTE I _2012 TECHNICAL REPORTProgram on Technology Innovation:

Crystallinity Characterization in High-Density Polyethylene Pipe and Welds Using PortableNuclear Magnetic Resonance I

37Program on Technology Innovation:

Crystallinity Characterization in High-Density Polyethylene Pipeand Welds Using PortableNuclear MagneticResonance This document does NOT meet the requirements ofI OCFR50 Appendix B, I OCFR Part 2 1, ANSIN45.2-1977 and/or the intent of ISO-9001 (1994)EPRI Project Managerj. WallRESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview AvenuePalo Alto, CA 94304-1338 USAPO Box 10412Palo Alto, CA 943030813 USA800.313.3774 650.855.2121 asýepri@epri

.cor 1025581w,,w.epfi.or Final Report, May 2012 AbstractPortable nuclear magnetic resonance was used to determine thecrystallinity of welds and sections of high-density polyethylene pipe.Researchers determined that the pipe sections tested exhibited heterogeneous crystallinity due to original processing.

The pipefusion welds showed a relative increase in crystallinity as compared tothe unwelded pipe material, as expected.

It is unlikely that portablenuclear magnetic resonance can be used to resolve defects in high-density polyethylene pipe fusion welds. The crystallinity heterogeneity of the samples is an interesting finding because such aphenomenon might contribute to fusion weld defects.

More researchis required to determine whether there is a correlation betweencrystallinity heterogeneity in high-density polyethylene pipes andfusion weld defects.KeywordsCrystallinity Fusion weld defectsHigh-density polyethylene pipeNuclear magnetic resonance 39)armaiIELECTRIC POWERRESEARCH INSTITUTE CapacityTesting of High-Density Polyethylene Bolted Flanged Joints LfoCapacity Testing of High-Density Polyethylene Bolted Flanged Joints1020438Final Report, March 2010EPRI Project ManagerB. ClarkWork to develop this product was completed under the EPRI Nuclear Quality Assurance Programin compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B and 10 CFR 21.1 NOELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

• PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

-650.855.2121

-askepri@epri.com

-www.epri.com IfIABSTRACTFor corroded piping in low-temperature

systems, such as service water systems in nuclear powerplants, replacement of carbon steel pipe with high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe is a cost-effective solution.

The labor costs to install polyethylene pipe are less than that for carbon steel,and HDPE pipe has a much greater resistance to corrosion.

In Code Case N-755, the ASMEBoiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1 permits the use of HDPE piping inburied safety-related Class 3 piping systems.

Additionally, HDPE pipe has been successfully used in non-safety-related systems in nuclear power facilities and other industries such as watermains and natural gas pipelines.

This report provides the initial bolt torque requirements for HDPE-to-steel and HDPE-to-HDPE flanged connections to ensure that the flange capacity (and the subsequent flange qualification) iscontrolled by the capacity of the pipe-to-flange-adapter butt fusion joint. For the HDPE-to-steel

flanges, test data from previously conducted flange capacity testing were used to develop andbenchmark finite element models. These models were used to establish the interfacial pressurethat was achieved during the testing.

Using this base model, test data from previously conducted leak capacity testing of flanged HDPE-to-steel joints were used. The bolt torques required toachieve this interfacial stress were calculated for various HDPE pipe sizes and standard diameterratios (SDR). The results were then compared to the torques specified in Plastics Pipe Institute (PPI) Technical Note 38 (PPI-TN-38).

For the HDPE-to-HDPE flanged connections, leakagecapacity testing was conducted for 4-inch SDR 7 and SDR 11 pipe. Finally, suggested changes toimplement the results of this investigation in Code Case N-755 are provided.

vii ELECTRIC POWERRESEARCH INSTITUTE Stress Intensification and Flexibility Factors of HighDensity Polyethylene Pipe FittingsVolume 1: Testing ResultsPREPAREDUNDER THEN U CLEAR q3Stress Intensification and Flexibility Factors of High DensityPolyethylene Pipe FittingsVolume 1: Testing Results1020439, V1Final Report, October 2010EPRI Project ManagerB. ClarkWork to develop this product was completed under theEPRI Nuclear Quality Assurance Program.ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hiliview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

• PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 USA800.313.3774

.650.855.2121

• askeprt@epri.com

• www.epri.com ABSTRACTFor corroded piping in low-temperature

systems, such as service water systems in nuclear powerplants, the replacement of carbon steel pipe with high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe is acost-effective solution.

Polyethylene pipe can be installed at much lower labor costs than carbonsteel pipe, and HDPE pipe has a much greater resistance to corrosion.

The ASME Boiler andPressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1 currently permits the use of nonmetallic piping inburied safety Class 3 piping systems.

In addition, HDPE pipe has been successfully used in non-safety-related systems in nuclear power facilities and is commonly used in other industries suchas water mains and natural gas pipelines.

This report presents the results of fatigue testing of PE 4710 (cell classification 445474C and445574C)

HDPE piping components.

The information was developed to support and provide astrong technical basis for the fatigue capacities of HDPE pipe fittings.

Stress intensification factors and flexibility factors for use in the design and analysis of HDPE piping systems innuclear safety-related applications were also developed.

The data might also be useful forapplications of HDPE pipe in commercial electric power generation facilities and chemical,

process, and wastewater plants through their possible use in the B31 series piping codes.vii 4%rELECTRIC POWERRESEARCH INSTITUTE Stress Intensification and Flexibility Factors of HighDensity Polyethylene Pipe FittingsVolume 2: Test Procedures PREPAREDUNDER THENUCLEAR Stress Intensification and Flexibility Factors of High DensityPolyethylene Pipe FittingsVolume 2: Test Procedure

1020439, V2Final Report, October 2010EPRI Project ManagerB. ClarkWork to develop this product was completed under theEPRI Nuclear Quality Assurance Program.ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

-PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

• USA800.313.3774

• 650.855.2121

.askepfl@epd.com

.www.epri.com 14.7REPORT SUMMARYThe results presented in this report are intended to support the development of American Societyof Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code Case N-755 for the use of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) in buried and aboveground ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section I1I,Division 1 safety-related piping applications by determining the fatigue capacities and ASMEstress intensification factors (SIFs) needed for piping design. These include fatigue data, stressintensification

factors, and flexibility factors for selected components.

This report presents thedetailed results of the fatigue testing of molded tees, electrofusion branch saddles, sidewallfusion branch connections, 450 wyes, and HDPE-to-HDPE flanged connections.

Stressintensification factors are developed for those fittings.

Empirical equations for stressintensification factors and flexibility factors are also developed for elbows, bends, tees, andbranched connections in support of Code Case N-755. Detailed fatigue testing results for thesecomponents were previously reported in Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) reports1015062 and 1016479.

Data and information from the previous reports are repeated as requiredfor clarification and for the development of the empirical equations.

Background

The degradation of service water systems is a major issue facing nuclear power plant owners,and many plants will require the repair or replacement of existing carbon steel pipingcomponents.

HDPE has been used in non-safety service water systems for more than eight yearsand found to perform well.Objective

• To develop SLFs and flexibility factors for common types of HDPE pipe fittings to supportthe use of HDPE Pipe in ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1,Subsection ND (safety Class 3) applications ApproachStress versus cycles (S-N) failure curves were developed for the HDPE pipe fittings.

They weregenerated using displacement-controlled cyclic testing based on the requirements of the ASMEBoiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1, Mandatory Appendix II. The S-Ncurves for the fittings were then compared with the S-N curves previously developed for butt-fusion joints. The SIFs were developed based on the comparison of the S-N curves, andflexibility factors were developed on the basis of static tests and comparison to finite element(stick) models.PE 47 10 HDPE material with a cell classification of 445474C was used for the run pipesegments, and molded pipe fittings were manufactured from PE 4710 with a cell classification of445574C-the material presently used by most molded fitting manufacturers.

v

.l.. , I ELECTRIC POWERRESEARCH INSTITUTE Stress Intensification and Flexibility Factors of HighDensityPolyethylene Pipe FittingsVolume 3: Supporting DataPREPAREDUNDER THENUCLEAR140' Stress Intensification and Flexibility Factors of High DensityPolyethylene Pipe FittingsVolume 3: Supporting Data1020439, V3Final Report, October 2010EPRI Project ManagerB. ClarkWork to develop this product was completed under theEPRI Nuclear Quality Assurance Program.ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

.PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

• USA800.313.3774

.650.855.2121

• askepd@epd.com

• www.eprl.com ABSTRACTFor corroded piping in low-temperature

systems, such as service water systems in nuclear powerplants, the replacement of carbon steel pipe with high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe is acost-effective solution.

Polyethylene pipe can be installed at much lower labor costs than carbonsteel pipe, and HDPE pipe has a much greater resistance to corrosion.

The ASME Boiler andPressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1 currently permits the use of nonmetallic piping inburied safety Class 3 piping systems.

In addition, HDPE pipe has been successfully used in non-safety-related systems in nuclear power facilities and is commonly used in other industries suchas water mains and natural gas pipelines.

This report presents the results of fatigue testing of PE 4710 (cell classification 445474C and445574C)

HDPE piping components.

The information was developed to support and provide astrong technical basis for the fatigue capacities of HDPE pipe fittings.

Stress intensification factors and flexibility factors for use in the design and analysis of HDPE piping systems innuclear safety-related applications were also developed.

The data might also be useful forapplications of HDPE pipe in commercial electric power generation facilities and chemical,

process, and wastewater plants through their possible use in the B31 series piping codes.vii i; IELECTRIC POWERaaf~ e l IRESEARCH INSTITUTE Evaluation of Design Methods for Above GroundHigh Density Polyethylene PipeI Evaluation of Design Methods forAbove Ground High DensityPolyethylene Pipe1021094Final Report, December 2010EPRI Project ManagerJ. HamelThis document does NOT meet the requirements of10CFR50 Appendix B, 1OCFR Part 21,ANSI N45.2-1977 and/or the intent of ISO-9001 (1994)ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

• PO Box 10412. Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

• USA800.313.3774

• 650.855.2121

-askepri@epd.com

• www.epri.corn 573ABSTRACTThe purpose of this report is to present and illustrate the method for the design analysis andqualification of safety class 2 and 3 above ground high density polyethylene (HDPE) pipingsystems.There are potential economic and safety benefits for pursuing the use of HDPE pipe above-ground due to its resistance to microbial attack and corrosion.

Buried HDPE pipe has been usedsuccessfully used in many industries, including the nuclear power industry.

HDPE has also beenused extensively above-ground, typically near the ground on closely spaced, ground-mounted supports.

In this report we examine its use in suspended

systems, a viable option, as evidenced by applications in non-nuclear industries, and in a non-safety application in the turbine buildingat the Catawba Nuclear Station.ASME Code Case N-755 has established a method'for the design analysis and qualification ofburied class 2 and 3 HDPE piping systems.

Enclosed in this report are proposed design rules forabove ground piping which relies primarily on the technical basis of Code Case N-755, but alsoaddresses issues specific to above-ground piping. Design issues addressed by the proposedabove-ground code case include sustained loads, seismic loads, thermal expansion loads, jointflexibility, piping supports and the concept of long-term and short-term HDPE properties.

Included is an example problem for which all of the criteria in the proposed code rules areanalyzed.

This example problem incorporates both hand solutions to some of the code-case equations and numerical solution utilizing Caesar II v5.20 software.

Attached in Appendix B isan independent check of the CAESAR II software with the Finite Element Analysis (FEA)software

package, Abaqus 6.10-1.vii irt-EI=P1I* ELECTRIC POWERRESEARCH INSTn7UTE SeismicProperties for High-Density Polyethylene Pipefor Use in Aboveground Applications Volume 1PREPAREDUNDER THENUCLEARPROGRAM Seismic Properties for High-Density Polyethylene for Use inAboveground Applications Volume 1Work to develop Ihis product was completed under the EPRINuclear Quality Assurance Program.EPRI Project ManagerD. MunsonIEIIAICH I N mU3420 Hillview AvenuePalo Alo, CA 94304.1338 USAPO Box 10412Polo Alto, CA 94303.0813 USA800.313.3774 650.855.2121 SL 1021095, Final Report, September 2011 AbstractThe data developed in the three testing tasks described in this report areintended to be used for the seismic design of aboveground high-density polyethylene (HDPE) piping systems.

Under the first task, the materialdamping values for HDPE pipe material were developed throughexperimental methods using the log decrement approach.

Cantilevered beam samples were deflected and released, and the resulting free vibration response was recorded.

The possible relationship of the damping value tothe natural frequency and stress level of the test samples was studied.Under the second task, the relationship between tensile elastic modulusand strain rates commensurate with seismic loading was determined.

Thiswas accomplished by first establishing a seismic strain rate for HDPE andthen conducting tensile tests using standard ASTM D-638 Type IIItensile specimens.

The tensile testing was conducted at three pull speeds toestablish a basic relationship between tensile elastic modulus and strainrates. This relationship was then used to calculate the modulus at thestrain rates expected under seismic loading.

The third task consisted of thedynamic testing of selected vent-and-drain valve configurations to provideproof of the conceptual designs.

The configurations were subjected toSeismic Qualification Report and Testing Standardization (SQURTS)spectral acceleration followed by checks for leakage and operability of thevalves.<vii >

SELECTRI POWERRESEARCH INSTITUTE Nondestructive Evaluation:

High Density Polyethylene Inspection Technology and Techniques 1021165 Nondestructive Evaluation:

High Density Polyethylene Inspection Technology and Techniques 1021165Technical Update, December 2010EPRI Project ManagerC. ParsnowThis document does NOT meet the requirements of1OCFR50 Appendix B, 1OCFR Part 21,ANSI N45.2-1977 and/or the intent of ISO-9001 (1994)ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

-PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

-650.855.2121

, askepd@epri.com

-www.epr.com 109REPORT SUMMARYOver the past several years, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has been investigating nondestructive examination (NDE) techniques to volumetrically examine butt-fusion joints inhigh-density polyethylene (HDPE) piping. The development of a volumetric examination technique was driven by concern about decreased bonding strength in the weld interface withoutvisual indications on the outside surface of the weld bead. EPRI created HDPE samples ofvarious diameters and wall thicknesses that exhibit decreased bond strength, simulated contamination from the field environment, and ultrasonic reflectors.

This report documents findings from HDPE sample fabrication and laboratory testing.Background The interest in developing volumetric examination techniques for HDPE in nuclear power plantscomes from Ameren UE's Callaway Plant and Duke Energy's Catawba Plant submitting reliefrequests to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) to use HDPE in place of carbonsteel piping in Section III, Class 3 systems in accordance with Code Case N-755 [2]. Carbonsteel piping in service water applications is prone to fouling, corrosion, and microbiological attack. In comparison, HDPE does not rust, rot, corrode, or support biological growth. Whilevolumetric examination is not currently required for carbon steel Class 3 applications, it isbelieved that it may become required for other HDPE piping installations because Callaway wasrequired to perform it for its relief request.In previous

reports, EPRI has referred to HDPE joints that are considered visually acceptable yetexhibit a poor fusion condition without experiencing "cold fusion."

However, as the term "coldfusion" is also used to describe a condition found in traditional metallic welds and lacks a properdefinition to use interchangeably in the HDPE industry, the term "reduced bond strength" is usedto provide clarification.

This term is more accurate and less susceptible to scrutiny as it canencompass all unacceptable joints that display visually acceptable outer surface weld beadconditions and unacceptable fusion interface strength parameters when referenced to bulk pipestrength.

These joints may lack the integrity to maintain operating pressures for their design lifedue to incomplete cross-linking and entanglement of the polyethylene chains across thejoint faces.Objectives

" To fabricate HDPE butt-fusion welds exhibiting reduced bond strength or contamination.

" To examine these samples using various volumetric inspection techniques, including two-dimensional and tandem phased array, time-of-flight diffraction and other ultrasonic andmicrowave techniques ApproachUtilizing recent industry experience, the butt-fusion welds were made outside the acceptable joining parameters set forth by the nuclear and plastic pipe industry.

Three variables were alteredto provide flawed samples with reduced bond strength, which is used in place of the term "coldfusion."

The unacceptable fused samples were examined using a newly developed tandemtechnique and a two-dimensional phased array technique that allows acceptable coverage of theweld and is capable of detecting artificial flaws less than 0.1 (2.54mm) inch in diameter.

Thev

&0project team chose these techniques as the initial inspection tool because they were used in the2009 Emerging Issues project (described in EPRI report 1019141) and have proved successful indemonstrations to detect contaminants in HDPE weld interfaces.

ResultsThe project team scanned 40 samples, including some that were fused under unacceptable circumstances.

The results cannot yet be confirmed as only samples with contamination anddecreased bond strength fusion conditions were inspected and the control samples have not yetdefined the good condition.

The two-dimensional phased array technology was demonstrated to be a feasible technique before the project was initiated and has continued to provide reliable and accurate

results, whichwill be confirmed by the final destructive tests of this sample set.The results of the examinations will help the industry explore additional inspection methods toreliably inspect HDPE volumetrically.

The project team will destructively test all of the samplesat the end of all of the volumetric testing to confirm, deny, or reveal integrity issues in the weldarea that indicate the presence of an unreliable joint.EPRI Perspective Investigating the use and application of HDPE pipe in the nuclear industry is in its infancy, andevery experience provides valuable data and information.

The industry is currently defining whatconstitutes an unacceptable joint. However, it is still necessary to begin development andfabrication of samples that represent potential damage mechanisms.

The project team usedunacceptable joining parameters to make joints representative of decreased bond strength asindicated by the fusion machine data logger. Each of the samples in this set was made by alteringthe fusion process from the qualified parameters with the intent to challenge the integrity of thefusion weld. Research to demonstrate an inspection technique that can detect welds with flawsindicative of an improper weld will continue as implementation of this material growsthroughout the nuclear industry.

KeywordsUltrasound Phased arrayHigh density polyethylene (HDPE)Cold fusionReduced bond strengthvi (01ELECTRIC POWERer-=kri I RESEARCH INSTITUTE Slow Crack Growth Testing of High-Density Polyethylene Pipe: 2011UpdatePREPAREDUNDER THENUCLEARBPROGRAM Slow Crack Growth Testing ofHigh-Density Polyethylene Pipe:2011 Update1022565Interim Report, August 2011EPRI Project ManagerD. MunsonWork to develop this product was completed under the EPRI Nuclear Quality Assurance Programin compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B and 10 CFR 21,1 NOELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

-PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

-650.855.2121

-askepi@epri.com

-www.epri.com ABSTRACTThe ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section 111, Division I currently permits the use ofnonmetallic piping in buried Safety Class 3 piping systems.

There have been concerns with theslow crack growth (SCG) resistance from scratches that might occur during fabrication andinstallation or the use of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) piping. This report presents theresults of an investigation into the SCG resistance of notched PE 4710 HDPE pipe and pipematerial.

Both bimodal and unimodal Plastics Pipe Institute rated PE 4710 materials wereincluded in the testing.

Tensile bar coupons were subjected to a constant tensile stress at anelevated temperature, and capped pipe specimens were maintained at constant internal pressureand submerged in water kept at an elevated temperature.

Two different types of scratches as wellas blended-out scratches were applied to the specimens.

For both the tensile coupon specimens and the pressurized pipe specimens, a summary of the failure data is provided.

To estimate pipelife at 140°F (600C)-the maximum temperature permitted in Code Case N-755-I--Popelar datashifts from the test temperatures to this temperature were performed for the pressurized pipespecimens.

In addition, the pipe life at various other temperature and stress combinations wasprojected.

The results also demonstrated a definite correlation between manufacturers' statedPENT values and pipe life.vii ELECTRC POWERRESEARCH INSTITUTE Nondestructive Evaluation:

Ultrasonic Examination Techniques for High Density Polyethylene Pipes1022941 Nondestructive Evaluation:

Ultrasonic Examination Techniques for High Density Polyethylene Pipes1022941Technical Update, November 2011EPRI Project ManagerJ. SpannerThis document does NOT meet the requirements of1 OCFR50 Appendix B, 1 OCFR Part 21,ANSI N45.2-1977 and/or the intent of ISO-9001 (1994)ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

-PO Box 10412, Palo Aito, California 94303-0813

• USA800.313.3774

-650.855.2121

-askepl@epri.rom

-www.epfl.com

&"7ABSTRACTHigh density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe has been used as a replacement material for buriedcarbon steel pipe in non-safety-related systems.

Using the current butt fusion procedure that usesheat and pressure to melt and join two sections of plastic pipe, concerns have been raised thatwould indicate that the presence of decreased bond strength when the welding parameters forfusion set forth by the plastic pipe industry were not followed.

Currently two utilities, AmerenUE at Callaway and Duke-Energy at Catawba, have installed HDPE pipe following the approvalof individual relief requests to use Code Case N-755. Because HDPE pipe is a new material inthe nuclear industry, there are no standardized volumetric examination methods available andnew inspection methods are being investigated to find a reliable nondestructive evaluation (NDE) technique.

This report describes the examination results using ultrasonic linear andtandem phased array techniques and conventional time-of-flight diffraction (TOFD) method forthe selected HDPE samples that were fabricated in 2010.In 2010, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) fabricated 80 joints of HDPE samples,20 joints for each diameter used. These joints were made using 4710 HDPE pipe in four outerdiameter sizes: 6, 12, 14, and 18 in. (15.24, 30.48, 35.56, and 45.72 cm).The ultrasonic phased array scanning was performed by Structural Integrity, and TOFDexaminations were performed by EPRI NDE Program staff. Because there are currently noindustry-established

criteria, all detection and sizing (length and through-wall) examinations were performed using best practices.

KeywordsCold fusionHigh density polyethylene (HDPE)Phased arrayUltrasound V

'-7ELECTRIC POWERSF=Ia I RESEARCH INSTITUTE Fire Testing of High-Density Polyethylene Pipe Fire Testing of High-Density Polyethylene Pipe1023004Final Report, August 2011EPRI Project ManagerD. MunsonThis document does NOT meet the requirements of 1OCFR50Appendix B, 10CFR Part 21, ANSI N45.2-1977 and/or theintent of ISO-9001 (1994)ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alo, California 94304-1338

-PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

• USA800.313.3774

-650,855.2121

• askepd@epd.com

-www.epd.com

'7ABSTRACTThis report presents and demonstrates a method that can be used to provide a fire-resistant barrier for aboveground high-density polyethylene (HDPE) piping systems that might berequired to withstand a postulated fire event.There are potential economic and safety benefits for pursuing the use of HDPE pipe in pipingsystems containing raw or minimally treated water because of its resistance to microbial attackand corrosion.

Buried HDPE pipe has been successfully used in many industries, including thenuclear power industry.

HDPE has also been used extensively aboveground but in areas in whichfire resistance is not an issue. The work summarized in this report is intended to provide a basisfor the use of HDPE in areas in which fire resistance is required.

The work performed in thisstudy was intended to be proof-of-concept only and should not be considered as a qualification or certification test.vii

-70V*iFI~~1 ELECTRIC POWERRESEARCH INSTITUTE 2012 TECHNICAL REPORTLong Term Performance of PE4710 Materials in Disinfectant Treated Nuclear Raw WaterSystems 71Long Term Performance ofPE471 0 Materials inDisinfectant Treated NuclearRaw WaterSystemsThis document does NOT meet the requirements of1 OCFR50 Appendix B, I OCFR Part 2 1, ANSIN45.2-1977 and/or the intent of ISO-9001 (1994).EPRI Project ManagersA. SummeD. MunsonaUIfa 1RRSEARC' H INSTITUT E3420 Hillview AvenuePalo Alto, CA 94304-1338 USAPO Box 10412Palo Alto, CA 94303-0813 USA800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@epri.com wwwepd .corn1025296Final Report, November 2012 Report SummaryDegradation of service water systems is a major issue facing nuclearpower plant owners, and many plants will require repair orreplacement of existing carbon steel piping components.

High-density polyethylene (HDPE) has been used in non-safety servicewater systems for over ten years and found to perform well. AlthoughHDPE has been approved in Code Case N-755-1 of the ASMEBoiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1 for use inburied safety-related Class 3 systems, the Code Case has not yet beenaccepted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

One issueconcerning the long-term performance of HDPE piping is its agingin disinfectant treated nuclear power plant raw water systems.Background HDPE is considered to have three stages in its aging process.

Themechanism of Stage I is the ductile-mechanical viscoelastic creepcommon to all plastics.

The mechanism of Stage II is a brittle-mechanical regime that results in stress-driven slow crack growth.The mechanism of Stage III is a mechanical-chemical process thatinvolves oxidation of the polymer and stress-driven propagation of acrack through the degraded material.

It is not only dependent on thetemperature, stress, and pipe material, but also on the oxidative aggressiveness of the transport fluid.Objectives

" To conduct an engineering assessment of the expectedperformance of polyethylene PE 4710 materials in nuclear powerplant disinfectant treated nuclear raw water systems due to StageIII aging." To identify areas where a more detailed assessment may beneeded.ApproachThis project was separated into 2 phases. In Phase 1, 216 end usecases were modeled for systems with chlorine and chlorine-bromine treatments.

These cases were intended to demonstrate the generallife expectancy trends for the range of operating parameters fornuclear raw water systems.

In Phase 2, the operating parameters wererefmed using the results of Phase 1 and a survey of raw water systemsin 19 nudear plants, culminating in 48 additional cases. Each casewas constructed to represent what is believed to be a conservative approach to projecting performance.

The material characteristics used in the evaluation were from one of the potential conforming suppliers to the nuclear industry.

Phase 2 included an additional 144 73cases using the three generic compound categorizations defined byPlastics Pipe Institute (PPI) standard TN-43.Each of the 408 cases (216 cases from Phase 1 and an additional 192cases from Phase 2) was evaluated using a Stage III aging modelbased on accelerated testing of specific resins, with the data shifted tooperating conditions of the specific case. Case results were placed inone of three categories:

green (high probability for > 40 year life),yellow (likely to perform satisfactorily for 40 years), and red (moredetailed evaluation required).

ResultsThe specific piping material examined in this report was a Category2 resin as defined by PPI TN-43. In general, it is projected toprovide good performance for the end-use scenarios considered.

Ofthe 216 cases evaluated in Phase 1, 179 were designated with a greencategorization, 34 were designated as yellow, and 3 as red. All of theyellow and red categorizations were for the higher temperature heatexchanger discharge piping, where it is believed that the operating parameters were quite conservative.

In Phase 2, 48 new scenarios were modeled for four conservative cases based on refined operating parameters.

Of the 48 scenarios, 40 were designated with greenperformance categorizations and 8 as yellow.Also modeled in Phase 2 were the 3 categories of HDPE piping asdefined by PPI TN-43. The Category 1 resin (the highestperformance category) showed excellent performance with only fouryellow performance categorizations for all 48 conservative casesconsidered.

Applications, Value, and UseClearly understanding the mechanisms of aging for any material, andhence the key factors impacting performance in end-use, is critical tounderstanding both how the material is best applied and thedevelopment of methodologies for projecting long-term performance in service.

To that end, research has been conducted on the long-term aging mechanisms of plastic piping materials in general and PEpipe materials specifically.

In general, the specific PE4710 pipingmaterial examined in this report is projected to provide goodperformance for the end-use scenarios considered.

Also, as discussed in the report, the modeling approach is newly evolved and there are anumber of potential further evolutions that could provide morerefined projections.

KeywordsHigh-density polyethylene, Raw water piping, Aging, Disinfectants

< vi >

.l.-l JELECTRIC POWERRESEARCH INSTITUTE Plant Engineering:

Compilation of Lessons Learnedon Buried and Underground Piping in NuclearPower Plants1025272 75-Plant Engineering:

Compilation of Lessons Learnedon Buried and Underground Piping in NuclearPower Plants1025272Technical Update, November 2012EPRI Project ManagerT. EckertThis document does NOT meet the requirements of10 CFR50 Appendix B, 10 CFR Part 21,ANSI N45.2-1977 and/or the intent of ISO-9001 (1994)ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 HIllview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

-PO Box 10412. Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

-650.855.2121

• askeprl@epd.com

-www.epri.com ABSTRACTThis is a Technical Update report for the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) projectCollation of Buried Pipe Lessons Learned, which is planned to continue through 2013. Theproject is part of EPRI's overall strategy to provide buried pipe program owners with theguidance documents and reference materials to help ensure that buried pipe management guidance is appropriately deployed in the field, as described in the EPRI Nuclear Sector's"Underground Piping and Tank Integrity Strategic Roadmap."

The roadmap contains severalother buried piping technologies for inspection,

analysis, repair, and mitigation of ongoingcorrosion in buried infrastructure.

These include the following:

• Development and delivery of appropriate reference documents and training to support broadknowledge awareness for buried and underground piping" Development and transfer of new buried pipe inspection technologies, such as remote fieldnondestructive evaluation (NDE) inspection robotics* Identification and evaluation of existing technologies that may be directly applied or easilyadapted for nuclear plant buried piping inspection

" Improved understanding regarding the usefulness of guided wave acoustic NDE technologies for buried piping inspections

• Availability of repair and replacement alternatives for buried pipe applications, including high-density polyethylene

• Enhanced buried pipe risk-ranking technologies through updates to existing softwareKeywordsBuried pipeCathodic protection (CP)Excavation High-density polyethylene (HDPE)In-line inspection (ILl)Prestressed concrete cylinder pipe (PCCP)v ELECTRIC POWERaf I I l j RESEARCH INSTITUTE Advanced Nuclear Technology:

The Long-Term Oxidative Resistance of Butt Fusion Joints inHigh-Density Polyethylene Piping Advanced NuclearTechnology:

The Long-Term Oxidative Resistance of ButtFusion Joints in High-Density Polyethylene PipingAll or a portion of the requirements of the EPRI NuclearQuality Assurance Program apply to this product.YES eEPRI Project ManagerA. SummeREERHINSTITUTE 3420 Hillview AvenuePalo Alto, CA 94304-1338 USAPO Box 10412Palo Alto, CA 94303-0813 USA800.313.3774 650.855.2121 ask.epri@epri.com www.veprl.corn 3002003120 Final Report, July 2014 77ProductDescription A previous EPRI report (Long Term Performance ofPE4710 Materials in Disinfectant Treated Nuclear Raw Water Systems, 1025296)projected the performance of PE4710 materials at various end-useconditions at a nuclear plant. This work predicted strong pipeperformance;

however, a knowledge gap was identified on the lack ofdata on the long-term oxidative resistance of butt fusion joints inhigh-density polyethylene (HDPE). As butt fusions are a commonmethod of joining PE pipe, the current project was undertaken toassess their impact on the long-term performance of a piping system.Background The long-term oxidative resistance of butt fusions to disinfected water is generally uncharacterized.

The long-term aging mechanism of PE pipe involves stabilizer depletion, crack initiation, and crackpropagation with the time for each of these events defining theoverall failure time of a pipe. The impact of fusion joints on theseevents is uncertain.

Objectives The objective of this project was to determine whether a butt fusiondetrimentally impacts the projected long-term oxidative resistance ofan HDPE piping system by accelerating the long-term agingmechanism of PE pipe.ApproachTesting butt fusions through exposure to chlorinated water at a singleelevated temperature and stress condition was conducted toaccelerate the long-term aging mechanism.

The results of theexposure can be used to project the performance of PE pipe atvarious end-use conditions.

ResultsThe conclusions, based on the testing results and subsequent preliminary failure analysis, include the following:

The butt fusion joints had no apparent impact on the long-term oxidative resistance of the tested HDPE pipe. All specimens tested in this project failed in the parent material and not at thefused joint; the fused joints lasted longer than the parent materialand did not show preferential oxidation.

" The parent material did not meet the expected resistance tochlorine exposure (CC2 as defined in Plastics Pipe Institute TN-43). The premature pipe failure results are not considered a validindicator of production pipe performance due to severalirregularities discovered during a preliminary root cause analysis.

" The samples were produced on a pipe extrusion line in a resinsupplier laboratory and not on commercial equipment.

Theresulting pipe quality was not typical of commercially producedpipe." The presence of atypical degradation indicates extrusion defectsthat apparently created areas of lower oxidative chlorineresistance.

" The presence of windows (unpigmented areas) through the pipewall thickness is indicative of an issue with carbon blackdistribution and, consequently, non-production quality pipe.Applications, Value and UseThe data collected on the long-term oxidative resistance of buttfusions suggest that no decrease in performance relative to the parentmaterial should be expected.

Therefore, any predictive models wouldlikely not require updating to capture the performance of pipingsystems containing butt fusions.The preliminary assessment of the lower-than-expected performance of the laboratory-produced HDPE pipe samples led to the following recommendations, which should improve the quality of HDPEmaterial in future research and development projects:

" Enhanced quality checks and documentation for test sampleprocurement from a pilot-scale facility should be standard.

" Thorough visual examination of procured test samples, including examining a cross-section of the pipe wall for windows, shouldbe performed.

" Nondestructive evaluation, such as microwave

analysis, should beconsidered as a counterpart to the visual analysis.

KeywordsButt fusionHigh-density polyethylene HDPE)Oxidative resistance Plastics Pipe Institute (PPI) TN-43<vi >

IELECTRIC POWERI RESEARCH INSTITUTE Nondestructive Evaluation:

High-Density Polyethylene NDE Technology Nondestructive Evaluation:

High-Density Polyethylene NDE Technology All or a portion of the requirements of the EPRI NuclearQuality Assurance Program apply to this product.YESEPRI Project ManagerR. Boucka ' =-ar i I E2iSEC HPO -EIR3420 Hillview AvenuePalo Alto, CA 94304-1338 USAPO Box 10412Polo Alto, CA 943030813 USA800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@eori.com www.eo~ri.com 3002000439 Final Report, November 2013 AbstractHigh-density polyethylene (HDPE) is considered a cost-effective material suited for Class HII nuclear applications.

In order toefficiently use HDPE in nuclear applications, reliable nondestruction evaluation (NDE) methods validated through performance demonstration are needed. The project that is the subject of thisreport focused on producing simulated cold fusion in a controlled fashion for the purpose of NDE technique assessments andperformance demonstration.

Having a consistently repeatable processof implanting simulated flaws of known dimensions is required inboth evaluating NDE techniques and administering performance demonstration on NDE procedures, equipment, and NDEpersonnel.

A vii ELECTRIC POWERaar~ a i IRESEARCH INSTITUTE An Assessment of Industry Data Related to Essential Variables for Fusing High Density Polyethylene Pipe An Assessment of IndustryData Related to Essential Variables for Fusing HighDensity Polyethylene PipeAll or a portion of the requirements of the EPRI NuclearQuality Assurance Program apply to this product.YES eEPRI Project ManagerD. Munson~I2I RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview AvenuePalo Alio, CA 94304-1338 USAPO Box 10412Palo Alto, CA 94303-0813 USA800.313.3774 650.855.2121 o5kenrI@epri comwwwepfi.com 3002000598 Final Report, July 2013

.9',AbstractAs ASME Code Cases N-755 and N-755-1, "Use of Polyethylene (PE) Plastic Pipe," have been developed, the U.S. NuclearRegulatory Commission (NRC) has expressed concerns.

Severalquestions relate to the essential variables and others to validation ofthe butt fusion process.

The Plastic Pipe Institute (PPI) periodically updates TR-33, Generic Butt Fusion Joining Procedure for Field Joiningof Polyethylene Pipe. Upon completion of PPI TR-33 (2012), copiesof that report along with two validation reports were presented to theNRC to determine if information in the reports could answerquestions related to essential variables and validation of a butt fusionprocedure.

This report evaluates the data in PPI TR-33 (2012) andshows that issues associated with essential variables can easily beaddressed, but additional comprehensive testing of many sizes andwall thicknesses is needed to validate a safety-related butt fusionprocedure.

< vii >

r ELECTRIC POWERI IRESEARCH INSTITUTE Applicability of High-Density Polyethylene inNuclear Piping Systems with Internal Radionuclides Applicability of High-Density Polyethylene in Nuclear PipingSystems with Internal Radionuclides 3002000524 Final Report, May 2013EPRI Project ManagerA. SummeThis document does NOT meet the requirements of1 CFR50 Appendix B, 1 OCFR Part 21,ANSI N45.2-1977 and/or the intent of ISO-9001 (1994)ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 HIlIvIew Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

-PO Box 10412, Palo Afto, California 94303-0813

• USA800.313.3774

• 650.855.2121

• askepri@eprl.com

-www.epri.com PRODUCT DESCRIPTION This report serves as a preliminary evaluation on the long-term impact of radiation on high-density polyethylene (HDPE) piping for nuclear power plant applications.

A short literature review is provided on the impact of radiation on HDPE material, followed by a Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) model of internal radiation exposure from radionuclides commonlyencountered at nuclear power facilities.

Ultimately, this work seeks to provide guidance on theapplicability of HDPE piping in radioactive environments and an expectation of service life inthese conditions.

To meet these goals, an industry-wide survey was conducted to obtain radionuclide concentration data in relevant liquid effluent systems.

These data were analyzed using the resultsof an MCNP model, and it was concluded that the internal radiation exposure to HDPE will beorders of magnitude below the dose thresholds of observable changes in material properties forall systems considered under normal operating conditions for a service life of 80 years. However,accident scenarios could be postulated to occur in which HDPE piping could be exposed for alimited amount of time to doses of considerable significance.

To bound the impact on HDPEpiping systems during accident scenarios, this report evaluates the dose and dose rates resulting from an extremely conservative accident scenario.

Background

HDPE piping offers several benefits over traditional piping materials; the two primary benefitsare corrosion resistance and significantly lower costs than corrosion-resistant alloys. The nuclearindustry has been using HDPE pipe in raw water applications for several years and is seeking toexpand its use to other areas of the plant. The Advanced Nuclear Technology (ANT) programwithin the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has been tasked with evaluating potential knowledge gaps with respect to the expanding application of HDPE.Objectives The primary objective of this task is to provide a feasibility assessment of HDPE piping fornuclear power plant applications exposed to internal and/or external radiation.

This objective wasaddressed through a literature review and further characterization of internal dose for specificnuclear systems.

A set of recommendations and follow-up steps are provided in the conclusion ofthe report.ApproachA literature review was conducted to accurately characterize the effects associated with radiation damage in HDPE and summarize the relevant degradation mechanisms along with an evaluation of the general material property trends observed.

This review also served to identify whichnuclear systems were of particular interest to the nuclear industry for using HDPE pipe. Theidentified systems were then evaluated for their potential internal and external radiation exposure.

This led to the modeling of internal radiation exposure levels in systems withv CIOpotentially significant quantities of radionuclides.

To quantify the doses and dose rates, multiplenuclear power plants were surveyed for system-specific radionuclide activity concentration datain their liquid effluent systems.

The data collected were used to run a multitude of MCNP casesto model the anticipated exposure through the pipe wall. Also modeled was a particularly conservative accident scenario to bound the results and provide further insight.ResultsThe literature review revealed various dose thresholds for HDPE that, when exceeded, wouldinitiate measurable changes in material properties.

It was also revealed that a dose-rate threshold

existed, where higher dose rates would lead to neutral or improved material performance whencompared to degraded material performance for lower dose rates at an equivalent integrated dose. Although site and system specific, a large majority of the nuclear systems identified forpotential application are expected to remain below the dose threshold limits. Of the systemsidentified for further analysis, it was found that all systems predicted an integrated dose that is anorder of magnitude or more below the dose thresholds for normal operation over 80 years.Therefore, with respect to internal radioactivity during normal operation, each system was foundacceptable for HDPE application.

For external exposure and accident scenarios, it isrecommended that a site- and system-specific analysis be performed to verify exposure levelsbelow the identified thresholds.

During accident scenarios with significant levels of exposure, itwas determined that there was a lack of data to fully evaluate the competing effects of theopposing degradation mechanisms.

Applications, Value, and UseThis report provides guidance on the impact of radiation exposure on HDPE piping over itsservice life at an operating nuclear facility and provides a means to trend accrued radiation doseagainst threshold dose values, which relate to potential service life limitations.

KeywordsHDPEHigh-density polyethylene MCNPNuclear pipingRadiation damagevi qIRE2AELECTRIC POWERra-(=ralI RESEARCH INSTITUTE Feasibility Evaluation of Glass Reinforced SpiralWound High DensityWater System PipingPolyethylene for Circulating Feasibility Evaluation ofGlass Reinforced SpiralWound High DensityPolyethylene for Circulating WaterSystemPipingThis document does NOT meet the requirements ofI OCFR50 Appendix B, 1 OCFR Part 2 1, ANSIN45.2-1977 and/or the intent of ISO-9001 (19941.EPRI Project ManagersA. SummeD. MunsonIIIRESEARCH IN$SI'TUE 3420 Hillview AvenuePalo Alto, CA Q4304-1338 USAPO Box 10412Palo Alto, CA 94303-0813 USA800.313.3774 650.855.2121 oskepri@epri.com 1025297Final Report, December 2012www.epr .com q3I -IAbstractThe Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) sponsored this reportto investigate the feasibility of glass reinforced spiral wound high-density polyethylene (PE-GF) piping for application in Circulating Water Systems at nuclear power plants. Conventional high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe has already proven beneficial to thenuclear power industry for its exceptional performance in raw watersystems due to its resistance to corrosion and microbiological growth.Additionally, combined material and labor costs for PE-GF may belower than pre-stressed concrete cylinder pipe (PCCP) or linedcarbon steel. By incorporating a reinforcing layer of glass fibers, PE-GF can significantly reduce the required wall thicknesses over thatof HDPE to make it a viable option for large diameter piping. Otherindustries have already utilized this material with success in lowpressure waterworks or drainage

systems, and have begun expanding its use to include moderate pressure applications.

This document presents available product application and test datafor PE-GF, and discusses the viability of its use for large bore direct-buried piping for nuclear power plant Circulating Water Systems.Current manufacturing capabilities and limitations are presented, along with system design and constructability issues. Presently, theavailability of large bore fittings utilizing PE-GF is a significant challenge that must be addressed through further testing and productdevelopment.

Industry support of these efforts will be critical.

To realize the potential economic and technical benefits of thismaterial, it will be necessary to obtain a Code listing in AmericanSociety of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) B31.1, Power PipingCode. A roadmap is included within this report that details theproduct testing and development necessary to achieve this status.< vii >

41(fi 121 ,ELECTRIC POWERRESEARCH INSTITUTE Repair of High Density Polyethylene Pipe1019172IE 04A%NOTICE: This report contains proprietary information that is the intellectual property of EPRI. Accordingly, it is available only under license from EPRIand may not be reproduced or disclosed, wholly or in part, by any licensee toany other person or organization.

Repair of High Density Polyethylene Pipe1019172Technical Update, November 2009EPRI Project ManagerA. PetersonCosponsors RRAC Steering Committee ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 USA800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepr@epn.com www.epd.com PRODUCT DESCRIPTION Degradation of service water systems is a major issue facing nuclear power plant owners, andmany plants will require repair or replacement of their existing carbon steel piping components.

High-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe has been used in non-safety service water systems formore than 10 years and has performed well. Recent applications of HDPE pipe at Duke Energy'sCatawba Station and Ameren's Calloway Plant have encouraged the nuclear industry to considerusing this type of pipe as an alternative to steel in low-energy applications.

This action has beenfacilitated by the issuance of American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code Case N-755, Use of Polyethylene (PE) Plastic Pipe, Section 111, Division I and XI. The results described in this report are intended to support the nuclear industry by providing additional repairtechniques for use on HDPE pipe. When these results are used in conjunction with a Request forRegulatory Relief, a nuclear plant operator will have a viable option for replacing a conventional steel Class 3 system with HDPE pipe; alternative repair techniques for that system will also beavailable should they be needed.Results and FindingsThe repair methods described in conjunction with those already available-including saddlefusion repair, electro-fusion patch repair, electro-fusion spool repair, mechanical fitting repair,repairs with solid sleeve, and flange adapter spool repair-should provide sufficient options formost scenarios.

Also of note is that the new techniques-tapered hole and plug repair and cavityrepair-require practice.

For example, the amount of time to heat the sidewalls of the hole or theamount of pressure applied to the plug will likely vary with the size of the component.

A review of the testing yields several conclusions:

" Sufficient heat must be applied using both techniques in order for the process to work." When using the tapered plug method it is critical that the angles machined for the plug andhole allow for full contact.* Grinding or sanding a flaw out of the pipe wall for purposes of filling the cavity with HDPE"filler" material should be done such that the heating tool has easy access to all walls andcorners." Mechanical testing confirms that the tapered plug method of repair is a viable option thatmaintains structural integrity.

Challenges and Objective(s)

The objective of this research was to apply two new techniques-tapered hole and plug as wellas cavity repair-to the repair of HDPE piping. The challenge in repairing plastics is that meltedpolyethylene does not "flow" or behave the same way as molten steels, and new training withplastics is often required.

Applications, Values, and UseHDPE materials will offer significant economic benefits to utilities.

The primary savings comesfrom the short installation time of HDPE piping compared to the weld times currently requiredv for steel piping. While current rules only allow for HDPE piping in buried piping systems, thebeginning stages for aboveground use are already being drafted.EPRI Perspective Three separate EPRI groups have provided technical support for implementation of Code CaseN-755-Balance of Plant (BOP), Non-Destructive Examination (NDE), and Welding and RepairTechnology Center (WRTC). BOP staff has focused primarily on design and seismicqualification requirements.

NDE staff has primary responsibility for examination issues. TheWRTC has investigated potential repair techniques that could be employed in the field. All ofthese areas will need to be considered for future ASME Code Case development.

Additional information about HDPE piping is available in the following EPRI reports:

AnIntegrated Project Plan to Obtain Code and Regulatory Approval to Use High-Density Polyethylene in ASME Class 3 Piping Applications (1013572, October 2006); Design andQualification of High-Density Polyethylene for ASME Safety Class 3 Piping Systems (1011836, December 2005); Tensile Testing of Cell Classification 345464C High Density Polyethylene Pipe Material (1013479, December 2006); and Fatigue and Capacity Testing of High DensityPolyethylene Pipe Material (1014902, April 2007).ApproachAfter repairing several coupons using tapered hole and plug and cavity repair methods,investigators sectioned the samples to examine the integrity of the repair. They validated successful fusion by destructively examining repaired samples via sectioning, visual observation, and tensile testing.KeywordsHigh Density Polyethylene (HDPE) PipePlastic pipeFused jointPipe repairASME Code Case N-755vi ELECTRIC POWERRESEARCH INSTITUTE Development of Crack Growth Curves andCorrelation to Sustained Pressure Test Results for CellClassification 445574C High-Density Polyethylene Pipe MaterialPKPA ELUNWRtEI NCLEAR Development of Crack GrowthCurves and Correlation to Sustained Pressure Test Results for CellClassification 445574C High-Density Polyethylene Pipe Material1025253Final Report, September 2012EPRI Project ManagerD. MunsonWork to develop this product was completed under theEPRI Nuclear Quality Assurance Program.ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillew Avenue, Palo Alto. California 94304-1338

• PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

• USA800.313.3774

-650.855.2121 askepd@epd.com

-www.epri.com (oDABSTRACTCode Case N-755-1 of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler andPressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division I Code currently permits the use of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) in buried safety-related Class 3 piping systems.

There have been concernswith the slow crack growth (SCG) of HDPE emanating from scratches that can occur duringfabrication or installation.

The possible use of tensile coupon tests for determining the life spanof the pipe with surface scratches could provide a more cost-effective testing method than theuse of sustained pressurized crack pipe tests does. This report presents the results of furtherinvestigation into the SCG rates of notched PE 4710 HDPE pipe made from a cell classification 445 574C bimodal resin. The da/dt versus KI curves were developed from notched coupontesting.

Standard fracture methods were then used to predict the failure time of the notchedpressurized pipe specimens subjected to long-term hydraulic stress. The results for the SCGdepth of the externally notched sustained pressurized pipe tests are provided along with thenotched coupon test results.

The actual failure times of the notched pressurized pipe tests arecompared to the predicted failure times for the same specimens.

vii I1RESELECTRIC POWER*=Er-maI RESEARCH INSTITUTE Tensile Stress-Strain Properties and Elastic Modulus ofPE 4710 Cell Classification 445574C HighPolyethylene PipeMaterialDensityPREPAREDUNDER THENUCLEARePROGRAMI Tensile Stress-Strain Properties and ElasticModulus of PE 4710 CellClassification 445574CHigh Density Polyethylene Pipe MaterialWork to develop this product wos completed under Ithe EPRI Nuclear Quality Assurance Progmra1025254Final Report, December 2012EPRI Project ManagerD. MunsonIISEAICH INSTItUE3420 Hillview AvenuePalo Alto, CA 94304 1338USAPO Box 10412Polo Alto, CA 94303-081 3USA800,313.3774 650.855.2121

.as.,,6ae.l cm. rr (03AbstractFor corroded piping in low temperature

systems, such as servicewater systems in nuclear power plants, replacement of carbon steelpipe with high density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe is a cost-effective solution.

Polyethylene pipe can be installed at much lower labor coststhan carbon steel pipe and HDPE pipe has a much greater resistance to corrosion.

The ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, SectionIII, Division 1 currently permits the use of non-metallic piping inburied safety Class 3 piping systems.

Additionally, HDPE pipe hasbeen successfully used in non-safety-related systems in nuclear powerfacilities and is commonly used in other industries such as watermains and natural gas pipelines.

This report presents the results oftensile testing of PE 4710 cell dassification 445574C pipe. Thisinformation was developed to support and provide a strong technical basis for tensile properties of HDPE pipe. The data may also beuseful for applications of HDPE pipe in commercial electric powergeneration facilities and chemical, process and waste water plants viaits possible use in the B31 series piping codes. The report providesvalues for yield stress, yield strain, ultimate strain, and ElasticModulus.

The standard tensile tests were conducted consistent withthe requirements of ASTM D638-10.

Specimens were cut in theaxial direction from cell composition 445574C HDPE pipingspools. In addition, the results are compared with the PE 3608 celldassification 345464C and PE 4710 cell classification 445474CHDPE material results presented in EPRI reports 1013479 and1018351, respectively.

< vii>

I Ol-3rf! i ELECTRIC POWERRESEARCH INSTITUTE Creep and Fatigue Properties of PE 4710 CellClassification 445574C High Density Polyethylene Pipe MaterialI UNDER THENUCLEAR Creep and Fatigue Properties of PE4710 Cell Classification 445574CHigh Density Polyethylene PipeMaterial3002000592 Final Report, November 2013EPRI Project ManagerD. MunsonAll or a portion of the requirements of the EPRI NuclearQuality Assurance Program apply to this product.e NOELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

-PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

-650.855.2121

• askepri@epri.com

-www.epri.com jO06ABSTRACTFor corroded piping in low temperature

systems, such as service water systems in nuclear powerplants, replacement of carbon steel pipe with high density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe is a cost-effective solution.

Polyethylene pipe can be installed at much lower labor costs than carbon steelpipe and HDPE pipe has a much greater resistance to corrosion.

The ASME Boiler and PressureVessel Code,Section III, Division 1 currently permits the use of non-metallic piping in buriedsafety Class 3 piping systems.

Additionally, HDPE pipe has been successfully used in non-safety-related systems in nuclear power facilities and is commonly used in other industries suchas water mains and natural gas pipelines.

This report presents the results of creep and fatiguetesting of PE 4710 cell classification 445574C pipe. This information was developed to supportand provide a strong technical basis for material properties of HDPE pipe for use in ASMEBoiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1, Class 3 applications and in ASMEBoiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI repair or replacement activites.

The data may alsobe useful for applications of HDPE pipe in commercial electric power generation facilities andchemical, process and waste water plants via its possible use in the B31 series piping codes. Thereport provides long term creep and modulus data, as well as an analysis of the stressdependency of both. The report also provides fatigue data in the form of Code S-N curves forfusion butt joints in PE 4710 HDPE.vii a'aMon ?v\peieB01 ýUýJon'a'a'a'aM~eClnglAt __lw

/04?Advanced Nuclear Technology:

Material Properties Affecting theButt Fusion of HDPE Pipe3002003133 Final Report, September 2014EPRI Project ManagersA. SummeD. MunsonAll or a portion of the requirements of the EPRI NuclearQuality Assurance Program apply to this product.YESELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

-PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

-650.855.2121

-askepri@epri.com

-www.epd.com 1o'1ABSTRACTIn an effort to control the quality of butt fusion, variables which can affect the quality of thefusion joint have been identified and are called essential variables.

It is acknowledged that thereare several essential variables for butt fusion which must be controlled within acceptable rangesto have reasonable assurance of strong and durable joints. This report provides a detailedconsideration of material properties of HDPE in order to create a deeper understanding of thescientific principles that inform butt fusion to benefit all nuclear safety-related application stakeholders.

vii I10~lELECTIC P¶OWERIRESEARCH INSTITUTE Slow Crack Growth Testing Of High DensityPolyethylene Pipe -Interim Results1019180 I(ISlow Crack Growth Testing Of High Density Polyethylene Pipe -Interim Results1019180Technical Update, December 2009EPRI Project ManagerT. EckertELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338

, PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813

-USA800.313.3774

• 650.855.2121

-askepri@epd.com

-www.epri.com REPORT SUMMARYThe results reported in this document are intended to support continued development ofAmerican Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code Case N-755 for use of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) in buried and above ground ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division I safety-related piping applications.

Project results support thisdevelopment by determining material and engineering properties needed for pipe design. Theseinclude full-range stress-strain data, fatigue data, stress intensification factors and flexibility factors for selected components, and data to establish an acceptable flaw or scratch depth size.To establish acceptable flaw or scratch depth size, data that provides slow crack growth (SCG)rate as a function of stress intensity (da/dt versus K, curves) are required.

These data will then besupported by confirmation pressure tests of actual flawed pipe specimens.

This report presentsinterim results for two separate tasks under the HDPE pipe test program.

Under the first task,da/dt versus K, curves are being determined for one of the PE 47 10 materials.

Test samples werecut from HDPE pipe with two different types of initial cracks that are 10% deep and subjected toa constant tensile load at a constant elevated temperature.

Under the second task, 4"-diameter HDPE pipe specimens with three different types of initial flaws that are 10% deep are beingsubjected to internal pressure stresses at elevated temperatures.

Background

Degradation of service water systems is a major issue facing nuclear power plant owners, andmany plants will require repair or replacement of existing carbon steel piping components.

HDPE has been used in non-safety service water systems for over 10 years and has performed well. Although HDPE has been approved in Code Case N-755 of the ASME Boiler and PressureVessel Code,Section III, Division I for use in buried safety-related Class 3 systems, the CodeCase has not yet been accepted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Objectives To provide SCG data that can be used as input for future fracture mechanics analysis of damagedpipe and to provide a strong technical basis for the establishment of allowable initial scratch orflaw sizes for HDPE pipe used for replacement of buried ASME Class 3 carbon steel servicewater piping (the allowable scratch depth will be based on assuring that a through-wall SCGfailure will not occur during the projected lifetime).

ApproachCrack growth rate test data are being obtained from long-term testing under constant tensile loadand will be correlated to sustained pressure tests of actual flawed pipe specimens at constantelevated temperatures.

ResultsThe report provides a summary of the testing completed to date. For development of the da/dtversus K, curves, initial displacement data are presented.

In addition, measured crack growth dataalso are provided.

Testing was conducted at 50% yield stress and 95°C (2030F). For pressurized pipe specimens, a summary of the failure data to date is provided.

Tests are being conducted atpressures that result in 30%, 40%, and 50% yield stress in the piping. Test temperatures are 85°CV (185°F) and 95°C (203'F).

Pipe materials considered were PE 4710 cell classifications 445474Cand 445574C.EPRI Perspective The data are being developed for use by industry in the design and analysis of safety and non-safety-related HDPE piping systems in commercial nuclear power plants. The data also mayapply to HDPE pipe in commercial electric power generation plants, chemical plants, process,and wastewater plants.Additional information about the project is available in the following reports:* Design and Qualification of High Density Polyethylene for ASME Safety Class 3 PipingSystems, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2005. 1011836." Nondestructive Evaluation:

Seismic Criteria for Polyethylene Pipe Replacement Code Case,EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2006. 1013549." An Integrated Project Plan to Obtain Code and Regulatory Approval to Use High-Density Polyethylene in ASME Class 3 Piping Applications, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2006. 1013572." Tensile Testing of Cell Classification 345464C High Density Polyethylene Pipe Material, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2006. 1013479." Fatigue and Capacity Testing of High Density Polyethylene Pipe Material, EPRI, Palo Alto,CA: 2007. 1014902." Fatigue and Capacity Testing of High Density Polyethylene Pipe and Pipe Components Fabricated from PE 4710, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2007. 1015062." Tensile Testing of Cell Classification 445474C High Density Polyethylene Pipe Material, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2005. 1018351.* Fatigue and Capacity Testing of High Density Polyethylene Pipe and Pipe Components Fabricated from PE 4710 -2008 Update, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2008. 1011836.KeywordsHigh-density polyethylene Slow crack growthBuried pipingvi