ML070370589

E-MAIL: (PD) Fwd: Documents from Pilgrim

ML070370589
Person / Time
Site:	Pilgrim
Issue date:	01/16/2007
From:	Perry Buckberg NRC/NRR/ADRO/DLR
To:	Jennifer Davis, Dan Hoang NRC/NRR/ADRO/DLR
References
TAC 3698
Download: ML070370589 (25)

Text

Page 1 of I Perry Buckberg - Fwd: Documents from Pilgrim From: Perry Buckberg To: Dan Hoang; James Davis Date: 1/16/2007 9:43:23 AM

Subject:

Fwd: Documents from Pilgrim CC: Kenneth Chang Dan, This came in last week from Pilgrim (sorry for the delay)

Perry

>>> Glenn Meyer 1/11/2007 1:00 PM >>>

Tim - Entergy has provided the 1999 evaluation of torus bolts and the drywell UT data, as attached.

Glenn

>>> "Ellis, Douglas" < dellisl@entergy.com > 01/11/2007 11:51 AM >>>

Glenn - find attached the documents requested to you. Doug Ellis, Pilgrim Licensing, 508.830.8160.

file://C:\temp\GW }OOOO1.HTM 2/1/2007

cAternp\GW)00001.TMP c:\tmp\ W}OOO1TMPPage 1 Mail Envelope Properties (45ACE48B.543 : 9: 8248)

Subject:

Fwd: Documents from Pilgrim Creation Date 1/16/2007 9:43:23 AM From: Perry Buckberg Created By: PHB I @nrc.gov Recipients Action Date & Time nrc.gov OWGWPOO3.HQGWDOO1 Delivered 1/16/2007 9:43:32 AM JAD (James Davis)

KXC2 CC (Kenneth Chang) nrc.gov OWGWPOO4.HQGWDOOI Delivered 1/16/2007 9:43:35 AM DVH (Dan Hoang)

Post Office Delivered Route OWGWPOO3.HQGWDOOI 1/16/2007 9:43:32 AM nrc.gov OWGWPO04.HQGWDO01 1/16/2007 9:43:35 AM nrc.gov Files, .._ .. S,.Nize Date & Time MESSAGE 1238 1/16/2007 9:43:-21 AM "TEXT.htm .814 ScanOO.1pdf. 97454... *. 1/1:1/2007 12:56:41 PM ScanOOL.pdf - 32755277- . -1/11/2007 12:56:52PM Options....

Auto Delete: No Expiration Date: None Notify Recipients: Yes Priority: Standard ReplyRequested: No Return Notification: None Concealed

Subject:

No Security: Standard To Be Delivered: Immediate Status Tracking: Delivered

(RTYPE B4.39)

Boston Edison Company Supplier Design Document Review Form PNPS Unit I SUDDS/RF# 99-134 Records Management Information Pages of attachments 13

'Q"19* Non-"Q" ['

Activity Corrosion Assessment of Torus Saddle Tiedown Concrete Anchor Keywords:Torus Tiedown, Support Bolt Assembly Saddle, rock anchors Contractor Duke Engineering & Services SUDDS/RF# 99-134 Document Type: Design Bases/Criteria/Work Scope M I Sys Description [-, Equip Spec/Mat'] Req M, Doc #

Analysis Rpt/Calc X, Dwg I'I, ESR # N/A Diagram n, Test Plan/Proc M], PDC # N/A Test Report [], Work Instr/Proc 5, PO/REQ #LSP011383 Other Other Document Problem Report 96-0096 Issue Date: 4/11/99 Draft: Yes 0 No Review: Conceptual

• Detail [)

Cognizant Engr/DM (BECo) J L Manning

... Cognizant Engr(s),.Contractor E C Biemiller Conforms to FSAR Reqmts: Yes X No [] Nuclear Distribution Comments: Name 1W/OAI W/A J G Dvckman X E3  ;*h,*A'.

Conforms to OtheriApplicable Doc/Proc 00 Yes X No 5 Comments: 00 Detailed Review Only ___________' ______'__.___

- Review and Evaluation Bases .0 Results of Evaluation (reason for changes, if any) 00

"__ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ E.0 Comments (suggested/required changes) Cognizant Engineer NESG File Action: Release X, Release w/Comments Incorporated -, Resubmit w/Comments Incor. F'],

Reject F-, Letter # Date __ Part 21 Evaluation Req'd: Yes F] No X

"ý/,l // N/A Date Contributing Engineer

/S/ N/A Department Manager Date Contributing Engineer Dept Mgr. Date Attachment I NE 3.01 Rev. 14

PILGRIM STATION CORROSION ASSESSMENT OF TORUS SADDLE TIEDOWN, CONCRETE ANCHOR BOLT ASSEMBLY Prepared by Duke Engineering & Services Bolton, Massachusetts Eric C. Biemiller Richard G. Orner April 11, 1999 Prepared for Pilgrim Station Boston Edison Company Boston, Massachusetts

TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page#

1.0 INTRODUCTION

.................................................... 3 2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION ......................................... 3 3.0 CORROSION ASSESSMENT ..................................... 4 4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................... 7

5.0 CONCLUSION

S......................................8 6.0 LIST OF REFERENCES ............................... 9 FIGURES ................. ...................................... 10 ATTACHMENT 1.... ................................ 11 ATTACHM ENT 2........................ ................................ 12 C7 Eric C. Biemiller Page 2 04/11/99

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Pilgrim Station, Torus Saddle Support Assembly is secured to a concrete foundation using Williams Form Engineering Corporation's solid "spinlock" rock and concrete anchor bolts. [1) The Reference [1] drawing is'attached as Attachment 1 to this report.

The anchor bolts extend into the concrete foundation, dependent on location, two to three feet [2]. For approximately eighteen years, ground water has been reported seeping into various locations through the foundation. More recently, ground water has been reported around some of the torus anchor bolt assemblies.

The anchor bolts penetrate the foundation at the station's -17' 6" elevation [3].

According to Mr. James Manning, Pilgrim Station, the station's ground elevation is approximately 22'. The 0' elevation of the station is mean sea level. Based on the elevations, considerable ground water pressure against the foundation is normal.

Pilgrim Station engaged the services of Duke Engineering & Services (DE&S) to perform a corrosion assessment of the concrete anchor assemblies. For the purpose of this assessment, it will be assumed that at least parts, if not all, of the anchor assemblies have been exposed to the ground water for the eighteen year period.

The anchor bolts are fabricated from ASTM SA-108 carbon steel. The extension shafts which secure the anchor bolts to the Torus Assembly are ASTM SA- 193, B7 material.

The B7 material is a higher strength alloy compared to the SA- 108 steel and contains additions of chromium and molybdenum. The expansion shell assembly, which wedges thed anchor bolts to the drilled holes in the concrete, is a carbon steel casting, ASTI*_,*"-

216; ,rade WCB [I]. After the anchor assemblies are secured with the wedging device, grout is pumped into the bolt cavity to seal it. Only the anchor assemblies are assumed toQ be wetted all the time. The extension shafts are in a transition area and are wetted on" ...

occasion. The general corrosion behavior of these materials is that of plain carbon sel.:'

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION On March 23, 1999, this author visited the Pilgrim Station and was escorted by Mr. James Manning into the plant to visually examine a sample of the wetted anchor bolts. The bolts examined were in Bay 10 under the torus. The torus saddle support adjacent to Bay l ! cont'aineWd, "he wetted bolts. A berm around one of the bolts had been built to contain the ground water that had seeped onto the foundation floor.

Photographs of a "clean" anchor assembly and a corroded or wetted anchor assembly are shown in Figures 1 and 2, respectively.

The anchor assemblies are in high radiation areas of the plant, so a real close inspection was not possible. The standing water, also in the high radiation area, was sampled for pH with the aid of a reach rod device. ColorpHast test strips were attached to the rod and The numbers in brackets refer to the list of References in Section 6.0 of this report.

Eric C. Biemiller Paze 3 04/11/99

the strips were emerged in the water. This allowed personnel to stay outside of the high radiation area. The strips, distributed by EM Science in Gibbstown, NJ, are color comparative strips, which allow the determination of pH in increments. pH in the range of 0 to 7 is acidic (7 is neutral); 7 to 14 is basic.

Two test strips were used. The readings were above a pH of 9, but below 10.

On average, the pH so determined was 9.5 or basic.

To provide another basis point for the test strips, a test strip was immersed in sea water at Plymouth Beach, a few miles north of Pilgrim Station. The strip read between a pH of 7 and 8. Seawater is reported to have a pH of 8 (41 and 8.1 to 8.3 (5]. Reference 5 also states that the pH of seawater can fall to 7 under the influence of anaerobic bacteria in stagnant pools. The sea water sample was taken at the beach in wave wash. The test strip's accuracy is within the reported values for sea water.

A "'salt look alike" residue was noted around the bolt area where the ground water had evaporated. It is believed that this residue may be a calcium compound brought up with the ground water from the concrete. See Figure 2. This is discussed in the next section.

3.0 CORROSION ASSESSMENT The corrosion of carbon steel in natural waters is governed by the water chemistry.

Typical natural water, relatively free from chloride ions, is noncorrosive. The primary impurities -in such waters are calcium and magnesium salts. These salts usually form a hard protective scale on steel [6]. This protective scale is also a function of the alkalinity of the water and the concentrations 6_ýfother salts. Pourbaix, in his studies of iron in equilibrium conditions with watetf ,found iron to be passive in the pH range of 10 to 13 due tothlef~rmaitfion of a protective*oxide film [7]. In general, the protective oxidel films 1 .

on steel exposed to natural water willform within the pH range:of 75 to 9.0 [51. The protecive depositionof calcium carbonate will occur if a saturation index exceeds zero*-,

Tliis Langelier indek" can becalculated if the concentrations of calcium carbonate (CaCO3), pH and other factors are known. .. -

Coupled with this information are studies of corrosion of reinforcing steel used in concrete structures. Concrete normally provides a noncorrosive environment for the reinforcing steel. The high pH (usually 12.5) of the aqueous phase of concrete causes a passive oxide film to form [8]. Corrosion will not occur as long as this passive film remains intact.

The torus saddle anchor bolts were inserted into predrilled holes in the concrete, then the holes were back filled with a concrete grout. The fact that ground water is seeping up the bolt holes leads one to believe that the grout is/was not packed in densely. Nonetheless, the bolts would have been exposed to the high pH grout and over time exposed to the high pH water caused by the lime in the Portland Cement/concrete. The fact that the standing water around the bolts on the foundation had a measured pH of 9.5 confirms this. Water in contact with air will absorb carbon dioxide. This forms carbonic acid Eric C. Biemiller Page 4 04/1 1/99

which reduces pH until the water is saturated with the carbon dioxide. Thus the pH of the water surrounding the anchor assemblies that is not in contact with air may be higher which is beneficial in preventing corrosion.

The pH measurement of 9.5 of the standing water around the anchor assembly and the whitish residue left by the evaporation of the standing water (See Figure 2) provide enough data to perform a conservative (worse case) estimate of the Langelier Index/Saturation Index (SI). The only measurement taken on the water was pH, however, Reference [9] provides a table of parameters that can be used given some assumptions.

This table is provided as Attachment 2 to this report.

Reference [9] provides the relationship for the Index as, SI = pH - pHs, where pHs is equal to:

PHs = (9.3 + A + B) - (C + D)

The values of A, B, C and D are based on F-Total dissolved solids (ranges in parts per million, ppm);

Temperature; C Calcium Hardness (ranges in ppm); and Alkalinity (as CaCO3, ranges in ppm), respectively.

Based on theirýMdiue left on the foundation floor from the evaporating water, the assumption isnfiaWd. that Total Dissolved Solids are high or in the Reference [9]-range, of,

• ,- ,,..

, 400 to 1006*ppmi.For this range, Reference [91 .giesan 'A4value.of0i-2.,-The only other.

M.' value ofl otherA.

rrange is 50 to ' ,,ppm for an 'A. yalueofOA..hasJittle'eiffecton.theou*t come.

The temperatureof tie water.Wa estimated at 82 88 degreesF It was warm in the

-

area. The 'B' value for this range givenby.Reference [9] is 1.9.

Using a midpoint estimate for ppm CaCO3 in the range of 230 - 270 ppm produces a 'C' value of 2.0. The highest least conservative value is 2.6 for a ppm range of 880 to 1000.

The lowest value, which assumes almost no CaCO3 is 0.6. Seeing the residue and knowing that the water percolated through concrete suggests that using the low number is not realistic.

The 'D' value based on alkalinity really isn't known at all, so in this case the lowest or most conservative value to produce the highest pHs was chosen. 'D' then is 1.0.

Calculating for pHs:

pHs= (9.3 + 0.2 + 1.9) - (2.0 + 1.0) pHs = 8.4 Eric C. Biemiller Page 5 04/11/99

The measured pH was 9.5, so the index is:

SI = pH - pHs or SI = 9.5 - 8.4 SI= 1.1 This is greater than zero so the protective film would be expected to precipitate inhibiting further corrosion. Really the key to this estimated calculation is the measured pH of 9.5.

The high pH almost guarantees the formation of the protective oxide regardless of how the 'C' and 'D' values, values that increase the pHs, were weighted..

Again, the high measured pH of 9.5 and the rough assumptions for a value of the Langelier or Saturation Index lead to the conclusion that any corrosion of the anchor bolts

• ,- has been passivated.

..-

-The unknown for this assumption is whether or not chloride ions are present in the water.

'7 .. It has been demonstrated that the passive film on concrete reinf6rcement steel is adversely affected by the introduction of chloride ions [8, 10]. Chloride ions diffuse through the protective oxide layer causing it to break down. These ions are particularly destructive if enough moisture and oxygen are present. This would be the case for the anchor bolts. Because the corrosion products occupy much more vo lume than the original steel, they create stresses in the concrete which cause the .concrete cover to spall or delaminate [10]. .. .

tid packed In the casedoftheanchorbolts it is assumed that' the ýgrout was fairly fightly -

• aroundthe bolts after installation. .Granted there must be cracks.or spaces~to allowth  :

g-oundwater'towell. up:around them. Nonetheless, should there be active corrosiori ce1I q. .

at Wrkb'honthe boltS'one might notice some cracks emanating from under the steel plate on the foundation that the bolts penetrate (Figures I and.2) or perhaps other signs of concrete spalling in the vicinity. From the distance. that the corrosion was observed (See Figure 2) no active spalling was noted. If possible, the standing water around the bolts should be sampled to determine if chlorides are present. The American Concrete Institute (ACI) gives a thod level of 0.15 % water soluble chloride ion by weight of cement as a level necessary for the corrosion of reinforcement steel in concrete [ 1I]. Tuthill, et. al.,

report that a continuous supply of chloride ions in fresh water, in the I to 2 ppm range, will produce corrosion rates of 2 to 4 mils per year. Note, the use of the word continuous. Tuthill further states that chlorine reacts so readily with metallic 'materials that any residual is consumed within a few days in most waters [ 12]. This work was performed under flowing water conditions.

Eric C. Biemiller Page 6 04/11/99

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION With respect to corrosion rates, in general, Reference 13 estimates rates of rusting in natural water between 1 and 2 mils per year. In salt water, the rate is one and a half times to three the natural water rate. This assumes no passivation.

For this assessment, given the measured pH conditions and the fact that the ground water welled up through the concrete foundation, a total corrosion of 1 to 3 mils loss will be assumed over the eighteen year period. Any corrosion is assumed to have passivated because of the high pH conditions. Given that the corrosion products have no where to go, the anchor bolts will, if anything, have become further wedged into the concrete.

No spalling of the concrete was noted in the vicinity of the anchor bolts. The spalling would be caused by the growth of corrosion products from active corrosion cells on the anchor bolts. Such cells could be active, despite the high localized pH, if chloride ions were present and were being renewed by the ground water welling up through the foundation. The lack of spalling suggests that chlorides are not a problem. Nonetheless, sampling of the water for chlorides is recommended to confirm this assumption.

4.1 Reduction In Anchor Bolt Tensile Capacity A calculation of the reduction of tension capacity in the bolts was made. The calculation was based on the maximum total corrosion estimate of 3 mils loss from the outer surface of the anchor bolts and subsequent loss of cross sectional area. The tension capacity of the bolt will be reduced in direct proprtion to the area reduction at the location within the corroded region of the minimum: cross sectional area of the bolt. Based on the Reference I drawing of the bolt, tý"sirni'mum area is within the 2"-6UN threaded,,.

Sle'ngths ii the expansion shell head assembly region and at the upper. end of the bolt'at the concrete surface. Per Reference 14,thetiensile. stress.aeat.f6rithi"srewi thread1Af6!&i A"

'2 65. in. Based on ths area, the radius. of the area is:-:: . -

Rng A 7t)~w

. .... ...... 2.65 /. ..

. 0.918 in.

A 3 mil reduction in radius at this location results in Rnew = 0.915 in.

Anew  % Rnew 7tr x 0.9152

= 2.630 in. 2 The area reduction is therefore 0.75 per cent. Consequently the tensile capacity of the bolt is also reduced by 0.75 percent. This tensile capacity reduction only applies to the bolt itself and is the maximum for capacity reduction for any of the installed bolts.

Eric C. Biemiller Page 7 04/11/99

5.0 CONCLUSION

S Given the measured pH value of the residual water surrounding one anchor bolt assembly and the fact that the ground water must percolate through the concrete, it is doubtful that active corrosion of the anchor bolts is taking place. This is due to the ground water's high pH at the anchor assembly location.

The reduction in tensile capacity of any bolt subjected to an assumed total corrosion loss of 3 mils is 0.75%. This is the maximum reduction which could occur pullout capacity of a particular bolt installation. Some minor reduction in the actual bolt may also occur as a result of the corrosion. in preload of a To confirm the findings of this assessment that any corrosion process has been passivated due to the high pH conditions, a sample of the ground water should be taken to determine chloride levels, if any.

gIK4 1ý nI ýC0,117,

-o Twý v+c . -, + ( V-4 , I Z , o ,,,+ ,4 * -R -

ft-ý. cwpkaA OL%4-al

. 144-- '-J , (T-elea" (ýLt acti., g*,

P~;?tv~Y~L- . Patm++

t "- +.V* yi ,+je ">

A,.,to+.+

t1%1L

.4-;r )j.

. ':. I'*?* .

40,

....... 1+p o+(+

~Z~c~ o+J  : +++ h & keL4

,,, -f 4fA< 04

~~~~~kt~~ (9q. S) , 4 dk.

Lý7~ u~/L-tziW4J~d Eric C. Biemiller Page 8 04/11/99

6.0 LIST OF REFERENCES

1. Boston Edison Drawing No. CIA180

2. Boston Edison Drawing No. C1A173

3. Boston Edison Drawing No. C1A175

4. Corrosion Engineering, Fontana, M. G., Greene, N. D., McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1967.

5. Corrosion Vol. 1, Metal/Environment Reactions, Shreir, L. L., Ed., Newnes-Butterworths, London, 1978, pg. 2:15

6. Materials Selection for Corrosion Control, Chawla, S. L., Gupta, R. K., Eds., ASM International, Materials Park, OH, 1993.

7. Atlas Of Electrochemical Equilibrium In Aqueous Solutions, Pourbaix, M., NACE,

-CEBLOR, 1974.

8. Paper No. 70, "Corrosion Of Reinforcing Steel In Concrete: Magnitude Of The Problem," Corrosion 78, National Association Of Corrosion Engineers (NACE),

1978.

9. NACE Corrosion Engineer's Reference Book, Treseder, R. S., Ed., Nati6nal.f Association Of Corrosion Engineers, Houston, Texas,1980, pg. 70.

Halvorsen, G.T,, 'Protecting:Rebar Inconcrete' -"MaterialsPerformance, pp3 ,1-33;

- 10.

National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE), August 1993.,,.

1 I. Corley; W.,G., "Designing Corrosion Resistance Into Reinforced Concrete,"

Materials Performance, pp54-58, National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE), September 1995. -

12. Tuthill, A. H., et. al., "Effect of Chlorine on Common Materials in Fresh Water,"

Materials Performance, pp. 52-56, ,National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE), November 1998.

13. Reference 5, pg. 3:16.

14. Machinery's Handbook, Seventeenth Edition, The Industrial Press, NY, 1964 Eric C. Biemiller Page 9 04/11 J99

Figure I Photograph of a clean Torus anchor bolt. Located in Bay 10, adjacent to Bay 9 (opposite saddle of Figure 2, below).

Figure 2 Photograph of a corroded Torus anchor bolt assembly. Located in Bay 10.

Note the scale left by evaporated water in the upper left. A berm has been built around the bolt to hold the ground water. This is where the pH was sampled using the test strips.

Eric C. Biemill er Page 10 04/11/99

I.)

134 z

I 5

A 0t, icing messagew are I I ited with this SU L 3 1 1997 the NORMS drawing I I 1.1, I data!ae 6"FUIL USING. (ýCAFC*AF a umWs YAIUS r.A4 a

ATTACHMENT 2 CALCULATION OF CALCIUM CARBONATE SATURATION INDEX (LANGELIER INDEX)

A C 0 Calium N.0.

Total Solids A laWenlS C Alkallly a

aWL mg/L mWL camO, rC4O, 50" 300 0.1 10- 11 0.6 10" 11 1.0 400-1000 0.2 12- 13 0.7 12- 13 1.1

14. 17 0.8 14- 17 1.2 I 18- 22 0.9 18- 22 1.3 Temprutml 1 23- 27 1.0 23- 27 1.4 1C "F 28- 34 1.1 28- 35 1.5 0-1 32- 34 2.6 35- 43 1.2 36- 44 1.6 2.6 36- 42 2.5 44- 55 1.3 45- 55 1.7 7-4 44- 48 2.4 56- 69 1.4 56- 89 1.8 10-13 50- 56 2.3 70- 87 1.5 70- 88 1.9 14-17 58- 62 2.2 88- 110 1.6 89- 110 2.0 18-21 64- 70 2.1 111- 138 1.7 111- 139 2.1 22-27 72- 80 2.0 139- 174 1.8 140- 176 2.2 28-31 82- 88 1.9 175- 220 1.9 177- 220 2.3 C 32-37 90-96 1.8 230- 270 2.0 230- 270 2.4 38-43 100-110 1.7 280- 340 2.1 2M0- 350 25 44-60 112-122 1.6 350- 430 2.2 360- 440 2.6 51-65 124-132 1.5 440- 550 2.3 450- 560 2.7 56-64 134-146 1.4 560- 6g0 2.4 560- 690 2.8 65-71 148-160 1.3 700- 870 2.5 700- 880 2.9 72-81 162-178 1.2 880-1000 2.6 890-1000 3.0

,. ,,: ..... +% '+ ".-+ 1.O kv ln f .B C*Df m ~ s h .. .. ---

.

+~~~..++ +.*... ... 1 2.p * (.3 +A 8)

. - (.C . D

+ . .- ++,. ..  ; ,

,+' .

71'.** ;:i

.. ..+* +"": '

' A+.

-A-A-,*t

'+.,}&+

ft index is0c-welee iim bhe~mscai. baýa Ifindex i, Pk a quaMnCP tero is altendency b ceibiot-

.calcium p-' "ition

,.minus -4uantity; Cal*ium*n Carbonate' does not precipitate,- and, the sIf-.inde.

probability of corrosion(if, dissolved oxygen is present) will increase in thenhegative value of the index.

To deterfmne temlperture at which scaling begins (i.e., pH = ple), find the temperature equivalent to the following value of 8:

a - pH * (C 4 D) - 19.3 + A)

Ryzner Stability Index - 2 (pt's) - p-With walte havvngi a Stolilty Index of 6.0 of Ian. rcaling incraes and the tendency to corosion decreumll. When the Stabllity Index is above 7.0. a Protecttm coating of calcium crboneate my not be developed.

Page 12

5~8~3C8939 T-C6Q Pi2I/QI F-186

- .. ~.. - -- .~ ,., ~

.9

-

77712 ----. ___...

-. -

___

-

-

--

I /

..

I ..

,~*....

+Ti

---

~.

.

--

OfF Ict OUL 80ston Edison Compan~y To: R. N. Swanson Date: Jan*ary 27. 1987 From: H. F. &rha~ftna A .98 7.7'0-Dept. D0c. ?MDE87..204W7-12Mi?

ft 1ect: Ultrasonic Thickness Sureftnt (NESR Number 86-03 and-NR 87-50-")of Dryw Llner pl"aiv Lr1~u. wn:

F. N. Fam.lari B. Perkins QC Clerk PMPS J. Seery 4A File 1.6.1

3. Seery QA File 1.6.1

Reference:

, (a) NESR. 86.-03 (b)QCI 50.40 44C InforMa.tiOn Notice 86-99, (d)ýRICS IL No'.09' 11

Enclosure:

(:A) Ultrasonic Thickness Measur nt Report

. The N'uclear prima....

- c-IE: .........

ngi'neering Depa:rt*ent requested that spe ific areas dry.... l ner plate be Measured of

%

er` 86-43). The requeest. cited the NRC. for wall thick"e.

Ge"er*al. Electric Come linformation. Notic S&9 Pany RICSIL No. 09 as alIert*n* utilioties ndtES cOr" ion of the drywell of ndss,te, i:.

,er mterial. The drywell ultrasonically examined, liner. plate was with no degradation by corrosion

!found.

I. re.sponse to referec aa- plan was7,e'st1**yablihed tO'i:

.

AD, P.6ovide'e -00io*bn., ca.n.ng *surace

.... . req":

.'***::':r ire".d.a*;." *'"' .. .. rintheevent 'furt

.. . . . p .v +]*t

.ereal. was,

• ... 1..

OR te.hni.que.t for both wallth '.<0..

c*or-ro. t n 's., .P.

......

-,bio

.... pitting tI Twelve

.9' - 2.*6s by 6a areas were prepared for ultrasonic exami:nation This areawas chosen to allow scnning forpitting at elevation r::* o:

other techn+iue~s. such as  :

required. OQC selected the angig ueaf. if further evalUatifon..

scope ultrasonic instret, were for more detail evaulation ofas oppos.d o a1 igitit' instrument. to allow Signal, such as:lamination the l:trasonic and pitting.

CONTR-0 COP

....*:**  :*iiii::*i*

jii!* L wv

~>- x

'4flX-.~X<.\,54,4,

- S,> n.Ae ,-,4~

,' S '4 To.

ýiýet Ultrason~ic 8-3ai~d 087-50-i) Thickfess pasarg GfOywl Lfmw Piart,*(ER at

'S All (b). twelve areas were ultrasonically examined in acco The plate thickness apears to be consistent e With ref*erotc (1.1 jncbes) "kfth c res with the design thickness of 1.0625 inches. Th r s MII

..... - L ref lect n W f

- ,- at area 9 and 12 of attac evaluated as inclusions because epn. These they did not reduce the backfaceref1etes Wee signal.

The drywell line plate has not experienced general or localiz:j corrI&,.

CG/dinc 4'*,,***,

.:; ,

• r :* ".

.7

onion Ms" comm QUAL111 gwm ENCLZSURE (A)

INSPLE110" up"I MOIR

• osiclbisaw~ OP9T *AS()ftl :i~y/' 'A PILGRIM UINCLEAR MENLSIAllow. VVI I MXOUAIL PON RUSPILC1JP9N&PJPOWl: ~.

V.@g9..S~ ,.~~~.s~-0~s.j_____Ng J)JA _t 'V't &ý "cme____ '

M: g4-c3 I C CO#1A~h:3 ~ _ ___ ___ ___ __0o_

___ ___ __ __ IWI SANDcait ftspi 4Jims

.~,flO L4~.I "~1JA W rn.rr . - ~ ~,..

f v i

01A OCR i Prepaedu y oils Sttion- ,.C.C. (viAgIftal 0ttwieuvd  :

bait:

ULTRASO4iC THICKNESS MEASJftEU~T PROJECT N

OMPWUTOR a Emma las'rumansT a a T U&. AMCAL "U" M&?a M ULTRA3011CMICASURCHCUTS C4~ ir*lTb

-;4~~AM I.

1 VERIFCATIN _a. ____a.__Dow?__

MaXSmul PROBABLE ERROR, SjMn or liesTRUINTU ANDC U2CMAMICAL PRICISIONS. I=. 0yF99 901 .OSL ZxiuATIoa DATA, MU~CHO 04 OU3CRPTaOM OF M(ASMURI LOCATMUS O7A

• irA/m~1w7" . r-ieAt/5! t1945aect- ewp- A, 74-ks IZ. RE 'Appec,' vygfl M2 k fvjý SAI/MAM~., W MIrAL&Ob.d. - ,0 7 ~

E7~ ~ Ak 0,~~ZbIAS '

2 Fv ~ £~:: 7~Vd~

- ~-I -

7~I~- \J4s~ Ai~ /

~I~AL. ~'-

CD, 7-IL not1MS

?LEVEL Oa.&? APPROE IV DATZ

ULTR"G*tC TUMMESS kKASUaE*ZKT PRCMWT 118STRU826my vgrc

'Cowox*?as PROISI wmx&a iwn m min=

R-2 -C.'O-j fve

..........

Io P49YEIENCI SAMPLES- MECKM#~CAL WAS: a. a.

ULTIAsomiculWI WENTS3 CAL- I INITIAL: S.&5 *C ~ _____

I.5 v~e~e~w~@e I

-AM~ Of INSTRfJWEI4T £AO 09CS4AUAL PRECISS9ONG VAX. 0FFIEU90DWOt RUAMINATION DATA, SUaTCH 02 ORSCRIPTION Of MAUR" LOCAT)US E4mptee, iv 5-/wt S~ krA-"Aw,6 C

EXMIEM OT LEV"L a0i ApPUPYSO 51 DATR

~;*'

0 NIl

,2....

-PLAN ,&ý 8so*

7 -A;# 4 Instruction 10.03 Rev.: 5 Attachment Pgge Iof '.

BO$SON EDISON COMPANY QUALITY CONIROL INSPICIION R.PORI No.

TYPE:() INS'IALLA11QN C)SU~RVEILLANCE SOURCE (v 1OHER BOS10N EDISON COMPAINY DAIL(s) PERFORMt.D: //2,2 'i.4 / j' )2 PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STAlION, UNIT 01 RFERENCE DOCUMLNIS USED fDR INSPEC71ON PURPOSES:

P.0.1- v11 - . w...r A i./t .R.fl-,I ;7 PROC.* r 0OTHER: A lg. CONTACIS7 NAML:J eKkt/ k *TITLE: Ci~,

3. Fi1NDiNGS: (SUKK'ARY Oý W1lNESS/lIOLD POIN1S AND OTHER INSPEC11ONS PERFORMED)-

4-

-r; 141: &-MSC

4. CONDIIIONS ADVERSL 10 QWALIIY; (As) NO ()YLS D.R. NO.(s:.....4.... NCR NO.(&):_______ S.W.O.NO()

Other:

DiSIRIBUT ION:

OOC Group Leader/IR F17' Prepared bit Pilgrim~ Station -D.C.C. (original)

~ C.Reviewed P6I'AJ~-d-7'~

,4/ ~~c4F-f~'~

-CA-.4Date:

1f7 4/ 6/'U*VPiFi' ~

~7\T 21 I; 12 -ýa7

-  ;  !: 2 1,  ; p S- Pý17 *.ý449 " ,75 4; # -

-

• ýý z~3 I

NORTH

~ B' RMHI 0 CRD'

, Hipcr

• II 14 ZXNA L f L ,,*

"T

• • '*"r **

p

/

I

,/

4,3 t

11 I

V.-

I

-U- 7E.-

........ 4 ,

CN  !*-r! "1- /

- ~3l I1 16

~j.

414 Rcic ~l R.

t.,"-* . ý- 1 - ý- -, ---- -- I I

• -3~ (~*rP) p (

~xo.

t a"! 54? -75:;

?~ .- ~

L' %J ./ '. :" 1

-, - -. 7

- A~I:. ~ ~

. J

• ~>. ow~, -. *-

• 4~~oS ~ __ c

-S, A- , -

QROTE C. k~

i UJATIONl, yO8a ~ i~PCT~.7 RA~N tu§ C)CF ACTION

.1 tACCEP/PSIECT ANO r.MWNT AS8NEC;SSARY)

I ____

___e4 ______

I ~k-I Fff..Uc'rL)C I

Ze-' 7 rM -4Nd L I