Page 1 of I

Perry Buckberg - Fwd: Documents from Pilgrim

From:To:

Date:

Subject:

CC:

Perry Buckberg

Dan Hoang; James Davis

1/16/2007 9:43:23 AM

Fwd: Documents from Pilgrim

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

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.

UT data, as attached.

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:Creation DateFrom:

Created By:

Fwd: Documents from Pilgrim1/16/2007 9:43:23 AMPerry Buckberg

PHB I @nrc.gov

Recipientsnrc.gov

OWGWPOO3.HQGWDOO1AM

JAD (James Davis)KXC2 CC (Kenneth Chang)

nrc.govOWGWPOO4.HQGWDOOI

AMDVH (Dan Hoang)

Action

Delivered

Date & Time

1/16/2007 9:43:32

Delivered 1/16/2007 9:43:35

Post OfficeOWGWPOO3.HQGWDOOIOWGWPO04.HQGWDO01

Files, .._ ..

MESSAGE"TEXT.htmScanOO.1pdf.ScanOOL.pdf -

Delivered Route1/16/2007 9:43:32 AM nrc.gov1/16/2007 9:43:35 AM nrc.gov

S,.Nize Date & Time1238 1/16/2007 9:43:-21 AM.81497454... • . 1/1:1/2007 12:56:41 PM32755277- . -1/11/2007 12:56:52PM

Options....Auto Delete:Expiration Date:Notify Recipients:Priority:ReplyRequested:Return Notification:

Concealed Subject:Security:

NoNoneYesStandardNoNone

NoStandard

ImmediateDelivered

To Be Delivered:Status Tracking:

(RTYPE B4.39)Boston Edison Company

Supplier Design Document Review FormPNPS Unit I

SUDDS/RF# 99-134

Pages of attachments 13

Activity Corrosion Assessment of Torus Saddle Tiedown Concrete AnchorBolt Assembly

Contractor Duke Engineering & Services

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

Keywords:Torus Tiedown, SupportSaddle, rock anchors

SUDDS/RF# 99-134

Doc #ESR # N/APDC # N/APO/REQ #LSP011383OtherProblem Report 96-0096

Document Type: Design Bases/Criteria/Work Scope M ISys Description [-, Equip Spec/Mat'] Req M,Analysis Rpt/Calc X, Dwg I'I,Diagram n, Test Plan/Proc M],Test Report [], Work Instr/Proc 5,Other

DocumentIssue Date: 4/11/99 Draft: Yes 0 No

Review: Conceptual *Cognizant Engr/DM (BECo) J L Manning

Detail [)

... Cognizant Engr(s),.Contractor E C Biemiller

Conforms to FSAR Reqmts: Yes X No []Comments:

Nuclear DistributionName 1W/OAI W/AJ G Dvckman XE3 ;•h,•A'.

Conforms to OtheriApplicable Doc/ProcYes X No 5 Comments:

0000

Detailed Review Only ___________' ______'__.___

- Review and Evaluation Bases .0

Results of Evaluation (reason for changes, if any) 00"_ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ E.0

Comments (suggested/required changes) Cognizant EngineerNESG 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/AContributing Engineer Date

/S/ N/ADepartment Manager Date Contributing Engineer Dept Mgr. Date

Attachment INE 3.01 Rev. 14

PILGRIM STATION

CORROSION ASSESSMENT OFTORUS SADDLE TIEDOWN,

CONCRETE ANCHOR BOLT ASSEMBLY

Prepared by

Duke Engineering & ServicesBolton, Massachusetts

Eric C. BiemillerRichard G. Orner

April 11, 1999

Prepared for

Pilgrim StationBoston Edison CompanyBoston, 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 CONCLUSIONS......................................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 foundationusing Williams Form Engineering Corporation's solid "spinlock" rock and concreteanchor 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 threefeet [2]. For approximately eighteen years, ground water has been reported seeping intovarious locations through the foundation. More recently, ground water has been reportedaround 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 isapproximately 22'. The 0' elevation of the station is mean sea level. Based on theelevations, considerable ground water pressure against the foundation is normal.

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

The anchor bolts are fabricated from ASTM SA-108 carbon steel. The extension shaftswhich 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 containsadditions of chromium and molybdenum. The expansion shell assembly, which wedgesthed 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 toQbe 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 byMr. James Manning into the plant to visually examine a sample of the wetted anchorbolts. The bolts examined were in Bay 10 under the torus. The torus saddle supportadjacent to Bay l ! cont'aineWd, "he wetted bolts. A berm around one of the bolts had beenbuilt 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 areshown in Figures 1 and 2, respectively.

The anchor assemblies are in high radiation areas of the plant, so a real close inspectionwas not possible. The standing water, also in the high radiation area, was sampled for pHwith 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 highradiation area. The strips, distributed by EM Science in Gibbstown, NJ, are colorcomparative strips, which allow the determination of pH in increments. pH in the rangeof 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 atPlymouth Beach, a few miles north of Pilgrim Station. The strip read between a pH of 7and 8. Seawater is reported to have a pH of 8 (41 and 8.1 to 8.3 (5]. Reference 5 alsostates that the pH of seawater can fall to 7 under the influence of anaerobic bacteria instagnant pools. The sea water sample was taken at the beach in wave wash. The teststrip'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 hadevaporated. It is believed that this residue may be a calcium compound brought up withthe 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 primaryimpurities -in such waters are calcium and magnesium salts. These salts usually form ahard protective scale on steel [6]. This protective scale is also a function of the alkalinityof the water and the concentrations 6_ýfother salts. Pourbaix, in his studies of iron inequilibrium conditions with watetf ,found iron to be passive in the pH range of 10 to 13due 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. Theprotecive 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 inconcrete structures. Concrete normally provides a noncorrosive environment for thereinforcing steel. The high pH (usually 12.5) of the aqueous phase of concrete causes apassive oxide film to form [8]. Corrosion will not occur as long as this passive filmremains intact.

The torus saddle anchor bolts were inserted into predrilled holes in the concrete, then theholes were back filled with a concrete grout. The fact that ground water is seeping up thebolt 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 thehigh pH water caused by the lime in the Portland Cement/concrete. The fact that thestanding water around the bolts on the foundation had a measured pH of 9.5 confirmsthis. 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 thewater surrounding the anchor assemblies that is not in contact with air may be higherwhich is beneficial in preventing corrosion.

The pH measurement of 9.5 of the standing water around the anchor assembly and thewhitish residue left by the evaporation of the standing water (See Figure 2) provideenough data to perform a conservative (worse case) estimate of the LangelierIndex/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 onF-

Total dissolved solids (ranges in parts per million, ppm);Temperature;

C Calcium Hardness (ranges in ppm); andAlkalinity (as CaCO3, ranges in ppm), respectively.

Based on theirýMdiue left on the foundation floor from the evaporating water, theassumption 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.

r range 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 thearea. 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 andknowing that the water percolated through concrete suggests that using the low number isnot realistic.

The 'D' value based on alkalinity really isn't known at all, so in this case the lowest ormost 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 orSI = 9.5 - 8.4SI= 1.1

This is greater than zero so the protective film would be expected to precipitate inhibitingfurther 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 howthe '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 theLangelier 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 diffusethrough the protective oxide layer causing it to break down. These ions are particularlydestructive if enough moisture and oxygen are present. This would be the case for theanchor bolts. Because the corrosion products occupy much more vo lume than theoriginal steel, they create stresses in the concrete which cause the .concrete cover to spallor delaminate [10]. .. .

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

• 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 plateon the foundation that the bolts penetrate (Figures I and.2) or perhaps other signs ofconcrete spalling in the vicinity. From the distance. that the corrosion was observed (SeeFigure 2) no active spalling was noted. If possible, the standing water around the boltsshould 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 asa 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 wordcontinuous. Tuthill further states that chlorine reacts so readily with metallic 'materialsthat any residual is consumed within a few days in most waters [ 12]. This work wasperformed 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 innatural water between 1 and 2 mils per year. In salt water, the rate is one and a half timesto three the natural water rate. This assumes no passivation.

For this assessment, given the measured pH conditions and the fact that the ground waterwelled up through the concrete foundation, a total corrosion of 1 to 3 mils loss will beassumed over the eighteen year period. Any corrosion is assumed to have passivatedbecause of the high pH conditions. Given that the corrosion products have no where togo, 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 spallingwould be caused by the growth of corrosion products from active corrosion cells on theanchor bolts. Such cells could be active, despite the high localized pH, if chloride ionswere present and were being renewed by the ground water welling up through thefoundation. 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 calculationwas based on the maximum total corrosion estimate of 3 mils loss from the outer surfaceof the anchor bolts and subsequent loss of cross sectional area. The tension capacity ofthe bolt will be reduced in direct proprtion to the area reduction at the location withinthe corroded region of the minimum: cross sectional area of the bolt. Based on theReference 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 theconcrete 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 % R new

7 tr x 0.9152

= 2.630 in.2

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

Eric C. Biemiller Page 7 04/11/99

5.0 CONCLUSIONS

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

The reduction in tensile capacity of any bolt subjected to an assumed total corrosion lossof 3 mils is 0.75%. This is the maximum reduction which could occur in the actualpullout capacity of a particular bolt installation. Some minor reduction in preload of abolt may also occur as a result of the corrosion.

To confirm the findings of this assessment that any corrosion process has been passivateddue to the high pH conditions, a sample of the ground water should be taken to determinechloride levels, if any.

gI K4 1ý nI ý C0,117,-o T w ý v + c . -, + ( V -4 , I Z , o , , , + , 4 • -R -

ft-ý. cwpkaA OL%4-al '-J , (T-elea". 144-- t1%1L

(ýLt acti., g•,

Patm++ t "- yi je ".P~;?tv~Y~L- +.V* ,+ A,.,to+.+ >

40, p o+(+.......1+ ~Z~c~ o+J : ++ h + & keL4

.4-;r )j.

. ':. I'•?• .

,,, -f 4fA< 04

~~~~~kt~~ q. S) , (9 4 dk. L ý7~ 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 BookCompany, 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., ASMInternational, 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 TheProblem," Corrosion 78, National Association Of Corrosion Engineers (NACE),1978.

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

- 10. Halvorsen, G.T,, 'Protecting:Rebar Inconcrete' -"Materials Performance, pp3 ,1-33;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, adjacentto 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 beenbuilt around the bolt to hold the ground water. This is where the pH wassampled using the test strips.

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

I.)

134

z

I

A5

0t,I I I I 1.1, I

a

icing messagew areited with this drawingthe NORMS data!aeSU L 3 1 1997

6"FUIL USING. (ýCAFC*AFr.A4 umWs YAIUS 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 mWLcamO, rC4O,

50" 300 0.1 10- 11 0.6 10" 11 1.0400-1000 0.2 12- 13 0.7 12- 13 1.1

14. 17 0.8 14- 17 1.2I 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 1.62.6 36- 42 2.5 44- 55 1.3 45- 55 1.77-4 44- 48 2.4 56- 69 1.4 56- 89 1.8

10-13 50- 56 2.3 70- 87 1.5 70- 88 1.914-17 58- 62 2.2 88- 110 1.6 89- 110 2.018-21 64- 70 2.1 111- 138 1.7 111- 139 2.122-27 72- 80 2.0 139- 174 1.8 140- 176 2.228-31 82- 88 1.9 175- 220 1.9 177- 220 2.332-37 90-9 6 1.8 230- 270 2.0 230- 270 2.438-43 100-110 1.7 280- 340 2.1 2M0- 350 2544-60 112-122 1.6 350- 430 2.2 360- 440 2.651-65 124-132 1.5 440- 550 2.3 450- 560 2.756-64 134-146 1.4 560- 6g0 2.4 560- 690 2.865-71 148-160 1.3 700- 870 2.5 700- 880 2.972-81 162-178 1.2 880-1000 2.6 890-1000 3.01. O kv ln f .B C•Df m ~ s h .. .. .---

C

:,. ,,: ..... +% '+ ".-+

+~~~..++ +.•... ... 1

,+' A''+. ':71'.•• ;:i . .. ..+• +"" : '2. p • (.3 .+A . .+ 8) - (.C D .- ++,. .. ; ,

ft index is0c-welee iim bhe~mscai. baýa

Ifindex i, a Pk quaMnCP tero is altendency b .calcium ceibiot- p-' "ition

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

probability of corrosion(if, dissolved oxygen is present) will increase in thenhegative

value of the index.

-A-A-,•t '+.,}&+

To deterfmne temlperture at which scaling begins (i.e., pH = ple), find the temperatureequivalent 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 tocorosion decreumll. When the Stabllity Index is above 7.0. a Protecttm coating of calciumcrboneate my not be developed.

Page 12

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

.9 -

77712 -

-. -

-

-- ----. ___... ___

I /

.. I ..

,~*....

+Ti

-- .

---- ~.

OfF Ict OUL80ston Edison Compan~y

To: R. N. Swanson From: H. F. &rha~ftna A .98 7.7' 0-Dept. D0c. ?MDE87..204W7-12Mi? ft

Date: Jan•ary 27. 1987

1ect: Ultrasonic Thickness Sureftnt of Dryw Llner pl"aiv(NESR Number 86-03 and-NR 87-50-")

Lr1~u. wn:

F. N. Fam.lariQC Clerk PMPS B. PerkinsJ. Seery 4A File 1.6.1

QA File 1.6.13. Seery

Reference:, (a)(b)

(d)ý

NESR. 86.-03QCI 50.4044C InforMa.tiOn Notice 86-99,RICS IL No'.09'

11 Enclosure: :(:A) Ultrasonic Thickness Measur nt Report

. The N'uclear IE: ngi'neering Depa:rt•ent requested that spe ific areas ofprima.... - c- ......... dry.... l ner plate be Measured for wall thick"e.;%:er` 86-43). The requeest. cited the NRC. linformation. Notic S&9 ndtESGe"er•al. Electric Come Pany RICSIL No. 09 as alIert•n• utilioties of ndss ,te,cOr" ion of the drywell i:. ,er mterial. The drywell liner. plate wasultrasonically examined, with no degradation by corrosion !found.

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

AD, P.6ovide'e -00io•bn., ca. n.ng •surace rin theevent 'furt .ereal. t was,.... req": . .'•••::':r a•;." •'"' .. .. ire". .. d . . .

.p .v +]• • ... 1..

'.<0..OR .t te.hni.que for b oth wallth pittingc• o r- r o. t 's .P. -, bio n ., ...... .... t I

Twelve 6s by 6a areas were prepared for ultrasonic exami:nation at elevation.9' - 2.• This areawas chosen to allow scnning forpitting : ..r::• o: other techn+iue~s. such as angig ueaf. if further evalUatifon wererequired. OQC selected the scope ultrasonic instret, as oppos.d o a1igitit' instrument. to allow for more detail evaulation of the l:trasonicSignal, such as:lamination and pitting.

CONTR-0 COP

.... •:** jii!• :•iiii::•i• L wv x - S,> n.Ae ,-,4~ '4 ~>- '4flX-.~X<.\,54,4, ,' S

To.ýiýet Ultrason~ic Thickfess pasarg GfOywl Lfmw Piart,*(ER at8-3ai~d 087-50-i)

'S

All twelve areas were ultrasonically examined in acco e With ref*erotc(b). The plate thickness apears to be consistent (1.1 jncbes) "kfth c reswith the design thickness of 1.0625 inches. Th r s MII ref lect n W f..... - , L - - at area 9 and 12 of attac epn. These ref1etes Weeevaluated as inclusions because they did not reduce the backface signal.

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

CG/dinc

.7

4'•, .:; ,•••, , • r :• '' ".

onion Ms" commQUAL111 gwm

INSPLE110" up"IENCLZSURE (A)

MOIR

*osiclbisaw~ OP9T *AS()ftl :i~y/' 'A

PILGRIM UINCLEAR MENL SIAllow. VVI I

MXOUAIL PON RUSPILC1JP9N&PJPOWl: ~.

V.@g J)JA 9..S~ _t &ý ~s.j_____Ng M: ' g4-c3,.~~~.s~-0 'V't "cme____I C CO#1A~h:3 ~ _ ___ ___ ___ __0o_

___ ___ ___ __ __ IWI SAND cait ftspi 4Jims

.~,flO fL4~.I "~1JA W rn.rr . - ~ ~,.. v

i

01A OCR i

oil s Sttion- ,.C.C. (viAgIftalPrepaedu y

0ttwieuvd :bait:

ULTRASO4iC THICKNESS MEASJftEU~T PROJECTN

OMPWUTOR a Emma

las'rumansT a a T U&. AMCAL "U" M &?a M

ULTRA3011CMICASURCHCUTS C4~ ir*lTb

-;4~~AM I. 1VERIFCATIN _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" .

74-ks IZ. RE

0,~~ZbIAS '

r-ieAt/5! t1945aect- ewp- A,

'Appec,' vygfl M2 k fvjý

SAI/MAM~., W MIrAL&Ob.d. - ,0

7 ~ E7~ ~ Ak

2 Fv ~ £~:: 7~Vd~

- ~-I -

7~I~- \J4s~ Ai~ /

~I~AL. ~'-

7-IL

CD,

not1MS ?LEVEL Oa.&? APPROE IV DATZ

ULTR"G*tC TUMMESS kKASUaE*ZKT PRCMWT..........

'Cowox*?as vgrc PROISIm min=

R-2 -C.'O-j I o118STRU826my wmx&a iwn fve

P49YEIENCI SAMPLES- MECKM#~CAL WAS: a. a.ULTIAsomiculWI WENTS3 CAL- I

INITIAL: S.&5 *C ~ _____

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

EXMIE M OT LEV"L a0i ApPUPYSO 51 DATR

~;*'

0

NIl

,2....

-PLAN ,&ý

8so*

BO$SON EDISON COMPANYQUALITY CONIROL

INSPICIION R.PORI

Instruction 10.03Rev.: 5AttachmentPgge Iof '.

7 -A;# 4

No.

TYPE:() INS'IALLA11QN C)SU~RVEILLANCE SOURCE (v 1OHER

BOS10N EDISON COMPAINY DAIL(s) PERFORMt.D: //2,2 / j' 'i.4 )2

PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STAlION, UNIT 01

RFERENCE DOCUMLNIS USED fDR INSPEC71ON PURPOSES:

P.0.1- v11 - . w... r i./t A .R.fl-,I ;7 PROC.* r 0OTHER: A

lg. CONTACIS7NAML:J eKkt/ k *TITLE: Ci~,

3. Fi1NDiNGS: (SUKK'ARY Oý W1lNESS/lIOLD POIN1S AND OTHER INSPEC11ONSPERFORMED)-

-r; 14 1: &-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 bitPilgrim~ Station -D.C.C. (original)

~ P6I'AJ~-d-7'~ C.Reviewed,4/ ~~c4F-f~'~ -CA-.4Date: 1f7

4/ 6/'U•VPiFi' ~

4-

~7\T 21 ; 12 -I -ýa7 ; 1, !: 2 ; p S - Pý17 *.ý449 " ,75 4 ; # -

*ýý -

NORTH

z~3

I

~ B' RMHI 0 CRD', H ipcr * II

I

-U-

CN

V .-

14 ZXNA

L fL ,,• ••'•"r ••p "T

/

t 4,3I,/

............. 4 ,

I11

7E.-

- ~3l

!•-r! "1-

I1 16/

~j.

414Rcic ~l R.

t.,"-* . ý - -1 -1 - ý - -, ---- --

*-3~ (~*rP)

I I

p (

~xo.

t

a"! 54? -75:;

?~ .- ~L' %J ./ '. : " 1-, - -. 7

- A~I:. ~ ~. J

*~>. ow~, -. *- *

4~~oS ~ -S, __ c 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

rM -4 Nd L

Ze-' 7

I