P"- 96 -I10 Nu jew Newneri ATT-4cf AtfJT ff)

CArATIO T CONTRMLSHMT - 7

fhjcisarPlIt FP3~ JAFO1 PAMIOF 2 CAI C NOf- 06,;r-W FEVOM .

CAJXcULATION a PREUMKR ROANL

PREPARER kf, XQ/ & a ' :Y lo/9q

- (DESIGN)-WvRIFIE/NA ZjkA

ORKGNATOR: '&MotOR17

SYSTEM NO. /NAM ofIL a1I& Ik TITME 45 /4t't4s' 101,ow"Lm

QACATEGORY.. .. DISOIPUNE. '7SRUUR2Ek MODIFICATION NO./TASK NO.- 1813 RE NOp pPJ - AX2

DESIGN BASIS /ASSUMPTION M/9~ c~6/ /c/j /96/,

N/p /YA4f~ c, ~'j~~2

SUMAR 4d f~AeM%/J:.7&~

THIS CALC SUPERSEDES OR VOIDS CALO. NO. ?ws- /

DISTRIBUTION: C - CONTROLLED I uINFO'

NAMAE DEPT LCC I

im~~~~ -1- D

IW 2Preparaton and CbrtUol of ATTACHPENT 4.1 kwNo. 5 Manual Calculations and Analyses page 12 Of 1Z

Nuclear Engineering low TJr *1 ~~CALCULATION CONTROL SHEETPo~f.s

PAGE 2OF 2

MAJOR PIPE NO. VALVE NO. SUPT. NO. INST. NO. PENE NO. EQUIPMENT _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

PI ATIED-flflfl IMENIS r

V 7-.

SECURITY. (YIN) . .COMPUTER PRINTOUT: (YIN)

I OC-2 Preparation and Control of ATTACHIMENT 4.11 Rev. No. 5 Manual Calculations and Analyses Page 14 of 1 7

I V

CALMULATION CXONTRIOL SHEET I rn NFNMPAM2 OF 2

MAJO PPE NO. VALVE NIO. SUPT. NQ PEST. NO. FENE- NO. .EQUIPMENT _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

PFI ATIfl nnr.1~ IMFIT

/PJ-C,4c-$W-o/69 .A7(b edoA. IW

S/p.3 5 4'm 3e~,s9e '~o'se"

RFI n ATflfAWINMB

SECUPJ1Y:(Y/N COMPUTER PRINTUT:. (Y/N

OCIM-2 Preparation and Control of A1TACHMENT 4.1 Rev. No. 5 Manual Calculations and Analyses Page 14 of 12

NY POWER P:JTHORI.TY

t IwYor kPowor 0 Authorit

6816450

RWIS

AUG jW 6 14:17 No.C04 P.02

/IVd -000Y

REMARKS

/o/q /. 1

1z /2 c 7ve n/7'

v74Aeja4

- - & I ~ I

/7

t'

ii

r PN-q%-ioS v c"44' IT 2

POW

=W

Verification of

Document Titie:

Document Number.~

Subject

Modification/Task Number (if applcable):

e IkY,- -,f -J4' _L a~iQ 0/e

k/ad 2 Va[ c*J e

AP.5- 07,4C - 9/f (Z

GA Category

A4P3 0 -JAF

Paqihwd W"____d emiew3

MJTRUMENT& CIJNTFOL _ _

FVE PRTECTIO

SAULATOR__

W-4 CESM VERFICATION ATTACHMENT FOPIA v. N c L 3 pop -A-Of

01 3Np- & %2s 0&WVrcAiiOt CER6HET

"PeI lof

w ~.lP3

0- JAFDESIGN VERIFICATION CHECKUST

page 1 of 4

IDENIFICA71ON: DISMPUNE.

Document ite: I""~' ''~ 4 ' ~ 9 [I EEC []I&C wamb k/adl 4EA4h iL-n [1 CH [JFirsProtect

Do.Nme /A!?- -~~~~6 Dc evso:____ C,'S [ Simulator [] Other

GA Category _________________

MEnhOD OF VERIFICATION: >(Design Review []Alternate Calculations 0 ualification Test

Selected Verifier. 6 S

# Design Verification Quiestonnaire All questions shall be expained in the space provided.

1. Were the inputs correct and incorporated into rte design? r

Explanation: Ajt CALC Is £MiAa Od ~ /f EAi~~~A

2. Are the physical and functional characteristics Of the proposed design within the approved design basis of the I sYstem(s) strctre(s) or components)?491

F:Ynlantin -'t - % J01 I t ~ ~ S ~ -r , Al -' RI ,

41.c~ ;YT7 t

3. 1Does the proposed design incorporate license Commiments?

Explanation: 7446 -n 1" 1,6 lJA 4cr,&~aa'& W! &,

4 Are assumptions necessary to perform the design activity adequately described and reasonable: Where

neesry r the assumptions identified for subsequent reverifications when the detailed design activities ame

Explanation: eo t I r vL; _4rs &/ c uAjo _fflA e)A rI2

5. 1Are the appropriate quality and quality assurance requirement s specified? e.g., safety classification? VPExplanation: 0.4. rCA4 -r

Explanation: SE V 1 16I7.d iA4reS/ Agsk*r,00J

0CM. 4 DESIGN VERIFICATION ATTACHMWENT 42 Rev. No. 3 Page 9 fj

zwwvkft

AfTr

p P~f'E- r7AZ

WW".wew

# Design Verification Questionnaire i i AJl questions shall be explained in the space provided 7. Have applicable consavction and operating experience been considered?

Explanation: d A

B. Have the design interface requirements for mechanical, electrical/&C. and cMl/structural engineering been satisfied?

Elanation: AI

9. 1Was the appropriate design method used? 1W Explanation: 7-14e- AuAl~qgj Is Arf ~~, . :- o,e:D!AA.JCi-0 s 7

10. 1Is the output reasonable compared to inputs?

Explanation: r/

12. Are the specified materials compatible with each other and the design environmental conditions to which the material will be exposed?

Explanation: At I A

13. 1Have personnel requirements and limitations for maintenance. testing, and inspection been satisfied?

Explanation: OJIA

14. IAre accessibility, maintenance, repair, and inservice inspection requirements for the plant including the plant Iconditions under which these will be performned been considered?

Explanation: AJ/A

15. Has adequate accessibility been provided to performn the in-service inspection expected to be required during

Ithe plant life?

Explanation: ,Aj/ /4

I IDESIGN VERIFICATKIN ATTACHNIENT 4.2

Page JQ0f~j

DESIGN VERIFICATION CHECKUST

DCMA - 4 IRev. No. 3

V/ AEmlanation:

ZI~A~vwU ~ m6 4 ~ -M

qW

DESIGN VERIFICATlON CHECKLIST page 3 of 4

* Design Verification Questionnaire All questions shall be explained in the space erovided

16. Has the design properly considered radiation exposure to the public and plant personnel? (ALARA/cobalt reduction)

Exlnation: A1

17. 1Are the acceptance criteria incorporated in the design documents sufficient to alIlow verification that design M euirements have satisfactority accomplished?

Explanation: '?b1W PA ,i- ~ 7-&a~4 Is .f1Adce ,.

Al 'f 64 -- ) I Q--, 7

I B.a Have adequate pr-prational and subsequent priodic test rqirements been appropriatel spe i? VFExplnation: MP ^/,0 121 & 0 r 7-& PIK cders 11~2&V1- ?Z

17#&" C 0 61C 1-03Id A] rfZ -7-4t, S Q L.c

19. 1Are adequate handling. storaea cleaning and shippin reuirements spcified? Explanation: t4/ A

2QL Ame adequate identification ruiremants spcified? Explanation: 'hJA

21. Are the conclusions drawn in the Safety Evaluation fully supported by adequate discussion in the test or Safety I Evaluation itself?

Explanation: I/A

22. Are necessar Poeural changes specified, and are rese2 ibilities for such changas dleer delineated? Explanation: J'/ d

23. 1Are requirements for record preparation. review, approval, reiention. etc.. adequatel specified? lPExplanation: Q9A. (>Azr 27XTW& r1-fA.

24. 1Have supplemental reviews by other engineering discipli nes (seismic. electrical, etc.) been performed on the integrated design package?'fC

Explanation: ybiS M( c1 IA, -. ( r D4 , I- ~.*.A -~ -,- C 10'd.0~

25. 1 Have the drawings, sketches, calculations, etc., included in the integrated design package been reviewed? Ve Explanation: c41 _L A")Ah1C, t 6fdhVg- Alc:A OI-ye

DCCM-.4 DESIGN VERIFICATION ATTACHNT 4.2 Rev. No. 3 Page AL of .1_

A rTA CW-ru 6-IJ 7-1AJ - q6'- 110 S-

AY#R4illr Jr. P01e1ICS2

wwv DESIGN VERIFICATION CHECKLIST page 4 of 4

I Design Verification auestionnaire

All questions shall be explained in the space provided

R26. Have" reviews been performed to identify any effect on the Check Valve Maintenance Program?

Explanation: A/IJA

27. 1Does the design for check valves meet the intents of INPO SOER 86-03?

Explanation: 41/A

28. 1Is the plant reference simulator physical and functional fidelty affected and it's design change been factored into the cost?

Explanation: jj 1 A

29. 1Are ad references usted rmduding design calculationlanalys is) that were used as part of the design review?

Explanation: 4 c-(_. ~ i~ r2r 4 ,je j 0 Irrt ~ A D n C- aA&WJ -71

REMARKSICOMMENTS:

Design Verification Complete: 2 Y Z Z 70/f

0CM.- 4 DESIGN VERIFICATION ATTACHMENT 412 Rev. No. 3 Paop -IL of.,.2L

Aaa .Is a~ - - -

4U~U in.' ~ - I F~ .L - .~ W%~ IA~ 1 ~ U/ ~

EVALUATION OF Piping System Description Prepared By Checked By

PIPS WALL THINNING

41 & 6 Dater A. UtNS',A- Date :

I _- iJW~iot* /9b

run & -4 c

STEP I I SCREENING EVALUAI'IOI

a. Cyaluation of Kinimun PrgdiCted Thicknem

- pipe Wall Nominal Thickness, t.. -. Latest Measured Minimum Wall Thickness, t. - Previous Measured Minimun Wall Thickness, t',,

(if wall has not measured before,,t..~s2*m - TINE Between Two Inspections,

(if wall has not measured before, TIME - service years of the pipe up to f irst Ins

- Erosion/Corrosion Rate, C t * mt j

C-

~nm

Ol 37j, in. In., in.

yr.

pection.)

~V/(~in/yr

-Years between Latest and Next Inspections, T yr$ (?C

C' -Y in._

b. Screening Lzimt

-Acceptable Limit -0.875 *tms Ma~ 2p in

-Unacceptable Limit - 0.3 ta in. /.

c. AcceptabiLity-of the Thinning Wall:

-( JAccept As Is for t, )O. 875*tm

[IStep 2 Evaluation Required for O*675*t.. > t >03t

r ><] Repair or.Replacement for 0. 3*t., >

ones Iwsa Wmtlm som a bo ad P4 1mlaUsm 1-u"1 bute thlnea eav

roue VMa

aztle

70%_ Vs- TT~c~cewr Jo

1R.3 _ NM.A" Pu N&AM

li0$th)

ZZ04"

V'o dot (/_ 104 1

NYI/OPS-MAINT.

N~wY@ikP@wW

ID:914-681-6536

04. 4"''~'7 be9 .........

AUG 28'96 *14:22 .No. 011 -P.09

~ ~ Jc@ ArTA C K&' - rvy ,

.~$ ... ........ . ...

f~.4

4L.- . .I.~~

p ywa

4~~~ V1 OF*5, Z4/~4

H

New~orkPower Authority.

v~j&- 1cS W~~ T A ~ ,2

mw I w - fI

Sub oct Z1ofs ..... 4,: ,'/1U./d . at..... ......

.... .................................. .... C ~ W. by ....................

/0 / 1 17

0174

01of

/~, "(ted//~'

/60 "'CAW

/0*'

c~i

~714r

oar a$7 e-4) C w

e~.69 /

Al

Al P(~L)cA)z Z L

'2 ~

/q.s~v/ f

a- O yz-

C7 03-f /9f'2±,0)~

71.711

e7

-'

U7-f se .

0,6 e * 0

d44 4,

/5o('V)

~C7~

V4- / VaLes

C , 'Pwa<t.

2y 7

(!5), ?s z (/ -:--- .q f ? s4i ,Ov4-Ur elicW)

& d4w

C, ZA7W

V3 f

q6- jo. C -E Pf ,/ 3 CT2-

EVA WAT ION OF PIPE WALL THIN)6r Pypx t em 3 U5r11

Dearyt~onI b7%ma Prepared By Dae2Z-t6

amP 1 2 SCRERN!NO KVAWAION

a* gvalgation of Xinim Prgdicted Tickaess : t

- Pipe Wall Nominal Thickness# tv. - Latest measured Minimum Wall Thickness# t.n-- previous Measured Ninimun Wall Thickness, t',,

(if vail has not measured before, t..inml*125ft..) -TIKE Betweenl Two Inspections, (if vail has not measured before, TINE a service years of the pipe up to first ins

- aroeion/Corrosiofl Rate, C

tgm ? USS

T. Years betweenl Latest and Next Inspect.

b. Screeningq Limits:

- Acceptable Limit -0.6875 t0

- Unacceptable Limit - 0.* 3 *ta

IWO

!!-

In. In. in.

- yr.

pection.)

0-.2.1~ in/yr

'0 3 in.

0./ ini.

C. Acceptailit of the Thinning Vail:

-(JAcceptAnsIs for t, 0.75t,..

(~)Step 2 Evaluation Required for 0.075'tum: t 0.3t.

-(3Repair or Replacement for O.3'tum, > t

L 1 IL. i*~ma@ 1 = coo- gu lM &A e. UN o (sm .u t W O ~ v in a I 1e 1 I m a . . I .

sko1 M.1e a

/ P-3 NOMA" P RAW

-x at" A

Et AJ q6- ioAv~cmue,,r iL

fal'EI y2s-zAWALATION OF PIPE WALL THiNIN

Piping System 5~e,ke 'Vakr Description :/ r;MV~ T A Prepared By X Dati : LILk A *~~L

Chocked By : . Date : ii~~

STEP 2 : MINIMUM WALL THICKNESS EVALUAIN !(e ~

a. Pipe Parmters:L

-Pipe outside Diameter, D - /' in. Design Pressure, P e&1_ psi

-Design Temperature, T, O -pipe Material Cs -Allowable Stress at Design Temperature, S - .- c2psi -Longitudinal Weld Effective Coefficient, 8 -An Additional Thickness for Erosion/Corrosion, A -- in.

b. Pipe Minimum Wall Thickness Required. by Hoop Stress

P*D /0/' t~al -+ A 0'0-7- in

2 (S*B+O. 4P)

c. pIV2 Minimum Wall Thickness Required by AXial Stresses

- Axial Stress due to Design Cond. (P+DW), ' - psi~ - Axial Stress due to Upset Cond. (P+DW+OBE), S". = psi - Axial Stress due to Faulted Cofld.(P+DW+DBE), sr.n = psi

- t. - (Sv../1.2S)*t. 0,07 in.- t3 = (S,../l*SS)*tr. in.,

-~.-Largest of (t 11,t 2,ts) - 0)3 in.~

d. Acceptability based on Minimum Wall Thickness Criteria:

- ~4Accept But monitor for t1 ; tj & t 1 8. - ( ]Step 3 Evaluation Required for 't .1 > t, t, - JRepair or Replacement for tV >

P 2 cW 9

- /p5~

::*W 0c;s

ff MC0-7 au no (=ffg. 1"a)

;&// 3

sums __PLUM

a,.*,;

.0q -jfc -e 6J4- T

.umva /P~&4hw-SS/ 16 Oe26f

VALUATION OF PIPS WAIL THINNING Piping System : Description s Prepared ByDae: Fsj Chocked ByDae g Ilid

STEP 3 ! LOCAL THINNING EVALUATION &ESTIMATZION OF REMAIXING S RC LIF!

a. Pipe Parameter.

c. Acceptable Local Thinning thicknesses:

-Case 1 : Applicable if %,41 4 ,

t..,t~m ( from curve 1 in Figure .3 )-_____

-Case 2 : Appicble if I1. 2.65R'ii. 1 .13t. ,g j

(1- -L . L + in.

t,= - (0. 353 1% Rt.)tL -_ __ in. t2 - Largerof( ,tu) - ___in.

-Case 3 : th../t~.m ( on Curve 2 in Figure 7.3 )-____

t7/-~~ ~~~ _____

O t~a~s in.

I Accept But Nonitor for t,) tu..

- RJRepair or Replacement for t, < c

e. PiV2 wall Remining service Lif (RSL):

- t- Larger of (tb,, tawj if t&ti 3 1 - 0/ n

- '. if tvtt

-RSL- (where C- pipe thinning rate) -yrs. - ~? L . UU - aw

I Tor, -"I:

M ewl on&=&= (am- OM IM a a 9

NYPOP-AjN. 9 4-6 8 1-653 6 AUJG 28'96 14:23 ' o .011*P-'0

_1 q--" C

PO AvB(A how q~ ~s?

a~ ez~o/lees

no &.iv tlvc

/

04 O Z7Z0ed(at~ w.A 7Zb

_C 9 W4u.

Li f4

JI ^9e44CYY 4A()'d44

Elo!(9d J09' 4~4 ~t--#LU h f6~

/P13 00La AZtdlawvpoe

___________ 0 -6-- a 4y-L ee-ek'

EVALUATION OF PIPE WALLT Piping System : TtIr G Description :xgr Prepared By :ft Checked By Date : -A#1f

sTEP I : SCREENING EVALUATION

a. Evaluation of Minimum Predicted Thickness z:

- Pipe Wall Nominal Thickness, t,. - Latest Measured Minimum.Wall Thick-ness, t., - Previous Measured Minimun Wall Thickness, t.

(If wall has not measured before, t',.-.=l125*t.) - TINE Between Two Inspections,

(If wall has not measured before, TINE - service years of the pipe up to first ins

- Erosion/Corrosion Rate, C

TINE

A-7 in. in. in.

yr.

pection.)

e5./33 in/yr

- , .,,.-C * y ./5 1/33Yl) -____ n

b. Screening Limits:

- Acceptable Limit 0.875 * t . 1 0____ n

- Unacceptable Limit - 0.3 * t.J./ in.

c. Acce~tablity Lof the Thinning Wall:

-C JAccept As Is for tv > O.875*t,..

- >] Step 2 Evaluation Required for 0.875*t. > tv 0.*m

-(]Repair or Replacement for 0. 3*t. > t

mm - umx m M- LLM G -. 1"92)

mates Iftis 3vmlautls Frwa m be W~d a. a 09 0alat.1 fo PIPO thkInag .valuwtSja. bu thaeaolml sbal t.Uw the reqLromen odVW

AreIs, q 7 joS

qAv7.

MM&Ws

02W AT~-ct15~r sf NRvSL PA

XVALUATION OF PIPE WALL THING Piping System :r Description :7 Wl Prepared By :Dite : Zlj30 Checked By Date :

STEP 2 :MINIMUM WALL THICKNSS EVALUATION

a. Elpa Parameters:.

- Pipe Outside Diameter, D in. jg - Design Pressure, p- .zUQ... psi - Design Temperature, %* 160 * - Pipe Material 0 __ 05__

- Allowable Stress at.Design Temperature, s - 16 000~ psi - Longitudinal Weld Effective Coefficient, E 9 - An Additional Thickness for Eros ion/Corros ion, A -- in.

b. Pipe Minimum Wall Thickness Reguired by Hoop Stress

- P*D+A-____ in

2(S*9+0.4P) +Ain

c. Pigg Minimuu Wall Thickness ReqUiired. by AXial stresses:

- Axial Stress due to Design Cond.(P+DW), Sam. - 1. 0; psi -Axial Stress due to Upset Cond.(P+DW+OBE), So, - psi

- Axial Stress due to Faulted Cond.(P+DW+DBB), Sn - & psi - ti - (Sb./S)*t. 0,07 in. - t 2 - (S,.1l. 2S) *t. IL in. - t2 = (SM,/l.85)*t1.- O95 in.

- t4,, - Largest of (t,,t2 ts) in.-~3j1

d. Accentability based on Minimux Wall Thickness Criteria

- 7JAccept But Monitor for !, ; tb. t-.4. - ( JStep 3 Evaluation Required for t 1 , > tv - ]Repair or Replacement for tV,,. >-t

=aM =-? MUMI PON ( . 1"1 M 2 or I

ZAZL&YAIW W. 'R t royle* .S&S _W&?-O.1e-M P A -l

'VALUATION OF PIPE WAIL THINNIIG Piping System : et le "*f Description :A7noa" Prepared By :ae: &S~q Checked By :Date :

-V~1V eI'TUIIf VUIITkU!'TEW Z VCMTWIMVIT^I V O WMITUT~lenII *?

a. Pipe Parameter.L:

R=D/2-i. t..,. rR,1 m n t .. ~ n

b. Local Thinning Dimensions : (see Figure 7.2)

Lin.,* - __ in.,LC)-___ n, .m___ in.

c. Acceotable--Local Thinning thicknesses:

- Case 1 :Applicable if L4,t 4 1f12tw t~Jt. (from curve 1 in Figure 7. -____

tz (t.tW)*t. ____ in.

- Case 2: Applicable if L, .6I & llt

't(1 ) + 1.Jft.j4-____ in. L

(,.-0 .3 53 *% /Awf: t-m.- ____ in. t.2 - Larger of (t., -_____ in.

- Case 3 : t~./tj ( from e 2 in Figure 7.3) ____

t. t./t~ - _______ in.

tea4'0 - nimum of (t1 ~ t2 1 t,) W in.

- JRepair or Replacement for t, < t,,,

e. Pipe Wall Remaining Service Life (RSL):

_ =j Larger of (tea,,, t-.A) if t ~a ~ if t a> t,? in._

-. --

L - RSL- - 'where C- pipe thinning rate) - ___yr.

m M C-7 aUhW m~ ( . iHsm

213/' -

-AdUN 0 7 ~te -XT

*0wAPLAU in k -. )S- e 100 WaaIu& /

j9VAWIATIOh( OF PIPE WALL THINNING Piin System 2 &rye

Description -; Prepared By :DateO: f/ 94 ez 9

a. Pip. Parameters 2

-Pipe Outside Diameter, D A/ /'0

Desigjn Pressure, P 7- psi Design Temperature, T./60 *

-Pipe Material C-. Allowable Stress at Design Temperature, S aeo psi - Longitudinal Weld Effective Coefficient, 3 9 - An Additional Thickness for Erosion/corrosion, A -- in.

b. Pipe Minimum Wall Thickness Reqired by Hoop Stress

-+ A -,/-do- in.

2(8*1+0. 4P)=__60,

c. Pixe Minimum Wall Thickness ReqUie by Axial Stresses

- Axial Stress due to Design Cond.(P+DW), S... ? 900 psi - Axial Stress due to Upset Cond.(P+DW+OBE), S, ps i - Axial Stress due to Faulted Cond. (P+DW+DBE), St. C VS psi

-t. (Sb.i/S)*t. d -7-3 in. -t 2 (S.0.11. 2S) t. 0_- in. -t, - (S,./l.8S)*t... 0.6=- in.

- j - Largest of (t,,,t,) n 0,0/3 in.

d. Acceptability based on Minim=m Wall Thickness Criteria:

->4Accept But Monitor for :,.; te,, t-.J -(3Step 3 Evaluation Required for >', t Va -(3Repair or Replacement for t*, .

, ,m a 9- MAW_____

4V-96-W/JD!2.

MA M MO-7 ZWALMr= MW W". "a) Sffs

ZL7P04-q O

/ 14;:-

EVALUATION OF PIPE WALL TH G Piping System Description Prepared By :ie: 4tLf6

STE I : SCRENING EVALUATION

- Pipe Wall Nominal Thickness, t.. in. -Latest Measured Minimum-Wall Thickness, t,.,. in.

pPrevious Measured Ninimun Wall Thickness, t*'., C2.V.'2 in.

(If wall has not measured before, TIME - service years of the pipe up to first inspection.)

- rosion/Corrosion Rate, C

C = TJ in/yr

- Years between Latest and Next Inspections, T y",.

b.1 Screening Limits

- Acceptable Limit -0.875 * t., ____ in.

- Unacceptable Limit - 0.3 * t,- _ ___ in.

c. Acceptability of the Thinning Wall:

-(JAccept As Is for 't, ) 0.875*t,

- >JStep ; Evaluation Required for 0.875*t.. > tv 0.3*t

-(3Repair or Replacement for O.3*tm, > t

Em -M LWW P (a". 1"21

oet.. Wea nUwlUmta w. am be -md as Ir 69 11 Lw P40 thLasWLdtft0 ev.1uxew. _

swim$

0W~*-rN

IR /'-C-~c. 541S - 420o67 -e

,VALUATION OF PIPS WALL THINNIN piping System 5rV a7u Description $ Prepared By D Da ft a '30

Checked By J ae &j~(

SqTigp 3 : LOCAL THINNINg RVALMAION &ESTIMATEION OF REKAIMITNQG SERC LIFE

a. Pipe Parameter:

R -D/2 - - in..,t.. -th", in, in.

b. Local Thinning limensions : (see Figure 7.2)

L - - in.L -iL -___iL( ___ in.

c. Aceptabl LAl1 Thinning thicknesses:

- case 1 : Applicable if L,4,,w (,/Rit t~j C~j from curve 1 In Figure 7.3) _____

t 1 -(ta~g/t~a~~h~ - _______in.

- Cas 2 zial if I~2.6 R*t.,, & l.13tm.

+ ~ ~ 1. 1t__ in. L

-(0. 353 1,//R'~-___ in. t2- Larger of (t~,. - _____ in.

- Case 3 : t~,t,,, from a 2in Figure 7.3) _ _

M (t.Lt,) Iin.

- [ ] Repair or Replacement for t. < t,,

e. Pipe Wall Remaining Service Life (RSL):

~t Larger of (t". 1 .tV11) if IV0tht s& t"i _ _in

if __'M>__>_o, n

- SL (where Cm pip. thining rate) -yre.

C

-EPM q6 -10 LL09

/Pl? NM3P L

bzi --& * ? -- -<4 - L& t L .elk4

EVALUATION OF PIPS NALL THD Pipi ng System : Description 2 tuca Prepared By : Checked By Dt

j

SP I z SCURRN EVALUATION 4 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 961u, i%

a.Evaluation of Minimus predicted Thickness : 1v- Pipe Wall Nominal Thickness# t,. - Latest Measured Hinimun.Wall Thickness, t. -Previous Measured Minimun Wall Thickness, to'.

(if wall has not measured before, t'.wl.25*t,.) -TIME Between Two Inspections,,

(If wall has not measured before, TIME = service years of the pipe up to first Ins

- Erosion/Corrosion Rate, C tur.

C =-TIME

&... tirmAma miA Wa*, Ypimv4 I ,*v,

- j in.

- ~ in.

- yr.

pection.)

aell/ in/yr

-

b. Screening Limits

-Acceptable Limit -0.875 * t. _____

- Unacceptable Limit = 0. 3 * t. in.// j

c. Aceptability of the Thinning Wail:

-( JAccept As Is for -t, O.875*t.

t~jStep 2 Evaluation Required for O.875*t. > t 0.*

-[JRepair or Replacement for 0. 3*tm > t b

- M Mn-1 mzua= MW (0". 1"21

99"1S osSu two 4M. ~bei W e ailt. Wg~~u~ w31 =u ft. . z.m~~a Van c

no a W 0

0Wf4Q.J~ ~ocAir'cr etf0

/P'-s a

*AI~ ./3 CdC-Su6-O2(D7 "MLIU-A "" /.

gCVALUATION oF PIPE WALL TUINNIUG riping S $ten t e'-'c k/ea Description :n it f C Prepared BY ai: 4 C ?& Chocked By -4IDae: 9ILQ

STEP 2 N MNIMM WALL THICKNESS1 EVALUATION

a. P Ie Parausterst

-Pipe Outside Diameter# D -____

-Design Pressure, P r.Pei Design Te. pertur*,. ?d16 O Pipe Materil05

-Al lowable Stress at Design Temperature, 8 /Zi~000 Psi Longitudinal Weld Effective Coefficient, Z An Additional Thickness for Eros ion/Corros ion, A -- In.

b. Pipe M1inimum Wall Thickness Required by Hoopi Stress

P*D

c. PIoe Minimum Wall Thickness Requre by Axial Stresses t

-Axial Stress due to Design Cond. (P+DW), of. 1&09( psi - Axial Stress due to Upset Cond. (P+DW+OBB), S.-Psi - Axial Stress due to Faulted cond. (P+DW+D83), S... 3 6S psi

-t, (SftJS)ftin 6'673 in. t. (S"/ 0 2S)t. 0--/ In.

-ts (St./l.-8S) *t. W. 10 -n

VtA,. - Largest of (t~st,,ta) in.O$~j~

d. arceptability based on Minimum Nall Thickness Criteria 2

- '1.Accept But Monitor for t t & t' -(JStep 3 Evaluation Required for t , to INr~ - [ JRepair or Replacement for to,

41V /S-Few

MAMAV2 _ __ __ __

VAMUTION of Ii ping Sys temn Descript Ion Prepared By Checked By

mawIa~

PIP3

a...... S 4

4 4 -

STE 3 LOAL HINNING SVAWATION & ESTINATEXOM O? flE(AINING SERVCS LI?!I

a. pise Parawetes

R -D2 .. in. tuit -t, _ in. JK-m

b. Local Thinning Dimensions : (see Figure 7.2)

L w -_ in., T.%= _ in., 1 l%,,, = _ In., * - In.

c.Acceptable Local Thinning thicknesses:

Case I Applicable if Lck :6 /R-*t t.3t.~. (from curve I in Figure 7.3 -____

(ttts~ia-____ in.

-- Case 2: Aolcble if 1%it2 fto"~ 1. 13t. (t

(1---- +l@~m - _ _In.

t,- (0.353 %b /I/1f~*~a-___ in. t2- Larger of (ta, - __ in.

-Case 3: t,../t~, ( from a 2 In Figure 7.3)- _ __

t-S = /t",_ in.

t.4";/kininu of ( t____s in.

d. bsdo xclTinn rti

[JRepair or Replacement for t, < t,,

e. Pipe Wall Regaining Service Lifet (RSL):

if t 'm > t? V- 62/~In.

COL.C m~~~~ta tvn UL (n.1112

A-fr&Al 1ld 7iS-

/P-? ~ NOLMV 5PA

9J4 1

9,Docket No. 50-286 IPN-96-1 05 Attachment Ill Page 1 of 1

LI ST OF COMMITMENTS

Number Commitment Due

IPN-96-1 05-01 Conduct periodic Every three months from augmented inspections initial UT until code (UT) every three months repair/replacement to ensure that the SW commences. flawed weld on pipe line number 1083 maintains its structural integrity for all design loading

_____ ____ ____ ____ ____ conditions._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

IPN-96-1 05-02 Perform qualitative Weekly until code assessment (visual) of repair/replacement the SW flawed weld on commences. pipe line number 1083 weekly during plant walkdowns to monitor for any change in the condition of the flaw and conduct UT if leakage

____________________ rate increases.

IPN-96-1 05-03 Code repair weld or Refueling Outage RO 9. replace portion of flawed pipe on SW line number 1083 during the next refueling outage RO 9.

IPN-96-105-04 Conduct metallurgical Refueling Outage evaluation of weld on RO 9. SW pipe line number

_______ ______ ______ 1083. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _