BVY 05-038, Attachment 2, Vermont Yankee - Technical Specification Proposed Change No. 263 - Supplement No. 27 Extended Power Uprate - Dryer Acoustic Load Methodology Benchmark, VY-RPT-05-00006 VYNPS Acoustic Model Benchmark- Dryer Acoustic Load.

Attachment 2, Vermont Yankee - Technical Specification Proposed Change No. 263 - Supplement No. 27 Extended Power Uprate - Dryer Acoustic Load Methodology Benchmark, VY-RPT-05-00006 VYNPS Acoustic Model Benchmark- Dryer Acoustic Load.

ML051010185
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee
Issue date:	04/05/2005
From:	Betti E, Hobbs B, Perez P Entergy Nuclear Northeast
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
BVY 05-038 VY-RPT-05-00006, Rev 0
Download: ML051010185 (233)

Text

BVY 05-038 Docket No. 50-271 ATTACHMENT 2 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Technical Specification Proposed Change No. 263 - Supplement No. 27 Extended Power Uprate - Dryer Acoustic Load Methodology Benchmark VY-RPT-05-00006 VYNPS Acoustic Model Benchmark- Dryer Acoustic Load Methodology NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION l Total number of pages InAttachment 2 l (excludina this cover sheet) is 224. l

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev. 0 Page 1 Of 27 ENTERGY NUCLEAR NORTHEAST

-Aft'

.~Et ergyo Engineering Report Cover Sheet Engineering Report

Title:

Acoustic Model Benchmark Dryer Acoustic Load Methodology Engineering Report Type:

New E Revision El Cancelled El Superceded El Applicable Site(s)

IPI El IP2 0 IP3 0 JAF El PNPS U VY Quality-Related: El Yes E No Prepared by: Enrico J. Betti Date:

Responsible Engineer (Print Name/Sign)

Verified/

Reviewed by: Pedro B. Perez Date:

Design Verifier/Reviewer (Print Name/Sign)

• Reviewed by: N/A Date:

Authorized Nuclear In-service Inspector (ANII)

Approved by: Brian Hobbs Date:

Supervisor (Print Name/Sign)

Multiple Site Review Site Design Verifier/Reviewer (Print Name/Sign) Supervisor (Print Name/Sign) Date

• For ASME Section Xl Code Program plans per ENN-DC-120, if required.

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.1

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

-_ Eli er~gy REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 Page 2 of 1271 NON PROPRIETARY NOTICE IMPORTANT NOTICE GE has determined that the PSD and other statistical data developed by ENTERGY from data obtained from the GE SMT facility in San Jose be considered as GE proprietary information. Therefore Figures 3 through 8 and Appendices A through H are considered GE proprietary.

This is a non-proprietary version of the Report No. VY-RPT-05-00006, which has the proprietary information removed. Portions of the document that have been removed are indicated by an open and closed bracket as shown here (( )).

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

-_ EntRer~gy REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 I Revision 0 Page 3 loff 27 RECORD OF REVISIONS Engineering Report No: VY-RPT-05-00006. Acoustic Model Benchmark Dryer Acoustic Loads Revision No.

j

-Description of Change Original report I Reason ForChange NA

+ +

+ 4

+/- 4

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

- Etnterrgy REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 l Page l 4 orf 27 Table of Contents Table of Contents .................................................. 4 List of Appendices ................................................. 4 Summary...................................................................................................................................5 Purpose.....................................................................................................................................5 Background ................................................. 6 Scale Test Model Test Facility.................................................. 6 Evaluation ................................................. 9 Selection of Cases for the CDI Benchmark .................................................. 9 SMT Data Uncertainty ................................................. 10 Selection of Dryer Microphone Data for Benchmark Comparison ......................................... 11 Comparison of Microphone Data; Time Domain ................................................. 13 Comparison of Microphone Data; Frequency Domain ................................................. 19 Conclusion ...... 27 References............................................................................................................................... 27 List of Appendices A VY3RUN2 Burst with No Flow Log and Linear Plots B VY3RUN2 Burst with No Flow +/-10% Load Step Uncertainty C VY1 3R1 Chirp with No Flow Log and Linear Plots D VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow +/-10% Load Step Uncertainty E W6RUN2 Burst with 81 CFM Flow Log and Linear Plots F VY6RUN2 Burst with 81 CFM Flow +/-10% Load Step Uncertainty G VY1 2R1, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow, Log and Linear Plots H VY12R1, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow, +/-10% Load Step Uncertainty I Roadmap for the data and file processing done in this Benchmark J. Technical review Comment and Resolution Form ENN-DC-1 47 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

IN NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

--iitergy REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 I Revision 0 Page l 5 lOr 27 Summary In order to evaluate the ability of CDI's acoustic circuit methodology to predict dryer loads, a "blind" benchmark test was performed using the GE Scale Model Test Facility (SMT) in San Jose CA. This test involved acquiring pressure measurements from an instrumented main steam system and steam dryer on the BWR-3 SMT facility. CDI was provided data from the eight points in the SMT steam piping, and one point on the exit plenum to the blower, as well as SMT flow and temperature information. All SMT dryer data from this test was held back in order to perform this benchmark assessment.

CDI used the data provided as input to the acoustic circuit analysis to predict scale model steam dryer fluctuating pressures. These CDI-predicted dryer pressures were then compared to the actual scale model dryer measurements in this report. Therefore, the predictions of steam dryer loads were blind, since measured steam dryer loads were not provided prior to CDl's analysis.

The CDI methodology was benchmarked in the same manner as it was applied in the full-scale VYNPS dryer acoustic analysis; using eight measurements from the main steam system to predict dryer loads. The measurements are representative of the four strain gages and four pressure sensors installed in the VY plant. The test cases were designed to assess how well the CDI acoustic model would predict acoustic pressures on the dryer when provided with the external piping measurements.

The benchmark results provide the justification and guidance for applying the CDI acoustic circuit methodology in predicting the full scale VYNPS dryer loads.

Purpose The CDI acoustic circuit analysis methodology was used to predict flow induced pressure loading on the VYNPS steam dryer. The methodology uses measurements from strain gages mounted on the main steam piping and measurements from temporary high frequency pressure sensors attached to the main steam venturi sensing lines. A blind benchmark test of the CDI methodology was conducted in order to determine the viability of the methodology.

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report r-Eiteity REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 l Page 6 l of l 27

Background

Scale Test Model Test Facility A 1:17.3 sub-scale model was used to generate data for the benchmark test (Reference 1).

The sub-scale test platform represented the Quad Cities 1 nuclear plant configuration with its original steam dryer design installed. The scale model test facility (SMT) consisted of a reactor vessel head, steam dryer and main steam piping. The model extended from the steam/water interface, located at an inlet plenum, to the turbine inlet. Main steam valves including SRV/ERVs, MSIVs, turbine control valves and turbine stop valves were included in the model at locations reflecting full scale plant configuration. The HPCI and RCIC steam supply lines were included on the associated main steam line. The SMT relied on a blower to generate a flow of ambient air through the facility in the direction of reactor steam flow. Upstream of the plenum is a muffler that served to isolate the model from blower and delivery piping noise. A venturi flow meter located between the blower and muffler was used to measure total system airflow. Two thermocouples were used to monitor air temperature in the system. All tests were performed at ambient pressure.

Microphones were installed in the SMT main steam piping, steam dryer and inlet plenum to measure the unsteady pressure oscillations in the system. The microphone circuits included pre-amplifiers. The microphones were mounted such that their diaphragms were flush with the outer surface of the steam dryer assembly or the inside surface of the pipe wall. The microphones used to collect data on the main steam lines were in the approximate locations of the strain gages and venturis on the full scale plant.

A sound generator (exciter) source was installed on the "An main steam line near the equalizing header. The purpose of this exciter was to generate a known sound signal that could be detected by the microphones in the SMT. Burst random and deterministic chirp exciter signatures were used during certain benchmark SMT test cases in order to provide a sufficiently broad range of sound frequencies.

The analog signals from the microphones were routed to a 32 channel LMS SCADAS IlIl dynamic signal analyzer, which recorded and analyzed the data. The analyzer converted the analog signal to digital data, performed signal analysis and stored the output data in digital format on a PC.

CDI developed an analytical model of the SMT for use in predicting loads on the model dryer. The SMT components and as-built dimensions were provided to CDI. CDI was provided with SMT main steam line microphone data, inlet plenum microphone data, the SMT process flow rate, SMT Temperature, and the PSD functions for the exciter sound source. CDI used this data to predict the responses at 20 selected SMT dryer microphone locations. Entergy subsequently compared the loads predicted by CDI to the subscale model dryer measured microphone data.

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report Ef-tei rvy REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 Page 7 of1271 The SMT benchmark test in San Jose (Reference 3) included the following conditions:

Test 1 Test Name Flow Rate (cfm) External Exciter Source 1 VY1 0 1000Hz Constant Signal 2 VY2 0 Chirp Input 3 VY3 0 Burst Input 4 VY4 81 Off 5 VY5 81 Chirp Input 6 VY6 81 Burst Input 7 VY7 115 Off 8 VY8 115 Chirp Input 9 VY9 115 Burst Input 10 VY10 0 1000Hz Constant Signal 11 VYI1 144 Off 12 VY12 81 Chirp Input.(Hi Volume) 13 VY13 0 Chirp Input (Hi Volume)

The 81 CFM flow rate represents -50% Power for Q2 Pre-EPU. The VY3 Burst signal and VY13 Chirp signals are depicted in Figure 1.

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

` Ein tergy REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 lPage l 8 l of 27 l Burst Noise Source Signal Applied In Benchmark 1.50E+01 1.00E+01 5t.OOE+00

O.OOE+00 45.OE+00 t .OOE+01

-1.50E+01 0 05 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Time (Secl Chirp Noise Source Signal Applied In Benchmark 4.OOE+01 3.OOE+O1 2.O0E+O1-N 1.COE+01 -

E O.OOE+OO -

-1.OOE+O1 -

• 2.00E+01 II

-3.OOE+01 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Time (Sec)

Figure 1: Source Noise Signals Applied in SMT Test (Mic P3A)

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

- - ter g x, REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 l Page l 9 l of l 27 Evaluation Selection of Cases for the CDI Benchmark The initial Entergy review of the SMT benchmark test data was performed in San Jose on 01/13/2005. This review included the 11 original benchmark cases. In this review it was noted that the deterministic chirp and burst random signals had insufficient volume and provided negligible signal at the dryer when combined with either of the two flow cases.

Therefore, two additional cases (cases 12 and 13) were performed. The chirp volume was set loud enough to provide a good signature of the chirp signal at the dryer face when combined with flow noise. The volume had to be limited however to not saturate the microphone channels. Therefore the lower of the two flow rates was used in the Case 12 test. Case 13 used the same volume chirp signal without flow.

For each test case a minimum of 25 segments of data were collected for each run. There were 3 runs performed for each test case. During each test run more than 30 seconds of data were captured. One sound trigger per second was used for runs with the exciter allowing adequate time between sound inputs for the signal to dissipate. A review of the PSD data for each of the 1 second sound segments was performed between test runs using the digital analyzer. This review demonstrated that there was acceptable repeatability in the segments with no discernable change in the input or transmission of the sound throughout the SMT. This allowed use of data from any one of the three runs for the benchmark analysis input. The three data collection runs for each case were performed with only a brief pause between each run. The blower was kept continuously running for the flow cases.

Based on VY review of data from the 13 test conditions, four test cases were selected by Entergy for CDI use in predicting SMT dryer microphone measurements. The test cases selected for the CDI acoustic model analysis included:

I SMT Tests Selected for CDI Benchmark Analyses 1 Test

_______ _ (cfM)

Blower Flow Rate Installed Exciter Exciter Location Burst Rand VY3Run2 0 Burst Random Port 3A VY6Run2 81 Burst Random upstream of D-VY12R1 81 Chirp Ring VY13R1 0 Chirp Rn Cases 3 and 13 provide both exciter source signals without flow. This provides two different signals for which we can compare the acoustic model without flow. The two flow cases, 6 ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

~---.JE ter,>/ REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 l Page I 10 I of l 27 and 12, provide one case where flow noise predominates and one case where the exciter sound source has a significant impact on the observed flow noise at the dryer.

In the full scale plant, the reactor vessel steam/water interface below the dryer serves as a reflective boundary for acoustic waves. In the SMT, this interface did not exist. In order to establish the conditions at the SMT interface, CDI was provided with microphone signal M30 at the outlet to the muffler. Review of the SMT data by Entergy demonstrated that the M30 microphone data had minimal coherence with microphone data on the face of the dryer or outside skirt regions. There was coherence between M30 and microphone data at the top of the dryer. It is the dryer face regions where pressure forces are highest. The dryer face forces are responsible for the major dryer loads that have likely contributed to dryer failures. Therefore, Entergy agreed to supply the M30 data to CDI for the benchmark and focus benchmark comparison on microphones on the face of the dyer.

SMT Data Uncertainty Case 1 included a 1000 Hz input signal. This was repeated in Case 10. This case was done to assess if there was any overall drift or signal change over the course of the testing.

This evaluation demonstrated that there was a larger than expected variation on amplitude as a function of temperature. Some microphones data increased as much as 20% under the higher temperature conditions during later testing. During Case 10 the temperature was allowed to cool. As the temperature approached Case 1 temperature, pressure values also returned to Case 1 values. Through multiple repeated runs at 144 CFM GE has found that that the removal and reinstallation of the microphone can have an impact on pressure amplitude.

The microphones were also subject to a pre- and post-test loop test with a calibrated sound source. (Reference 4) Results indicated that there was little change in the calibration of the microphones. Most microphones a post test sensitivity within 3%of the pre-test value. All microphones exhibited a post-test sensitivity within 6% of the pre-test values. The GE test summary containing the calibration results is attached included in Reference 4 and 5.

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

__"Tn~terap REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 RevisionO l Page l 11 of 1 27 l d

Selection of Dryer Microphone Data for Benchmark Comparison Microphones installed on the dryer and skirt during the test included Ml, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15,16, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 32, 33, 39, 50, and 52.

The microphone data used in the comparison was parsed to a subset that includes those microphones on the components of greatest interest; the dryer face and cover-plates.

Microphones Ml, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 23, and 24 were located on these components. The location of these microphones is depicted in Figure 2.

M50 and M52, located at the top of the dryer, were not included in the comparison. The acoustic model shows very good agreement with these locations, but these microphones have very similar frequency content and amplitude as microphone M30, the microphone at the outlet of the SMT muffler. The M30 data was provided to CDI to allow characterization of the boundary condition in the inlet plenum. Having the data for M30 does not make prediction of the signal at M50 and M52 a meaningful test.

The balance of microphones excluded were M25, 32, 33, and 39. These microphones were in the dryer skirt region. These regions are well below the top of the dryer and in areas were the dryer is cylindrical in shape. Flow loads in this region have negligible impact on fatigue life.

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

-=-E tergy REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 I Revision 0 l Page l 12 l Of l 27 l Q9 01 010 02 0i1 03 012 04 Dryer 90 Degree Vertical face and Cover Plate Microphone Locations This is Nozzle (Pipe) C&D Side of the Dryer (cover plate rotated for clarity) 021 013 Q 22 014 023 015 0 24 016 Dryer 270 Degree Vertical Face and Cover Plate Microphone Locations This is Nozzle (Pipe) A&B Side of the Dryer (cover plate rotated for clarity)

Figure 2. Dryer Microphone Locations Used in the Benchmark Assessment (Reference 2)

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report iE 1- feig)) REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 l Page l 13 l of l 27 Comparison of Microphone Data: Time Domain Entergy supplied CDI with approximately 30 seconds of data for each of the four selected test cases. Inthe acoustic model analysis, CDI elected to use the first 8 seconds of data provided. Therefore all comparisons in this assessment were performed using the same 0 to 8 second subset of the SMT data. The CDI report documenting their blind benchmark calculation is included in Reference 6.

The first comparison performed included a review of the time domain data. The LMS system is configured for AC acquisition. This means any bias or drift has been filtered out of the data. Entergy's check of the output data demonstrated that the mean pressure data at all the microphones was approximately zero.

Figures 3a, b, c and d compare the peak amplitude from the time history data. This includes the maximum absolute pressure data over the 8 seconds of loading, or 65536 time points. In general the CDI acoustic analysis model did a good job at predicting the peak loads on the dryer. These figures also include a comparison of the Prms over the 8 seconds of loading. Prms is representative of energy in the signal. This data also compares reasonably well.

Figures 3a and 3b show that with no flow and the sound source applied, the acoustic model predicts higher loads on the dryer than the SMT measure loads.

Figures 3c shows maximum pressure for flow and low volume burst source. Here the comparison shows a better match; with microphone measurements slightly higher than the loads predicted by CDI. Figure 3d shows maximum pressure for flow and high volume chirp source. The CDI predicted acoustic loads matched reasonably well predicting slightly higher values than the microphone measurements.

While the figures compare individual microphone results, in a structural analysis of the modified full scale VYNPS steam dryer, these loads would be effectively 'integrated' by the 1" face plate and heavy 5/8" cover plate and 1/2" gussets. The following table therefore presents an average dryer face loads from the acoustic model and the SMT benchmark.

CDI vs. SMT Comparison of Averaged Point I to 24 Averaged Data pts 1to 24 VY3RUN2 VY13R1 VY6RUN2 VY12R1 Average CDI Max Pascal 21.5 87.2 26.9 63.6 Average Max Pacal 16.6 53.9 29.4 58.4 Ratio CDI/SMT % 130% 162% 91% 109%

The results indicate that the averaged maximum CDI acoustic analysis predicted loads range from 160% to 91% of the SMT microphone measured loads. Therefore, the CDI ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report BE-Efteray REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision Page 14 of 27 acoustic analysis model would appear to be a reasonable tool for predicting steam dryer peak loads.

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

--=Ef n tergy REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 Page 15 of 27 11 Figure 3A. Burst Random No Flow. All Mics. Maximum Pressure and Prms (Std Dev).

(For a Full size plot see Appendix A pgs Al and A2)

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report i- Ef tery REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 I Page l 16C of l 27 l

))

Figure 3B. Chirp No Flow. All Mics. Maximum Pressure and Prms (Std Dev).

(For a Full size plot see Appendix C pgs C1 and C2)

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Eane Engineering Report

"- ei tert,(T REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 I Revision 0 l Page l 17 l of l 27

))

Figure 3C. Burst Random and 81 CFM Flow. All Mics. Maximum Pressure and Prms (Std Dev).(For a Full size plot see Appendix E pgs El and E2)

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report Ei'-d,1ferge y REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 I Revision 0 l Page 1 18 oOfr 27 l 1]

Figure 3D. Chirp and 81 CFM Flow. All Mics. Maximum Pressure and Prms (Std Dev).

(For a Full size plot see Appendix G, pgs G1 and G2)

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Aft Engineering Report

--- Ef REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 I Revision 0 l Page 1 19 l of l 27 l Comparison of Microphone Data: Frequency Domain A comparison of measured versus predicted dryer frequency response was performed by converting the time history data to the frequency domain data using a Fourier transform.

The structural analysis of the dryer is performed as a dynamic analysis. Therefore the frequency characteristics of the signal can be a key factor in determining fatigue stress.

This is especially important near the natural frequency of the loaded component.

Appendices A through H include PSD Comparison plots for all dryer face microphones.

In summary Appendix, Description' A VY3RUN2, Burst with No Flow, Log and Linear Plots B VY3RUN2, Burst with No Flow, +1-10% Load Step Uncertainty C VY13R1, Chirp with No Flow, Log and Linear Plots D VYI 3R1, Chirp with No Flow, +/-10% Load Step Uncertainty E VY6RUN2, Burst with 81 CFM Flow, Log and Linear Plots F VY6RUN2, Burst with 81 CFM Flow, +/-10% Load Step Uncertainty G VY12R1, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow, Log and Linear Plots H VY12R1, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow, +/-10% Load Step Uncertainty Appendix I provides a road map for the data and file processing done in this Benchmark.

The PSD data in these Appendices was developed for a sample rate of 8192 Hz and a fast Fourier transform (FFT) size of 1024 for a bin size of 8 Hz. This provides a resolution of 400 bins in the 0 to 3200 Hz plots below. The 400 bin resolution resulted in data plots that provide a detailed yet discernable resolution in the plotted data. A Hanning window was used in the FFT calculation. The averaging was done with a 50% FFT overlap. To maintain a 8 Hz bin size, for the +10% time step PSDs the sample rate was assumed to be (8192 Hz

/ 1.1 =) 7447 Hz and the FFT size was reduced to 931. For the -10% time step PSIs the sample rate was assumed to be (8192 Hz / 0.9 =) 9102 Hz and the FFT size was increased to 1138.

Figures 4 and 5 provide a good depiction of where the acoustic model did well and not so well at predicting the frequency content of the dryer loads when there was an applied noise signal and no flow.

In Figure 4 it can be noted that the acoustic model enveloped most of the peaks of the SMT Microphone 4 data. From the log chart it is noted that the amplitude follows the SMT quite

' Note the +/- Load step uncertainty assessments were done in the post processing of data by Entergy on the data provided by CDI.

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report IREPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 l Page l 20 of l 27 well. In Figure 5 it can be noted that for Microphone 16 the acoustic model over-predicts the response at 800 and 1200 Hz and misses a peak at 900 Hz.

Microphone 16 with Burst signal and 81 CFM flow (Figure 6) depicts the typical comparison of acoustic predictions and SMT data for the tests conducted with flow. With minor exception, the acoustic model envelopes the amplitude from 240 Hz through 3200 Hz. In general the acoustic model becomes more conservative above 2000 Hz. The model typically under predicts the flow noise below 240 Hz2. Inthis case you will also note that the acoustic model does not predict an SMT peak at 800 Hz.

While in general the acoustic model did well under flow conditions from 240 Hz to 3200 Hz there are still some mismatches at narrow frequency bands. The frequency content of the load at or near the fundamental structural frequencies of the dryer face components is very important to the structural response. One method to address uncertainty in the frequency content of a dynamic load is to perform the structural analysis with a plus and minus variation in the load step. Inthis benchmark, we generated additional PSD data sets varying the sample rate (Hz) by 1/0.9 and 1/1.10. This is equivalent to varying the time step

+/- 10%. Then we established an enveloping PSD curve by using the maximum value of the three PSD curves. We provide a full set of these enveloped curves in Appendices B, D, F and H. We have included an excerpt below in Figure 7 for Microphone 16, Burst signal and 81 CFM flow. As can be seen from Figure 6, the +/- 10% provides a conservative envelope of nearly all frequencies above 240 Hz.

From this benchmark it can be said that with the application of the +/-10% timestep variation that acoustic loads are conservative from 240 Hz to 3200 Hz and nonconservative at lower frequencies. Figure 8 compares the pipe signal with the dryer face signal and the acoustic model prediction at this same point for the Burst signal with 81 cfm flow. It should be noted that the pipe signal had significant noise amplitude below 240 Hz. Therefore the dryer load amplitude is reflected in the piping data.

Conversion of frequency values from the SMT to the full scale plant is as follows:

240 Hz in the SMT corresponds to -20 Hz in the full scale plant.

2000 Hz in the SMT corresponds to -160 Hz in the full scale plant.

Inthe full scale plant, the repaired dryer face first natural frequency is 77 Hz (Reference 7 and also Entergy response to NRC RAI EMEB-B-1-5 contained in BVY 04-058). Therefore it is likely that under predicting the frequency content below 20 Hz (full scale, 240 Hz SMT scale) and shifting the peak response to higher frequencies below 77 Hz would have a 2 It should be noted that the microphones response characteristics are published from 20 to 15000 Hz. Therefore ENVY cannot establish the reliability of SMT data below 20 Hz.

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

=-- Ef teigy REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 I Revision 0 l Page l 21 or o 27 conservative impact on stress in the structural assessment. Alternatively other methods could be employed to better define low frequency forces.

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

~E itergy REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 I Revision 0 Page l 22 lof I 27

((

1]

Figure 4. Mic 4, Burst No Flow ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

--- EJ 1 tergy REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 Page j 23 of I 27l

[I

))

Figure 5. Mic 16, Burst No Flow ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report 7-:: Enteria REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 Page 24 of 27

))

Figure 6. Mic 16. Burst with 81 CFM Flow ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

'-n terogy REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 I Revision 0 Page l 25 l of 27 l Figure 7. Mic 16. Burst with 81 CFM Flow, Time Step CDI Data +/-10%

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Engineering Report

=EEIJiter,'y REPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 I Revision 0 l Page l 26 Of I 27 o

1]

Figure 8. Comparison of Pipe Signals (P2A), Dryer Signal smtMl6, and CDI Prediction at M16.

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION A& Engineering Report

- biEfteryJTREPORT No. VY-RPT-05-00006 Revision 0 l Page 27 of 27 Conclusion The acoustic model does a reasonable job of predicting pressure amplitude and energy at the dryer face. The acoustic model does an adequate job of predicting SMT frequency content in the 240 Hz to 2000 Hz 3 range. If a 10% load step uncertainty is applied to the data the acoustic model predictions are conservative. The acoustic model under predicts the frequency content below 20 Hz and over-predicts the high frequency content above 2000 Hz.

Fatigue assessment is generally performed with mean centered load prediction. The design margin is provided through use of the conservative fatigue stress endurance limits that provide a factor of 2 against failure. For the purpose of fatigue assessment the acoustic methodology will provide a conservative representation of full scale plant loads from 20 to 200Hz.

References

1. GENE-0000-0032-7903-04, Interim Test Report # 2, Quad Cities Unit 1 Scale Model, Source Screening Tests - Original Dryer Configuration, November 2004 (GE Proprietary).

2. GE Proprietary Drawing 124D1043, Sensor Locations, Quad Cities Steam Dryer, Scaled.

3. Entergy SMT-CDI Test Plan, Phase I, Data Acquisition, 3/9/05.

4. Letter Daniel Somerville, GENE to Enrico Betti, Fulfillment of remaining Items for Benchmark Testing in Support of VY EPU. 3-10-2005,

5. CD from GE Copy of SMT Microphone Certifications and Instrument Calibration Reports.

6. C.D.I. Technical Memorandum No. 05-09, Calculations Supporting Blind Benchmarking of CDI's Acoustic, Circuit Analysis for Steam Dryer Loads, March 2005.

7. GE Report, GE-NE-0000-0024-7944-1, "Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Steam Dryer Modification", Revision 1, March 2004.

3240 Hz to 2000 liz iscquivalent to 20 Hz to 160 Hz full scale frequency ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

App_.,A NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone Mall Max VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page Al of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_A NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone Mall Prms VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A2 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppA NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone Ml log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A3 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_~A NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone MI VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A4 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_.A NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M3 log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A5 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_Ak NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M3 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A6 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppA NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M4 log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A7 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_A NP.xis Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M4 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A8 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_.A NP.xAs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M8 log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A9 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_.A NP.xAs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M8 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page Al 0 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_,A NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M9 log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page All of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_A NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M9 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page Al 2 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_,A NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone MIO log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page Al 3 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_A. NP.xAs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M10 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page Al 4 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_A NP.xAs, Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M12 log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page Al 5 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppA NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M12 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page Al 6 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_.,A NP.xts Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M13 log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page Al 7 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_,A NP.xAs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M13 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page Al 8 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppA NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M14 log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page Al 9 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_A NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M14 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A20 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_A NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M15 log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A21 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_.,A NP.xis Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M15 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A22 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppA NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone MIG log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A23 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppA NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M16 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A24 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppA NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M20 log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERG Y Page A25 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_,A NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M20 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A26 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppA NP.xts Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M21 log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A27 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppA NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M21 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A28 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppA NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M23 log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A29 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppA NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M23 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A30 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_.A NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M24 log VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A31 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_.A NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/5/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix A, VY3RUN2 Burst Random with No Flow Microphone M24 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page A32 of A32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_B NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone MI with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B1 of B15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppB NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M3 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B2 of BIS (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppB NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M4 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B3 of B15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppB NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M8 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR1I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B4 of B15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppB NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M9 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B5 of B1 5 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_B NP.xis Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone MIO with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B6 of B1 5 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppB NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M12 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B7 of B15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_B NP.xis Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M13 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B8 of B1 5 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppB NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M14 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B9 of B15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppB NP.xis Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M15 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B1 0 of B1 5 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppB NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M16 with +/-10%Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B1 1 of B1 5 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_B NP.xIs Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M20 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B12 of B15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_B NP.xIs Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M21 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR1I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B1 3 of B1 5 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppB NP.xIs Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark

- Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M23 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SR/1.1) i VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B14 of B15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_B NP.xIs Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix B, VY3RUN2, Burst Random No Flow Microphone M24 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

• 1 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 ENTERGY Page B1 5 of B15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

i 4/4/2005 AppC_~NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow Microphone Mall Max VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Page C1 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Entergy

App_CNP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow Microphone Mall Prms VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C2 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 App_CNP.xls Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone Ml log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C3 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C._NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone MI VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C4 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_CNP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow Microphone M3 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C5 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 App_CNP.xls Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow Microphone M3 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C6 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

4/4/2005 AppqNP.xIs Non-Proprietary Version Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M4 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C7 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C._NP.xIs Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow Microphone M4 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C8 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C~_NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M8 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C9 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_CNP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M8 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C10 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C~_NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow Microphone M9 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C11 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C_NP.xIs Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M9 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C12 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_CNP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M10 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C13 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_CNP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone MIO VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C14 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppCNP.xIs Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M12 log a

VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page CI5 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3) I

App_C._NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M12 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C16 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C~_NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow Microphone M13 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C17 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C~_NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M13 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C18 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C._NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow Microphone M14 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C19 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C~_NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M14 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C20 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_CNP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M15 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C21 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C~_NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M15 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C22 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C~_NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M16 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C23 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C~_NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M16 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C24 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_CNP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow Microphone M20 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C25 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_CNP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M20 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C26 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C~_NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow Microphone M21 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C27 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C._NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M21 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C28 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C,_NP.xIs Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M23 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C29 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C~_NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow Microphone M23 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C30 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C_NP.xIs Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13R1 Chirp with No Flow Microphone M24 log VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C31 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_C~_NP.xls Non-Proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix C, VY13RI Chirp with No Flow Microphone M24 VY-RPT-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page C32 of C32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_DNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13RI, Chirp with No Flow Microphone Ml with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D1 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_D~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13RI, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M3 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SRII, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D2 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_D~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13RI, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M4 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D3 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_DNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13R1, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M8 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D4 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppDNP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13R1, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M9 with +/-10%Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SRI1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D5 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_D~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13RI, Chirp with No Flow Microphone MI0 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D6 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_D~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13R1, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M12 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D7 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppDNP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13RI, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M13 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D8 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_D~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13R1, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M14 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D9 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_D~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13RI, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M15 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D10 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_D~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13RI, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M16 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page DII of DI5 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_DNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13RI, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M20 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1) l VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D12 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_D~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13RI, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M21 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D13 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_D._NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13R1, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M23 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D14 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_DNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix D, VY13RI, Chirp with No Flow Microphone M24 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page D15 of D15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppjE_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone Mall Max VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page El of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppjE_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone Mall Prms VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E2 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppjE_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone Ml log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E3 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppjE_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone Ml Entergy VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Page E4 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E._NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M3 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E5 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E.NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M3 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E6 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppjENP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M4 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E7 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E,_NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M4 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E8 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppE._NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M8 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E9 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E_NP.xAs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M8 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page El0 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E_NP.xAs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M9 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page ElI of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E_NP~xs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M9 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E12 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E,_NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M10 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E13 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App._ENP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone Ml0 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E14 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppENP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M12 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page El5 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 App_E_NP.xAs Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M12 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E16 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E._NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M13 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E17 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppjE_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M13 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E18 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E.NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M14 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E19 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 App_E,_NP.xIs Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M14 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E20 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E.NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M15 log

(

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E21 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone MIS VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E22 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppjENP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M16 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E23 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App-E.NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M16 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E24 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppjE_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M20 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E25 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_ENP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M20 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E26 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M21 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E27 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E,_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M21 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E28 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E,_NP.xis Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M23 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E29 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M23 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E30 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M24 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E31 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_E_.NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix E, VY6RUN2 Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M24 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page E32 of E32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 AppjF_NP.xls Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone Ml with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F1 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppjFNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M3 with +/-10%Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

I VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F2 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppjF_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M4 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F3 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppjF_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M8 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F4 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_F~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M9 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SRII, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F5 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppjFNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone MIO with +/-10%Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F6 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppjF_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M12 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SR/1.1) t I

I VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F7 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

Appj:F_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M13 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F8 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppjF_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark 4 Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M14 with +/-10%Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SRII, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F9 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_F._NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M15 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page FIO of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppjF_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 414/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M16 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F1I of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppF._NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M20 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR1I, SR/1.1)

I!

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F12 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

App_FLNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M21 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SRII, SR/1.1)

I 11 '

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F13 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppjFNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M23 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SRI1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F14 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppF._NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix F, VY6RUN2, Burst Random with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M24 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/I, SR/1.1) 0 VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page F15 of F15 (ENN-DC-147 rev 3)

AppG_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone Mall Max VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G1 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G,_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone Mall Prms VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G2 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G_NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone MI log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G3 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppQNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone Ml VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G4 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppG_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M3 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G5 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

)

App_G~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M3 I

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G6 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppGNP.xls Non-Oroprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M4 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G7 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M4 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G8 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_GNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M8 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G9 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M8 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page GIO of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

,A

App_GNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M9 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G11 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_GP_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M9 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G12 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G_NP.xAs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone MIO log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G13 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppGNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M10 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G14 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_GQ_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M12 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page GI 5 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M12 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G16 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G_~NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M13 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G17 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M13 i

I I

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G18 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_~G_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M14 log l

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G19 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_.G_NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M14 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G20 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppGNP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M15 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G21 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G_NP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M15 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G22 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M16 log I.,

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G23 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_GNP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M16 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G24 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M20 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G25 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G~_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M20 I

VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G26 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_,GNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M21 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G27 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M21 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G28 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M23 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G29 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_GNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12RI Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M23 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G30 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_G_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M24 log VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G31 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppGNP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix G, VY12R1 Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M24 VY-RPT-05-00006 rev 0 Entergy Page G32 of G32 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App._HNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12R1, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone MI with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

I VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H1 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Ap_ _NPx Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12R1, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M3 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H2 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

'11

AppH.NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12RI, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M4 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H3 of HI5 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_FLNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12RI, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M8 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H4 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppHNP.xis Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VYI2R1, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M9 with +/-10%Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

I VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H5 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_FLNP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12RI, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone MIO with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H6 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_H_.NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12RI, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M12 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H7 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_HNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12RI, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M13 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

I VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H8 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_FLNP.xis Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VYI2R1, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M14 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H9 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppHNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12R1, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M15 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H10 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_H_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12RI, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone MI6 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H11 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppjH_NP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12RI, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M20 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1) l VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H12 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppHFNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12R1, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M21 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/I, SR/1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H13 of Hi5 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

AppHFNP.xls Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12R1, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M23 with +1-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SRI.9, SR/I, SR1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H14 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

App_FLNP.xIs Non-proprietary Version 4/4/2005 Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix H, VY12RI, Chirp with 81 CFM Flow Microphone M24 with +/-10% Uncertainty Applied to CDI Loads (Max SR/.9, SR/1, SRI1.1)

VY-RPT-05-00006 Rev 0 Entergy Page H15 of H15 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix 1: Roadmap for Processing Data Appendix l; Roadmap for Processing Data Entergy Page II of I7 VY-RPT-05-00006 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix I: Roadmap for Processing Data Roadmap for Processing SMT and CDI Data GE provided the following Time history files. These files included all the recorded data from the SMT test. Each data file included approximately 30 seconds of data.

Summary of time history files provided by GE:

01/13/2005 05:33 PM 283,478,487 VY9Run9AII.txt 01/13/2005 04:17 PM 275,602,618 VY ORun7AII.txt 01/13/2005 05:43 PM 271,238,830 VY1 ORun9AII.txt 01/13/2005 04:26 PM 267,722,256 VYI 1Run5AII.txt 01/13/2005 01:59 PM 283,489,431 VY1 Run1AII.txt 01/13/2005 02:56 PM 283,487,337 VY1 Run2AII.txt 01/13/2005 02:59 PM 283,488,018 VYI Run3AtI.txt 01/13/2005 02:04 PM 287,771,675 VY2Run1 1AII.txt 01/13/2005 03:03 PM 287,763,890 VY2Runl 2A11.txt 01/13/2005 03:06 PM 283,369,687 VY2Runl 3A!I.txt 01/13/2005 02:07 PM 283,345,842 VY3Run2AII.txt 01/13/2005 03:12 PM 283,376,049 VY3Run3AII.txt 01/13/2005 03:15 PM 283,335,261 VY3Run6AII.txt 01/13/2005 02:11 PM 283,471,938 VY4Run1AII.txt 01/13/2005 03:21 PM 267,726,153 VY4Run2AII.txt 01/13/2005 03:26 PM 267,722,849 VY4Run3AII.txt 01/13/2005 02:14 PM 283,451,074 VY5Run3AII.txt 01/13/2005 03:35 PM 283,457,552 VY5Run4AII.txt 01/13/2005 03:38 PM 283,463,399 VY5RunSAII.txt 01/13/2005 02:18 PM 283,478,752 VY6Run2AII.txt 01/13/2005 03:42 PM 283,461,218 VY6Run3AII.txt 01/13/2005 03:47 PM 283,484,900 VY6Run4AII.txt 01/13/2005 02:21 PM 267,720,093 VY7Run5AII.txt 01/13/2005 03:51 PM 267,719,082 VY7Run6AI.txt 01/13/2005 03:54 PM 267,703,991 VY7Run7AIl.txt 01/13/2005 02:24 PM 287,950,372 VY8RunIAII.txt 01/13/2005 03:57 PM 287,949,363 VY8Run3AII.txt 01/13/2005 04:00 PM 287,956,400 VY8Run4Al.txt 01/13/2005 02:27 PM 283,462,108 VY9Run3AII.txt 01/13/2005 05:36 PM 283,478,017 VY9Run5AII.txt 01/13/2005 05:40 PM 267,784,949 VY1ORun1AIl.txt 01/13/2005 09:13 PM 287,174,379 VY13R3AII.txt 01/13/2005 09:26 PM 287,954,233 VY12R2AII.txt 01/13/2005 09:29 PM 283,473,846 VY12R3AII.txt 01/13/2005 09:07 PM 282,698,036 VY13R1AII.txt 01/13/2005 09:09 PM 287,169,906 VY13R2AII.txt 01/13/2005 09:22 PM 283,446,151 VY12R1AII.txt GE also included PSD files for one of the three Runs for each SMT condition.

These PSDs were based on the 8192 hz sampling rate and a 8192 transfer size Entergy Page 12 of 17 VY-RPT-05-00006 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix 1: Roadmap for Processing Data and therefore provide a 1Hz bin resolution. They are averaged over the entire

-30 sec transient.

01/13/2005 08:44 PM 1,298,459 VI OR1.csv 01/13/2005 06:42 PM 1,339,454 Vi RI.csv 01/13/2005 08:04 PM 1,339,454 V2R1 1.csv 01/13/2005 08:08 PM 1,339,454 V3R2.csv 01/13/2005 08:10 PM 1,339,454 V4R1.csv 01/13/2005 08:27 PM 1,339,454 V5R3.csv 01/13/2005 08:31 PM 1,339,454 V6R2.csv 01/13/2005 08:40 PM 1,298,459 V7R5.csv 01/13/2005 08:36 PM 1,339,454 V8Rl.csv 01/13/2005 08:46 PM 1,339,454 V9R3.csv 01/14/2005 12:21 AM 1,339,454 Vi OR9.csv 01/13/2005 09:50 PM 1,133 V13R1.mtx 01/13/2005 09:49 PM 528 V12RI.idx 01/13/2005 09:49 PM 101,032 vl2rl.ixO 01/13/2005 09:49 PM 21,024 v12rl.ixl 01/13/2005 09:49 PM 1,133 V12R1.mtx 01/13/2005 09:50 PM 2,157,601 vl3rl.dat 01/13/2005 09:50 PM 528 V13R1.idx 01/13/2005 09:50 PM 101,032 vl3r1.ixO 01/13/2005 09:50 PM 21,024 v1 3r1.ixl 01/13/2005 09:49 PM 2,157,601 v12r1.dat 01/14/2005 12:51 AM 1,339,451 VI 3R1.csv 01/14/2005 12:50 AM 1,339,451 VI2R1.csv From these time history and PSD files ENVY then extracted the following data subset for CDI:

PSD at the Source microphone, Mic P3A, 8 piping microphone data sets, P1 a,b,c,&d, P2 a,b,c,&d, 1 muffler exhaust microphone M30, flow dP transmitter signal, PT-1, RPV dome pressure, PT-2, and the RPV dome temperature, TC-1.

This data was provided to CDI in the following data files. This information was transmitted to along with SMT configuration information in accordance with ENN-DC-141. The data was downloaded by CDI from the ENVY upload data transfer website.

1-Applied Source PSD 01/17/2005 07:46 PM 1,061,376 Source PSDs.xls 2a- Time History Data at P1, P2, M30 TC Data 01/18/2005 07:01 PM 26,112 Conversion of 01/17/2005 09:26 PM 40,122,459 VY12R1CDl.txt 01/17/2005 09:32 PM 40,136,425 VY13R1CDl.txt Entergy Page 13 of 17 VY-RPT-05-00006 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix 1: Roadmap for Processing Data 01/17/2005 09:08 PM 40,124,293 VY3Run2CDI.txt 01/17/2005 09:20 PM 40,121,532 VY6Run2CDI.txt 2b- Time History Data for Pressure Transmitters 01/18/2005 06:43 PM 10,999,750 VY12RlCDlpt.txt 01/18/2005 06:39 PM 10,999,750 VY6R2CDlpt.txt CDI then used this data in their Accoustic model. They analyzed the first 8 seconds of the 30 seconds of data supplied. This included 65536 time points at 8192 Hz . When the benchmark analysis was complete CDI transferred the results of their model at the 21 specified dryer points to the Continuum Dynamics upload site.

The following list summarizes the files downloaded from the CDI site for the Benchmark Comparison:

CDI Data 03/10/2005 03:23 PM 91,590 vy3psd.txt 03/11/2005 06:43 PM 88,897 vy6psd.txt 03/11/2005 06:43 PM 85,792 vyl2psd.txt 03/10/2005 03:22 PM 86,178 vyl3psd.txt 03/10/2005 03:25 PM 11,903,347 vy3time.txt 03/11/2005 06:46 PM 11,127,839 vy6time.txt 03/11/2005 06:45 PM 11,083,085 vyl 2time.txt 03/10/2005 03:25 PM 11,951,116 vyl3time.txt CDI later after delivering the benchmark (prior knowing how their data compared with.SMT data) decided to experiment with a refined acoustic model mesh. The . ..

full scale VY and QC mesh has a 3" element size. The 1/16" SMT scale model has a 3/16" sized mesh. The reduced size mesh being investigated by CDI required much longer to process. If the refined mesh resulted in substantial improvements in the Benchmark comparison, it would be advisable to refine the full scale model 3" mesh and regenerate dryer loads for the full scale VY model.

The following list summarizes the files downloaded from CDI for the refined mesh benchmark comparison:

CDI Data Refined Mesh Loads 03/14/2005 03:13 PM 90,887 vy3psd.txt 03/14/2005 03:15 PM 88,834 vy6psd.txt 03/14/2005 03:12 PM 85,502 vyl2psd.txt 03/14/2005 03:13 PM 84,585 vyl3psd.txt 03/14/2005 03:16 PM 11,874,837 vy3time.txt 03/14/2005 03:15 PM 11,137,388 vy6time.txt 03/14/2005 03:14 PM 11,097,900 vyl2time.txt Entergy Page 14 of 17 VY-RPT-05-00006 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix 1: Roadmap for Processing Data 03/14/2005 03:14 PM 11,865,093 vyl 3time.txt The GE time history data for the 21 dryer points and the input signal Mic P3A were parsed from the original GE output files. The data was also subdivided into three files to permit printing and checking of data. These files included the following. The title and data were also separated for use in Matlab.

VY3RUN2 01/26/2005 12:05 PM 1,122 VY3RUN2MicOand18OandTopViewTitleList.txt 01/26/2005 12:06 PM 25,738,548 VY3RUN2MicOand18OandTopViewDataNumbers.txt 01/26/2005 11:45 AM 1,382 VY3RUN2Mic9OTopViewTitleList.txt 01/26/2005 11:48 AM 32,939,091 VY3RUN2Mic9OTopViewDataNumbers.txt 01/26/2005 12:00 PM 1,398 VY3RUN2Mic270andl8OViewTitleList.txt 01/26/2005 11:58 AM 32,927,667 VY3RUN2Mic270and 18OViewDataNumbers.txt VY6RUN2 01/26/2005 12:43 PM 1,122 VY6RUN2MicOandl 80andTopViewTitleList.txt 01/26/2005 12:45 PM 25,759,522 VY6RUN2MicOand1 80andTopViewDataNumbers.txt 01/26/2005 12:31 PM 1,382 VY6RUN2Mic9OandTopViewTitleList.txt 01/26/2005 12:37 PM 32,992,951 VY6RUN2Mic9OandTopViewDataNumbers.txt 01/26/2005 12:41 PM 1,398 VY6RUN2Mic270andl8OViewTitieList.txt 01/26/2005 12:34 PM 32,995,121 VY6RUN2Mic270andl8OViewDataNumbers.txt VY12R1 01/26/2005 01:02 PM 1,122 VY12R1 MicOandl8OandTopViewTitleList.txt 01/26/2005 01:05 PM 25,759,245 VY12Rl MicOandl8OandTopViewDataNumbers.txt 01/26/2005 12:54 PM 1,382 VYI2R1 Mic9OandTopViewTitleList.txt

.- *01/26/2005 12:55 PM 32,978,268 VY12RIMic9OandTopViewDataNumbers.txt 01/26/2005 12:58 PM 1,402 VY12R1 Mic270andl 8OViewTitleList.txt 01/26/2005 01:00 PM 32,978,865 VY12R1 Mic270andl8OViewDataNumbers.txt VY13R1 01/26/2005 01:17 PM 1,122 VY13R1MicOandl8OandTopViewTitleList.txt 01/26/2005 01:19 PM 25,652,663 VY13R1 MicOandl8OandTopViewDataNumbers.txt 01/26/2005 01:10 PM 1,382 VY1 3R1 Mic9OandTopViewTKleList.txt 01/26/2005 01:11 PM 32,675,383 VY1 3R1 Mic9OandTopViewDataNumbers.txt 01/26/2005 01:13 PM 1,402 VY13R1 Mic270andl80ViewTitleList.txt 01/26/2005 01:15 PM 32,664,780 VY13R1 Mic270andl8OViewDataNumbers.txt It was imperative that the benchmark comparison be done with the same set time data used in the CDI analysis. Therefore the original data files above were parsed to extract the dryer microphone data from 0 to 8 seconds. (all lines after 8 seconds were deleted). The titles were cut into an excel spread sheet this provided a numeric file for Matlab reading. The data files were run through MatLab to calculate important statistical data from the time history data including:

maxTH Entergy Page 15 of 17 VY-RPT-05-00006 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix 1: Roadmap for Processing Data minTH averageTH (Mean Function in Matlab) stdevTH PSD The PSDs calculated in Matlab were done for a sample rate of 8192Hz and a FFT size of 1024 for a bin size of 8 Hz. This provides a resolution of 400 bins in the 0 to 3200 Hz plots provided. This resolution is on par with the 1 Hz resolution used in the evaluation of full scale data from 0 to 200 Hz. The 400 bin resolution resulted in data plots that provide a detailed yet discernable resolution in the plotted data. A Hanning window was used. The averaging was done with a 50%

fft overlap. These same parameters were in the PSD processing on the CDI data.

This information was then copied into an excel spread sheet. The spread sheet was formulated to reorders the data in the same format provided by CDI. These statistical data evaluations are done in the following files:

VY3RUN2 03/08/2005 06:39 PM 6,745,841 VY3RUN2Micoandl8OandTopViewDataNumbers.txt 03/0912005 07:10 AM 8,631,326 VY3RUN2Mic9OTopViewDataNumbers.txt 03/09/2005 07:26 AM 8,627,051 VY3RUN2Mic270and18oViewDataNumbers.txt 03/13/2005 10:43 AM 6,060 PT smt. psd. stats.m 03/13/2005 12:12 PM 1,571,328 reorderedPSDdataVY3RUN2.xIs VY6RUN2 03/13/2005 12:21 PM 6,752,882 VY6RUN2MicOandl8oandTopViewDataNumbers.txt 03/13/2005 12:23 PM 8,651,592 VY6RUN2Mic9oandTopViewDataNumbers.txt 03/13/2005 12:25 PM 8,650,645 VY6RUN2Mic270and18oViewDataNumbers.txt 03/13/2005 12:42 PM 6,060 PT smt psd stats.m 03/13/2005 01:05 PM 665,088 reorderedPSDdataVY6RUN2.xis VY12R1 03/13/2005 01:21 PM 6,752,985 VY12R1 MicOandl 80andTopViewDataNumbers.txt 03/13/2005 01:23 PM 8,645,481 VY12R1Mic90andTopViewDataNumbers.txt 03/13/2005 01:25 PM 8,643,308 VY12R1Mic270and18oViewDataNumbers.txt 03/13/2005 01:38 PM 6,059 PT-smt..psdstats.m 03/13/2005 01:44 PM 665,088 reorderedPSDdataVY12R1.xIs VY13R1 03/13/2005 01:47 PM 6,724,177 VY13R1 MicOand 18OandTopViewDataNumbers.btx 03/13/2005 01:49 PM 8,565,086 VY13R1 Mic9OandTopViewDataNumbers.txt 03/13/2005 01:51 PM 8,562,186 VY13R1 Mic270andl80ViewDataNumbers.txt 03/13/2005 02:01 PM 6,059 PT-smtpsd stats.m 03/13/2005 02:03 PM 665,088 reorderedPSDdataVY13R1 .xis The final step was to perform the same Matlab assessment that was use in for the SMT data assessment. One Matlab run was performed for all 21 sets of CDI predicted Mic locations. The time history txt files included in this directory are the same files provided by CDI with one change, the first header line was removed for Matlab processing. The resulting Matlab data was then pasted in an Excel file, Entergy Page 16 of 17 VY-RPT-05-00006 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Acoustic Model Benchmark Appendix 1: Roadmap for Processing Data the SMT data from the corresponding excel file above was also added and comparison charts were made. Each of these assessments was completed in the following files:

Comparison VY3RUN2 03/27/2005 05:14 AM 2,089,472 CompareVY3RUN2plusminus.xis 03/27/2005 05:43 AM 1,622,016 CompareVY3RUN2R1.xIs 03/26/2005 01:56 PM 6,040 PT smt psd stats.m 03/10/2005 06:52 PM 11,903,262 vy3time.txt Comparison VY6RUN2 03/27/2005 06:05 AM 6,040 PT_smt psd stats.m 03/13/2005 12:51 PM 11,127,754 vy6time.txt 03/24/2005 10:05 AM 1,285,120 CompareVY6RUN2.xIs 03/27/2005 05:49 AM 1,614,336 CompareVY6RUN2R1.xIs 03/27/2005 06:15 AM 2,082,304 CompareVY6RUN2plusminus.xis 03/29/2005 08:52 AM 802,304 Compare Pipe data and Mic 16.xIs Comparison VY12R1 03/27/2005 06:24 AM 6,039 Comparison VY12R1 03/13/2005 01:09 PM 11,083,000 vyl2time.txt 03/24/2005 09:47 AM 1,282,048 CompareVY12R1.xIs 03/27/2005 05:42 AM 1,614,336 CompareVYI2R1R1.xIs 03/27/2005 07:07 AM 6,041 PTsmt psdstats.m 03/27/2005 01:55 PM 2,362,880 CompareVY12R1plusminus.xIs Comparison VY13R1 03/27/2005 08:06 AM 6,034 PT smt psdstats.m 03/13/2005 02:07 PM 11,951,031 vy13time.txt 03/24/2005 10:05 AM 1,322,496 CompareVY13R1.xIs 03/27/2005 08:18 AM 1,616,384 CompareVY13R1R1.xIs 03/27/2005 08:18 AM 2,396,160 CompareVY13R1 plusminus.xls Comparison VY6RUN2 refined mesh 03/13/2005 12:53 PM 6,033 PT.smt.psdstats.m 03/14/2005 03:20 PM 11,1 37,303 vy6time.txt 03/14/2005 03:35 PM 1,238,016 CompareVY6RUN2refinedmesh.xis Comparison VY13R1 refined mesh 03/13/2005 02:09 PM 6,034 PT smt psd stats.m 03/14/2005 03:40 PM 11,865,008 vy133time.txt S 03/14/2005 03:38 PM 1,275,392 CompareVY13R1refinedmesh.xls Entergy Page 17 of 17 VY-RPT-05-00006 (ENN-DC-147 Rev 3)

Appendix J - Technical Review Comments And Resolution Form AM ENN Site Applicability: C] IP1 Li IP2 Li IP3 L JAF Li PNPS [ VY

~Entergy Engineering Report Technical Review Comments and Resolutions Form Engineering Report VY-RPT- Rev. 0 Title Acoustic Model Benchmark Number 05-00006 Dryer Acoustic Loads Quality Related: El Yes t3 No Special Notes or Instructions: None.

Comment Section/ Review Comment Response/Resolution Responsible Number Page No. Engineer's Accept

-Initials 1 3 See attachment Comment 1 1. Incorporated EJB <Op 2 8 270 CFM should be 81 2. Corrected EJB _,

CFM 3 16 See attachment Comment 3 3. Added Footnote EJB 4 Various Minor editorial comments 4. Incorporated EJB (g Reviewed/ Verified By: Pedro B. Perez Date: 3-29-2205 Site/Department: VYNPS/Design Engineering, Phone: 802451-3118 Fluid Systems ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

Am_ ENN Site Applicability: LI IP1 0 IP2 L0 IP3 LI JAF LI PNPS Z VY EEntejgyEngineering Report egy Technical Review Comments and Resolutions Form Engineering Report VY-RPT- Rev. 0 Title Acoustic Model Benchmark Number: 05-0006 Dryer Acoustic Loads Quality Related: L Yes 0 No Special Notes or InstrieCtiotis: None Comment 1:

Change the last paragraph in the summary to read as follows:

Tie benchntark resultsp)roi'idethe justyfication andgiidanceforap)p)lying fihe CDI acoustic circuit methodology i))pIedicting the VYNPS darer loads.

Comment 3:

The i 10% is really not part of the benchmark. It was performed post benchmark to provide an enveloping spectrum. Please provide an introductory comment on Page 16 to avoid confusion over the scope of the actual benchmark.

Reviewer Closing Comment:

The reviewer utilized the Appendix I road map and fully followed the comprehensive process for VY3RUN2. All Matlab script files (M files) where checked as well as the data for the other cases. In addition a consultant, Dr. Charles W. Mayo, provided technical comments throughout the benchmark effort that have been incorporated in this report.

ENN-DC-147 Rev. 3 Attachment 9.3

BVY 05-038 Docket No. 50-271 ATTACHMENT 3 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Technical Specification Proposed Change No. 263 - Supplement No. 27 Extended Power Uprate - Dryer Acoustic Load Methodology Benchmark VY-RPT-05-00006 VYNPS Acoustic Model Benchmark- Dryer Acoustic Load Methodology Affidavit Total number of pages InAttachment 3 1 (excludina this cover sheet) is 3.

General Electric Company AFFIDAVIT I, George B. Stramback, state as follows:

(1) I am Manager, Regulatory Services, General Electric Company ("GE") and have been delegated the function of reviewing the information described in paragraph (2) which is sought to be withheld, and have been authorized to apply for its withholding.

(2) The information sought to be withheld is contained in Entergy Northeast Nuclear Engineering Report and Attachments, VY-RPT-05-00006, Acoustic Model Benchmark Dryer Acoustic Load Methodology, (This Report Contains GE Proprietary Information),

dated March 29, 2005. The proprietary information is delineated by a double underline inside double square brackets. In Appendixes A through H, the entirety of each page is proprietary. Therefore, the header of each page in those Appendixes carries the notation "GE Proprietary Informationl 3 1." In each case, the superscript notation1 31 refers to Paragraph (3) of this affidavit, which provides the basis for the proprietary determination.

(3) In making this application for withholding of proprietary information of which it is the owner, GE relies upon the exemption from disclosure set forth in the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), 5 USC Sec. 552(b)(4), and the Trade Secrets Act, 18 USC Sec. 1905, and NRC regulations 10 CFR 9.17(a)(4), and 2.790(a)(4) for "trade secrets" (Exemption 4). The material for which exemption from disclosure is here sought also qualify under the narrower definition of "trade secret", within the meanings assigned to those terms for purposes of FOIA Exemption 4 in, respectively, Critical Mass Energy Project v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 975F2d871 (DC Cir. 1992), and Public Citizen Health Research Group v. FDA, 704F2d1280 (DC Cir. 1983).

(4) Some examples of categories of information which fit into the definition of proprietary information are:

a. Information that discloses a process, method, or apparatus, including supporting data and analyses, where prevention of its use by General Electric's competitors without license from General Electric constitutes a competitive economic advantage over other companies;

b. Information which, if used by a competitor, would reduce his expenditure of resources or improve his competitive position in the design, manufacture, shipment, installation, assurance of quality, or licensing of a similar product;

c. Information which reveals aspects of past, present, or future General Electric customer-funded development plans and programs, resulting in potential products to General Electric;

d. Information which discloses patentable subject matter for which it may be desirable to obtain patent protection.

(frns-ln,-n-AfVV PnterpvPRPT V-PPT-0S-0l(06 flrvar Rpnrhmnrle a-9Q-o5 A dnc A~dffidvt Pnve 1

The information sought to be withheld is considered to be proprietary for the reasons set forth in paragraphs (4)a., and (4)b, above.

(5) To address 10 CFR 2.790 (b) (4), the information sought to be withheld is being submitted to NRC in confidence. The information is of a sort customarily held in confidence by GE, and is in fact so held. The information sought to be withheld has, to the best of my knowledge and belief, consistently been held in confidence by GE, no public disclosure has been made, and it is not available in public sources. All disclosures to third parties including any required transmittals to NRC, have been made, or must be made, pursuant to regulatory provisions or proprietary agreements which provide for maintenance of the information in confidence. Its initial designation as proprietary information, and the subsequent steps taken to prevent its unauthorized disclosure, are as set forth in paragraphs (6) and (7) following.

(6) Initial approval of proprietary treatment of a document is made by the manager of the originating component, the person most likely to be acquainted with the value and sensitivity of the information in relation to industry knowledge. Access to such documents within GE is limited on a "need to know" basis.

(7) The procedure for approval of external release of such a document typically requires review by the staff manager, project manager, principal scientist or other equivalent authority, by the manager of the cognizant marketing function (or his delegate), and by the Legal Operation, for technical content, competitive effect, and determination of the accuracy of the proprietary designation. Disclosures outside GE are limited to regulatory bodies, customers, and potential customers, and their agents, suppliers, and licensees, and others with a legitimate need for the information, and then only in accordance with appropriate regulatory provisions or proprietary agreements.

(8) The information identified in paragraph (2), above, is classified as proprietary because it contains GE's benchmarking details for analysis of the design of the BWR Steam Dryer.

Development of this information and its application for the design, procurement and analyses methodologies and processes for the Steam Dryer Program was achieved at a significant cost to GE, on the order of approximately two million dollars.

This information also supports NEDC-33090P, Safely Analysis Report for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Constant Pressure Power Uprate, Class III (GE Proprietary Information), Revision 0, dated September 2003, which was submitted to the NRC. This power uprate report contains detailed results and conclusions from evaluations of the safety-significant changes necessary to demonstrate the regulatory acceptability for the power uprate of a GE BWR, utilizing analytical models, methods and processes, including computer codes, which GE has developed, obtained NRC approval of and applied to perform evaluations of the transient and accident events in the GE Boiling Water Reactor ("BWR").

The development and approval of these system, component, and thermal hydraulic models and computer codes was achieved at a significant cost to GE, on the order of several million dollars.

The development of the evaluation process along with the interpretation and application of the analytical results is derived from the extensive experience database that constitutes a major GE asset.

Gnql~-Ml5-fYM VFnterrv RPT W-RPT (lS flTflA frver R*nehmnrkr-WQ-fl5 tnr AfW h A frunvit Paope7

(9) Public disclosure of the information sought to be withheld is likely to cause substantial harm to GE's competitive position and foreclose or reduce the availability of profit-making opportunities. The information is part of GE's comprehensive BWR safety and technology base, and its commercial value extends beyond the original development cost. The value of the technology base goes beyond the extensive physical database and analytical methodology and includes development of the expertise to determine and apply the appropriate evaluation process. In addition, the technology base includes the value derived from providing analyses done with NRC-approved methods.

The research, development, engineering, analytical and NRC review costs comprise a substantial investment of time and money by GE.

The precise value of the expertise to devise an evaluation process and apply the correct analytical methodology is difficult to quantify, but it clearly is substantial.

GE's competitive advantage will be lost if its competitors are able to use the results of the GE experience to normalize or verify their own process or if they are able to claim an equivalent understanding by demonstrating that they can arrive at the same or similar conclusions.

The value of this information to GE would be lost if the information were disclosed to the public. Making such information available to competitors without their having been required to undertake a similar expenditure of resources would unfairly provide competitors with a windfall, and deprive GE of the opportunity to exercise its competitive advantage to seek an adequate return on its large investment in developing these very valuable analytical tools.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing affidavit and the matters stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

Executed on this 3 ,t day of 2005.

Geo B. Stmack General Electric Company fnR_-O5f-n7_Af VV Fnterov RPT IV-RPT-n5-nOOl6 Tlwrver Tb-nchmnrk 197Q-45 OAne A fritnvit Pnvel

BVY 05-038 Docket No. 50-271 ATTACHMENT 4 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Technical Specification Proposed Change No. 263 - Supplement No. 27 Extended Power Uprate - Dryer Acoustic Load Methodology Benchmark BVY 05-034, Attachment 5 Replacement General Electric Company Affidavit l Total number of pages in Attachment 4 l (excludina this cover sheet) is 3. l

General Electric Company AFFIDAVIT 1, George B. Stramback, state as follows:

(1) I am Manager, Regulatory Services, General Electric Company ("GE") and have been delegated the function of reviewing the information described in paragraph (2) which is sought to be withheld, and have been authorized to apply for its withholding.

(2) The information sought to be withheld is contained in the GE proprietary report, GE-NE-0000-0038-0936, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Modified Steam Dryer Stress Analysis, Class III (GE Proprietary Information), dated March .2005. The proprietary information is delineated by a double underline inside double square brackets. Figures and large equation objects are identified with double square brackets before and after the object.

In each case, the superscript notation(3 ) refers to Paragraph (3) of this affidavit, which provides the basis for the proprietary determination.

(3) In making this application for withholding of proprietary information of which it is the owner, GE relies upon the exemption from disclosure set forth in the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), 5 USC Sec. 552(b)(4), and the Trade Secrets Act, 18 USC Sec. 1905, and NRC regulations 10 CFR 9.17(a)(4), and 2.790(a)(4) for "trade secrets" (Exemption 4). The material for which exemption from disclosure is here sought also qualify under the narrower definition of "trade secret", within the meanings assigned to those terms for purposes of FOIA Exemption 4 in, respectively, Critical Mass Energy Project v. Nuclear Regulatorv Commission. 975F2d871 (DC Cir. 1992), and Public Citizen Health Research Group v. FDA, 704F2d1280 (DC Cir. 1983).

(4) Some examples of categories of information which fit into the definition of proprietary information are:

a. Information that discloses a process, method, or apparatus, including supporting data and analyses, where prevention of its use by General Electric's competitors without license from General Electric constitutes a competitive economic advantage over other companies;

b. Information which, if used by a competitor, would reduce his expenditure of resources or improve his competitive position in the design, manufacture, shipment, installation, assurance of quality, or licensing of a similar product;

c. Information which reveals aspects of past, present, or future General Electric customer-funded development plans and programs, resulting in potential products to General Electric;

d. Information which discloses patentable subject matter for which it may be desirable to obtain patent protection.

GBS-05-02-Af VY Dryer Stress Analysis 38-0936.doc Affidavit Page I

The information sought to be withheld is considered to be proprietary for the reasons set forth in paragraphs (4)a., and (4)b, above.

(5) To address 10 CFR 2.790 (b) (4), the information sought to be withheld is being submitted to NRC in confidence. The information is of a sort customarily held in confidence by GE, and is in fact so held. The information sought to be withheld has, to the best of my knowledge and belief, consistently been held in confidence by GE, no public disclosure has been made, and it is not available in public sources. All disclosures to third parties including any required transmittals to NRC, have been made, or must be made, pursuant to regulatory provisions or proprietary agreements which provide for maintenance of the information in confidence. Its initial designation as proprietary information, and the subsequent steps taken to prevent its unauthorized disclosure, are as set forth in paragraphs (6) and (7) following.

(6) Initial approval of proprietary treatment of a document is made by the manager of the originating component, the person most likely to be acquainted with the value and sensitivity of the information in relation to industry knowledge. Access to such documents within GE is limited on a "need to know" basis.

(7) The procedure for approval of external release of such a document typically requires review by the staff manager, project manager, principal scientist or other equivalent authority, by the manager of the cognizant marketing function (or his delegate), and by the Legal Operation, for technical content, competitive effect, and determination of the accuracy of the proprietary designation. Disclosures outside GE are limited to regulatory bodies, customers, and potential customers, and their agents, suppliers, and licensees, and others with a legitimate need for the information, and then only in accordance with appropriate regulatory provisions or proprietary agreements.

(8) The information identified in paragraph (2), above, is classified as proprietary because it contains detailed information about the steam dryer stress analysis in support of NEDC-33090P, Safety Analysis Report for Vennont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Constant Pressure Power Uprate, Class III (GE Proprietary Information), Revision 0, dated September 2003, which was submitted to the NRC. This power uprate report contains detailed results and conclusions from evaluations of the safety-significant changes necessary to demonstrate the regulatory acceptability for the power uprate of a GE BWR, utilizing analytical models, methods and processes, including computer codes, which GE has developed, obtained NRC approval of and applied to perform evaluations of the transient and accident events in the GE Boiling Water Reactor ("BWR"). The development and approval of these system, component, and thermal hydraulic models and computer codes was achieved at a significant cost to GE, on the order of several million dollars.

The development of the evaluation process along with the interpretation and application of the analytical results is derived from the extensive experience database that constitutes a major GE asset.

(9) Public disclosure of the information sought to be withheld is likely to cause substantial harm to GE's competitive position and foreclose or reduce the availability of profit-making opportunities. The information is part of GE's comprehensive BWR safety and technology base, and its commercial value extends beyond the original development cost. The value of GBS-05-02-Af VY Dryer Stress Analysis 38-0936.doc Affidavit Page 2

P\

the technology base goes beyond the extensive physical database and analytical methodology and includes development of the expertise to determine and apply the appropriate evaluation process. In addition, the technology base includes the value derived from providing analyses done with NRC-approved methods.

The research, development, engineering, analytical and NRC review costs comprise a substantial investment of time and money by GE.

The precise value of the expertise to devise an evaluation process and apply the correct analytical methodology is difficult to quantify, but it clearly is substantial.

GE's competitive advantage will be lost if its competitors are able to use the results of the GE experience to normalize or verify their own process or if they are able to claim an equivalent understanding by demonstrating that they can arrive at the same or similar conclusions.

The value of this information to GE would be lost if the information were disclosed to the public. Making such information available to competitors without their having been required to undertake a similar expenditure of resources would unfairly provide competitors with a windfall, and deprive GE of the opportunity to exercise its competitive advantage to seek an adequate return on its large investment in developing these very valuable analytical tools.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing affidavit and the matters stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

Executed on this 3° day of IU4tW.A 2005.

rge B. S(ramback General Electric Company GBS-05-02-Af VY Dryer Stress Analysis 38-0936.doc Affidavit Page 3