IR 05000124/2028008

Enclosure 3, Areva Np Calculation 32-5012428-08, Davis-Besse Heat Balance Uncertainty.

ML071070578
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse, 05000124
Issue date:	04/12/2007
From:	AREVA
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
3198 32-5012428-08
Download: ML071070578 (71)

Text

Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 3198 Enclosure 3 Enclosure 3 AREVA NP Calculation 32-5012428-08 Davis-Besse Heat Balance Uncertainty April 2007 20697-10 A CALCULATION SUMMARY SHEET (CSS)AREVA Document Identifier 32-5012428-08 Title Davis Besse Heat Balance Uncertainty Calculation PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: METHOD: M' DETAILED CHECK [] INDEPENDENT CALCULATION NAME Bret L. Boman NAME Todd Matthews SIGNATURE SIGNATURE 4 TITLE Eng Mgr DATE q/qI/7 TITLE Principal Eng DATE COST REF. TM STATEMENT:

CENTER 41917 PAGE(S) 37-38 REVIEWER INDEPENDENCE

_NAME z__ _ _ _ _PURPOSE AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS: Purpose -The objective of this calculation was to calculate Davis Besse's full-power reactor core power uncertainty value, also referred to as the "heat balance uncertainty," based on the planned installation of Caldon's ultrasonic feedwater flow metering equipment.

Specific objectives were: (1) determine the minimum practical full-power core thermal power uncertainty in order to define the limits of Davis Besse's MUR power uprate; (2) determine the sensitivity of the core thermal power uncertainty to the individual measurements'

uncertainty.

This will assist Davis Besse in making decisions regarding the maintenance and modification of the instrumentation used in the core thermal power calculation; and (3) provide an accepted core thermal power uncertainty methodology to be used in future evaluations.

Summary of Results- The ASME Performance Test Code Methodology was used to calculate the expected core thermal power uncertainty to be achieved using the Caldon CheckPlusTM System ultrasonic flow meter. The analysis concluded that using the following instrument uncertainty values, the core thermal power uncertainty would be 0.369%, thus allowing a power uprate of 1.63% to be pursued.* Feedwater Flow Uncertainty of 0.29%* Feedwater Pressure Uncertainty of 14.6 psi (systematic)

and 1.35 psi (random)* Steam Pressure Uncertainty of 1.42 psi (systematic)

and 1.52 psi (random)* Steam Temperature Uncertainty of 1.56*F (systematic)

and 0.153"F (random)The other parameters (makeup, letdown, RCP heat, and ambient losses) are minor contributors.

Their uncertainties are defined in the body of the report.Rev. 01 -added the case for the MVP Uprate conditions.

Rev. 02 -As-tested Caldon uncertainties evaluated.

Rev. 03 -removed assumption regarding random uncertainty values. Rev 04 & 05 evaluated a change in steam pressure uncertainties as directed by FENOC. Rev 06 complete revision to address comments and eliminate inconsistencies.

Rev 07 incorporates the feedwater pressure uncertainty change into the MVP case. Rev 08 revised the feedwater flow uncertainty from 0.26% to 0.29%, updates References 3 and 21, and deletes Caldon proprietary attachments.

THE DOCUMENT CONTAINS ASSUMPTIONS THAT MUST BE VERIFIED PRIOR TO USE ON THE FOLLOWING COMPUTER CODES HAVE BEEN USED IN THIS DOCUMENT:

SAFETY-RELATED WORK CODENERSION/REV CODENERSION/REV-YES Z NO AREVA NP Inc., an AREVA and Siemens company Page 1 of 71 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 RECORD OF REVISIONS Revision Date Purpose 00 01 June 2001 Oct. 2001 April 2003 02 03 04 05 May 2003 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 April 2007 Original Release Define the uncertainty for the MVP operating conditions.

Changed a previous assumption on steam temperature, steam pressure, and feedwater pressure to an input by referencing a Davis Besse calculation package.In the previous revision feedwater flow and temperature uncertainty values were assumed.Based on testing the assumed values have been confirmed as bounding.

See assumption number 3.Based on input from FENOC the assumption regarding the validity of the random uncertainty values was removed.Removed Proprietary header. Fixed typos.Revised Uncertainties for feedwater pressure.Revised Uncertainties for feedwater pressure (case 10). Added case 11 for as-tested Caldon LEFM uncertainties.

Completely revised document to redefine the base case and remove inconsistencies created by multiple revisions.

Revised the MVP section for the revised feedwater pressure uncertainty (pages. 27 &30 only).Revised the feedwater flow uncertainty from 0.26% to 0.29% based on the replacement transducers.

Updated References 3 and 21 to latest revisions, deleted previous attachments 1 and 4, changed 'FRA-ANP'

to 'AREVA NP'and 'Appendix K' to 'MUR'.06 07 08 2 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 SUMMARY OF RESULTS The ASME Performance Test Code Methodology was used to calculate the expected core thermal power uncertainty to be achieved using the Caldon CheckPlusTM System ultrasonic flow meter. The analysis concluded that using the following instrument uncertainty values, the core thermal power uncertainty would be 0.367%, thus allowing a power uprate of 1.63% to be pursued. This is based on:* Feedwater Flow Uncertainty of 0.29%" Feedwater Temperature Uncertainty of 0.1 *F (systematic)

and 0.46°F (random*)* Feedwater Pressure Uncertainty of 14.6 psi (systematic)

and 1.35 psi (random)" Steam Pressure Uncertainty of 1.42 psi (systematic)

and 1.52 psi (random)* Steam Temperature Uncertainty of 1.56 0 F (systematic)

and 0.153 0 F (random)The other parameters (makeup, letdown, RCP heat, and ambient losses) are minor contributors.

Their uncertainties are defined in the body of the report.This result is valid for both the MUR and MVP uprates.* "Random" as described herein corresponds to one standard deviation as opposed to two standard deviations.

The Caldon published random uncertainty of 0.56°F corresponds to two standard deviations or 0.28°F. The 0.28*F value was increased to 0.46°F to match the Caldon published combined flow uncertainty (see Case 3).36 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 7.0 REFERENCES (1) ASME PTC 19.1-1998, Test Uncertainty, Instruments and Apparatus, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, NY, NY, 1998.(2) Caldon, Inc. Engineering Report-80P Revision 0 (Proprietary Version), Topical Report -"Improving Thermal Power Accuracy and Plant Safety While Increasing Operating Power Level Using the LEFM V/TM System," March 1997. (For Information Only)(3) Caldon Topical Report Caldon, Inc. Engineering Report-157P Revision 5 (Proprietary Version), Topical Report -"Supplement to Topical Report ER-80P: Basis for a Power Uprate With the LEFM,/T M or LEFM CheckPlus T M System.". (For Information Only)(4) AREVA NP Document 32-1119395-00, Calculated Uncertainty in Qprimary," May 1980.(5) AREVA NP Document 32-1142654-00, "Error Equations for RC Flow Calculation," May 1983.(6) AREVA NP Document 32-5001078-01, "CR-3 Heat Balance Uncertainty Calc," March 1998.(7) AREVA NP Document 75-1103982-02, "Core Thermal Power Analysis Module (CTPA), 1983.(8) AREVA NP Document 32-5007853-01, "DAVIS-BESSE CYCLE 13 OLC DBU," May 2000 (9) AREVA NP Document 51-5005750-00, "DBNPS Design Basis Validation for the Makeup and Purification System," October 1999.(10) AREVA NP Document 32-5011757-00, "DB App. K Power Uprate -New Operating Conditions," March 2001.*(11) Bechtel Drawing M-203A Rev. 20, "Piping Isometric Main Steam System Ctmt. Bldg. Steam Gen. 1-1."*(12) Bechtel Calculation No. 1.38 Rev. 0.(13) Idelchik, I.E., Handbook of Hydraulic Resistance, Second Edition, Hemisphere Publishing Co., Washington DC, 1986.(14) Ladish General Catalog No. 55, "Forged and Seamless Welding Pipe Fittings, Cudahy, WI, 1971.37 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 (15) Crane Technical Paper No. 410, "Flow of Fluids Through Valves, Fittings, and Pipe," 2 4 th Printing, King of Prussia, PA, 1988.*(16) Bechtel Drawing M-203B Rev. 16, "Piping Isometric Main Steam System Ctmt. Bldg. Steam Gen. 1-2."*(17) Bechtel Drawing M-203C Rev. 11, "Piping Isometric Main Steam System Turbine Building." (18) AREVA NP Document 51-5003544-00, "FIDMS Methodology," September 1999.(19) AREVA NP Document 32-5013080-00, "DB 3016 Mwt Power Uprate -New Operating Conditions," June 2002.*(20) Davis Besse Calculation No. C-ICE-083.01-004 Rev. 01, "Loop Uncertainty for Main Feedwater

& High Pressure Turbine Main Steam Temperature

& Pressure."*(21) Caldon, Inc. Engineering Report: ER-202 Revision 2, "Bounding Uncertainty Analysis for Thermal Power Determination at Davis Besse Nuclear Power Station Using the LEFM/+ System," July 2004.*(22) Letter from Ed Madera (Cameron)

to Tim Laurer (Davis Besse), "Cameron Measurement Systems Response to Transducer Replacement Sensitivity," dated March 8, 2007. (Attachment 2)*(23) Davis Besse Calculation No. C-ICE-083.01-004 Rev. 03 Addendum No. 2,"DB Loop Uncertainty for Main Feedwater

& High Pressure Turbine Main Steam Temperature

& Pressure." (24) AREVA NP 38-5038413-00, "Revision of NAS QHTRS Variable."* Retrievable from Davis-Besse records center and thus acceptable references for this calculation.

AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 APPENDIX A -Heat Balance Spreadsheets The methodology developed in Section 5 was programmed in Excel for ease of evaluating various inputs. The Excel spreadsheet was verified by comparing the results of Case 2 with those listed in Section 5.39 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Case 1 -Definition of "Random" Feedwater Temperature Uncertainty All uncertainties except feedwater flow and feedwater temperature set to zero.Absolute Absolute Nominal Systematic Std. Dev. Absolute Units Value Uncertainty of the Mean Sensitivity Absolute Absolute Relative Relative Systematic Random Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Contribution Contribution Contribution Contribution Symbol Description WFW Feedwater Flow Rate TS Steam Temperature PS Steam Pressure TFW Feedwater Temperature PFW Feedwater Pressure WMU Makeup Flow Rate TMU Makeup Temperature PMU Makeup Pressure WLD Letdown Flow Rate TLD Letdown Temperature PLD Letdown Pressure QRCP RCP Power QLOSS Ambient Heat Loss Ibm/hr F Psia F Psia Ibm/hr F Psia Ibm/hr F Psia Btu/hr Btu/hr 1.18E+07 596 930 455 1005 2.23E+04 100 2250 2.23E+04 557 2250 6.75E+07 0.00E+00 3.55E+04 0 0 0.6 0 0.OOE+00 0 0 0.OOE+00 0 0 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 0 0 0 0.24728 0 0.OOE+00 0 0 0.OOE+00 0 0 0 0 8.170E+02 9.969E+06-1.340E+06-1.323E+07-6.157E+03 7.396E+01 2.201 E+04 5.812E+01 5.555E+02 2.791 E+04-4.009E+01 1.OOOE+00 1.OOOE+00 2.105E+14 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 1.574E+13 1.070E+13 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.000E+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0OOOE+00 0.000E+00 2.263E+14 1.070E+13 93.05%0.00%0.00%6.96%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%Absolute Absolute Absolute Relative Nominal Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Units Value Uncertainty Uncertainty Btu/hr %Btu/hr 9.621E+09 3.009E+07 6.541E+06 3.079E+07 0.32 Symbol Description Qc Core Thermal Power HSB HFWB HMU HLD Steam Enthalpy Feedwater Enthalpy Makeup Enthalpy Letdown Enthalpy Btu/lbm Btu/lbm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm 1250 433 73.96 555.52 DHS/DT DHFW/DT DHMU/DT DHLD/DT 0.842 DHS/DP-1.117 DHFW/DP 0.9882 DHMU/DP 1.2532 DHLD/DP-0.1132-5.20E-04 2.61 E-03-1.80E-03 40 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Case 2 -Base Case Using Dua) Loop Instrument Uncertainties Absolute Absolute Nominal Systematic Std. Dev. Absolute Units Value Uncertainty of the Mean Sensitivity Absolute Absolute Relative Relative Systematic Random Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Contribution Contribution Contribution Contribution Symbol Description WFW TS PS TFW PFW WMU TMU PMU WLD TLD PLD QRCP OLOSS Feedwater Flow Rate Steam Temperature Steam Pressure Feedwater Temperature Feedwater Pressure Makeup Flow Rate Makeup Temperature Makeup Pressure Letdown Flow Rate Letdown Temperature Letdown Pressure RCP Power Ambient Heat Loss Ibm/hr F psia F psia Ibm/hr F psia Ibm/hr F psia Btu/hr Btu/hr 1.18E+07 596 930 455 1005 2.23E+04 100 2250 2.23E+04 557 2250 6.75E+07 2.23E+06 3.55E+04 1.56 1.42 0.6 14.6 1.11E+03 5 50 1.11E+03 5 50 4.93E+06 2.50E+06 0 0.153 1.52 0.24728 1.35 2.23E+03 2 50 2.23E+03 2 50 0 0 8.173E+02 9.969E+06-1.340E+06 1.323E+07-6.157E+03 7.396E+01 2.201 E+04 5.812E+01 5.555E+02 2.791 E+04-4.009E+01 1.000E+00 1.OOOE+00 2.107E+14 6.047E+13 9.056E+1 1 1.574E+13 2.020E+09 1.696E+09 3.027E+09 2.112E+06 9.566E+10 4.868E+09 1.004E+06 6.076E+12 1.563E+12 2.956E+14 Relative Uncertainty 0.36852537 0.OOOE+00 2.327E+12 4.150E+12 1.070E+13 6.908E+07 2.713E+10 1.937E+09 8.446E+06 1.531E+12 3.116E+09 4.017E+06 O.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 1.873E+13 71.29%20.46%0.31%5.33%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.03%0.00%0.00%2.06%0.53%100.00%0.00%12.42%22.15%57.09%0.00%0.14%0.01%0.00%8.17%0.02%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%Absolute Absolute Absolute Nominal Systematic Random Uncertainty Units Value Uncertainty Uncertainty Btu/hr Btu/hr 9.621 E+09 3.438E+07 8.657E+06 3.546E+07 Symbol Description Qc Core Thermal Power HSB HFWB HMU HLD Steam Enthalpy Feedwater Enthalpy Makeup Enthalpy Letdown Enthalpy Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/lbm Btu/lbm 1253.356 436.041 73.96 555.52 DHS/DT DHFW/DT DHMU/DT DHLD/DT 0.842 1.117 0.9882 1.2532 DHS/DP DHFW/DP DHMU/DP DHLD/DP-0.1132-5.20E-04 2.61 E-03-1.80E-03 41 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Case 3 -Definition of Randon Feedwater Temperature Uncertainty for As-Tested Caldon Flowmeter All other terms set to zero Absolute Absolute Nominal Systematic Std. Dev. Absolute Units Value Uncertainty of the Mean Sensitivity Absolute Absolute Relative Relative Systematic Random Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Contribution Contribution Contribution Contribution Symbol Description WFW Feedwater Flow Rate TS PS TFW PFW WMU TMU PMU WLD TLD PLD QRCP QLOSS Steam Temperature Steam Pressure Feedwater Temperature Feedwater Pressure Makeup Flow Rate Makeup Temperature Makeup Pressure Letdown Flow Rate Letdown Temperature Letdown Pressure RCP Power Ambient Heat Loss Ibm/hr F psia F psia Ibm/hr F psia Ibm/hr F psia Btu/hr Btu/hr 1.18E+07 596 930 455 1005 2.23E+04 100 2250 2.23E+04 557 2250 6.75E+07 0.OOE+00 3.08E+04 0 0 0.1 0 0.OOE+00 0 0 0.OOE+00 0 0 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0 0 0 0.46 0 0.OOE+00 0 0 0.OOE+00 0 0 0 0 8.173E+02 9.969E+06-1.340E+06 1.323E+07-6.157E+03 7.396E+01 2.201 E+04 5.812E+01 5.555E+02 2.791 E+04-4.009E+01 1.OOOE+00 1.OOOE+00 1.583E+14 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 4.373E+1 1 3.701 E+1 3 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 1.587E+14 3.701E+13 99.72%0.00%0.00%0.28%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%Absolute Absolute Absolute Relative Nominal Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Units Value Uncertainty Uncertainty Btu/hr %Btu/hr 9.621 E+09 2.519E+07 1.217E+07 2.798E+07 0.29080499 Symbol Description Qc Core Thermal Power HSB HFWB HMU Steam Enthalpy Feedwater Enthalpy Makeup Enthalpy Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm 1253.356 436.041 73.96 DHS/DT DHFW/DT DHMU/DT 0.842 DHS/DP 1.117 DHFW/DP 0.9882 DHMU/DP-0.1132-5.20E-04 2.61 E-03 42 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Case 4 -Base Case Using New Feedwater Flowmeter Transducer Uncertainty Absolute Absolute Nominal Systematic Std. Dev. Absolute Units Value Uncertainty of the Mean Sensitivity Absolute Systematic Uncertainty Contribution Absolute Random Uncertainty Contribution Relative Systematic Uncertainty Contribution Relative Random Uncertainty Contribution Symbol Description WFW TS PS TFW PFW WMU TMU PMU WLD TLD PLD QRCP QLOSS Feedwater Flow Rate Steam Temperature Steam Pressure Feedwater Temperature Feedwater Pressure Makeup Flow Rate Makeup Temperature Makeup Pressure Letdown Flow Rate Letdown Temperature Letdown Pressure RCP Power Ambient Heat Loss Ibm/hr F psia F psia Ibm/hr F psia Ibm/hr F psia Btu/hr Btu/hr 1.18E+07 596 930 455 1005 2.23E+04 100 2250 2.23E+04 557 2250 6.75E+07 O.00E+00 3.43E+04 1.56 1.42 0.1 14.6 1.11E+03 5 50 1.11E+03 5 50 4.93E+06 2.50E+06 0 0.153 1.52 0.46 1.35 2.23E+03 2 50 2.23E+03 2 50 0 0 8.173E+02 9.969E+06-1.340E+06 1.323E+07-6.157E+03 7.396E+01 2.201 E+04 5.812E+01 5.555E+02 2.791 E+04-4.009E+01 I.OOOE+00 1.0OOE+00 1.969E+14 0.OOOE+00 6.047E+13 2.327E+12 9.056E+1 1 4.150E+12 4.373E+1 1 3.701E+13 2.020E+09 6.908E+07 1.696E+09 2.713E+10 3.027E+09 1.937E+09 2.112E+06 8.446E+06 9.566E+10 1.531E+12 4.868E+09 3.116E+09 1.004E+06 4.017E+06 6.076E+1 2 0.OOOE+00 1.563E+12 0.OOOE+00 2.664E+14 4.505E+13 73.89%22.69%0.34%0.16%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.04%0.00%0.00%2.28%0.59%100.00%0.00%5.16%9.21%82.15%0.00%0.06%0.00%0.00%3.40%0.01%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%Absolute Absolute Absolute Relative Nominal Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Units Value Uncertainty Uncertainty Btu/hr %Btu/hr 9.621E+09 3,265E+07 1.342E+07 3.530E+07 0.36687916 Symbol Description Qc Core Thermal Power HSB Steam Enthalpy HFWB Feedwater Enthalpy HMU Makeup Enthalpy Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/lbm 1253.356 436.041 73.96 DHS/DT DHFW/DT DHMU/DT 0.842 DHS/DP 1.117 DHFW/DP 0.9882 DHMU/DP-0.1132-5.20E-04 2.61 E-03 43 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Case 5 -Reduced Steam Temperature Uncertainty Absolute Absolute Nominal Systematic Std. Dev. Absolute Units Value Uncertainty of the Mean Sensitivity Absolute Absolute Relative Relative Systematic Random Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Contribution Contribution Contribution Contribution Symbol Description WFW TS PS TFW PFW WMU TMU PMU WLD TLD PLD QRCP QLOSS Feedwater Flow Rate Ibm/hr Steam Temperature F Steam Pressure psia Feedwater Temperature F Feedwater Pressure psia Makeup Flow Rate Ibm/hr Makeup Temperature F Makeup Pressure psia Letdown Flow Rate Ibm/hr Letdown Temperature F Letdown Pressure psia RCP Power Btu/hr Ambient Heat Loss Btu/hr 1.18E+07 596 930 455 1005 2.23E+04 100 2250 2.23E+04 557 2250 6.75E+07 0.OOE+00 3.43E+04 1.1 1.42 0.1 14.6 1.11E+03 5 50 1.11E+03 5 50 4.93E+06 2.50E+06 0 0.153 1.52 0.46 1.35 2.23E+03 2 50 2.23E+03 2 50 0 0 8.173E+02 9.969E+06-1.340E+06 1.323E+07-6.157E+03 7.396E+01 2.201E+04 5.812E+01 5.555E+02 2.791 E+04-4.009E+01 1.OOOE+00 I.OOOE+00 1.969E+14 0.OOOE+00 3.006E+13 2.327E+12 9.056E+11 4.150E+12 4.373E+11 3.701E+13 2.020E+09 6.908E+07 1.696E+09 2.713E+10 3.027E+09 1.937E+09 2.112E+06 8.446E+06 9.566E+10 1.531E+12 4.868E+09 3.116E+09 1.004E+06 4.017E+06 6.076E+12 0.OOOE+00 1.563E+1 2 0.OOOE+00 2.360E+14 4.505E+13 83.41%12.74%0.38%0.19%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.04%0.00%0.00%2.57%0.66%100.00%0,00%5.16%9.21%82.15%0.00%0.06%0.00%0.00%3.40%0.01%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%Absolute Absolute Absolute Relative Nominal Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Units Value Uncertainty Uncertainty Btu/hr %Btu/hr 9.621E+09 3.073E+07 1.342E+07 3.353E+07 0.34851553 Symbol Description Qc Core Thermal Power HSB HFWB HMU Steam Enthalpy Feedwater Enthalpy Makeup Enthalpy Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm 1253.356 436.041 73.96 DHS/DT DHFW/DT DHMU/DT 0.842 DHS/DP 1.117 DHFW/DP 0.9882 DHMU/DP-0.1132-5.20E-04 2.61 E-03 44 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Case 6 -Single Loop Uncertainties Absolute Absolute Nominal Systematic Std. Dev. Absolute Units Value Uncertainty of the Mean Sensitivity Absolute Systematic Uncertainty Contribution Absolute Random Uncertainty Contribution Relative Systematic Uncertainty Contribution Relative Random Uncertainty Contribution Symbol Description WFW TS PS TFW PFW WMU TMU PMU WLD TLD PLD QRCP QLOSS Feedwater Flow Rate Steam Temperature Steam Pressure Feedwater Temperature Feedwater Pressure Makeup Flow Rate Makeup Temperature Makeup Pressure Letdown Flow Rate Letdown Temperature Letdown Pressure RCP Power Ambient Heat Loss Ibm/hr F psia F psia Ibm/hr F psia Ibm/hr F psia Btu/hr Btu/hr 1.18E+07 596 930 455 1005 2.23E+04 100 2250 2.23E+04 557 2250 6.75E+07 O.OOE+00 3.43E+04 2.2 2 0.1 20.63 1.11E+03 5 50 1.11E+03 5 50 4.93E+06 2.50E+06 0 0.153 1.52 0.46 1.35 2.23E+03 2 50 2.23E+03 2 50 0 0 8.173E+02 9.969E+06-1.340E+06 1.323E+07-6.157E+03 7.396E+01 2.201 E+04 5.812E+01 5.555E+02 2.791 E+04-4.009E+01 1.OOOE+00 1.OOOE+00 1.969E+14 1.203E+14 1.796E+12 4.373E+1 1 4.033E+09 1.696E+09 3.027E+09 2.112E+06 9.566E+10 4.868E+09 1.004E+06 6.076E+12 1.563E+12 3.271E+14 0.OOOE+00 2.327E+12 4.150E+ 12 3.701 E+1 3 6.908E+07 2.713E+10 1.937E+09 8.446E+06 1.531E+12 3.116E+09 4.017E+06 O.OOOE+00 0.OOOE+00 4.505E+1 3 60.19%36.76%0.55%0.13%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.03%0.00%0.00%1.86%0.48%100.00%0.00%5.16%9.21%82.15%0.00%0.06%0.00%0.00%3.40%0.01%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%Absolute Absolute Absolute Relative Nominal Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Units Value Uncertainty Uncertainty Btu/hr %Btu/hr 9.621E+09 3.617E+07 1.342E+07 3.858E+07 0.40102689 Symbol Description Qc Core Thermal Power HSB HFWB HMU HLD Steam Enthalpy Feedwater Enthalpy Makeup Enthalpy Letdown Enthalpy Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/lbm 1253.356 436.041 7.3.96 555.52 DHS/DT DHFW/DT DHMU/DT DHLD/DT 0.842 DHS/DP 1.117 DHFW/DP 0.9882 DHMU/DP 1.2532 DHLD/DP-0.1132-5.20E-04 2.61 E-03-1.80E-03 45 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Case 7 -Instrument Location Effects (Adjustment Incorporated)

Absolute Nominal Systematic Units Value Uncertainty Absolute Std. Dev.of the Mean Absolute Systematic Absolute Uncertainty Sensitivity Contribution Absolute Random Uncertainty Contribution Relative Systematic Uncertainty Contribution Relative Random Uncertainty Contribution Symbol Description WFW TS PS TFW PFW WMU TMU PMU WLD TLD PLD QRCP QLOSS Feedwater Flow Rate Steam Temperature Steam Pressure Feedwater Temperature Feedwater Pressure Makeup Flow Rate Makeup Temperature Makeup Pressure Letdown Flow Rate Letdown Temperature Letdown Pressure RCP Power Ambient Heat Loss Ibm/hr F psia F psia Ibm/hr F psia Ibm/hr F psia Btu/hr Btu/hr 1.18E+07 3.43E+04 596 930 455 1005 2.23E+04 100 2250 2.23E+04 557 2250 6.75E+07 0.OOE+00 1.56 1.48 0.1 14.6 1.11E+03 5 50 1.11E+03 5 50 4.93E+06 2.50E+06 0 8.173E+02 0.153 9.969E+06 1.52 -1.340E+06 0.46 1.323E+07 1.35 -6.157E+03 2.23E+03 7.396E+01 2 2.201E+04 50 5.812E+01 2.23E+03 5.555E+02 2 2.791E+04 50 -4.009E+01 0 1.OOOE+00 0 1.OOOE+00 1.969E+14 0.OOOE+00 6.047E+13 2.327E+12 9.837E+11 4.150E+12 4.373E+11 3.701E+13 2.020E+09 6.908E+07 1.696E+09 2.713E+10 3.027E+09 1.937E+09 2.112E+06 8.446E+06 9.566E+10 1.531E+12 4.868E+09 3.116E+09 1.004E+06 4.017E+06 6.076E+12 0.OOOE+00 1.563E+12 0.OOOE+00 2.665E+14 4.505E+13 73.87%22.69%0.37%0.16%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.04%0.00%0.00%2.28%0.59%100.00%0.00%5.16%9.21%82.15%0.00%0.06%0.00%0.00%3.40%0.01%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%Absolute Absolute Absolute Relative Nominal Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Units Value Uncertainty Uncertainty Btu/hr %Btu/hr 9.621E+09 3.265E+07 1.342E+07 3.530E+07 0.36692518 Symbol Description Qc Core Thermal Power HSB Steam Enthalpy HFWB Feedwater Enthalpy HMU Makeup Enthalpy HLD Letdown Enthalpy Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm 1253.356 436.041 73.96 555.52 DHS/DT DHFW/DT DHMU/DT DHLD/DT 0.842 DHS/DP 1.117 DHFW/DP 0.9882 DHMU/DP 1.2532 DHLD/DP-0.1132-5.20E-04 2.61 E-03-1.80E-03 46 AREVA NP Case 8 -Instrument Location Effects (Adjustment Not Incorporated)

32-5012428-08 Absolute Absolute Nominal Systematic Std. Dev. Absolute Units Value Uncertainty of the Mean Sensitivity Absolute Absolute Relative Relative Systematic Random Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Contribution Contribution Contribution Contribution Symbol Description WFW TS PS TFW PFW WMU TMU PMU WLD TLD PLD QRCP QLOSS Feedwater Flow Rate Steam Temperature Steam Pressure Feedwater Temperature Feedwater Pressure Makeup Flow Rate Makeup Temperature Makeup Pressure Letdown Flow Rate Letdown Temperature Letdown Pressure RCP Power Ambient Heat Loss Ibm/hr F psia F psia Ibm/hr F psia Ibm/hr F psia Btu/hr Btu/hr 1.18E+07 596 930 455 1005 2.23E+04 100 2250 2.23E+04 557 2250 6.75E+07 0.OOE+00 3.43E+04 1.56 2.91 0.1 14.6 1.11E+03 5 50 1.11E+03 5 50 4.93E+06 2.50E+06 0 0.153 1.52 0.46 1.35 2.23E+03 2 50 2.23E+03 2 50 0 0 8.173E+02 9.969E+06-1.340E+06 1.323E+07-6.157E+03 7.396E+01 2.201 E+04 5.812E+01 5.555E+02 2.791E+04-4.009E+01 1.OOOE+00 1.OOOE+00 1.969E+14 0.OOOE+00 6.047E+13 2.327E+12 3.803E+12 4.150E+12 4.373E+1 1 3.701 E+1 3 2.020E+09 6.908E+07 1.696E+09 2.713E+10 3.027E+09 1.937E+09 2.112E+06 8.446E+06 9.566E+10 1.531E+12 4.868E+09 3.116E+09 1.004E+06 4.017E+06 6*076E+12 0.OOOE+00 1.563E+12 0.OOOE+00 2.693E+14 4.505E+13 73.10%22.45%1.41%0.16%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.04%0.00%0.00%2.26%0.58%100.00%0.00%5.16%9.21%82.15%0.00%0.06%0.00%0.00%3.40%0.01%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%Absolute Absolute Absolute Nominal Systematic Random Uncertain Units Value Uncertainty Uncertainty Btu/hr Btu/hr 9.621E+09 3.282E+07 1.342E+07 3.546E Relative ty Uncertainty

+07 0.36858151 Symbol Description Qc Core Thermal Power HSB HFWB HMU HLD Steam Enthalpy Feedwater Enthalpy Makeup Enthalpy Letdown Enthalpy Btu/lbm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm 1253.356 436.041 73.96 555.52 DHS/DT DHFW/DT DHMU/DT DHLD/DT 0.842 DHS/DP 1.117 DHFW/DP 0.9882 DHMU/DP 1.2532 DHLD/DP-0.1132-5.20E-04 2.61 E-03-1.80E-03 47 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Case 9 -Use of Turbine Header Pressure Instruments Absolute Nominal Systematic Units Value Uncertainty Absolute Std. Dev. Absolute of the Mean Sensitivity Absolute Systematic Uncertainty Contribution Absolute Random Relative Relative Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Contribution Contribution Contribution Symbol Description WFW TS PS TFW PFW WMU TMU PMU WLD TLD PLD QRCP QLOSS Feedwater Flow Rate Steam Temperature Steam Pressure Feedwater Temperature Feedwater Pressure Makeup Flow Rate Makeup Temperature Makeup Pressure Letdown Flow Rate Letdown Temperature Letdown Pressure RCP Power Ambient Heat Loss Ibm/hr F psia F psia Ibm/hr F psia Ibm/hr F psia Btu/hr Btu/hr 1.18E+07 596 930 455 1005 2.23E+04 100 2250 2.23E+04 557 2250 6.75E+07 0.OOE+00 3.43E+04 1.56 2.87 0.1 14.6 1.11E+03 5 50 1.11E+03 5 50 4.93E+06 2.50E+06 0 0.153 1.52 0.46 1.35 2.23E+03 2 50 2.23E+03 2 50 0 0 8.173E+02 9.969E+06-1.340E+06 1.323E+07-6.157E+03 7.396E+01 2.201E+04 5.812E+01 5.555E+02 2.791 E+04-4.009E+01 1.OOOE+00 1.OOOE+00 1.969E+14 0.OOOE+00 6.047E+13 2.327E+12 3.699E+12 4.150E+12 4.373E+11 3.701E+13 2.020E+09 6.908E+07 1.696E+09 2.713E+10 3.027E+09 1.937E+09 2.112E+06 8.446E+06 9.566E+10 1.531E+12 4.868E+09 3.116E+09 1.004E+06 4.017E+06 6.076E+12 0.OOOE+00 1.563E+12 O.OOOE+00 2.692E+14 4.505E+13 73.13%22.46%1.37%0.16%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.04%0.00%0.00%2.26%0.58%100.00%0.00%5.16%9.21%82.15%0.00%0.06%0.00%0.00%3.40%0.01%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%Absolute Absolute Absolute Relative Nominal Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Units Value Uncertainty Uncertainty Btu/hr %Btu/hr 9.621E+09 3.282E+07 1.342E+07 3.546E+07 0.36852064 Symbol Description Qc Core Thermal Power HSB Steam Enthalpy HFWB Feedwater Enthalpy HMU Makeup Enthalpy HLD Letdown Enthalpy Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm 1253.356 436.041 73.96 555.52 DHS/DT DHFW/DT DHMU/DT DHLD/DT 0.842 DHS/DP 1.117 DHFW/DP 0.9882 DHMU/DP 1.2532 DHLD/DP-0.1132-5.20E-04 2.61 E-03-1.80E-03 48 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Case 10 -Insensitivity of Makeup and Letdown Uncertainty Assumptions Absolute Nominal Systematic Units Value Uncertainty Absolute Std. Dev.of the Mean Absolute Systematic Absolute Uncertainty Sensitivity Contribution Absolute Random Uncertainty Contribution Relative Systematic Uncertainty Contribution Relative Random Uncertainty Contribution Symbol Description WFW TS PS TFW PFW WMU TMU PMU WLD TLD PLD QRCP QLOSS Feedwater Flow Rate Steam Temperature Steam Pressure Feedwater Temperature Feedwater Pressure Makeup Flow Rate Makeup Temperature Makeup Pressure Letdown Flow Rate Letdown Temperature Letdown Pressure RCP Power Ambient Heat Loss Ibm/hr F psia F psia Ibm/hr F psia Ibm/hr F psia Btu/hr Btu/hr 1.18E+07 596 930 455 1005 2.23E+04 100 2250 2.23E+04 557 2250 6.75E+07 2.23E+06 3.43E+04 1.56 1.42 0.1 14.6 2.23E+03 10 100 2.23E+03 10 100 4.93E+06 2.50E+06 0 0.153 1.52 0.46 1.35 4.45E+03 4 100 4.45E+03 4 100 0 0 8.173E+02 9.969E+06-1.340E+06 1.323E+07-6.157E+03 7.396E+01 2.201 E+04 5.812E+01 5.555E+02 2.791 E+04-4.009E+01 1.OOOE+00 I.000E+00 1.969E+14 0.OOOE+00 6.047E+13 2.327E+12 9.056E+1 1 4.150E+12 4.373E+1 1 3.701 E+1 3 2.020E+09 6.908E+07 6.782E+09 1.085E+1 1 1.211 E+10 7.749E+09 8.446E+06 3.378E+07 3.826E+11 6.122E+12 1.947E+10 1.246E+10 4.017E+06 1.607E+07 6.076E+12 O.OOOE+00 1.563E+12 0.OOOE+00 2.668E+14 4.974E+13 73.81%22.67%0.34%0.16%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.14%0.01%0.00%2.28%0.59%100.00%0.00%4.68%8.34%74.41%0.00%0.22%0.02%0.00%12.31%0.03%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%Absolute Absolute Absolute Relative Symbol Description Qc Core Thermal Power Nominal Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Units Value Uncertainty Uncertainty Btu/hr %Btu/hr 9.621E+09 3.267E+07 1.411E+07 3.558E+07 0.36981424 HSB HFWB HMU HLD Steam Enthalpy Feedwater Enthalpy Makeup Enthalpy Letdown Enthalpy Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm 1253.356 436.041 73.96 555.52 DHS/DT DHFW/DT DHMU/DT DHLD/DT 0.842 DHS/DP 1.117 DHFW/DP 0.9882 DHMU/DP 1.2532 DHLD/DP-0.1132-5.20E-04 2.61 E-03-1.80E-03 49 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Case 11 -MVP Base Case Using Dual Loop Instrument Uncertainties (Based on Case 2)Absolute Absolute Nominal Systematic Std. Dev. Absolute Units Value Uncertainty of the Mean Sensitivity Absolute Systematic Uncertainty Contribution Absolute Random Uncertainty Contribution Relative Systematic Uncertainty Contribution Relative Random Uncertainty Contribution Symbol Description WFW TS PS TFW PFW WMU TMU PMU WLD TLD PLD QRCP QLOSS Feedwater Flow Rate Steam Temperature Steam Pressure Feedwater Temperature Feedwater Pressure Makeup Flow Rate Makeup Temperature Makeup Pressure Letdown Flow Rate Letdown Temperature Letdown Pressure RCP Power Ambient Heat Loss Ibm/hr F psia F psia Ibm/hr F psia Ibm/hr F psia Btu/hr Btu/hr 1.27E+07 591 930 455 1005 2.23E+04 100 2250 2.23E+04 557 2250 6.75E+07 2.23E+06 3.69E+04 1.56 1.42 0.1 14.6 1.11E+03 5 50 1.11E+03 5 50 4.93E+06 2.50E+06 0 0.153 1.52 0.46 1.35 2.23E+03 2 50 2.23E+03 2 50 0 0 8.131 E+02 1.071E+07-1.487E+06-1.421 E+07-6.614E+03 7.396E+01 2.201 E+04 5.812E+01 5.555E+02 2.791E+04-4.009E+01 1.OOOE+00 1.OOOE+00 2.249E+14 0.OOOE+00 6.979E+13 2.685E+12 1.115E+12 5.108E+12 5.047E+1 1 4.272E+1 3 2.331 E+09 7.973E+07 1.696E+09 2.713E+10 3.027E+09 1.937E+09 2.112E+06 8.446E+06 9.566E+10 1.531E+12 4.868E+09 3.116E+09 1.004E+06 4.017E+06 6.076E+12 0.OOOE+00 1.563E+12 0.OOOE+00 3.040E+14 5.207E+13 73.97%22.95%0.37%0.17%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.03%0.00%0.00%2.00%0.51%100.00%0.00%5.16%9.81%82.03%0.00%0.05%0.00%0.00%2.94%0.01%0.00%0.00%0.00%100.00%Absolute Absolute Absolute Relative Symbol Description Qc Core Thermal Power Nominal Systematic Random Uncertainty Uncertainty Units Value Uncertainty Uncertainty Btu/hr %Btu/hr 1.029E+10 3.487E+07 1.443E+07 3.774E+07 0.36665809 HSB HFWB HMU HLD Steam Enthalpy Feedwater Enthalpy Makeup Enthalpy Letdown Enthalpy Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm Btu/Ibm 1249.121 436.041 73.96 555.52 DHS/DT DHFW/DT DHMU/DT DHLD/DT 0.842 DHS/DP-1.117 DHFW/DP 0.9882 DHMU/DP 1.2532 DHLD/DP-0.1169-5.20E-04 2.61 E-03-1.80E-03 50 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 APPENDIX B -Excerpts from CTPA Within the code listing, formulations were provided for the heat balance. Computer code excerpts are provided below. Some of these values are considered constants whose values are defined in Reference 8 (and shown below). For the core power based on the secondary heat balance: QCOR1 =(QSECA+QSECB+QLOSS-QCDTO-QCDT1 -QCDT2-QCDT3)/(WMBTU*RCSCL)

Where: QSECA = CORE THERMAL POWER FROM SECONDARY SIDE HEAT BALANCE (STEAM GENERATOR-A-)

QSECB = CORE THERMAL POWER FROM SECONDARY SIDE HEAT BALANCE (STEAM GENERATOR-B-)

QLOSS = ENERGY LOSS BETWEEN MAKE UP AND LETDOWN FLOW QCDTO, QCDT1, QCDT2, QCDT3 are terms for RC pump heat and ambient losses. For the case of four RC pumps operating, QCDT1 and QCDT3 are equivalent to two RC pumps. QCDT1 also accounts for the ambient losses in the form "QHTRS" shown below.WMBTU = Conversion from kilowatts to Btu/hr = .34121E+04 RCSCL = Conversion from Mw to kw 1.OE+3 For the steam generator heat balance terms: QSECA=WFIDA*(HSTM(TSTA,PSTA)-HFID(TFWA,PFIDA))

QSECB=WFIDB*(HSTM(TSTB,PSTB)-HFID(TFWB,PFIDB))

Where: WFIDA = CORRECTED FEEDWATER FLOW TO STEAM GENERATOR A WFIDB = CORRECTED FEEDWATER FLOW TO STEAM GENERATOR B HSTM IS A FUNCTION THAT YIELDS ENTHALPY STEAM FOR A GIVEN TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE 51 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 HFID IS A FUNCTION THAT YIELDS ENTHALPY FEEDWATER FOR A GIVEN TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE For the makeup and letdown heat balance: QLOSS = QLTDN -QMKUP Where: QLTDN = ENERGY OF THE LETDOWN FLOW QMKUP = ENERGY OF THE MAKEUP FLOW QLTDN=WLTDN*HAVE(TLTDN,PRESS)

WLTDN = SIX-MINUTE AVERAGE OF LET DOWN FLOW RATE TLTDN = SIX-MINUTE AVERAGE OF LET DOWN TEMP (DEG F)PRESS = PRIMARY SYSTEM PRESSURE (PSIA)PRESS = SIX-MIN. AVERAGE OF SPCRA,SPCRB (PSIA)SPCRA = 30 SEC RC PRESSURE AT LOOP A (PSIA)SPCRB = 30 SEC RC PRESSURE AT LOOP B (PSIA)QMKUP = WMKUP*HAVE(TMKUP,PRESS)

WMKUP = SIX-MINUTE AVERAGE OF MAKE-UP FLOW RATE TMKUP = SIX-MINUTE AVERAGE OF LET DOWN TEMP (DEG F)For the RC pump heat and ambient loss terms: If both pumps in the A loop are operating:

QCDT3=(2.0*QPUMP+QHTRS)*WMBTU If both pumps in the B loop are operating:

QCDT1 =2.0*QPUMP*WMBTU QPUMP = ETA*QMOTR ETA = RC Pump/Motor Efficiency QMOTR = RC Pump Motor Power 52 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 QHTRS = ADDITIONAL ENERGY CREDITS OR LOSSES TO THE REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM. NOTE CTPA ARE INPUT AS NEGATIVE QUANTITIES IN KILOWATTS From Reference 8, constants for Davis Besse's version of CTPA are: QHTRS = 0.0 QMOTR = 6181.0 kw ETA = .80000E+00 Rev 05 From Reference 24, QHTRS = -653.0 Kw 53 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 APPENDIX C -Steam Line Pressure Losses Calculations of the pressure losses between the OTSG outlet nozzles and the pressure transducers are presented herein. Both the outlet pressure transducers and turbine header pressure transducers are considered.

Because steam density is small elevation and momentum pressure changes were ignored.Losses to the Outlet Pressure Transducers SG1-1 to PT SP12B2 From Reference 11, line losses consist of a 26" X 24" reducer, straight pipe, and three long radius elbows (R/D = 1.5 assumed).

The straight pipe length was determined from Reference 11 to be: L = [(12'3-1/16")

-(5'6-5/8")]+cos(406)

+ 10'2-3/16" + 18'0-1/16" + 9' = 46.0 ft From Reference 12, pipe ID = 24.476", friction factor = 0.0115 for the 26" pipe. The flow area = (2r/4)*(24.476/12)2

= 3.2674 ft 2.For the 24" pipe, ID = 22.062".fL/D = 0.0115*46/(24.476/12)

= 0.26 From Reference 13, Diaqram 6-1, form loss for a 90', circular cross section elbow 0.21/(R/D)

0 5 = 0.21/(1.5)U.

= 0.17, For three elbows, K = 3*0.17 = 0.51 From Reference 14, the length of a 26" X 24" reducer = 24" Therefore the expansion angle, 0, = tan 1 {[(24.476-22.062)/2]/24

= 5.740 From Reference 15, the loss factor based on the larger pipe (26") is K = 2.6(sin9/2)(1-f3 2)2/p4 13 = 22.062/24.476

= 0.90 K = 2.6(sin(5.74/2))(1-0.90 2)2/0.9 4 = 0.01 Total form loss = 0.01 + 0.26 + 0.51 = 0.78 based on 3.2674 ft 2 The pressure loss was calculated as: AP = W 2 X(K + fL/D)p A 2 2 gc 54 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 where, W = steam flow rate = 5.92e6 Ibm/hr/per OSTG (Ref. 10)Since there are two 26" lines, W = 2.96e6 Ibm/hr = 822.2 Ibm/s p = 1.788 Ibm/ft 3 (P = 930 psia, T = 596 0 F)A= 3.2674 ft 2 YX(K + fL/D) = 0.78 AP = (822.2)2 Ibm 2/s 2 * 0.78 1.788 Ibm/ft3 * (3.2674)2 ft 4 * 64.4 Ibmft/(Ibf S2) * 144 in 2/ft 2 AP = 3.0 psi SG 1-1 to PT SP12B1 From Reference 11, line losses consist of a 26" X 24" reducer, straight pipe, and three long radius elbows (R/D = 1.5 assumed).

The straight pipe length was determined from Reference 11 to be: L = [(12'3-1/16")

-(5'6-5/8")]-+-cos(40 0) + 13'8-3/16" + 12'2-15/16" + 7' = 41.7 ft Thus, I(K + fL/D) = 0.01 + 0.51 + 0.0115*41.7/(24.476/12)

= 0.76 AP = (822.2)2 Ibm 2/s 2 * 0.76 1.788 Ibm/ft3 * (3.2674)2 ft 4 * 64.4 Ibmft/(Ibf s2) * 144 in 2/ft 2 AP = 2.9 psi SG 1-2 to SP12A2 From Reference 16, the hydraulic characteristics match those from SG 1-1 to SP12B2. Thus, the AP = 3.0 psi.SG 1-2 to SP12A1 From Reference 16, the hydraulic characteristics match those from SG 1-1 to SP12B1. Thus, the AP = 2.9 psi.55 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Losses to the Turbine Header Pressure Transducers SG 1-1 Parallel 26" Lines from OTSG to 36" Tee SP12B2 Side From Reference 11, line losses consist of a 26" X 24" reducer, straight pipe, five long radius elbows (R/D = 1.5 assumed), a 26" X 36" reducer, and a 36"X36" Tee. The straight pipe length was determined from Reference 11 to be: To SP12B2 = 46.0'From SP12B12 = (16'0-1/2"-

9') + 19'6-11/16" + *7'5-1/2" = 34.1'Total Length = 46.0 + 34.1= 80.1'* maximizes AP since part of length is 36" pipe For five elbows, K = 5*0.17 = 0.85 From Reference 14, the length of a 36" X 26" reducer = 24" (based on other reducers)The 36" pipe ID = 33.89" (Ref. 12). A = n/4 * (33.89/12)2

= 6.264 ft 2 Therefore the expansion angle, 0, = tan 1 {[(33.89 -24.476)/2]/24}

=11.10 From Reference 15, the loss factor based on the smaller pipe (26") is K = 2.6(sine/2)(1-

_2)2= 24.476/33.89

= 0.72 K = 2.6(sin(11.1/2))(1-0.72 2)2 = 0.06 For the Tee, Diagram 7-4 of Reference 13, shows for a 50% flow split and Fs/Fc = 1.0, K = 0.77 based on the 36" pipe. Adjusting for the area difference K = 0.77*(3.2674/6.264)2

= 0.21 based on 26" pipe.Y(K + fL/D) = 0.01 + 0.06 + 0.85 + 0.21 + 0.0115"80.1/(24.476/12)

=1.58 based on 3.2674 ft 2 56 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 AP = (822.2)2 Ibm 2/s 2 * 1.58 1.788 Ibm/ft 3 * (3.2674)2 ft 4 * 64.4 Ibmft/(Ibf S 2) * 144 in2/ft 2 AP = 6.0 psi SP12B1 Side From Reference 11, line losses consist of a 26" X 24" reducer, straight pipe, four long radius elbows (RID = 1.5 assumed), a 26" X 36" reducer, and a 36"X36" Tee. The straight pipe length was determined from Reference 11 to be: To SP12B1 = 41.7'From SP12B1 = (20'-7') + *38'3-11/16" = 51.3'* maximizes AP since part of length is 36" pipe Total Length = 41.7 + 51.3 = 93.0'For four elbows, K = 4*0.17 = 0.68 From Reference 14, the length of a 36" X 26" reducer = 24" (based on other reducers)The 36" pipe ID = 33.89" (Ref. 12). A = n/4 * (33.89/12)2

= 6.264 ft 2 Therefore the expansion angle, 0, = tan-1 {[(33.89 -24.476)/2]/24}

=11.10 From Reference 15, the loss factor based on the smaller pipe (26") is K = 2.6(sinO/2)(1-1_

2)2 13 = 24.476/33.89

= 0.72 K = 2.6(sin(11.1/2))(1-0.72 2)2 = 0.06 For the Tee, Diagram 7-4 of Reference 13, shows for a 50% flow split and Fs/Fc = 1.0, K = 0.53 based on the 36" pipe. Adjusting for the area difference K = 0.53*(3.2674/6.264)2

= 0.14 based on 26" pipe.Y(K + fL/D) = 0.01 + 0.06 + 0.68 + 0.14 + 0.0115*93.0/(24.476/12)

=1.41 based on 3.2674 ft 2 57 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 AP = (822.2)2 Ibm 2/s 2 * 1.41 1.788 Ibm/ft3 * (3.2674)2 ft 4 * 64.4 Ibmft/(Ibf s2) * 144 in 2/ft 2 AP = 5.4 psi Since the APs to the common location differ, the flow will not be evenly split.W2/W1 = (1.58/1.41)05

= 1.06 W2 = 1.06W1 Since WI + W2 = 2*822.2, Wi + 1.06*W1 = 2*822.2 W1 = 798.3 Ibm/s AP = (798.3)2 Ibm 2/s 2 * 1.58 1.788 Ibm/ft 3 * (3.2674)2 ft 4 * 64.4 Ibmft/(Ibf S2) * 144 in 2/ft 2 AP = 5.7 psi From Tee to P1109 From References 11 and 17, line losses consist of two check valves, straight pipe, and eight long radius elbows (RID = 1.5 assumed).

The straight pipe length was determined from References 11 and 17 to be: L = 4'7-13/16" + 32'11-1/8" + *36.36' + 9'6" + 104'11" + 64' + 85' + (24'7" -5'1"-4'6") + 50'6" + 5'6" + 18" + 16'4" + (23'11"- 3'9" -12") = 445.3'*Note: 34'11-5/16" of length has a diameter of 33.625" vs. typical 33.89". The equivalent length 34.943*(33.89/33.625)5

= 36.34'For eight elbows, K = 8*0.17 = 1.36 Two check valves = 50L/Ds each (Ref. 12)Area = n/4 * (33.89/12)2

= 6.2643 ft 2 X(K + fL/D) = 1.36 + 0.01075*(445.3

+ 100)/(33.89/12)

= 3.44 based on 6.2643 ft 2 AP = (2*822.2)2 Ibm 2/s 2 * 3.44 1.788 Ibm/ft 3 * (6.2643)2 ft 4 * 64.4 Ibmft/(Ibf s2) * 144 in 2/ft 2 AP = 14.3 psi 58 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Total AP from SG 1-1 to PI 109 = 5.7 + 14.3 = 20.0 psi SG 1-2 From SG 1-2 to Tee AP = 5.7 psi since geometry is the same as SG 1-1 From Tee to P1273 From References 16 and 17, line losses consist of two check valves, straight pipe, two 450 elbows and four 900 long radius elbows (RID = 1.5 assumed).The straight pipe length was determined from References 16 and 17 to be: L = 4'7-3/16" + 32'11-1/8" + *38.42' + 9'6" + 31'11" + 10' + 5'6" + (32'5" -5'1") +50'6" + 5'6" + 18" + 16'4" + (23'11"- 3'9" -12") = 253.2'*Note: 36'11-5/16" of length has a diameter of 33.625" vs. typical 33.89". The equivalent length = 36.943*(33.89/33.625)5

= 38.42'For four 900 elbows, K = 4*0.17 = 0.68 For two 450 elbows, K = 2*0.17*0.9sin(45)

= 0.22 (See Ref. 13, Dia 6-1)Two check valves = 50L/Ds each (Ref. 12)Area = n/4 * (33.89/12)2

= 6.2643 ft 2 Y(K + fL/D) = 0.68 + 0.22 + 0.01075*(253.2

+ 100)/(33.89/12)

= 2.24 based on 6.2643 ft 2 AP = (2*822.2)2 Ibm 2/s 2 * 2.24 1.788 Ibm/ft3 * (6.2643)2 ft 4 * 64.4 Ibmft/(Ibf S2) * 144 in 2/ft 2 AP = 9.3 psi Total AP from SG 1-2 to PI 109 = 5.7 + 9.3 = 15.0 psi 59 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 ATTACHMENT 1 -CALDON Uncertainty Inputs -Telecon with Herb Estrada Note: the values shown in this attachment were superceded by those in Reference 21. The information used herein was the description of how to treat the Caldon "lumped" feedwater flow-temperature uncertainty treatment, rather than the values themselves.

Telecon Memo Date: April 12, 2001 Person calling: Bret Boman, Framatome Technologies Person called: Herb Estrada Subiect: LEFM Interface and Reconciliation Document, Davis Besse, dated 4/12/01 Bret called after having read the subject document.

He understood that the value given for the "AB" term is a bounding value and covers thermal power uncertainties in both mass flow and enthalpy.

However, the analysis that he is preparing for Davis Besse carries these terms separately and he would like to retain this format. I suggested that, in lieu of simply increasing the temperature error from 0.6 OF until the aggregate uncertainty due to mass flow and feedwater enthalpy is 0.31% (the value given for AB in the table), he retain the 0.6 OF error, but treat a portion of it as systematic (to be summed with the mass flow error) and a portion of it as random (to be combined as the root sum square with the mass flow and systematic temperature term). This process in fact represents the nature of the errors. Bret understood and said he will iterate to find the fraction of the temperature related enthalpy error that should be treated as systematic, while treating the remainder randomly, to obtain the same bottom line. I told him I believed the fraction was about 0.3. [I have since calculated the fraction; it is 0.313. That is, the 0.08% should be divided into two parts: a systematic part S = 0.313 x 0.08, which should be summed with the 0.28% mass flow error, and a random part R= (1 -0.313) x 0.08, which should be combined with (0.28 + S) as the root sum square.]I noted that the LEFM uncertainties listed in the subject document do not support an uprate of 1.7%. I said that, if the 1.7% figure is a firm objective, the final LEFM uncertainty analysis will probably support it. This is because the final analysis incorporates the actual profile factor uncertainty, which is usually in the 0.20 to 0.22%range. I also told him it would be good if the analysis submitted to the NRC shows some margin because they are looking for it.60 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 We discussed briefly the methodology of our analysis.

I told him that we followed PTC 19.1. He noted that that document discusses both random errors and biases. I told him that in fact we have both kinds and they are incorporated in AB-no additional random errors should be included.

I told him that to bound time dependent random errors, due both to time measurements and turbulence, the analysis assumes a two minute (minimum)

average of the data.Bret asked, and I confirmed, that we considered the effect of the two (loop) feedwater measurements that will be incorporated at Davis Besse. I said that while a number of terms are reduced by the random combination of the uncertainties in the two loop measurements, these terms are small. Furthermore some of the starting points for time measurement and length errors are a little larger than the analyses of ER 157P because the two Davis Besse pipes are individually smaller than the single 157 pipe.The random combination of these slightly larger errors for two pipes brings the aggregate result to a level equal to or slightly below that in 157. I noted that the biggest LEFM uncertainty-profile factor-is treated as systematic, because both spools are usually calibrated in the same hydraulic model in the same facility, one after the other.I told Bret that I used what I believed to be conservatively accurate values for feed and steam conditions in calculating the Davis Besse numbers. Specifically: " Total feedwater flow: 11.8 million pounds per hour (actual, 12 million)" Steam conditions:

900psia, 590 OF (actual, 900, 596)* Final feed conditions:

(1050 psia, 460 OF (actual -1100, 455)The net effect of all of the above discrepancies is to make the Davis Besse numbers in the subject document very slightly conservative (their effects probably will not show in the bottom line).I told Bret that if he or any of the Framatome people would like to discuss our analysis in detail we would be happy to oblige.Distribution:

Bret Boman, Framatome Technologies Leeanne Jozwiak Ernie Hauser Ed Madera Jenny Regan 61 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 ATTACHMENT 2 -Revised CALDON Flow Uncertainty Values The attached file presents the revised feedwater flow uncertainty for the replacement transducers.

AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 ItCAMERON Measurement Systems Caldonm Ultrasonics Technology Center 1000 McClarsn Woods Drive Coraopolis, PA 15108 Tel: 724-273-9300 Fax: 724-273-9301 WWW.c-a-m.com March 8, 2007 Tim Laurer Nuclear Staff Engineer Davis-Besse NuclearPower Station 5501 North State Route 2 Oak Harbor, OH 43449 Attn: Tim Laurer Telephone Number; 419-321-7764 Reference:

First Energy Nuclear Operation Corp. Order No. 7048503 Cameron Measurement Systems Contract No. CO-22776 Subject: Cameron Measurement Systems Response to Transducer Replacement Sensitivity

Dear Tim,

At the request of the NRC, Cameron conducted transducer replacement testing to create an empirical, statistical evaluation of the uncertainty involved in replacing LEFM ChuckPlus transducers in the field. The results of these tests reveals a spread on the same order as the uncertainty in the testing itself. In addition, uncertainties already accounted for in the analysis could be the source of parts of the spread in the raw results, As a conservative measure, however, Cameron has elected to create a new uncertainty term in all analyses going forward explicitly to address the transducer replacement uncertainty.

The term will actually appear both in the calibration uncertainty and in the installed system uncertainty as it applies to both instances The amount of this uncertainty term for Davis Besse's two 18 inch pipe case Is 0.1%. Applying this term in both calibration and installation uncertainty cases results in a change in overallmass flow uncertainty fiom 0.26% to 0.29%.It is planned that no changes will be backfit to existing analyses, but that all analyses going forward will contain these additional terms, However, as Davis Besse isin the unusual position of having an old analysis being submitted for a new approval, an exception to this plan seems to be required.

Therefore, Cameron proposes to revise Davis Besses analysis to reflect the now terms. We will deliver the revised analysis in 90 days. In the meantime, Cameron will continue with our plans to schedule a general meeting with the NRC to discuss the particulars of the issue and the proposed plan.Please do not hesitate to give me a call if you have any questions.

AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 I I OCAMERON

Sincerely, Measurement Systems Caldon 5 Ultrasonlcs Technology Center 1000 McClaren Woods Drive Coraopolls, PA 15108 Tel: 724-273-9300 Fax: 724-273-9301 www.c-a-m.oom Ed Madera Cameron Measurement Systems St. Project Engineer Ernie Hauser Director of Sales Cameron Measurement Systems (formerly Caldon Inc.)64 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 ATTACHMENT 3 -Davis Besse Instrument Uncertainty Values The attached file presents the basis for the random uncertainty values for steam temperature, steam pressure, and feedwater pressure.65 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 FirstEnTY DaviS-Besse Nudear Power Station 5501 North State Route 2 Oak Harbor, Ohio 43449-9760 PRS-03-00016 April 28, 2003 Mr. Bret Boman Framatome ANP 3315 Old Forest Road PO Box 10935 Lynchburg, VA 24506-0935 Subject: Calculation 32-5012428, Heat Balance Uncertainty

Dear Bret,

In regards to assumption (4) of the subject calculation, please consider the data provided as Attachment 3 to the calculation to be valid input for random uncertainties used for steam temperature

= 0.153 0 F, steam pressure = 1.52 psi and feedwater pressure = 1.35 psi. This data was obtained at steady state, 100% power, at 30 second intervals for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> on August 25, 2000. The plant computer Data Acquisition Display System analyzed this data collection and calculated a standard deviation for these computer points. This process has been reviewed and is considered to be representative of the random error for these instrument strings.Please use the above to provide verification of assumption (4) in the Heat Balance Uncertainty Calculation.

Sincerely, John P. Hartigan, Senior Consultant JPH/sas cc: Nuclear Records Management

AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Caldon Flow Errors Qsec = WFw'(Hstr-HFw)dQsec = dWFw(HStm-HFw) + (WFW'dHstm)

+ (WFW'dHFw)

The instrument string uncertainty was obtained from Instrument data packages and the mean and standard deviation was obtained from data collected on 8/25/00 at a 30 second sample rate for the entire day. Values were calculated by DADS.Mean p481 871.7 Psig p482 880.6 Psig p930 924.4 Psig p935 926.0 Psig t476 589.9 Deg F t477 590.5 Deg F t671 454.8 Deg F t672 455,5 Deg F f673 5853 KPPH f674 5826 KPPH f675 671.3 In I--10 f676 666.6 In H-0 f679 5782 KPPH f680 5810 KPPH f681 655.0 In 1-t20 f682 652.8 In H0 Process Standard Deviation 8p481 := 1.47 Bp482:= 1.52 8 p930:= 1.32 8p935:= 1.35 8t476:= .148 51477:= .153 8t671 .183 5 t672 : .184 8f673 26.7 8-741:= 26.7 5 f675 := 6.18 5f676:= 6.10 5 f679 := 22.7 8,,0:= 23.0 8 f681 5.17 8 f682 5.20 Instrument String Accuracy dp481 :4.38 dp482 :4.38 dp 9 3 0:= 10.6 dp 9 3 5 10.6 dt 4 76:= 4.3 dt 4 7 7 4.3 dt671 =4.32 dt672 =4.32 df6 7 3:= 46.46 df674:= 46.46 df675:= 5.34 df6 7 6 := 5.29 df679:= 46.46 d680 := 46.46 dF68: 1 5.30 df682 :5.28 Total Uncertainty d~p481 : p4812 + do481 2 d~p482 T84= 2/pS + dp482 d8p 9 3 0 -8 p930 + dp932 d~p935 )=[]8 p9352 + dp 9 3 5 2 d~t76 T81162 27 46 d8t 4 7 6 6t472 + dt4762 2 2 d~t671 + dr6 7 1 d~t672 [=Zt6722 + d 1 6 7 2 2 2 d 81672 + d 1 6 7 2 d8f 6 7 4 [82 7+ difi 2 2 d8f 7 5:= 8 75 + d1 7 5 d~f676:= 1 8 f6762 + d67 6 2 2 2 d8f6 7 9 := [8;79 + dr68 7 22 2 d8f 6 g 0 := d~go 2 2 d8 ~g : [8f~lI'+ d,.8 2 2 d 8 f692= -882 + df6g 2 d8p 4 8 1 = 4.62 d8p 4 8 2 = 4.636 d8p 9 3 0 = 10.682 d8p 9 3 5 = 10.686 d81476 = 4.303 d8 1 4 7 7 = 4.303 d81671 = 4.324 d81671 = 4.324 d~f673 = 53.586 d8f 6 7 4 = 53.586 d8f6 7 5 = 8.167 d8f6 7 6 = 8.074 d8f6 7 9 = 51.709 d8-8 0 = 51.841 6 8 1 = 7.404 d8162 = 7.411 Of note, the string accuracy for t476 and t477 are different but the actual hardware is identical.

AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 Feedwater temperature is obtained from T671 and T672 which are physically located in the same thermowell and as such, the temperature at that location and the temperature error are as follows.t671 + t672 tFeed .- t7 tFeed = 455.15 2 2 2 d d6t672 d(tFeed d, t6 I12 d 6 tFeed 4.324 The following Densities were calculated based on International Association for the Properties of Water (lAPS 1984)Pp930tFeed 51.4259 Pp935tFeed 51.4265 Feedwater flow is determined by the following methods PFftd WFeed = C-1 Ped DPFeed PRef Wf681 := 225900. Pp93OtFeed

'f681 Wf 6 8 1 5.778 x 106 5 1.4933 Wf682:= 226300.1 P........ .f682 Wf 6 8 2 = 5.778 x 106 51.4933 Wf675 :=225200.

Pp935tFeed

.4675 Wf 6 7 5 =5.831 x 106 51.4933 Wf676:= 226100- Pp-RFeedf 6 7 6 Wf6 7 6 = 5.834 x 106 F/51..49333 5 1.4933 Wf 6 7 5+ Wf6 7 6 6 WFdI .WFeedd 5.832X t2 2 Wf 6 8 1 + Wf 6 8 2 6 WFeed2 .- 2 WFeed2 5.778x 10 68 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 the following Enthalpies were calculated based on International Association for the Properties of Water (lAPS 1984)HPT Inlet from OTSG 1 HPT Inlet from OTSG 2 hp482t477:=

1252.26 hp 4 81t47 6:= 1252.78 hstl hp4x 2 t47 7 hStm2 hp481t476 hStm = 1252.26 hSt2 = 1252.78 OTSG 1 Inlet OTSG 2 Inlet hp930tFed

= 436.13 hFeedl =hp930tFeed hFedl= 436.13 hp935tFccd

= 436.13 hFd2 ;bp935tFeed hFeced2 = 436.13 The following calculates enthalpy errors for the above parameters.

dh ][II -dp]2 + (-hdti2 8h Ah h(p- 10,t) -h(p+ 10,t)8p Ap 20 dp -pressureuncertainty 8h Ah h(p, t + 5) -h(p, t- 5)at At 10 dt = temperatureuncertainty Ahp 4 82t 4 7 7 := 1(0.1142 d~p 4 8 2)2 + (0.82969,d~t 4 7 7)2 AhStinl := Ahp4X2t477 Ahp481t476:=

I(O. 11389.d~p481)

2 + (0.82506d6 1 4 7 6)2 Ahstm2 := Ahp481t 4 7 6 Ahp 4 82477 = 3.609 Ahstmi = 3.609 Ahp481t476=

3.589 Ahstm 2= 3.589 69 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 AhP930tFeed

= (-0.0005Sdp 9 3 0)' + (1.11835"d8tFeed)

2 AhFecdI := Ahp930tFeed Ahp935tFeed

= ,/(-o.oo05.ds 3)2 + (1.11 833.d8tFeed)

2 AhFeCd2 := Ahp935tFeed Ahp930tFeed

= 4.836 AhFeedl = 4.836 Ahp935tFeed

4.836 AhFeed2 = 4.836 QSec :=WFeedIl(hStmI hFeedl) + W~eed2-(hstm2 hFeedl)Qsec = 9.479X 10'The new CALDON flow sensor will have a Feedwater temperature uncertainty of 0.5 Deg F and the flow sensor will have <0.28% mass flow error dQSec

-HFw)]2+ (WFwdHStm)

2-(WFw-dHFw)

2 dW~wl.28 dWFw.I :=WFeed1" -*2 W~el100 dWFwI = 1.633x 104 8 f673 + 8 f674 3 8WFWI = 2.67x 104 d6WFwI : WFw12 + dWFw12 d8WFw1 = 3.13x 104 28 dWFw 2 WFeed2 '"2 100 dWFw2= 1.618 x 104 51Iw2 5F679 + 5 MO.03 2 8WFw2 = 2.285 x 104 d8WFw2 := 8 WFw22 + dWF, 2 2 dS WFw2 = 2.8xx 104 70 AREVA NP 32-5012428-08 80 = t6712 + 8 t672 dtFw 0.5 +tFw 3 2 dHFwl ] (-o.ooos-dsp 9 3 5)2+ (1.1 1833.dtFw)

2 d~tFw := [8tFw2 + dtFw2 d 8 tFw = 0.533 dHFw2 := ( (-0.0005'dap 9 3 0)2 + (1.1 1835.dtFw)

2 dHFwl = 0.559 dHFw2 = 0.559 dQsecl :-jdWWFwl*(html-h )ed]j2 + (WFeedIAhStml)

2 + (WFeedI "dHFwl)2 dQsel = 3.326x 107 dQSecl ERR, :=1 I00 E = WFeed l'(hStm 1 -hFeedl )I ERRI = 0.699 dQSec2 :[d6WFw2'(hSu2-hFeed2)] + (WFeed2Ah n2)2 + (WFecd2'dHFW2)

2 dQSeC2 3.103x 107 dQSec2 100 ERR 2 WFeed2(hstm2-hFeed2)ERR 2 = 0.658 ERR := ERR 1 2 + ERR 2 2 2 ERR = 0.679 71