JAFP-08-0067, Calculation No. 0800846.302, Revision 0, Comparison of Instrument Nozzle (N16) and Beltline P-T Curves.

Calculation No. 0800846.302, Revision 0, Comparison of Instrument Nozzle (N16) and Beltline P-T Curves.

ML082100457
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	07/22/2008
From:	Gustin H L, Jaeger M J, Stevens G L Structural Integrity Associates
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
10201335, JAFP-08-0067 0800846.302, Rev 0
Download: ML082100457 (20)

Text

Proprietary Information Withhold from Public Disclosure Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)

ATTACHMENT 5 to JAFP-08-0067 Entergy Nuclear James A. FitzPatrick Operations, Inc.Nuclear Power Plant Structural Integrity Associates Calculation No. 0800846.302, Revision 0,"Comparison of Instrument Nozzle (N16) and Beltline P-T Curves," 7/22/2008 Attachments 2, 6, and 8 contain proprietary information as described in 10 CFR 2.390.When separated from these attachments this letter and its contents are non-proprietary.

I Proprietary Information Withhold from Public Disclosure Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)

ATTACHMENT 5 to JAFP-08-0067 CONTENTS 1) SIA Calculation 0800846.302 18 Pages Attachments 2, 6, and 8 contain proprietary information as described in 10 CFR 2.390.When separated from these attachments this letter and its contents are non-proprietary.

Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. File No.: 0800846.302 CALCULATION PACKAGE Project No.: 0800846 PROJECT NAME: JAF Support for NRC RAI's on P-T Curves CONTRACT NO.: 10201335 CLIENT: PLANT: Entergy Nuclear Northeast "James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant CALCULATION TITLE: Comparison of Instrument Nozzle (N 16) and Beltline P-T Curves Document Affected Project Manager Preparer(s)

&D o n afe Revision Description Approval Checker(s)

R iaSignature

& Date Signatures

& Date 0 1 -o 18, Initial Issue g y ./Computer A (/ d.VVV& V Files G.L. Stevens 7/22/2008 M. J. Jaeger 7/22/2008 G. L. Stevens 7/22/2008 T. J. Herrmann for H. L. Gustin 7/22/2008 Page I of 18 F0306-01 RO Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION

....................................................

3 2.0 M E T H O D O L O G Y .......................................................................................................................

3 2.1 A RT and ARTNDT V alues ...............................................................................................

3 2 .2 P -T C urves .............

...........................................

4.................................................................

4 3.0 DESIGN IN PUTS /ASSUM PTION S .....................................................................................

8 3.1 A RT and ARTNDT V alues ..............................................................................................

8 3 .2 P -T C urves ...........................................................................................................................

8 3.3 Polynom ial Stress Coefficients......................................................................................

8 4.0 CALCULATIONS

...................................................

12 4.1 A RT and ARTNDT V alues .............................................................................................

12 4.2 P-TCC u rves ................................................

.......................................................................

12

5.0 CONCLUSION

S...............................................

17 6.0 R E F E R EN C E S ...........................................................................................

................................

18 List of Tables Table I: Polynomial Coefficients

.......................

.........................

9 Table 2: Instrument Nozzle ART Calculations

-32 EFPY .......................................................................

12 Table 3: JAFNPP Instrument Nozzle Curve A for 32 EFPY .........................................

...........................

13 Table 4: JAFNPP Instrument Nozzle Curve B for 32 EFPY .................................................................

14 List of Figures Figure 1: Instrument Nozzle Fracture Mechanics Model [11] ..............................

7 Figure 2: Pressure Stress Curve Fit Com parison ....................

...............................................................

10 Figure 3: Therm al Stress Curve Fit Com parison ....................................................................................

II Figure 4: JAFNPP P-T Curve A Comparison for 32 EFPY ..............................

15 Figure 5: JAFNPP P-T Curve B Comparison for 32 EFPY ................................................................

16 File No.: 0800846.302 Page 2 of 18 Revision:

0 F0306-01 RO Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this calculation is to assess the 2" instrument nozzles (NI6A and N16B) located in the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) from a brittle fracture perspective.

This evaluation is being performed to address questions raised by the NRC about the impact of these nozzles on the recently revised JAFNPP pressure-temperature (P-T) curves [2], due to their proximity to the RPV beltline region. Specifically, since the fluence exposure of these nozzles is greater than lxI017 n/cm 2 during the operating life of the reactor, the NRC has questioned whether the nozzles are bounded by the beltline P-T curves, which are based on the limiting beltline plate material with the highest fluence.2.0 METHODOLOGY The recently revised adjusted reference temperature (ART) calculations, reference temperature shift (ARTNDT) calculations, and P-T curve calculations for JAFNPP are documented in References

[1] and[2]. Those calculations provide most of the necessary input for the work performed herein for the N16 nozzles.In this calculation, ART values are calculated for 32 effective full power years,(EFPY) for the lower intermediate plates at the N 16 nozzle locations, using fluence values provided for these specific locations, and using NRC Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2 methodology

[3]. P-T Curves A (Pressure Test) and B (Normal Operation, Core Not Critical) are calculated for the N 16 nozzles for 32 EFPY of operation, using the fracture mechanics solution shown in Figure 1 [11]. A nozzle corner flaw equal to 1/4-thickness (l/t);of the RPV wall thickness is assumed for all calculations.

The nozzle curves are compared to the 32 EFPY beltline curves developed in Reference

[2] to demonstrate that the previously developed beltline curves are bounding.

The N16 curves are developed consistent with ASME Code,Section XI, Appendix G (2001 Edition including the 2003 Addenda) [4] and IOCFR50, Appendix G [5]methodology, as was done for the previous JAFNPP beltline P-T curves. In addition, methodology consistent with the Pressure-Temperature Limits'Report (PTLR) methodology

[10] is used.2.1 ART and ARTNDT Values The methodology for calculating the ART and ARTNDT values was previously defined in Reference

[I].ART values for the beltline region of the JAFNPP reactor vessel were computed in that document for 32, 40, 48.and 54 EFPY.Based on Reference

[6], the JAFNPP N I6A and NI6B instrument nozzles are located at the 40' (A) and 2200 (B) RPV azimuths, at an elevation of 358 inches above "Vessel 0" (inside surface of RPV bottom head). From Figure 3-2 of Reference

[7], this places the instrument nozzles in the lower-intermediate shell plates of the reactor vessel. From Figure 4-4 and Table 4-1 of Reference

[9], the nozzles are located in the reactor plates with Heat No.'s C3278-2 (A) and C336871 (B).File No.: 0800846.302 Page 3 of 18 Revision:

0 F0306-01 RO VStructural Integrity Associates, Inc.The nozzles consist of a stainless steel pipe welded into the RPV wall with austenitic material [8].Because of the presence of austenitic material, which is inherently ductile and does not possess a brittle fracture concern, the only issue with these nozzles is the stress concentration effect of the nozzle on the RPV base plate itself. Therefore, the ART values for the N 16 instrument nozzles are computed using the same parameters as the lower-intermediate vessel shell plates, except that the fluence values used are determined where the nozzle diameter interfaces with the RPV base metal. While not quite a best-estimate value from an actual nozzle model, TransWare Enterprises Inc. has indicated that the fluence value at this interface is within the uncertainties of the fluence modeling process [12].2.2 P-T Curves P-T curves are computed for the N 16 instrument nozzles for the following plant conditions:

Pressure Test (Curve A) and Normal Operation/Core Not Critical (Curve B). The curves are then compared to the existing beltline P-T curves, which were developed in Reference

[2], to verify that the N16 nozzles are bounded by the beltline limits. Calculations for Normal Operation

-Core Critical (Curve C)conditions are not required, since the Curve C limits are an extension of the Curve B limits.The methodology for calculating P-T curves is described in Reference

[10], and was applied in the Reference

[2] calculation.

Thus, all equations and values in this section are obtained from Reference[10], unless otherwise noted. One exception is the instrument nozzle fracture mechanics solution;although a nozzle solution is provided in Reference

[10], it applies to a different nozzle geometry than that of the instrument nozzles. Therefore, a solution appropriate to the N16 nozzle geometry is applied in this evaluation (Figure 1). The N16 instrument nozzle P-T curves are calculated by means of an iterative procedure that is identical to the procedure specified in Reference

[10] for nozzles, in which the following steps are completed:

Step 1: A fluid temperature, T, is assumed. The P-T curves are calculated under the premise of a flaw that has extended 1/4 of the way through the vessel wall. According to Reference

[10], the temperature at the assumed flaw tip, T 1/4 , is conservatively assumed to be equal to-the RPV fluid temperature.

Step.2: The static fracture toughness, K 1 o, is computed using the following equation: Kk =20.734. eO 02(T-ART)+33.2 (1)where: Kic = the lower-bound static fracture toughness (ksi nch)T = the metal temperature at the tip of the postulated 1/4/ through-wall flaw ('F), as described above ART = the ART value for the RPV plate at the N16 nozzle location (fF)File No.: 0800846.302 Page 4 of 18 Revision:

0 F0306-01 RO Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.Step 3: The allowable stress intensity factor due to pressure, Kip, is calculated as: Klý -Kit Kip -(2)SF Where: Kip = the allowable stress intensity factor due to membrane (pressure) stress ( ksii-nch)Kjc = the lower-bound static fracture toughness factor calculated in Equation I (ksi-i-tnch)

Kit the thermal stress intensity factor inch SF = the safety factor, based on the reactor condition For hydrostatic and leak test conditions (i.e., P-T Curve A), SF = 1.5. For normal operation (i.e., P-T curve B), SF = 2.0. For Curve A, the thermal stress intensity factor is neglected (Kit= 0), since the hydrostatic leak test is performed at or near isothermal conditions (typically, the rate of temperature change is 25°F/hr or less).For Curve B, Kit is obtained from the stress distribution output of a finite element model (FEM), in a similar fashion to the feedwater nozzle / upper vesseliregion discussed in Reference[10].

A thermal transient finite element analysis (FEA)'is performed, and a polynomial curve-fit is developed for the through-wall stress distribution at each time point of the bounding thermal transient.

The subsequent equation to evaluate Kit is [11]: 2a a 4a 3 Kht Poly It 20.723C t + '0.551C~t 0.462C2t + 0.408C3 (3)where: a 1/4 through-wall postulated flaw depth, a = / t of cross section evaluated (in.)Ct,Ct, ---thermal stress polynomial coefficients, obtained from a curve-fit of C2t,C3t .the extracted stresses from an FEM thermal transient analysis.The thermal stress polynomial coefficients are based on 'the assumed polynomial form of or(x)=CO +C1 *x+C 2 .x 2 + C 3

• xa, where "x" represents the distance in inches from the inside Surface to any point on the crack front along the nozzle cross section (see Figure 1).The transient FEA is performed to determine the maximum thermal stress that occurs during the limiting normal/upset thermal transient applicable to the N16 nozzle. Thus, the value of Kit calculated in Equation 3 represents the maximum thermal stress for the limiting thermal transient and is conservatively used for all points in the P-T curve calculations.

File No.: 0800846.302 Page 5 of 18 Revision:

0 F0306-01 RO Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.Step 4: For the instrument nozzle, the allowable pressure is determined from a ratio of the allowable and applied stress intensity factors. The applied factor can be determined from an FEM that outputs the stresses due to the internal pressure on the nozzle / RPV. The methodology for this approach is as follows: K , p * -Prf (4)K Ip-app where: Pallow -the allowable RPV internal pressure (psig)Pref RPV internal pressure at which the finite element analysis was performed (psig)Kip = the allowable stress intensity factor due to membrane (pressure) stress, as defined in Equation 2 (ksii-nch-)

Kip-app = the applied pressure stress intensity factor (ksii-nch)

The applied pressure stress intensity factor is determined using a polynomial curve-fit approximation for the through-wall pressure stress distribution from an FEA, similar to the methodology of Equation 3: 2aa 4a 3 Kip-app p0.723Cp + 0.551Cip + 2. 0"462C2p + .0.408C 3 p (5)Where: a = 1/ through-wall postulated flaw depth, a = 1/4 t of cross section evaluated (in.)COp,CIp, = pressure stress polynomial coefficients, obtained from a curve-fit C 2 p,C 3 p of the extracted stresses from an FEM unit pressure analysis Step 5: The final P-T limits are calculated using the following equations:

Tp_r = T + UT (6)P-T = Pallow -PH -UP (7)where: T = the metal temperature at the tip of the postulated 1/4/ through-wall flaw ('F)Tp-T = the allowable coolant (metal surface) temperature

('F)UT = the coolant temperature instrument uncertainty

(°F)PP-T = the allowable reactor pressure (psig)PH = the pressure head to account for the water in the RPV (psig), calculated as, PH, = p- Ah= 29.8 psig (same as Reference

[2])p = water weight density at ambient temperature (Ibm/ft 3)Ah = elevation of normal water level in RPV (in.)Up = the pressure instrument uncertainty (psig)File No.: 0800846.302 Page 6 of 18 Revision:

0 F0306-01 RO V Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.Step 6: The fluid temperature (T) is incremented, and the calculations resume from Step 1.Calculations proceed in this iterative manner until the allowable reactor pressure (PP-T)exceeds the maximum possible operating pressure.

The maximum pressure is usually set to 1,600 psig, since this value bounds the typical pre-service ASME Code hydrostatic test pressure of 1,563 psig.FUN 10 -QUARTER-CIRCULAR CRACK IN QUARTER-SPACE K 1 a [0.723 A 0 + 0,551 (-O) A + 4 ) A 2 + 4a 3A- 2A2 2 0.408-'W.-)

A 3 I Figure 1: Instrument Nozzle Fracture Mechanics Model [111 File No.: 0800846.302 Revision:

0 Page 7 of 18 F0306-01 RO Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.3.0 DESIGN INPUTS / ASSUMPTIONS 3.1 ART and ARTNDT Values As discussed in Section 2. 1, the JAFNPP N 16 instrument nozzles are located in the lower-intermediate shell plates of the reactor vessel. ART values for these plates were previously generated in Reference[I ] for the point of maximum fluence. ART values for the instrument nozzles are therefore computed using parameters identical to the vessel plates, except that the fluence is chan'ged to reflect the level at the N 16 nozzle locations.

The fluence values at the instrument nozzle locations are provided in Reference

[ 12].3.2 P-T Curves The latest JAFNPP P-T curves are documented in Reference

[2]. Curves were computed for the beltline, bottom head, and upper vessel / feedwater nozzle regions for 32, 40, 48 and 54 EFPY. Unless explicitly stated below, inputs for the instrument nozzle P-T curves were obtained from the previous P-T curves.The beltline comparison curves for 32 EFPY are obtained directly from Reference

[2].ART values for the instrument nozzles are calculated at 32 EFPY in Section 4.1. The polynomial coefficients needed for Equations 3 and 5 are calculated in Section 3.3, based on the stress distributions obtained from the FEA output files of Reference

[13]. The pressure and temperature instrument uncertainties are taken as 0 psig and 0°F, respectively, which mirrors the assumptions of Reference

[2].3.3 Polynomial Stress Coefficients The pressure and thermal stress analyses performed in Reference

[13] generated a series of nozzle corner stress distributions for use in the fracture mechanics model in Figure 1. Since the maximum pressure stress occurred at a different location than the maximum thermal stress, the stress distributions were reported for two paths, as shown in Figures 9 and 10 of Reference

[13].The pressure stress distributions for Paths I and 2 are fit with a third-order polynomial equation.

Stress intensity factors were calculated for the pressure stress coefficients using Equation 5. A maximum pressure stress intensity factor of 60.266 ksi inch was calculated from the Path 2 coefficients; this value will be used in the ensuing P-T curve calculations.

The curve fit for the limiting Path 2 stress history is shown in Figure 2, and the polynomial coefficients are provided in Table 1. Note that although the polynomial fit does not adequately represent the entire stress distribution, the correlation is satisfactory at the 'At location of interest (approximately 1.8 inches into the RPV wall).File No.: 0800846.302 Page 8 of 18 Revision:

0 F0306-01 RO Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.Thermal stress analyses were performed for two separate transients in Reference

[13]: (1) the Loss of Feedwater Pumps (LOFP) event, and (2) the Safety Relief Valve (SRV) Blowdown event. Each analysis resulted in a number of stress distributions, one for each time step that was evaluated.

The minimum temperature during an LOFP transient is 300'F, as shown in Table 6 of Reference

[13], whereas an SRV Blowdown event transitions from rated temperature to ambient temperature.

Since the temperature range of interest for the P-T curves is well below 300'F, it is assumed that only the SRV Blowdown transient is applicable for thermal stress intensity factor calculations.

This assumption is justified in the P-T curve calculations in Section 4.2.The SRV Blowdown stress distributions for Paths I and 2 are each fit with a third-order polynomial equation, and thermal: stress intensity factors were calculated for each set of polynomial coefficients using Equation 3. Using this approach, a maximum stress intensity factor of 28.345 ksiinch was calculated at a time of 670 seconds for the SRV Blowdown event. The curve fit for this limiting time step is plotted in Figure 3. The thermal stress polynomial fit does not adequately represent the overall stress distribution; consequently, the cO coefficient was adjusted to ensure an accurate representation of the stress at the '4 t location of interest (approximately 1.8 inches into the RPV wall). The adjusted polynomial coefficients, which are provided in Table 1, result in a thermal stress intensity factor of 33.541 ksii-nch ; this value will be used in the ensuing P-T curve calculations.

Table 1: Polynomial Coefficients Instrument Nozzle Pressure Stress Coefficients Kip.applied,'

cO -c1 c2 c3 (psi*inchY 2)42,980.0 -18,287.7 12,187.9 -3,207.1 60,266 instru~ment"Nozzle Thermal Stress C~oefficients,, Kt COcl c2 c3 ,(psi*inclI 2)52,575.0 -29,139.5

-26,085.1 13,818.1 33,541 File No.: 0800846.302 Revision:

0 Page 9 of 18 F0306-01 RO V Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.Pressure Stress -Curve Fit Comparison 0.0)I-4.Co 50000 45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 Stress CurveFit 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Position in Wall (inches)Figure 2: Pressure Stress Curve Fit Comparison File No.: 0800846.302 Revision:

0 Page !0 of 18 F0306-01 RO V Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.Thermal Stress -Curve Fit Comparison U)0)I-60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0-10000 Stress CurveFit Position in Wall (inches)Figure 3: Thermal Stress Curve Fit Comparison File No.: 0800846.302 Revision:

0 Page I I of 18 F0306-01 RO V Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.4.0 CALCULATIONS 4.1 ART and ARTNDT Values ART values are determined at 32 EFPY for the two JAFNPP N 16 instrument nozzles, using the methodology discussed in Section 2.1 and a fluence of4.6x 1017 n/cm 2 at 32 EFPY per Reference

[12].The resulting calculations are provided in Table 2. The N 16A instrument nozzle, located in the lower-intermediate plate #2 (C3278-2), has the limiting ART value of 31.8'F at 32 EFPY.Table 2: Instrument Nozzle ART Calculations

-32 EFPY I , ."- -_-. ý I I ~ I ~ I I I Nozzle N16A 5.375 1.344 4.60E+17 0.724 3.332E+17 4.2 P-T Curves For the Curve A calculations, the minimum bolt-up temperature of 60'F [2] is applied to the instrument nozzle as the initial temperature in the iterative calculation process. The P-T curve points are calculated using the methodology in Section 2.2, and the data at 32 EFPY is provided in tabular form in Table 3.Figure 4 is a graphical comparison of the Curve A plots for the instrument nozzle and the RPV beltline.For the Curve B calculations, the initial temperature is again set equal to the minimum bolt-up temperature of 60'F. Since the temperature range of interest does not exceed 300'F, the LOFP transient is not applicable, and the maximum SRV Blowdown thermal stress intensity listed in Table I is applicable over the entire temperature range. The 32 EFPY data is presented in tabular form in Table 4, and compared graphically to the beltline region Curve B in Figure 5.The purpose of this document is only to demonstrate that the beltline locations are limiting compared to the instrument nozzles; this does not require development of a full set of P-T curves. Based on the discussion in the first paragraph of Section 2.2, demonstrating that the beltline region is limiting for Curve B inherently demonstrates the same for Curve C.File No.: 0800846.302 Revision:

0 Page 12 of 18 F0306-01 RO V Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.Table 3: JAFNPP Instrument Nozzle Curve A for 32 EFPY Plant = Fitzpatrick Component Instrument Nozzle ART =Vessel Radius, R =Nozzle corner thickness, t =Kit =Kip-applied

=Crack Depth, a =Safety factor =Temperature Adjustment

=Height of Water for a Full Vessel =Pressure Adjustment

=Pressure Adjustment

=Reference Pressure Unit Pressure =Gauge Fluid Temperature (6F)60.0 60.0 62.0 64.0 66.0 68.0 70.0 72.0 74.0 76.0 78.0 80.0 82.0 84.0 86.0 88.0 90.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 98.0 100.0 102.0 104.0 106.0 108.0 110.0 112.0 114.0 116.0 118.0 31.80 110.38 7.15 0.00 60.27 1.79.1.50*0.00 '825.20 29.80 0.00 1,000 1,563 Klý(ksi*inchl 1)69.64 69.64 71.13 72.68 74.29 75.97 77.71 79.53 81.42 83.39 85.44 87.57..89.79 92.10 94.50 97.00 99.61 102.32 105.14 108.07 111.13 114.31 117.62 121.06 124.65 128.38 132.26 136.31 140.52 144.90 149.45'F ======> All EPFY inches inches, approximate ksi*inch"z ksi*inch inches*F (applied after bolt-up, instrument uncertainty) inches psig (hydrostatic pressure head for a full vessel at 70oF)psig (instrument uncertainty) psig (pressure at which FEA stress coefficients aire valid)psig (hydrostatic pressure)Kip (ksi*inch 1/)46.43 46.43 47.42 48.45 49.53 50.64 51.81 53.02 54.28 55.59 56.96 58.38 59.86 61.40 63.00 64.67 66.40 68.21 70.09 72.05 74.08 76.20 78.41 80.71 83.10 85.59 88.18 90.87 93.68 96.60 99.64 Temperature for P-T C urve (0F)60.0 60.0 62.0 64.0 66.0 68.0 70.0 72.0 74.0 76.0 78.0 80.0 82.0 84.0 86.0 88.0 90.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 98.0 100.0 102.0 104.0 106.0 108.0 110.0 112.0 114.0 116.0 118.0 Adjusted Pressure for P-T Curve (psig)0 741 757 774 792 811 830 850 871 893 915 939 963 989 1,016 1,043 1,072 1,102 1,133 1,166 1,199 1,235 1,271, 1,309 1,349 1,390 1,433 1,478 1,525 1,573 1,623 File No.: 0800846.302 Revision:

0 Page 13 of 18 F0306-01 RO Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.Table 4: JAFNPP Instrument Nozzle Curve B for 32 EFPY Plant = F -a k Component

= Instrument Nozzle ART =Vessel Radius, R =Nozzle corner thickness, t =Kit =Kip-applied

=Crack Depth, a =Safety factor =Temperature Adjustment

=Height of Water for a Full Vessel =Pressure Adjustment

=Pressure Adjustment

=Reference Pressure =Unit Pressure =31.80 110.38 33.54 60.27 1.79~2.00Iý-ý825 .20 29ý.801 0.00"'.1,000 0 F ======> All EPFY inches inches, approximate ksi*inch,, ksi*inch inches'F (applied after bolt-up, instrument uncertainty) inches psig (hydrostatic pressure head for a full vessel at 70°F)psig (instrument uncertainty) psig (pressure at which FEA stress coefficients are valid)psig (hydrostatic pressure)1__ ,§63 Gauge Fluid Temperature (6F)60.0 60.0 62.0 64.0 66.0 68.0 70.0 72.0 74.0 76.0 78.0 80.0 82.0 84.0 86.0 88.0 90.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 98.0 100.0 102.0 104.0 106.0 108.0 110.0 112.0 114.0 116.0 118.0 120.0 122.0 124.0 126.0 128.0 130.0 Klc (ksi*inchl/l) 69.64 69.64 71.13 72.68 74.29 75.97 77.71 79.53 81.42 83.39 85.44 87.57 89.79 92.10 94.50 97.00 99.61 102.32 105.14 108.07 111.13 114.31 117.62 121.06 124.65 128.38 132.26 136.31 140.52 144.90 149.45 154.20 159.14 164.28 169.62 175.19 180.99 Kip (ksi*inchl1 2)24.07 24.07 25.06 26.09 27.17 28.28 29.45 30.66 31.92 33.23 34.60 36.02 37.50 39.04 40.64 42.31 44.04 45.85 47.73 49.69 51.72 53.84 56.05 58.3S5 60.74 63.23 65.82 68.51 71.32 74.24 77.28 80.44 83.73 87.16 90.72 94.43 98.30 Temperature for P-T C urve 60F)60.0 60.0 62.0 64.0 66.0 68.0 70.0 72.0 74.0 76.0 78.0 80.0 82.0 84.0 86.0 88.0 90.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 98.0 100.0 102.0 104.0 106.0 108.0 110.0 112.0 114.0 116.0 118.0 120.0 122.0 124.0 126.0 128.0 130.0 Adjusted Pressure for P-T Curve (psigl)0*370 386 403 421 440 459 479 500 522 544 568 592 618 645 672 701 731 762 795 828 864 900 938 978 1,019 1,062 1,107 1,154 1,202 1,252 1,305 1,360 1,416 1,476 1,537 1,601 File No.: 0800846.302 Revision:

0 Page 14 of 18 F0306-01 RO Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.Fitzpatrick Pressure Test (Curve A), 32 EFPY 1,600 1,500 1,400 1,300-S1,200 C 1,100 4 LU x w S91,000 0 C..LLI 7n 900 u)uJ>X, 800 0 1-600 U' 500 Cn I11 400 IX a._---I P i I H----- ------020 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 MINIMUM REACTOR VESSEL METAL TEMPERATURE (OF)300 200 100 0 C1 Figure 4: JAFNPP P-T Curve A Comparison for 32 EFPY File No.: 0800846.302 Revision:

0 Page 15 of 18 F0306-01 RO Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.Fitzpatrick Normal Operation

-Core Not Critical (Curve B), 32 EFPY 1,600 1,500 1,400 1,300 1,200 a.1,100 LU x 0. 1,000 0 I-LU in 900 U)LU Ir 800 0< 700 i, 600 LU 500 w 400 a.- 1- 1-- I- P- --rUH~---I-I I I II I I F-L]i I ! i I I ] I I [ ,I ! ! ! i i I I.I--

I-I--E-I-I

-- t-I/_-ff-/T FE A I I OF H i I I I I I A 300 200 100 0 Bolt-up Temp 1 60-F-Th I !-I- i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 F F E Beltline Region-Instrument Nozzle I l l ! ! I I ' l I iI I ]I-I- 4 1 1 -0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 MINIMUM REACTOR VESSEL METAL TEMPERATURE (fF)Figure 5: JAFNPP P-T Curve B Comparison for 32 EFPY File No.: 0800846.302 Revision:

0 Page 16 of 18 F0306-01 RO R Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.

5.0 CONCLUSION

S A-In this calculation, the JAFNPP RPV 2" instrument nozzles (N 16A and N 16B) have been evaluated from a brittle fracture perspective.

This evaluation was performed to address questions raised by the NRC about the impact of these nozzles on the recently revised JAFNPP P-T curves, due to their proximity to the RPV beltline region. Specifically, since the fluence exposure of these nozzles is greater than IXI017 n/cm 2 during the operating life of the reactor, the NRC has questioned whether the nozzles are bounded by the beltline P-T curves, which are based on the limiting beltline plate material with the highest fluence.Figure 4 and Figure 5 demonstrate that the N 16 nozzles arebounded by the beltline P-T limits previously established for JAFNPP in Reference

[2]. Therefore, the Reference

[2] P-T curves remain valid and bound the N 16 nozzles through 32 EFPY of operation.

File No.: 0800846.302 Revision:

0 Page 17 of 18 F0306-01 RO Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.

6.0 REFERENCES

I. Structural Integrity Associates Calculation No. FITZ-I OQ-301, Revision 0, "Evaluation of Adjusted Reference Temperatures and Reference Temperature Shifts," February 2008.2. Structural Integrity Associates Calculation No. FITZ-IOQ-302, Revision 0, "Revised Pressure-Temperature Curves," February 2008.3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, "Radiation Embrittlement of Reactor Vessel Materials," May 1988.4. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section Xl, Rules for In-Service Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components, 2001 Edition including the 2003 Addenda.5. Part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Appendix G, "Fracture Toughness Requirements," January 2005.6. Entergy Drawing No. 5.01-15, Revision 6 (GE Drawing No. 919D690BD, Sheet 1), "Reactor Vessel," SI File No. 0800846.203.

7. TransWare Enterprises Report No. ENT-FLU-002-R-005, Revision 0, "Non-Proprietary Version of James A. Fitzpatrick Reactor Pressure Vessel Fluence Evaluation at End of Cycle 17 and 54 EFPY," October 2007, SI File No. FITZ-10Q-201.

8. Combustion Engineering Book No. 21566, "FitzPatrick Reactor Vessel Instruction Manual," July 1971 (GE APED Vendor Print Package No. 1980-305-2, dated 8-13-71), S1 File No.0800846.205.

9. Structural Integrity Associates Report No. SIR-98-078, Revision 0, "Review and Summary of Fabrication Records and Material Properties for Use in Section XI Appendix A Flaw Evaluation James A. FitzPatrick Reactor Vessel," October 1998, St File No. NYPA-59Q-401.

10. Structural Integrity Associates Report No. SIR-05-044-A, Revision 0, "Pressure-Temperature Limits Report Methodology for Boiling Water Reactors," April 2007, S1 File No. GE-IOQ-401.

11. S. A. Delvin and P. C. Riccardella, "Fracture Mechanics Analysis of JAERI Model Pressure Vessel Test," ASME, 78-PVP-91, New York, April 5, 1978 (originally presented at the joint ASME/CSME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, Montreal, Canada, June 25-30, 1978).12. TransWare Enterprises Report No. ENT-FLU-002-R-006, Revision 0, "James A. Fitzpatrick Reactor Pressure Vessel Nozzle Fluence Prediction at 32 EFPY," July 2008, S1 File No.0800846.204.

13. Structural Integrity Associates Calculation No. 0800846.301, Revision 0, "2" Instrument Nozzle Stress Analysis," July 2008.File No.: 0800846.302 Page 18 of 18 Revision:

0 F0306-01 RO