ML081010197

Piping Flow Induced Vibration Monitoring Program

ML081010197
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	03/31/2008
From:	Nuclear Management Co
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L-MT-08-018, TAC MD5531
Download: ML081010197 (23)

Text

Enclosure 10 to L-MT-08-018 Piping Flow Induced Vibration Monitoring Program

Enclosure 10 Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................................... i Table of Tables ........................................ ......................................................... ii Acronym s and Abbreviations ............................................................................... iii

1. Introduction ................................................................................................. 1

2. Susceptibility and Monitoring .................................................................... 3

3. Rem ote Monitoring Program .................................................................... 4 3.1. Inside the Drywell Monitoring Inform ation ........................................... 4 3.2. Outside the Drywell Monitoring Inform ation ........................................ 4 3.3. Piping Vibration Acceptance Criteria ................................................. 4 3.3.1. Methodology ............................................................................... 4 3.3.2. Calculation .................................................................................. 5 3.4. Piping Vibration Data at CLTP... ........................................................ 6

4. Vibration Monitoring Program Results ....................................................... 7 4.1. Data Acquisition Param eters ............................................................. 7 4.2. Data Reduction Methodology ............................................................ 7 4.2.1. Drywell ........................................................................................ 7 4.2.2. Steam Tunnel ........................................................................... 10 4.2.3. Turbine Building ........................................................................ 12 4.3. Results for All Accelerom eters .......................................................... 14 4.4. Projected Results for EPU ................................................................ 14

5. References .............................................................................................. 16 i.

Enclosure 10 Table of Tables Table 3-1: Maximum Stresses and Adjustment Factors for Various Piping Segm ents at C LT P ....................................................................... 5 Table 4-1: Drywell Accelerometer Locations .................................................... 8 Table 4-2: Drywell Piping Accelerometer Data Comparison for CLTP ............ 9 Table 4-3: Steam Tunnel Accelerometer Channels and Locations ................ 11 Table 4-4: Steam Tunnel Piping Accelerometer Data Comparison for CLTP .... 12 Table 4-5: Turbine Building Accelerometer Channels and Locations ............. 13 Table 4-6: Turbine Building Piping Accelerometer Data Comparison for CLTP. 13 ii

Enclosure 10 Acronyms and Abbreviations No. Short Form Description 1 ALARA As Low As Reasonably Achievable (radiation dose concern) 2 ARS Amplified Response, Spectrum 3 ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers 4 BWR Boiling Water Reactor 5 BWROG Boiling Water Reactor Owners' Group 6 CLTP Current Licensed Thermal Power 7 CPPU Constant Pressure Power Uprate 8 EPU Extended Power Uprate 9 FFT Fast Fourier Transform 10 FIV Flow Induced Vibration 11 FW Feedwater 12 LTR Licensing Topical Report 13 MNGP Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant 14 MS Main Steam 15 MSIV Main Steam Isolation Valve 16 MSL Main Steam Line 17 OE Operating Experience 18 RMS Root Mean Squared 19 SRSS Square Root Sum of the Squares 20 SRV Safety/Relief Valve 21 TSV Turbine Stop Valve iii

Enclosure 10

1. Introduction Sections 2.2.2 and 2.5.4.1 of Enclosure 5 to the Extended Power Uprate (EPU) submittal briefly discuss the EPU effects upon Flow Induced Vibration (FIV) for the Main Steam (MS) System and the Feedwater (FW) System. This Enclosure to the submittal provides a more detailed discussion of the analyses and testing program undertaken to provide assurance that unacceptable FIV issues are not experienced at Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP) due to EPU implementation.

Increased flow rates and flow velocities during operation at EPU conditions are expected to produce increased FIV levels in some systems. As discussed in Section 3.4.1 of Licensing Topical Report (LTR) NEDC-33004P-A, Revision 4, "Constant Pressure Power Uprate," the MS and FW piping vibration levels should be monitored because their system flow rates will be significantly increased (Reference 4). While a review of industry EPU operating experience identified very few component failures that can be attributed to EPU, most of these failures were related to FIV.

In January 2007, the Boiling Water Reactor Owners' Group (BWROG) issued NEDO-33159, Revision 1, "Extended Power Uprate (EPU) Lessons Learned and Recommendations" based on operating experience (OE) and evaluations from Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) plants that have previously implemented EPUs and from plants currently performing pre-EPU evaluations (Reference 1).

NEDO-33159 states:

"Since the majority of EPU-related component failures involve flow induced vibration, the BWROG EPU Committee held a vibration monitoring and evaluation information exchange meeting of industry experts in June 2004. The committee determined that the current process of monitoring large bore piping systems in accordance with the requirements of ASME O&M Part 3 is sufficient to preclude challenges to safe shutdown. Increases in large bore piping vibration levels are a precursor to increased vibration levels in attached small bore piping and components."

During Monticello's 23rd refueling outage, in 2007, a vibration monitoring program was implemented to support the MNGP Extended Power Uprate Project. Piping systems both inside and outside the drywell are being monitored using accelerometers. Monitoring occurs inside the drywell, turbine building and steam tunnel. The following piping is being monitored for vibration to establish baseline data prior to uprate and to ensure that the vibration levels of the selected piping systems are within acceptable limits during operation at EPU conditions:

Main Steam (Drywell and Turbine Building)

Feedwater (Drywell and Turbine Building)

Page 1 of 16

Enclosure 10 The current results of the EPU Vibration Monitoring Program indicate no abnormal vibration levels exist within the MS and FW systems. Continued vibration monitoring of these systems during EPU power ascension will be performed. The same acceptance criteria established at CLTP will be applied to ensure that potential effects of flow induced vibration are captured under EPU conditions.

Page 2 of 16

Enclosure 10

2. Susceptibility and Monitoring The MS System piping and the FW System piping will have higher mass flow rates and flow velocities under EPU conditions. When power is increased from CLTP to EPU conditions, steady state FIV levels are expected to be approximately proportional to the mass flow rate squared. Thus, the vibration levels of the MS and the FW system piping are expected to increase by approximately 32% based upon a steam flow increase of 14.8%. Hence, a startup vibration monitoring program using accelerometers mounted on representative portions of the MS and FW piping located inside the containment will be required during the initial implementation of EPU.

In addition, the accessible large bore MS and FW piping outside of containment will be monitored by performing visual observations and by taking vibration measurements using hand-held vibration instruments during walkdowns of this piping. These walkdowns will be performed during initial plant operation at the EPU conditions. MS and FW piping outside of containment that is inaccessible to plant personnel when the plant is at high power levels required the installation of remote vibration monitoring sensors (completed in 2007).

Small bore piping attached to the MS and FW systems is susceptible to the effects of FIV. As stated in Section 1, the small bore piping will be evaluated as a function of the large bore piping FIV results. If the vibration level in the main piping in these systems is greater than 50% of the acceptance criteria, then an engineering evaluation of the small bore piping will be performed to ensure that the steady state stresses are within the endurance limit.

Page 3 of 16

Enclosure 10

3. Remote Monitoring Program During the spring 2007 Monticello refueling outage, accelerometers were installed on the MS and FW piping (and selected components) inside and outside of the drywell to monitor the steady state vibration levels. The purpose of collecting this data was to determine the baseline vibration levels in these systems in support of planned operation at EPU conditions. The steady state vibration levels of these two systems may increase due to EPU operating conditions. The collection of baseline data enables extrapolations to EPU operating conditions for steady state vibration levels. Data was collected at several power levels during power ascension following the outage.

3.1. Inside the Drywell Monitoring Information The MS and FW systems are to be monitored because of their significant increases in flow to achieve increases in thermal power. The current scope monitors 16 piping locations using 39 accelerometers and three components using nine accelerometers (see Table 4-1 for locations). A modal analysis was performed on the as-modeled piping system to determine natural frequencies and mode shapes. The accelerometer locations were determined based on a review of the mode shapes. The accelerometer locations correspond to node points with high-calculated modal displacements.

3.2. Outside the Drywell Monitoring Information 50 accelerometers at 21 locations are being monitored in the steam tunnel and turbine building (see Tables 4-3 and 4-5 for locations). Similar to the drywell accelerometers, the locations and number of accelerometers in the steam tunnel and turbine building were determined based on performing modal analyses of the MS and FW piping systems.

3.3. Piping Vibration Acceptance Criteria 3.3.1. Methodology Determination of the acceptance criteria is based on the guidance of ASME OM-S/G Part 3 (OM-3) (Reference 2). The methodology provides a pass/fail mechanism for the piping system such that, if the values are met, no further justification of the measured vibration levels is required.

Page 4 of 16

Enclosure 10 3.3.2. Calculation Detailed models of the MS and FW piping systems were developed for this evaluation. A 1g broad-band amplified response spectrum (ARS) was applied up to 250 Hz in each of the three orthogonal directions. Static loads, such as weight and thermal expansion, are not considered since these loads do not contribute to cyclic loading of the piping system. Additionally, seismic (inertia and anchor movements) and turbine stop valve loads are not considered, since these loads are transient dynamic loads that do not contribute to the steady-state cyclic loading of the system.

The results of the piping analysis are provided in terms of accelerations, displacements, and stresses at each node. The overall values at each node were obtained by combining the results for all three orthogonal directions using the SRSS method. Adjustment factors (calculated using maximum stress values and the guidance of ASME O&M-S/G Part 3) and maximum stress values (from the piping analysis) for each of these segments are presented in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1: Maximum Stresses and Adjustment Factors for Various Piping Segments at CLTP Inside Containment Outside Containment Name Maximum Adjustment Reference Maximum Adjustment Reference Stress (psi) Factor Stress (psi) Factor A 13,929 0.552 PSIA Max MS B 24,461 0.314 PS2A Max 1,0 .6 SI a C 18,484 0.416 PS3A Max D 11,899 0.646 PS4A Max A 21,633 0.356 FMMSIA Node 364 FW 69,452 0.111 FWSIA Node 201 B 14,536 0.529 FWSIA Node 1 6 1 Page 5 of 16

Enclosure 10 The acceptance criteria are then calculated by multiplying the accelerations and displacements by the adjustment factors in Table 1. Sample calculations at Node 25 on the FW-B drywell piping are provided below:

Ax= acalculated

• Fadjust = 0.776g

• 0.529 = 0.410g Ay= acalculated

• Fadjust = 1.664g

• 0.529 = 0.881g Az= acalculated

• Fadjust = 1.332g

• 0.529 = 0.705g Dx = dcalculated

• Fadjust = 0.884in

• 0.529 = 0.468in Dy= calculated

• Fadjust = 2.219in

• 0.529 = 1.174in z= dcalculated

• Fadjust = 2.752in

• 0.529 = 1.456in 3.4. Piping Vibration Data at CLTP Baseline vibration data was obtained following the spring 2007 refueling outage, using three Structural TMIntegrity Associates TM Versatile Data Acquisition Systems (SI-VersaDASTM). One SI-VersaDAS was used to monitor the drywell accelerometers, and the other two units monitored the steam tunnel and turbine building accelerometers independently. The data was processed as described in Section 4.2. The processed data at 100% CLTP reactor power was then compared to the calculated acceptance criteria. This comparison is provided in tabular form in Section 4.

Page 6 of 16

Enclosure 10

4. Vibration Monitoring Program Results 4.1. Data Acquisition Parameters The accelerometer data (time histories) was recorded on an SI-VersaDASTM.

Each data set was recorded using a sample rate of 2500 samples per second (sps) for the duration of 2 minutes. The data is time stamped for comparison to plant process data. Data from the Drywell and Steam Tunnel are synchronized to each other as well.

4.2. Data Reduction Methodology The accelerometer time histories were first filtered using a Chebyshev bandpass filter (data from 2-250 Hz was allowed to pass). Once the signal was bandpass filtered, each time history was converted from the time domain to the frequency domain (frequency spectra) using a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) algorithm within MATLAB (Reference 3). An FFT was generated for each group and then all FFT groups were summed together, and divided by the number of groups to provide linearly averaged frequency spectra. Plots for each averaged frequency spectrum (amplitude, g-RMS versus frequency, Hz) were generated for each channel.

4.2.1. Drywell Of the 48 accelerometer channels, seven are located on FW loop A, five on FW loop B, ten on main steam line (MSL) A, five on MSL B, five on MSL C, seven on MSL D, six on SRVs, and three on MSIVs. The channel number versus accelerometer location is summarized in Table 4-1. The piping accelerations versus allowable values are provided Table 4-2. The analysis of the data was done using MATLAB, and the results are summarized below:

• In all cases, the magnitude of the vibration is low. The RMS magnitudes are generally below 0.06 g with the exception of channels 14, 23, and 24 having magnitudes residing below 0.09 g, which is considered low steady state vibration levels.

• At 100% reactor power MS A, MS B, and SRV showed consistent low magnitude vibration in the 2-50 Hz range. Similarly MSIV shows a low magnitude vibration at approximately 128 Hz.

• Channel 14 experienced elevated broadband noise in upper reactor power levels, 80%-95%.

" Channel 1 shows an isolated 0.028 g-RMS response at approximately 195 Hz at 50% reactor power. Likewise, channel 11 recorded a 0.048 g-RMS response at approximately 115 Hz and 85% power.

• Channels 23 and 24 experienced an elevated response at approximately 170 Hz and 50% power with the latter at lower overall amplitude, below 0.06 g-RMS.

Page 7 of 16

Enclosure 10 Table 4-1: Drywell Accelerometer Locations Ch Node Channel Name Dir System OD (in) Location Description No No 1 ACC-FWB-10X X FW, Loop B 6 ft 5 in upstream of 2 ACC-FWB-10 Z riser support FW39B 3 ACC-FWB-25X X FW, Loop B 6 ft 8 in upstream of 4 25 ACC-FWB-25Y Y header support FW38B 5 ACC-FWB-25Z Z 6 ACC-FWA-340X X FVV, Loop A 7 ft upstream of 7 340 ACC-FWA-340Y Y hae 10.75 header support FW38A 8 ACC-FWA-340Z Z 9 ACC-FWA-356X X FW, Loop A 3 ft 1 in upstream of 10 356 ACC-FWA-356Z z riser 10.75 support FW39A 11 ACC-FWA-376X X FW, Loop A 2 ft 3 in upstream of 376107 12 ACC-FWA-376Z z riser support FW36A.

13 111, ACC-MSA-1IX X MSLA 18 13 ft 9 in downstream 14 PSIA ACC-MSA-111Z Z riser of support MSH1A 15 ACC-MSA-1 77X X 16 177, MSLA 10.75 4 ft 11 in upstream of 6 PS1 ACC-MSA-177Y Y disch line support RVH70 17 ACC-MSA-177Z Z __

18 ACC-MSA-242X X 9 19 242, A MSA242YMSL Y- headerA, 10.75 9offtsupport 11 in downstream 24AH2 20 PS1A ACC-MSA-242 20 ACC-MSA-242Z Z _______

21 256, ACC-MSA-256X X MSL A, 10.75 1 ft 3 in upstream of 22 PSIA ACC-MSA-256Y Y header support 24AH3 23 134, ACC-MSB-134X X MSL B, 7 ft 4 in downstream 24 PS2A ACC-MSB-134Z Z riser 18 of support MSH3B 25 ACC-MSB-241X X 26 241, AG-MSB-241Y MSL B, 10.75 5 ft 2 in upstream of PS2A Y disch line support 25H2 27 ACC-MSB-241Z Z 28 111, ACC-MSC-111X X MSLC, 18 11 ft 1 in downstream 29 PS3A ACC-MSC-111Z Z riser of support MSHlC 30 173, ACC-MSC-173X X dSL Ch 4 ft 1 in upstream of 31 PS3A disch line support RVH77 32 ACC-MSC-173Z Z 33 140, ACC-MSD-140X X MSL D, 7 ft 6 in downstream 34 PS4A ACC-MSD-140Z Z header of support MSH4D 35 184, ACC-MSD-184X X MSL D, 7 ft 4 in downstream 36 PS4A ACC-MSD-184Z z disch line 10.75 of support 27H6 37 ACC-MSD-261X X 261, MSL D, 4 ft 9 in downstream 38 PS4A ACC-MSD-261Y Y header 10.75 of support 27AH5 39 ACC-MSD-261Z Z 40 ACC-SRV-212X X 212, MSL B, Inlet flange of SRV 41 PS2 ACC-SRV-212Y Y' SRV 15.5 RV 2-71B 42 ACC-SRV-212Z Z 43 ACC-SRV-149X X 149, ACC-SRV-149Y Y MSL C, 15.5 Inlet flange of SRV 45 S ACC-S RV- 149Z

-SRV-149 -Z SRV RV 2-71C PS3 46 142,- ACC-MSIV-142X X MSL D, 6 MSIV stuffing box 47 PS4 ACC-MSIV-142Y Y 6MSIV 48 ACC-MSIV-142Z Z Page 8 of 16

Enclosure 10 Table 4-2: Drywell Piping Accelerometer Data Comparison for CLTP Channel Acceptance Measured Value Measured % of No Channel Name Criteria (100% Power) Acceptable Value 1 ACC-FWB-1OX 0.9413 0.0579 6.15%

2 ACC-FWB-1OZ 0.9375 0.0580 6.19%

3 ACC-FWB-25X 0.4105 0.0268 6.53%

4 ACC-FWB-25Y 0.8807 0.0492 5.58%

5 ACC-FWB-25Z 0.7050 0.0680 9.65%

6 ACC-FWA-340X 0.2441 0.0296 12.12%

7 ACC-FWA-340Y 0.5501 0.0510 9.28%

8 ACC-FWA-340Z 0.4911 0.0696 14.18%

9 ACC-FWA-356X 0.6805 0.0532 7.82%

10 ACC-FWA-356Z 0.5842 0.0616 10.55%

11 ACC-FWA-376X 0.6620 0.0591 8.93%

12 ACC-FWA-376Z 0.4566 0.0167 3.67%

13 ACC-MSA-111X 0.9147 0.0802 8.77%

14 ACC-MSA-111Z 0.8416 0.0000 N/A 15 ACC-MSA-177X 0.4952 0.0540 10.91%

16 ACC-MSA-177Y 0.3819 0.0241 6.30%

17 ACC-MSA-177Z 1.4204 0.0409 2.88%

18 ACC-MSA-242X 0.5439 0.0236 4.34%

19 ACC-MSA-242Y 0.9331 0.0311 3.33%

20 ACC-MSA-242Z 0.8315 0.0361 4.35%

21 ACC-MSA-256X 1.0117 0.0000 N/A 22 ACC-MSA-256Z 0.9335 0.0000 N/A 23 ACC-MSB-134X 0.2806 0.0907 32.32%

24 ACC-MSB-134Z 0.4843 0.0000 N/A 25 ACC-MSB-241X 0.7518 0.0009 0.12%

26 ACC-MSB-241Y 0.5216 0.0181 3.47%

27 ACC-MSB-241Z 0.3643 0.0167 4.60%

28 ACC-MSC-111X 0.5387 0.0625 11.60%

29 ACC-MSC-111Z 0.5958 0.0858 14.40%

30 ACC-MSC-173X 0.6608 0.0129 1.96%

31 ACC-MSC-173Y 0.9322 0.0109 1.16%

32 ACC-MSC-173Z 0.6516 0.0363 5.57%

33 ACC-MSD-140X 0.2929 0.0609 20.79%

34 ACC-MSD-140Z 0.7017 0.0775 11.05%

35 ACC-MSD-184X 0.7458 0.0261 3.50%

36 ACC-MSD-184Z 1.3138 0.0220 1.68%

37 ACC-MSD-261X 0.9577 0.0048 0.50%

38 ACC-MSD-261Y 1.2356 0.0180 1.45%

39 ACC-MSD-261Z 1.0258 0.0249 2.43%

Note: A field with N/A indicates that the measured value for that particular channel was invalid. Invalid values were set to zero in the tables and subsequent plots.

Page 9 of 16

Enclosure 10 4.2.2. Steam Tunnel Of the 24 accelerometer channels, two are located on FW loop A, two on FW loop B, two on MSL A, and six on each of the remaining three MSL (B, C, and D).

The channel number versus accelerometer location is summarized in Table 4-3.

The piping accelerations versus allowable values are provided Table 4-4. The analysis of the data was done using MATLAB, and the results are summarized below:

" In all cases, the magnitude of the vibration is low. The RMS magnitudes are all below 0.2142 g, and the Max-Min values are all below 2.0 g.

" FW RMS acceleration trends show a gradual increase in vibration from low to high power levels.

" MS A RMS acceleration trend shows almost equal vibration level at 39%

and 100% power with lower levels in between.

MS B, C, and D RMS acceleration trends show fairly constant vibration levels across all power levels with 100% vibrations being generally the highest.

Page 10 of 16

Enclosure 10 Table 4-3: Steam Tunnel Accelerometer Channels and Locations Ch Node Channel Name Dir System OD (in) Location Description No No 33 89 ACC-FWB-89Y Y FW, Loop B 14 3 ft 5 in upstream of 34 ACC-FWB-89Z Z support FW29 35 ACC-FWA-296Y 296FWLopA Y 1 2 ft 2 in upstream of 36 ACC-FWA-296Z Z support FW21 37 115 ACC-MSA-1 15X X MSLA 18 11 ft 7 in upstream of 38 ACC-MSA-115Z Z support PS-2 39 ACC-MSB-1 97X X 6 ft 2 in downstream 40 ACC-MSB-197Z Z of support PS-6 41 ACC-MSC-240X X 3 ft 3 in downstream 42 ACC-MSC-240Z Z of support PS-11 43 ACC-MSD-277Y Y 2 ft 6 in downstream 44 ACC-MSD-277Z Z of support PS-17 45 ACC-MSB-L1X X Location 1 20.5 46 ACC-MSB-L1Z Z 207 A Outboard MSIV B 47 ACC-MSB-L2X X Location 2 20 48 ACC-MSB-L2Z Z 49 ACC-MSC-L1X X Location 1 20.5 50 ACC-MSC-L1Z Z.

247 Outboard MSIV C 51 ACC-MSC-L2X X Location 2 20 52 ACC-MSC-L2Z Z 53 ACC-MSD-L1X X Location 1 20.5 54 ACC-MSD-L1Z Z 289 Outboard MSIV D 55 ACC-MSD-L2X X 56 ACC-MSD-L2Z Z Location 2 20 Page 11 of 16

Enclosure 10 Table 4-4: Steam Tunnel Piping Accelerometer Data Comparison for CLTP Channel Acceptance Measured Value Measured %of No Channel Name Criteria (100% Power) Acceptable Value 33 ACC-FWB-89Y 0.1059 0.0452 42.63%

34 ACC-FWB-89Z 0.1479 0.0000 N/A 35 ACC-FWA-296Y 0.1143 0.0343 30.05%

36 ACC-FWA-296Z 0.2341 0.0305 13.01%

37 ACC-MSA-115X 0.4202 0.1197 28.50%

38 ACC-MSA-115Z 1.0776 0.0000 N/A 39 ACC-MSB-197X 0.4032 0.1327 32.91%

40 ACC-MSB-197Z 0.7628 0.1994 26.15%

41 ACC-MSC-240X 0.2168 0.0000 N/A 42 ACC-MSC-240Z 0.6433 0.0715 11.11%

43 ACC-MSD-277Y 0.6951 0.0000 N/A 44 ACC-MSD-277Z 1.1037 0.1086 9.84%

Note: A field with N/A indicates that the measured value for that particular channel was invalid. Invalid values were set to zero in the tables and subsequent plots.

4.2.3. Turbine Building Of the 26 accelerometer channels, four are located on MSL A, four on MSL B, two on MSL C, and two on MSL D. Eight accelerometers are installed on the FW piping and six accelerometers are installed on turbine stop valves (TSV) (see Figure 4-1).

Table 4-5 lists the accelerometer channel numbers, description, and direction for the accelerometers installed on the MS and FW systems in the Turbine Building.

The piping accelerations versus allowable values are provided Table 4-6. The analysis of the data was done using MATLAB, and the results are summarized below:

• The RMS magnitudes for all the piping'locations (Channels 1 through 20) are below 0.3 g, and the corresponding maximum-minimum values at 100% power are less than 2.5 g.

• No significant acoustic response is apparent in the frequency spectra.

Some channels show peaks in the 15-45 Hz range, which may be acoustic, but these are of very low magnitude. This indicates that there is sufficient separation between the acoustic and vortex shedding frequencies in the main steam safety relief valve branch lines.

• The measured acceleration values for the TSV location 1 are below 0.5 g-RMS. The measured acceleration values for TSV location 2 vertical direction decrease from 0.9 g-RMS at 39% power to 0.26 g-RMS at 100%

power. The other two orthogonal directions never exceed 0.03 g-RMS.

Therefore, it is suspected that the cable connections for Channel 25 may Page 12 of 16

Enclosure 10 be bad and it is planned to check these cable connections during the next outage (of sufficient duration) to confirm if the signal for Channel 25 is valid.

Table 4-5: Turbine Building Accelerometer Channels and Locations Ch No Channel name System Details Direction Description 1 Ch. 1-FWB-94X X 4 ft 3 in downstream of 2 Ch.2-FWB-94Z FW Loop B Riser 14" z support FW28 3 Ch.3-FWB-105X . X 5 ft 7 in from support 4 Ch.4-FWB-105Y FW Loop B 14" Y FX201 downstream 5 Ch.5-FWX-147Y Header between .14" Y 4 ft 1 in from Loop A 6 Ch.6-FWX-147Z Loops A & B z towards support FW30 7 Ch.7-FWA-152X Riser, Loop A 14" X 4 ft 3 in from support 8 Ch.8-FWA-152Z Z FW20 upstream 9 Ch.9-MSA-120Y Y 7 ft 3 in downstream from 10 Ch.10-MSA-120Z z support PS-2 11 Ch.11-MSA-126X MSL A 18" X 6 ft 6 in upstream of 12 Ch.12-MSA-126Y Y support PS-4 13 Ch.13-MSB-186X X 6 ft downstream of 14 Ch.14-MSB-186Y Y support PS-8 15 Ch.15-MSB-192Y Y 5 ft 6 in downstream of 16 Ch.16-MSB-192Z z support PS-7 17 Ch.17-MSC-233Y Y 7 ft 3.5 in downstream of 18 Ch.18-MSC-233Z z support PS-12 19 Ch.19-MSD-300X X 13 ft 3 in downstream of 20 Ch.20-MSD-300Y Y support PS-19 21 Ch.21-TSV1-SV4X X 22 Ch.22-TSV1-SV4Y Location 1 SV-4 27" Y See Figure 4-1 23 Ch.23-TSV1-SV4Z Z 24 Ch.24-TSV2-SV4X X 25 Ch.25-TSV2-SV4Y Location 2 SV-4 18" Y See Figure 4-1 26 Ch.26-TSV2-SV4Z Z Table 4-6: Turbine Building Piping Accelerometer Data Comparison for CLTP Channel Channel Name Acceptance Measured Value Measured % of No Criteria (100% Power) Acceptable Value 1 ACC-FWB-94X 0.1196 0.0277 23.16%

2 ACC-FWB-94Z 0.1173 0.0229 19.48%

3 ACC-FWB-105X 0.1374 0.0227 16.50%

4 ACC-FWB-105Y 0.1349 0.0253 18.73%

5 ACC-FWX-147Y 0.1438 0.0311 21.64%

6 ACC-FWX-147Z 0.1371 0.0198 14.45%

7 ACC-FWA-152X 0.1068 0.0221 20.68%

8 ACC-FWA-152Z 0.1149 0.0008 0.72%

Page 13 of 16

- 4 Enclosure 10 Channel Channel Name Acceptance Measured Value Measured % of No Criteria (100% Power) Acceptable Value 9 ACC-MSA-120Y 0.9021 0.1061 11.76%

10 ACC-MSA-120Z 0.9471 0.0000 N/A 11 ACC-MSA-126X 0.7980 0.1126 14.11%

12 ACC-MSA-126Y 0.7448 0.0518 6.95%

13 ACC-MSB-186X 0.7335 0.1601 21.83%

14 ACC-MSB-186Y 0.5855 0.1156 19.74%

15 ACC-MSB-192Y 0.9248 0.0829 8.97%

16 ACC-MSB-192Z 0.5933 0.1362 22.96%

17 ACC-MSC-233Y 1.0651 0.1121 10.53%

18 ACC-MSC-233Z 0.7107 0.0135 1.90%

19 ACC-MSD-300X 0.7276 0.2472 33.98%

20 ACC-MSD-300Y 1.5793 0.1395 8.83%

Note: A field with N/A indicates that the measured value for that particular channel was invalid. Invalid values were set to zero in the tables and subsequent plots.

4.3. Results for All Accelerometers In summary, the maximum acceleration observed for the 100% (CLTP) power level in the FW piping inside the containment was 14% of the criterion. The maximum acceleration of the MS piping inside the containment was 32% of the criterion. The corresponding percentages for the FW and MS systems outside the containment were 43% and 34%, respectively.

4.4. Projected Results for EPU Applying the expected increase of approximately 32% (based upon a steam flow increase of 14.8%) to the maximum acceleration as a percentage of the acceptance criterion (43% from Section 4.3) predicts the maximum acceleration at EPU conditions will be less than 57% of the acceptance criterion. Therefore, MS and FW piping vibration levels at EPU conditions are expected to be acceptable and vibration monitoring, as part of power ascension testing, will verify acceptable vibration levels.

Page 14 of 16

Enclosure 10 Figure 4-1: Accelerometer positions on TSV Wle1 Page 15 of 16

Enclosure 10

5. References

1. BWR Owners' Group EPU Committee, Extended Power Uprate (EPU)

Lessons Learned and Recommendations, NEDO-33159 Revision 1, January 2007

2. ASME O&M-S/G, Standards and Guides for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants, Part 3, 1994 Edition, "Requirements for Preoperational and Initial Start-Up Vibration Testing of Nuclear Power Plant Piping Systems."

3. MATLAB, Version 7.0.4.365, Release 14, Mathworks, January 2005 (Macro: UniPro Version 2.3.4).

4. GE Nuclear Energy, "Constant Pressure Power Uprate," Licensing Topical Report NEDC-33004P-A, Revision 4, Class III (Proprietary), July 2003; and NEDO-33004, Class I (Non-proprietary), July 2003.

Page 16 of 16

. - Is Enclosure 12 to L-MT-08-018 CDI Affidavit

W 9O 2t-Continuum Dynamics, Inc.

(609) 538-0444 (609) 538-0464 fax 34 Lexington Avenue Ewing, NJ 08618-2302 AFFIDAVIT Re: C.D.I. Report No.07-23P 'Tlow-Induced Vibration in the Main Steam Lines at Monticello and Resulting Steam Dryer Loads," Revision 0, February 2008; C.D.I. Report 07-25P "Acoustic and Low Frequency Hydrodynamic Loads at CLTP Power Level on Monticello Steam Dryer to 200 Hz, Revision 1,March 2008; C.D.I. Report No.07-26P "Stress Assessment of Monticello Steam Dryer," Revision 0, March 2008; C.D.I. Technical Note No.08-12P "Limit Curve Analysis with ACM Rev. 4 for Power Ascension at Monticello," Revision 0, March 2008 and Enclosure II to L-MT-08-018 "Steam Dryer Dynamic Stress Evaluation" I, Alan J. Bilanin, being duly sworn, depose and state as follows:

1. I hold the position of President and Senior Associate of Continuum Dynamics, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as C.D.I.), and I am authorized to make the request for withholding from Public Record the Information contained in the documents described in Paragraph 2. This Affidavit is submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) pursuant to 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4) based on the fact that the attached information consists of trade secret(s) of C.D.I. and that the NRC will receive the information from C.D.I. under privilege and in confidence.

2. The Information sought to be withheld, as transmitted to Nuclear Management LLC as attachments to C.D.I. Letter No. 08064 dated 25 March 2008 C.D.I.

Report No.07-23P "Flow-Induced Vibration in the Main Steam Lines at Monticello and Resulting Steam Dryer Loads," Revision 0, February 2008; C.D.I.

Report 07-25P "Acoustic and Low Frequency Hydrodynamic Loads at CLTP Power Level on Monticello Steam Dryer to 200 Hz, Revision 1, March 2008; C.D.I. Report No.07-26P "Stress Assessment of Monticello Steam Dryer,"

Revision 0, March 2008; C.D.I. Technical Note No.08-12P "Limit Curve Analysis with ACM Rev. 4 for Power Ascension at Monticello," Revision 0, March 2008 and Enclosure 11 to L-MT-08-018 "Steam Dryer Dynamic Stress Evaluation"

3. The Information summarizes:

(a) a process or method, including supporting data and analysis, where prevention of its use by C.D.I.'s competitors without license from C.D.I. constitutes a competitive 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;

qll '4 (c) Information which discloses patentable subject matter - for which it may be desirable to obtain patent protection.

The information sought to be withheld is considered to' be proprietary for the reasons set forth in paragraphs 3(a), 3(b) and 3(c) above.

4. The Information has been held in confidence by C.D.I., its owner. The Information has consistently been held in confidence by C.D.I. and no public disclosure has been made and it is not available to the public. All disclosures to third parties, which have been limited, have been made pursuant to the terms and conditions contained in C.D.I.'s Nondisclosure Secrecy Agreement which must be fully executed prior to disclosure.

5. The Information is a type customarily held in confidence by C.D.I. and there is a rational basis therefore. The Information is a type, which C.D.I. considers trade secret and is held in confidence by C.D.I. because it constitutes a source of competitive advantage in the competition and performance of such work in the industry. Public disclosure of the Information is likely to cause substantial harm to C.D.I.'s competitive position and foreclose or reduce the availability of profit-making opportunities.

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

Executed on this o>2 day of 2008.

Alan J. Bilanin Continuum Dynamics, Inc.

Subscribed and sworn before me this day: c3"7 c>

4 efenirtuIinimest r, ýotary Public EILEEN P. BURMEISTER NOTARY PUBLIC OF NEW JERSEY MY COMM. EXPIRES MAY 6,2012