ML092170333

Enclosure 2 to PLA-6542 - SSES Replacement Steam Dryer and Flow Induced Vibration Report Unit 2 Start-Up 107.0% Power Test Plateau. (Non-Proprietary)

ML092170333
Person / Time
Site:	Susquehanna
Issue date:	07/31/2009
From:	Bartos J Susquehanna
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
PLA-6542
Download: ML092170333 (57)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:Enclosure 2 to PLA-6542 Non - Proprietary Version of "SSES Replacement Dryer and Flow Induced Vibration Report, Unit 2 Start-up, 107% Power Test Plateau"

Non-Proprietary Version

                               \ 1 *1 PP               411$. % TM SSES Replacement Steam Dryer and Flow Induced Vibration Report Unit 2 Start-Up 107.0% Power Test Plateau July, 2009 Prepared By:            John A. Bartos Reviewed By:            Kevin G. Browning Approved by:            John E. Krais

Non-Proprietary Version TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 E xecutive Sum m ary ............................................................................... 1 2.0 Main Steam Line Strain Gage Data Analysis ................................... 1 2.1 Power Spectral Density ......................................................... 1 2.2 T rendin g ................................................................................ 6 2.3 Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Data Comparison .................................... 6 2.4 Steam Dryer Evaluation Summary ................................... 8 3.0 Piping Flow Induced Vibration ..................................................... 8 3.1 Introduction ........................................................................... 8 3.2 Data Collection Scope ........................................................... 9 3.3 Data Analysis Methodology ............................................... 9 3.4 R esults .................................................................................. 10 3.5 Piping Summary .................................................................. 10 4.0 R eferen ces ............................................................................................. 11 Appendix A - Plant Data Log Sheets ...................................................... 41 i

Non-Proprietary Version LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1: Power/Core Flow Data Collection Conditions ........................................................... 1 Table 2: PSD Notch Filter Specifications for 97.8 Mlbm/hr Data (Test Point 1) ................ 2 Table 3: PSD Notch Filter Specifications for 92.8 Mlbm/hr Data (Test Point 2) ................ 2 Table 4: PSD Notch Filter Specifications for 107.8 Mlbm/hr Data (Test Point 3) .............. 3 Table 5: Maximum MSL Strain Gage Readings @ 3731 MWth and 97.8 Mlbm/hr Expressed as a Ratio of the Monitoring Limits (Test Point 1) ............................... 4 Table 6: Maximum MSL Strain Gage Readings @ 3728 MWth and 92.8 Mlbm/hr Expressed as a Ratio of the Monitoring Limits (Test Point 2) ............................... 4 Table 7: Maximum MSL Strain Gage Readings @ 3726 MWth and 107.8 Mlbm/hr Expressed as a Ratio of the Monitoring Limits (Test Point 3) ............................... 5 Table 8: Adjusted Stress with Bias and Uncertainty and LCF ACM Analysis F-Factor M ethod ............................................................................. 7 Table 9: Adjusted Stress with Bias and Uncertainty and LCF Supplemental Analysis F-Factor M ethod ............................................................... 7 Table 10: Adjusted Stress with Bias and Uncertainty and LCF Supplem ental Analysis RM S M ethod ...................................................................... 8 ii

Non-Proprietary Version LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1: MSL A Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1.................................. 12 Figure 2: MSL A Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1 ........................................ 12 Figure 3: MSL B Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1 ................................. 13 Figure 4: MSL B Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1.................... 13 Figure 5: MSL C Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1................................ 14 Figure 6: MSL C Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1 ........................................ 14 Figure 7: MSL D Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1........................................ 15 Figure 8: MSL D Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1 ........................................ 15 Figure 9: MSL A Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2................................... 16 Figure 10: MSL A Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 ..................................... 16 Figure 11: MSL B Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 ........................................ 17 Figure 12: MSL B Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 ...................................... 17 Figure 13: MSL C Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2..................... 18 Figure 14: MSL C Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 ..................................... 19 Figure 15: MSL D Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 ................................. 19 Figure 16: MSL D Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 ..................................... 19 Figure 17: MSL A Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 .................................... 20 Figure 18: MSL A Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 ..................................... 20 Figure 19: MSL B Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point3 ...................................... 21 Figure 20: MSL B Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 ...................................... 21 Figure 21: MSL C Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 ...................................... 22 Figure 22: MSL C Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 ..................................... 22 Figure 23: MSL D Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 ...................................... 23 Figure 24: MSL D Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 ..................................... 23 Figure 25: MSL A Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with R evised L imit C urves ........................................................................................ 24 Figure 26: MSL A Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with R evised L imit C urves ........................................................................................ 24 Figure 27: MSL B Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with R evised L imit C urves ........................................................................................ 25 Figure 28: MSL B Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with R evised L imit C urves ........................................................................................ 25 iii

Non-Proprietary Version LIST OF FIGURES (cont'd.) Figure 29: MSL C Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with R evised L imit C urves ....................................................................................... 26 Figure 30: MSL C Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with R evised L imit C urves ........................................................................................ 26 Figure 31: MSL D Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with R evised Lim it C urves ........................................................................................ 27 Figure 32: MSL D Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with R evised Lim it C urves ........................................................................................ 27 Figure 33: MSL A Upper Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot ............................................... 28 Figure 34: MSL A Lower Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot ............................................... 28 Figure 35: MSL B Upper Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot ............................................... 29 Figure 36: MSL B Lower Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot ............................................... 29 Figure 37: MSL C Upper Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot ............................................... 30 Figure 38: MSL C Lower Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot ............................................... 30 Figure 39: MSL D Upper Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot ............................................... 31 Figure 40: MSL D Lower Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot ............................................... 31 Figure 41: MSL Strain Gage Time History RMS Trends .................................................. 32 Figure 42: MSL A Upper Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison ................................................... 33 Figure 43: MSL A Lower Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison ................................................... 33 Figure 44: MSL B Upper Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison .................................................... 34 Figure 45: MSL B Lower Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison ................................................... 34 Figure 46: MSL C Upper Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison ................................................... 35 Figure 47: MSL C Lower Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison ................................................... 35 Figure 48: MSL D Upper Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison ................................................... 36 Figure 49: MSL D Lower Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison ................................................... 36 Figure 50: Main Steam Line 'B' Piping - % of Allowables (RMS) ................................... 37 Figure 51: Main Steam Line 'C' Piping - % of Allowables (RMS) ................................. 37 Figure 52: Feedwater Piping - % of Allowables (RMS) .................................................... 38 Figure 53: Reactor Recirculation 'A' Loop Piping - % of Allowables (RMS) ................ 38 Figure 54: RHR 'A' Loop Inside Containment Piping - % of Aliowables (RMS) ....... 39 Figure 55: Reactor Recirculation 'B' and RHR 'B' Loop Inside Containment Piping ....... 39 Figure 56: RHR HV151FO15A & B Valves (Outside Containment)% of Allowables (RMS) ............................................ 40 Figure 57: RHR HV151FO17A & B Valves (Outside Containment)% of Allowables (RMS) ............................................ 40 iv

Non-Proprietary Version ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Short Form Description ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers CLTP Current License Thermal Power (Formerly 3489 MWth) EPU Extended Power Uprate FE Finite Element FIV Flow Induced Vibration Hz Hertz (Cycles per Second) HPCI High Pressure Coolant Injection LCF Limit Curve Factor Mlbm/hr Millions Pound-Mass per Hour MSL Main Steam Line MWth Mega-Watts - Thermal OLTP Original License Thermal Power (3293 MWth) PSD Power Spectral Density RCIC Reactor Core isolation Cooling RHR Residual Heat Removal RMS Root Mean Square RWCU Reactor Water Clean-Up SRV Safety Relief Valve (Main Steam) VPF Vane Passing Frequency v

Non-Proprietary Version 1.0 Executive Summary This report provides a summary of the SSES Unit 2 replacement steam dryer monitoring instrumentation (Main Steam Line Strain Gage) and flow induced vibration (FIV) measurements at the targeted 107.0% CLTP test plateau (3733 MWth). This data was collected at the actual power levels and core flows indicated in Table 1: Table 1: Power/Core Flow Data Collection Conditions Test Point Thermal Power (MWt Core Flow (Mlb/hr) 1 3731 97.8 2 3728 92.8 3 3726 107.8 The main steam line (MSL) strain gage locations are documented in Reference 1. Plant data log sheets for each Table 1 test point is contained in Appendix A. The data log sheets provide a record of plant conditions at these power conditions. The MSL strain gage data indicates that sufficient steam dryer margin (approximately 100%) to the ASME endurance limit of 13,600 PSI exists and that the power ascension can proceed to 3952 MWth. The analysis of the piping accelerometer FIV data confirms that there is adequate margin (greater than 100%) to the ASME limits in the SSES main steam, feedwater, and reactor recirculation system piping. 2.0 Main Steam Line Strain Gage Data Analysis 2.1 Power Spectral Density Figures 1 through 32 provide power spectral density (PSD) plots of MSL strain gage readings. The level 1 and level 2 monitoring curves for each strain gage location are also plotted on each figure. The strain values represent average strain values observed over a 180 second test time period. A data sampling rate of 2500 Hz was used in the data processing. The test data, was band-pass filtered between 3 and 250 Hz to be consistent with the load definition used in the replacement dryer structural analysis in Reference 2. There is substantial noise from the 60 Hz alternating current and the recirculation pump power supply, thus filtering of this electrical noise was performed. Also the reactor recirculation pump vane passing frequencies were filtered from the data sets. Testing on the instrumented Unit 1 steam dryer {{{ Reference 2 documented that the { { {

                                                                       } }} The filters applied to the data collected at the respective test points are identified in Tables 2, 3 and 4 below:

Page 1

Non-Proprietary Version Table 2: PSD Notch Filter Specifications for 97.8 Mlbm/hr Data (Test Point 1) Table 3: PSD Notch Filter Specifications for 92.8 Mlbm/hr Data (Test Point 2) Page 2

Non-Proprietary Version Table 4: PSD Notch Filter Specifications for 107.8 Mlbm/hr Data (Test Point 3) PSDs were calculated on 2 second blocks of data from the test time period (180 seconds). In order to increase the number of spectral averages, the data blocks were overlapped by 50%. The PSDs were calculated using a Hanning window and a 0.5 Hz bin size. The resulting PSDs were then linearly averaged and are presented as Figures 1 through 32. This method of data processing was used to provide the results in a format consistent with the processing used to develop the monitoring curves. There are also two monitoring (limit) curves included with the PSD plots. The level I monitoring curve represents the response of the SSES dryer finite element (FE) model under the design acoustic load conditions factored by the minimum component analysis margin to the endurance limit. The level 2 monitoring curve is based on 80% of the level 1 curve. A more complete description of the limit curves and how they are generated is included in Reference 3 and Reference 4. The limit curves were generated, in accordance with Reference 4, using a baseline data set from Unit 2 collected at 3611 MWth (103.5% CLTP). These monitoring curves provide guidance for evaluating the measured dryer response with respect to the structural analysis results. Table 5 below shows the maximum strain gage reading for 3731 MWth and 97.8 Mlbm/hr (Test Point 1) as a percent of monitoring limits generated in accordance with Reference 4 using a baseline data set from Unit 2 collected at 3611 MWth (103.5% CLTP). All values of strain were below the level 1 and level 2 monitoring limits. The data is plotted with the monitoring limits in Figures 1 through 8. Page 3

Non-Proprietary Version Table 5: Maximum MSL Strain Gage Readings @ 3731 MWth and 97.8 Mlbm/hr Expressed as a Ratio of the Monitoring Limits (Test Point 1) Table 6 below shows the maximum strain gage reading for 3728 MWth and 92.8 Mlbm/hr (Test Point 2) as a percent of monitoring limits generated in accordance with Reference 4 using a baseline data set from Unit 2 collected at 3611 MWth (103.5% CLTP). {{{

                                         } }} The data is plotted with the monitoring limits in Figures 9 through 16.

Table 6: Maximum MSL Strain Gage Readings @ 3728 MWth and 92.8 Mlbm/hr Expressed as a Ratio of the Monitoring Limits (Test Point 2) Page 4

Non-Proprietary Version Table 7 below shows the maximum strain gage reading for 3726 MWth and 107.8 Mlbm/hr (Test Point 3) as a percent of monitoring limits generated in accordance with Reference 4 using a baseline data set from Unit 2 collected at 3611 MWth (103.5% CLTP). All values of strain are below the level 1 and monitoring limits. {{{ The data is plotted with the monitoring limits in Figures 17 through 24. Table 7: Maximum MSL Strain Gage Readings @ 3726 MWth and 107.8 Mlbm/hr Expressed as a Ratio of the Monitoring Limits (Test Point 3) As a result of the MSL A Upper exceeding its level 2 monitoring limit curve at a core flow of 107.8 Mlbm/hr, a stress evaluation was conducted using the F-Factor and RMS methodology documented in Reference 3 and Reference 4. The results of that analysis are documented in Section 2.3 below and in Tables 8 through 10. {{{ Page 5

Non-Proprietary Version 2.2 Trending For trending purposes, filtered MSL strain gage PSDs for powers up to 107.0% of CLTP (3733 MWth) have been plotted in a waterfall format and are presented in Figures 33 through 40. Figure 41 is a trend plot of the RMS value of the sample time histories plotted against total steam flow. Figures 33 through 41 show that MSL strains are MSL strain gages mounted on the A and D steam lines have the highest magnitude readings. This is attributed to the 15 Hz peak being reinforced by the safety relief valve (SRV) dead-legs on these two steam lines, as discussed in References 5 and Reference 6. 2.3 Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Data Comparison The Unit 2 MSL strain gage PSDs are similar to the PSDs measured on Unit 1 in 2008 in both frequency content and magnitude. Figures 42 through 49 show Unit 1 3728 MWth @ 97 Mlbm/hr data plotted with Unit 2 3731 MWth @ 97.8 Mlbm/hr data. An examination of Figures 42 through 49 demonstrates that the acoustic signatures of Unit 1 and Unit 2 are similar. As an additional comparison of the acoustic data generated by Unit 1 and Unit 2, an F-Factor and RMS analyses (as described in Reference 3 and Reference 4) were conducted on two similar sets of MSL strain gage data. These analyses were performed to generate estimates of dryer stresses at the current operating plateau. The Unit 1 data set was taken at a reactor power of 3716 MWth and a core flow of 107.3 Mlbm/hr. The Unit 2 data set was taken at a reactor power of 3726 MWth and a core flow of 107.8 Mlbm/hr. As described in Reference 3 and Reference 4, three separate analyses were performed on each of the data sets. The data sets were filtered to remove the recirculation system pump vane passing peaks. The results presented below exclude estimates of stresses that result from pump vane passing peaks. The effects of the vane passing peaks on total steam dryer stresses are discussed in Reference 2. Tables 8 through 10 contain the results of the analyses. Page 6

Non-Proprietary Version Table 8: Adjusted Stress with Bias and Uncertainty and LCF ACM Analysis F-Factor Method Table 9: Adjusted Stress with Bias and Uncertainty and LCF Supplemental Analysis F-Factor Method Page 7

Non-Proprietary Version Table 10: Adjusted Stress with Bias and Uncertainty and LCF Supplemental Analysis RMS Method An examination of Tables 8 through 10 further demonstrates the {{{ 2.4 Steam Dryer Evaluation Summary Based on the current margins shown in Tables 8 through 10 and in Figures 1 through 32, there is adequate projected margin (approximately 100%) to the steam dryer ASME endurance limit of 13,600 PSI for continued power ascension to 3952 MWth. The presented data also validates the conclusion that the steam dryer stress analysis based on the instrumented Unit 1 steam dryer (presented in Reference 2), is applicable to the Unit 2 steam dryer. 3.0 Piping Flow Induced Vibration 3.1 Introduction Piping accelerometers on the main steam, feedwater, reactor recirculation, residual heat removal (RHR), and reactor water cleanup (RWCU) systems were monitored during start-up. Key locations were selected based on geometry and the expected potential for vibration-related problems or maximum pipe stress. For main steam, the accelerometers were located on the "B" and "C" lines, since these are expected to be the most active. These steam lines have active flow under the SRV branch lines, as well as the HPCI and RCIC system steam supply branch connections. Accelerometers were also located at, or near, the above mentioned branch lines of interest. In all, 74 accelerometers at 33 locations were monitored during start-up. Page 8

Non-Proprietary Version Prior to the start-up, two RMS acceptance levels were calculated for each accelerometer on the main steam and feedwater systems. A level 1 value was determined based on vibration calculations using ASME OM-3 (Reference 7) allowable stresses. A level 2' value was conservatively established for each accelerometer at 50% of level 1. The accelerations used in the vibration analyses were "zero to peak" values (consistent with ASME OM-3) and conservative factors were used to determine equivalent RMS values. The Reactor Recirculation/RHR/RWCU system accelerometers were assigned only conservative level 2 RMS and "zero-to-peak" allowable values, since these systems were negligibly affected by EPU. If both criteria (i.e., RMS and "zero-to-peak") were exceeded for a given instrument, then a more detailed engineering evaluation was performed. 3.2 Data Collection Scope Formal monitoring for the effects of FIV on piping was initiated at the target test point of 2569 MWth (-65% full EPU power). Data was also collected and analyzed at targeted test points of 3293 MWth (OLTP), 3489 MWth (CLTP), 3611 MWth (103.5% CLTP), and for several core flow conditions at 3733 MWth (107% CLTP), as described in Table 1 above. In addition, piping FIV was monitored on an hourly basis, and general plant walkdowns were continuously performed during power ascension from 3489 MWth to 3611 MWth, as well as from 3611 MWth to 3733 MWth. Detailed plant walk downs of piping and components were performed for most systems affected by Extended Power Uprate located outside the drywell. These walk downs were performed at the targeted test points 2569 MWth, 3489 MWth, 3611 MWth, and 3733 MWth. The walk downs were performed for piping and components located in accessible and inaccessible (high radiation) areas. Two remote controlled, mobile cameras were used to observe the vibration in the inaccessible areas. 3.3 Data Analysis Methodology Spectral analyses for each accelerometer were performed at each of the test points for a time period of 180 seconds. The data was evaluated based on 4 second blocks of data and to increase the number of spectral averages, the data blocks were overlapped by 50%. The data was band-pass filtered between 2 Hz and 250 Hz, with a 0.25 Hz bin size to provide for consistency with the method used to develop the acceptance criteria for the accelerometers. Significant electrical noise was observed at the 60 Hz multiples of the power supply frequencies, so notch filters were applied as required. Multiples of the reactor recirculation pump vane passing frequency (VPF) were observed; however, the VPF frequencies were not filtered, since they represent true mechanical vibration (i.e., displacement/stress). Page 9

Non-Proprietary Version 3.4 Results Throughout power ascension, four (4) accelerometers degraded to the point where their output was judged to be questionable (i.e., a "near zero" output). This is acceptable since at these locations, nearby accelerometers indicated values within the ASME OM-3 acceptance criteria. Figures 50 through 52 indicate the percent of allowable RMS acceleration versus total main steam flow/feed water flow trends during the power ascension to 3733 MWth. In addition, Figures 53 through 57 indicate the percent of allowable RMS acceleration versus core flow trends for the Reactor Recirculation, RHR, and RWCU system instruments. The walk downs were performed for piping and components located in accessible and inaccessible (i.e., high radiation) areas. As expected, the vibration observed increased with power ascension. In general, all observed vibration was within previously established acceptance criteria. However, walk down observations of the feedwater venturi instrument tubing indicated that some additional locally mounted instrumentation was prudent. A tri-axial accelerometer was added at the maximum point of vibration. For all test points, venturi tubing vibration levels met the original plant design criteria. Consideration is being given to installing additional supports on this non-safety-related tubing to reduce vibration levels. 3.5 Piping Summary During the Unit 2 power ascension to 3733 MWth, piping vibration levels were monitored to assess effects of flow induced vibration (FIV). Trending was performed, and all valid accelerations/displacements were within pre-established limits, based on ASME OM-3 allowable stresses. The piping/components walkdown results were as expected; general vibration levels increased during power ascension and the overall response of piping and components were within established criteria. Page 10

Non-Proprietary Version 4.0

References:

1. PPL Letter To USNRC, PLA-6176 (Figure 31-1), "Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Proposed License Amendment No. 285 For Unit 1 Operating License No. NPF-14 And Proposed License Amendment No. 253 For Unit 2 Operating License No. NPF-22 Extended Power Update Application Regarding Steam Dryer And Flow Effects Request For Additional Information Responses", dated 4/27/2007

2. GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Engineering Report 0000-0095-2113-P-RO, "Susquehanna Replacement Steam Dryer Updated Stress Analysis At Extended Power Uprate Conditions", Class III, February 2009 (Provided via PPL Letter To USNRC, PLA-6484, dated 2/27/09)

3. GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Engineering Report 0000-0096-5766-P-R1, "Revised Susquehanna Replacement Steam Dryer Limit Curves - Main Steam Line Mounted Instrumentation", Class III, February 2009 (Provided via PPL Letter To USNRC, PLA-6484, dated 2/27/09)

4. GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Engineering Report 0000-0101-0766-P-RO, "Main Steam Line Limit Curve Adjustment During Power Ascension", Class III, April 2009 (Provided via PPL Letter To USNRC, PLA-65 10, dated 5/12/09)

5. PPL Letter To USNRC, PLA-6076 (Attachment 10), "Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Proposed License Amendment No. 285 For Unit 1 Operating License No. NPF-14 And Proposed License Amendment No. 253 For Unit 2 Operating License No. NPF-22 Constant Pressure Power Uprate", dated 10/11/2006

6. PPL Letter To USNRC, PLA-6176 (Questions 4, 7, and 31), "Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Proposed License Amendment No. 285 For Unit 1 Operating License No.

NPF-14 And Proposed License Amendment No. 253 For Unit 2 Operating License No. NPF-22 Extended Power Update Application Regarding Steam Dryer and Flow Effects Request for Additional Information Responses", dated 4/27/2007

7. ASME OMb-S/G-2005, "Standards and Guides for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants", Part 3, "Requirements for Preoperational and Initial Start-Up Vibration Testing of Nuclear Power Plant Piping Systems" (ASME OM-3)

Page 11

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 1: MSL A Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1 Figure 2: MSL A Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1 Page 12

Non-Proprietary Version

                                                          }M}

Figure 3: MSL B Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1 Figure 4: MSL B Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point I Page 13

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 5: MSL C Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1 Figure 6: MSL C Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1 Page 14

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 7: MSL D Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 1 Figure 8: MSL D Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point I Page 15

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 9: MSL A Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 Figure 10: MSL A Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 Page 16

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 11: MSL B Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 Figure 12: MSL B Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 Page 17

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 13: MSL C Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 Figure 14: MSL C Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 Page 18

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 15: MSL D Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 Figure 16: MSL D Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 2 Page 19

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 17: MSL A Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 Figure 18: MSL A Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 Page 20

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 19: MSL B Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 Figure 20: MSL B Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 Page 21

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 21: MSL C Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 Figure 22: MSL C Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 Page 22

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 23: MSL D Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3

                                                           }M}

Figure 24: MSL D Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 Page 23

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 25: MSL A Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with Revised Limit Curves Figure 26: MSL A Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with Revised Limit Curves Page 24

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 27: MSL B Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with Revised Limit Curves Figure 28: MSL B Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with Revised Limit Curves

                                                                                     }

Page 25

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 29: MSL C Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with Revised Limit Curves Figure 30: MSL C Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with Revised Limit Curves Page 26

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 31: MSL D Upper Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with Revised Limit Curves Figure 32: MSL D Lower Strain Gage PSD Plot at Test Point 3 with Revised Limit Curves Page 27

Non-Proprietary Version

                                                     }1}

Figure 33: MSL A Upper Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot Figure 34: MSL A Lower Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot Page 28

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 35: MSL B Upper Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot Figure 36: MSL B Lower Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot Page 29

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 37: MSL C Upper Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot Figure 38: MSL C Lower Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot Page 30

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 39: MSL D Upper Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot Figure 40: MSL D Lower Strain Gage PSD Waterfall Plot Page 31

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 41: MSL Strain Gage Time History RMS Trends Page 32

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 42: MSL A Upper Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison Figure 43: MSL A Lower Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison Page 33

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 44: MSL B Upper Unit I vs. Unit 2 Comparison Figure 45: MSL B Lower Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison Page 34

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 46: MSL C Upper Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison Figure 47: MSL C Lower Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison Page 35

Non-Proprietary Version Figure 48: MSL D Upper Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison Figure 49: MSL D Lower Unit 1 vs. Unit 2 Comparison Page 36

Non-Proprietary Version SSES Unit 2 - May 2009 - Main Steam Line 'B' Piping - Percent of Allowables Note: 60, 120, 180 & 240 Hz filtered out - For 3545, 3587& 3733 MWt only 60 & 180 Hz filtered out I uuI/. I -- I-------- t----- ----- -.-.-.-.

                                                                         . Tt "---I--
                 -     VE26707 MSL-B HPCI axial                                      N Le* I =100% AýME OM-3 AIowab 90%      -  -VE26708        MSL-B HPCI horz
                  ---  VE26709 MSL-B HPCI trans 80% --      ---   VE26710 MSL-B SRV-J horz
                 -VE26711     MSL-B SRV-J perp 70% F-            VE26712 MSL-B FE-B21-2N052 vert U)
                  -    VE26713 MSL-B FE-B21-2N052 axial 2

60% 1 -.- VE26714 MSL-B FE-B21-2N052 horz o, Level 2 = PO% ASME qM-3 AMowabW 0 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% _- ___ 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Main Steam Flow - Mlbslhr Figure 50: Main Steam Line 'B' Piping - % of Allowables (RMS) SSES Unit 2 - May 2009 - Main Steam Line 'C' Piping - Percent of Allowables Note: 60, 120, 180 & 240 Hz filtered out - For 3545, 3587 & 3733 MWt only 60 & 180 Hz filtered out 100%

                 ---   VE26715 MSL-C RCIC axial 90%         ---   VE26716 MSL-C RCIC (N-S)
                 -     VE26717 MSL-C RCIC (E-W) 80%         ----- VE26718 MSL-C SRV-B axial
                 ---   VE26719 MSL-C SRV-B horz 70%               VE26720 MSL-C SRV-B trans U),                 a-VE26721 MSL-C MSL axial 60%       _ -e-VE26722 MSL-C MSL horz 0

50% 0 30% 20% 10% 0% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Main Steam Flow - Mlbs.hr Figure 51: Main Steam Line 'C' Piping - % of Allowables (RMS) Page 37

Non-Proprietary Version SSES Unit 2 - May 2009 - Feedwater Piping - Percent of Allowables Note: 60, 120, 180 & 240 Hz filtered out - For 3545, 3587 & 3733 MWt only 60 & 180 Hz filtered out T OUo0,------------------ -------------- ------ -----

                  ---  VE26769 FW-A DLA-201 N 'ýLevref2 = 5ý% ASME ON3A#wbW            I 45% +-          -VE26770       FW-A DLA-202 perp Level = 1001 ASME O        I Aowable-    FF CHART
                 -     VE26771 FW-A DLA-202 perp to 40% f-              VE26770
                 -VE26772         FW-A N4E axial
                 --*-VE26773 FW-A N4E perp 35% +-

(n VE26774 FW-A N4E perp to VE26773

• 30% - VE26775 FW-A DLA-202 vert

                 -'0--VE26776 FW-A DLA-202 axial 25%    m       -VE26777        FW-A DLA-202 trans 0
                  -VE26778        FW-A N4D perp

• 20%

15% 10%/ 5%/ 0% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Feedwater Flow - Mlbs/hr Figure 52: Feedwater Piping - % of Allowables (RMS) SSES Unit 2 - May 2009 - Recirculation A' Loop Piping - Percent of Allowables 110% Note: 60, 120, 180 & 240 Hz filtered out - For 3545, 3587 & 3733 MWt only 60 & 180 Hz filtered out 100% Lev&e2 r100% of tno(Criteria:I 90% -- efaiatd Erredm* =eview %equi-LIFE* BothRI ANDZe To-Pek E , VE? 80% 7ero-To- Aiwa withih PFE do0 . ...... Accepte ice U) 70% 2

              "-u--VE26723RRS-A N2K Riser                                                        _

60%

               -VE26724         RRS-A 4" Pump Bypass Line Riser 50%       ---     VE26725 RRS-A 4" Pump Bypass Line Run                                                                       _-____

CL

               -VE26726         RRS-A Dead End 40%        -e-VE26727 RRS-A Decon"--                                                                                 :

VE26728 RRS-A 4" RWCU 30% -"PVE26729 RRS-A 2" RWCU E-W *qr*

               --e-VE26730 RRS-A 2" RWCU N-S                                                                              l              *7:29 20%               VE26731 RRS-A F031A Pump Disch Valve"*,----"ql 10%

0% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Total Core Flow - Mlbs/hr Figure 53: Reactor Recirculation 'A' Loop Piping - % of Allowables (RMS) Page 38

Non-Proprietary Version SSES Unit 2 - May 2009 - RHR 'A Loop Inside Containment Piping Percent of Allowables Note: 60, 120, 180 &240 Hz filtered out - For 3545, 3587 &3733 MWt only 60 & 180 Hz filtered out 50% 12 = 1001 of Aocceiac C+le - uf 40% 'U 30% 10%

• 20%

0. 0% 10% 0% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Total Core Flow - Mlbs/hr Figure 54: RHR 'A' Loop Inside Containment Piping - % of Allowables (RMS) SSES Unit 2 - May 2009 - Reactor Recirculation 'B' and RHR 'B' Loop Inside Containment Piping Percent of Allowables Note: 60, 120, 180 & 240 Hz filtered out - For 3545, 3587 & 3733 MWt only 60 & 180 Hz filtered out 100% T 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% CL 30% 20% 10% 0% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Total Core Flow - Mlbslhr Figure 55: Reactor Recirculation 'B' and RHR 'B' Loop Inside Containment Piping

                             % of Allowables (RMS)

Page 39

Non-Proprietary Version SSES Unit 2 - May 2009 - RHR HVI51FO15A & B Valves (Outside Containment) Percent of Allowable Note: 60, 120, 180 &240 Hz filtered out - For 3545, 3587 & 3733 MWt only 60 & 180 Hz filtered out 20% 15% u)

          = 10%

0 C 0 5% 0% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Total Core Flow - Mlbslhr Figure 56: RHR HV151FO15A & B Valves (Outside Containment)% of Allowables (RMS) SSES Unit 2 - May 2009 - RHR HVI51FO17A & B Valves (Outside Containment) Percent of Allowable Note: 60, 120, 180 &240 Hz filtered out - For 3545, 3587 &3733 MWt only 60 &180 Hz filtered out 35% Leve 2 =100% FAccelptaH Crfterl - Furttwe fero-To4.P4 ik' RevPeA Required 4Exceedel - OFF CH kRT 30% - VE26744 RHR F017A Operator horz

                              -VE26745       RHR F017A Operator vert
                            -.-   VE26746 RHR F017A Operator para 25%   -f-                ---   VE26747 RHR F017A Valve horz VE26748 RHR F017A Valve vert
'U                                VE26754 RHR F01 7B Operator horz

'R 20%

                            --    VE26755 RHR F017B Operator vert
                            -VE26756         RHR F01 7B Operator para 15%   I                   -    VE26757 RHR F017B Valve horz
                            -VE26758         RHR F017B Valve vert 0~

10% 5% 0% I 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Total Core Flow - Mlbslhr 70 80 90 100 ___ 110 Figure 57: RHR HV151FO17A & B Valves (Outside Containment)% of Allowables (RMS) Page 40

Non-Proprietary Version Appendix A Plant Data Log Sheets Page 41

Non-Proprietary Version Steam Dryer Data Log Sheets Start jDate/Time 614/2009 16:10 (Start) Computer ID Value Units Thermal Power (Instantaneous) u02.nba0l 3730.72 MWth Thermal Power (15 min Ave.) u02.nbal0l 3731.86 MWth Electrical Power u02.gnjO2 1238.53 Mwe Total Core Flow u02.nffl2 97.81 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop Flow A u02.njf02 49.29 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop Flow B u02.njfO3 48.60 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop A Suction Temperature u02.nrt0l 524.78 T Recirc Loop B Suction Temperature u02.nrtO2 524.48 T Core Plate DIP u02.njp5l 15.47 PSI Indicated Steam Flow Line A u02.nffOl 3.91 M Ibm/hr Indicated Steam Flow Line B u02.nffO2 4.09 M Ibm/hr Indicated Steam Flow Line C u02.nffO3 4.00 M Ibm/hr Indicated Steam Flow Line D u02.nffO4 3.92 M Ibm/hr Indicated Total Steam Flow u02.nfflO 15.90 M Ibm/hr Indicated Feedwater Flow u02.nffl 1 15.50 M Ibm/hrr Feedwater Temperature Line A u02.fpt0l 398.09 TF Feedwater Temperature Line B u02.fptO2 396.30 OF Feedwater Temperature Line C 0 u02.fpt03 393.68 F Rx Dome Pressure Narrow Range u02.nfpOl 1019.73 PSIG Rx Dome Pressure Wide Range u02.nfpO2 1018.97 PSIG Steam Dome Temperature u02.nfa05 548.55 TF Recirculation Pump A Speed vm.2p401a/2arrptac 1464.00 RPM Recirculation Pump B Speed vm.2p401b/2b rrptac 1441.00 RPM Recirculation Pump A Power u02.nrj5l 3.90 MWe Recirculation Pump B Power u02.nrj52 3.71 MWe CRD Cooling Header Flow u02.nef03 62.36 GPM CRD System Flow u02.nef0l 62.32 GPM CRD System Temperature u02.ndt05 131.99 OF Bottom Head Drain Temp u02.nlt0l 528.35 TF Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nflOl 36.07 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nflO2 35.90 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nflO3 34.04 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Wide Range u02.nbIO2 28.88 Inches H20 Recirculation Pump A Vane Passing Freq. n/a 122.00 Hz Recirculation Pump B Vane Passing Freq. n/a 120.08 Hz Recirculation Pump A Motor Frequency n/a 49.29 Hz Recirculation Pump B Motor Frequency n/a 48.52 Hz Enhanced Steam Flow Calculations Feed Flow Line A (LEFM) u02.nff77 5.18 M Ibm/hr Feed Flow Line B (LEFM) u02.nff78 5.19 M Ibm/hr Feed Flow Line C (LEFM) u02.nff79 5.14 M Ibm/hr CRD Flow u02.ndf0l 0.03 M Ibm/hr Total Feedwater Flow n/a 15.54 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line A n/a 3.81 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line B n/a 4.00 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line C n/a 3.90 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line D n/a 3.83 M Ibm/hr Total Steam Flow n/a 15.54 M Ibm/hr Test Point 1 - 3731 MWth / 97.8 Mlbm/hr - Start Page 42

Non-Proprietary Version Steam Dryer Data Log Sheets Finish 1Date/Time 61412009 16:13 (Finish) Comnouter ID Value Units Thermal Power (Instantaneous) u02.nba01 3730.58 MWth Thermal Power (15 min Ave.) u02.nbal01 3731.73 MWth Electrical Power u02.gnjO2 1235.60 Mwe Total Core Flow u02.nff12 97.59 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop Flow A u02.njf02 48.97 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop Flow B u02.njfO3 48.92 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop A Suction Temperature u02.nrt0l 524.56 TF Recirc Loop B Suction Temperature u02.nrtO2 524.37 TF Core Plate DIP u02.njp5l 15.45 PSI Steam Flow Line A u02.nffOl 3.90 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line B u02.nffO2 4.10 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line C u02.nffO3 3.99 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line D u02.nffO4 3.93 M Ibm/hr Total Steam Flow u02.nfflO 15.95 M Ibm/hr Feedwater Flow u02.nffll 15.50 M Ibm/hr Feedwater Temperature Line A u02.fptOl 398.09 TF Feedwater Temperature Line B u02.fpt02 396.30 *F Feedwater Temperature Line C u02.fptO3 393.57 'F Rx Dome Pressure Narrow Range u02.nfpOl 1019.59 PSIG Rx Dome Pressure Wide Range u02.nfpO2 1018.99 PSIG Steam Dome Temperature u02.nfaO5 548.62 TF Recirculation Pump A Speed vm.2p40la/2a rrp tac 1464.00 RPM Recirculation Pump B Speed vm.2p401b/2b rrptac 1441.00 RPM Recirculation Pump A Power u02.nrj5l 3.90 MWe Recirculation Pump B Power u02.nrj52 3.72 MWe CRD Cooling Header Flow u02.nef03 62.34 GPM CRD System Flow u02.nefOl 62.32 GPM CRD System Temperature u02.ndtO5 131.99 TF Bottom Head Drain Temp u02.nlt01 528.37 TF Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nfl01 35.52 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nfl02 37.29 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nflO3 35.52 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Wide Range u02.nblO2 29.13 Inches H20 Recirculation Pump A Vane Passing Freg. n/a 122.00 Hz Recirculation Pump B Vane Passing Freq. n/a 120.08 Hz Recirculation Pump A Motor Frequency n/a 49.29 Hz Recirculation Pump B Motor Frequency n/a 48.52 Hz Enhanced Steam Flow Calculations Feed Flow Line A (LEFM) u02.nff77 5.18 M Ibm/hr Feed Flow Line B (LEFM) u02.nff78 5.19 M Ibm/hr Feed Flow Line C (LEFM) u02.nff79 5.14 M Ibm/hr CRD Flow u02.ndf01 0.03 M Ibm/hr Total Feedwater Flow n/a 15.54 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line A n/a 3.81 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line B n/a 4.00 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line C n/a 3.90 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line D n/a 3.83 M Ibm/hr Total Steam Flow n/a 15.54 M Ibm/hr Test Point 1 - 3731 MWth / 97.8 Mlbm/hr - Finish Page 43

Non-Proprietary Version Steam Dryer Data Log Sheets Start jDate/Time 611012009 10:04 (Start) ID Value Units Comouter Computer ID Value Units Thermal Power (Instantaneous) u02.nba01 3727.73 MWth Thermal Power (15 min Ave.) u02.nbal01 3722.08 MWth Electrical Power u02.gnj02 1231.93 Mwe Total Core Flow u02.nff12 92.80 M lbm/hr Recirc Loop Flow A u02.njf02 45.92 M lbm/hr Recirc Loop Flow B u02.njf03 45.94 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop A Suction Temperature u02.nrt01 523.64 OF Recirc Loop B Suction Temperature u02.nrt02 523.28 OF Core Plate DIP u02.njp51 13.85 PSI Indicated Steam Flow Line A u02.nff01 3.92 M Ibm/hr Indicated Steam Flow Line B u02.nffO2 4.07 M Ibm/hr Indicated Steam Flow Line C u02.nffO3 4.01 M Ibm/hr Indicated Steam Flow Line D u02.nffO4 3.91 M Ibm/hr Indicated Total Steam Flow u02.nffl0 15.91 M Ibm/hr Indicated Feedwater Flow u02.nffll 15.48 M Ibm/hr Feedwater Temperature Line A u02.fpt01 397.95 OF Feedwater Temperature Line B u02.fptO2 396.17 OF Feedwater Temperature Line C u02.fpt03 393.70 OF Rx Dome Pressure Narrow Range u02.nfp01 1019.24 PSIG Rx Dome Pressure Wide Range u02.nfpO2 1017.94 PSIG Steam Dome Temperature u02.nfaO5 548.47 OF Recirculation Pump A Speed vm.2p401a/2arrptac 1376.00 RPM Recirculation Pump B Speed vm.2p4Olb/2b rrptac 1360.00 RPM Recirculation Pump A Power u02.nrj51 3.24 MWe Recirculation Pump B Power u02.nrj52 3.13 MWe CRD Cooling Header Flow u02.nef03 61.25 GPM CRD System Flow u02.nef01 62.33 GPM CRD System Temperature u02.ndtO5 133.59 OF Bottom Head Drain Temp u02.nlt01 526.96 OF Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nfl01 33.39 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nfl02 36.82 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nfl03 35.04 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Wide Range u02.nblO2 29.33 Inches H20 Recirculation Pump A Vane Passing Freq. n/a 114.67 Hz Recirculation Pump B Vane Passing Freq. n/a 113.33 Hz Recirculation Pump A Motor Frequency n/a 46.33 Hz Recirculation Pump B Motor Frequency n/a 45.79 Hz Enhanced Steam Flow Calculations Feed Flow Line A (LEFM) u02.nff77 5.24 M Ibm/hr Feed Flow Line B (LEFM) u02.nff78 5.04 M Ibm/hr Feed Flow Line C (LEFM) u02.nff79 5.21 M Ibm/hr CRD Flow u02.ndf01 0.03 M Ibm/hr Total Feedwater Flow n/a 15.53 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line A n/a 3.82 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line B n/a 3.97 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line C n/a 3.91 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line D n/a 3.82 M Ibm/hr Total Steam Flow n/a 15.53 M Ibm/hr Test Point 2 - 3728 MWth / 92.8 Mlbm/hr - Start Page 44

Non-Proprietary Version Steam Dryer Data Log Sheets Finish [Daterrime 611012009 10:07 (Finish) Computer ID Value Units Thermal Power (Instantaneous) u02.nba0l 3728.34 MWth Thermal Power (15 min Ave.) u02.nbal0l 3724.92 MWth Electrical Power u02.gnjO2 1231.20 Mwe Total Core Flow u02.nffl2 92.78 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop Flow A u02.njfO2 46.16 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop Flow B u02.njfO3 45.89 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop A Suction Temperature u02.nrt0l 523.61 'F Recirc Loop B Suction Temperature u02.nrtO2 523.26 °F Core Plate DIP u02.njp5l 13.85 PSI Steam Flow Line A u02.nffOl 3.91 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line B u02.nffO2 4.08 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line C u02.nffO3 4.02 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line D u02.nffO4 3.93 M Ibmlhr Total Steam Flow u02.nfflO 15.92 M Ibm/hr Feedwater Flow u02.nffll 15.49 M Ibm/hr Feedwater Temperature Line A u02.fpt0l 397.95 'F Feedwater Temperature Line B u02.fpt02 396.30 'F Feedwater Temperature Line C u02.fptO3 393.83 °F Rx Dome Pressure Narrow Range u02.nfpOl 1019.59 PSIG Rx Dome Pressure Wide Range u02.nfp02 1018.08 PSIG Steam Dome Temperature u02.nfaO5 548.48 *F Recirculation Pump A Speed vm.2p401a/2a rrpjtac 1375.00 RPM Recirculation Pump B Speed vm.2p4Olb/2brrp~tac 1359.00 RPM Recirculation Pump A Power u02.nrj5l 3.24 MWe Recirculation Pump B Power u02.nrj52 3.13 MWe CRD Cooling Header Flow u02.nef03 61.43 GPM CRD System Flow u02.nef0l 62.33 GPM CRD System Temperature u02.ndtO5 133.59 °F Bottom Head Drain Temp u02.nlt0l 526.89 'F Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nflOl 34.46 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nflO2 37.06 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nflO3 35.08 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Wide Range u02.nblO2 29.21 Inches H20 Recirculation Pump A Vane Passing Freq. n/a 114.58 Hz Recirculation Pump B Vane Passing Freq. n/a 113.25 Hz Recirculation Pump A Motor Frequency n/a 46.30 Hz Recirculation Pump B Motor Frequency n/a 45.76 Hz Enhanced Steam Flow Calculations Feed Flow Line A (LEFM) u02.nff77 5.24 M Ibm/hr Feed Flow Line B (LEFM) u02.nff78 5.05 M Ibm/hr Feed Flow Line C (LEFM) u02.nff79 5.22 M Ibm/hr CRD Flow u02.ndf0l 0.03 M Ibm/hr Total Feedwater Flow n/a 15.54 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line A n/a 3.81 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line B n/a 3.98 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line C n/a 3.92 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line D n/a 3.83 M Ibm/hr Total Steam Flow n/a 15.54 M Ibm/hr Test Point 2 - 3728 MWth / 92.8 Mlbm/hr - Finish Page 45

Non-Proprietary Version Steam Dryer Data Log Sheets Start [Date/Time 6/11/2009 12:22 (Start) Computer ID Value Units Thermal Power (Instantaneous) u02.nba01 3726.14 MWth Thermal Power (15 min Ave.) u02.nbal01 3725.51 MWth Electrical Power u02.gnj02 1224.24 Mwe Total Core Flow u02.nff12 107.82 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop Flow A u02.njf02 54.07 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop Flow B u02.njf03 53.90 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop A Suction Temperature u02.nrt01 526.71 °F Recirc Loop B Suction Temperature u02.nrt02 526.20 OF Core Plate D/P u02.njp51 18.23 PSI Indicated Steam Flow Line A u02.nff01 3.94 M Ibm/hr Indicated Steam Flow Line B u02.nffO2 4.09 M Ibm/hr Indicated Steam Flow Line C u02.nffO3 4.02 M Ibm/hr Indicated Steam Flow Line D u02.nffO4 3.93 M Ibm/hr Indicated Total Steam Flow u02.nffl0 15.93 M Ibm/hr Indicated Feedwater Flow u02.nffl 1 15.50 M Ibm/hr Feedwater Temperature Line A u02.fpt01 398.09 °F Feedwater Temperature Line B u02.fptO2 396.30 °F Feedwater Temperature Line C u02.fpt03 393.69 OF Rx Dome Pressure Narrow Range u02.nfp01 1019.65 PSIG Rx Dome Pressure Wide Range u02.nfpO2 1018.33 PSIG Steam Dome Temperature u02.nfa05 548.58 °F Recirculation Pump A Speed vm.2p401a/2arrptac 1603.00 RPM Recirculation Pump B Speed vm.2p401b/2brrp tac 1577.00 RPM Recirculation Pump A Power u02.nrj5l 5.11 MWe Recirculation Pump B Power u02.nrj52 4.86 MWe CRD Cooling Header Flow u02.nef03 62.34 GPM CRD System Flow u02.nef01 62.32 GPM CRD System Temperature u02.ndtO5 136.53 OF Bottom Head Drain Temp u02.nlt01 530.60 OF Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nfl01 34.44 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nfl02 35.90 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nfl03 36.75 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Wide Range u02.nblO2 26.02 Inches H20 Recirculation Pump A Vane Passing Freq. n/a 133.58 Hz Recirculation Pump B Vane Passing Freq. n/a 131.42 Hz Recirculation Pump A Motor Frequency n/a 53.97 Hz Recirculation Pump B Motor Frequency n/a 53.10 Hz Enhanced Steam Flow Calculations Feed Flow Line A (LEFM) u02.nff77 5.22 M Ibm/hr Feed Flow Line B (LEFM) u02.nff78 5.08 M Ibm/hr Feed Flow Line C (LEFM) u02.nff79 5.18 M Ibm/hr CRD Flow u02.ndf01 0.03 M Ibm/hr Total Feedwater Flow n/a 15.52 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line A n/a 3.83 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line B n/a 3,97 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line C n/a 3.90 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line D n/a 3.82 M Ibm/hr Total Steam Flow n/a 15.52 M Ibm/hr Test Point 3 - 3726 MWth / 107.8 Mlbm/hr - Start Page 46

Non-Proprietary Version Steam Dryer Data Log Sheets Finish jDate/Time 6/1112009 12:25 (Finish) Computer ID Value Units Thermal Power (Instantaneous) u02.nba01 .3726.26 MWth Thermal Power (15 min Ave.) u02.nbal01 3725.99 MWth Electrical Power u02.gnjO2 1223.51 Mwe Total Core Flow u02.nffl2 107.86 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop Flow A u02.njfO2 54.10 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop Flow B u02.njfO3 53.66 M Ibm/hr Recirc Loop A Suction Temperature u02.nrt0l 526.71 oF Recirc Loop B Suction Temperature u02.nrtO2 526.22 oF Core Plate DIP u02.njp5l 18.23 PSI Steam Flow Line A u02.nffOl 3.89 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line B u02.nffO2 4.10 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line C u02.nffO3 4.02 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line D u02.nffO4 3.92 M Ibm/hr Total Steam Flow u02.nfflO 15.93 M Ibm/hr Feedwater Flow u02.nffll 15.50 M Ibm/hr Feedwater Temperature Line A u02.fpt0l 398.22 oF Feedwater Temperature Line B u02.fptO2 396.30 oF Feedwater Temperature Line C u02.fptO3 393.70 'F Rx Dome Pressure Narrow Range u02.nfpOl 1019.41 PSIG Rx Dome Pressure Wide Range u02.nfp02 1018.08 PSIG Steam Dome Temperature u02.nfa05 548.58 oF Recirculation Pump A Speed vm.2p401a/2a rrp tac 1602.00 RPM Recirculation Pump B Speed vm.2p401b/2b rrp tac 1578.00 RPM Recirculation Pump A Power u02.nrj5l 5.12 MWe Recirculation Pump B Power u02.nrj52 4.87 MWe CRD Cooling Header Flow u02.nefO3 62.26 GPM CRD System Flow u02.nef01 62.34 GPM CRD System Temperature u02.ndt05 136.53 'F Bottom Head Drain Temp u02.nlt01 530.60 oF Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nfl01 35.21 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nflO2 35.98 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Narrow Range u02.nflO3 35.76 Inches H20 Reactor Water Level Wide Range u02.nblO2 25.91 Inches H20 Recirculation Pump A Vane Passing Freq. n/a 133.50 Hz Recirculation Pump B Vane Passing Freq. n/a 131.50 Hz Recirculation Pump A Motor Frequency n/a 53.94 Hz Recirculation Pump B Motor Frequency n/a 53.13 Hz Enhanced Steam Flow Calculations Feed Flow Line A (LEFM) u02.nff77 5.23 M Ibm/hr Feed Flow Line B (LEFM) u02.nff78 5.08 M Ibm/hr Feed Flow Line C (LEFM) u02.nff79 5.18 M Ibm/hr CRD Flow u02.ndfO1 0.03 M Ibm/hr Total Feedwater Flow n/a 15.52 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line A n/a 3.79 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line B n/a 3.99 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line C n/a 3.92 M Ibm/hr Steam Flow Line D n/a 3.82 M Ibm/hr Total Steam Flow n/a 15.52 M Ibm/hr Test Point 3 - 3726 MWth / 107.8 Mlbm/hr - Finish Page 47 to PLA-6542 Affidavit

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION SUBMITTED UNDER 10 C.F.R. §2.390 AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD D. PAGODIN I, Richard D. Pagodin General Manager-Nuclear Engineering PPL Susquehanna, LLC, do hereby affirm and state:

1. I am authorized to execute this affidavit on behalf of PPL Susquehanna, LLC (hereinafter referred to as "PPL").

2. PPL requests that the information attached and identified by text inside triple brackets {{{This sentence is an example.}1} be withheld from public disclosure under the provisions of 10 C.F.R. 2.390(a)(4).

3. The PPL Documents contain confidential commercial information, the disclosure of which would adversely affect PPL.

4. This information has been held in confidence by PPL. To the extent that PPL has shared this information with others, it has done so on a confidential basis.

5. PPL customarily keeps such information in confidence and there is a rational basis for holding such information in confidence. The information is not available from public sources and could not be gathered readily from other publicly available information.

6. Public disclosure of this information would cause substantial harm to the competitive position of PPL, because such information has significant commercial value to PPL.

7. The information identified in paragraph (2) above is classified as proprietary because it details the results of test data derived from test instrumentation installed specifically to collect this data. This instrumentation was installed at a significant cost to PPL. The data and the conditions under which it was collected constitute a major PPL asset.

8. Public disclosure of the information sought to be withheld is likely to cause substantial harm to PPL by foreclosing or reducing the availability of profit-making opportunities. The information is of value to other BWR Licensee's and would support evaluations and analyses associated with extended power uprate license amendment submittals. Making this information available to other BWR Licensee's would represent a windfall and deprive PPL the opportunity to recover a portion of its large investment in the test instrumentation from which this data is derived.

PPL SUSQUEHANNA, LLC Richard D. Pagodin Subscribed and sworn before me, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA a Notary Public in and for the Vintcent,Saw Pamela m.Notarw Noary P"J~o Commonwealth of Pennsylvania S&Wrkf Twp., Cmbki CWj This,3blay of ,,."-, ,2009 My CrmSon_Epres May 31,2010

                                                   -ernbw,  Pennsylvania Association of Nowros}}