NRC-88-0286, Responds to Generic Ltr 88-11, NRC Position on Radiation Embrittlement of Reactor Vessel Matls & Impact on Plant Operations

Responds to Generic Ltr 88-11, NRC Position on Radiation Embrittlement of Reactor Vessel Matls & Impact on Plant Operations

ML20206M155
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	11/28/1988
From:	Sylvia B DETROIT EDISON CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
References
CON-NRC-88-0286, CON-NRC-88-286 GL-88-11, NUDOCS 8811300458
Download: ML20206M155 (20)

Text

c -

s'

. , B. Ralph Sytyk] )

• * . ,'>enor V>ce President  !

Detrol,t m,m o . _ ,,

Edison =r"-

Novenber 28, 1988 100-88-0286 U. S. Inclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Docturent Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555 Refererces: 1) Fermi 2 NIC Docket No. 50-341 100 License No. NPF-43

2) NIC Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, "Paliation Dbrittle: rent of Reactor Vessel Materials",

datal May,1988

3) NFC Generic Letter 88-11, "NIC Position on Radiation Dbrittlerent of Pt. actor Vessel Materials and Its Inpact On Plant Cperations",

dated July 12, 1988

Subject:

Remoonee to IT GeTLq;ic Letter 88-11 Detroit Blison received ard reviewrx1 Generic Letter 88-11 ard Revision 2 of Pegulatory Guide 1.99. The supporting technical services of General Electric were securo 3 in the form of a plant specific analysis. The analysis assessrsi the inpact of Revision 2 of the Reg.

Guide on:

1) The todatal Final Safety Analysis Report (LTSAR) section 5.2, and anterrlant figu.es.

2) Technical Specification 3/4.4.6.

The vessel materials of construction, and the accociated chemical analysis were enveloped by the "limitatiorn" specified in section 1.3 of the Reg. Guide revision. The enclosure to this letter contains the results of the technical analysis and an action plan which will include analysis of a flux wire doniteter and preparation of UFSAR and Technical Spccification revisionn. .

00

' I gp3?#2n8shh[ht P

$ h

'l OSNFC Novenber 28, 1988 100-88-0286 Page 2 If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Girija Stukla at (313) 586-4270.

Sincerely, h j cc Mr. A. B. Davis Mr. R. C. Knop Mr. W. G. Pogers Mr. J. F. Stang l

b i

i I

> l l

l l

-m Enc)osureto NR(,-89-0286-Page 1*. .

o RESPONSE TO NRC GENERIC LETTER 80-11 o BACKGROUND The pressure temperature (P T) curves in the Technical Specifications are established to the requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix G to assure that brittle fracture of the reactor vessel is prevented. Part of the analysis involved in developing the P T curves is to account for irradiation embrittlement effects in the core region, or beltline. In the past, Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 1 has been used to predict the shift in nil ductility reference temperature (RTNDT) as a function of fluence in the beltline region. Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 1 (Rev 1) was developed assumin5 that copper (Cu) and phosphorus (P) were the key chemical ele'ments influencing embrittlement.

Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2 (Rev 2) vas issued in May 1988.

Rev 2 represents the results of statistical evaluation of commercial reactor surveillance test data accumulated through about 1984. The basic elements of the regulatory guide, a chemistry factor and a fluence factor remained the same from Rev 1 to Rev 2. However, each factor is significantly different. The chemistry factor (CF) has been changed from an equation based on Cu and P in Rev 1 to table, of CF values based on Cu and nickel (NL), with separate tables for plates and for welds. The fluence factor has been modified in Rev 2 to a somewhat more complex form. The overall effect of the changes from Rev 1 to Rev 2 has generally been to increase RTNDT shift predictions for relatively low fluences (below 10 19 n/cm8 ) and to decrease RT NDT shift predictions for higher fluences.

Generic Letter 88 11 requests an evaluation of the impact of Rev 2 on existing PT curves, and an impicmentation schedule for i

required actions. This response presents the results of the Rev 2 impact evaluation for Termi 2. Proposed actions required for implementation of Rev 2 and proposed schedules for implementation are also provided with this response.

Encl? sure to

. NRC-88-02B5 Page 2 ~ '

o IMPACT EVALUATION The beltline region in Fermi 2 consists of three lower shell plates, four lower-intermediate shell plates and the connecting longitudinal welds and girth weld. Attachment A shows the details of the impact evaluation. The process followed for analyzing each beltline material is described below.

Chemistry The chemistry data shown in the attachments were taken from the GE design record file which supports Section 5.2 of the UFSAR.

As-welded fabrication chemistry data are not available for the longitudinal welds designated 2-307, so the default values prescribed by the regulatory guide were assumed. For the other veld chemistries, Ni content data were not reported, so the default value of 1.0% was assumed.

initial RTNDT The values of initial RTNDT shown in the attachments were taken from the design record files supporting the materials information and the pressure temperature (P-T) curves in the UFSAR. These values were based on 30 ft-lb impact energy verification testing, with longitudinal Charpy specimens used for plate, done at the time of vessel fabrication. A GE procedure was used to establish conservative values of RTgg7 from the fabrication test data for the P T curves in the UFSAR. Since the inicial RTNDT values are conservative, the term in the Rev 2 margin c.:pression og ic assumed to be zero.

I

Enc

. NRC-}osureto 88-0286 Pjge 3' .

Fluence The value of fluence for 32 effective full power years (EFPY) shown in the attachment is based on the most recent design calculations performed for Fermi 2. The 1/4 T fluence value used to develop the P-T curves in the Technical Specifications, 18 n/cm2 , was reduced in 1981 to 1.1x10 18 1.4x10 n/cm2 to reflect improved methods. The 1/4 T value was used in the attachments for the Rev i shift calculations. The inside surface fluence was used in the Rev 2 shift calculations, as described below.

The Rev 2 method of calculating shift requires that the fluence at the vessel inside surface, fsurf, be calculated and then attenuated to the 'epth x according to the relationship:

f x-fsurf (e 0a4x),

This method results in a slightly higher fluence at the 1/4 T location than was calculated as the design basis.

Surveillance Test Correction Factor Rev 1 allows for consideration of credible surveillance data when it becomes available. Rev 2 requires that two sets of credible data be developed before considering their use. However, no surveillance testing has been performed yet, so surveillance test correction factors do not apply for either Rev 1 or Rev 2 calculations, and are set to 1.0 in the attachment.

Enclovire to NRC-88-028.6

• Pago 4 ,

l L

SHIFT and Adjusted Reference Temnerature (ART)

The RTNDT shift calculations in the attachment are based on the procedures in Rev 1 and Rev 2. For Rev 1, the equation for SHIFT is:

SHIFT - (STF)*[40 + 1000(%Cu - .08) + 5000(%P - .008))*(f)0,5 ,

where STF - surveillance test correction factor f - fluence for the given EFPY / 10 19 For Rev 2, the SHIFT equation consists of two terms: ,

SHIFT - ARTNDT + Margin where ARTNDT - (CF)*f(0,28 0.10 log f)

Margin - 2(og 2 + o32 ).5 ,

Chemistry factors (CF) are tabulated for welds and plates in Tables 1 and 2, respectively, of Rev 2. The margin term og has set values in Rev 2 of 17'F for plate and 28'F for weld. However, og need not be greater than 0.5*ARTFDT*

The values of ART in the attachnents are computed by adding the SHIFT terms to the values of initial RT NDT' i

t I

r a

Euc)csure to NRC-83,0286 Page 5 o RESULTS

SUMMARY

The impact of implementing Rev 2 is determined by comparing the ART values based on Rev 1 and Rev 2. Table 1 shows the ART values at 32 EFPY for each beltline material in Unit 2. The following conclusions are drawn from the results in the table:

1. The Rev 2 ART values at 32 EFPY are below 200'F, which is the allowable limit in 10CFR50, Appendix G. Therefore, implementation of Rev 2 will not result in any additional analysis, testing or provisions for thermal annealing.

2. The ART value for Unit 2 which epplies to the P T curves in the UFSAR is 80*F at 32 EFPY ". The maximum Rev 2 ART value in Table 2 for 32 EFPY is 134.5'F. Therefore, the PT curves are less conservative than curves that would be generated with Rev 2 methods.

3. The current P.T curves in the Technical Specifications, based on Rev 1 methods, show curves A, B and C valid to 20 EFPY and curves A', B' and C' valid to 31 EFPY, If ART values are computed according to Rev 2 methods, curves A, B and C are valid to about 6 EFPY. Curves A' , B' and C' are valid to about 10 EFPY using i

Rev 2 methods.

L j

i i

4

)

This ART value is based on a 1/4 T fluence of 1.4x10 18 n/cm2, rather than the most recently computed design value of 1,lx10 18 n/cm 2,

b Enclosure to tmC-88-00%  !

Page 6 I o PROPOSED ACTIONS A?D !EHPDULES I . NPLDENTATION CF REV. 2 i

Generic Letter 88-11 requires that Rev. 2 be inplemented within  !

two plant outages (approximately 3 years) . Based on the results i described earlier, following are the propose 3 actions and j

schedules for inplenentation of Rev. 2.

o Since the inplementation of Rev. 2 methodt, results in Pressure Tenperature (P-T) limits that are nore conservative than those t in the current P-T curves, which are based on Rev.1, the r i existing P-T curves will be revised. However, the existing '

P-T curves are valid per Rev. 2 analysis for at least 6 FPY.

! Therefore, operation with the existing curves provides ,

satisfactory safety rargin against brittle fracture.  !

I o In order to develop P T curves which represent the true Fermi

• 2 operating corditions (fluence) the results of the flux wire i donimeter testing should be included in the P-T curve [

, calculations. In this way, revised P-T curves will include a fluence value based on the actual plant operation which is  :

I expected to be lower than the design fluence. 'Ihe current  ;

schedule for withdrawal and testing of the flux wire dosimeter j i is during the first refueling outage. Results of this l l analysis would be conpleted an3 incorporated into P-T curve

! cdculations for Rev. 2. '

}

! Accordingly, Fermi 2 Technical Specifications and the UFSAR i

sections related to P-T curves will be revised before the  ;

l second refueling outage to incorporate the new P-T curves. j l

l' This proposed s,:bcdule conplies with the tHC requirenents for safe  ;

operation of Fermi 2 arrl the validity of the existing P-T curves [

i for the proposed operating tire period based upon Rev. 2 of j 4

Pogulatory Guide 1.99 for protection against brittle fracture of ,

l the reactor vessel. l 1

i 4 r

! f 4

t I

l l  !

l- I I

l i -

I t t

En'losure c to

'll R C - 9 8 .0.2 8 7 Page 7 Table 1 COMPARISON OF REV 1 AND REV 2 ART VALUES FOR FCRMI UNIT 2 32 EFPY Rev 1 Rev 2 Beltline Component Heat No. ART ('F',

ART ('_El Unit 2 Plates:

G 3703-5 C4564 1 i.9 40.2 G-3705 1 B8614 1 ?1.5 51.5 G 3705 2 C4574-2 13.8 42.5 G-3705 3 C4568-2 21.2 59.5 G 3706 1 C4540 2 6.6 35.9 G 3706 2 C4560-1 16.5 56.4 G 3706 3 C4554 1 21.5 61.0 Unit 2 Welds:

2 307 A,B,C 13253,12008 67.1 134.5 15-308 A,B,C,D 33A277 56.1 124.4 1 313 10137 26.3 112.3 i

^ __

ATI/CIPIDTP A CWPARISCN T IRRADIATION INBRITTLDDTP PRIDICTIONS T RIIIIIA%I& GUIDE 1.99, REVISIONS 1 A?D 2 FOR FDNI 2 l

i l

l I

l l

Page 1 CO?"PARISON OF REG. GIIILE 1.99 REVISIONS 1 AND 2 FOR FERMI 2 BELTLINF. MATERIALS Iower Intermedicte Plate: G-3703-5 Thickness 6.13 inches '

Material Heat: C4564-1 Chemistry: C Mr P S Si Cu Ni Mo 0.21 1.3 0,01 0.015 0.25 0.09 0.55 0.48 Initial RTndt: RTndt-I - -12 F, Sigma-I = 0F 32 EFPY Fluence (f): Calculated Peak 1/4T f = 1.1E+18 n/cm*2 (used with Rev 1)

Calculated Peak 1.D. f= 1.7E+18 n/cm^2 Rev 2 Attenuated 1/dT f = 1.2E+18 n/cm^2 (basis for Rev 2 delta RT)

Surveillance Testing Affecting Rev 1 Shift Calculation:

Sury.illance testing not yet done.

Correction factor applied = 1 Chemistry Far-tor for Rev 2 Shift: CF= 58 Co=parison of Rev 1 and Rev 2 SHIFT and ART (degrees F) versus EFPY:

Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 1 Rev 1 EFPY Deltr. RT Margin SHIFT ART SHIFT ART 4 8.2 8.2 16.4 4.4 7.0 -5.0 8 12.6 12.6 25.2 13.2 9.9 -2.1 12 15.9 15.9 31.7 19.7 12.2 0.2 16 16.5 18.5 37.0 25.0 14.1 2.1 20 20.8 20.8 41.6 29.6 15.7 3.7 24 22.8 22.8 45.5 33.5 17.2 5.2 28 24.5 24.5 49.0 37.0 18.6 6.6 32 26.1 26.1 52.2 40.2 19.9 7.9

o .

t

~

Page 2

' COMPARISON OF REG. GUIDE 1.99 REVISIONS 1 AND 2 FOR FERMI 2 BELTLI?!E NATERIALS I

Lower Intermediate ? late: G-3705-1 Thickness 6.13 inches Material Heat: -B8614-1 Chemistry: C Mn P S Si Cu Ni Mo 0.23 1.22 0.011 0.015 0.27 0.12 0.61 0.62 Initial RTndt: RTndt-I = -20 F, Sigma-I = 0F 32 EFPY Fluence (f): Calculated Peak 1/*4T f=f= 1.1E+18 n/ca^? (used with Rev 1)

Calculated Peak I.D. 1.7E+18 n/ca^2 Rev 2 Attenuated 1/47 f = 1.2E+18 n/ca"2 (basis for .*.w 2 delta RT) i Surveillance Testing Affecting Rev 1 Shift Calculation:

Surveillance testing not yet done.

Correction factor applied = 1 I

l Chemistry Factor for Rev 2 Shift: CF= E3.2 Comparison of Rev 1 and Rev 2 SHIFT and ART (degrees F) versus EFPY:

Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev . Rev 1 EFPY Delta R* Margin SHIFT .1RT - SHIFT ART 4 11.8 11.8 23.6 3.6 11.1 -8.9 i

8 18.1 18.1 35.1 16.1 15.8 -4.2 12 22.7 22.7 45.5 25.5 19.3 -0.7

' 53.1 33.1 22.3 2.3 16 26.6 26.6 20 29.8 29.d 59.6 39.6 24.9 4.9 24 32.6 32.6 65.3 45.3 27.3 7.3 28 35.2 34.0 69.2 49.2 29.5 9.3 32 37.5 34.0 71.5 51.5 31.5 11.5

Page 3

• COMPARISON OF REG. GUIDE 1.99 REVISIONS 1 AND 2 FOR FERMI 2 BELTLINE MATERIALS Lower Intermediate Plate: G-3705-2 Thickness 6.13 inches Material Heat: C4574-2 Chemistry: C Mn P S Si Cu Ni Mo 0.22 1.36 0.014 0.016 0.24 0.1 0.55 0.54 Initial RTndt: RTndt-I = -16 F, Sigma-I = 0F t

32 EFPY Fluence (f): Calculated Peak 1/4T f = 1.1E+18 n/cm^2 (used with Rev 1)

Calculated Peak I.D. f= 1.7E+18 n/cm^2 Rev 2 Attenuated 1/4T f = 1.2E+18 n/cm^2 (basis for Rev 2 delta RT)

Eurveillance Testing Affecting Rev 1 Shift Calculation:

Surveillance testing not yet done.

Correction factor applied = 1 Chemistry Factor for Rev 2 Shift: CF= 65 Comparison of Rev 1 and Rev 2 SHIFT and ART (degrees F) versus EPPY:

Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 1 Rev 1 EFPY Delta RT Margin SHIP" ART SHIFT ART 4 9.2 9.2 18.4 2.4 10.6 -5.4 8 14.1 14.1 28.2 12.2 14.9 -1.1 12 17.8 17.8 35.5 19.5 18.3 2.3 16 20.8 20.8 41.5 25.5 21.1 5.1 20 23.3 23.3 46.6 30.6 23.6 7.6 24 25.5 25.5 51.0 35.0 25.9 9.9 28 27.5 27.5 55.0 33.0 2,.9 11.9 32 29.3 29.3 58.5 42.5 29.8 13.8

Page 4

~

COMPARISON OF REG. GUIDE 1.99 REVISIONS 1 AND 2 FOR FERMI 2 BELTLINE MATERIALS Lower Intermediate Plate: G-3705-3 Thickness 6.13 inches Material Heat: C456d-2 Chemistry: C Mn P S Si Cu Ni Mo l 0.23 1.32 0.012 0.016 0.24 0.12 0.61 0.56 Initial RTndt: RTndt-I = -12 F, Sigma-I = 0F

32 EFPY Fluence (f)

Calculated Peak 1/4T f = 1.1E+18 n/cma 2 (used with Rev 1)

Cr.lculated Peak I.D. f= 1.7E+18 n/ca^2 Rev 2 Attenuated 1/4T f = 1.2E+18 n/cm^2 (basis for Rev 2 delta RT)

Surveillance Testing Affecting Rev 1 Shift Calculation:

Surveillance testing not yet done.

Correction factor applied = 1 Chemistry Factor for Rev 2 Shift: CF= 83.2 Comparison of Rev 1 and Rev 2 SHIFT and ART (degrees F) versus EFPY:

Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 1 Rev 1 EFPY Delta RT Margin SHIFT ART SHIF"' ART 4 11.8 11.8 23.6 11,5 11.7 -0.3 8 18.1 18.1 36.1 24.1 16.6 4.6 12 22.7 22.7 45.5 33.5 20.3 3.3 16 26.6 26.6 53.1 41.1 23.5 11.5 20 29.8 29.8 59.6 47.6 26.2 14.2 24 32.6 32.6 65.3 53.3 28.7 16.7 28 35.2 34.0 69.2 57.2 31.0 19.0 32 37.5 34.0 71.5 59.5 33.2 21.2

Page 5 .

COMPARISON OF REG. GUIDE 1.99 REVISIONS 1 AND 2 FOR FERMI 2 BELTLINE MATERIALS -

Lower Shell Plate: G-3706-1 Thickness 6.13 inches Material Heat: C4540-2 Chemistry: C Mn P S Si Cu Ni Mo 0.24 1.3 0.01 0.01 0.21 0.08 0.62 0.54 Initial RTndt: RTndt-I = -10 F, Sigma-I = 0F 32 EFPY Fluence (f) : Calculated Peak 1/1T f = 1.1E+18 n/cm^2 (used with Rev 1)

Calculated Peak I.D. f= 1.7E+18 n/cm^2 Rev 2 Attenuated 1/4T f = 1.2E+18 n/ca^2 (basis for Rev 2 delta RT)

Surveillance Testing Affecting Rev 1 Shift Calculation:

Surveillance testing not yet done.

Correction factor applied = 1 Chemistry Factor for Rev 2 Shift: CF= 51 Comparison of Rev 1 and Rev 2 SHIFT and ART (degrees F) versus EFPY:

Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 1 Rev 1 EFPY Delta RT Margin SHIFT ART - SHIFT ART 4 7.2 7.2 14.4 4.4 5.9 -4.1 8 11.1 11.1 22.1 12.1 8.3 -1.7 12 13.9 13.9 27.9 17.9 10.2 0.2 16 16.3 16.3 32.6 22.6 11.7 1.7 20 18.3 18.3 36.5 26.5 13.1 3.1 24 20.0 20.0 40.0 30.0 14.4 4.4 28 21.6 21.6 43.1 33.1 15.5 5.5 32 23.0 23.0 45.9 35.9 16.6 6.6

Page 6 .

l COMPARISON OF REG. GUIDE 1.99 REVISIONS 1 AND 2 I

( FOR FERMI 2 BELTLINE MATERIALS Lower Shell Plate: G-3706-2 Thickness 6.13 inches Material Heat: C4560-1 Chemistry: C Mn P S Si Cu Ni Mo 0.22 1.3 0.01 0.015 0.25 0.11 0.57 0.5 Initial RTndt: RTndt-I = -10 F, Sigma-I = 0F 32 EFPY Fluence (f): Calculated Peak 1/4T f = 1.1E+18 n/ca^2 (used with Rev 1)

Calculated Peak I.D. f= 1.7Et18 n/cm^2 Rev 2 Attenuated 1/4T f = 1.2E+18 n/ca^2 (basis for Rev 2 delta RT)

Surveillance Testing Affecting Rev 1 Shift Calculation:

Surveillance testing not yet done.

Correction factor applied = 1 1

Chemistry Factor for Rev 2 Shift: CF= 73.7 I

Comparison of Rev 1 and Rev 2 SHIFT and ART (degrees F) versus EFPY:

Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 1 Rev 1 EFPY Delta RT Margin SHIFT ART SHIFT ART f

4 10.4 10.4 20.9 10.9 9.4 -0.6 8 16.0 16.0 32.0 22.0 13.3 3.3 12 20.2 20.2 40.3 30.3 16.2 6.2 16 23.5 23.5 47.1 37.1 18.8 8.8 20 26.4 26.4 52.8 42.8 21.0 11.0 24 28.9 28.9 57.8 47.8 23.0 13.0 28 31.2 31.2 62.3 52.3 24.8 14.8 32 33.2 33.2 66.4 56.4 26.5 16.5

, ~

Page-7 j ,

l .

3

COMPARISON OF REG. GUIDE 1.99 REVISIONS 1 AND 2

• l FOR FERMI 2 BELTLINE MATERIALS e

i -

^

3 Iower Shell Plate: G-3706-3 Thickness 6.13 inches i Material Heat: C4554-1 I Chemistry: C Mn P S Si Cu Ni Mo j O.22 1.27 0.011 0.018 0.22 0.12 0.56 0.48 Initial RTndt: RTndt-I = -10 F, Sigma-I = 0F I

a l

1

.[ 32 EFPY Fluence (f): Calculated Peak 1/4T f = 1.1E+18 n/cma 2 (used with Rev 1)

Calculated Peak I.D. f= 1.7E+18 n/ca^2 j Rev 2 Attenuated 1/4T f = 1.2E+18 n/cm*2 (basis for Rev 2 delta RT) l Surveillance Testing Affecting Rev 1 Shift Calculation:

Surveillance tenting not yet done.

Correction factor applied = 1 Chemistry Factor for Rev 2 Shift: CF= 82.2 Comparison of Rev 1 and Rev 2 SHIFT and ART (degrees F) versus EFPY:

1 5 P.ev 2 Rev 2 Rev .'t Rev 2 Rev 1 Rev 1 EFPY Delta RT Margin SHIFT ART - SHIFT ART I 4 11.6 11.6 23.3 13.3 11.1 1.1 l 8 17.8 17.8 35.7 25.7 15.8 5.8 12 22.5 22.5 45.0 35.0 19.3 9.3

16 26.2 26.2 52.5 42.5 22.3 12.3 j 20 29.4 29.4 58.9 48.9 24.9 14.9 l 24 32.3 32.3 64.5 54.5 27.3 17.3 28 34.8 34.0 68.8 58.8 29.5 19.5 32 37.0 34.0 71.0 61.0 31.5 21.5 1

1 1

1 i

)

. O

{ Page 8 e COMPARISON OF REG. GOIDE 1.99 REVISIONS,1 AND 2

, FOR FERMI 2 BELTLINE MATERIALS i Beltline Weld 2-307 A,B,C Thickness 6.13 inches I

Material Heat: TANDEM 13253,12006 1092 IDT 3833 i

l Chemistry: C Mn P S Si Cu Ni Mo j O.013 0.35 1

! Initial RTndt: RTndt-I = -44 F, Sigma-I = 0F t

32 EFPY Fluence (f): Calculated Peak 1/4T f = 1.1E+18 n/cm*2 (used with Rev 1) i Calculated Peak I.D. f= 1.7E+18 n/ca^2 Rev 2 Attenuated 1/4T f = 1.2E+18 n/ca^2 (basis for Rev 2 delta RT)

Surveillance Testing Affecting Rev 1 Shift Calculation:

Surveillance testing not yet done.

Correction factor applied = 1 1

Chemistry Factor for Rev 2 Shift: CF= 272

Comparison of Rev 1 and Rev 2 SHIFT and ART (degrees F) versus EFPY

l Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 1 Rev 1 1 EPPY Delta RT Margin SHIFT ART - SHIFT ART 4 38.5 38.5 77.1 33.1 39.3 -4.7 8 59.1 56.0 115.1 71.1 55.6 11.6 12 74.4 S6.0 130.4 86.4 68.0 24.0 l 16 86.8 56.0 142.8 98.8 78.6 34.6 1 20 97.4 56.0 153.4 109.4 87.8 43.8 l 24 106.7 56.0 162.7 118.7 96.2 52.2 28 115.0 56.0 171.0 127.0 103.9 59.S 32 122.5 56.0 178.5 134.5 111.1 67.1 i

. - . _ - . - . . - - ..-.. - _ _ _ - - _ . - - . - . ~ , - - _ - - . - - - - , - - . - -__. _ -- . _ . ___ ,

. o Page 9

~

COMPARISON OF REG. GUIDE 1.99 REVISIONS 1 AND 2 FOR FERMI 2 BELTLINE MATERIALS Beltline Weld 15-308 A,B,C,D Thickness 6.13 inches Material Heat: 33A277 124 IDT 3878 Chemistry: C Mn P S Si Cu Ni Mo 0.073 1.29 0.016 0.011 0.33 0.32 1 0.52 Initial RTndt: RTndt-I = -50 F, Sigma-I = 0F 32 EFPY Fluence (f): Calculated Peak 1/4T f = 1.1E+18 n/ca^2 (used with Rev 1)

Calculated Peak I.D. f= 1.7E+18 n/ca^2 Rev 2 Attenuated 1/4T f = 1.2E+18 n/ca^2 (basis for Rev 2 delta RT)

Surveillance Testing Affecting Rev 1 Shift Calculation:

surveillance testing not yet done.

Correction factor applied = 1 Chemistry Factor for Rev 2 Shift: CF= 263 Comparison of Rev 1 and Rev 2 SHIFT and ART (degrees F) versus EFPY:

Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 1 Rev 1 EFPY Delta RT Margin SHIFT ART SHIFT ART 4 37.3 37.3 74.5 24.5 37.5 -12.5 8 57.1 56.0 113.1 63.1 53.1 3.1 12 71.9 56.0 127.9 77.9 65.0 15.0 16 84.0 56.0 140.0 90.0 75.0 25.0 20 94.2 56.0 150.2 100.2 83.9 33.9 24 103.2 56.0 159.2 109.2 91.9 41.9 28 111.2 56.0 167.2 117.2 99.3 49.3 32 118.4 56.0 174.4 124.4 106.1 56.1

• C Page 10 - * .

0 COMPARISON OF REG. GUIDE 1.99 REVISIONS 1 AND 2 FOR FERMI 2 BELTLINE MATERIALS -

~

Beltline Girth Weld 1-313 Thickness 6.13 inches Material Heat: 10137, 0091 Lot 3999 Chemistry: C Mn P S Si Cu Ni Mo 0.2 1.13 0.016 0.01 0.14 0.23 1 0.49 Initial RTndt: RTndt-I = -50 F, Sigma-I = 0F 32 EFPY Fluence (f): Calculated Peak 1/4T f = 1.1E+18 n/cm*2 (used with Rev 1)

Calculated Peak I.D. f= 1.7E+18 n/cma2 Rev 2 Attenuated 1/4T f = 1.2E+18 n/cm^2 (basis for Rev 2 delta RT)

Surveillance Testing Affecting Rev 1 Shift calculation:

Surveillance testing not yet done.

Correction factor applied = 1 Chemistry Factor for Rev 2 Shift: CF= 236 Comparison of Rev 1 and Rev 2 SHIFT and ART (degrees F) versus EFPY:

Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 2 Rev 1 Rev 1 EFPY Delta RT Margin SHIFT ART - SHIFT ART 4 33.4 33.4 66.9 16.9 27.0 -23.0 8 51.2 51.2 102.5 52.5 38.1 -11.9 12 64.5 56.0 120.5 70.5 46.7 -3.3 16 75.3 56.0 131.3 81.3 53.9 3.9 20 84.5 56.0 140.5 90.5 60.3 10.3 24 92.6 56.0 148.6 93.6 66.1 16.1 28 99.8 56.0 155.8 105.8 71.4 21.4 32 106.3 56.0 162.3 112.3 76.3 26.3