PSEG Nuclear LLC P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, New .Jersey 08038-0236

PSEG SEP 0 6 2017 NuclearlLC

10 CFR 50.90 LR-N17-0126

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001

Subject:

References: 1.

2.

Hope Creek Generating Station Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-57 NRC Docket No. 50-354

Response to Request for Additional Information (RAI), Re: P-T Limit Report License Amendment Application (MF9502)

NRC email to PSEG, "Final RAI: P-T Limit Report License Amendment Application (MF9502)," dated August 10, 2017

PSEG letter to NRC, "License Amendment Request to Amend the Hope Creek Technical Specifications (TS) to Revise and Relocate the Pressure-Temperature Limit Curves to a Pressure and Temperature Limits Report," dated March 27, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML 17086A364)

In Reference 1, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requested PSEG Nuclear LLC (PSEG) to provide additional information in order to complete the review of the license amendment request (LAR) to amend the Technical Specification (TS) to revise and relocate the pressure-temperature limit curves to a pressure and temperature limits report. Attachment 1 provides a response to the request for additional information.

Enclosure 1 provides BWRVIP letter 2017-017 and the BWRVIP-135 pages applicable to Hope Creek (Non-Proprietary).

Enclosure 3 contains proprietary information as defined by 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4). EPRI, as the owner of the proprietary information, has executed the Enclosure 2 affidavit identifying that the proprietary information has been handled and classified as proprietary, is customarily held in confidence, and has been withheld from public disclosure. EPRI requests that the proprietary information in Enclosure 3 be withheld from public disclosure, in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4).

PSEG has determined that the information provided in this submittal does not alter the conclusions reached in the 10 CFR 50.92 no significant hazards determination previously submitted. In addition, the information provided in this submittal does not affect the bases for concluding that neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental assessment needs to be prepared in connection with the proposed amendment.

Page 2 LR-N17-0126

There are no regulatory commitments contained in this letter.

Should you have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact Ms. Tanya Timberman at 856-339-1426.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

SEP 0 5 2017 Executed on

(Date)

Sincerely,

Eric S. Carr Site Vice President Hope Creek Generating Station

Attachment: 1. Response to Request for Additional Information

Enclosures: 1. BWRVIP letter 2017-017 and BWRVIP-135 Pages Applicable to Hope Creek Generating

Station (Non-Proprietary) 2. Affidavit for Withholding 3. BWRVIP letter 2017-017 and BWRVIP-135 Pages Applicable to Hope Creek Generating

Station (Proprietary)

cc: Mr. D. Dorman, Administrator, Region I, NRC Ms. L. Regner, Project Manager, NRC NRC Senior Resident Inspector, Hope Creek Mr. P. Mulligan, Chief, NJBNE Hope Creek Commitment Tracking Coordinator Corporate Commitment Tracking Coordinator

LR-N17·0126

Attachment 1

Response to Request for Additional Information

LR-N17-0126 Attachment 1

Request for Additional Information (RAI) Hope Creek Generating Station

Docket No 50-354

By letter dated March 27, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML 17086A364), PSEG submitted a License Amendment Request (LAR) for Hope Creek, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90 (CAC No. MF9502). The LAR proposes changes to the Hope Creek Technical Specifications (TS) that would revise the reactor coolant system pressure-temperature (P-T) limit curves and relocate the new P-T limit curves from the Hope Creek Technical Specifications (TS) to a new P-T Limits Report (PTLR).

The staff has determined that additional information is required in order to complete its review of the subject LAR.

Request for Hope Creek Integrated Surveillance Program (ISP) Data from BWRVIP-135

Tables 10, 11, and 12 of the proposed Hope Creek PTLR list the adjusted reference temperature (ART) calculations and the supporting material property and neutron fluence inputs for the Hope Creek reactor pressure vessel (RPV) beltline materials, applicable to 32 effective full power years (EFPY), 44 EFPY, and 56 EFPY, respectively. Chemistry factor values for the ISP material line entries in the ART tables are marked as EPRI Proprietary Information.

PTLR Criterion 7 of Generic Letter (GL) 96-03, "Relocation of the Pressure Temperature Limit Curves and Low Temperature Overpressure Protections System Limits," specifies that the licensee should "provide supplemental data and calculations of the chemistry factor in the PTLR if the surveillance data are used in the ART [adjusted reference temperature] calculation." Therefore, in order to ensure that the proposed Hope Creek PTLR is consistent with Criterion 7 in GL 96-03, provide supporting data and calculations from the Boiling Water Reactor Vessel and Internals Project (BWRVIP) Integrated Surveillance Program Data Source Book (BWRVIP-135) for determining the proprietary ISP material chemistry factor values listed in Tables 10, 11, and 12 of the Hope Creek PTLR.

PSEG Response

The supporting data and calculations from the Boiling Water Reactor Vessel and Internals Project (BWRVIP) Integrated Surveillance Program for determining the proprietary ISP material chemistry factor values listed in Tables 10, 11, and 12 of the Hope Creek PTLR are included in

����-tneEPRI-BWRI!rP-retterzo-17=-o-17;crateaJanuary 19-;-2o-17-;-toPSEG-:-BWR'VIP-retter2o-17=-o-17 contains pages applicable to Hope Creek that will be contained in a future revision to the BWRVIP Integrated Surveillance Program Data Source Book (BWRVIP-135). Enclosure 1 provides BWRVIP letter 2017-017 and the BWRVIP-135 pages applicable to Hope Creek (Non­Proprietary). Enclosure 2 includes an affidavit from Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) requesting withholding the proprietary information from public disclosure. Enclosure 3 provides BWRVIP letter 2017-017 and the BWRVIP-135 pages applicable to Hope Creek (Proprietary) to be withheld from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4).

LR-N17-0126

Enclosure 1 BWRVIP letter 2017-017 and BWRVIP-135 Pages Applicable to Hope Creek Generating Station

(Non-Proprietary)

Attachment 1 to this letter provides the plant-specific evaluations of the data that will be included in the next revision of BWRVIP-135. This fulfills the BWRVIP commitment to provide recommendations for the best use of ISP data. Attachment 2 provides the evaluation of plate heat 5K3238/1 that will be included in the next revision of BWRVIP-135 as Appendix A-6. The change in USE for the 120° capsule in Table A-6-3 was corrected as described above. Attachment 3 provides the evaluation of surveillance weld heat D53040 that will be included in the next revision of BWRVIP-135 as Appendix B-7.

Plant-Specific Evaluations

2-37

Hope Creek

Representative Surveillance Materials

The ISP Representative Surveillance Materials for the Hope Creek vessel target weld and plate are shown in the following table.

Table 2-49 Target Vessel Materials and ISP Representative Materials for Hope Creek

Target Vessel Materials ISP Representative Materials

Weld D53040 D53040

Plate 5K3025/1 5K3238/1

Summary of Available Surveillance Data: Plate

The representative plate material 5K3238/1 is contained in the following ISP capsules:

Hope Creek Capsules

Specific surveillance data related to plate heat 5K3238/1 are summarized in Appendix A-6. Two capsules containing this plate heat have been tested. The Charpy V-notch surveillance results are as follows:

Table 2-50 T30 Shift Results for Plate Heat 5K3238/1

Capsule Cu (wt%)

Ni (wt%)

Fluence (1017 n/cm2, E > 1 MeV) T30 (°F)

Hope Creek 30° [[ E}]] [[ {E}]]

1.64 3.6

Hope Creek 120° 6.27 18.0

The results given in Appendix A-6 show a fitted chemistry factor (CF) of [[ {E}]], as compared to a value of 58.0°F from the chemistry tables in Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev. 2. The maximum scatter in the fitted data is within the 1-sigma value of 17°F for welds as given in Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev. 2.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The representative plate material is not the same heat number as the target vessel plate in the Hope Creek vessel. Therefore, the utility should use the chemistry factor from the Regulatory Guide 1.99 Rev. 2 tables (Regulatory Position 1.1) to determine the projected ART value for the target vessel plate. However, the surveillance heat 5K3238/1 is a Hope Creek vessel beltline

Plant-Specific Evaluations

2-38

plate and because there are two irradiated data sets for this plate that fall within the 1-sigma scatter band, the ISP surveillance data should be used to revise the projected ART value for the vessel plate heat 5K3238/1, using a reduced margin term (Regulatory Position 2.1). Recommended guidelines for use of ISP surveillance data are provided in Section 3 of this Data Source Book.

Summary of Available Surveillance Data: Weld

The representative weld material D53040 is contained in the following capsules:

Hope Creek Capsules

Specific surveillance data related to weld heat D53040 are presented in Appendix B-7 and the results are summarized below. Two capsules containing weld heat D53040 have been tested. The Charpy V-notch surveillance results are as follows:

Table 2-51 T30 Shift Results for Weld Heat D53040

Capsule Cu (wt%)

Ni (wt%)

Fluence (1017 n/cm2, E > 1 MeV) T30 (°F)

Hope Creek 30° [[ {E}]] [[ {E}]]

1.64 59.0

Hope Creek 120° 6.27 44.4

The results given in Appendix B-7 show a fitted chemistry factor (CF) of [[ {E}]], as compared to a value of 93.5°F from the chemistry tables in Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev. 2. The maximum scatter in the fitted data exceeds the 1-sigma value of 28°F for welds as given in Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev. 2.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Because the representative weld material is the same heat number as the target weld in the Hope Creek vessel the ISP surveillance data should be considered when a revised ART is calculated for target vessel weld D53040. However, scatter in the surveillance data exceeds the credibility criteria. Also, the fitted CF ([[ {E}]], based on surveillance data) is higher than the Table CF (93.5°F, from the Reg. Guide 1.99 Rev. 2 tables). Therefore, the higher (fitted) CF should be used, along with a full margin term (the reduced margin term normally permitted with a surveillance-based CF should not be used because credibility criteria are not satisfied). Recommended guidelines for evaluation of ISP surveillance data are provided in Section 3 of this Data Source Book.

Attachment 2

Evaluation of Plate Heat: 5K3238/1

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-1

A-6 Plate Heat: 5K3238/1

Summary of Available Charpy V-Notch Test Data

The available Charpy V-notch test data sets for plate heat 5K3238/1 are listed in Table A-6-1. The source documents for the data are provided, and the capsule designation and fluence values are also provided for irradiated data sets.

Table A-6-1 ISP Capsules Containing Plate Heat 5K3238/1

Capsule Fluence (E> 1 MeV, 1017 n/cm2) Reference

Unirradiated (LT) Baseline Data –– Reference A-6-1

Unirradiated (TL) Baseline Data –– Reference A-6-2

Hope Creek 30° 1.641 References A-6-1 and A-6-3

Hope Creek 120° 6.271 Reference A-6-3

Notes: 1. As noted in [A-6-3], the capsule flux wire activation evaluation found that calculated activity overestimated measured activity.

The cause was attributed to a possible discrepancy in location of the capsules on as-built drawings relative to the nominal dimensions. Because definitive resolution of the discrepancy was not possible, [A-6-3] provided best estimate capsule fluences for both nominal capsule positions and as-built capsule positions. The fluence values reported for the location based on nominal position are slightly less than those for the as-built location. The fluence values reported in Table A-6-1 and used for evaluations in this appendix are the lower, “nominal position” fluence values. Use of lower fluence values for evaluation of surveillance materials is conservative because it results in a higher Reg. Guide 1.99 Rev. 2, Position 2.1, chemistry factor and greater predicted decrease in upper shelf energy per Regulatory Position 2.2. Use of the lower fluence values is also conservative for comparison of measured to predicted T30 shift and decrease in USE values. The discrepancy noted in [A-6-3] has no effect on RPV fluence evaluation.

The CVN test data for each set taken from the references noted above are presented in Tables A-6-7 through A-6-10. The BWRVIP ISP uses the hyperbolic tangent (tanh) function as a statistical curve-fit tool to model the transition temperature toughness data. Tanh curve plots for each data set have been generated using CVGRAPH, Version 5 [A-6-4] and the plots are provided in Figures A-6-1 through A-6-4.

Best Estimate Chemistry

Table A-6-2 details the best estimate average chemistry values for plate heat 5K3238/1 surveillance material. Chemical compositions are presented in weight percent. If there are multiple measurements on a single specimen, those are first averaged to yield a single value for that specimen, and then the different specimens are averaged to determine the heat best estimate.

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-2

Table A-6-2 Best Estimate Chemistry of Available Data Sets for Plate Heat 5K3238/1

Cu (wt%) Ni (wt%) P (wt%) S (wt%) Si (wt%) Specimen ID Source

0.08 0.62 0.011 –– –– Tensile P1A (room temp)

Reference A-6-1 0.09 0.7 0.011 –– –– Tensile P1B (550 deg F)

0.085 0.66 0.011 –– –– Average P1

0.09 0.63 0.012 0.008 0.31 Baseline Plate CMTR

Reference A-6-1 and A-6-2

0.09 0.62 0.012 0.012 0.29 Surveillance plate

Reference A-6-1 and A-6-2

[[ {E}]] [[ {E}]] [[ {E}]] [[ {E}]] [[ {E}]] Best Estimate Average

Calculation of Chemistry Factor (CF):

The Chemistry Factor (CF) associated with the best estimate chemistry, as determined from U.S. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2 [A-6-5], Table 2 (base metal), is:

CF(5K3238/1) = 58.0°F

Effects of Irradiation

The radiation induced transition temperature shifts for heat 5K3238/1 are shown in Table A-6-3. The T30 [30 ft-lb Transition Temperature], T50 [50 ft-lb Transition Temperature], and T35mil [35 mil Lateral Expansion Temperature] index temperatures have been determined for each Charpy data set, and each irradiated set is compared to the baseline (unirradiated) index temperatures. The change in Upper Shelf Energy (USE) is also shown. The unirradiated and irradiated values are taken from the CVGRAPH fits presented at the back of this sub-appendix (only CVN energy fits are presented).

Comparison of Actual vs. Predicted Embrittlement

A predicted shift in the 30 ft-lb transition temperature (ΔT30) is calculated for each irradiated data set using the Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev. 2, Regulatory Position 1.1 method. Table A-6-4 compares the predicted shift with the measured ΔT30 (°F) taken from Table A-6-3.

Comparison of Actual vs. Predicted Decrease in USE

Table A-6-5 compares the actual percent decrease in upper shelf energy (USE) to the predicted decrease. The predicted decrease is calculated using equations in Regulatory Guide 1.162 [A-6-6] that accurately model the Charpy upper shelf energy decrease prediction curves in Figure 2 ofRegulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2; the measured percent decrease is calculated from the values presented in Table A-6-3.

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-3

Table A-6-3 Effect of Irradiation (E>1.0 MeV) on the Notch Toughness Properties of Plate Heat 5K3238/1

Material Identity Capsule ID

T30, 30 ft-lb Transition

Temperature

T50, 50 ft-lb Transition

Temperature T35mil, 35 mil Lateral

Expansion Temperature CVN Upper Shelf Energy

(USE)

Unirrad(°F)

Irrad(°F)

T30(°F)

Unirrad(°F)

Irrad(°F)

T50(°F)

Unirrad(°F)

Irrad(°F)

T35mil (°F)

Unirrad(ft-lb)

Irrad (ft-lb)

Change(ft-lb)

HC1 5K3238/1 30° (LT) -8.3 -4.7 3.6 19.3 17.5 -1.8 -1.4 0.9 2.3 140.0 120.7 -19.3 HC1 5K3238/1 120° (TL) 4.4 22.4 18.0 52.7 67.0 14.3 43.6 43.1 -0.5 91.2 93.8 2.6

Table A-6-4 Comparison of Actual Versus Predicted Embrittlement for Plate Heat 5K3238/1

Capsule Identity Material Fluence (x1018 n/cm2)

Measured Shift1

°F

RG 1.99 Rev. 2 Predicted Shift2

°F

RG 1.99 Rev. 2 Predicted Shift+Margin2, 3

°F HC1 30° Plate Heat 5K3238/1 in Hope Creek 0.164 3.6 8.8 17.6 HC1 120° 0.627 18.0 19.1 38.3

Notes:

1. See Table A-6-3, T30.

2. Predicted shift = CF FF, where CF is a Chemistry Factor taken from tables from USNRC Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev. 2, based on each material’s Cu/Ni content, and FF is FluenceFactor, f0.28-0.10 log f, where f = fluence (1019 n/cm2, E > 1.0 MeV).

3. Margin = 2√(σi2 + σΔ

2), where σi = the standard deviation on initial RTNDT (which is taken to be 0ºF), and σΔ is the standard deviation on ΔRTNDT (28ºF for welds and 17ºF forbase materials, except that σΔ need not exceed 0.50 times the mean value of ΔRTNDT). Thus, margin is defined as 34°F for plate materials and 56°F for weld materials, ormargin equals shift (whichever is less), per Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev. 2.

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-4

Table A-6-5 Comparison of Actual Versus Predicted Percent Decrease in Upper Shelf Energy (USE) for Plate Heat 5K3238/1

Capsule Identity Material Fluence

(x1018 n/cm2) Cu Content

(wt%) Measured Decrease

in USE1 (%) RG 1.99 Rev. 2

Predicted Decrease in USE2

(%) HC1 30° Plate Heat 5K3238/1 in Hope Creek 0.164 [[ {E}]] 13.8 6.8 HC1 120° 0.627 --3 9.3

Notes: 1. See Table A-6-3, (Change in USE)/(Unirradiated USE).2. Calculated using equations in Regulatory Guide 1.162 [A-6-6] that accurately model the Charpy upper shelf energy decrease curves in Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2.3. Value less than zero.

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-5

Credibility of Surveillance Data

The credibility of the surveillance data is determined according to the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.99, Rev. 2 and 10 CFR 50.61, as supplemented by the NRC staff [A-6-7]. The following evaluation is based on the available surveillance data for irradiated plate heat 5K3238/1. The applicability of this evaluation to a particular BWR plant must be confirmed on a plant-by-plant basis to verify there are no plant-specific exceptions to the following evaluation.

Per Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2 and 10 CFR 50.61, there are 5 criteria for the credibility assessment.

Criterion 1: Materials in the capsules should be those judged most likely to be controlling with regard to radiation embrittlement.

In order to satisfy this criterion, the representative surveillance material heat number must match the material in the vessel.

Criterion 2: Scatter in the plots of Charpy energy versus temperature for the irradiated and unirradiated conditions should be small enough to permit the determination of the 30 ft-lb temperature and upper shelf energy unambiguously.

Plots of Charpy energy versus temperature for the unirradiated and irradiated condition are presented in this sub-appendix. Based on engineering judgment, the scatter in these plots is small enough to permit the determination of the 30 ft-lb temperature and the upper shelf energy. Hence, this criterion is met.

Criterion 3: When there are two or more sets of surveillance data from one reactor, the scatter of RTNDT values about a best-fit line drawn as described in Regulatory Position 2.1 normally should be less than 17F for plates. Even if the fluence range is large (two or more orders of magnitude), the scatter should not exceed twice that value. Even if the data fail this criterion for use in shift calculations, they may be credible for determining decrease in upper shelf energy if the upper shelf can be clearly determined, following the definition given in ASTM E185-82 [A-6-8].

For plate material 5K3238/1, there are 2 surveillance capsule data sets currently available. The functional form of the least squares fit method as described in Regulatory Position 2.1 is utilized to determine a best-fit line for this data and to determine if the scatter of these RTNDT values about this line is less than 17°F for plates. Figure A-6-5 presents the best-fit line as described in Regulatory Position 2.1 utilizing the shift prediction routine from CVGRAPH, Version 5.0.2.

The scatter of RTNDT values about the functional form of the best-fit line drawn as described in Regulatory Position 2.1 is presented in Table A-6-6.

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-6

Table A-6-6 Best Fit Evaluation for Surveillance Plate Heat 5K3238/1

Material Fitted CF (°F) Capsule FF

Measured RTNDT

(30 ft-lb) (°F)

Best Fit RTNDT

(°F)

Scatter of

RTNDT (°F)

<17°F (Base Metal)

<28°F (Weld metal)

5K3238/1 [[ {E}]] 30° 0.152 3.6 [[ {E}]] [[ {E}]] Yes

[[ {E}]] 120° 0.330 18.0 [[ {E}]] [[ {E}]] Yes

Table A-6-6 indicates that the scatter is within acceptable range for credible surveillance data. Therefore, plate heat 5K3238/1 meets this criterion.

Criterion 4: The irradiation temperature of the Charpy specimens in the capsule should match the vessel wall temperature at the cladding/base metal interface within + / - 25°F.

BWRVIP-78 [A-6-9] established the similarity of BWR plant environments in the BWR fleet. The annulus between the wall and the core shroud in the region of the surveillance capsules contains a mix of water returning from the core and feedwater. Depending on feedwater temperature, this annulus region is between 525°F and 535°F. This location of specimens with respect to the reactor vessel beltline is designed so that the reactor vessel wall and the specimens experience equivalent operating conditions such that the temperature will not differ by more than 25°F. Any plant-specific exceptions to this generic analysis should be evaluated.

Criterion 5: The surveillance data for the correlation monitor material in the capsule should fall within the scatter band of the database for that material.

Few ISP capsules contain correlation monitor material. Generally, this criterion is not applicable.

For plate heat 5K3238/1, these criteria are satisfied (or not applicable). The surveillance data are nominally credible because the scatter criterion is met. Prior to application of the data, a plant should verify that no plant-specific exceptions to these criteria exist.

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-7

Table A-6-7 Unirradiated Charpy V-Notch Results for Surveillance Plate 5K3238/1 (LT)

Spec ID Temp (°F) CVN (ft-lb) LE (mils) %Shear 4 -80 10.0 15.0 10 3 -40 12.5 15.0 8 12 -10 52.5 41.0 29 2 0 34.5 36.5 24 11 20 62.5 49.0 43 1 40 30.0 35.0 38 9 50 74.5 57.0 53 10 70 99.5 75.0 67 5 80 113.5 89.0 87 6 120 139.5 94.0 100 7 200 139.5 92.5 100 8 300 141.0 92.0 100

Table A-6-8 Unirradiated Charpy V-Notch Results for Surveillance Plate 5K3238/1 (TL)

Spec ID Temp (°F) CVN (ft-lb) LE (mils) %Shear -- 10 31.5 20 15 -- 10 30.3 22 20 -- 10 30.3 22 15 -- 40 40.9 36 45 -- 40 48.2 33 40 -- 40 43.3 33 25 -- 68 62.0 46 40 -- 104 62.0 50 50 -- -22 20.3 17 10 -- -22 21.3 18 10 -- -49 20.3 12 10 -- -76 12.8 8 2 -- >195 88.0 69 99 -- >195 94.5 78 99 -- >195 91.0 73 99

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-8

Table A-6-9 Charpy V-Notch Results for 5K3238/1 (LT) in HC1 30° Capsule

Spec ID Temp (°F) CVN (ft-lb) LE (mils) %Shear 614 -80 7.0 6.5 3 604 -50 8.5 10.0 6 603 -40 32.5 29.9 15 606 -20 7.0 8.5 18 612 0 42.0 37.0 16 607 40 55.0 50.5 52 610 60 97.0 77.0 60 611 70 105.0 84.5 79 609 80 115.0 78.0 85 608 120 113.5 80.0 100 613 200 115.5 81.0 100 605 300 133.0 92.0 100

Table A-6-10 Charpy V-Notch Results for 5K3238/1 (TL) in HC1 120° Capsule

Spec ID Temp (°F) CVN (ft-lb) LE (mils) %Shear P2-1 -100.3 4.96 3.1 1.6 P2-2 -51.3 13.5 11.8 6.7 P2-7 -26.5 20.71 14.9 11.5 P2-3 0.3 21.49 18.2 18.7 P2-8 20.5 32.82 27.8 20.8 P2-5 37.8 34.08 35.2 34.3 P2-11 68.4 49.27 40.1 42.1 P2-10 89.8 45.77 40.0 44.8 P2-4 110.7 76.59 62.9 85.1 P2-6 153.1 92.27 69.9 100.0 P2-9 234.7 91.06 61.9 100.0 P2-12 308.7 98.13 62.1 100.0

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-9

Tanh Curve Fits of CVN Test Data for Plate Heat 5K3238/1

Figure A-6-1 Charpy Energy Data for Plate 5K3238/1 (LT) Unirradiated

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-10

Figure A-6-1 Charpy Energy Data for Plate 5K3238/1 (LT) Unirradiated (Continued)

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-11

Figure A-6-2 Charpy Energy Data for Plate 5K3238/1 (TL) Unirradiated

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-12

Figure A-6-2 Charpy Energy Data for Plate 5K3238/1 (TL) Unirradiated (Continued)

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-13

Figure A-6-3 Charpy Energy Data for Plate 5K3238/1 (LT) in HC1 30° Capsule

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-14

Figure A-6-3 Charpy Energy Data for Plate 5K3238/1 (LT) in HC1 30°Capsule (Continued)

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-15

Figure A-6-4 Charpy Energy Data for Plate 5K3238/1 (TL) in HC1 120° Capsule

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-16

Figure A-6-4 Charpy Energy Data for Plate 5K3238/1 (LT) in HC1 120° Capsule (Continued)

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-17

Figure A-6-5 Fitted Surveillance Results for Plate Heat 5K3238/1

[[

{E}]]

ISP Plate Heat Evaluations

A-6-18

References A-6-1. GE Nuclear Energy, “Hope Creek Generating Station RPV Surveillance Materials

Testing and Fracture Toughness Analysis,” GE-NE-523-A164-1294R1, December 1997. A-6-2. Letter from S.E. Miltenberger (PSEG) to USNRC, “Response to Generic Letter 92—01,

Revision 1, Reactor Vessel Structure Integrity, 10CFR50.54(f), Hope Creek Generating Station, Facility Operating License No. NPF-57, Docket No. 50-354,” Public Service Electric and Gas Company, NLR-N92080, dated June 30, 1992.

A-6-3. BWRVIP-298NP: BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Testing and Evaluation of the Hope Creek 120° Capsule. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2016. 3002007844.

A-6-4. CVGRAPH, Hyperbolic Tangent Curve Fitting Program, Developed by ATI Consulting, Version 5.0.2, Revision 1, 3/26/02.

A-6-5. “Radiation Embrittlement of Reactor Vessel Materials,” USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, May 1988.

A-6-6. “Format and Content of Report for Thermal Annealing of Reactor Pressure Vessels,” USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.162, February 1996.

A-6-7. K. Wichman, M. Mitchell, and A. Hiser, USNRC, Generic Letter 92-01 and RPV Integrity Workshop Handouts, NRC/Industry Workshop on RPV Integrity Issues, February 12, 1998.

A-6-8. ASTM E-185, “Standard Practice for Conducting Surveillance Tests for Light-Water Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Vessels,” American Society for Testing and Materials, July 1982.

A-6-9. BWR Vessel and Internals Project: BWR Integrated Surveillance Program Plan (BWRVIP-78). EPRI, Palo Alto, CA and BWRVIP: 1999. TR-114228.

Attachment 3

Evaluation of Weld Heat: D53040

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-1

B-7 Weld Heat: D53040

Summary of Available Charpy V-Notch Test Data

The available Charpy V-notch test data sets for weld heat D53040 are listed in Table B-7-1. The source documents for the data are provided, and the capsule designation and fluence values are also provided for irradiated data sets.

Table B-7-1 ISP Capsules Containing Weld Heat D53040

Capsule Fluence (E>1 MeV, 1017 n/cm2) Reference

Unirradiated Baseline Data –– Reference B-7-1

Hope Creek 30° 1.641 Reference B-7-1 and B-7-2

Hope Creek 120° 6.271 Reference B-7-2

Notes:

1. As noted in [B-7-2], the capsule flux wire activation evaluation found that calculated activity overestimated measured activity.The cause was attributed to a possible discrepancy in location of the capsules on as-built drawings relative to the nominaldimensions. Because definitive resolution of the discrepancy was not possible, [B-7-2] provided best estimate capsulefluences for both nominal capsule positions and as-built capsule positions. The fluence values reported for the locationbased on nominal position are slightly less than those for the as-built location. The fluence values reported in Table B-7-1and used for evaluations in this appendix are the lower, “nominal position” fluence values. Use of lower fluence values forevaluation of surveillance materials is conservative because it results in a higher Reg. Guide 1.99 Rev. 2, Position 2.1,chemistry factor and greater predicted decrease in upper shelf energy per Regulatory Position 2.2. Use of the lower fluencevalues is also conservative for comparison of measured to predicted T30 shift and decrease in USE values. The discrepancynoted in [B-7-2] has no effect on RPV fluence evaluation.

The CVN test data for each set taken from the references noted above are presented in Tables B-7-7 through B-7-9. The BWRVIP ISP uses the hyperbolic tangent (tanh) function as a statistical curve-fit tool to model the transition temperature toughness data. Tanh curve plots for each data set have been generated using CVGRAPH, Version 5 [B-7-3] and the plots are provided in Figures B-7-1 through B-7-3.

Best Estimate Chemistry Table B-7-2 details the best estimate average chemistry values for weld heat D53040 surveillance material. Chemical compositions are presented in weight percent. If there are multiple measurements on a single specimen, those are first averaged to yield a single value for that specimen, and then the different specimens are averaged to determine the heat best estimate.

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-2

Table B-7-2 Best Estimate Chemistry of Available Data Sets for Weld Heat D53040

Cu (wt%)

Ni (wt%)

P (wt%)

S (wt%)

Si (wt%) Specimen ID Source

0.05 0.41 0.016 –– –– Tensile P2A (RT) Reference B-7-1

0.06 0.5 0.017 –– –– Tensile P2B (550° F)

0.055 0.455 0.017 –– –– Average P2

0.09 0.68 0.012 0.005 0.31 Surveillance weld qualification

Reference B-7-1 and B-7-4

[[ {E}]] [[ {E}]] Best Estimate Average

Calculation of Chemistry Factor (CF):

The Chemistry Factor (CF) associated with the best estimate chemistry, as determined from U.S. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2 [B-7-5], Table 1 (weld metal), is:

CF(D53040) = 93.5 °F

Effects of Irradiation

The radiation induced transition temperature shifts for heat D53040 are shown in Table B-7-3. The T30 [30 ft-lb Transition Temperature], T50 [50 ft-lb Transition Temperature], and T35mil [35 mil Lateral Expansion Temperature] index temperatures have been determined for each Charpy data set, and each irradiated set is compared to the baseline (unirradiated) index temperatures. The change in Upper Shelf Energy (USE) is also shown. The unirradiated and irradiated values are taken from the CVGRAPH fits presented at the back of this sub-appendix (only CVN energy fits are presented).

Comparison of Actual vs. Predicted Embrittlement

A predicted shift in the 30 ft-lb transition temperature (ΔT30) is calculated for each irradiated data set using the Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev. 2, Regulatory Position 1.1 method. Table B-7-4 compares the predicted shift with the measured ΔT30 (°F) taken from Table B-7-3.

Comparison of Actual vs. Predicted Decrease in USE

Table B-7-5 compares the actual percent decrease in upper shelf energy (USE) to the predicted decrease. The predicted decrease is calculated using equations in Regulatory Guide 1.162 [B-7-6] that accurately model the Charpy upper shelf energy decrease prediction curves in Figure 2 of

[[ {E}]] [[ {E}]] [[ {E}]]

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-3

Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2; the measured percent decrease is calculated from the values presented in Table B-7-3.

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-4

Table B-7-3 Effect of Irradiation (E>1.0 MeV) on the Notch Toughness Properties of Weld Heat D53040

Material Identity

Capsule ID

T30, 30 ft-lb Transition

Temperature

T50, 50 ft-lb Transition

Temperature

T35mil, 35 mil Lateral Expansion

Temperature

CVN Upper Shelf Energy (USE)

Unirrad(°F)

Irrad(°F)

T30(°F)

Unirrad(°F)

Irrad(°F)

T50(°F)

Unirrad(°F)

Irrad(°F)

T35mil

(°F)

Unirrad(ft-lb)

Irrad(ft-lb)

Change(ft-lb)

HC1 D53040 30° -64.8 -5.8 59.0 -28.7 19.1 47.8 -44.5 4.7 49.2 163.8 156.3 -7.5

HC1 D53040 120° -64.8 -20.4 44.4 -28.7 6.5 35.2 -44.5 -2.0 42.5 163.8 158.4 -5.4

Table B-7-4 Comparison of Actual Versus Predicted Embrittlement for Weld Heat D53040

Capsule Identity Material

Fluence (x1018 n/cm2)

Measured Shift1 °F

RG 1.99 Rev. 2 Predicted Shift2

°F

RG 1.99 Rev. 2 Predicted

Shift+Margin2, 3 °F

HC 30° Weld Heat D53040 in Hope Creek 0.164 59.0 14.2 28.4

HC 120° Weld Heat D53040 in Hope Creek 0.627 44.4 30.9 61.7

Notes:

1. See Table B-7-3, T30

.

2. Predicted shift = CF FF, where CF is a Chemistry Factor taken from tables from USNRC Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev. 2, based on each material’s Cu/Ni content,and FF is Fluence Factor, f

0.28-0.10 log f, where f = fluence (1019 n/cm2, E > 1.0 MeV).

3. Margin = 2 √(σi2 + σΔ

2), where σi = the standard deviation on initial RTNDT (which is taken to be 0°F), and σΔ is the standard deviation on ΔRTNDT (28°F for weldsand 17°F for base materials, except that σ∆ need not exceed 0.50 times the mean value of ΔRTNDT). Thus, margin is defined as 34°F for plate materials and56°F for weld materials, or margin equals shift (whichever is less), per Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev. 2.

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-5

Table B-7-5 Comparison of Actual Versus Predicted Percent Decrease in Upper Shelf Energy (USE) for Weld Heat D53040

Capsule Identity Material

Fluence (x1018 n/cm2)

Cu Content (wt%) Measured

Decrease in USE1

(%)

RG 1.99 Rev. 2 Predicted

Decrease in USE2 (%)

HC 30° Weld Heat D53040 in Hope Creek 0.164 [[ {E}]]

4.6 7.9

HC 120° Weld Heat D53040 in Hope Creek 0.627 3.3 10.9

Notes:

1. See Table B-7-3, (Change in USE)/(Unirradiated USE).

2. Calculated using equations in Regulatory Guide 1.162 [B-7-6] that accurately model the Charpy upper shelf energy decrease curves in Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2.

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-6

Credibility of Surveillance Data

The credibility of the surveillance data is determined according to the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.99, Rev. 2 and 10 CFR 50.61, as supplemented by the NRC staff [Reference B-7-7]. The following evaluation is based on the available surveillance data for irradiated plate heat D53040. The applicability of this evaluation to a particular BWR plant must be confirmed on a plant-by-plant basis to verify there are no plant-specific exceptions to the following evaluation.

Per Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2 and 10 CFR 50.61, there are 5 criteria for the credibility assessment.

Criterion 1: Materials in the capsules should be those judged most likely to be controlling with regard to radiation embrittlement.

In order to satisfy this criterion, the representative surveillance material heat number must match the material in the vessel.

Criterion 2: Scatter in the plots of Charpy energy versus temperature for the irradiated and unirradiated conditions should be small enough to permit the determination of the 30 ft-lb temperature and upper shelf energy unambiguously.

Plots of Charpy energy versus temperature for the unirradiated and irradiated condition are presented in this sub-appendix. Based on engineering judgment, the scatter in these plots is small enough to permit the determination of the 30 ft-lb temperature and the upper shelf energy. Hence, this criterion is met.

Criterion 3: When there are two or more sets of surveillance data from one reactor, the scatter of RTNDT values about a best-fit line drawn as described in Regulatory Position 2.1 normally should be less than 28F for welds. Even if the fluence range is large (two or more orders of magnitude), the scatter should not exceed twice that value. Even if the data fail this criterion for use in shift calculations, they may be credible for determining decrease in upper shelf energy if the upper shelf can be clearly determined, following the definition given in ASTM E185-82 [B-7-8].

For weld material D53040, there are 2 surveillance capsule data sets currently available. The functional form of the least squares fit method as described in Regulatory Position 2.1 is utilized to determine a best-fit line for this data and to determine if the scatter of these RTNDT values about this line is less than 28°F for welds. Figure B-7-4 presents the best-fit line as described in Regulatory Position 2.1 utilizing the shift prediction routine from CVGRAPH, Version 5.0.2.

The scatter of RTNDT values about the functional form of the best-fit line drawn as described in Regulatory Position 2.1 is presented in Table B-7-6.

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-7

Table B-7-6 Best Fit Evaluation for Surveillance Weld Heat D53040

Material Fitted CF (°F) Capsule FF

Measured RTNDT

(30 ft-lb) (°F)

Best Fit RTNDT

(°F)

Scatter of

RTNDT (°F)

<17°F (Base Metal)

<28°F (Weld metal)

D53040 [[ {E}]] 30° 0.152 59.0 [[ {E}]] NO

[[ {E}]] 120° 0.330 44.4 [[ {E}]] Yes

Table B-7-6 indicates that the scatter is not within acceptable range for credible surveillance data. Therefore, weld heat D53040 does not meet this criterion.

Criterion 4: The irradiation temperature of the Charpy specimens in the capsule should match the vessel wall temperature at the cladding/base metal interface within + / - 25°F.

BWRVIP-78 [B-7-9] established the similarity of BWR plant environments in the BWR fleet. The annulus between the wall and the core shroud in the region of the surveillance capsules contains a mix of water returning from the core and feedwater. Depending on feedwater temperature, this annulus region is between 525°F and 535°F. This location of specimens with respect to the reactor vessel beltline is designed so that the reactor vessel wall and the specimens experience equivalent operating conditions such that the temperature will not differ by more than 25°F. Any plant-specific exceptions to this generic analysis should be evaluated.

Criterion 5: The surveillance data for the correlation monitor material in the capsule should fall within the scatter band of the database for that material.

Few ISP capsules contain correlation monitor material. Generally, this criterion is not applicable.

For weld heat D53040, Criterion 3 is not satisfied. Therefore the surveillance data cannot be considered credible. However, because the fitted Chemistry Factor is greater than the Reg. Guide 1.99 Rev.2 table CF, the higher (fitted) value should be used. Furthermore, the full margin term should be used (the reduced margin permitted when the data are credible cannot be used).

[[ {E}]]

[[ {E}]]

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-8

Table B-7-7 Unirradiated Charpy V-Notch Results for Surveillance Weld D53040

Spec ID Temp (°F) CVN (ft-lb) LE (mils) %Shear4 -80 11.5 14.0 159 -60 27.5 26.5 273 -40 36.5 32.0 2110 -20 78.5 66.0 452 0 89.0 63.0 5511 10 58.0 49.0 371 40 102.0 70.0 745 80 118.5 77.0 806 120 153.0 89.0 1007 200 151.5 96.5 1008 300 187.0 84.0 100

Table B-7-8 Charpy V-Notch Results for D53040 in HC 30° Capsule

Spec ID Temp (°F) CVN (ft-lb) LE (mils) %Shear594 -80 5.5 9.5 12597 -40 22.5 20.0 17595 -10 31.0 27.0 26592 0 19.5 22.5 34596 20 59.5 48.5 39599 40 88.5 72.0 50601 50 61.0 44.0 58593 80 112.5 69.0 77598 120 147.5 92.0 100 591 150 154.5 90.0 100 602 200 144.5 91.0 100 600 300 178.5 88.0 100

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-9

Table B-7-9 Charpy V-Notch Results for D53040 in HC 120° Capsule

Spec ID Temp (°F) CVN (ft-lb) LE (mils) %ShearP3-5 -105.2 7.2 5.7 5.9 P3-7 -47.6 8.44 6.9 16.2 P3-10 -27.8 22.64 19.5 28.8 P3-11 -15.7 57.21 45.1 37.3 P3-8 1.0 42.3 33.0 33.5 P3-12 14.2 35.39 28.7 25.5 P3-9 27.5 78.3 60.8 42.9 P3-6 70.0 119.99 76.5 76.0 P3-3 115.9 132.12 78.6 86.4 P3-4 181.0 158.18 86.7 100.0 P3-2 207.7 161.08 84.4 100.0 P3-1 302.5 156.04 82.0 100.0

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-10

Tanh Curve Fits of CVN Test Data for Weld Heat D53040

Figure B-7-1 Charpy Energy Data for Weld D53040 Unirradiated

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-11

Figure B-7-2 Charpy Energy Data for Weld D53040 in HC 30° Capsule

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-12

Figure B-7-2 Charpy Energy Data for Weld D53040 in HC 30° Capsule (Continued)

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-13

Figure B-7-3 Charpy Energy Data for Weld D53040 in HC 120° Capsule

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-14

Figure B-7-3 Charpy Energy Data for Weld D53040 in HC 120° Capsule (Continued)

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-15

Figure B-7-4 Fitted Surveillance Results for Weld Heat D53040

[[

{E}]]

ISP Weld Heat Evaluations

B-7-16

References

B-7-1. GE Nuclear Energy, “Hope Creek Generating Station RPV Surveillance Materials Testing and Fracture Toughness Analysis,” GE-NE-523-A164-1294R1, December 1997.

B-7-2. BWRVIP-298NP: BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Testing and Evaluation of the Hope Creek 120° Capsule. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2016. 3002007844.

B-7-3. CVGRAPH, Hyperbolic Tangent Curve Fitting Program, Developed by ATI Consulting, Version 5.0.2, Revision 1, 3/26/02.

B-7-4. Letter from S.E. Miltenberger (PSEG) to USNRC, “Response to Generic Letter 92—01, Revision 1, Reactor Vessel Structure Integrity, 10CFR50.54(f), Hope Creek Generating Station, Facility Operating License No. NPF-57, Docket No. 50-354,” Public Gas and Electric Company, NLR-N92080, dated June 30, 1992.

B-7-5. “Radiation Embrittlement of Reactor Vessel Materials,” USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, May 1988.

B-7-6 “Format and Content of Report for Thermal Annealing of Reactor Pressure Vessels,” USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.162, February 1996.

B-7-7. K. Wichman, M. Mitchell, and A. Hiser, USNRC, Generic Letter 92-01 and RPV Integrity Workshop Handouts, NRC/Industry Workshop on RPV Integrity Issues, February 12, 1998.

B-7-8 ASTM E-185, “Standard Practice for Conducting Surveillance Tests for Light-Water Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Vessels,” American Society for Testing and Materials, July 1982.

B-7-9 BWR Vessel and Internals Project: BWR Integrated Surveillance Program Plan (BWRVIP-78). EPRI, Palo Alto, CA and BWRVIP: 1999. TR-114228.

LR-N17-0126

Enclosure 2

Affidavit for Withholding signed by Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)

t=�121 1 ELECTRIC POWER

a=. l -RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Ref. EPRI Project Number 669

August 14, 2017

Document Control Desk Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

NEIL WILMSHURST

Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer

Subject: Request for Withholding of the following Proprietary Information Included in::

"Response to Request for Additional information (RAJ), Re: P-T Limit Report License Amendment Application (MF9502)" dated August 2017

To Whom It May Concern:

This is a request under 10 C.F.R. §2.390(a)(4) that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") withhold from public disclosure the information identified in the enclosed Affidavit consisting of the proprietary information owned by Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. ("EPRI") identified above in the attached report. Proprietary and non-proprietary versions of the Report and the Affidavit in support of this request are enclosed.

EPRI desires to disclose the Proprietary Information in confidence to assist the NRC review of the enclosed submittal to the NRC by PSEG. The Proprietary Information is not to be divulged to anyone outside of the NRC or to any of its contractors, nor shall any copies be made of the Proprietary Information provided herein. EPRI welcomes any discussions and/or questions relating to the information enclosed.

If you have any questions about the legal aspects of this request for withholding, please do not hesitate to contact me at (704) 595-2732. Questions on the content of the Report should be directed to Andy McGehee of EPRI at (704) 502-6440.

Sincerely,

\ulJ� Attachment(s)

c: Lisa Regner, NRC (lisa.regner@nrc.gov)

Together ... Shaping the Future of Electricity

1300 West W.T. Harris Boulevard, CharloHe, NC 28262·8550 USA • 704.595.2732 • Mobile 704.490.2653 • nwilmshurst@epri.com

t=�121 1 ELECTRIC POWER

-=·- RESEARCH INSTITUTE

AFFIDAVIT

RE: Request for Withholding of the Following Proprietary Information:

"Response to Request for Additional Information (RAI), Re: P-T Limit Report License Amendment Application (MF9502)" dated August 2017

I, Neil Wilmshurst, being duly sworn, depose and state as follows:

I am the Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer at Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. whose principal office is located at 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California ("EPRI") and I have been specifically delegated responsibility for the above-listed Report that contains EPRI Proprietary Information that is sought under this Affidavit to be withheld "Proprietary Information". I am authorized to apply to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") for the withholding of the Proprietary Information on behalf of EPRI.

EPRI Proprietary Information is identified in the above referenced report by underlining and double brackets. Example of such identification is as follows:

[[This sentence is an example {EJ]]

Figures containing EPRI Proprietary Information are identified with double brackets before and after the object. In each case the superscript notation {EJ refers to this affidavit and all the bases included below, which provide the reasons for the proprietary determination.

EPRI requests that the Report be withheld from the public on the following bases:

Withholding Based Upon Privileged And Confidential Trade Secrets Or Commercial Or Financial Information (see e.g. 10 C.F.R. §2.390(a)(4))::

a. The Proprietary Information is owned by EPRI and has been held in confidence by EPRI. All entities accepting copies of the Proprietary Information do so subject to written agreements imposing an obligation upon the recipient to maintain the confidentiality of the Proprietary lnformationt. The Proprietary Information is disclosed only to parties who agree, in writing, to preserve the confidentiality thereof.

b. EPRI considers the Proprietary Information contained therein to constitute trade secrets of EPRI. As such, EPRI holds the Report in confidence and disclosure thereof is strictly limited to individuals and entities who have agreed, in writing, to maintain the confidentiality of the Information.

c. The information sought to be withheld is considered to be proprietary for the following reasons. EPRI made a substantial economic investment to develop the Proprietary Information and, by prohibiting public disclosure, EPRI derives an economic benefit in the form of licensing royalties and other additional fees from the confidential nature of the Proprietary Information. If the Proprietary Information were publicly available to consultants and/or other businesses providing services in the electric and/or nuclear power industry, they would be able to use the Proprietary Information for their own

commercial benefit and profit and without expending the substantial economic resources required of EPRI to develop the Proprietary Information.

d. EPRI's classification of the Proprietary Information as trade secrets is justified by the Uniform Trade Secrets Act which California adopted in 1984 and a version of which has been adopted by over forty states. The California Uniform Trade Secrets Act, California Civil Code §§3426 - 3426.11, defines a "trade secret" as follows:

"'Trade secret' means information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program device, method, technique, or process, that:

(1) Derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to the public or to other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and

(2) Is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy."

e. The Proprietary Information contained therein are not generally known or available to the public. EPRI developed the Information only after making a determination that the Proprietary Information was not available from public sources. EPRI made a substantial investment of both money and employee hours in the development of the Proprietary Information. EPRI was required to devote these resources and effort to derive the Proprietary Information. As a result of such effort and cost, both in terms of dollars spent and dedicated employee time, the Proprietary Information is highly valuable to EPRI.

f. A public disclosure of the Proprietary Information would be highly likely to cause substantial harm to EPRI's competitive position and the ability of EPRI to license the Proprietary Information both domestically and internationally. The Proprietary Information can only be acquired and/or duplicated by others using an equivalent investment of time and effort.

I have read the foregoing and the matters stated herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I make this affidavit under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America and under the laws of the State of California.

Executed at 1300 W WT Harris Blvd being the premises and place of business of Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.

01tlo�;·1 Neil Wilmsh::;:e

(State of North Carolina) (County of Mecklenburg)

. );( Subscrib�d and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on thiS J!{_day of £fl4L , 20JJ, by

'1li1 L,)�J!d)t , proved to me on the basis of satiSfa Gry evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me.

Signature ------�Jd:��"='='--,.!f?=��-,.---e..<>jj._.---'o£��"'9'----- (Seal)

My Commission Expires d-..�y of -----"�qj-'!:..=1.--' 20 tV,