ML13311A421

Tornado Resistance Design Review for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1

ML13311A421
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	06/12/1987
From:	CYGNA ENERGY SERVICES
To:
Shared Package
ML13311A420	List: ML13311A419 ML13311A421
References
RTR-NUREG-0829, RTR-NUREG-829 NUDOCS 8707080197
Download: ML13311A421 (94)

Text

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY Tornado Resistance Design Review For San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1 Response to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Request for Additional Information Regarding NUREG-0829 Section 4.5 Wind and Tornado Loadings June 12, 1987 8707080197 870702 PDR ADOCK 05000206 P

PDR

INTRODUCTION Southern California Edison Company (Edison) submitted the following documents by letters dated October 10, 1986 and November 11, 1986 respectively:

1. "Tornado Resistance Design Review for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1," Report Number TR-85028-02, Revision 0, Cygna Energy Services, San Francisco, CA, August 1986.

2. "Tornado Resistance Design Review Criteria for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1," Criteria Number DC-85028-01, Revision 0, Cygna Energy Services, San Francisco, CA, October 1986.

By letter dated March 3, 1987 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff requested additional information regarding these documents, the evaluations performed, and the planned facility upgrades. This document provides response to this information request.

Southern California Edison Company SONGS 1 Tornado Review u

Response to Request for Additional Information

Request Provide windspeed capacities for the storage building (portion Number 1:

of the reactor auxiliary building above grade).

Indicate the controlling wind loading condition: wind velocity pressure, atmospheric pressure drop, or missile loads. It should be noted that the NRC calculated 80 mph for the westside masonry walls and 54 mph for the north side masonry walls. If larger wind capacities are claimed, the Licensee should provide justification of its modeling technique.

Response

The methodology used in the SONGS 1 Tornado Resistance Design Review was unique in that it was directed along a "systems" analysis approach rather than a "structural" analysis approach. The systems analysis approach involved the identification of multiple plant shutdown system configurations. Each system configuration was then evaluated and the components required to remain operable identified.

This system/component identification included all support functions such as electrical power, instrumentation, and control.

At this stage of the analysis, structures required to support or house these components were identified and evaluated for windspeed and missile capacity.

The windspeed capacities for the storage building were not reevaluated during the SONGS 1 Tornado Resistance Design Review. No system components required for safe shutdown following a tornado event are located within or supported by the storage building structure.

Southern California Edison Company 2

I SONGS 1 Tornado Review HIIIInHU Response to Request for Additional Information

Request Indicate whether the turbine building gantry crane has been Number 2:

evaluated for tornado risks.

Provide a description of the evaluation method and limiting wind speeds for this structure.

Response

The turbine building gantry crane was evaluated for tornado risk.

The overturning moment produced by wind forces assuming no shielding and an overall drag coefficient of 1.4 was calculated and compared to the resisting moment due to self weight. The results of the calculation indicate that with a safety factor of 1.0, the limiting condition is a North-South wind perpendicular to the face of the crane to which the gantry crane can withstand a 169.2 mph wind which qualifies it to the 10-6 windspeed probability.

Southern California Edison Company 3

SONGS 1 Tornado Review WHUMUU Response to Request for Additional Information

Request Provide a description and the results of the evaluation of the Number 3:

vent stack windspeed capacity. This evaluation should consider extreme fiber stress comparisons, the capacity of the base connection, and the dynamic effects of the vortex shedding.

Response

Many evaluations of the vent stack windspeed capacity were performed and/or evaluated. However, the results of these evaluations were not used in the design review because operability of the vent stack is not required to bring the plant to a safe shutdown condition following a tornado event.

Southern California Edison Company 4

I SONGS 1 Tornado Review 0 0 @

Response to Request for Additional Information

Request In Table 6-1 of Reference 2, define "Group 1," "Group 2," and Number 4:

"Group 3" with respect to the turbine building masonry walls.

Response

The turbine building walls were modeled consistent with the seismic reevaluation efforts at SONGS 1 [1]. The turbine building has 12 walls designated TB-1 through TB-12 that required reevaluation. These walls are shown in Figure 4-1.

The dimensions and reinforcing information for these walls is given below:

Wall Height REINFORCING OPENINGS GROUP ID (feet)

Vertical Horizontal TB-1 21' 4"*

1. 5 @ 32"

1. 5 @ 48" YES 1, 2a TB-2 14' 8"

1. 5 @ 32"

1. 5 @ 48" NO 2

TB-3 14' 8"

1. 5 @ 32"

1. 5 @ 48" NO 2

TB-4 14' 8"

1. 5 @ 32"

1. 5 @ 48" NO 2

TB-5 21' 4"

1. 5 @ 32"

1. 5 @ 48" NO 1

TB-6 21' 4"

1. 5 @ 32"

1. 5 @ 48" NO 1

TB-7 21' 4"*

1. 5 @ 32"

1. 5 @ 48" YES 1, 2a TB-8 14' 8"

1. 5 @ 32"

1. 5 @ 48" YES 2

TB-9 20' 8"

1. 5 @ 32"

1. 5 @ 48" NO 1

TB-10 20' 8"

1. 5 @ 32"

1. 5 @ 48" NO 1

TB-11 20' 8"

1. 5 @ 32"

1. 5 @ 48" YES 1

TB-12 10' 0"

1. 5 @ 24"

1. 5 @ 48" NO 3

Also has portions 15' 8" high which were designated group 2a.

Southern California Edison Company 5

SONGS 1 Tornado Review Sp Response to Request for Additional Information

The turbine building masonry walls were divided into three groups according to their height as follows:

Group 1 21' 4" Group 2 14' 8"I Group 3 10' 0"

Reference:

[1]

"Masonry Wall Design Southern California Edison Company San Onofre Unit 1", Technical Evaluation Report No. TER C5506-405, Eranklin Research Center, August 20, 1985.

Southern California Edison Company 6

• -/s SONGS 1 Tornado Review uu Response to Request for Additional Information

TB-4 TB-3 TB-2 TB-1 M

TB-5 TB-12 TB-6 TB-8 T

T10TB-90 10-1 FIGURE 4-1 Turbine Building Masonry Walls Southern California Edison Company 7

SONGS 1 Tornado Review

~

Response to Request for Additional Information

Request At what wind speed does excessive deflection occur due to Number 5:

utility pole impact for the following walls:

o control room, 9 in, east reinforced concrete wall o

dc switchgear room 1, 8 in, west reinforced concrete wall.

Define "excessive deflection".

Response

Effect of utility pole impact on reinforced concrete walls was evaluated using an energy balance technique as described in Reference 1. The limit on satisfactory behavior is given by an allowable ductility ratio. The allowable ductility ratio is taken from Entry I(b) of Table 5.1 of Reference 2, i.e.,

r av L u

"a 1llow 4X e where pallow

=

Allowable ductility ratio ru av

=

Rotation capacity < 0.07 L

=

Shortest span of wall Xe

=

Yield Deflection Then, "excessive deflection", Xm, is that deflection which causes the allowable ductility ratio to be exceeded.

Using the maximum allowable ductility ratios as defined above, it is found that:

0 For the 9" east reinforced concrete wall of the control room, excessive displacement due to utility pole impact occurs at a maximum horizontal tornado windspeed of 67 mph (or a missile strike velocity of 39 fps).

Southern California Edison Company 8

SONGS 1 Tornado Review mMMM Response to Request for Additional Information

o For the 8" west reinforced concrete wall of the battery charger room, excessive displacement due to utility pole impact occurs at a maximum horizontal tornado windspeed of 86 mph (or a missile strike velocity of 47 fps).

References:

[1]

"Design of Structures for Missile Impact", Topical Report BC-TOP-9A, Revision 2, September 1974, Bechtel Power Corporation.

[2]

Report of the ASCE Committee on Impactive and Impulsive Loads, Vol. 5, Proceedings of the Second ASCE Conference on Civil Engineering and Nuclear Power, Knoxville, Tennessee, September 1980.

Southern California Edison Company 9

T SONGS 1 Tornado Review mU M

Response to Request for Additional Information

Request Indicate whether ventilation equipment building masonry walls Number 6:

will be modified for missile impact. If so, describe modification concept.

Response

The ventilation equipment building walls are not being structurally modified for tornado generated missile impacts.

All components that are attached to the building or are impacted by the building's failure have been identified. Those components that are required to function in order to achieve a safe shutdown, or whose malfunction could compromise the ability to achieve a safe shutdown are being relocated.

Southern California Edison Company 10

-s -

SONGS 1 Tornado Review aggug n

Response to Request for Additional Information

Request Verify the actual windspeed capacities of the following Number 7:

structures and indicate the controlling wind loading condition:

wind velocity pressure, atmospheric pressure drop, or missile loads.

a. control room roof

b. 4160-V switchgear room (control and administration building)

c.

north turbine building deck

d. 480-V switchgear room (fuel storage building)

Response

a.

Control Room Roof The controlling wind loading condition for the control room roof is a utility pole impact. Under a utility pole impact, the horizontal tornado windspeed capacity of the control room roof is 152 mph (or a vertical missile strike velocity of 72 fps).

At that windspeed, the roof slab ductility reaches the allowable ductility (as defined in Response to Request Number 5).

b.

4160-V Switchgear Room (Control Administration Building)

The 4160-V switchgear room has three reinforced concrete walls exposed to atmosphere: 2'10" thick on the north and west sides and a 1'1" thick wall on the south side.

o The 1'1" thick reinforced concrete south wall has a 261 mph wind velocity pressure capacity. The capacity of the 2'10" thick walls exceed the above value by far.

Southern California Edison Company 11 S-

-4

= I SONGS 1 Tornado Review Response to Request for Additional Information

o The room satisfies the minimum vent area/volume requirement given in the Project Design Criteria (Ref. [1]).

The vent areas are protected from missile strike by plant geometric configuration.

o The minimum wall thickness of 1'1" exceeds the wall thickness requirement given in the NRC evaluation of SEP Topic III-4.A [2].

Based on the above, it is concluded that, for the 4160-V switchgear room, the controlling loading condition is wind velocity pressure loading and the capacity exceeds a 260 mph windspeed.

c.

North Turbine Building Deck The North Turbine Building Deck is a prestressed concrete deck with a thickness of 8.5 in.

o The prestressed deck can withstand the wind velocity dynamic pressure associated with a windspeed of 420 mph.

o The turbine complex is vented mainly through opening on its East side and, therefore, atmosphere pressure drop loading need not be considered.

o Under utility pole impact, the horizontal windspeed capacity of the deck is 166 mph (corresponding to a vertical missile strike velocity of 78 fps).

At that windspeed, the deck slab ductility reaches the allowable ductility (as defined in Response to Request No. 5).

Southern California Edison Company 12 I

SONGS 1 Tornado Review m

uuun Response to Request for Additional Information

Based on the above, it is concluded that for the North Turbine Building Deck the controlling loading condition is overall structural response under utility pole impact and the corresponding capacity is 166 mph.

d.

480-V Switchgear Room (Fuel Storage Building)

The 480-V Switchgear Room of.the Fuel Storage Building is surrounded by 8" thick reinforced masonry block walls on three sides.

o Wind velocity pressure capacity of the 8" masonry block walls is 133 mph.

o The room satisfies the minimum vent area/volume requirement given in the Project Design Criteria [1].

o It is assumed that the masonry block walls offer no protection against tornado missiles and no credit is taken for these walls.

Based on the above, it is concluded that for the 480-V switchgear room the controlling loading condition is wind velocity pressure loading and the capacity is 133 mph.

References:

[1]

"Tornado Resistance Design Review Criteria for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1", Report No.

DC-85028 01, Rev. 0, Cygna Energy Services, October 1985.

[2]

"SEP Topic III-4.A, Tornado Missiles San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1", Docket No. 50-206, LS05-82 11-065, Dated November 19, 1982.

Southern California Edison Company 13

-e?

1 SONGS 1 Tornado Review l

H Response to Request for Additional Information

Request With respect to Table 6-1 (2), indicate whether the failure Number 8:

velocities in notes 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9 are based on atmospheric pressure or wind velocity pressure.

Response

The failure velocities are based on wind velocity pressure.

Southern California Edison Company 14 T

SONGS 1 Tornado Review II Response to Request for Additional Information

Request With respect to the fuel storage building, provide the Number 9:

following information:

o Indicate whether the wind and tornado evaluation included the seismic modifications to this structure.

o The Licensee assumed missile impact failure of the masonry walls above the spent fuel pool.

Specify the assumed mode of failure of these walls.

o If tornado wind or missile modifications are not proposed for this building, indicate how internal components (other than spent fuel racks) are protected.

Response

As briefly described in our response to Request No. 1, the methodology employed in the SONGS 1 Tornado Resistance Design Review was directed along a systems analysis approach that began by identifying systems and components required for safe plant shutdown and then led into the identification of required structures.

Once all the structures, systems, and components were identified, wind and missile evaluations began.

To minimize the duplication of efforts, these damage evaluations centered around those structures, systems, and components identified by the NRC in their SERs [1], [2], as not being qualified to withstand the postulated wind loads or as not being adequately protected from tornado induced missiles.

The evaluation performed by the NRC was based on criteria used for licensing new facilities.

The fuel storage building at SONGS 1 includes the spent fuel pool, the new fuel storage and the 480 Volt switchgear room.

The spent fuel pool was qualified by the NRC and was therefore Southern California Edison Company 15

-I SONGS 1 Tornado Review BMMU1mmum Response to Request for Additional Information

not reevaluated. The masonry walls above the spent fuel pool and the 480 Volt switchgear room are discussed below.

The masonry walls above the spent fuel pool were assumed to fail.

This evaluation did not include any seismic modifications to the structure. The assumed failure mode was perforation and collapse. The affect of the most severe impact on the spent fuel assemblies was evaluated and determined to be a direct strike by the 1490 lb. utility pole. The radiological consequences of the loss of the masonry walls and direct missile impact on the spent fuel assemblies were determined to be less than that of the design basis fuel handling accident

[3], [4] and within the guidelines of 10CFR100.

The 480 Volt switchgear room houses the 480 Volt Switchgear, Motor Control Center No. 2, and the associated electrical raceways. These components were identified as part of the systems potentially available for safe plant shutdown.

However, due to the components within the tornado and missile resistant 4160 Volt switchgear room, the final Tornado Shutdown System did not include the components within the 480 Volt switchgear room. Because these components are not required for safe plant shutdown following a tornado event, protection was not provided.

References:

[1]

"SEP Topic 111-2, Wind and Tornado Loadings San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1", Docket No. 50-206, L805-82-02-006 USNRC, February 1, 1983.

[2] "SEP Topic III-4.A, Wind and Tornado Loadings San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1", Docket No. 50:206, L805-82-11-065 USNRC, November 19, 1982.

Southern California Edison Company 16 SONGS 1 Tornado Review I

Response to Request for Additional Information

[3]

"SEP Topic IX-1, Fuel Storage San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1", USNRC Docket No.

50-206, LS05-82-12-014, December 7, 1982.

[4]

"SEP Topic XV-20, Radiological Consequences of Fuel Damaging Accidents (Inside and Outside Containment)",

USNRC Docket No. 50-206, January 17, 1980.

Southern California Edison Company 17 SONGS 1 Tornado Review IIIlII Response to Request for Additional Information

Request With respect to the refueling water (RWS) tank, provide the Number 10:

following information:

1. Provide the actual windspeed capacity of this tank.

It should be noticed that although the tank meets the Licensee's 10-5 probability wind speed (103 mph), it does not necessarily meet the NRC's 10-5 probability wind speed (135 mph).

2. Indicate whether that tank was evaluated for wind pressure loads and provide calculations.

3. Discuss differences between auxiliary feedwater storage tank (10-6 perforation acceptable) and RWS tank (10-6 perforation unacceptable).

Response

1. The actual windspeed capacity of the tank is 123 mph.

The controlling failure mechanism is perforation due to utility pole impact.

2. The RWS tank was evaluated for wind pressure loads.

The calculation is provided in Appendix A.

3. The RWS tank is constructed with.25 inch thick and.329 inch thick steel plates. The.329 inch thick plates are used only for the bottom course of the tank.

The auxiliary feedwater tank is constructed with steel plates that are between.875 inch thick to.25 inch thick. Only the top nine feet of the tank is constructed using the.25 inch thick plates.

Perforation of the top nine feet of the tank was determined to be acceptable because adequate time is available to provide alternate auxiliary feedwater sources.

Southern California Edison Company 18

-?

SONGS 1 Tornado Review BMi mm Response to Request for Additional Information

Request With respect to Table 3.1 in Reference 3, provide a sample Number 11:

calculation of pressure drop values.

Response

A sample calculation is provided below.

Magnitude and Rate of Pressure Drop The pressure drop at the center of the San Onofre Unit 1 tornado, based on the DBT-77 model, is computed from:

AP = pV2 m

where AP is the total pressure drop, p = 7.651 x 10- 2 lb/Ft 3, the density of air at sea level; and Vm (the maximum tangential velocity) = 80.4 mph for the 10-5 probability storm. Using these values, a pressure drop is calculated as follows:

AP

=

0.23 psi for 10-5 per year tornado The maximum rate of pressure drop during the approach phase of a tornado is expressed by:

dP 2

-1

(

)ma

=

pV TmR dt max m mo0 where:

2 PV

=

AP which has been computed m

Tm

=

maximum tornado translational speed R

=

radius of tornado outer core 0

Southern California Edison Company 19

/

SONGS 1 Tornado Review I

Response to Request for Additional Information

For the 10-5 probability per year tornado, the values are:

Tm = 17.69 mph Ro = 57.76 ft.

Using these values in the equation, we obtain dP 50~

( dP m)=

0.11 psi/sec for the 10-per year tornado dt max Southern California Edison Company 20 SONGS 1 Tornado Review IIIIl I

Response to Request for Additional Information

Request Provide justification of horizontal velocity basis for tornado Number 12:

missiles as given in Table 3.2 of Reference 3.

Response

The horizontal velocity bases of 0.6VT for the steel rod and 0.8VT for the utility pole, where VT equals the total tornado or straight wind velocity whichever is greater, were derived from Standard Review Plan, Section 3.5.1.4, Revision 1. This SRP Section states that for plants which were not required to design to the full spectrum of tornado missiles at the construction permit stage, these two missiles at their given fraction of total wind velocity are appropriate for evaluation.

Conservatism was included in the evaluation of SONGS 1 by using the straight windspeed at the 10-4 probability of occurrence instead of the corresponding tornado windspeed which is lower.

Use of these velocity bases is consistent with the final San Onofre Unit 1 Systematic Evaluation Program [1] and the Standard Review Plan [2] which specify identical missiles and fractional missile velocities.

References:

[1]

"SEP Topic III-4.A, Tornado Missiles San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1", USNRC Docket No. 50-206, LS05-82-11-65, November 19, 1982.

[2]

"Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants", NUREG-0800, USNRC, July, 1981.

Southern California Edison Company 21 S-4

-?

SONGS 1 Tornado Review H

m Response to Request for Additional Information

Request Reference the equations used for local missile impact effects Number 13:

on concrete barriers (refer to Section 6.3.1 of Reference 3)

Response

The equations presented in Section 6.3.1 of the Tornado Resistance Design Review Criteria, DC-85028-01, Revision 0 describe the reinforced concrete thickness at which spalling will begin when impacted by solid steel and steel pipe missiles. These equations were obtained from the proceedings of the Second American Society of Civil Engineers Conference on Civil Engineering and Nuclear Power, Volume V:

Report of the ASCE Committee on Impactive and Impulsive Loads. The equation for solid cylindrical missiles is equation 4.1.1.2-7 and for pipe missiles is equation 4.1.1.3-1 of this report.

The actual reference for these equations is Rotz, J. V., "Results of Missile Impact Tests on Reinforced Concrete Panels", Second ASCE Specialty Conference on Structural Design of Nuclear Plant Facilities, New Orleans, December 1975.

Southern California Edison Company 22 S-

?

SONGS 1 Tornado Review mm mu Response to Request for Additional Information

Request Provide sample calculations illustrating the evaluation of Number 14:

structures for the following loads:

o wind velocity pressure o

differential pressure caused by atmospheric pressure drop o

missile local and global affects

Response

Sample calculations for the following structures are provided in the noted Appendices:

o North Turbine Building Deck, Appendix B o

4160-V Switchgear Room, Appendix C Southern California Edison Company 23 S-

-?

SONGS 1 Tornado Review M

Response to Request for Additional Information

Request With respect to the inelastic alternate acceptance criteria for Number 15:

masonry walls (Appendix A, Reference 3), identify the differences in methodology between the tornado evaluation and seismic evaluation.

Response

The inelastic alternate acceptance criteria for masonry walls was not used in the Tornado Resistance Design Review of SONGS 1. Therefore, no response to this request is required.

Southern California Edison Company 24 SONGS 1 Tornado Review H un u

Response to Request for Additional Information

Request Indicate whether any anchor bolts exist in exteriors masonry Number 16:

walls.

Assess the impact of increasing masonry allowables for tornado loads on anchor bolt margins of safety.

Response

Anchor bolts do exist in exterior masonry walls however, masonry allowables were not increased. The predominant failure mechanism for structures and components at SONGS 1 was missile impact. Masonry walls were assumed to provide no protection from missiles and those protecting and/or supporting components required for plant shutdown were recommended for modification.

Southern California Edison Company 25 SONGS 1 Tornado Review H

M Response to Request for Additional Information

Request Please clarify the significance in Table 6-4 of "Yield 10-4n.

Number 17:

a. Does this mean piping has reached yield stress or that the stress criterion section 5.4 of the Criteria Report has been reached?

b. Is "yield" considered to be Failure; or does it depend on equipment function or type? For instance, piping in the mainsteam/main feedwater system associated with reheaters is marked as "Yield 10-4" yet no upgrades are noted where as other pfping (such as auxiliary feedwater tank to pumps) is being protected.

c.

Compare the meaning of "Yield 10-4 with "10-4" in the failure column (see for instance p. 6-11 top).

Response

a. Components identified as yielding means that the component has reached the stress criterion of Section 5.4 of the Criteria Report.

b.

Yes.

Components identified as yielding are considered failed. Only those components required for shutdown or for isolation of other failed components are being upgraded.

As briefly described in response to Request No. 1 and further discussed in response to Request No. 9, the SONGS 1 Tornado Resistance Design Review was directed along a systems analysis approach. The first task was the identification of all possible system configurations available for safe plant shutdown. The next task was the identification and damage evaluation of components and structures required to assure operability of these Southern California Edison Company 26

-F SONGS 1 Tornado Review wuim Response to Request for Additional Information

systems.

This damage evaluation was used to identify a unique subset of plant structures, systems, and components used for safe shutdown that required the minimum cost of plant upgrades. This subset of structures, systems, and components became the Tornado Shutdown System.

The results presented in Section 6 of the report [1],

including Table 6-4, are the results of the damage evaluation of all structures and components available for safe shutdown. These results along with the plant upgrade cost estimates presented in Section 7 [1] were used to identify the Tornado Shutdown System. Only those components required for shutdown or for isolation of other failed components are being upgraded. Therefore, many structures and components noted in Section 6 [1] as not being qualified or protected at lower wind speeds will have no upgrades recommended.

c.

Yield indicates that the component has reached the stress criteria of Section 5.4 of the Criteria Report. Those components provided with a probability factor only indicates a gross material failure.

Reference:

[1]

"Tornado Resistance Design Review for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1", Report No. TR-85028-02, Revision 0, Cygna Energy Services, August, 1986.

Southern California Edison Company 27 SONGS 1 Tornado Review II Response to Request for Additional Information

Request:

Discuss seal water system function - that is, the role of Number 18:

FCV-1112 and seal water flow instruments in system performance.

Response

The systems required to achieve a safe plant shutdown following a tornado event at SONGS 1 were determined by analysis of the plant shutdown functions. These functions are reactivity control, primary coolant inventory control, primary coolant pressure control, and decay heat removal.

The Seal Water System supports the two plant functions of reactivity and primary coolant inventory control.

The Seal Water System supports primary coolant inventory control by cooling the reactor coolant pump seals so that RCS leakage is minimized, and provides an injection flow path for borated water in support of the reactivity control function.

The role of FCV-1112 is to control charging flow through the normal charging line so that seal flow is maintained. One initial assumption of the SONGS 1 Tornado Resistance Design Review was immediate loss of the Instrument Air System.

FCV-1112 fails closed on loss of air and/or power which would block the normal charging flow path to the RCS.

Backup N2 has been recommended for FCV-1112 so that the normal charging flow path can be throttled, adequate seal flow assured and, if required during long term cooldown, control additional charging injection to support primary coolant inventory control.

The seal water flow instruments provide indication to the operators of sufficient seal flow.

Southern California Edison Company 28 SONGS 1 Tornado Review u

Response to Request for Additional Information

Request How will structural modifications such as turbine building west Number 19:

wall be interfaced with seismic modifications

Response

The structural modifications identified in the report are only conceptual designs to determine feasibility and order of magnitude costs. Therefore, details as to how.the proposed modifications will be interfaced with seismic modifications are not available at this time. Proposed modifications for tornado conditions will be evaluated for their effects on existing seismic modifications and seismic analyses.

Presently, we are proposing to replace the west masonry wall of the Turbine Building with a reinforced concrete wall.

Since the wall is outside the column line of the structure, the wall will only be connected at the top to the structural framing of the Turbine Building and not physically interfere with the seismic modifications installed on the Turbine Building. An evaluation will be required to assess the effects of the additional mass of the concrete wall on the Turbine Building's structural framing and instructure response spectra.

Southern California Edison Company 29 S-I-4 I

SONGS 1 Tornado Review mmumummUM Response to Request for Additional Information

Request Discuss how cable rerouting will be interfaced with other Number 20:

issues, such as Appendix R, physical separation of trains, etc.

Response

Any cable rerouting required as part of the tornado design related upgrades will give consideration to Appendix R and physical separation of trains, among other design criteria.

The rerouting will be designed in accordance with the SONGS 1 Retrofit Design Criteria Manual, which includes design criteria considerations such as Appendix R and physical train separation requirements. The Retrofit Design Criteria Manual includes design requirements to meet the codes, standards, and regulatory guidance that encompass all of SCE's design criteria related commitments.

Southern California Edison Company 30 E-

'-4 F

SONGS 1 Tornado Review muuum Response to Request for Additional Information

APPENDIX A STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REFUELING WATER STORAGE TANK Southern California Edison Company 31

-I SONGS 1 Tornado Review I I Response to Request for Additional Information

Calculation Cover IIIIfnlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII S heet Project Q

Q,(

Job No.

File No.

F Client Calc. Set No.

No. of Sheets i /Cc. c vCE siEr Subject Statement of Problem J

7

i.

'bULLLT~L r

7. QC~

(KE rIl Q~r O

M

t. L F

F T ZDiE. TTS v; T(tML 4

c, E

(tJ AATEL tHIL.E IN

-r r'

SE T T 7HAT TE T A rJ V.V I CI(S F

/E 7T /3 1C-r.tA r Cp Sources of Data s-r-

pE'cLE,j c r _

r 4 Sources of Formulae & References Remarks S

TT/M5.E F %

Originators Checkers Distribution Revision No.

q f

(T J Supersedes Calculation Set No.

Approved By:

Date:

1005.00

________Calculation 7

Sheet Project Prepared By:{

Date Subject EVL

~P-

\\~

'ZZChecked By:

A atp/,/

System Job No.

File NO.

/ F Analysis No.

-Rev.

No.

o Sheet No.~

TAftUL&

0F UDQIJTEW7.J5 fu N.

f~£vF 4cI:

s F:b P~L-[-.M [rIESr tSCZ(T&

15 T-~c-& r(-Ek7ir:

QF TA JY 7

1006 00

ILL'4 f-4.

ikL

(.

.J 3L 49 Li

-2

-2 71

>H 4-Q

'3 0

72I AC 12 C-4 0

ILAL IL LL Q

?

UV r

?

2

%4, 6~

-2 zA 1-3 2-.

~

r u) 2 UN0 o

Li

~

LA 2

-)

cc' 2

-J 2

I2i LIN 2

U)

U)

<)

________Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By Date Subject F-AL.IJT(QtJ OF FCAAT T-Y Checked By:

~

Date k/;

System Job No.c File No.

IF Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

A.

L.r 0 bI1iA

F_

ING~ VLC K

V PLJE I

I

~~LOADSC~5(~

F~~L-- 1q~4 tAA(.L Z- \\)rLAFT N"JET, 1 -1L.

\\./ L rtL FO#

-4 MI-S5-SWirr-F-~

T~k r- \\J Q$ ST'T\\A4)

AT F~,

P- ~

K~

1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:(

~ '

Date Subject EVA*L\\J^T'V' UL 2 3 ~

~4 Checked By:

Dates<

System Job No.

File No.

F Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

E VA-LJ6A7F

-Ti:

5TtJ-I/T7 CF T-t

-fC l-

,)

kP A-C1 57V.-Ar 76TANJ<

zr-~ 7Ai'-fk TA KJL V-E kCA~

WT TAN'K VI"-rfi 54 Rt A Z J ZT-f-~ K-117 4-%.

~

~U2It S\\7-QF' Qfi S

5-7

-41 l

1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project c-.

g IPrepared ByDate subject F'/At-A TLtW OF r" 3Yr-F-LTK-AIAD C

Checked By Date(

System Job No.

~

Fije No. fF Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

s r~tIZIt IL A

1*

4t-34 1-- 5 100600

________Calculation Sheet Project IPrepared By: ~

~ 4 Date Subject E-V

-QAT t 'F C-tCYT P'zt ToI('.JA4;Cj Checked By:

Date

//i System Job No.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No.

0 Sheet No.

A Vu IT M \\1 T J1IL-IfAc tjo>T C V-C'JQK, VK TAK S Q.1V~

A 1 O Av

%7~~T7 V VQ CIvf PtS F

IS

/SA Q.v z~~S F

(

?

r.3 bt~

IIV Ft Zp2 4EJJJ~

U

Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:

Date Subject E '4L\\AT tJ'J OF ZAL F \\)L Checked By:

Date System Job No.

File No Analysis No.

Rev. No Sheet No.

FbIv~$

Ft ST F

O 0\\ft

+*X3-0 33 4-571) 4F(

)

V

-I 1 0 06I V

100600

________Calculation Sheet Project

£

~

~ 1Prepared By:

L~ I,

Date Subject TVA )TT-TI-t.3 -TL4&,*~tv t4 3o)

Checked By:

[)Date System Job No.

File No.

I/F Analysis No.

Rev. No Sheet No.

hAU L-~~-

t/AN H

A-A

~~~~/qx T~~~ A t \\_ 14 4~

4 x L

-i34K 3*ILT-X 0i&lT)(7 +

I 74 JT4 to C4tV-I\\J c ~lS C-A A

S

~ T-4 TA vcX MVJr V-J 5~.~ V4A

.'..r-7JW.

r, F-l KJIJ

~

~

H

-~

S3 \\L-V.~W(

EAC -T 3L-ICF KZ 100600

________Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:,

Date Subject Q/A AT~ J t.x'lfrF1

-12 TD/NJ Checked By:~P~tA-Date ~/-~/

I.'

it System Job No. j

~

File No. IF Analysis No.

-Rev.

NoQj Sheet No.

~~S HL-L-~O \\Tf H.ATZ Lic (4EA T -

T I

x A

4~

/A F

X~t~

TF?3c4~C~S!

100600

________Calculation Sheet Project Prpae By I

.A Dt Subject E-V 6A -J AT(A V\\F kw IT FQY-T'O "AV~

Checked By:Dt System Job No.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

TcothL-VE-( r.Al-r-Q,,

QW~ T\\AE 1TAfJLV IQ IAl V

4.

t V

• A~

w V,

~X Vo3

-A 1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project jPrepared By:

(

~ IC Date Subject EVA L-\\JA T ( JtPJ O~ V~

FZ-.

/KAkr Checked By:

Date System Job No.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No. 4 P~i ST Z-S S

AT T-rE A-"TP )

NF T-T TA t.jV Yk DHQ S-rIa1s3 A-rE-EVAT-.VJ 9 L

-7 Ls~~CAT\\t~.JA~ ~~ESS b\\)E.- TQ oFSS V

1006 K

________Calculation Sheet Project Iz J

Prepared By: 1 6A. A Date !

Subject g V i\\JFTQf' OF il~ZIr FZL

-TO41 AilJk Checked By:

Date System Job No.

File No.

IF Analysis No.

Rev. No.

I Sheet No.

12PtAL TZSS c, V,

1Q Z)J~~j24

\\/\\A^/E

~.

C-X~

KL Pr t TA E.

V

L +~ V\\INA,<>l

(+:

1 1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By. P A4 I-I A Date Subject E-VA TQ A O7 k~i NCCC)

Checked BY: P-e Date~/,

I/

System Job No.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

IT(LCN( T A t'c 2

%4 t( -

LE H /z.F1J, E

A E

-T 7-H(f<KrE fCF~

~~i#4T/2A L 7H 7A

)\\ b 1 4 1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project5Q CAi I Prepared By M

~ CA Date <

Subject VA L-\\JT C

l fWP Checked By:

Dat System Job No.

File No.

(F Analysis No.

Rev. No.

4 Sheet No.

I 100600

________Calculation

=

-Sheet Project

-R!

IPrepared By:

A4t-ICA Date Subject AIA-i A L' F (2>,X'-

F 'lYL Checked By:~P~t 1

Dater(

1 q37 System Job No.%

File No.

F Analysis No.

-Rev.

No.

Sheet No.

t, I

LIx

~

Q t3

-t-Kle k

rL 7v V

L-F 1006 Oc

________Calculation Sheet Project c-tI-Prepared By:

A IF Ct A Date.

Subject F-VAL xJATL(JC WtP CZ~T(

Checked By:

4.

~Date c.11/~

System Job No.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

17 6

.3, 1 0 4-.

F C.~

i-7

.00 IlkL

.0-0

/

rZ O~

QT L

-t i005,OC

________Calculation Sheet Project S~%3C~.C I Prepared By:(.fL.It Date,-..,

W Subject EV~X.t.'

2 ~'AJ

~ZChecked By:~

Date 7

System Job No.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No.

~lSheet No.

-7

/I T

~C4. 3.

-4 A 3Zv.-?

slt-Q IN T~~~

cEl4~,c V

4 V

-6

(

________Calculation Sheet Project

'0,,

Pr~rdY ACA Date Subject FVA(A\\JATI' OF /K-WiT FV1 TIIZ-ACDO Checked By:

An-IA-,

Date 15 /I9$

System Job No.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No.1 Sheet No.

-T 4-a. q1c(

v l'V 1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project (S

IPrepared By:

A Date Subject tVAL9AT Th yr Z

h/JYFr Checked By:

I TA-P.

Date BLQ7 System Job No.

File No.

J Analysis No.

Rev. No. 0Sheet No.

A4

-T =L 1 V +Q.1 4-4-~VV, CCI-I C, T A-0TEJI~

r'v.(z.. INTEK E'Z rt(

FN v1P '(L-C M ~TNJ11 J STWEJ k 1 -r)3 a.

FCE 4-3 1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project SPrepared By:~

A A l ate,/; )

Subjct ~VA ~

~ ~

~L 1J~~JA~ Checked By:

~

Date System Job No.

File No. 'IF Analysis No._

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

-r-i Y,

t -vK 4

U0 Q

Loy_

A;A iFk s T TEIJKZAT I3/ 7A K1 V

V-/

I~~~(AT A.-9j 1006 OC

________Calculation Sheet Project N

rPrepared By:

I C,( /q Dale j

Subject F-A\\

TJt4

( JF

~)F~i Checked By:~

-7 if Date

//,

System Job No.

~

File No. 1 /F Analysis No.

Rev. No.

QSheet No.

AS; A

Ex l

\\-I,/ AI t/7kVC VV__

(4 V",t S~I.. C F~

V,

\\T L

V T, V f~e W E:1,

r,-JL. T V, EE

- T-Tk 7-"r--T A J V,

%17TZ H i'A7E 1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project IPrepared By:

At Dale ~i Subject EV/A -JAIl ON %ZT-f-JIT F;Z)- -RkJOa Checked By: j)ppf Dale System Job No.

File No.h Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

urE~t N ib \\; ~tk 'LQ

-S 6 KNiI AC, f-I-tI LA2C 7-F-yA~

sl I1.25..

100600

________Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:

6A~ L I Date T Subject aVf~ A T

t")

4 JT F Tl iJ Checked By:~

Date ~uI System Job No.

~

File No.

'IF Analysis No.~

Rev. No.1 Sheet No.

97 Y, 3 1

V. S,

/

O0--7,,,l X 1006 Oc

________Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:

~

AsA-i-Date I

Subject F-VL.JOA-jt,01 CT-A(VWJT-F' 4 T"OkI},4DV Checked By:

Date~J~

System Job No.

File No.

_4___

hF Analysis No.

-Rev.

No.

Sheet No.

C V

YvZEE

-rRS ITANV WALU ArQP 17t'r X~z F) rHL4TANk iOA14

-Th-AL vr-ro-iA LA ACT~t ttk TH5 AA P7 F-TANK WM(CHT-LJA1r--P WE-IC(N 157

TCf,

_Nr"\\,~k I

J~

T~Z (A

D_

1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:~

4 Date

)

Subject IT1A~t~JOf-

,)T J 1/JAV; Checked By:

jDate System Job No.

File INO.

Analysis No.

.Rev.

No.

Sheet No.

DALL +;

CvTQ A-V3c.Cc A~ts td E F CT jQS Z.Q,4 Dt ~M-F+Fr4E N VL. 5 V4 EZ tTh NE,,W.AL C, i 1 ) uL. Ck, tit AJ FL( 4 1A47 5TKE V I tJ TA A K.

T- (w-L tf-r 0 Art-3N c/ TF-NftwJ K-ir-TH-&.

Si)ifJ AT Tk4-z 6~A~TI V;F TVS Ai.JK cob-.AtJ t

T.

1006,00

________Calculation Sheet Project jPrepared By: (

1A. C.A Date Subject C\\~L~~ N iCWY4&T7 F CI TD

.A AQ Checked BY: 3PT-J-Date System Job No. -eN

_File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No. c Sheet No.

/$ :

K fILX(

F-CEJL-SL.. £CJY ThE ST;f7tkIL.N7I;'EK(EKTIAL

('CtAINK A

L~~i~-tKC. D~ t'(

TQ

(.I4

\\J TIE 571,-17 QAPf V

kS A~~(

1)t

/

'Ty\\

rILT AF th-L, Sv

-cZ I

J(

ro Vcc QS

-Az C\\ -

________Calculation Sheet Project c

fPrepared By:(

AL 'c. Date~/.)'

Subject EV

\\f-TQ OF k(&~fA-$ F4LZ Checked By:

Date System Job No File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

('

V C

TACV A-Th f-~M CF O-kA,,T kJ C V~fJ FF y~x~W.

H

-V'~

ST T F AJZ cz(

MP-I-qZ'ACL tQRS VUs,~z

________Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:

Date Subject r-.V, '

JQA-hO/QCF fk, I7CJ F

,- JAtKD Checked By:

Date C System Job No.

File No.

/

Anatysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

VI I T C I

-I 0- Q;2P1-L L--

c F

)~tf 1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project CI Prepared By:

Dale Subject E VAJATc (4-- iZLkAJT r r TCIZAJAD Q Checked By:

Date ~f:/i System Job No. g

~File No Analysis No.

___Rev.

No.

0Sheet No.

V Y\\4N Z:TA 41'~K S/53 I

I r

S I N r r-FV iS ri S R V Ev A

1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project (A

Prepared By:

• (

(A LA(I Date r

Subject r--VLA AT(SJ OF /' jAX!T P~'t-R kN'A DQ Checked By.

)OT Date System Job No File No. ~

Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

C-N~(I2 6-1J~.

FV k.L4rci V 100600

________Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By.

Datei Subject F-VA44AJATV.'f lDP t~T F~-

Checked Bly A Date System J ob No.

File No.

Analysis No Rev. No.0 Sheet No.

31

-7I C

12 -7 1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project 5'IJ.S IPrepared By. A I 'A (,A Datec Subject

.V A L Q A-T' Q 0J

-r ~T - 4::Y Checked By:

Date System Job No.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No.

o Sheet No.

2 ~

C4A~~L( ~

TrNWV-F-V7y L\\ C~,V.tJC ATV THE~ 6Afr

-rA

I___

\\\\S VJ t.2 CNCAV TA4Z 7TAJV-I-'ZY, T~

~

S~T

,eSE SIE-Kc /

-3

-1 X I L~~-

9 r ZJZ

+ (' 1 Z3X JEEF. 5t-rT Aly 1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:

A Date P

Subject VA V A dT(

1. 4 ( I T-F Checked By:~

Date System Job No.

)jf File No.

Analysis No.

-Rev.

No.

Shieet No.

6!3 Q KJtT I

C(rHlEj.J T bA7A VQA~

E N C

.1.~~~

~~

S1-c Qx.,

N$TFt-gr brKA r;C(

KX 3 q,--V 6 /3s. ~t V

_)

k I*:~

L-awINC p-CItr-kZ r

ti.

\\Tq-,,

TCA-A(-T Q QS

/

fJL - 1

/ -AK kly

/

1006 00

________Calculation Sheet Project Prepared ByA SCi~l Dt Sysjt 7' k Che ~ked By:

Date SytmJob No.

File No.

AnlssN.Rev. No. 10Sheet No.

4.

TPir t K1ZJ T /Z t C AO £~CiC

-kA 7V1tJC

(,:,7AFO EAIAsJA~ok H~ SZS P I T f cI G-AL('JLATO K t i/,EJ 87Q16-

./I SET-A AK~%ijwI)( VU, FIC)&#C VI-IIQ\\ /c t Q IK FJLL-5(kC l-rCT-h$5

-F 1006 00

20. MISCELLANEOUS WATER SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT REFUELING WATER STORAGE TANK, D-1 REFERENCES Manufacturer, Pittsburgh-Des Moines Quanticy, One Speci:ication, BSO-433 Purchase Order, BSO-433 DATA Tank Height, Straight Shell 37 ft 1 in Tank Diameter, Mean 34 ft 0 in Number of Courses 5

Size of Courses 88-5/16 in Plate Material A283C Plate Thickness Bottom 5/16 in Roof 1/4 in Course 1 0.329 in Courses 2, 3, 4, 5 1/4 in Size of Top Angle 3-1/2 x 3 x 1/4 in Size Anchor Bearing Plates 3-1/8 x 5/8 x 7 in Number of Anchor Bolts 34 Tank Capacity 240,000 gal Type of Mechanical Cleanup for Mill Scale U.S. of Bottom SSPC-SP-6 Vent Size CYG 104A 7-5/8 in round x 4 in York Demister ATTACHMENT Vent Model JOB NO. i7 Style #326 Lining Material FILE NO.

Plasite #7155 Lining Thickness SHEET ND..2LI 8 mils 20-14

pro*

Was r4N33HS7f trrIi 3T-T O N 311A11

-I-LN3W~H3VUV h

.FJ.

iii ili I fill BID]

1 A.1 1.,___

1

@3Op fil I3-a

s 2 2 b sB 910 11 12 13is 1

is Ise u

£ 9S

31.

4'G

iSHEE NO.*

~~iv "s

6 0w-

-U 1;

MU

NE-3000 -

DESIGN NE-3133.5-NE-3133.6 D.2L, T A, A than the moment of inertia for the section

=

L,4 selected in Step 1, a new section with a 10.9 larger moment of inertia must be selected and a new moment of inertia determined. If If the stiffeners should be so located that the maxi-the required moment of inertia is smaller mum permissible effective shell sections overlap on than the moment of inertia for the section either or both sides of a stiffener, the effective shell selected in Step 1, that section should be section for the stiffener shall oe shortened by one-half of each overlap.

W For fabrication and installation requirements (b) The availablk moment of inertia I or r for a for stiffening rings, see NE-4437.

stiffening ring shall be determined by the following procedure:

NE-3133.6 Cylinders Under Axial Compression.

Step 1: Assuming that the shell has been designed The maximum allowable compressive stress to be used and D, L, and T. are known, select a in the design of cylindrical shells and tubular products member to be used for the stiffening ring and subjected to loadings that produce longitudinal com determine its cross-sectional area A, Then pressive stresses in the shell shall be the smaller of the calculate factor B using the following for-following values:

mula:

(a) the Srh value for the applicable material at Design Temperature given in Tables 110.0; PD c the value of B determined from the applicable B =314 (

)

chart in Appendix VII, using the following definitions Tm. + A IL, for the symbols on the charts:

T=minimum required thickness of the shell or Step 2: Enter the right side of the applicable materi-tubular product, exclusive of the corrosion al chart in Appendix VII for the material allowance, in.

under consideration at the value of B deter-R =the inside radius of the cylindrical shell or ieby Step. If different materials are tubular product, in.

used for the shell and stiffening ring, use the The value of B shall be determined from the applicable material chart resulting in the larger value of chart contained in Appendix VII as given in Steps Ain Step4or5below.

throug5.

Step 3: Move horizontally to the left to the mate-Step 1: Using the selected values of T and R, rial/temperature line for the design metal calculate the value of factor A using the temperature. For values of B faming below following formula:

the left end of the material/temperature line, see Step 5.0.2 Step 4: Move vertically to the bottom of the chart A 0.i and read the value of A.t m

t it Step 5: For values of B falling below be the material/temperature line f c

Using the value of A calculated in Step 1, Temperature, the value of A cm~bkcu-f s enter the applicable material chart in Ap ed using the formula:

-pendix VII for the material under consider The maxiati l Move vertically to an intersection 2B tdwith material/temperature line for the Dc A E tJ~.~

~

sign Temperature. Interpolation may be A

subecte t made between lines for intermediate temper Stepre 6s stiv atures. In cases where the value at A falls to moment the right of the end of the materi of inertia from the formulas [or 1, or-7i,-

D al/temperature line, assume an intersection

above, with the horizontal projection of the upper Step 7: Calculate the available moment of inertia I end of the material/temperature line. For or rf of the stiffening ring using the section values of A falling to the left of the materi corresponding to that used in Step 6.

al/temperature line, see Step 4.

Step 8: If the required moment of inertia is greater Step 3: From the intersection obtained in Step 2, 43

NE-3133.6-NE-3211 SECTION HI, DIVISION I -

SUBSECTION NE move horizontally to the right and read the equals the largest inside diameter of the cone (NE value of factor B. This is the maximum 3325).

allowable compressive stress for the values of Tand R used in Step 1.

Step 4: For values of A falling to the left of the NE-3134 Material Properties applicable material/temperature line, the Values for intermediate temperatures may be found value of B shall be calculated using the by interpolation.

following formula:

NE-3134.1 Yield Strength Values. The values of B =

yield strength S, shall be those given in Tables 1-2.0.

e NE-3134.2 Ultimate Tensile Strength Values. The Step 5: Compare the value of B determined i Steps values of ultimate tensile strength shall be those given 3 or 4 with the computed longitudinal in Tables 1-3.0.

compressive stress in the cylindrical shell or tube, using the selected values of Tand R. If the value of B is smaller than the computed NE-3134.3 Coefficients of Thermal Conductivity compressive stress, a greater value of T must and Thermal Diffusivity. The values shall be those be selected and the design procedure repeat-given in Tables 1-4.0.

ed until a value of B is obtained which is greater than the compressive stress comput-NE-3134.4 Coefficients of Thermal Expansion. The ed for the loading on the cylindrical shell or values of thermal expansion coefficients shall be those tube.

given in Tables 1-5.0.

NE-3133.7 Conical Heads. The required thickness NE-3134.5 Modulus of Elasticity Values. The of a conical head under pressure on the convex side values of modulus of elasticity shall be those given in shall not be less than that determined by (a), (b), and Tables 1-6.0.

(c) below.

(a) When one-half of the included apex angle of the cone is equal to or less than 22% deg., the thickness of NE3134.6 Allowable Stress Intensity and Stress the cone shall be the same as the required thickness of Values. The allowable stress intensity Sm 1 shall be the a cylindrical shell, the length of which equals the axial S. listed in Tables I-1.0, and the allowable stress length of the cone or the axial distance center-t intensity shall be the S,,, listed in Tables -10.0.

center of stiffening rings, if used, and the outside The basis for establishing allowable stress intensity diameter of which is equal to the outside diameter at and stress values is given in Appendix III.

the large end of the cone or section between stiffening rngs.

(b) When one-half of the included apex angle of the NE-320 DESIGN BY ANALYSIS cone is greater than 22% deg. and not more than 60 deg., the thickness of the cone shall be the same as the NE-3210 DESIGN CRITERIA required thickness of a cylindrical shell, the outside NE-3211 General Requirements for diameter of which equals the largest inside diameter of Acceptability the cone measured perpendicular to the cone axis, and the length of which equals an axial length that is the The requirements for the acceptability of a design lesser of either the distance center-to-center of by analysis are given in (a) and (b) below.

stiffening rings, if used, or the largest inside diameter (a) The design shall be such that stress intensities do of the section of the cone considered.

not exceed the appli ble limits at temperature de (c) When one-half of the included apex angle of the scribed in this Subarti e.

cone is greater than 60 deg., the thickness of the cone (b) In addition to ee et in () boe, the shall be the same as the required thickness for a flat buckling stress shall ed iaccordance with head under external pressure, the diameter of which NE-3222.

A F ILE F O S HE 2:T W_,_A 2

APPENDIX VII Fig. VII-1101-2 Table VII-1101-2 contains values for plotting.

7up to 30 F--

?000

-1

-:e 700 F

-18,000 7.F 14.000 6000F

-00 90 12,000 10,000 94000

8. 00 7 000 5,000 E - 29.0. 1061 E = 27.0 x 10 6

.000 E= 24.5 a1 E = 22.8 : 10 6

,0 E =20.8 x 10E 3,000 2

3 4 5 6789 2

3 4 5 6789 2

3 4

5 6789 2

3 4 5 6789 00001

.0001

.001

.01

.1 FACTOR A FIG. VII-1101-2 CHART FOR DETERMINING SHELL THICKNESS OF CYLINDRICAL AND SPHERICAL COMPONENTS UNDER EXTERNAL PRESSURE WHEN CONSTRUCTED OF CARBON AND LOW ALLOY STEELS (Specified Yield Strength 30,000 to 38,000 psi, inclusive) AND TYPES 405 AND 410 STAINLESS STEEL A

ATTAC>l??.'T JOBNo. I1Co FILE NO.

SHEET NO. A 0

277

APPENDIX B STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS NORTH TURBINE DECK EXTENSION Southern California Edison Company 32

-?

SONGS 1 Tornado Review I11ll III IIIIIIIIIII11,1 Response to Request for Additional Information

Calculation Cover lillin11llIIIIIIllI lIIIIIII S heet Project on Job No. T/AG :

)b 05 TO~o iiAbTpr File No.!P Client Calc. Set No.

!CE No. of Sheets Subject Statement of Problem T -I TobrP0 x4afE)

CAPTI O e TNw TOffi 711 NOMP o

To e C/LD(<4.D. TOjDp_14oe Thfflex~

pAQ~z.2 G F A) C, Pitch)A(

1W' 5.PU'L Jr1AT LOAi3' MA.T ok a

Sources of Data golG3 Ta H. 0 L Z.

05,0~7Q scn inae ArrmhA saKV-OV as~

tCA.5-r, Sources of Formulae & References

\\9JSpna ofTh-~ %

x; orr& T

\\0 1

TWE i'

a NL-u 1' 90CMso 7

V f

2ao /(

COCr'ar I

Ow' PoQWaysVs C3"F OL.L 5 V)LG

-To4r4V av stHG-l)VAT TarS7 "

GPFAT RC9oar jri?-4 370.-97IM OTq-p(-

AeGrlticE Cvncf vJ/ --

Ao#-4N

-T -b Qc.

s(FT.

Remarks Originators Checkers Distribution Revision No. O Supersedes Calculation Set No.

Y WWo r

Approved By:

Date:

1005.00

Calculation Sheet Project 0005 TO r/

p54c6 Prepared By:

Date Subject Checked By:

Date System Job No.

Fie No Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

To T90 Nreq

-4 s

rub 91x fo TUM WE DE

-RoanT' Ex7044to 5t fbuowr~i 07 9 00

" 1 THE. DECVK

'5 fT4-a*rtco QQ <T

\\

84 Ticjcgs ciF 1oIA To 5ot"%i L1oL s7 p

DJ AC.

L-OA C'r

)

1 LL-

?3A Cod Ic 100)

.000

• TokWNtp~o m)A5\\LC-e(19 T IQAC 1006.00

Calculation Sheet Project TO 0

6T M Prepared By:

Date Subject Toi'too

\\,4 Checked By:

Date System 1

Job No.

File No. C Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

Tp ga

{FR TFh~ cod CoA)(

15 VE&NTED M1Av L T~oc Lo/u4 C~ NO3 rN1(

geV CoA$ > JU7p iIvJ OA

)

N

)BC, RYSTAj LAfmd 0~

fP 'T-

-yWyoZ Lo

}~~~~~-

T RzWWg oW NA o

on t

m oP L30 rP- ( yeR-re 04 Ptt 9%7% -3 B(iiECar T}f Tr [5 R

r )00Pf

, TPwoY - k-,a Ia coo d 489 Ai Ut Pto AEo5 35 100L AAr NPe-yrovEt SC4DT m ngm of 1T6.p en00a sU 4

e)hgOi 1006.00

Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:

Date Subject Checked By:

Date System T Job No. t3704 e No Analysis No.

Rev. No. O Sheet No.

TD

.1 OL-71VZ aO/

(oava L CcO1do )

plo<a-cpe7

\\s mooo d PIA-

& To Thc gmy-rp M -

=

,,t1

=

0.002%~~~~

c

evv, f7T 0002 oAi 71 f2 o

Tihk'b

-:pkohe E-zw Co t

a o Tr( NjTE.

1006.00

Calculation Sheet Project 5 / TOtAAp Prepared By:

Date Subject f A

q Checked By:

Date System Job No.

File No.

Analysis No Rev. No Sheet No.

T O 4 1 -

LO Gk, 94T0iZ LNA]A ( ataTIa 9 -

OV/\\..

$@b&Ek r

LT-I T (

o Ope

-~~

~

LOCAE JAE G\\MdyO rjLo LO W 8 L at)

L LN 0

?

fMT -1,:)

a.

~

4L27pk~

-A

) oo, kk.R)

AOT 14om av joof4 027a 4\\7 7v

(

rKM.1--

\\"=7 L=

)40 v\\Jo 1006.00

Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:

Date Subject 4

\\4 Checked By:

Date System Tb

)-X No. O File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

)-~~

Lo77. M M7n,777b 6VoA ior F(orra

'TokN"

\\eo 1/0 -'*

114* WILL;aa 150 o

TnS IT WI -

VI 1~-

~jiL~V~'

(

) o)

TO

/

T 4 V4 146 or~ B s(

v) T 11 y

____76 T_____T__~

V,=45 FIs TK

\\ItT1

=f

~IQ 0i i9F "ril2ou 15 VOD~Y fyAw g

he

)cxk of GE Iof"0 okTE TL~

&Lb CH 5 1006100

Calculation Sheet Project C

)

O 4

STM C Prepared By:

Date 4 7 Subject TO_

9t Checked By:

Date System Job No.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No. O Sheet No.

j-Lc'

" OrxC 0 LJ - I 13,A

_t~oi!-j. Cz~~

.c5QM.

0

-9 (C3 C.0,IQ4

-r--1 X/

t

~

%412~

_Jq 1-Lo Ck 94glCi Dia Nr

'I o-n-'

cl Nq, Qapo-.

I f p)

~~D T

T14.

REThLA~'x 1006.00

Calculation Sheet Project SN C ) Togr 5 T1A 1

Prepared By:

Date Subject Checked By:

Date System -

Nc$

1 Job No.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev No. O Sheet No.

a H)55)C L M? MET Lo y6f CCM 9) 0aKP A seU T

7 4 I aPMMg

)T~

T KPP pm On014 rew6 Ofe-TnW nfc TRTM U-b UO T

01 roi0) )

Ut/ F)-v 5 TcYD If 0O.0087)

K- ?f/FT 10 P-44:', J l 077

/

1006 00

Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:

Date Subject Checked By:

Date Systern J ob N o.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev No.

Sheet No.

FeP

• ho-

)?-T La A

( Code~)

2 Vo427 Y-;;O/n

~~7T L

,+

ao.

1006.00

Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:

Date Subject Checked By:

Date System Job No.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

C-V~_LT I ccL, 0 S~~olLT p o-iL L=Oqgyao

=57.4,L o~cfwjI a9~ Jk

. G 8 f lo-A o

-0 fe 1A irP 3*) W. C 1006.00

Calculation Sheet Project C 5

(

TOZ5

('ZT/

L Prepared By:

Date Subect-O

'y Y

Checked By:

Date System T OA Job No.

File No Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No. TP r~A T= )

(3')

-SS L e

)E L

SS

\\AIU SI' i -k-c-i'0i(

0 5)(

)

V.-FT/fT C,~~

I/7 1006.00

Calculation Sheet Project Prepared By:

Date Subjec t Checked By:

Date System

/ - 4 %27 Tk 10- Job No. q7O G File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No. O Sheet No.

• 51LEJ li PP'0 Lo~

Cod a)

S 3

Thed

=

(0

+33

-ny)

/r 11(_27_)_()r

()

=- 044 r

AT 100c0 (VAX h~~24oi7o3 QC~~~;

00 ~o44(,

(4 1006.00

APPENDIX C STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS 4.16 KV SWITCHGEAR ROOM REINFORCED CONCRETE WALLS Southern California Edison Company 33

-/

SONGS 1 Tornado Review I

Response to Request for Additional Information

Calculation Cover Sheet Project Job No.

T i OILA4i~

AFile No.

Client Calc. Set No.

No. of Sheets Subject 4.I U 91TCH CE 400c1 krul~u.

Statement of Problem Sources of Data Sources of Formulae & References Remarks LWas W

,4rP5TPAP qR(o tvN 0C oA tn.

'2-11, ru 014 Sla.

Originators Checkers Distribution Revision No. 0 Supersedes Calculation Set No.

Approved By:

Date:

1005.00

Calculation Sheet Project O

TAAC Prepared By:

Date Subject Checked By:

Date System 4,)6 00 A 'V)

Job No.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No O

Sheet No.

oT/O or we 4.t 10wer/

re cgr fo.--

Co" OCo 10

_F 0 1~ 2 sTroms c, be 6& c s bad oA 4sd~ 7603 I'O' C,-1t, (aGCno45 C & Q) 7e p oretoA WAtLS 7P;Ey

)-0 41 94 ofir TN EOT 0.WA P~u

• T AmbE ksrr TIM Pf-5s -

lec fwome PA~-fA OL \\,ax re, AT A LOO Wg5ICE kA fe F.I 0 ALLS WI Lt Th5 s L xo5z To VqN9 LOA4r.

Toro-,0r-k4 gs) L-c Nt>ven-w01be NT(1P~ee w

WrftU-hCrtSS 5 L( CI~9 Thow E

ic

.p x

PTRC TELHA Et OT-

• POAT Or w th -TOPC-iT-4P a VA TT TEo.TLEm }11.0 417) 1006,00 1

Calculation Sheet Project j

TOA^v OnSTMce Prepared By:

Date Subject Checked B Date System Job No.

File No Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

CtfKF to Isv VE4IT AAEprs'.

~JJ'T AO-T( '&A 1

f9(/W

!V'

%so*t EL H MT 7/'

4

/x 8

+4 x

8

)okAM

?Ox Q0 0 a ='79-4.0 F-T" (CtE U8td '57,489) conPSge7YV1~

vok 74P)'.3 94r77 FTp Vaq&Lacor ya fo.

=],419.toF-T T7 pecom4 To 7 E

0Tur,9e, LOAOs 0-mcrs "A

C, TJ~

1

>bTK1'Trr V-r T Mo-To

)LLO)PTE

/To oec 0o "PI -SPEIP

-.9rTPt twCAto o 10rc6,0 0JI-s 1aTo W.= o0 1006 00

Calculation Sheet Project T

Prepared By:

Date

/

/3.

Subject Checked By Date System V V Sv4TO4 a3r,'

0 JobNo.

File No.

Analysis No.

Rev. No O Sheet No.

Seeno

~

~

~

~

1-C

,(e a

osoC To

)&

o' 1 wicc

\\;+,-

4 8~)'2." hatb.

T7ie wr L.I o2,

/ a C CIA

)o7-A (

wazf G5,031 / EL. C) o e

O')) '/" 0 h, -aIe G ( s k

o l G L. F ) 7 i

n

,C:

wftvDAQ o(,

i~c 1 4,1 11K A

/hbA1 TR Wu5 To TA o

Lo-T 11 T

L oTdkVe.

11~eA

[j10 bP

&\\t 0"- O a

M o

n tl Fo I WQxTIVCATOL (lo F6 ptv-Q x

n 4A 0

10-06.O0059 0

1006.00

Calculation Sheet Project So 1 TOAr o A11TMCR Prepared By:

Date Subject Checked B Date System c

0 Job No.

File No Analysis No.

Rev. No.

Sheet No.

T~od r}o 0.9)(0.443X9.01) [ - 0 008))47jof

-)'IM-w-/FT ToA&-

51n f

77O 4 7-9 u-T L.-Tf

=0779 V/f T

776) 0.o C! ; o (s 5 we a

q

=7 779 /.ot 6o1)7 r 2 (o<o n 0 o Z4atP CNAt fi UTN

't2G0 MPHN(,L, -To4ol" hi f 0.001L, C/

Ib- 000 (0(7;' Je L$\\s L'/F-T/

LFVf

\\

=779 1006.00

Calculation Sheet Project 5 I TOA v s

CE Prepared By:

Date Subject O/c Checked By:

Date System Job No.

O File No Analysis No.

Rev No O Sheet No.

~LL

'kCTbA N~e Gfq DC~O>

cyg~

F

)40 6

T lp1 s

-r IcI(

/

414 G 0 VVBT TZ PIKrT

-P L

(wo~

T 4

-T0 t-ci 10"'&~x-N yv' ( r/

(A fee.

a FoA C

wo-X)117 FTr Cr a

M hx co-V - o*9 6

1 00 6T0, Lt).-

/

o 1006.00

Calculation Sheet Project 5-T Prepared By:

Date Subject Checked B Date System Job No.

O File No, Analysis No.

Rev No Sheet No.

b QOo w

0 V4 C/o. ri c {2 6/o 00

'C Toz 7m

\\4 0.0 ons C

0.00

(

S O%

\\1 Los.

,, =17. 5 y FgT 2 '- 11o c o

-f Th T 16 7

Wo

/19c o

a 0" f-"

ba T to 6k f;GTs MA W-1 V"T,-B itA -nT

(

L 0t Ao Tf

)l40 ric f

ArWtL n-o0icd 90Twzkyt C

100x'

'oo-y fITl dco

>JO /Ij A

C T MK.

vt Compearod

\\pll-t, i'dC(Ah Th000~

4 CA~tan 5'

1060 f~ $u- ;

I7b O')N iOA s (

dP