ML13317A803
| ML13317A803 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 11/13/1981 |
| From: | Nelson T LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY |
| To: | Russell W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-A-0415, CON-FIN-A-415 SM-81-302, NUDOCS 8201070011 | |
| Download: ML13317A803 (4) | |
Text
Lawrence Livermo*4ational Laboratory November 13,1981 SM 81-302 Docket 50-206 FIN A0415 Mr. William T. Russell, Branch Chief Systematic Evaluation Program Branch Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Reg.
Washington, D.C. 20555
Subject:
PROGRAM PLAN REVIEW FOR SAN ONOFRE, UNIT 1 The enclosed document represents a summary of the program plan review for the subject plant. It is presented in the form of a checklist. Each applicable item is given two reviews. The first one is an "acceptance" review, to check if that particular item has been addressed. The second is an "adequacy" review, to judge if the proposed methodology to address the item is acceptable for the purpose of reevaluation. The numbers in the parentheses refer to comments that are listed at the end of the checklist.
The items marked yes in the "adequate" column mean that there is no deviation from current criteria, which includes Regulatory Guides, Standard Review Plans and SEP criteria. If they are marked yes with a number in parentheses, they do not meet the letter of current criteria but are deemed adequate for the reasons explained in the corresponding comment. It should be noted that even if the methodologies are deemed adequate from a review of the program plan, the application of the proposed methods must be reviewed in detail when the analysis results are submitted.
Additional data and comments regarding the program plans can be found in the previous submittals for each plant.
Sincerely, Thomas A. Nelson Project Manager Structural Mechanics Group Nuclear Test Engineering Division TAN/mg 0179m Enclosure Oii
W SAN ONOFRE UNIT 1 REVIEW
SUMMARY
OF THE SEISMIC REEVALUATION PROGRAM PLAN ITEM ADDRESSED?
ADEQUATE?
I.
Soil and Foundation A.
Rock Site (Partly) no B. Soil.Site o
Foundation Input yes yes o
Generation of time history yes yes o
Modeling technique yes no (1,2,3) o Computer Codes (4)
C.
Description of Foundation yes yes D. Free Field Input Spectrum yes yes II. Structural A.
List and Description of Category I yes (5)
Structures or Structures Affecting Category I Systems or Components B.
Modeling Techniques o
Damping yes yes o
Stiffness modeling yes no (2,3,6) o Mass Modeling yes no (2) o Consideration of 3-D effects yes yes C.
Seismic Analysis Methods o
Response Spectrum, time history yes (7) or equivalent static analysis o
Selection of significant modes yes yes o
Relative displacements yes yes o
Modal combinations yes yes o
Three component input yes yes o
Floor spectra generation yes yes o
Peak broadening yes yes o
Load combination yes yes
ITEM ADDRESSED?
ADEQUATE?
D.
Analytical Criteria o
Codes and criteria, including yes yes AISC, ACI and NUREG/CR-0098 E.
Computer Codes o
Description and verification yes no (4)
III. Structural Integrity of Mechanical and Electrical Components, Piping and Supports A. List and Description of yes (5)
Systems and Components B. Modeling Techniques o
Eccentric masses yes (9) o Mass distribution yes (9) o Support flexibility yes (9) o Spectra selected yes (9)
C.
Analytical Procedures o
Damping yes (9) o Span tables, dynamic analysis yes no (8,9) o Overturning yes (9) o 3 component input yes (9) o Support analysis yes (9,10)
D.
Analysis Criteria o
ANSI B31.1 yes (9) o ASME B&PV code yes (9) o NUREG/CR-0098 no o
Load Combinations yes (9)
E.
Computer Codes o
Description and Verification yes no(9,11)
Comments
- 1. No explicit mention of the soil property variation range is made to comply with SSRT SSI guidelines. The program plan for BOP structures refers to a Reference 3.
- 2. The program plan for BOP structures refers to a Reference 8, Design Guide C-2.44. It appears to be a Bechtel inhouse document which should be made available for review.
- 3. For the concrete enclosure building and containment sphere, it is not clear how soil-structure interaction is modeled. More information is needed to complete a review.
- 4. Computer codes applied to BOP structures are not described.
- 5. NRC staff will determine the completeness of the list.
- 6. For the Ventilation Equipment Building, the program assumes a rigid structure and neglects soil-structure interaction, in order to apply the static analysis method. Justification is required.
- 7. Referring to Section 3.7.3.5 of program plan for BOP structures, clarification is needed on how multi-degree systems will be evaluated by static analysis method.
- 8. At lease one more time history analysis of the NSSS using a different set of time histories is reouired because nonlinear response of the system is very sensitive to characteristics of the input time histories while many of the components, according to the nonlinear analysis, have a safety margin of only 1.1.
- 9. Only the NSSS system has been fully addressed. A scope or list of the remaining equipment and systems is given in Ref. 1, but no methodology or procedure is mentioned.
- 10. Reevaluation criteria for electrical equipment supports is not available for review.
- 11. Verification of Westinghouse analysis codes was not provided.
References
- 1. Letter from K. P. Baskin of So. Calif. Edison Co. to D. M. Crutchfield of NRC, July 7, 1981.