ML15223A714
| ML15223A714 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 02/09/1981 |
| From: | Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Parker W DUKE POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8103050151 | |
| Download: ML15223A714 (5) | |
Text
DISTRIBUTION Docket File R. Reid NRC PDR M. Fairtile L PDR R. Ingram TERA Gray Files NSIC ACRS-16 ORB#4 Rdg E. Blackwood Docket Nos.-50-269/270/287 D. Eisenhut H. Ornstein R. Purple 5<;H4 T. Novak R. Tedesco Mr. William 0. Parker, Jr.
G. Laines Vice Pr ident - Steam Production J. Heltemes Duke Power Company OELD P. 0. Box 2178 I&E-3 422 South Chyrch Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242
Dear Mr. Parker:
In order to complete our review o6 the Standby Shutdown Facility at the Oconee Nuclear Station we find that we need additional information.
These requests relate to seismic design.
Kindly respond with three signed originals and 31 additional copies on a schedule consistent with the completion schedule of the Facility.
Sincerely, Original signed by Robet W. Reid Robert l.ff Roid, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/enclosure:
See next page OFFICE)
ORB#4:DL
- DL SURNAMEO MFairti1e;c DATE 2?/P/81 2/./8 NRC FORM 318(10/80)NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1980-329-824
!,kRECO4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, 0. C. 20555 February 9, 1981 Docket Nos 069 70/287 Mr. William 0. Parker, Jr.
Vice President - Steam Production Duke.Power Company P. 0. Box 2178 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242
Dear Mr. Parker:
In order to complete our review of the Standby Shutdown Facility at the Oconee Nuclear Station we find that we need additional information.
These requests relate to seismic design.
Kindly respond with three signed originals and 37 additional copies on a schedule consistent with the completion schedule of the Facility.
Sincerely, "R6bert W. Reid, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/enclosure:
See next page
.Duke Power Company cc w/enclosure(s):
Mr. William L. Porter Duke Power Company P. 0. Box 2178 422 South Church Street Office of Intergovernmental Relations Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 116 West Jones Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 Oconee County Library 501 West Southbroad Street Walhalla, South Carolina 29691 Honorable James M. Phinney County Supervisor of Oconee County Walhalla, South Carolina 29621 Director, Criteria and Standards Division Office of Radiation Programs (ANR-460)
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D. C. 20460 U. 5. Environmental Protection Agency Radion 'V Office A'T: EIS.COORDINATOR 35 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30308 Mr. Francis lape U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Route 2, Box 610 Seneca, South Carolina 29678 Mr. Robert B. Borsum Babcock & Wilcox Nuclear Power Generation Division Suite 420, 7735 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, Maryland 20014 Manager, LIS NUS Corporation 2536 Countryside Boulevard Clearwater, Florida 33515 J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
DeBevoise & Liberman 1200 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, 0. C. 20036
ENCLOSURE REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
- 1. Provide the mathematical model that is used in your earthquake response analysis of SSF. The model should show mass points, their coordinates, damping and spring arrangements and their corresponding numerical values as well as appropriate configuration of soil and bedrock found ation. In particular, provide a reasonable discussion as to how the embedded.portion of the building below the ground level is modeled and how soil-structure interaction is considered. If no such soil-structure interaction is considered, please justify the proposed design by dis cussing why the-model without soil-structure interaction represents a conservative dynamic model.
- 2.
Discuss where the 0.10g bedrock acceleration is applied. Indicate the location of application in the model requested in Question 1 above.
- 3. Provide the reference from which the proposed load combinations of SSF are obtained. Discuss and justify any deviations from the SRP either in the actual combination formulas or the definition of the terms.
- 4. Describe any safety grade structures such as cable tunnels or buried piping systems that connect SSF with other facilities (e.g. reactor building). Discuss design limits and associted safety analysis for such structures.
- 5. It is not clear whether your submittal was written before or after the completion of the SSF desian. Indicate if the proposed design criteria
Page 2 of Enclosure - REQUEST FOR INFORMATION contained in the present report have been met in the final design.
Should there be any deviations from it, identify and discuss such deviations.
Indicate also if the design has met all the pertinent regulations
.and therefore public safety is assured.