ML15223A736
| ML15223A736 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 06/01/1981 |
| From: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Parker W DUKE POWER CO. |
| References | |
| IEB-80-11, NUDOCS 8106090153 | |
| Download: ML15223A736 (15) | |
Text
DISTRIBUTION TERA-3 FSchauer, SEB
- 0 R Il-ORB#4 Rdg AEOD NRC PDR-3 DEisenhut IE-3 JStolz ACRS-10 Dockets Nos. 50-269, 50-270 PWagner Gray File and 50-287 RIngram CTrammell NRomney, SEB Mr. William 0. Parker, Jr.
Vice President -
Steam Production JUN 0 4 1981 Duke Power Company, U.S. NUCuLAusuuro P. 0. Box 33189 COMMSON 422 Sotith Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242
Dear Mr. Parker:
The NRR staff has recently completed the review of your November 4, 1980 letter to J. P. O'Reilly of OIE responding to IE Bulletin 80-11 "Masonry Walls".
In order for us to complete our review of this issue, we will require some additional information.
Therefore, we request that you respond to the request for additional infor mation contained in Enclosure 1 within 45 days of your receipt of this letter. We have also included, as Enclosure 2, a copy of "SEB Interim Criteria for Safety Related Masonry Wall Evaluation" for your information and use.
If you have any questions on this subject, please contact your NRC Project Manager.
Sincerely, P0EIGINAL SIGNED BY JoHs F. STOLToII John F. Stolz, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Licensing
Enclosures:
- 1. Request for Additional Information
- 2. Interim Criteria cc w/enclosures:
See next page r8 10 6 O'90/#
OFFICEO ORB#
DL C-RB#4:DL SeRNAMEr/c NMI J DATE R'1 81 5
81 6
781 NRC FORM 31810/80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGPO:1980-329824
R REG 1UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 June 1, 1981 Dockets Nos. 50-269, 50-270 and 50-287 Mr. William 0. Parker, Jr.
Vice President -
Steam Production Duke Power Company P. 0. Box 33189 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242
Dear Mr. Parker:
The NRR staff has recently completed the review of your November 4, 1980 letter to J. P. O'Reilly of OIE responding to IE Bulletin 80-11 "Masonry Walls". In crder for us to complete our-review of this issue, we will.
require some additional information.
Therefore, we request that you respond to the request for additional infor mation contained in Enclosure 1 within 45 days of your receipt of this letter. We have also included, as Enclosure 2, a copy of "SEB Interim Criteria for Safety Related Masonry Wall Evaluation" for your information and use.
If you have any questions on this subject, please contact your NRC Project Manager.
Sincerely, oh F. Stolz, Chief p rating Reactors Branch #4 ision of Licensing
Enclosures:
- 1. Request for Additional Information
- 2. Interim Criteria cc w/enclosures:
See next page
Duke Power Company cc w/enclosure(s):
Mr. William L. Porter Duke Power Company P. 0. Box 33189 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 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IV Office ATTN:
EIS COORDINATOR 345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30308 Mr. Francis Jape 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, D. C. 20036
ENCLOSURE 1 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING BRANCH OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 IE BULLETIN 80-11 DOCKET NUMBERS 50-269, 50-270 AND 287 LICENSE NUMBERS DPR 38, 47 AND 55
- 1. Provide detailed drawings of all masonry wall configurations, giving horizontal and vertical spans, reinforcing details, wall thickness and the wall function (i.e., fire barrier, radiation barrier, partition etc.).
Indicate walls which are used to support piping and/or equipment, and describe how these items are attached to the masonry walls.
- 2. The November 4, 1980 response describes the use of Dur-O-Wall joint reinforcing for horizontal joints. Describe the vertical reinforcing used to carry the tensile bending stresses and the method employed to anchor the reinforcing bars for load transfer to the main structural elements supporting the masonry walls.
- 3. With regard to masonry walls grouted solid:
- a. Describe the measures taken to avoid the occurrence of voids and/or segregation of the aggregate.
- b. In the current re-evaluation program, describe the measures taken to determine the presence of voids in those masonry walls which are grouted solid.
Page 2 of Enclosure 1
- 4. The November 4, 1980 submittal describes, in reference to the mortar used in the masonry wall construction, "an undocumented field construction procedure which called for a 3 to 1 (sand to mortar) mix."
Describe the control tests performed to determine the actual compressive strength of the mortar used.
Compare the tests performed with the requirements of ASTM Standards C-91 and C-270 and justify any deviations from these standards.
Indicate whether the "undocumented field procedures" achieved the minimum 28 day compressive strength of 750 psi for mortar type N as specified in the November 4, 1980 submittal.
- 5. Attachment 2 of the referenced letter indicates that light-weight block with a compressive strength f'm of 2000 psi in accordance with ASTM C-90 was used. However, ASTM Standard C-90 specifies a com pressive strength of 1000 psi for grade N and 700 psi for grade S blocks. Explain and justify this deviation.
- 6. Describe the control tests performed to determine the compressive strength of the masonry blocks and bricks used for masonry wall construction. Compare the tests used with the requirements of ASTM Standards C-90 and C-55 for block and brick, respectively. Explain and justify any deviations from the ASTM Standards.
- 7. Describe the quality control tests performed on the steel used for masonry wall reinforcement. Indicate whether such tests were in conformance with the requirements of ASTM Standard A-82 and justify any deviations.
Page 3 of Enclosure 1
- 8. Attachment 3 of the referenced letter has several typical details which show the masonry walls to be supported on one side by 2 1/2" x 2 1/2" x 1/4" steel angles. During a seismic event with seismic loads reversing direction (i.e., North/South, East/West),
such a detail would not support the wall.
Describe the analysis and modifications necessary to accommodate stress reversal during a seismic event. Furthermore demonstrate (i.e., provide calculations) that the 2 1/2" x 2 1/2" x 1/4" angles and the 1/2" diameter cinch anchors used are capable of transferring the masonry wall loads to the main structural element during a seismic event.
- 9. Section 5.1.7 of Attachment 4 states that "design allowables may be exceeded if it is shown by sound analytical techniques that the masonry wall is stable considering its particular geometric conditions."
Describe the analytical techniques used and provide examples.
- 10.
Section 5.3.1 of attachment 4 of the referenced letter provides what appears to be three methods of determining the modulus of rupture of the masonry walls.
Explain and justify the use of the three methods.
In the expression 6 (f'c)5, explain and justify the factor "6" as well as the factors 0.8 and 3.0 used in the three methods.
- 11. In the analysis of masonry walls describe how the seismic loads, interstory drift during a seismic event and the loads from piping and/or equipment attached to the masonry walls were accounted for.
Describe both the local and global effects of piping and/or equipment attached to masonry walls. Provide examples of the analysis.
- 12.
Indicate those masonry walls which, as a result of the re-evaluation effort, were found to be structurally inadequate.
Describe the modification required to strengthen these walls.
Page 4 of Enclosure 1
- 12.
Indicate those masonry walls which, as a result of the re-evaluation effort, were found to be structurally inadequate. Describe the modification required to strengthen these walls.
ENCLOSURE 2 SEB INTERIM CRITERIA FOR SAFETY-RELATED MASONRY WALL EVALUATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- 1. General Requirements
- 2. Loads and Load Combinations
- a. Service Load Conditions
- b. Extreme Environmental, Abnormal, Abnormal/Severe Environmental, and Abnormal/Extreme Environmental Conditions
- 3. Allowable Stresses
- 4. Design and Analysis Considerations
- 5. Revision of Criteria
- 6. References
- 1. General Requirements The materials, testing, analysis, design, construction and inspection related to the design and construction of safety-related concrete masonry walls shall conform to the applicable requirements contained in Uniform Building Code - 1979, unless specified otherwise, by the provisions in this criteria.
The use of other industrial codes, such as ACI-531, ATC-3 or NCMA is also acceptable. However, when the provisions of these codes are less conservative than the corresponding provisions of the interim criteria, their use should be justified on a case-by-case basis.
- 2. Loads and Load Combinations The loads and load combinations shall include consideration of normal loads, severe environmental load, extreme environmental load, and abnormal loads. Specifically, for operating plants the load combinations provided in plant's FSAR shall govern. For operating license applications, the following load combinations shall apply (for definition of load terms, see SRP Section 3.8.4.11-3).
(a) Service Load Conditions (1) D + L (2) D + L + E (3) D + L + W If thermal stresses due to To and R0 are present, they should be included in the above combinations, as follows:
-2 (la) D + L + T + R (2a) D + L + T 0 + R + E (3a) D + L + T 0 + R 0 + W Check load combination for controlling condition for maximum
'L' and for no 'L'.
(b) Extreme Environmental, Abnormal, Abnormal/Severe Environmental and Abnormal/Extreme Environmental Conditions (4) D + L + T 0 + R 0 + E (5) D + L + T + R + w (6) D + L + T + Ra+ 1.5 P a (7) D + L + Ta+ 1.25 Pa+ 1.0 (Yr +
Y ) + 1.25 E + Ra (8) D + L + Ta+ Ra+ 1.0 Pa+ 1.0 (Yr +
m) + 1.0 E In combinations (6), (7), and (8), the maximum values of Pa, Ta, Ra, Y, Yr, and Ym, including an appropriate dynamic load factor, should be used unless a time-history analysis is performed to justify otherwise. Combinations (5), (7) and (8) and the corresponding structural acceptance criteria should be satisfied first without the tornado missile load in (5) and without Y* Y.,
and Y in (7) and (8).
When considering these loads, local section strength capacities may be exceeded under these concentrated loads, provided there will be no loss of function of any safety-related system.
Both cases of L having its full value or being completely absent should be checked.
-3
- 3. Allowable Stresses Allowable stresses provided in Chapter 24 of UBC-79, as supplemented by the following modifications/exceptions shall apply.
(a) When wind or seismic loads (OBE) are considered in the loading combinations, no increase in the allowable stresses is permitted.
(b) Use of allowable stresses corresponding to special inspection category shall be substantiated by demonstration of compliance with the inspection requirements of the NRC criteria.
(c) No tension perpendicular to bed joints of either reinforced or unreinforced masonry walls is allowed, except in the evaluation of unreinforced masonry walls of operating plants. In such cases, the allowable values of UBC-79 can be used, if justified by test program or other means.
(d) For load conditions, which represent extreme environmental, abnormal, abnormal/severe environmental, and abnormal/extreme environmental conditions the allowable working stresses may be multiplied by the factors shown in the following table:
-4 TYPE OF STRESS FACTOR (1)
Axial or Flexural Compression 2.5 Bearing 2.5 Reinforcement stress except shear 2.0 but not to exceed 0.9 fy Shear reinforcement and/or bolts 1.5 Masonry tension parallel to bed joint 1.5 Shear carried by masonry 1.0 Masonry tension perpendicular to bed joint for reinforced masonry 0
for unreinforced masonry(2) 1.0 Notes (1) When anchor bolts are used, design should prevent facial spalling of masonry unit.
(2) See 3 (c).
- 4. Design and Analysis Considerations (a) The analysis should follow established principles of engineering mechanics and take into account sound engineering practices.
(b) Assumptions and modeling techniques used shall give proper considerations to boundary conditions, cracking of sections, if any, and the dynamic behavior of masonry walls.
(c) Damping values to be used for dynamic analysis shall be those for reinforced concrete given in Regulatory Guide 1.61.
9 0
-5 (d) In general, for operating plants the seismic analysis, and Category I structural requirements of FSAR shall apply. For other plants, corresponding SRP requirements shall apply.
(e) The analysis should consider both in-plane and out-of-plane loads.
(f) Interstory drift effects should be considered.
(g) In new construction, no unreinforced masonry wall is permitted, also all grout in concrete masonry walls shall be compacted by vibration.
(h) For masonry shear walls, the minimum reinforcement requirements of ACI-531 or ATC-3 shall apply.
(i) Special constructions (e.g. multiwythe, composite) or other items not covered by the code shall be reviewed on a case-by-case basis for their acceptance.
(j)
Licensees or applicants shall submit QA/QC information, if available, for staff's review.
In the event, QA/QC information is not available, a field survey and a test program reviewed and approved by the staff shall be implemented to ascertain the conformance of masonry construction to design drawings and specifications (e.g. rebar and grouting).
(k) For masonry walls requiring protection from spalling and scabbing due to accident pipe reaction (Y ), jet impingement (Y.) and missile impact r
J (YM),
the requirements of SRP 3.5.3 shall apply. Any deviation from the SRP 3.5.3 shall be reviewed and approved on a case-by-case basis.
-6
- 5. Revision of Criteria The criteria will be revised, as appropriate, based on:
(a) Design review meetings with the selected licensees and their A/E's.
(b) Experience gained during review.
(c) Additional information developed through testing and researches.
- 6. References (a) Uniform Building Code - 1979 Edition (b) Building Code Requirements for Concrete Masonry Structures ACI-531 -
79 and Commentary ACI-531R -
- 79.
(c) Tentative Provisions for the Development of Seismic Regulations for Buildings - Applied Technology Council ATC 3-06.
NBS Special Publication 510 NSF Publication 78-8 Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington,-D. C. 20402--$6.75.
(d) Specification for the Design and Construction of Load-bearing Concrete Masonry - NCMA August, 1979.
(e) Trojan Nuclear Plant Concrete Masonry Design Criteria Safety Evaluation Report Supplement - November, 1980.