ML16340D502
| ML16340D502 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 06/07/1983 |
| From: | Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Crane P PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8306240464 | |
| Download: ML16340D502 (10) | |
Text
1
~g k V
V 1983 DISTRIBUTION
/Document Control 50-275/323 NRC PDR L PDR NSIC PRC System Docket Nos.:
50-275 and 50-323 Philip A. Crane, Jr.,
Esq.
Pacific Gas 8 Electric Company Post Office Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94120
Dear Hr. Crane:
LB83 Reading JLee BBuckley HSchierling
- Jordan, IE
-'aylor, IE TIINovak
- Attorney, OELD ACRS (16)
As stated in Supplement 13 to our Diablo Canyon Safety Evaluation Repoi't, you have committed to complete the evaluation of'afe'ty related masonary walls according to the bulletin criteria on this subject and complete the necessary fixes prioy 'to full power operation.
Ne have reviewed your submittal on safety related masonary walls dated July 7, 1981 and find that we need additional information described in the enclosures in order to complete our review.
Please provide this information within sixty-days of receipt of this letter.
Sincerely.
Enclosures:
As stated
'Original signed bY Qeorgeijl. Mighton George H. Knighton, Chief Licensing Branch No.
3 Division of Licensing cc:
See next page 8306240464 830607 PDR ADOCK 05000275 p
PDR OFFICE/
SURNAMEIN DATE P DL: LBltI3 BBuckley/yt 6/4 /83 S/g/83 to(
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~
~ I
~
0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~
~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~I~ ~ ~
0'
~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
NRC FORM 318 u0-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
~ USGPO: 1991~5-960
4 I Tl C'i J
I'
ma,~
go
~
6 Diabl o Can/on D~iiip A. Crane, Jr.,
Esq.
Pacific Gas 5 Electric Companv Post Office Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94120 CC:
Mr. Malcolm H. Furbush Vice President
- General Counsel Pacific Gas 8
El ctric Company Pos. Office Box 7443 San Francisco, California 94120 Janice E. Kerr, Esq.
California Public Utilities Commission 350 McAl lister Street San Franci sco, Cali forni a 94102 Mr. Frederick Eissler, President Scenic Shoreline Preservation Conference, Inc.
4623 More Mesa Drive Santa Barbara, California 93105 Ms. Elizabeth Apfelberg 1415 Cozadero San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Mr. Gordon A. Silver Ms. Sandra A. Silver 1760 Alisal Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 1
Harry M.
Millis, Esq.
Seymour 6 'I'illis 6Cl C li."orn
=-
=-.
=
, Suite 2100 San Francisco, CA 94108 Mr. Richard Hubbard MHB Techni cal Ass oci ates Suite K
1725 Hami lton Avenue San Jose, CA 96125 Mr; John Marrs, Managing Editor San Luis Obispo County Telegram Tribune 1321 Johnson Avenue P.
O.Box 112 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 Resident Inspector/Diablo Canyon NPS c/o U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissior P. 0.
Box 369 Avila Beach, California 93424 Ms.
Raye Fleming 1920 Mattie Road Shell B ach, California 93440 Joel
- Reynolds, Esq.
Jor.n R. Phillips, Esq.
Cer,'ter =or Law in the. Public Interest 10951 1'est Pico Boulevard Th',rd Floor Los l ngeles, California 90064 Paul C. Valentine, Esq.
321 Ly..on Avenue Palo Alto, California 94302
'.'ir. 'i;:1=: i am Ccoper
?r;'e"- Manager - 5511 Te,ac ~r,= Engineering Services l3 c"nd Avenue
!4a.:-'.I.ar,:, Massachusetts 02254 Herbert H. Brown, Esq.
i, C'".r-'stopher 8 Phi]lips, P.C.
19:3 M Street, N.W.
'itashington, D..C.
20036 Mr. Dick Blankenburg Editor 5 Co-Publisher South County Publishing Company P. 0.
Box 460 Arroyo Grande, California 93420 Mr. Jam s 0. Schuyler=
Vi e ?r sident - Nuclear Generation
="pal ment
?a i =ic Gas 8 Electric Company 77 B=a:.e, Room 1451 San Francisco, California 94106
~
~
~'
~
~I
'3 S'*
DIABLO CANYON POWER'LANT UNIT 1 SAFETY RELATED MASONRY klALLS REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORHATIOII1~ '
l.
Description of location of the masonry walls in Table 1 (Section III), El. 85-0, does not match the location on the drawing 8 59535.
Please mark on drawings (Section V and VI) masonry walls identified as safety related to enable the reviewer to correlate with the listing contained in Table 1 and 2 (Section III).
II.
The following comments pertain to the information contained in Sections VIII and IX.
Provide legible catalogs for kwik bolts and slugin anchors in order to justify the allowable values used.
The page with information on slugin anchors contained in Section VIII is not legible and there is no information in the report regarding kwik bolts.
(I'.
. 3.
Explain and justify the factor of 1.5 used in calculating shear capacity of kwik bolts.
Specify the factor of safety used for the kwik bolts and relate this factor of safety for tension and
- shear, to the corresponding value contained in the IE Bulletin 79-02, dated November 8, 1979.
The factor of safety of 1.7 used in the calculation of allowable shear load o
the slugin anchors is too low.
Evaluate the allowable capacity of the anchors in shear and tension in accordance with the requirements of IE Bulletin 79-2 and evaluate the integrity of the masonry walls attachments on that basis.
4.
5.
Explain and justify the fact that interstory drift effects have not been considered in the analysis of masonry walls.
Evaluate the contribution of interstory drifts and assess their impact on the results of the analysis of the masonry walls.
The calculations pertaining to evaluation of the 8" block wall along line C at El. 119'-0" in the turbine building do not contain the information necessary to complete the review.
For
- example, the following items should be included:
(a)
Figure 15 - Horizontal
Response
Spectrum at EL.119'-0 in east-west direction to justify the seismic factor of 1.6 g
(b)
Sketch or a drawing showing spacing of the vertical beams to justify the span of 9,67 ft.
(c)
/fore detailed information pertaining to horizontal and vertical brac'ing.
lieport on Satety Re ated
~masonry ha11s, Diablo Canyon P<x~er Plant, L'nit 1 dated July 7, 1981
p 6.
The following has been observed in calculation of shear:
(1)
Half of the load was taken in off-plane direction.
(2)
Total load was taken for in-plane calculation of shear at the base.
This would indicate that the top connection of the wall offers resistance to shear only in the direction perpen-dicular to the axis of the wall.
In view of the above:
(a)
Confirm if the above assumption is correct (it is not stated in the report) and provide details of such a connection.
(b)
Demonstrate that the connection at the top of the walls is capable to resist the calculated loads perpendicular to the wall, and (c)
Indicate if this condition is true for all of the walls considered.
7.
Ref. Turbine Building Area "D" Fire Zone, EL. 140' Start-up office.
(a)
P., 14 of 21 - Provide the value of the Young's tlodulus of the masonry in compression and shear used to calculate the corresponding deflections, in the table of the re(erenced
- page, in order to verify the values of h /36I and
/A respectively.
From the information provided it appeases that the value of Young's f1odulus used was 3X10 psi which is high and is different from the one used in other parts of the analysis.
If the value of Young's t1odulus of 3 X 10 psi is 6
correct please provide the sufficient information to justify it.
(b)
The start-up office is a self enclosed structure and should be analyzed for all of the forces imposed on it according to the criteria provided by the staff (part of which is contained in Section VIII).
This should include torsional effects, consideration of three-dimensional earthquake,
- shear, etc.
t1odify your analysis in accordance with the requirements of the criteria provided by the staff.
8.
The following comments refer to the analysis of masonry walls in the auxiliary building (Section IX):
(a)
The in-plane, out-of-plane and vertical loads should be combined in order to determine the stresses in steel and masonry.
(b) Provide details of the connections at the top and at the bottom of the walls. If the details have been provided with the drawings included in the report~ refer to the appropriate drawings and details showing the connection.
Also, verify that the connections are adequate to resist the loads imposed on the walls.
L
~
r