ML17255A393

Forwards Request for Addl Info to Continue Review of Util Response to IE Bulletin 80-11, Masonry Wall Design. Response Should Be Submitted within 60 Days

ML17255A393
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	09/21/1983
From:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Maier J ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
References
IEB-80-11, LSO5-83-09-028, LSO5-83-9-28, NUDOCS 8309220121
Download: ML17255A393 (13)

Text

rl ae

'eptember 21, 1983 Docket No. 50-244 LS05-83-09-028 Mr. John E. Maier Vice President Electric and Steam Production Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649

. ;stribution ocket j NRC PDR Local PDR ORB ¹5 Reading OELD DEisenhut EJordan GDick HSmith NSIC JTayl or ACRS NChokshi CTrammell DPersinko

SUBJECT:

RE(VEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION; MASONRY WALL DESIGN, IE BULLETIN 80-11 R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant We are continuing our review of your response to IE Bulletin 80'.'ll.

We have found that the additional information described in the enclosure to this letter is needed before we {can complete our review.

Your response to this request should be submitted within 60 days of receipt of this 1 etter.

i)

The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in thi,'s letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.

Sincerely,

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/enclosure Original signed by Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch ¹5 Division of Licensing 8309220i21 83092i PDR ADOCK 05000244 PDR

• See previous concurrence sheet

{

OFFICE[

SURNAME$

OAVE P D

H B ¹5

~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~

~ ~

Jc

\\ ~

~

~ ~ ~

~

83 0

¹5*

~

~ 0 ~ 1 ~i ~ 00 ~

/~n,83

~ 0 ~ SO ~ Ol ~

DL:

DCr

~/Ce/83 leld NRG FORM 318 (10-80 NRCM 0240 OFFICIAI RECORD COPY USGPO: 1981~rg60

'I E

k Cp

<<1 4

w

~

b 4

t L,

i

,l I )

I

't

~

s Docket No.

50-244 Mr. John E. Maier

<ice'President Electric and Steam Production Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649 DISTRI8UTION Docket NRC PDR Local PDR ORB. 95Reading OELD DEisenhut EJordan GDick.

HSmith NSIC JTay1or ACRS NChokshi CTramme11 DPersinko

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL ItjFORtQTION; MASONRY WALL'ESIGN, IE BULLETIN 80-11 R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant We are continuing our review of your response to IE Bulletin 80-11.

We have found that the additional information described in the enclosure to this letter is needed before we can complete our review.

Your response to this request should be submitted within 60 days of receipt of this letter.

S incer ely,

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/enclosure Dennis t<. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch ¹5 Division of Licensing OFFICE P SURNAt4E $

DATE 5 D

0

¹5 DL:ORB ¹5

~

~

~

Co ~ ~ ~ e ~

.QGru.t,cd.i.al................."---

/

/83

~I~ 0 ~ IO

~

~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ OI ~

~

~

~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ 0 ~ ~ ~ J NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 0 F F IC1AL R ECO R D COPY USOPO: 198 l~~r9

4 C

~

s'-"i':

8."0:.l<l

Hr. John E. Maier CC Harry H. Voigt, Esquire

LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby and MacRae 1333 New Hampshire

Avenue, N.

W.

Suite 1100 Washington, D. C.

20036 Nr. Michael Slade 12 Trailwood Circle Rochester, New-~York 14618 Ezra Bialik Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Bureau New York State Department of Law 2 World Trade Center New York, New York 10047 Resi dent Inspector R.

E. Ginna Plant c/o U. S.

NRC 1503 Lake Road

Ontario, New York 14519 Stanley B. Klimberg, Esquire General Counsel New York State Energy Office Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza

Albany, New York 12223 Dr.

Emmeth A. Luebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

20555 Dr. Richard F. Cole Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Copqission Washington, D. C.

20555 Dr. Thomas E. thurley, Regional Administrator Nuclear Regulatory Conmission, Region I 631 Park Avenue

'ing of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region II Office ATTN:

Regional Radiation Representative 26 Federal Plaza New York, New York 10007 Herbert Grossman, Esq.,

Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

20555 Supervisor of the Town of Ontario 107 Ridge Road West

Ontario, New. York 14519 Jay Dunkleberger New York State Energy Office Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza

Albany, New York 12223

RE UEST FOR ADDITI'ONAL I.HFORMATKON MASONRY WALL DESIGN IE BULLETIN 80-11 R.

E.

GIHNA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO.

50-244 y I ~

The SGEB criteria (5) do not allow an increase in allowable. stresses

,or load combinations containing OBE or wind loads.

Provide justification for the 1/3 increase in allowable stress (Reference 3, Section 3.4.2) used for load combinations (nor'mal operating conditions).

Identify the affected walls and include the calculated stresses for each wall.

Also explain all conservative measures (if any). used in the analysis to justify the increase in allowable stresses.

2.

Justify the use of an allowable stress increase factor of 1.67 for load combinations containing accident pressures or SSE loads.

This is in excess of several factors permitted by the SGEB criteria (5); they are listed below by type of stress:

masonry shear in flexural members masonry shear in unreinfopced shear walls reinforcement takes entirq shear tension normal to bed joint tension parallel to bed joint 1.3 1.3 1.5 1..3 1.5

~

~

I-, any exiisting iest data will be used to justify this increase fac or, discuss th applicability o these tests to th walls at the Ginna plant with particular emphas',s on the following:

- boundary conditions

- nature of loads

- size of test walls

- type of masonry construction (block or mortar type, grouted or ungrouted)

The Licensee is also reauested to indica.e the number of walls that would no.

be qua/i fi ed i the SGLB criteria were to be used and to specify he percentages of exceedance.

ihe Licensee is advised to explain all conservative measures (i

any) used in the analysis to justi =y his increase factor,.g hh n the r sponse spectrum m thod of 5 is lie analys is is used, he accel'erations o

walls on a particular floor should be based on the floor response soectrum for that

> loor elevation.

However, as stated in Section

3. 5.

1 of Peference 3, the Licensee derives ail wail accelerations from the ground response spectrum.

Justify the use of the ground response spectrum instead of the floor response spectra.

4.

With re>erence to the reinforcement in masonry walls, the ACI 531-79 Code specifies tha. the minimum area of rein>orcement in a wall in either di rection, vertical or horizontal, shall be 0.0007 (0,07~)

times the gross cross-sec-.ional area o

the wall and iha-. the minimum total arec of sieel, vertical and horizontal, shall no: be less than 0.002 (0.2

) times ih gross cross-shcti'onal area.

In view of this, clarify whether the reinforced walls at this plant meet the above requirements.

The Licensee i s also requested to provi de

. the type and spacing of vertical reinforcement and the total number of vertically reinforced walls.

It should be noted that the horizontal reinforcemen.

I g) ~

'>s 1nstc l led to sc 1sfy ihe minimum l einf0, cemefli l equil emeni fol c

-" """rein orced wai 1.

With re,erence to

.he joint reinforcemen:,

identi,y the number o,

walls oualified by the tens1"ge strength of joint reinforcement S

and l'dl cc e

che "pe cQc spec iAg oi the jo1At I e i A70rcemeni.

Base'd on the review of existing codes and published literature, the

,",does not, at

ent, approve the use of joini reinforcement as a

S ruo..ura!

=" I amen..

I'.

S icff p051 ion on this

-issue

';s beinc developed and will be provicec to the licensee in uture.

5.

Indicate the boundary cond1t10ns used in the analysis and verify that they resemble'the real physical conditions.

Identify. all of the mechanisms used to transfer shear and moment (i, any) with particular emphasis for walls qualified by arching action.

If any doubt exists (i.e., whether simply supported or fixed-end conditions should be assumed),

verify ihat the assumed boundary conditions will produce conservative results.

i nd i cat how i nterstory dr ift e i i ects, bOih. in-plane ano oui-of-plane, were considered in the analysis.

Also, indicate and justify by available test data the permissible strains used or both confined and unconfined walls.

illG i cate 'whether concrete block walls are s.acked or running. bond.

If any stack bond wall exists, provide sample ca lculaiions for stresses in iypical wall. 'Also iden ify th number of s.acked bond walls and ineiir appropriate allowabl e stresses.

Ii

~

Reference 3 indica ed thai some brick walls were constructed at the slant.

Indicate ihe number of brick walls and specify the allowable stresses irom appropriate codes used in the analyses.

any inclease ol s wc, e used

=or SSE loacinc case jus '

i ca ion si oulG bc pl ovid"d.

9, Mith reference to Section 3.2.5 o

Reference 3, the Licensee indicated itici acciGeni pressure and associated tempera ure loads are considered only inside containment when applicable.

Provide a sample calculation (and any explanations necessary to make it understandable) illustraiing the analysis procedures in this case.

10.

In Seciion 3.5.1 of Reference 3, the Licensee indicaied thai the computed siresses are. increased,5~

to accouJIt for hioher modes of vibration.

Justify by sample calculation that 5~ is an appropriate percentage for multimode effects.

e 11.

Provide sample calculations (with explanations necessary to make the calculations understandable) for:

a single-wythe wall analysis a multi-wythe wall analysis a brick wall analysis.'2.

According to Attachment 3 of Reference 3, only 84 walls were identified as safety-related; however, in a meeting at the NRC on January 20,

)983 with regard to the use of the nonlinear analysis technique (arching theory), the Licensee 101 identi.ffed 101 walls qualifi'cd by'archie'19 theory.

Explain this difference.

Indicate the total number of safety-related I,*

walls and the number of walls qualified by arching theory.

Indicate how the uncertainties'due to variations in mass, materials, and sections properties were accounted for in the analysis.

14.

Indicate whether collar joint strength has been used 'in the analysis.

If so, provide and justify the allowable stresses of the collar joint.

15.: Confirm whether all modifications have been completed and the modified walls are in compliance with the SGEB criteria.

16.

Explain how earthquake motions in three directions are treated in the analysis.

Indicate whether any walls are subject to in-plane loading.

If so, provide a sample calculation illustrating how the wall is, qual ifi ed wi th respect to the SGEB criteri a.

xol c in and jus-ify now crackec and uncrackec mom nt of i ner-.i a was calculated.

In Attachment 4 o Reference 3, the Licensee provided the test data for the compressive strength of cor'crete masonry walls.

Provide the basis

=or selecting those five specimens foi testing and indicate whether they represen.

the variety of material construction in all buildings.

Since no detailed records relating to masonry block wall construction were

...,maintained, justify the strength of the mortar used in the analysis.

~

~

REFEREHCES I E.Bulletin 80-11 Nasonry Mall Design HRC, 08-Nay-81 2.

~ ~

~

L.

D. White, Jr.

Letter to B. H. Grier, HRC,

Subject:

IE Bulletin 80-11, Masonry Mall Design - R.

E. Ginna Huclear Power Plant - Response to Items 1,

2a and 3

Rochester, Gas 5 Elec=ric Corp., 07-Jul-80 4.

i.

-". Y>aier Letter to B.

H. Grier, HRC.

Subject:

IE Bulletin 80-11, Nasonry D sion - R.

-. Cinna Huclear Power Plant Rochester Gas 6 Electric Corp.,

04-Hov-80 J.

E. Naier Letter to B.

H. Grier, HRC.

Subject:

IE Bulletin 80-11, masonry

'Wall Design - Supplemental information to 180 Day Response

- R.

E.

Cinna Huclear Power Plant Rochester Gas R Electric Corj,.; 03-Jan-81 Mal 1 GEB Criteria for Safe.y'-Pelated Nasonry Wall Evaluation Develooed by the St. uctural and Geo~echnical Branch of the HRC vuly 1981.

Uniiorm Building Code International Conference of Bui ldino Officials, 1979 Ji 1 d i no Code Reou i rements

-,or Conc. ete Y~asonrv S-1 uctures "etroi-.:

.~>>eri can Concrete Inst i LUTe, 1979 AC! 531-79 and ACI 531-R-79.

0 t i J

T