ML17320A779

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards SER & Technical Evaluation Rept Re Responses to IE Bulletin 80-11, Masonry Wall Design. Joint Reinforcement Masonry Walls Not Well Established.Structural Element Not Acceptable.Response Requested
ML17320A779
Person / Time
Site: Cook  American Electric Power icon.png
Issue date: 09/20/1983
From: Varga S
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Dolan J
AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER SERVICE CORP., INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG
Shared Package
ML17320A780 List:
References
IEB-80-11, NUDOCS 8310130025
Download: ML17320A779 (5)


Text

~

}

~a Docket Nos.

50-315 and 50-316 iSEP zo 1983 Mr. John Dolan, Vice President Indiana and Michigan Electric Company c/o American Electric Power Service Corporation 1 Riverside Plaza

Columbus, Ohi o 43216

Dear Mr. Dolan:

DISTRIBUTION NRC PDR Local PDR ORB 1 File D. Eisenhut OELD E. Jordan D. Wigginton C. Parrish J. Taylor ',

ACRS (10)

We have completed our review of the Indiana and Michigan Electric Company (IMEC) responses to IE Bulletin 80-11, Masonry Wall Design, for the Donald C.

Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos.

1 and 2.

Our Safety Evaluation and our contractor Technical'valuation Report are provided in the enclosure.

In our review, we have determined that the IMEC evaluations and modifica-tions of masonry walls at the Donald C.

Cook Nuclear Plant are acceptable except for five walls where IMEC has relied upon joint reinforping in qualifying unreinforced masonry walls.

The structural significance of joint reinforcement in masonry walls is not well established, and therefore, its use as a structural element is not acceptable.

Our staff position on the use of joint reinforcing in qualifying unreinforced masonry walls is also enclosed.

We request that IMEC inform us of actions planned and the schedule for completion of wall modifications in conformance with the wall design criteria (Appendix A to the Technical Evaluation Report).

Your response should be made in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

We also request that this response be made within 30 days of receipt of this letter.

If you have any questions, please contact the Operating Reactor Project Manager for your plant.

'nggiZe. signea ~yc

@0, A. Vega

Enclosures:

See next page cc w/enclosures:

See next page Stephen A. Varga, Chief Operating Reactors Branch ¹1 Division of Licensing JAG'~

9//r83 grg lrlrp<0 AvlAlt'/t~S

~~c orb¹P 1

DWigginton 9/+83 ggiOi30025 830920 PDR ADDCK 05000315 Irn IOC/M 5r l~e I

Q PDR~ j C8 ~+

o~i ~m

e II I

II

)'

~ ~

'I i').0 4~

)1

~,

.=

~

4)

(I i) ll iI')>>

'l b

I I: l"',",

I I

dP'

)')

il 4

1 I

II 4

l(J(4 il r(

II

)'4 i) I il.)

  • 'I l

-r iI

)>>

'l at'

$ 4

)

Vf

)

I

) 1 I

II It II I iI 0

A I

I 4

4 ah II 4"'

lt hl)

II II

)yb ll 4

4 144 'll

)g$

pl

)

4 I

ls I

I (I

g II l1

'v ka)l)'

Docket Nos.

50-315 and 50-316 Mr. John Dolan, Vice President Indiana and Michigan Electric Company c/o American Electric Power Service Corporation 1 Riverside Plaza

Columbus, Ohio 43216

Dear Mr. Dolan:

We have completed our review of the Indiana and Michigan Electric Company

( IMEC) responses to IE Bulletin 80-11, Masonry Wall Design, for the Donald C.

Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos.

1 and 2.

Our Safety Evaluation and our contractor Technical Evaluation Report are provided in the enclosure.

In our review, we have determined that the IMEC evaluations and modifica-tions of masonry walls at the Donald C.

Cook Nuclear Plant are acceptable except for fine walls where IMEC has relied upon joint reinforcing in qualifying unreinforced masonry walls.

The structural signifidance of joint reinforcement in masonry walls is not well established, and therefore, its use as a structural element is not acceptable.

Our staff position on the use of joint reinforcing in qualifying unreinforced masonry walls is also enclosed.

We request that IMEC inform us of actions planned and the schedule for completion of wall modifications in conformance with the wall design criteria (Appendix A to the Technical Evaluation Report).

Your response should be made in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

We also request that this response be made within 30 days of receipt of this letter.

If you have any questions, please contact the Operating Reactor Project Manager for your plant.

Sincerely,

Enclosures:

See next page cc w/enclosures:

See next page Stephen A. Varga, Chief Operating Reactors Branch ¹I Division of Licensing orb¹1 DWigginton 0// /83 orb¹l SVarga Q/

/83

( 7 //8~

V

'h

~ p h

~ h ht I

tt ht I

Li h.t hi

+Pl

't il t

rt tt h tt I~

lh

'" h Ih 44 jh

<<rhth t

1 J

ht th' h

~

1

,ht Ih 1th t

h h

h h C it

".,". Jo.-.-,~ci an Inc',ana a-d Mi hioan =lee.ric Comoany CC:

Mr.

M.

P. Alexich Assis. an: Vice President.

or Nuclear Engineering American Electric Power Service Corporation' Broadway New York, New York 10004 Gerald Charnoff, Esquire Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N.W.

Washington, 0.

C.

20036 W.

G. Smith Jr., Plant Manager Donald C.

Cook Nuclear Plant P.

0.

Box 458

Bridgman, Michigan 49106 U.

S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspectors Office 7700 Red Arrow Highway Stevensville, Michigan 49127 The Honorable Tom Corcoran United States House of Representatives Washington,'0.

C.

20515 James G. Keppler Regional Administrator - Region III U.

S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen El lyn, Illinois 60137