ML18053A343
| ML18053A343 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 04/15/1988 |
| From: | Wambach T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Berry K CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18053A344 | List: |
| References | |
| IEB-80-11, TAC-42915, NUDOCS 8804280110 | |
| Download: ML18053A343 (5) | |
Text
e April 15, 19"38 Docket No. 50-255 Mr. Kenneth W. Berry Director, Nuclear Litensing Consumers Power Company
- 1945*West Parnall Road Jackson, Mi chi g_an 49201
Dear Mr. Berry:
DISTRIBUTION
!:Docket File J l
~ -
- --...... ~-.--.. --
N RC & Local PDRs Pb31 Plant Gray GHolahan Ringram
- Twambach OGC-Beth EJordan JPartlow ACRS (10)
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE. TO IE BULLETIN 80-ll~
11 MASONRY WJ'.\\LLS 11 (TAC NO. 42915)
We have* reviewed your respons*~s *dated Novemtier.a,'._.198.2,..-a~d December.29, 1982,.
to our request for i nformati on"*<dated Septemb,er 7, 1982:' '. We find that we need
- additional information..
- Enclbs'ure'*1 provi~es the *specJfic requests.
- p*rovidesour.. b.as'is.for,questi.on 3 a*nd ~nclosure*J.provides our
.basis.for question 4.
P~ease:r.e5cpond within 90' days of *receipt of this l.etter.
t
~* '
. ~
\\.,'~
,~
Since the ~equest is specific to Pali&~des Plant ~nd aff~cts fewer respondents 1 OMB clearanceJs ~o~:~eq~i~ed under P.1;*96~511.
,,I
- ~~
1
'\\"I./,, *. :
.*~
.,~.. *
- Sincefre:ly;..
than ten
-~.
~
Origin~l.-sigMd b¥.
J Thoma*s V. Wambach,* Project Manager Project Directorate III-1
Enclosures:
As stated c~:
See next* page
./Xv~.
PM/Pt{31: DRSP TWambach*: l t l2t<1187 D/.PD31: DRS~
MVirgi l i o
- 1Jtl15 18'1 4-eeo42eo110 es 05g~~5~
PDR ADOC~
. PDR :
\\.
. ~ -
Di.vision of Reactor Projects*- I.II, IV~ V
& Special Projects j'
~..
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Docket No. 50-255 Mr. Kenneth W. Berry Director, Nuclear Licensing Consumers Power Company 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201
Dear Mr. Berry:
April 15, 1988
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO IE BULLETIN 80-11 1 "MASONRY WALLS" (TAC NO. 42915)
We hav~ reviewed your responses dated No~emb~r 8, 1982, and December. 29~ 1982, to our request for information dated September 7t 1982.
We find that we need additional information. provides the specific requests.
Enclosure* 2 provides our basis for question 3 and Enclosure 3 provides our basis for question 4.
Please respond within 90 days of receipt of this letter.
Since. the request is specific to Palisades Plant and affects fewer than ten respondents, OMB clearance is not required under P. 1.96-511.
Enclosures:
As stated cc:
See next page Sincerely, d~A/ 1/ -~~vi.-
Thomas V.
W~mbach~ Project Manager Proj~ct Directorate III-1 Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V
& Special *Projects
Mr. Kenneth W. Berry Consumers Power Company cc:
M. I. Mi 11 er, Esquire Isham, Lincoln & Beale Slst Floor
.Three First National Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60602 Mr. Thomas A. McNish, Secretary Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Judd L. Bacon, Esquire Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, ~ichigan 49201 Region~l Administrator, Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Jerry Sarno Township Supervisor Covert Township 36197 M-140 Highway Covert, Michigan 49043 Office of the Governor Room 1 - Capitol Building*
Lansing~ Michigan 48913 Mr. David P. Hoffman Plant General Manager Palisades Plant 27780 Blue Star Memorial Hwy.
Covert, Michigan 49043 Resident Inspector c/o U.S, Nuclear Regulatory Commission Palisades Plant 27782 Blue Star Memorial Hwy.
- Co~ert, Mfthig~n 49043 Palisades Plant Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section Office Division of Radiological Health P.O. Box 30035 Lansing, Michigan 48909
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MASONRY WALL DESIGN, IE BULLETIN 80-11 PALISADES PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-255
- 1.
With reference to the reinforcement in masonry wa 11 s, the ACI 531-79 Code (Ref. 1) specifies that the minimum area -0f reinforcement in a wall in either direction, vertical or horizontal, shall be 0.0007 (0.07%) times the gross cross-sectional area of the wall and that the minimum total area of steel, vertical and horizontal, shall not be less than 0.002 (0.2%) times the gross cross-sectional area.
In view of this, clarify whether the reinforced walls
- at this plant meet the above criteria.
- 2.
If the joint reinforcement is used to resist tension in a vertically reinforced wall, it should follow the working stress design method which limits its allowable to 30 ksi.
Please clarify whether this criterion has been satisfied. If this criterion is not satisfied, identify all affected walls along with the calculated stress value for each wall.
- 3.
Indicate any wall that has only joint reinforcement (horizontal reinforcement), no vertical reinforcement, and may have been qualified using the tensile resistan~e of the joint reinforcement.
(See enclosure 2)
- 4.
With ~egard to the arching a~tion technique, the use of the arching action theory to qualify unreinforced masonry walls is not proven.
(See enclosure
- 3) Please provide.additional justification for not modifying walls 107.5, 105.14, and 321.1.
- 5.
In Response No. 11 of Reference 3, a sample calculation was provided for beam brace modification for wall C-104.5 in which the modified wall was analyzed as a horizontal beam strip.
However, drawing FSK-C-104.5 (Q) (1) shows that the two vertical sides of the wall are free.
Since the vertical sides are free, please provide justifications for the horizontal beam strip assumption.
- 6.
In Response No.. 4 of Reference 3, a total of four walls (C-107.10, C-107,28, C-107.31, C-108.11) were identified to be removed.
Please provide the status of these wa 11 s.
- 7.
Reference 3 indicated that p 1 ate analysis was used to q!Jal i fy a number of walls.. Please explain the analytical procedures used in the post-cracked state of the wall (i.e., cracks along the vertical and horizontal direction).
-8. -
In Response.No. 9.of Reference 3, wall.303.9 was identified as unqualified under tornado missile impact.
However, it was stated that no modification was needed.
Please provide justification for not modifying this wall (i.e.,
details of the wall with surrounding structures, quantitative results supporting your conclusion).
REFERENCES
- 1.
ACI 531-79 and ACI 531-R-79 Building Code Requirements for Concrete Masonry Structures American Concrete Institute, 1979
- 2.
SGEB Criteria for Safety-Related Masonry.Wall Evaluation (con 1 t)
Developed by the Structural and Geotechnical Engineering. Branch (SGEB) of the NRC July 1981
- 3.
B. D. Johnson, Consumers Power Company Letter to D. M. Crutchfield (NRC)
Subject_;
Pa 1 i sades Pl ant - Response to Request for Add it i ona 1 Information Regarding IE Bulletin 80-11, Masonry Walls Consumers Power Company, November 8, 1982