ML19274D667
| ML19274D667 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/01/1979 |
| From: | Broehl D, Damon D, Frewing J PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19274D668 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7902220146 | |
| Download: ML19274D667 (29) | |
Text
Q. >.';
NRC PUEuc DOCU. MENT R00'J
$ww m, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA h
.g V\\r ) [j p *,A.Q"*
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION fx BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD g
(8 In the Matter of
)
)
Docket 50-344 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY,
)
et a1
)
(Control Building Proceeding)
)
(Trojan Nuclear Plant)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on February 1, 1979:
- 1) Licensee's Supplemental Responses dated February 1, 1979 to Consolidated Intervenors Interrogatories received August 14, 1978;
- 2) Licensee's Supplemental Responses dated February 1, 1979 to Stephen M. Willingham's Interrogatories dated August 11, 1978;
- 3) Licensee's Supplemental Responses dated February 1, 1979 to Coalition for Safe Power's Interrogatories dated September 6, 1978; and
- 4) Affidavits of D. J. Broehl, John L. Frewing, Ronald W. Johnson, and D. L. Damon have been served upon the persons listed below by depositing copies thereof in the United States mail with proper postage af fixed for first class mail.
Marshall E. Miller, Esq., Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U. S. Nuclesr Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Washington, D. C.
20555 Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom, Dean Docketing and Service Section (3)
Division of Engineering, Office of the Secretary Architecture and Technology U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Oklahoma State University Washington, D. C.
20555 Stillwater, Oklahoma 74074 Joseph R. Gray, Esq.
Dr. Hugh C. Paxton Counsel for NRC Staff 1229 - 41 Street U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Los Alamos, New Mexico 87544 Washington, D. C.
20555 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS POOR QUAUTY PAGES II9 0 D 2 0 $
3 I
C_ERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, Axelrad & Toll Panel 1025 Connecticut Ave., N. W.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Suite 1214 Washington, D. C.
20555 Washington, D. C.
20036 John H. Socolofsky, Esq.
Mr. John A. Kullberg Assistant Attorney General Route 1, Box 250Q Of Attorneys for the State of Oregon Sauvie Island, Oregon 97231 100 State Office Building Salem, Oregon 97310 Mr. David B. McCoy 348 Hussey Lane Robert M. Johnson, Esq.
Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 Assistant Attorney General Of Attorneys for the State of Oregon Ms. C. Gail Parson 100 State Office Building P. O. Box 2992 Salem, Oregon 97310 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 William Kinsey, Esq.
Mr. Eugene Rosolie Bonneville Power Admir stration Coalition for Safe Power P. O. Box 3621 215 S. E. 9th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97208 Portland, Oregon 97214
- 58. Nina Bell Mr. Stephen M. Willingham 632 S. E.18th Street 555 N. Tomahawk Drive Portland, Oregon 97214 Portland, Oregon 97217 Columbia Environmental Council Columbia County Courthouse P. O. Box 611 Law Library St. Helens, Oregon 97051 Circuit Court Room St. Helens, Oregon 97051 s
Ronald W. 4p6nson Corporate Attorney Portland General Electric Company Dated:
February 1,1979
s b
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
Docket 50-344 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY,
)
e t a1
)
(Control Building Proceeding)
)
(Trojan Nuclear Plant)
)
LICENSEE'S GUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES DATED FEBRUARY 1,1979 TO CONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS INTERROCATORIES RECEIVED AUGUST 14, 1978 Following are the Licensee's supplemental responses dated February 1, 1979 to consolidated intervenors interrogatories. Persons responding to each interrogatory are indicated by their initials as follows:
D. J. Broehl (DJB)
John L. Frewing (JLF)
D. L. Damon ',DLD) 1.
DAVID B. McCOY Interrogatory 7 The design approach to correct the Control Building structural deficien-cies was a structural extension. Other methods were considered according to Report No. 78-13, May 5, 1978. What were those other repair methods?
What was the cost of each? What were the technical problems of each method? What were the reasons for the rejection of each particular method? What was the impac-. of each method on Plant operations?
Supplemental Response to Interrogatory 7 The proposed Centrol Building modifications are described in the " Report on Design Mcdifications for the Trojan Control Building' (PGE-1020),
dated January 14, 1979. Detailed design and analyses have shown that the reinforceme7t of certain Control Building walls by the addition of reinforced concrete walls and a large steel plate, as described in this report, is an effective and efficient method of restoring the seismic capacity to the Control Building. The cost of field work for these modifications is estimated to be $2-3 million exclusive of costs for engineering, testing, hearing preparation, etc.
The other seriously considered method was building a structural exr.ension to the north side of the existing Control Building. That method is now considered to be a less effective way of restoring margin, since its capability is directly related to the strength of the connections between the existing building and the structural extension. The modifications proposed in PGE-1020 add lateral strength where it will be most effective. Connections between the old structure and the new walls will be of more conventional and effective " shear type", retbar than of the " tension-compression" type associated with the str2ctural extension.
The work for either the originally planned structural extension or the proposed modifications described in PGE-1020 can be performed while the Plant is operating. Conduct of work during Plant operation is discussed in PGE-1020 Sections 4 and 5.
Other methods which have been considered and rejected are discussed in Licensee's August 31, 1978, additional responses to McCoy Interroga-tory 6 and Parson Interrogatory 17, including Bechtel internal memoranda dated August 18 and August 30, 1978. Alternatives were also discussed in the report of the TABS analysis (referred to in Licensee's September 13, 1978, responses to NRC Interrogatories G6-G8), which was submitted to the parties on October 2,1978.
Cost estimates on these altnerativta, other than those already reported, have not been made.
(DLD)
Interrogatory 18 Provide an analysis of how the alternatives to structural extension would effect the safety margins with respect to No. 15 interrogatory. Compare each alternative to structural extension in a cost oenefit analysis.
Supplemental Response to Interrogatory and 18 Since the loads imparted by the events listed are not of the same type, and are of much lesser magnitude than seismic acceleration forces, the ability of the Control Building to respond to those events has not been reduced in any meaningful way by the design deficiency, and will not be reduced by the modifications.
No cost benefit analyses of altneratives have been performed.
(DLD)
Interrogatory 19 Provide a copy of the license amendment.
Supplemental Response to Interrogatory 19 License Amendment 35 was issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on December 22, 1978 and was served upon all parties.
License Amendment 35 allowed Interim Operation of the Trojan Nuclear Plant prior to modification of the Control Building.
No license amendment relating to modifications of the Control Buildf ag has been issued.
(JLF)
II.
C. GAIL PARSON Following are the Licensee's supple = ental responses to intervenor C. Gail Parson interrogatories.
Interrogatory 15 To what extent was effect on plant operation a factor in determining what type of modifications would be done.
Interrogatory 16 If plant operation were not a factor, what structural modification would have been selected instead?
Supplemental Response to Interrogatory 15 and 16 Careful consideration was given to Plant operation in determining the type of modifications to be made to the Control Building, but that was not found to be a l';1 ting or controlling f actor in determining the design. The mosc effective method to increase the existing bui'. ding's seismic capability is to add shear walls to enclose the railroad bay openings, with a steel plate or concrete wall extending above these new walls. The railroad bay is not required for Plant operation and is physically separated from the operating portions of the Plat.t.
As discussed in PGE-1020, Sections 4 and 5, the proposed modifications can te made while the Plant is operating.
If the modifications were intended to be made while the Plant was not operadng, they would be essentially the same as the proposed modifications.
(DJB)
Interrogatory 17 Provide written and oral communications regarding criteria for and descriptions of all seriously considered design approaches /other methods of corrective action.
Supplemental Response to Interrogatory 17 Attachments 1 and 2 hereto provide additional pertinent communications regarding corrective action considered which were not provided by our previous responses to this interrcgatory. Also see NRC meeting notes for the December 19 meeting which were supplied to all parties to this proceeding on December 28, 1978.
(DJB)
ATTACIDfE?rr 1
. CONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS FEBRUARY 1, 1979 PAGE 1 of 24 MEETING NOTES TROJAN NUCLEAR PLANT CONTROL BUILDING STnEUGTliENING SC11 EMES November 28, 1978 Osneration Engineering Conference Room, Service Building, First Floor, Tuesday, 2:00 p. m-Attendess:
W. White (Dechtel)
K. Gross F. Meyer R. Anderson C. Halligan L. Damor.
W. J. Lindblad (PGE)
D. J. Broehl L. Booth C. R. Christensen F. Rogan R. Halicki C. A. Zimmerman T. E. Eushncil R. W. Johnson L. W. Erickson thcir scheduled to cllow Bechtel an opportunity to describe proposed cethods of restoring intended cargins to the Control building.they had The neeting was Dick Anderson increduced the meeting by stating that;h licenscable and c solutions, bo Following core than 20 runs of STA2 SYNE to evaluate prcposed a recorcenda-frame.
fixes, Bechtel Power Corporation (Bechtcl) was ready to make tion and request a decision by PCE in the near future on which schenc The Structurci Support System (SSS) was develtped and Until recently, the SSS had been the preferred would be used.
proposed in April 1978.
However, with recent investi;aticas solutien and it is still viable.
the Strengthen-Existing-into the possibility of internal strengthening, Eechtel has evcluated Building (SES) approach has become more attractive.(1) the technical details (in ot these approaches on four factors.
words, how the modification works), (2) licensing aspects, (3) the ef fect and (4) effcet on long-ters operation on operation during construction,Bechtel reccamends serious consideration for the lifetime of the Plant.
of the internal strengthening approach to codifying the Control Euilding.
Fred Meyer next made a presentation using view graphs which are provided as the attachment labelled as slides.
Slide 1 provides cur rent cenpos-in ice wall tes ting results with comparison to the " Basic Criteria" used
ATTACHMENT 1 CONSOL.IDATED INTERVENORS FEBRUARY 1, 1979 PAGE 2 of 24 the Supplemental Structural Evaluation dated September 19, 1978.
Slide 2 provides a tabular exhibit of results to date for their composite wall tests.
Slides 3, 4 and 5 reprtoent shear capacity diagrams for major shear walls in the Control Building based on one-half of the Basic Criteria.
Slides 6, 7 and 8 provide similar schematic representations of the shear force in these walls for the existing building from the STARDYNE analysis.
These slides can be compared as overlays with Slides 3, 4 and 5 *o ecm-pare shear forces with shear capacity.
Slide 9 is a plan view of the SSS used in their latest STARDYNE model for evaluation of that strengthening approach.
Slide 10 indicates in tabular form where the shear loads have been transferred between the Control Building and the SSS.
Slides 11, 12 and 13 are schematic representations of the shear forces in walls within the SSS and the existing building modeled in the STARDYNE program. These again can be compared for existing walls with the capacity diagrams on Slides 3, 4 and 5.
Slides 14 and 15 are sketches indicating the form of their SES model used for STARDYNE evaluation.
Slides 16, 17, 18 and 19 indicate shear force diagrams for walls with the SES, which again can be compared with Slides 3, 4 and 5.
Following some technical discussion about details of the two modifica-tions, Bill Uhite presented Bechtel's viewpoint on the licensing aspects of the two approaches. Basic technical differences result from the fact that with the SSS, shear-load transfer is through tension / compression connections at the end of walls and floor slabs, resulting in line transfer of forces, whereas the SES scheme relies on shear connections with a more planar transfer of forces between new and existing structural elcments. They expect the response spectra effects of either codifica-tion to be similar with no advantage of one over the other frca this aspect. Because of the naar state-of-the-art technical ingenuity required for connection; of tha SSS with the existing building and other aspects, Bechtel fcels that the SES cculd more easily be revieued by URC's tcch-nical staff.
Following Dr. White's discussion, Larry Damon presented some sletches indicating proposed utilization of spaces which t;ould be created by the internal strengthening approach.
LU;/4crv5A15
A,TTAGDIENT 1 CONSOL,IDATED JNTERVENORS ii FEBRUARY 1,)97%q PAGE 3 of 2V 4so-7 i
/
/
l
/
i 4= -
/.
9
>l u
4 A2
/
/
/
350-
/
ON hl/p w
.02 GhkC ec-)
j e 6%( a Sckj,*'/
4
. ( 50 ~
p, p
d l[
l (tio/ #
i
/ 3 / -ll
<- v b'
k' ff,/ pp
,/
'j p ""
y*^*,,.: f.0 w
'i
/
3
/'
.y
/
tt
- c. >
/
- *.< ' ' *),/
l 7
-Qf j/
igop:itheu;.; &/
(Wr ll t w
cc.;;
3
/
we.bcsr-1 41
. l m.
- ~ ""' ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'
a. f < g,.
.....p
.. J.'
,./ I;W
., f.'
f 7
- ~ t.n 4
\\
4 v' r.. -
'. ' <. ~ ' '
' o So go 150 2x 2GO 5**
cxp,.~eni:., lo:.c' c.e : pdm.~
G~ h p:i i
I I
T, E STIN G PRO GiR AM RESULTS
- -- - ~<
$Ltch :- t
.e.aeg w
/ j e
SliEAR TEST DESIGil AliD RESULTS Compres-sion TEST RESULTS CRITERIA Load on Leading Vu N
Estimated Specimen Specimen Design yj Bas ic Ha tio 9
First Crack End Test criteria Actual Vu p.
On g
g Vu Ul timate (nsi l Elastic Liuit y
t.
Modified Basic (psi)
./u (psi )
flexure shear (psi)
Ve (psi f
(psi) (inches)
Schneider Criteria d
N Al 2
105 X
281 233 X
165 6.15 244 1.16 A2 2
180 X
349 257 X
315 236 2.99 2 63 1.32 A3 2
105 X
263 235 X
236 99 1.90 244 1.07 A4 2
' 280 X
468 210 394 367 275 0.91 288.
1.62 A5 2
180 X
315 210 X
289 263 B1 2
105 X
252 235 X
131 3.0 150 ~
1.68 B2 2
100 X
315
?.10 X
210 3.0 150 2.10 83 2
105 X
234 157 X
210 104 2.05 150 1.56 C4 2
ISO X
323 153 X
289 184
- 3. 0 150 2.15 l.
150 C5 2
30 X
150 D1 2
50 X
231 if ;;j 9.g El 1
50 X
243 0$!>
E2 1
100 X
" iEr C F1 2
50 X
231 f;[g 243 t- @r F2 2
100 X
- EE
- 150 eg G1 2
30 X
150
.f G2 2
50 X
231 O
i:1 2
50 X
- 243 ti2 2
100 X
231 Ji 2
50 X
A.TTACIDENT 1
~~~ ~" ~~~
i CONSOIJDATED INTERVENORS FEBRUARY 1, 1979 l
PAGE 5 of 24 l-SHdAP.
3900
/*
BII7
,.4t4z "
,g f
i ssge" i f v,
i,
(
g / a2',
4
<t
,,y, a
' y,.'.u,..., l '.
g
. %.~
l-t :~-
(l
/
9 e:'
l J
f....L.
!.-~'a i.
5 5 l.in e Wall t
l hil Wr,lls ts e c v'
?
Vlad fi ed %hmn dw c ri 4 c :-ic..
4 i
l J
t S.'.t O C~ l'- 3
.=
l<
'l ATTACIDfENT 1 CONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS l
FEBRUARY 1, 1979 t
l PAGE 6 of 24 g
i r
i.
1 SHEAR CA PAC IT Y 22SU
'26W ff Af5 f
,.37WI gi ;j 7*
1
, d.
e-
,,,],
+
j
/
s g
F g
3 i
Eco /
d i
).,
%z ij 3
c,'
)s= 2.0
/0 29to l
- m.. 7.
i l
i
/)
2.9.E0' s
1 d
r
/
in f 3., _.,
if,vt)s s
/
i,-
c)., <,,,,. g,/.
y e - --
s 53 77[j !/
s
.\\
.aw>
- 0;
- I : %q a
~l, e
u
<s., ea. - - -
)
t' * %< (.
\\ ; (.,q.
- e0 y*
f
)
I
.h t S L
.i l
lb l
l'
,}'
j
,.,.,>o
,t 19 0,4
_s 5
3 p,c,93 -
1904
- y c,y:;/+
t N-In'u wall R-Mc wall 0
BI:cn enMc = h.[ k;e 6.leclc. 6;cd:f,LJ Sk:;L.,-) }_d.J f.b ld 2. I s o p t..
R e J o u.41.',,c - E./ B.u;c C.,hh, JA wall.: w' t/,oml c,or:: rehae I:alc.c! ?,, Iso p t..
i LO bcre." $LLd os4!,'ne, qgg345 dg.
-t t.g (c{.4 -I.i { l ne S' M E 7
,i L> t' o. b e \\ib s cds+ 6 c-elven~ (c.<;.'d'487')
ATTACIDIENT 1 CONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS I
FEBRUARY 1, 1979 l
PAGE 7'of 24 0
t
~
i.llEAR O PAciff of t,JAt.t.5 s
t lll
-...,u,, n.....w-i. w... ~,9 f
.,I 13g j
j l&64",
s h
s J
9 i
5 3, <-
[$=
u 5
l h
1
$.O[w ' -
1 1
I 1
I e
$y
,h 0b I.e c I:
(
i.
e n,..
m
}
44*
l O
i i
5 i
?
)
i a
t
$;,p,,9
{
f'd
][
1 s
s.w.~.
5
- )
lr., h alt
,n qs s,
R
.i f
?
e (f*
{
c'!'.!
^
5,,,,,,;,,, 3,$
~~o*--*
'e f.
5 h,, RI. l a a t. n<fssc 4 a,. r4 ~
- )
s Ece.euax-a:v.1 hee.'..:::v:ww.:w.N IG' . ~.... 4
- O l'
e l e a G O e i 0 0
- 5
A,TTACIDfENT 1 s CONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS FEBRUARY 1, 1979 l i FAGE 8 of 24 s I ( FXISTitM STRUCTO,GE Lifj$ N .= 5 O IG! S ' It'l ,as sa sia s s, n. .~. . 6 h i 5 l p I 3 r { 'm n; 1!11, 10 5 'T 5 7.3 ~/ t.,.. ,e QO ~ *-
- ~ * ~ ~ ~ ~
'sa sese p [ / e r. l,,9.0f3 j,. 4 4 d .s. x t f II - (f g, A 7.774' 6;s <w 2< r. I f /.k b f I h J-q 3 ,,5./ tus'_:Utl,uEJ ed, - 2 l e ene g l 00s : 0 q, p. 2 y, 4 $Lt G7 ii h. ~ d q
ATTACHMENT 1 3 CONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS e.- FEBRUARY 1, 1979 PAGE 9 of 24 6 PJ.1511H6 5f20(f025 LirJE @ 'k g t n1 s ! ?[. s. g a. .1 .s a f 10 5 } am 23tah ~- t 93 5.a.w.,,,., i i { . ', g;yy;s. ,f jj
- e
.u r +.
- l 13 / ' o' d
s I J A (5
- ' l
'~ l 5 U.'.,0 # ' (, t y 1 5 h '4 f r.c: r <b S - o.a k' ' ' '. ' ". " ' '.' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' <~ ?.L: ' t '. 0l l.,t [' ' -. - ~. - _. -. - k OCO: *y7 p.., r ,a - <. /o J e, l (,,,.. n. s-em
b n 3 2,~7 7Q \\'?.E. r. t. L P a y = f"*= to M r%. La==. h j '. CD. P t'% sD W .lllI' 6 i g l. l fl l 8 r e l Il I c.t. .a t~ n g I,,.,.,_. _ _..]y L* su p N.y * ..,.\\. p C,. [C *. .e. ,,o womw u. f.. o .o' .J L. s N r' .7y g% 79+Gs* ..g 1. c:a l.t t ( N. P.,. f. n w',' ' ' "' g' " "k,com,,', s w.W5%Miss';& f-S1 ."*\\ m ,A, \\s s'
- v-wer_a a.1.w. A s = ' 'A'.L'hu:>n's:2
\\--.'M'.'21'2 ( .h ' \\. n ^ .S 3. ,~ ~* e h C t;- ':a . 3 ~+ . g rw' W t e9 "] .a, .i. d .:?. 'hi E*
- cqF,WCWMuF@j
_.. # w.. u ,',,3 g,n .e e o, s.w .o. m v. y = .x, R .s to m (... _ ,-,o...N.n u n N E k.- . m \\ m m sv p m ts %9' Si: :.:2;.na::. i::.vm'.'.:n1.::,vurr,vm:'m; :wm:.'reruu 21.u'r.u '.ri:. ."I o r' W c-l. ~+ af. %o sn M
- .1.
c.> $\\ gg. .d ~. t u. et m m m\\m. w ra j ) L' 5 r. .t sc t ^ m s s \\ M ._g \\\\*NNNN*\\ %\\\\WW\\ 3 e so s ci t ,. e. s. .d. n ',,m,',m m.s M t en
- L w,
W t,~ o \\ s' ~o N s c<% 4 u ct. s) m 4 s g g\\\\woNms e c a r, 6 ww ww,.*une 1 1 v1 i \\s d 4 k I s e %gd\\\\\\\\\\\\\\%\\\\'[.'% \\ %_ ('\\' M %I_% % %%' \\ \\1 \\\\M% % % \\\\1 %'4_\\\\ g51 % (\\\\ se g% 4 \\\\ % \\ \\ g 4 % g i g g gggg\\ \\ g g g 7Z Jo 01 3DVd s 646T 'I QVnEH35 SEON3AE31NI G31VQI'IOSNO3 I I IN3HIDV11V
I ATTAC1DiENT 1 i CDNSOLIDATED INTERVENORS FEBRUAkY 1, 1979 ID ~ E PAGE 11 of 24 { i t { Aux. St.DC. .I. e rs' 4. et n 1 r 4. er 93 I I' 4. El 11 ~7 se,M6 As, R"Line ./T, ///////// -- c' l ~! o / 1, s.l..e :le.L s / / rd R GE.77.* 93 / / .2',bf c,} [L ir7 e l ,d j 4. / a Caa n oL Sld 9 a]j.- e, i >+ / / y. ll 2.'.!. El II] I / / 4 _. / y.r. g n / ci]- ~ ' ~ " l 2* l. GL In2 / CE-- / ,/ EGG [ 25"s G' bd. El 45 / / 9 -,_ _ 7.__Tm A // / / / / // /.r*-~~ ? rl<</,h/< U El 77 l !93. b /f S '/. et 77 3'!. E2 93 SS T ' l* 6*l /17 K.. g 3g Ig" couc b e.l. El 6 5 y# 77 ~~ PL AN \\llG\\c1 C.0 " SS S " GL t O k- :$ 'I '~ ~
- f
3. ATTACIBiET ' l C'ONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS FEBRUA'RY 1, 1979 PAGE 12 of 24 i 'M O D E L 8-2 (555) SHEAR TRAMSFER L C A D.S ( R.;h) SaiWeatJ STR v c r u R.S ~ -EL ' u"u n!t Interior I?.u nII Ta+al 49 !!7 12.G 1483 SF G G t-} f' e lof IS S 59 45 Z (-o 93 !a2o 63% fog 115 0 77 3 G t.L gg7 20/ jo tlg . _' ! 2 <f> 5 537. 5. '726 ~ Z 15Go ~ 15 0,1 9 5') 3 G "} & F e g a I. e S i. I '.5 li C.:" .'#a l'O 3 y
'"~ ~ l ATTACIDfENT 1 8 CONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS ^ FEBRUARY 1, 1979. lMODEL B,, (sss, AGE 13 of 24 R t N~ 5. MO TION ' v. EL. trt' -. _r 7.A i G S50 trist -- ~ tos
- (
s .a '; 565
- 1511
'./ ' / .c / j cis m wrri m-i 4 ,l' e t 2nS 566 Ill0 j s / / / e / s n
- ?
/m pn rrro i, .i ', is 2.i < c3a f ,( I?l,u, l C.,.. j o ,' p/ Y C n.' S j),.. <j y, r G1 -- - lt. i ') 4l t, t , /. 9 .i l'%'3 ', I 5 % 7.ene
- , ?.s?.
i c .i /) 't /l / .a k
- x.u.au,
'w.uus Q G -. -.. l s... tVCST LVAU. Rl., ;W\\ M. It WN.L
- l. - IV, I L (SSS)
R $MEAR FORCE IN
- KIPS, A U xit ); M y BulLDal Q HJCLuosD Tc sscTio N H
e $' t tG 'i \\ \\ s
ATTACHMENT 1 ONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS i .l g Q E { h, 'l BRUARY 1, 1979 j AGE 14 of 24 I N S. t<io TI O N ' 1 1 EL. Il7 ' ,::r; ~~nmm - n, s [j. ljq l , s $,4 o7 15cjef t s I los eM s 0;? 5
- n i
j e j 4 G e<l 2 i 1863 e i 691 ~, i i i,r;T) ec s w 5 i,-,,; %,,, e e d s a I s ? d 1 S tSu s' ~ DCC a w,i .i lj s 4 / 1 y <, T, s p.a'M i,-- 8 l a s 6 s,,< !? G '? ~ j j j 'A ' f ri 6 'i g L5 C-,Q 1., ~ .~ r G 1 --- ,~ .\\ J . }* ~ i s1 i t 1. *o i ' h 7 '8i b i1. i':, h fw s I ) ~ t:b.....-Y:.:.:x..c. Y 5s" =N i CAST P//sLL N1 h' 6,g'. j.. n,,' " ^ ' - 1, (e,;.e., s,; i g. l'!A L'. /5 ? ~ (. I e 3 i SHEAR FCfiCE lb' MIPS 5 Auxit,1AR Y B Ult.D!A! G INcluoED SECT 10H H 1 l } v i 4 "L w!DC [2 C. E %)
"~ j ATTACHMENT.1 i CDNSOLIDATED INTERVENORS l FEBRUAkY 1, 1979 PAGE 15 of 24 ($$5) i MODE L 8-2. E-w McTioN I i s 0% ll7 - ~
- -~c p
rirn; e i I i los3 l', ( GIS t 40 i ( )() ,' j. ~ / /0 6- - [ 47 g i, b I4C
- ; Sg, i
' Mis
< i e
i!
93 - -
s.
.T.
l m;
r,v; y
v
t;X p o; n.
g li
' ',g 77- -
- mr:9
- og gr-e,q.j o
/ +. / l fj '/ Y 909 f b) ? C 5 I , IO3L I {.' t l j. G; i i). '1 G1 - -.- : %.n 5 $ p .d,; fi 1 3 9 { f 4tJo i
- n. G t,
( 69S 8y 4G2 i g rf f t. . L,..A (.'S- . -..'.u v. < u.v w. w d twsud &.2.a WALL 55 wAu u wtset 51 watt 54 . SHEAR FO M E-iW KIPS AUKILIA RY B UIL DIN G IN(LUDED To SECTION H 51.ur: c. l3 4 9 =
'~~ ATTACHMENT 1 i CONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS I - FEBRUARY 1, 1979 PAGE 16 of 24 + 1 MODEL 8 Z. (555 ) i l fW IAO TIO N / 7;' EL. til-- ? 1 e ,. s
- ' 364 j 707 l 512.
',s ~ s s o 10 5 a i
- o
) 591 l SoQ j 442 ? d d 1 9 2,-- l 'g n-b i s a s ) ',, r. ',, 6s c g y.o 3
- f. o ~ i
,) l ,= .y 'n ,i I j
- y
<; l c. a,- ,.i c '. su 3 g, J p. a a
- c..,
GJ ,J, s,n. 6- ~. 3 G I '-- - 'l ) F 1 / 79.C 173?- 2 e,0 3 ,j 1 <i p) /s o 9 d-f ,/di.'d.?-.* S W f f{ .f-a:2.I'N . ~ /i D O O T H '.7 A L L ID RT:1 W A !. L tv.ALL (G $11 /,.GSS.'; AI h[ \\ 8 9 J ] ]- hU;G! ![.TL Y 0 0H.Dl.% Q HKLUND YO S K Tl@ 1 .1 '"!!.\\ D l.Y l/-[ J
A,TTACHMENT'1 j CONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS FEBRUARY 1, 1979-j PAGE 17 of 24-u 7 .d Jl 9* c; ( l e T J I ne q R, . r~, r 3 . c. c: s o jr -i. .i';.\\ ..). \\ .u'14 s e
- g
.~ Y Y.s '1T& / maa m. s s. s. s .,r 3 y,. g / \\/\\fg')s,9 'g L / /\\7v\\ x 9 i a hsN N' \\ s~ i \\,f*x \\ '\\ a j.. \\ /_v ~ ) / / / /\\ / b y ql l 7\\ n.-- \\ / [c/[.-pgss \\ x ss. N \\ /\\\\/v,;;: g 1g /.Lx cd cube.ig e*e 'x1 e
i ATTACHME!Tr 1 CDNSOLIDATED INTERVENORS FEBRUARY 1, 1979 t PAGE 18 of 24 M ODE L D-3 \\ AUX. Bl.DG. k. *< .a' 4, EL 9 s - ~ / ^ / 4' f 4. c f. c s - '. 5, 6,, c/= o albm. L / i3 el. e l. 77 f~/'c%j.R 6/ "i "l ,l p'" / (a rmove a "idra'c %h f c, (7 r / ~ -- =w a_ __ ~ s = o '=v i /_ _,w y;/ a _._ _ _ y -[./_ j j j j / 7, r I L'.!. a,.; z. .s. kx.[/_ i i < /_I. N' 3"so El (.3 3 ' 4. El. c. G ] 1
()
24>"1. lil.17[ ' Ga:.yco l u.,, c,n. J / G. 5'. tf a a.l. GL c 3 1 - 1 c c c c +. E7. 0 ( l' cca: r'u El GI f / ////, R -m l %, of " %) ph des G.'. Gl. 7 7 '.f L'. '8 :- II.I t!G St 55 O'.tte a Ito .e
ATTACHMENT 1 j CONSOL,IDATED LNTERVENORS FEBRUARY 1, 1979 i PAGE 19 of 24 l SHemR 70RCE btAGRAlf -(o $gg -) , 18 41
- Et i < i,,
Y t.v N
- 3"sleel (8
. i *.,. V v c c, q. .1 , syf ~ r, a ', 20 % g l. ,1 n ,. i t 7 ,. uzo m. y. I4 g-m -lG06, u-g e s';- -./ 1 o \\ z : c.-._..._ . -)g i ( t s-sab
- 2
. -.<, a \\ 1G?! ' f. t s \\ New nwc. IW1.h I GX/ST/N G svA /. / D e O live is e gem o EU DQ' '$ l]
i ATTACIDIENT 1 CDNSOLIDATED INTERVENORS ~ FEBRUAkY 1,1979 PAGE 20 of 24 l SHE.4R FORCE DIAG P A M ("ses") e I l' R loll ' ,. % o f El I17 t s v k k' ~ 215 0 412 e r, f / goc s t o j gl*' '
- ~rm, llSC. I' c'
s i + y j 3 / 1 ,l titG1 y-W /* 207.0 (? o <e f,19 C?. c. se , J :.*, g. - - - ~ -, - w ( ,s f ) _r - % ;,cq :. .. i. / l t a s _a a.. l . - - ~ \\ <e 'n '. A/ W c:!C. W.T.0 M!!-l CvX lSE f:ef0cra p) /U// ok:;.' C iSII~'d' h / 5 6 '! i w c! '.! 6 bc/. Col} !!6 0C: V!nl L ~ 6 (f Y'O Y. 'J u o e v.; 3
f i ATTACHMENT 1 CONSOLIDATED'INTERVEN0;!5 j FEBRUARY 1, 1979 l' PAGE fl;of 24 C. y m g% w= e C' c- .o 9 S. 3 = a l 8 e I .I d \\ a p 4 .d Em c.n I ... s mw.w. 7.TT. .s,.... ~
- n
%4*.1. s.* E. a.aa n a. n ie gre e an.e n *g 4 e 4 el '4 ed O O w w ed ces' C= W g% ,o-a = M gef# %7 6 e =: r) i ....s.v 3
== ,.... W T n. m..... g .'".6."......... 4.. ...g.- 3 y g y W.4 w. g s .. n.a u.." % %.... %.... s........ u. m...., s..... r., ...M / C (4 ') 2... 1 W, ) e C"* c-a= o, e,.,
- % T@i.1%%.
pr% S4 i a w g.- y b C .c ~ w s 4>+ ..t...s 3.s.+._.... w..,. a s.s...._.J.., C. . -. ~. . O.. C"/' t, e i .. C2 t.r..o cv. 1 e c~ 4 <a= 6 4
- e.,.,
.r., e Y 1.t$ (,Pr=* Q a g N e Y g , e'? cd. C7' , FT.mc..t.]., ee b p., p,, y jui.'.G*t.WE' ij .y s,w.....,.- C Q. rw.w.... w ~......%3 e , g g.g.g....,.;..; ' m. -.. .e - u -.,.. -... .c.. . e.......g.g., = ;;.g.3. g e./ g %t% eu ? I U .d ces s ?> C "P tl YI y b-S F ' 2* '.. wd. q C' cd s ) tl't o ) 4.'4 P"4*.7 M. G C ? t ( w s w,.,,.S 4, ... a I
- 5**
e.1 [ (f,, r-v, i f., W c' CJ t M, G". '.C7.* t t ~.m.W.WC
- A
*7 t{.._ _. .. _.. -.... _.......,.s,....~ l. 4/ l Q t.7 lC, 44 ~ w
I ATTACIDE'Tr 1 CDNSOLIDATED INTERVENORS l FEBRUAkY 1, 1979 }, PAGE 22 of 24 g l I Z = v L b I-M-L Ll l e i i 5 e_.,
- m e
i Q k me \\ w s s 5 s 3
- -}
o-s m = g g g 9 if. .35 - L, L '1 L, c L L vl ,1 a ,f M. l hl i a. a a l s i .t h } v! I2 W h h d' E J \\ g i) l J u 4.c._'-{ F. 2nau n -d f .j 4 q i I 7; [1 f 5 L o-l' I F"9 ci e t-l- l l r3 G j-uru......~xuux- ,.== c:. z w _, c: e f8 = e .e g / 12 n / s -?'.9 v/wi \\'O \\ e N / [ s e /\\/4 9\\ t g, /\\ \\\\ \\ / d\\ i x i - ir l</ f / I \\ v's ; i su.. \\ , y., ~ m N, / n.- /.0 v\\ 4' z.M./ V ..N \\
ATTACIDIENT 1 CDNSOLIDATED INTERVENORS FEBRU,91Y 1, 1979 PhCE 23 ot'd4 (".) y -9' 7-- -7r ... ~ g". r.. .--..__...i{,._. g* n Ll. y[. r ra j i'4 .[ ;. i i i I ,23 1,! s c :-q r I h !r= t.
- -r
.2 $f M-E 1 >',.r-,-- g n n .u_ . a.. q ,3 r, mi f v i i s
- 3 si n,.
u.t 9* s -.I s va E! t --r " t c rg a rs_ z=--@ 1 -. a ~ -z O I ls s i . m. 3 = = { j
- i!
n: i t Z.
- r;
,~5 r .__r i i 1 g 1 .I 1 I I l g" r L.
- e
= ..i.' ..?. ... ' ~ 4 4 i g ,- -. __i q- _. a-er = 3
- s'
'l ;g:) w eq lN*L ,h E 5 I SI ~ I a J..p;w, i.: n- ! W M ' e,,y' li 6 g= y ,:-t -c ~ 6911 nii I s y >. s 1 lj-1.' !; w. s, e.I ';;i -74 i l 3.r- } - ~+- n i l L l.! 4 y,i.
- n e
0 l hk l l h i (l: a n 1: gj r ! gh, y - ' l. + p. y~ww a Il l--r . k. f i i
- l
- i.
i 3' i ,J -:c @g I i a [ S er jE J 8 .. y w hi ?d E 2: a. i z s V j j-r-@ E s. 1 I I I l l
ATTACHMENT 1 CDNSOLIDATED INTERVENORS FEBRUAkYl[d4(A) 1979 (9 @i.>.1 (k) Pfd$ 24,, 4-l u i - = c u,_-_ y p -; q;1 >. u,,
- i,73 s,m',
v] !,[ 8 7: f -4 si
- -l \\ Q..
y' 'j % 1' ;,, g -r N_m _,.. ..=c.]- 7 ~. a e-g . {,f q , l v. ,i } ,Tk-1 ,-t -t c -- -~ ~T - C WS -?~ u ... <l~ _ y) c i u II 19, - I ' i, y i j.i i. K .a.. i,: @ k-a. u T w i ti' l c-l i t: l g n a-e g .i. d = m F Z i @E [.' V j 2-i. 2 [ i .a. + p I j. .) O O. 1 i y. t 's7 r r -- -. ,. - - __ d l f ' rte M=5@ C M .i l [ i i p a._,q. a ![ l ,.hl Mil f ',. l I -n 3 [-- ,L:il: d.w-: w .i. 1 m___.J c: :a l I
- - r-PJ i,
[? p'W 3-l i l l j i]. [ -~ 3 i .s e pl e i ? J I } .i 6- -7 F 'i j ) t: i a---[)@b ri ? 3 jc i b l N r* d j rr c.s = l Z 5 y._t g a y l __ i l i i I I}}