ML19316A203
| ML19316A203 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 11/12/2019 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | NRC/NRR/DNRL |
| References | |
| Download: ML19316A203 (73) | |
Text
From:
Habib, Donald Sent:
Tuesday, November 12, 2019 8:22 AM To:
Vogtle PEmails
Subject:
FW: LAR-19-019: Draft to Support Nov. 21, 2019 Pre-submittal Meeting Attachments:
LAR-19-019 draft for PSM.pdf From: Humphrey, Mark Phillips <MPHUMPHR@southernco.com>
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2019 2:49 PM To: Habib, Donald <Donald.Habib@nrc.gov>; Santos, Cayetano <Cayetano.Santos@nrc.gov>
Cc: Grant, Eddie <X2EDGRAN@SOUTHERNCO.COM>; Chamberlain, Amy Christine
<ACCHAMBE@southernco.com>; Agee, Stephanie Y. <SYAGEE@southernco.com>; Arafeh, Yasmeen N.
<YNARAFEH@southernco.com>; Patel, Chandu <Chandu.Patel@nrc.gov>; Redd, Jason P.
<JPREDD@southernco.com>; Wu, Si <wu1s@westinghouse.com>; Harper, Zachary S
<harperzs@westinghouse.com>
Subject:
[External_Sender] LAR-19-019: Draft to Support Nov. 21, 2019 Pre-submittal Meeting Tanny and Don-As communicated by Yasmeen Arafeh in her email dated Nov. 5, 2019, SNC is proposing a pre-submittal meeting (PSM) regarding VEGP Units 3 and 4 LAR-19-019 [Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis] on Nov. 21, 2019. Please confirm this date is acceptable to the Staff.
SNC is providing the attached draft LAR enclosures for the Staffs consideration to support a 2-week review in advance of the proposed PSM. SNC plans to submit LAR-19-019 on Dec. 17, 2019 following the proposed PSM.
SNC appreciates the opportunity to discuss the draft LAR with the Staff on Nov. 21, 2019, if that date is acceptable. Please contact me with any questions you may have.
Respectfully, Mark P. Humphrey Licensing Supervisor Nuclear Development Southern Nuclear 3535 Colonnade Parkway Birmingham, AL 35243 O: 205.992.6452 C: 205.215.5152 mphumphr@southernco.com
Hearing Identifier:
Vogtle_COL_Docs_Public Email Number:
498 Mail Envelope Properties (BN7PR09MB254888F70B8AD234AEB15D5B97770)
Subject:
FW: LAR-19-019: Draft to Support Nov. 21, 2019 Pre-submittal Meeting Sent Date:
11/12/2019 8:21:30 AM Received Date:
11/12/2019 8:21:42 AM From:
Habib, Donald Created By:
Donald.Habib@nrc.gov Recipients:
"Vogtle PEmails" <Vogtle.PEmails@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
BN7PR09MB2548.namprd09.prod.outlook.com Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1664 11/12/2019 8:21:42 AM image001.gif 2058 LAR-19-019 draft for PSM.pdf 1890747 Options Priority:
Normal Return Notification:
No Reply Requested:
No Sensitivity:
Normal Expiration Date:
Southern Nuclear Operating Company ND-19-XXXX Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) Units 3 and 4 Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
(This Enclosure consists of 37 pages, including this cover page)
DRAFT VEGP) Units 3 and 4 VEGP) Units 3 nse Amendment nse Amendment Rega Conditions Inputs to C ons Inputs to Basis Basis (LAR L
-199-01 0
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 2 of 37 Table of Contents 1.
SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION 2.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION 3.
TECHNICAL EVALUATION 4.
REGULATORY EVALUATION 4.1.
Applicable Regulatory Requirements/Criteria 4.2.
Precedent 4.3.
Significant Hazards Consideration 4.4.
Conclusions 5.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 6.
REFERENCES DRAFT S
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 3 of 37 Pursuant to 10 CFR 52.98(c) and in accordance with 10 CFR 50.90, Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC) hereby requests an amendment to Combined License (COL) Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92 for Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) Units 3 and 4, respectively.
- 1.
SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION The proposed changes would revise the accidental air and surface temperatures for the main steam isolation valve (MSIV) compartments, accident thermal loads for the exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building, and normal thermal loads for the passive containment cooling system (PCS) tank in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). The proposed changed impact UFSAR Tier 2 and Tier 2* information in UFSAR Subsection 3H.3.3, and Tables 3.8.5-3, 3H.5-1, 3H.5-2, 3H.5-3, 3H.5-4 3H.5-5, 3H.5-6, 3H.5-7, 3H.5-8, 3H.5-9, 3H.5-11, 3H.5-12, and 3H.5-15.
This enclosure requests approval of the license amendment necessary to implement this change.
- 2.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION Design Function Related to the Activity As described in COL Appendix C, Section 3.3, the nuclear island structures include the containment and the shield and auxiliary buildings. The primary functions of the nuclear island structures are to provide support, protection, and separation for the seismic Category I mechanical and electrical equipment located in the nuclear island. The nuclear island structures are structurally designed to meet seismic Category I requirements. The nuclear island structures provide protection for the safety-related equipment against the consequences of either a postulated internal or external event. The nuclear island structures are designed to withstand the effects of natural phenomena such as hurricanes, floods, tornados, tsunamis, and earthquakes without loss of capability to perform safety functions. The nuclear island structures are designed to withstand the effects of postulated internal events such as fires and flooding without loss of capability to perform safety functions. The nuclear island structures include the containment (the steel containment vessel and the containment internal structures) and the shield and auxiliary buildings. The containment, shield and auxiliary buildings are structurally integrated on a common basemat which is embedded below the finished plant grade level.
The shield building is the structure that surrounds the containment vessel. The shield building cylinder is a composite steel and concrete (SC) structure except for the portion surrounded by the auxiliary building, which is reinforced concrete (RC). During normal operations, a primary function of the shield building is to provide shielding of the containment vessel and the radioactive systems and components located in the containment vessel. The shield building, in conjunction with the internal structures of the containment, provides the required shielding for the reactor coolant system and the other radioactive systems and components housed in the containment. The shield building also protects the containment vessel from external events. The shield building protects the containment vessel and the reactor coolant system from the effects of tornadoes and tornado produced missiles. The shield building protects the containment vessel and the reactor coolant system from external events, such as aircraft impact or tornado missile impact.
The shield building is an integral part of the passive containment cooling system. The passive containment cooling system air baffle is located in the upper annulus area. It is attached to the DRAFT S
7, 3H.5 7, 3H ent necessary to imp ent necessary tion 3.3, the nuclear ion 3.3, the nuc y buildings. The prima uildings. The prima protection, and sepa ion, and sepa nt located in the nuclea nt located in the t seismic Category I req t seismic Category afet afety-y related equipme ated equipme nal event. The nuclear event. The nuclear mena such as hurrican mena such as ity to perform safety fu ity to perform safety ects of postulated inte ects of postulated inte safety functions. T safety functions el and the co el and the c t, shield t, shield be be
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 4 of 37 cylindrical section of the containment vessel. The air inlets in the shield building provide the air flow for the passive containment cooling system. The passive containment cooling water storage tank (PCCWST), located on the roof of the shield building, provides water for external cooling of the containment.
The auxiliary building is RC and houses the safety-related mechanical and electrical equipment located outside the containment and shield buildings. The primary function of the auxiliary building is to provide protection and separation for the seismic Category I mechanical and electrical equipment located outside the containment building. The auxiliary building provides protection for the safety-related equipment against the consequences of either a postulated internal or external event. The auxiliary building also provides shielding for the radioactive equipment and piping that is housed within the building.
The auxiliary building is a seismic Category I reinforced concrete structure. It shares a common basemat with the containment building and the shield building. The auxiliary building wraps around approximately 70 percent of the circumference of the shield building. Floor slabs and the structural walls of the auxiliary building are structurally connected to the cylindrical section of the shield building.
As identified in UFSAR subsection 6.2.2, the PCS is an engineered safety features system. Its function is to reduce the containment temperature and pressure following a loss of coolant accident (LOCA) or main steam line break (MSLB) accident inside the containment by removing thermal energy from the containment atmosphere. The passive containment cooling system also serves as the means of transferring heat to the safety-related ultimate heat sink for other events resulting in a significant increase in containment pressure and temperature. The passive containment cooling system also provides a source of safety-related makeup water to the spent fuel pool in the event of a prolonged loss of normal spent fuel pool cooling.
As identified in UFSAR Subsection 6.2.2.2.3, the PCS tank is incorporated into the shield building structure above the containment vessel and is filled with demineralized water for the passive containment cooling function.
Background and Description of the Activity Change 1 - Design Temperature for Thermal Gradient The thermal loads are design basis loads in the AP1000 licensing basis for seismic Category I (SC-I) structures. The design temperatures (both normal and accident) for thermal gradient for the nuclear island critical sections are defined in UFSAR Table 3H.5-1.
Change 1A - PCS Tank Wall Normal Temperature There is an inconsistency of normal temperature in the PCS tank between the UFSAR Subsection 3H.3.3 & Table 3H.5-1 and other sections of the licensing basis. UFSAR Subsection 3H.3.3 identifies that the water in the PCS tank is assumed to be at 70°F when the outside air temperature is 115°F for normal thermal loading. Similarly, UFSAR Table 3H.5-1 specifies a PCS tank wall inside design temperature of 70°F and outside temperature of 115°F for determining the thermal gradient across the PCS tank walls.
However, the Technical Specifications show that the minimum PCS tank water temperature is 40°F and the maximum PCS water temperature is 120°F as identified in the Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.6.6.1. UFSAR Table 6.2.2-1, Passive Containment Cooling System Performance Parameters, also identifies that the DRAFT cti cti oncrete structure oncrete st d building d bu
. The auxil The ce of the shield ce of building buildi rally connected to the rally connected to the he he PCS P
is an engineer an en emperature and press mperature and pre reak (MSLB) accident i MSLB) accident i nt atmosphere nt atmosphere. The pas The pas ng heat to the safety ng heat to the sa
-re rease in containment rease in containmen also provides a source so provides a source prolonged loss of norm prolonged loss of norm R Subsection 6.2.2.2.3, R Subsection 6.2.2.2 containment vessel containment vessel unction.
unctio ption of t ption of t D
tur tur
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 5 of 37 minimum PCS tank water temperature is 40°F and the maximum water temperature is 120°F. The structural design of the PCS tank walls takes a conservative deterministic assumption to the maximum thermal gradient across the walls by using thermal gradient of 40°F (inside) / 115°F (outside) and 40°F (inside) / -40°F (outside). Therefore, the temperature for normal thermal loading in the PCS tank needs to be changed from 70°F to 40°F on the inside in UFSAR Subsection 3H.3.3 and Table 3H.5-1.
Change 1B - Auxiliary Building Exterior Walls Below Grade and Basemat Accidental Thermal UFSAR Table 3H.5-1 defines temperatures for the auxiliary building exterior walls below grade and basemat. There is an inconsistency of accident thermal loads for the exterior walls below grade and basemat in auxiliary building between UFSAR Table 3H.5-1 and UFSAR Table 3D.5-4, which identifies abnormal accident environment. As identified in UFSAR Table 3D.5-5, the accident environments are the same as the abnormal environments for the auxiliary building rooms with exterior walls below grade. UFSAR Table 3H.5-1 currently does not require considering accident thermal in the exterior walls below grade and basemat in auxiliary building. However, UFSAR Table 3D.5-4 and Table 3D.5-5 define the abnormal and accident environments outside containment as a function of equipment location and shows that accident thermal temperatures exist in auxiliary building rooms, including rooms next to exterior walls below grade and the basemat. Per UFSAR Table 3D.5-1 and UFSAR Figures 1.2-4, 1.2-5, and 1.2-6, the auxiliary building exterior walls below grade and basemat are in environmental Zones 2, 6 and 7. Per UFSAR Tables 3D.5-4 and 3D.5-5, the governing accident temperature in Zones 2, 6 and 7 is 140°F for rooms with exterior walls below grade due to either a loss of heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) or loss of AC power. Since the loss of HVAC and loss of AC power are considered events in the auxiliary building, the exterior walls below grade and basemat in auxiliary building need to be designed for the accident thermal gradient as result of those events. For the purposes of determining thermal gradients, an outside temperature (below grade) of 50°F is considered in accordance with America Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineer (ASHRAE) requirements.
Therefore, UFSAR Table 3H.5-1 needs to be updated to show accident temperature of 140°F on the inside of the below grade exterior walls and basemat and 50°F on the outside of the below grade exterior walls and basemat. In addition, since the temperatures defined in this row of UFSAR Table 3H.5-1 are specifically for the auxiliary building exterior walls below grade and basemat, it is proposed to add Auxiliary Building in the remark column of the table.
As result of the change of accident thermal gradient on exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building, the governing load combinations and demands for the auxiliary building basemat critical sections identified in UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3, and for Wall 1 in UFSAR Tables 3H.5-2 and 3H.5-3 are impacted. The changes to basemat in UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 are discussed in detail in Change 2A below. The changes to Wall 1 in UFSAR Tables 3H.5-2 and 3H.5-3 affecting Wall 1 are discussed in detail in Change 2B below.
DRAFT tween twee cident envi ciden nts are the sa nts are t with exterior walls be with exterior w dering accident therma dering accident ther ng. However, UFSAR T ng. However, UFSAR T environments outside vironment at accident thermal tem ent th xt to exterior walls belo xt to exterior walls AR Figures Figures 1.2 1.2-4, 1.2 4, 1.2-5 nd basemat are in env emat are in en 3D.5 3D.5-5, 5, the governing a gove ith exterior walls below ith exterior walls b ditioning (HVAC) ditioning (HVAC) or los or lo re considered events in nsidered events in mat in auxiliary buildin mat in auxiliary sult of those events. Fo sult of those events.
perature (below grade perature (below grade ating, Refrigerating ating, Refrigerat AR Table 3H AR Table 3H of the b of the b er er
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 6 of 37 Change 2 - Critical Section Tables Update for Auxiliary Building Basemat, Concrete Walls, and Shield Building Roof UFSAR Section 3.8 and Appendix 3H list critical sections of SC-I structures in the nuclear island.
The critical section tables in the UFSAR show demands and/or capacities of the critical sections.
During AP1000 design certification, a thermal note was added to some of the critical section tables. The thermal note clarifies that the design of the critical section tables considered thermal loads even though the required reinforcement in the tables do not reflect values under combined seismic and normal thermal loads. The combination of seismic loads and normal/accident thermal loads were evaluated in the design calculations to confirm the design meet ACI 349-01 requirements. However, the critical section tables did not reflect demands under combined seismic and thermal when the AP1000 design was certified. As part of efforts of updating temperatures in UFSAR Table 3H.5-1 for structural design as discussed in Change 1, the critical section tables for the walls and basemat are revisited and are proposed to remove the thermal note to show demands under combined seismic and thermal loads. The revised tables with inclusion of combined seismic and thermal load combinations provide quantification of that load combination within the UFSAR to clearly demonstrate compliance with load combinations in ACI 349-01 and UFSAR Table 3.8.4-2. The proposed changes to the tables by removing the thermal note can also simplify the presentation of the critical section designs in the licensing basis and can facilitate future understanding of how the loads are applied. Therefore, it is proposed to update the critical section tables of auxiliary building walls and basemat to reflect the demands under the load combinations with inclusion of combined seismic and thermal load combinations, and to delete the corresponding thermal note.
In addition to the inclusion of combined seismic and thermal load combinations, the demand changes in the critical section tables are also caused by refined meshing of local finite element models, localized detailing changes, and expanded load combinations. The capacities are also updated to match the latest design for some of the critical sections as discussed below.
Change 2A - Basemat Critical Section Table Update (Table 3.8.5-3)
UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 shows the required reinforcement and provided reinforcement in the basemat at two critical locations. UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 does not reflect the demands under load combinations with seismic and thermal loads combined as identified in the thermal note (Note 6). The basemat is in the rooms which are subject to 140°F of accident thermal in the loss of AC power or loss of HVAC, and the basemat is exposed to soil/rock which has a temperature of 50°F. Therefore, the basemat is subject to accident thermal gradient. The combined seismic and thermal loads impact the demands of the basemat in UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3.
In addition to the combined seismic and thermal loads, the following changes in the design documents contribute to the demand changes in UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3:
Updated basemat design based on the revised liftoff and basic stress analyses utilizing the updated nuclear island finite element model Update of top reinforcement clear cover due to construction requirements The current calculation has a criterion of keeping a minimum of 20% margin in the reinforcement design of the basemat. The revised design calculation only keeps the criteria of 20% margin to the reinforcement design at areas specified in UFSAR DRAFT As As discusse discu are proposed are pro hermal loads.
ermal load The inations provide quant inations provide q trate compliance with trate compliance with posed changes to the osed chang of the critical section de e critical ow the loads are applie ow the loads are ary building walls and y building walls an sion of combined seism f combined seism rmal note rmal n combined seismic and combined seismic a n tables are also caus tables are also caus g changes, and expand ges, and expand test design for some of test design for so
- Basemat Critical Sec Basemat Critical Sec D
3.8.5 3.8.5-3 shows the ws t critical locat critical loca ations w ations w T
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 7 of 37 Figure 3.8.5-3 and calculates minimum required reinforcement in rest of locations in accordance with ACI 349-01 to remove unnecessary conservatism.
Furthermore, the demands in current UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 do not include a small portion of basemat (between column line L to 5' east of column line L and shield building to column line 9.2) as shown in UFSAR Figure 3.8.5-3 Sheets 5-7. However, the table does not identify this exception. Therefore, it is proposed to clarify this information through a note in the table. The proposed markup of UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 is consistent with the scope of the current UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3, which does not include the small region of basemat.
Change 2B - Wall 1 Critical Section Table Update (Tables 3H.5-2 and 3H.5-3)
There are two critical section tables for Wall 1 in the licensing basis, UFSAR Tables 3H.5-2 and 3H.5-3. UFSAR Table 3H.5-2 for Wall 1 shows the moments and forces in different segments along the height from EL. 66'-6" to 180'-0". UFSAR Table 3H.5-3 identifies both the provided and required reinforcement in Wall 1 under various load combinations without seismic and thermal loads combined as identified in the thermal note (Note 2). The required reinforcement in UFSAR Table 3H.5-3 is calculated based on the demands in UFSAR Table 3H.5-2. Wall 1 is an exterior wall and is next to the Spent Fuel Pool (SFP).
Therefore, Wall 1 is subject to both normal and accident thermal loads. The combined seismic and thermal loads impact the demands of Wall 1 in UFSAR Tables 3H.5-2 and 3H.5-3.
In addition to the combined seismic and thermal loads, the following changes in the design documents contribute to the changes in values in UFSAR Tables 3H.5-2 and 3H.5-3:
Change of accident thermal for auxiliary building walls below grade from Not Required to 140°F on the inside surface and 50°F on the outside surface of the wall, as discussed in Change 1B above The current calculations use the basic load combinations for SC-I structures as defined in UFSAR Tables 3.8.4-1 and 3.8.4-2. The updated calculations expand the basic load combinations by considering the directionality of the seismic loads combined with thermal accident pressure, and PRHA loads. The expanded load combinations were performed to document explicit quantification of the possible combinations and to simplify explanation for future reference.
The current tables are based on calculations that divide the wall into segments to determine the required reinforcement shown by contour plots by means of a finite element analysis path operation. In some locations, localized regions of some walls were updated with refined meshing in the finite element analysis. The refined meshing was performed to simplify the assessment of peak demand from localized loading conditions. The updated calculations use design forces and moments taken from the global finite element model and calculate the required area of steel by considering the load combinations for each wall element, which provide more accurate results.
The current calculations use a conservative representative thermal reduction factor. The updated calculations utilize a thermal reduction factor by elevation, considering reinforcement specific to each wall zone. The local thermal reduction factors better represent the level of cracking in the wall section and provide a more accurate thermal demand.
DRAFT s 3 s 3 T
ensing ba ensing t the momen he m 0". UFSAR Table 0". UFSAR 1 under various load c 1 under various l dentified in the therma dentified in the therm 3H.5 H.5-3 is calculated ba calculated ba rior wall and is next to wall and i normal no and accident t nd ac the demands of Wall he demands of Wa seismic and thermal lo seismic and ther the chang the changes in values es in valu ccident thermal for aux ident thermal for aux o 140°F on the inside s
°F on the inside s discussed in Change 1B discussed in Cha urrent urren calculations use culations us ed in UFSAR Tables ed in UFSAR Tables ic load combinat ic load combin with therm with therm s were s were
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 8 of 37 Furthermore, as result of revised design calculations mentioned above, the required shear reinforcement in UFSAR Table 3H.5-3 is changed from Not Required (NR) to 0.17 in2/ft between EL. 100'-0" and EL. 135'-3". Accordingly, the shear reinforcement of #4@6"x6" is added to Wall 1 between EL. 100'-0" and EL. 135'-3". Since the current UFSAR Table 3H.5-3 shows that there is no shear reinforcement provided between EL. 100'-0" and EL.
135'-3", UFSAR Table 3H.5-3 is revised to show the provided shear reinforcement EL.
100'-0" and EL. 135'-3".
Change 2C - Wall 7.3 Critical Section Table Update (Tables 3H.5-4 and 3H.5-5)
There are two critical section tables for Wall 7.3 in the licensing basis, including UFSAR Tables 3H.5-4 and 3H.5-5. UFSAR Table 3H.5-4 for Wall 7.3 shows the moments and forces in different segments along the height from EL. 66'-6" to roof. UFSAR Table 3H.5-5 for Wall 7.3 shows the required reinforcement under governing load combinations without seismic and thermal loads combined as identified in the thermal note (Note 1) and provided reinforcement. The required reinforcement in UFSAR Table 3H.5-5 is calculated based on the demands in UFSAR Table 3H.5-4. Even though there is no thermal load on Wall 7.3, thermal loads are applied at other locations in the nuclear island, and the thermal induced deformation in the nuclear island can cause thermal stresses in Wall 7.3. The latest Wall 7.3 calculation includes the load combinations with combined seismic and thermal loads. Therefore, UFSAR Tables 3H.5-4 and 3H.5-5 are revised to show those load combinations and their results.
In addition to the combined seismic and thermal loads, the following changes in the design documents contribute to the changes in values in UFSAR Tables 3H.5-4 and 3H.5-5:
The current calculations use the basic load combinations for SC-I structures as defined in UFSAR Tables 3.8.4-1 and 3.8.4-2. The updated calculations expand the basic load combinations by considering the directionality of the seismic loads combined with thermal, accident pressure, and PRHA loads. The expanded load combinations were performed to document explicit quantification of the possible combinations and to simplify explanation for future reference.
The current tables are based on calculations that divide the wall into segments to determine the required reinforcement shown by contour plots by means of a finite element analysis path operation. In some locations, localized regions of some walls were updated with refined meshing in the finite element analysis. The refined meshing was performed to simplify the assessment of peak demand from localized loading conditions. The updated calculations use design forces and moments taken from the global finite element model and calculate the required area of steel by considering the load combinations for each wall element, which provide more accurate results.
The current calculations use a conservative representative thermal reduction factor. The updated calculations utilize a thermal reduction factor by elevation, considering reinforcement specific to each wall zone. The local thermal reduction factors better represent the level of cracking in the wall section and provide a more accurate thermal demand.
Change of concrete reinforcement cover from 1 1/2" to 2" to accommodate embedment plates DRAFT l l 66' 66'-6" to 6"
under govern under entified in the therm ntified in th ment in UFSAR Table ment in UFSAR T 5-4. Even though there
- 4. Even though ther r locations in the nuclea locations in the nuclea nd can cause thermal can cause the load combinations the load comb Tables 3H Tables 3H.5-4 and 3H 4 and ults.
seismic and thermal loa seismic and ther the changes in values the changes in valu alculations use the bas culations use the ba FSAR Tables 3.8.4 R Tables 3.8.4-1 load combinations by load combinatio ned with thermal, accid ned with thermal, acc binations were perform binations were perform ations and to sim ations and to s nt tables are nt tables ar he requ he requ sis sis
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 9 of 37 Furthermore, the current design of Wall 7.3 has T headed shear reinforcement of
- 6@12"x12" between EL. 155'-6" and the roof. The corresponding provided area of reinforcement is 0.44 in2/ft and is larger than the required reinforcement of 0.38 in2/ft. The design proposes to change the #6@12"x12" T headed shear reinforcement #4@6"x6" conventional shear reinforcement between EL. 155'-6" and the roof to accommodate the construction need. The corresponding provided area of reinforcement in the revised design is 0.80 in2/ft. UFSAR Table 3H.5-5 currently shows the shear reinforcement is 0.44 in2/ft. Therefore, UFSAR Table 3H.5-5 is revised to show shear reinforcement area of 0.80 in2/ft between EL. 155'-6" and the roof.
Change 2D - Wall L Critical Section Table Update (Tables 3H.5-6 and 3H.5-7)
There are two critical section tables for Wall L in the licensing basis, including UFSAR Tables 3H.5-6 and 3H.5-7. UFSAR Table 3H.5-6 for Wall L shows the moments and forces in different segments along the height from EL. 117'-6" to 154'-2". UFSAR Table 3H.5-7 for Wall L shows both the provided and required reinforcement under governing load combinations without seismic and thermal loads combined as identified in the thermal note (Note 1). The required reinforcement in UFSAR Table 3H.5-7 is calculated based on the demands in UFSAR Table 3H.5-6. Wall L is the east wall of the east MSIV compartment which is subject to high temperature during accident. The combined seismic and thermal loads impact the demands of Wall L in UFSAR Tables 3H.5-6 and 3H.5-7.
In addition to the combined seismic and thermal loads, the following changes in the design documents can also impact the values in UFSAR Tables 3H.5-6 and 3H.5-7:
The current calculations use the basic load combinations for SC-I structures as defined in UFSAR Tables 3.8.4-1 and 3.8.4-2. The updated calculations expand the basic load combinations by considering the directionality of the seismic loads combined with thermal, accident pressure, and PRHA loads. The expanded load combinations were performed to document explicit quantification of the possible combinations and to simplify explanation for future reference.
The current tables are based on calculations that divide the wall into segments to determine the required reinforcement shown by contour plots by means of a finite element analysis path operation. In some locations, localized regions of some walls were updated with refined meshing in the finite element analysis. The refined meshing was performed to simplify the assessment of peak demand from localized loading conditions. The updated calculations use design forces and moments taken from the global finite element model and calculate the required area of steel by considering the load combinations for each wall element, which provide more accurate results.
The current calculations use a conservative representative thermal reduction factor. The updated calculations utilize a thermal reduction factor by elevation, considering reinforcement specific to each wall zone. The local thermal reduction factors better represent the level of cracking in the wall section and provide a more accurate thermal demand.
Change of concrete reinforcement cover from 1 1/2" to 2" to accommodate embedment plates Update of MSIV accident pressure and steam generator accident pressure as result of previous licensing amendment request LAR-17-028.
DRAFT s 3 s 3 T
licensin licens Wall L shows Wall L 17'7'-6" to 154' 6" to 15 -2".
ired reinforcement un ired reinforceme ds combined as identifi ds combined as ident FSAR Table 3H.5 FSAR Table
-7 is s L is the east wall of th the east during accident. The co during acciden L in UFSAR Tables 3H in UFSAR Tables ismic and thermal loads d thermal load t the values in UFSAR t the values in UF ulations use the basic ulations use the ba SAR Tables 3.8.4 AR Tables 3.8.4-1 an an ad combinations by co mbinations by co d with thermal, acciden d with thermal, a nations were performed nations were perform binations and to simpli binations and to simpli rrent tables are b rrent tables are e the require e the require alysis p alysis p at at
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 10 of 37 Furthermore, the current design of Wall L has T headed shear reinforcement of
- 3@12"x12" between EL. 135'-3" and EL. 154'-2". The corresponding provided area of reinforcement is 0.11 in2/ft and is larger than the required reinforcement of 0.01 in2/ft. As result of revised design calculations mentioned above, the required shear reinforcement is changed from 0.01 in2/ft to 0.13 in2/ft between EL. 135'-3" and EL. 154'-2". Therefore, the shear reinforcement is changed from #3@12"x12" T headed shear reinforcement to
- 4@6"x6" conventional shear reinforcement between EL. 135'-3" and EL. 154'-2. The corresponding provided area of #4@6"x6" shear reinforcement in the revised design is 0.80 in2/ft. UFSAR Table 3H.5-7 currently shows the shear reinforcement is 0.11 in2/ft.
Therefore, UFSAR Table 3H.5-7 is revised to show shear reinforcement area of 0.80 in2/ft between EL. 135'-3" and EL. 154'-2.
Change 2E - Shield Building Roof Critical Section Table Update (Tables 3H.5-9 and 3H.5-
- 15)
There are two critical section tables for the shield building roof in the licensing basis, including UFSAR Tables 3H.5-9 and 3H.5-15. UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 Sheets 1-2c show the demands and capacities of the air inlet and tension ring of the shield building under load combinations without seismic and thermal combined as identified in the thermal note (Note 2). UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 3 and UFSAR Table 3H.5-15 show the demands and capacities of the PCS tank exterior wall and conical roof of the shield building under load combinations with seismic and normal thermal combined. The shield building roof structures are adjacent to the PCS tank and upper annulus. The PCS tank has a minimum water temperature of 40°F and maximum water temperature of 120°F during normal operation. The PCS tank exterior wall is also subject to atmosphere temperature of -40 °F in winter and atmosphere temperature of 115 °F in summer. The tension ring and air inlet are next to the upper annulus interior, which is on the outside of the air baffle, are subject to 165 °F of air temperature on the inside and 115 °F of atmosphere temperature on the outside during accident. The conical roof is above the containment vessel and is subject to air which can be heated up after passing through the bottom of the air baffle and beginning to rise. Therefore, the shield building roof structures are subject to both normal and accident thermal loads. The combined seismic and thermal loads impact the demands of shield building roof in UFSAR Tables 3H.5-9 and 3H.5-15. It is proposed to revise Tables 3H.5-9 and 3H.5-15 with inclusion of combined seismic and normal/accident thermal load combinations, and remove the thermal note for the purpose of:
Providing quantification of that load combination within the licensing basis Simplifying the presentation of the critical section designs in the licensing basis.
DRAFT ble Update ble Up (T
T hield building roof in hield building ro UFSAR Table 3H.5 UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 d tension ring of the sh d tension ring of the sh al combined as identifie ombined a nd UFSAR Table 3H.5 nd UFSAR Ta r wall and conical roof o wall and conical ro d normal thermal com rmal thermal com PCS tank and upper an PCS tank and upper an F and maximum wate F and maximum k exterior wall is also su k exterior wall is also here temperature of 11 ere temperature of 11 er annulus interior, whi ulus interior, whi temperature on the ins temperature on t g accident. The conica g accident. The conic can be heated up a can be heated up a se. Therefore, th se. Therefore, mal loads. T mal loads. T oof in oof in H
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 11 of 37 Change 3 - Spent Fuel Pool West Wall Critical Section Table Update (Table 3H.5-8)
The west wall of Spent Fuel Pool (SFP) (along column line L-2) is a critical section in the licensing basis. UFSAR Figure 3H.5-10 shows an elevation of the west wall of the SFP and element numbers in the finite element model. UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 shows the demands and capacities of the SFP west wall at seven critical locations. Revision of the design calculations to clarify detail and document explicit quantification of the load combinations resulted in the following changes which impact the demands in UFSAR Table 3H.5-8:
The accident thermal loads are combined with seismic loads in the load combinations for SFP wall to provide quantification of that load combination within the UFSAR to clearly demonstrate compliance with load combinations in ACI 349-01 and UFSAR Tables 3.8.4-1 and 3.8.4-2.
The SFP finite element analysis (FEA) model is refined by changing the element size from 5' x 5' to 1' x 1' to allow the averaging of elements to occur to aid in realistic representations of stress at discontinuities such as corners. The refined meshes are averaged back out to elements shown in UFSAR Figure 3H.5-10.
The boundary conditions in the SFP FEA model are refined. In addition to the current model with fixed-fixed boundary condition, a new model with fixed-pined boundary condition was created to accommodate the changes of floor to wall connections as approved in LAR 009. The fixed-pinned model can capture the slight rotation occurred at floor to wall connection due to the position of the floor dowel in relation to floor bottom liner plate and its ability to transfer force via a non-contact lap splice type mechanism. The results from the two models are enveloped to conservatively capture potential behavior of the floor to wall connection.
Change 4 - Critical Section Tables Update for Auxiliary Building Floors Change 4A - Composite Floor Critical Section Table Update (Table 3H.5-11)
UFSAR Table 3H.5-11 shows the demands and capacities of the composite floor between column lines M and P at EL. 135'-3". The floor design considers the dead, live, construction, extreme environmental and other applicable loads. Revision of the design calculations to clarify detail and document explicit quantification of the load combinations resulted in the following changes are made which impact the demands in UFSAR Table 3H.5-11:
Modified seismic mass by counting 25% of live load instead of 100% of the live
- load, Refined floor vertical seismic acceleration, Account for air handling unit loads.
Change 4B - Tagging Room Ceiling Critical Section Table Update (Table 3H.5-12)
UFSAR Table 3H.5-12 shows the demands and capacities of the tagging room ceiling floor, which is a cast-in-place concrete placed on precast concrete floor. Revision to the design calculations to better capture the behavior of the structure and to incorporate revised design changes as discussed below results in impact on the demands in UFSAR Table 3H.5-12:
Refined analysis to more accurately account for 2-way behavior of the slab Change as approved in LAR-14-003.
Therefore, it is proposed to revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-11 to match the latest design documents.
DRAFT hang han o aid in r o aid meshes are meshe e refined. In addition t e refined. In add del with fixed del with fi
-pined bo ed b or to wall connections r to wall con e slight rotation occurre ht rotatio n relation to floor botto n relation to floo plice type mechanism.
ce type mechanism pture potential behavio potential behavio s Update for Auxiliary B s Update for Aux RA site Floor Critical Sectio te Floor Critical Sectio RA 5-11 shows the deman 11 shows the deman M and P at EL. 135' M and P at EL.
extreme environmenta extreme environment o clarify detail and d o clarify detail a following chang following chan mic mic
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 12 of 37 Licensing Basis Change Descriptions:
Proposed Licensing Basis Changes Text, Table, or Figure Description of the Proposed Change UFSAR Subsection 3H.3.3 x
The second paragraph under subheading Operating Thermal Loads (To) is proposed to be revised to identify that the structural design of PCS tank also conservatively assumes that the temperature on the inside of the PCS tank walls is 40°F when the outside air temperature is postulated to be at 115°F.
UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 x
In the critical location between column lines K to L and shield building to column line 11:
o UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 shows the required top reinforcement along east-west direction is 1.5 in2/ft. It is proposed to change the top reinforcement from 1.5 in2/ft to Note 5 because the governing locations for the design is in other segments as shown in UFSAR Figure 3.8.5-3 Sheets 3-6.
o UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 shows the required bottom reinforcement along east-west direction is 1.6 in2/ft. It is proposed to change the top reinforcement from 1.6 in2/ft to 1.85 in2/ft.
o UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 shows the required shear reinforcement in this critical section is 0.23 in2/ft. It is proposed to change the shear reinforcement from 0.23 in2/ft to 0.24 in2/ft.
x In the critical location between column lines 1 to 2 and column lines K-2 to N:
o UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 shows the required top reinforcement along north-south direction in central zone is 2.72 in2/ft. It is proposed to change the top reinforcement from 2.72 in2/ft to 3.11 in2/ft.
o UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 shows the amount of bottom reinforcement required along east-west direction is low per Note 5 in the table.
The required bottom reinforcement along east-west direction becomes 1.85 in2/ft in design finalization. It is proposed to replace Note 5 with 1.85 in2/ft in the table for the required bottom reinforcement.
x It is also proposed to remove Note 6 from Table 3.8.5-3 because the demands in the table reflect load combinations with seismic and thermal loads combined. The superscript of Note 6 on top of the table next to Required is removed.
x It is proposed to add a clarification note (Note 6) in current UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 to clarify that the demands in the table do not include a small portion of basemat (between column DRAFT n co n co 3.8.5 3.8.5-3 show 3
along east along east-west dir w
to change the top rein to change the top ote 5 because the gove ote 5 because the gov is in other segments as s in other seg 5-3 Sheets 3 eets 3-6.
-3 reinforcement along inforcement along is proposed to cha proposed to cha in2/ft to 1.8 t to 1.85 in2/f/f o
UFSAR Tabl UFSAR reinforceme reinforcem proposed proposed in2/ft t x
In the critic the c lines K lines K 2 o
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 13 of 37 line L to 5' east of column line L and shield building to column line 9.2) as shown in UFSAR Figure 3.8.5-3 Sheets 5-7. The superscript of the new Note 6 is added next to Column line K to L and from Shield Building to Col. Line 11 in the table. F UFSAR Table 3H.5-1 x
It is proposed to revise to identify that the water in the PCS tank is assumed to be 40°F when the outside air temperature is 115°F for determining normal thermal loading on the PCS tank and affected structures for summer conditions.
x It is proposed to revise to show 140°F accident thermal on the inside surface of the auxiliary building exterior walls below grade and basemat to correspond with the accident temperatures for equipment qualification.
x It is proposed to revise to show 50°F accident thermal on the outside surface of the auxiliary building exterior walls below grade and basemat to correspond with the ASHRAE requirements UFSAR Table 3H.5-2 x
In Table 3H.5-2 between EL. 135'-3" and EL. 180'-0":
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required vertical reinforcement from D + L + H + Ta to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required horizontal reinforcement from 1.05D + 1.3L + 1.3H +
1.2To to D+F+L+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym and 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
x In Table 3H.5-2 between EL. 100'-0" and EL. 135'-3":
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required vertical reinforcement from D + L + H + Ta to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required horizontal reinforcement from D + L + H + Ta to D+F+L+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
x In Table 3H.5-2 between EL. 82'-6" and EL. 100'-0":
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required vertical reinforcement from 1.05D + 1.3L + 1.3H +
1.2To to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required horizontal reinforcement from D + L + Es to 0.9D+0.9F+1.3L+1.2To+1.3H+1.3Ro and 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
x In Table 3H.5-2 between EL. 66'-6" and EL. 82'-6":
DRAFT orre orre t qualifica t qua o show 50°F a o show e
e auxiliary building auxiliary bu mat mat to correspond w espon 2 between EL. 135' between EL
-3" proposed to change sed to orresponding demand orresponding de vertical ertical reinforcemen reinforceme 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa 9D+F+H+Es+Pa o
It is proposed t proposed t corresponding correspo horizontal r horizonta 1.2T 1.2To to to 0.9D x
In Table 3H Tabl o
I
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 14 of 37 o
It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required vertical reinforcement from D + L - Es and 0.9D + Es to 0.9D+F+H+Ro+To+Es o
It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required horizontal reinforcement from 0.9D + Es to 0.9D+F+H+Ro+To+Es.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-3 x
In Table 3H.5-3 between EL. 135'-3" and EL. 180'-0":
o It is proposed to change the required vertical reinforcement from 3.48 in2/ft to 3.65 in2/ft on the outside face, and from 1.94 in2/ft to 2.76 in2/ft on the inside face of the wall.
o It is proposed to change the required horizontal reinforcement from 2.65 in2/ft to 3.08 in2/ft on the outside face, and from 1.52 in2/ft to 2.51 in2/ft on the inside face of the wall.
x In Table 3H.5-3 between EL. 100'-0" and EL. 135'-3":
o It is proposed to change the required vertical reinforcement from 1.88 in2/ft to 3.00 in2/ft on the outside face, and from 1.77 in2/ft to 3.00 in2/ft on the inside face of the wall.
o It is proposed to change the required shear reinforcement from NR to 0.17 in2/ft, and provided shear reinforcement from None to 0.80 in2/ft.
x In Table 3H.5-3 between EL. 82'-6" and EL. 100'-0":
o It is proposed to change the required vertical reinforcement from 1.42 in2/ft to 3.04 in2/ft on the outside face, and from 1.01 in2/ft to 3.04 in2/ft on the inside face of the wall.
o It is proposed to change the required horizontal reinforcement from 0.70 in2/ft to 1.55 in2/ft on the outside face, and from 0.70 in2/ft to 1.25 in2/ft on the inside face of the wall.
o It is proposed to change the required shear reinforcement from 0.003 in2/ft to 0.03 in2/ft.
x In Table 3H.5-3 between EL. 66'-6" and EL. 82'-6":
o It is proposed to change the required vertical reinforcement from 2.29 in2/ft to 3.37 in2/ft on the outside face, and from 1.87 in2/ft to 2.68 in2/ft on the inside face of the wall.
o It is proposed to change the required horizontal reinforcement from 0.87 in2/ft to 0.95 in2/ft on the outside face, and from 0.87 in2/ft to 0.95 in2/ft on the inside face of the wall.
DRAFT 48 48 om 1.94 om 1 wall.
wall.
d to change the d to change nt from 2.65 in nt from 2.65 in2/ft to ace, and from 1.52 in ace, and from 1.52 in2/
ace of the wall.
ce of the wa 5-3 between EL. 100' etween is proposed to ch is proposed reinforcement from 1 einforcement from outside face, and f tside face, and f inside face of the de face of the o
It is propos It is p reinforceme reinforcem shear shear rei rei x
In Table 3H.5 In Ta o
It r
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 15 of 37 o
It is proposed to change the required shear reinforcement from 0.27 in2/ft to 0.56 in2/ft.
x It is also proposed to remove the content of Note 2 and change it to Not used. in Table 3H.5-3 because the demands in the table reflect load combinations with seismic and thermal loads combined.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-4 x
In Table 3H.5-4 between EL. 155'-6" and roof:
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required vertical reinforcement from 1.05D + 1.3L + 1.2To to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required horizontal reinforcement from 1.05D + 1.3L + 1.2To to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
x In Table 3H.5-4 between EL. 135'-3" and EL. 155'-6":
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required vertical reinforcement from 0.9D Es to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required horizontal reinforcement from D + L - Es to D+F+L+H+Ro+To+Es.
x In Table 3H.5-4 between EL. 117'-6" and EL. 135'-3":
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required vertical reinforcement from 0.9D Es to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required horizontal reinforcement from D + L - Es to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
x In Table 3H.5-4 between EL. 100'-0" and EL. 117'-6":
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required vertical reinforcement from 0.9D Es to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required horizontal reinforcement from D + L - Es to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
x In Table 3H.5-4 between EL. 82'-6" and EL. 100'-0":
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required DRAFT a+R a+R hange the hang demands whi demand orcement from 1.0 orcement fro H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+
H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra between EL. 135' between E
-3" an 3" an roposed to change the posed to ch esponding demands ding d ertical reinforcement ertical reinforc 0.9D
.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+T F+H+Es+Pa+
o It is proposed to c s proposed to c corresponding esponding horizontal re horizonta D+F+L+H+
D+F+L+H x
In Table 3H.5 In Table 3H.5-4 o
It is p cor
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 16 of 37 vertical reinforcement from 0.9D Es to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required horizontal reinforcement from D + L - Es to D+F+L+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
x In Table 3H.5-4 between EL. 66'-6" and EL. 82'-6":
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required vertical reinforcement from 0.9D Es to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required horizontal reinforcement from D + L - Es to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-5 x
In Table 3H.5-5 between EL. 155'-6" and roof:
o It is proposed to change the required horizontal reinforcement from 3.96 in2/ft to 4.06 in2/ft.
o It is proposed to change the provided shear reinforcement from 0.44 in2/ft to 0.80 in2/ft.
x In Table 3H.5-5 between EL. 135'-3" and EL. 155'-6":
o It is proposed to change the required vertical reinforcement from 3.59 in2/ft to 3.64 in2/ft.
x In Table 3H.5-5 between EL. 117'-6" and EL. 135'-3":
o It is proposed to change the required horizontal reinforcement from 2.03 in2/ft to 2.10 in2/ft.
o It is proposed to change the required vertical reinforcement from 2.63 in2/ft to 3.10 in2/ft.
x In Table 3H.5-5 between EL. 100'-0" and EL. 117'-6":
o It is proposed to change the required horizontal reinforcement from 2.29 in2/ft to 2.34 in2/ft.
x In Table 3H.5-5 between EL. 82'-6" and EL. 100'-0":
o It is proposed to change the required vertical reinforcement from 2.08 in2/ft to 2.33 in2/ft.
x In Table 3H.5-5 between EL. 66'-6" and EL. 82'-6":
o It is proposed to change the required vertical reinforcement from 0.98 in2/ft to 1.52 in2/ft.
x It is also proposed to remove the content of Note 1 and change it to Not used. in Table 3H.5-5 because the demands in the table reflect load combinations with seismic and thermal loads combined.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-6 x
In Table 3H.5-6 between EL. 135'-3" and EL. 154'-2":
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required vertical reinforcement from 0.9D + Es + Pa + Yj to 0.9D+F+L+H+Ro+To+Es.
DRAFT a+R a+R hange th hange demands whi demand forcement from orcement
+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj
+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Y between EL. 155' between E
-6" an 6" an proposed to change oposed to orcement from 3.96 in ment from 2
is proposed to c is proposed reinforcement from 0.4 einforcement from 0 able 3H.5 H.5-5 between E between E o
It is proposed s proposed reinforcement reinforce x
In Table 3H.5 In Table
-5 be 5 b o
It is pr It is pr reinfo o
It x
In Ta In x
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 17 of 37 o
It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required horizontal reinforcement from 0.9D + Es + Pa + Yj to 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym.
x In Table 3H.5-6 between EL. 117'-6" and EL. 135'-3":
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required vertical reinforcement from 0.9D + Es + Pa + Yj to 0.9D+F+L+H+Ro+To+Es.
o It is proposed to change the load combinations and corresponding demands which governs required horizontal reinforcement from 0.9D + Es + Pa + Yj to 0.9D+F+L+H+Ro+To+Es.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-7 x
In Table 3H.5-7 between EL. 135'-3" and EL. 154'-2":
o It is proposed to change the required horizontal reinforcement from 2.08 in2/ft to 2.09 in2/ft.
o It is proposed to change the required shear reinforcement from 0.01 in2/ft to 0.13 in2/ft, and provided reinforcement from 0.11 in2/ft to 0.80 in2/ft.
x In Table 3H.5-7 between EL. 117'-6" and EL. 135'-3":
o It is proposed to change the required horizontal reinforcement from 1.36 in2/ft to 1.46 in2/ft.
o It is proposed to change the required vertical reinforcement from 2.02 in2/ft to 2.37 in2/ft.
o It is proposed to change the required shear reinforcement from 0.33 in2/ft to 0.55 in2/ft.
x It is also proposed to remove the content of Note 1 and change it to Not used. in Table 3H.5-7 because the demands in the table reflect load combinations with seismic and thermal loads combined.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 x
It is proposed to update the forces and moments under the same load cases and load combinations at each critical location to match the latest calculations. The changes of moments and forces are marked up on pages 46-59 of this document. In addition to the existing load combinations, it is proposed to add the forces and moments under the load combinations with seismic and accident thermal loads combined, which is shown as LC(6a), D + L + F + Es + Ta and LC(6b),D + L + F + Es + Ta in the markups of Table 3H.5-8.
x In the Notes of UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 it is proposed to change Maximum principal stress for load combination 5 including thermal to Maximum principal stress for load combinations including thermal and change Maximum stress intensity range for load combination 5 including thermal to Maximum stress intensity range for the load combinations including thermal for all sheets.
DRAFT nds nds ment from ment o+To+Es.
o+To+E AFT en EL. 135' en EL. 135'-3" and sed to change the sed to change t ment from 2.08 in ment from 2/ft to
/ft to proposed to chang proposed to orcement from 0.01 ment fro rovided reinforcement f rovided reinforce le 3H.5 3H.5-7 between EL.
7 between EL o
It is proposed to is proposed to reinforce forcement fro ment fro o
It is propos It is pr reinforceme reinforcem o
It is p It is p reinfo x
It is also pr It is als it to No it to No table ta com co x
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 18 of 37 x
It is proposed to change the values of maximum principal stress from 40.3 ksi to 48.2 ksi on Sheet 2, 46.95 ksi to 51.3 ksi on Sheet 3, and from 25.1 ksi to 28.2 ksi on Sheet 6, and 22.1 ksi to 27.2 ksi on Sheet 7.
x It is proposed to change the values of maximum stress intensity range from 46.3 ksi to 74.2 ksi on Sheet 1, from 50.8 ksi to 70.1 ksi on Sheet 2, from 84.9 ksi to 97.4 ksi on Sheet 3, from 72.6 ksi to 74.3 ksi on Sheet 4, from 20.6 ksi to 23 ksi on Sheet 5, from 31.3 ksi to 34.2 ksi on Sheet 6, and from 22.1 ksi to 35.0 ksi on Sheet 7.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 x
In UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 1 for axial force and bending verification:
o At Section 2 lower, it is proposed to change the Seismic L/C from 9 to 33 and corresponding stress from 14.31 ksi to 28.11 ksi at 5.625° angle and change the Seismic L/C from 17 to 41 and corresponding stress from 13.15 ksi to 27.59 ksi at 84.375° angle.
o At Section 1 lower, it is proposed to change the Seismic L/C from 9 to 34 and corresponding stress from 15.35 ksi to 30.07 ksi at 0° angle and change the Seismic L/C from 17 to 43 and corresponding stress from 14.46 ksi to 29.48 ksi at 90° angle.
o The maximum stress among the two sections is changed from 15.35 ksi to 30.07 ksi, and maximum required reinforcement is changed from 9.21 in2/ft to 18.00 in2/ft. The demand to capacity ratio is changed from 0.51 + 2% to 1.00.
x In UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 1 for shear force and torsion verification:
o At Section 1 lower, it is proposed to change the stress from 6.28 ksi to 7.27 ksi at 0° angle and change the stress from 5.80 ksi to 6.78 ksi at 90° angle.
o The maximum stress among the Section 2 lower and Section 1 lower is changed from 6.28 ksi to 7.27 ksi, and maximum required reinforcement is changed from 5.65 in2/ft to 6.54 in2/ft. The demand to capacity ratio is changed from 0.31 to 0.36.
x It is also proposed to remove Note 2 from Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 1 because the demands in the table reflect load combinations with seismic and thermal loads combined.
x In UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 2a (horizontal sections):
o At Section 5 + 6, it is proposed to change the stress from 1.91 ksi to 2.01 ksi at 0° - 5.625° angle and change the Seismic L/C from 8 to 24 and corresponding stress from 1.80 ksi to 2.08 ksi at 84.375° - 90° angle.
et 1 et 1 wer, it is pro wer, it rom 9 to 33 and co rom 9 to 33 ksi to 28.11 ksi at 5.625 ksi to 28.11 ksi at 5 mic L/C from 17 to 4 mic L/C from 17 to from 13.15 ksi to 27.59 om 13.15 ks Section 1 lower, it is n 1 low eismic L/C from 9 to eismic L/C from from 15.35 ksi to 30.0 om 15.35 ksi to 30 Seismic L/C from ismic L/C from from 14.46 ksi to m 14.46 ksi to o
The maximum The ma changed fr changed required required 18.00 from x
In UFSA In UFSA verific ve
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 19 of 37 o
At Section 7, it is proposed to change the stress from 2.38 ksi to 4.19 ksi at 0° - 5.625° angle and change the Seismic L/C from 8 to 24 and corresponding stress from 2.15 ksi to 4.27 ksi at 84.375° - 90° angle.
o At Section 9, it is proposed to change the stress from 2.26 ksi to 5.02 ksi at 0° - 5.625° angle and change the stress from 2.27 ksi to 5.03 ksi at 84.375° - 90° angle.
o At Section 11, it is proposed to change the stress from 1.73 ksi to 3.55 ksi at 0° - 5.625° angle and change the stress from 1.53 ksi to 3.57 ksi at 84.375° - 90° angle.
o The maximum required reinforcement of the Sections 5 + 6, 7 and 9 is changed from 2.38 in2/ft to 5.03 in2/ft.
The demand to capacity ratio is changed from 0.20 to 0.42.
o The maximum required reinforcement of Section 11 is changed from 1.73 in2/ft to 3.57 in2/ft. The demand to capacity ratio is changed from 0.15 to 0.30.
x It is also proposed to remove Note 2 from Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 2a because the demands in the table reflect load combinations with seismic and thermal loads combined.
x In UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 2b (vertical sections):
o At Section 3 Upper, it is proposed to change the Seismic L/C from 9 to 33 and the corresponding stress from 9.97 ksi to 11.91 ksi at 0° angle and change the Seismic L/C from 17 to 41 and corresponding stress from 9.25 ksi to 11.91 ksi at 90° angle.
o At Section 3 Lower, it is proposed to change the stress from 8.45 ksi to 8.84 ksi at 0° angle and change the stress from 7.75 ksi to 8.08 ksi at 90° angle.
o At Section 4 Upper, it is proposed to change the Seismic L/C from 9 to 33 and the corresponding stress from 10.53 ksi to 11.91 ksi at 5.625° angle and change the Seismic L/C from 17 to 41 and the corresponding stress from 9.75 ksi to 11.91 ksi at 84.375° angle.
o At Section 4 Lower, it is proposed to change the stress from 8.26 ksi to 8.65 ksi at 5.625° angle and change the stress from 7.54 ksi to 7.86 ksi at 84.375° angle.
o The maximum required reinforcement of the Sections 3 Upper, 3 Lower, 4 Upper and 4 Lower is changed from 10.53 in2/ft to 11.91 in2/ft. The demand to capacity ratio is changed from 0.88 to 0.99.
x It is also proposed to remove Note 2 from Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 2b because the demands in the table reflect load combinations with seismic and thermal loads combined.
x In UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 2c (out of plane shear reinforcement):
DRAFT d re d re anged fro anged apacity ratio is apacity m required reinforcem m required reinfo from 1.73 in from 1.73 2/ft to 3.57 3.57 y ratio is changed from ratio is chan oposed to remove Note d to rem se the demands in the t se the demands ismic and thermal load mic and thermal lo FSAR Table 3H.5 Table 3H.5-9 Sh 9 Sh o
At Section 3 U Section 3 U Seismic L/C fr Seismic from 9.97 k from 9.97 Seismic Seismic from 9 o
At S f
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 20 of 37 o
At 0° - 5.625° angle, it is proposed to change the Seismic L/C from 1 to 25 and the corresponding required reinforcement from 0.13 in2/ft to 0.16 in2/ft at maximum of vertical Sections 3 upper to 4 upper. The sum of the required reinforcement in maximum of vertical Sections 3 upper to 4 upper and in Horizontal Section 5+6 is changed from 0.13 to 0.16.
o At 84.375° - 90° angle, it is proposed to change the Seismic L/C from 1 to 25 and the corresponding required reinforcement from 0.12 in2/ft to 0.16 in2/ft at maximum of vertical Sections 3 upper to 4 upper. The sum of the required reinforcement in maximum of vertical Sections 3 upper to 4 upper and in Horizontal Section 5+6 is changed from 0.12 to 0.16.
o At 84.375° - 90° angle, it is proposed to change the required reinforcement from 0.21 in2/ft to 0.22 in2/ft at maximum of vertical Sections 3 lower to 4 lower. The sum of the required reinforcement in maximum of vertical Sections 3 lower to 4 lower and in Horizontal Section 9 is changed from 0.21 to 0.22.
o At 0° - 5.625° angle, it is proposed to change the Seismic L/C from 18 to 66.
o At 84.375° - 90° angle, it is proposed to change the required reinforcement from 0.21 in2/ft to 0.22 in2/ft at maximum of vertical Sections 3 lower to 4 lower. The sum of the required reinforcement in maximum of vertical Sections 3 lower to 4 lower and in Horizontal Section 11 is changed from 0.21 to 0.22.
x It is also proposed to remove Note 2 from Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 2c because the demands in the table reflect load combinations with seismic and thermal loads combined.
x In UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 3:
o It is proposed to change the maximum required vertical reinforcement from 1.49 in2/ft to 1.53 in2/ft and change the corresponding demand to capacity ratio from 0.54 to 0.56 at the bottom segment of the wall.
o It is proposed to change the maximum required hoop reinforcement from 0.80 in2/ft to 1.22 in2/ft and change the corresponding demand to capacity ratio from 0.40 to 0.61 at the bottom segment of the wall.
o It is proposed to change the maximum required vertical reinforcement from 0.64 in2/ft to 0.69 in2/ft and change the corresponding demand to capacity ratio from 0.23 to 0.25 at the mid-height segment of the wall.
o It is proposed to change the maximum required hoop reinforcement from 1.93 in2/ft to 1.99 in2/ft and change DRAFT ecti ect ed reinfo ed re 3 upper to 4 u 3 uppe changed from 0.12 changed fro 90° angle 90°
, it is propo it is einforcement from 0.2 einforcement from 0.2 um of vertical Sections m of vertical of the required reinf he requ rtical Sections 3 lower rtical Sections Section ection 9 is changed f 9 is changed o
At 0° 0° - 5.625° ang 5.625° ang Seismic L/C from smic L/C from o
At 84.375° At 84.37
- 9 required rei required r maximum maximum sum o vert S
x It is al It 2c b 2c w
x
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 21 of 37 the corresponding demand to capacity ratio from 0.97 to 0.99 at the mid-height segment of the wall.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-11 x
For concrete slabs parallel to the beams:
o It is proposed to change the governing load combinations from 3 - Extreme Environmental Condition to 6 - Abnormal Condition.
o It is proposed to change the in-plan shear forces from 20.0 kips to 31.0 kip.
o It is proposed to change the required reinforcement from 0.41 in2/ft to 0.43 in2/ft.
x For concrete slabs perpendicular to the beams:
o It is proposed to change the governing load combinations from Normal Condition to 6 - Abnormal Condition.
o It is proposed to change the required reinforcement from 0.28 in2/ft to 0.43 in2/ft.
x It is also proposed to remove Note 1 from Table 3H.5-11 because the composite floor has been evaluated under the load combinations with seismic thermal loads combined and the evaluations demonstrated that the load combinations are not governing.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-12 x
For the design of the 24-inch slab:
o It is proposed to change the governing load combination from Extreme Environmental Condition (SSE) to Abnormal Condition.
o It is proposed to change the design bending moment at the midspan along E-W direction from 14.40 kips ft/ft to 16.23 kips ft/ft.
o It is proposed to change the design in-plane tension (E/W Direction) at midspan and at support from 21.9 kips/ft to 37.1 kips/ft.
o It is proposed to change the bottom reinforcement along E-W direction from 0.53 in2/ft to 0.71 in2/ft.
o It is proposed to change the design in-plane tension (E/W Direction) from 21.9 kips/ft to 37.1 kips/ft.
o It is proposed to change the design bending moment along N-S direction from 8.47 kips ft/ft to 21.55 kips ft/ft.
o It is proposed to change the top and bottom reinforcement along N-S direction from 0.59 in2/ft to 0.65 in2/ft.
x It is also proposed to remove the content of Note 1 and change it to Not used. in Table 3H.5-12 because the demands in the table reflect load combinations with seismic and thermal loads combined.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-15 x
It is proposed to change the required radial reinforcement from 1.80 in2/ft to 1.81 in2/ft and change the corresponding DRAFT ular ular o chang o ch m
m Normal Norm Con ed to change the ed to change the req inin2/ft to 0.43 in
/ft to 0 2/ft.
posed to remove Note osed to rem e composite floor has posite binations with seismic binations with s aluations demonstrate ations demonstrat governing.
ning For For the design of the 24 the design of the 24 o
It is propos It is p combinatio combinati (SSE) to (SSE) to o
It is p at t t
o
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 22 of 37 reinforcement ratio from 1.30 to 1.29 at the conical roof near tension ring.
x It is proposed to change the required vertical reinforcement from 1.49 in2/ft to 1.53 in2/ft and change the corresponding reinforcement ratio from 1.85 to 1.80 at the knuckle region.
x It is proposed to change the required radial reinforcement from 2.85 in2/ft to 3.48 in2/ft and change the corresponding reinforcement ratio from 1.25 to 1.02 at the knuckle region.
x It is proposed to change the required hoop reinforcement from 2.64 in2/ft to 2.67 in2/ft and change the corresponding reinforcement ratio from 1.18 to 1.16 at the knuckle region.
x It is proposed to change the required hoop reinforcement from 2.49 in2/ft to 2.50 in2/ft at the compression ring.
- 3.
TECHNICAL EVALUATION Change 1 - Changes of Design Temperature for Thermal Gradient Change 1A - PCS Tank Wall Normal Temperature Change As discussed, UFSAR Subsection 3H.3.3 and UFSAR Table 3H.5-1 are proposed to be revised to identify a temperature of 40°F (in lieu of 70°F) for the PCS tank water for determining normal thermal loading on the PCS tank and affected structures when the outside air temperature is 115°F. The PCS recirculation heater is provided to maintain water contents inside the PCS tank above 40°F during normal operation. The recirculation heater automatically turns on when the heater inlet temperature gets down to approximate 47°F and turns off when it reaches approximate 52°F. When the outside air temperature is 115°F in summer, the PCS tank water temperature can reach 120°F. Even though the PCS tank water temperature cannot get down to 40°F when outside air temperature is 115°F, the structural design of the PCS tank walls takes a conservative deterministic assumption to maximum the thermal gradient across the walls by using thermal gradient of 40°F on the inside and 115°F on the outside. The PCS tank walls are also designed for thermal gradient of 40°F on the inside and -40°F on the outside during winter normal operation. The use of a PCS tank water temperature of 40°F for determining the design thermal gradient across the PCS tank walls during summer conditions is conservative and consistent with the requirements of the AP1000 civil/structural design criteria, and is based on the minimum PCS tank water temperature allowed in the Technical Specifications of 40°F as identified in surveillance requirement SR 3.6.6.1.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 3 currently shows demands under combined seismic and normal thermal loads for the PCS tank exterior wall. UFSAR Figure 3H.5-11 shows reinforcement details of the PCS tank. The PCS tank structure has been evaluated with the revised PCS tank water temperature of 40°F for normal thermal loading during summer conditions. The results of that evaluation conclude that the values currently specified in UFSAR Table 3H.5-9, Sheet 3, which identify the maximum reinforcement required, the reinforcement provided, and the ratio of reinforcement provided/reinforcement required for the PCS tank, remain bounding. Accordingly, no change to the PCS tank reinforcement physical design is required. The proposed change does not impact UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 DRAFT to 1 to 1 e required e req t the compress t the com Thermal Gradient Thermal Grad FT Temperature Change Temperature AF 3H.3.3 3H.3.3 and UFSAR T and UFSAR re of 40°F (in lieu 40°F (in lieu of of loading on the PCS ta oading on the PCS ta 115 115°F
°F. The PCS recir
. The PCS e PCS tank above 40°F e PCS tank above 40 urns on when the heate rns on when the heate when it reaches appro it reaches appro mer, the PCS tank wat mer, the PCS tan ter temperature canno ter temperature cann structural design of th structural design of th maximum the th maximum the ide and 115 ide and 11 40 40°F
°F
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 23 of 37 Sheet 3 or Figure 3H.5-11. The PCS tank design continues to meet the requirements of ACI-349 and AISC N690.
Change 1B -Auxiliary Building Exterior Walls Below Grade and Basemat Accidental Thermal Change The proposed activity revises the accident temperatures for auxiliary building exterior walls below grade and basemat in UFSAR Table 3H.5-1 to match the accident temperatures for equipment qualification in UFSAR Tables 3D.5-4 and 3D.5-5 which are supported by design analyses. The current UFSAR Table 3H.5-1 shows that the accident thermal does not need to be considered for the exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building. However, the accident temperatures in rooms that are adjacent to exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building can cause an accident thermal gradient on the walls and basemat per UFSAR Tables 3D.5-4 and 3D.5-5. Per UFSAR Table 3D.5-1 and UFSAR Figures 1.2-4/5/6, the auxiliary building exterior walls below grade and basemat are in environmental Zones 2, 6 and 7. The maximum accident temperatures for exterior walls below grade and basemat are 120°F in Zone 2, 140°F in Zone 6, and 114°F in Zone 7. For conservatism, it is assumed that the accident temperature for the inside of exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building is 140°F when determining thermal gradient for those structures. The temperature on the outside of exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building is assumed to be 50°F in accordance with ASHRAE requirements. The auxiliary building exterior walls below grade and basemat are re-evaluated for the accident thermal gradient of 50°F to 140°F. The effect of the new thermal gradient is evaluated for the impacted walls using thermal behavior fundamentals. The moment due to the thermal gradient is calculated based on a plate with a clamped edge. Because the moment is generated due to the restraint at the edges preventing deflection, no out-of-plane shear is developed. The moment due to the thermal gradient is calculated using the cracked section properties. The structures continue to be evaluated in accordance with ACI 349-01. The design of exterior walls below grade in auxiliary building using the revised temperature satisfies ACI 349-01.
There are two critical sections of the auxiliary building in the licensing basis that show demands below grade, including the auxiliary building wall along column line 1 (Wall 1) as shown in UFSAR Tables 3H.5-2 and 3H.5-3, and the auxiliary building basemat as shown in UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3. UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 shows the required reinforcement and provided reinforcement in the basemat at two critical locations. As discussed in Change 2, the critical section tables for the walls and basemat are revisited and are proposed to remove the thermal note to show demands under combined seismic and thermal loads.
This is because the revised tables with inclusion of combined seismic and thermal load combinations provide quantification of that load combination within the UFSAR to clearly demonstrate compliance with load combinations in ACI 349-01 and UFSAR Table 3.8.4-
- 2. The proposed changes of accident temperatures in auxiliary building exterior walls below grade and basemat impact UFSAR Tables 3.8.5-3, 3H.5-2 and 3H.5-3. The impacts are evaluated in Change 2A and Change 2B in this document.
The proposed changes do not impact the structural behaviors of basemat and Wall 1. The proposed activity does not impact the equipment qualifications because the equipment is qualified in accordance UFSAR Appendix 3D and there is no change to the information in at at ause an ause and 3D.5 and 3
-5.
uilding exterior wa ilding exte
. The maximum accide
. The maximum a 120°F in Zone 2, 140°F 120°F in Zone 2, 140° d that the accident temp that the accident temp in the auxiliary building e auxiliary
- s. The temperature on
- s. The tempera auxiliary building is ass xiliary building is a The auxiliary building auxiliary building r the accident thermal g the accident thermal g nt is evaluated for the nt is evaluated f ment due to the thermal g ment due to the therm cause the moment is ause the moment is on, no out out-of of-plane she plane she ulated using the cracked ulated using the c accordance with ACI 3 accordance with ACI ding using the revised ding using the revised ritical section ritical sectio de, inc de, inc es es
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 24 of 37 UFSAR Appendix 3D. The proposed activity does not impact the radiation shielding because the physical design of the concrete structures does not change.
Change 2 - Critical Section Tables Update for Auxiliary Building Basemat, Concrete Walls and Shield Building Roof Even though the demands (i.e. forces, moments, and required reinforcement) in critical section tables of auxiliary building walls and basemat do not reflect combined seismic and thermal loads, the design of those structures were evaluated to confirm that the demands under combination of mechanical loads (i.e. dead loads, live loads, seismic loads) and thermal loads met ACI 349-01 and UFSAR Table 3.8.4-2 requirements. The behavior of mechanical loading and thermal loading are different. The thermal demand in most cases is self-relieving due to concrete cracking and localized yielding of reinforcement as described in Appendix A of ACI 349-01. The combination of SSE and thermal load results in a structural demand that is less than the ACI 349 capacity of the building structures. Thermally induced forces do not reduce the plastic collapse strength of the structure. The margin of the structure with respect to review level earthquake is not compromised by consideration of this load combination. The accurate calculation of thermal demand is complex, as described in the ACI 349-01 commentary to Appendix. Thermal demand generated for combination with SSE is typically generated in a conservative manner, so that the combination of SSE and thermal does not reflect the actual demand under thermal condition due to the self-relief mechanisms described above. The margin in the AP1000 building design between mechanical loading demand vs. capacity allows for a conservative approach in development of thermal demand. As such, the significance of the thermal demand has not changed. The thermal demand in the SSE plus thermal load combinations is a conservative representation of the thermal demand. Removal of the note and inclusion of the SSE plus thermal load combination provides quantification of that load combination within the UFSAR to clearly demonstrate compliance with the ACI 349 load combinations. As such, the note is no longer needed. The inclusion of the SSE plus thermal load combinations in the tables does not change the design.
Change 2A - Basemat Critical Section Table Update (Table 3.8.5-3)
The nuclear island structures, consisting of the containment vessel, shield building, and auxiliary building are founded on the 6-foot-thick, cast-in-place, reinforced concrete basemat foundation. The basemat provides the interface between the nuclear island structures and the supporting soil or rock. The basemat transfers the load of nuclear island structures to the supporting soil or rock. The basemat transmits seismic motions from the supporting soil or rock to the nuclear island. Resistance to sliding of the concrete basemat foundation is provided by soil friction.
The demands in UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 do not include the loads combinations with seismic and thermal loads combined due to the thermal note. This activity proposes to delete the thermal note in Note 6 and show the required reinforcement under load combinations with seismic and thermal combined. As discussed in Change No. 1B above, the accident thermal gradient for the basemat is changed from NR to 140°F inside/50°F outside in UFSAR Table 3H.5-1. The revised accident thermal gradient is accounted in the basemat design and is reflected in the markup of UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3. The revised liftoff analysis is consistent with methods used in the previous analysis and is in compliance with the licensing basis requirements in UFSAR Appendix 3G. The change of concrete cover is in DRAFT g d g d A of AC A of A is less than is les reduce the plastic reduce the spect to review level spect to review nation. The accurate c nation. The accurate 01 commentary to App 01 commentary to App y generated in a conser nerated in flect the actual demand flect the actua above. The margin i above. The margi d vs. capacity allows capacity allows As such, the significan As such, the significan n the SSE plus therma n the SSE plus emand. Removal of the emand. Removal of t quantification of that loa antification of that lo with the ACI 349 load e ACI 349 load of the SSE plus therma of the SSE plus t Basemat Critical S Basemat Critica D
nd structures nd structure are fou are fou T
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 25 of 37 compliance with ACI 349-01. The revised criteria of margin continue to be in compliance with requirements in UFSAR Subsection 3.8.5.4.1. The basemat design with the revised demands remains in compliance with ACI 349-01. No increase in provided reinforcement in the basemat is needed. The proposed changes do not have adverse impact on the global structural analysis of the nuclear island. The proposed changes do not impact the interactions between the basemat and soil or rock. The proposed changes have no impact of the analysis of the nuclear island to sliding or overturning.
The addition of the new Note 6 is to clarify that the demands in current UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3 does not include a small portion of basemat (between column line L to 5' east of column line L and shield building to column line 9.2) as shown in UFSAR Figure 3.8.5-3 Sheets 5-7. This change does impact the intent of the table and does not impact the design of the basemat.
Change 2B - Wall 1 Critical Section Table Update (Tables 3H.5-2 and 3H.5-3)
Wall 1 at the south end of the auxiliary building is a SC-I reinforced concrete wall extended from EL. 66'-6" to EL. 180'-0 and is designed in accordance with ACI 349-01. Wall 1 provides protection to equipment and components inside the auxiliary building from tornado missile impact. Wall 1 is designed to withstand the strike from the adjacent non-seismic radwaste building in seismic event.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-2 for Wall 1 shows the moments and forces in different segments along the height from EL. 66'-6" to 180'-0". UFSAR Table 3H.5-3 for Wall 1 shows the required reinforcement under various load combinations without seismic and thermal loads combined due to the thermal note and shows provided reinforcement as well. The required reinforcement in UFSAR Table 3H.5-3 is calculated based on the demands in UFSAR Table 3H.5-2. This activity proposes to delete the thermal note and show the required reinforcement under load combinations with seismic and thermal combined in UFSAR Table 3H.5-3. This activity proposes to update the corresponding moment and forces in UFSAR Table 3H.5-2 as well. Wall 1 is next to the SFP and can be subject to 212°F of accident temperature above EL. 135'-3" in the event of spent fuel pool boiling.
Wall 1 is also an exterior wall and can be subject to atmosphere temperature as low as -
40°F in winter. Wall 1 is designed for combined seismic and this type of accident thermal.
The thermal induced deformation on the upper elevation also results in thermal stresses on lower portions of the wall between EL. 82'-6" and EL.100'-0". In addition, as discussed in Change 1B, the accident thermal gradient for the exterior walls below grade in the auxiliary building is changed from NR to 140°F inside/50°F outside in a loss of AC power or loss of HVAC event. The wall segment below grade is designed for combined seismic and accident thermal gradient due to either a loss of AC power or loss of HVAC event.
Since loss of AC power can also cause SFP boiling, the wall segment between EL. 82'-6" and EL.100'-0" is checked for combined thermal demands due to SFP boiling on EL. 135'-
3" and loss of AC below grade. The markup of UFSAR Tables 3H.5-2 and 3H.5-3 reflect the combined seismic and thermal demands under those two types of accident events. In addition, the change of load combinations in the calculations provide a conservative design because the revised load combinations are more comprehensive and can envelope the possible scenarios in the service life of the structures. The refined analysis also provides more conservative results because the envelope of peak values from FEA DRAFT ho ho ble and ble an ate (Tables 3H.5 ate (Tables 3H.5-2 and FT g is a SC g is a
-I reinforced co orced gned in accordance w gned in accordance w components inside th mponents gned to withstand the s gned to withs ic event.
c event.
l 1 shows the momen ws the momen 66' 66'-6" to 180' 6" to 180'-0". UFSA 0".
under various load co under various load o the the thermal mal note and note and ent in UFSAR Table 3 in UFSAR Table 3 H.5 H.5-2. This activity pro
- 2. This act orcement under load co orcement under load e 3H.5 e 3H
-3. This activity his activity AR Table 3H.5 AR Table 3H.5-2 nt temperatur nt temperatu xterior w xterior w isis
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 26 of 37 meshes can better reflect the localized demands. The refined thermal reduction factor by using individual factors per elevation can better reflect the actual thermal behavior of structures at different locations, and therefore is more accurate. Therefore, the revised demands in the UFSAR tables provide conservative and accurate results of the design.
The revised provided shear reinforcement of #4@6"x6" meets the requirements of ACI 349-01. The markup of Table 3H.5-3 shows that the required reinforcement is smaller than the provided reinforcement. The Wall 1 design remains in compliance with ACI 349-01 and the requirements in UFSAR Subsection 3.8.4.5.1. There is no reduction in margin of safety for the structure because Wall 1 continues to meet ACI 349-01. The proposed changes do not have adverse impact on the global structural analysis of the nuclear island.
The proposed changes do not impact the design function regarding the capability of Wall 1 to withstand tornado missile impact. The proposed changes do not impact the ability of Wall 1 to resist strike from the non-seismic radwaste in seismic event.
Change 2C - Wall 7.3 Critical Section Table Update (Tables 3H.5-4 and 3H.5-5)
Wall 7.3 is a SC-I reinforced concrete wall that connects the shield building and the auxiliary building Wall I. Wall 7.3 extends from EL. 66'-6" to EL. 180'-0 and is designed in accordance with ACI 349-01. Wall 7.3 is designed to withstand seismic impact.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-4 for Wall 7.3 shows the moments and forces in different segments along the height from EL. 66'-6" to roof. UFSAR Table 3H.5-5 for Wall 7.3 shows the required reinforcement under governing load combinations without seismic and thermal loads combined due to the thermal note and shows provided reinforcement as well. The required reinforcement in UFSAR Table 3H.5-5 is calculated based on the demands in UFSAR Table 3H.5-4. This activity proposes to delete the thermal note and show the required reinforcement under load combinations with seismic and thermal combined in UFSAR Table 3H.5-5. This activity proposes to update the corresponding moment and forces in UFSAR Table 3H.5-4 as well. Wall 7.3 is an interior wall in the auxiliary building and is not subject to normal thermal or accident thermal loads. However, due to the thermal loads applied at other locations in the nuclear island, the thermal induced deformation in the nuclear island causes thermal stresses in Wall 7.3. Wall 7.3 is designed for combined seismic and thermal. The markup of UFSAR Tables 3H.5-4 and 3H.5-5 reflect the combined seismic and thermal demands. In addition, the change of load combinations in the calculations provide a conservative design because the revised load combinations are more comprehensive and can envelope the possible scenarios in the service life of the structures. The refined analysis also provides more conservative results because the envelope of peak values from FEA meshes can better reflect the localized demands. The refined thermal reduction factor by using individual factors per elevation can better reflect the actual thermal behavior of structures at different locations, and therefore is more accurate. The revised concrete reinforcement cover meets ACI 349-01 and has negligible impact on the performance of the wall. Therefore, the revised demands in the UFSAR tables provide conservative and accurate results of the design and do not impact the performance of the structure. The revised provided shear reinforcement meets the requirements of ACI 349-01. The markup of Table 3H.5-5 shows that the required reinforcement is smaller than the provided reinforcement. The Wall 7.3 design remains in compliance with ACI 349-01 and the requirements in UFSAR Subsection 3.8.4.5.1. There is no reduction in margin of safety for the structure because Wall 7.3 continues to meet DRAFT reg reg hanges d hang in seismic ev in seis pdate (Tables 3H.5 pdate (Tables 3H
-4 a FT that connects the sh that connects the s rom EL. 66' om EL. 66'-6" to EL. 18 6" to EL 18 s designed to withstand signed to shows the moments a hows the momen
" to roof. UFSAR Tab roof. UFSAR Tab governing load combi ng load comb thermal note and thermal note an show n UFSAR Table 3H.5 n UFSAR Table 3H
- 4. This activity propose This activity propose ment under load combi under load combi H.5 H.5-5. This activity pro
- 5. This activ AR T AR Table 3H.5 e 3H.5-4 as we 4 as w ubject to normal the ubject to normal the applied at othe applied at ot e nuclear isla e nuclear isl mic and mic and s
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 27 of 37 ACI 349-01. The proposed changes do not have adverse impact on the global structural analysis of the nuclear island. The proposed changes do not impact the ability of Wall 7.3 to withstand seismic impact.
Change 2D - Wall L Critical Section Table Update (Tables 3H.5-6 and 3H.5-7)
Wall L, to the west of Main Control Room (MCR) in the auxiliary building, is a SC-I reinforced concrete wall, and extend from EL. 66'-6" to the roof. Wall L is designed to withstand seismic impact.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-6 for Wall L shows the moments and forces in different segments along the height from EL. 117'-6" to 154'-2". UFSAR Table 3H.5-7 for Wall L shows the required reinforcement under governing load combinations without seismic and thermal loads combined due to a thermal note and shows provided reinforcement as well. The required reinforcement in UFSAR Table 3H.5-7 is calculated based on the demands in UFSAR Table 3H.5-6. This activity proposes to delete the thermal note and show the required reinforcement under load combinations with seismic and thermal combined in UFSAR Table 3H.5-7. This activity proposes to update the corresponding moment and forces in UFSAR Table 3H.5-6 as well. Wall L is the east wall of the east MISV compartment and can be subject to accident thermal temperature due to high energy line break in the MISV compartment. Wall L is also an interior wall and can be subject to ambient temperature of 70°F. Wall L is designed for combined seismic and thermal. The markup of UFSAR Tables 3H.5-6 and 3H.5-7 reflect the combined seismic and thermal demands. In addition, the change of load combinations in the calculations provide a conservative design because the revised load combinations are more comprehensive and can envelope the possible scenarios in the service life of the structures. The refined analysis also provides more conservative results because the envelope of peak values from FEA meshes can better reflect the localized demands. The refined thermal reduction factor by using individual factors per elevation can better reflect the actual thermal behavior of structures at different locations, and therefore is more accurate. The revised concrete reinforcement cover meets ACI 349-01 and has negligible impact on the performance of the wall. The change of MSIV accident pressure and generator accident pressure as result of previous licensing amendment request LAR-17-028 has been incorporated into the wall calculations and does not impact the physical design of the wall.
Therefore, the revised demands in the UFSAR tables provide conservative and accurate results of the design and do not impact the performance of the structure. The revised provided shear reinforcement meets the requirements of ACI 349-01. The markup of Table 3H.5-7 shows that the required reinforcement is smaller than the provided reinforcement.
The Wall L design remains in compliance with ACI 349-01 and the requirements in UFSAR Subsection 3.8.4.5.1. There is no reduction in margin of safety for the structure because Wall L continues to meet ACI 349-01. The proposed changes do not have adverse impact on the global structural analysis of the nuclear island. The proposed changes do not impact the ability of Wall L to withstand seismic impact. Wall L continues to provide MCR boundary and MSIV boundary.
DRAFT ions w ions provided rein provid calculated base calculate o delete the thermal o delete the th ons with seismic and ons with seismic an ses to update the corre ses to update the corre ell. Wall L is the eas Wall L is ccident thermal temper ccident therma Wall L is also an inter Wall L is also an Wall L is designed for co is designed for co H.5-6 and 3H.5 d 3H.5-7 reflec 7 reflec change of load comb change of load ause the revised load c ause the revised loa ssible scenarios in the sible scenarios in th des more conservative more conservative s can better reflect the s can better ref ng individual factors p ng individual factors structures at different structures at different orcement cover orcement cove he wall. The he wall. The of pre of pre wa wa
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 28 of 37 Change 2E - Shield Building Roof Critical Section Table Update (Tables 3H.5-9 and 3H.5-15)
The shield building and shield building roof provide shielding of the containment vessel and the radioactive systems and components located in the containment vessel. The shield building protects the containment vessel and the reactor coolant system from the external event, i.e. tornado missile impact, aircraft impact. The shield building supports the baffle that directs the air over the exterior of the containment vessel. The air inlets in the shield building provide the air flow for the passive containment cooling system. The PCCWST, located on the roof of the shield building, stores water for external cooling of the containment as parts of the passive containment cooling system.
UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 Sheets 1-2c show the demands and capacities of the air inlet and tension ring of the shield building under load combinations without seismic and thermal combined due to the thermal note. UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 3 and UFSAR Table 3H.5-15 show the demands and capacities of the PCS tank exterior wall and conical roof of the shield building under load combinations with seismic and normal thermal combined. This activity proposes to delete the thermal note in UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 Sheets 1-2c and show the demands under load combinations with seismic and normal/accident thermal loads combined in UFSAR Tables 3H.5-9 and 3H.5-15.
The tension ring and air inlet in the shield building are next to the upper annulus interior.
The upper annulus, which is on the outside of the air baffle, is exposed to air without HVAC control and contains air which experiences only a relatively small heat up during accident.
The accident air temperature on the inside of the shield building at the elevation of tension ring and air inlet can reach 165 °F in summer and 10 °F in winter. Since the atmosphere temperatures in summer is 115 °F and in winter is -40 °F, the maximum accident thermal gradient for the tension ring and air inlet is 50 °F (= 165 °F - 115 °F). The tension ring and air inlet structures are also subject to normal thermal gradient of 110 °F (-40 °F outside/70
°F inside) in winter and 45 °F (115 °F outside/70 °F inside) in summer. Therefore, the tension ring and air inlet are designed for combined seismic and normal/accident thermal loads. The markups of Table 3H.5-9 Sheets 1-2c show that the required reinforcement is equal or smaller than the provided reinforcement under combined seismic and thermal loads. The tension ring and air inlet structural design remains in compliance with the applicable requirements in ACI 349-01 and AISC N690-94. There is no reduction in margin of safety for the structure because the design of tension ring and air inlet structures continues to meet the applicable codes.
The conical roof is above the containment vessel and is subject to air which can be heated up after passing through the bottom of the air baffle and beginning to rise during accident.
The accident air temperature on the inside of the shield building conical roof can reach 180 °F in summer and 120 °F in winter. Since a portion of the conical roof is exposed to atmosphere and the atmosphere temperatures in summer is 115 °F and in winter is -40
°F, the maximum accident thermal gradient for the conical roof is 160 °F (= 120 °F - (-40)
°F). The conical roof is also subject to normal thermal gradient of 110 °F (-40 °F outside/70
°F inside) in winter and 45 °F (115 °F outside/70 °F inside) in summer. Therefore, the shield building conical roof is designed for combined seismic and normal/accident thermal loads. The markup of Table 3H.5-15 shows that the required reinforcement is smaller than DRAFT and cap and nations witho nation H.5 H.5-9 Sheet 3 an She S tank exterior wall an S tank exterior w seismic and normal th seismic and normal t e in UFSAR Table 3H.5 in UFSAR Table 3H.5 with seismic and norm h seismic nd 3H.5 n
-15.
- 15.
the shield building are shield building are n the outside of the air b side of the air b ch experiences only a ch experiences o ature on the inside of the ature on the inside o reach 165 °F in summe each 165 °F in summe mmer is 115 °F and in w is 115 °F and in w ension ring and air inlet ension ring and ures are also subject to ures are also subject winter and 45 °F (11 winter and 45 °F (11 nd air inlet are des nd air inlet are d ups of Table ups of Table an the an the ng ng
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 29 of 37 the provided reinforcement under combined seismic and thermal loads. The conical roof design remains in compliance with ACI 349-01. There is no reduction in margin of safety for the structure because the design of the conical roof continues to meet the applicable codes.
The PCS tank has a minimum water temperature of 40°F and maximum water temperature of 120°F during normal operation. The PCS tank exterior wall is also subject to atmosphere temperature of -40 °F in winter and atmosphere temperature of 115 °F in summer. The structural design of the PCS tank walls takes a conservative deterministic assumption to the maximum thermal gradient across the walls by using thermal gradient of 40°F (inside) / 115°F (outside) and 40°F (inside) / -40°F (outside) during normal operation. Even though there is no accident thermal load on the PCS tank exterior wall, thermal loads applied at other locations of the shield building roof, i.e. conical roof and tension ring, can induce deformation and therefore cause thermal stresses in the PCS tank exterior wall. Therefore, the PCS tank exterior wall is designed for combined seismic and normal/accident thermal loads. The markup of Table 3H.5-9 Sheet 3 shows that the required reinforcement is smaller than the provided reinforcement under combined seismic and thermal loads. The PCS tank exterior wall design remains in compliance with ACI 349-01. There is no reduction in margin of safety for the structure because the design of the PCS tank exterior wall continues to meet the applicable codes.
The proposed changes do not have adverse impact on the global structural analysis of the nuclear island. The proposed changes do not impact the ability of the shield building to withstand tornado missile impact or aircraft impact because the configuration of the shield building roof and provided steel remain unchanged. The proposed changes do not change the configuration or size of the air inlets or alter the design air flow through the inlets. The proposed changes do not impact the volume of the PCS tank and the performance of the tank. Piping and instrumentation connections to the tank and the tank leak chase design are not changed in size or location.
Change 3 - Spent Fuel Pool West Wall Critical Section Table Update (Table 3H.5-8)
The SFP walls are module walls which are located on the south side of the auxiliary building from elevation 66'-6" to elevation 135'-3", enclosed by column lines 2 and 4, and L2 and K2, as shown in UFSAR Figure 3.8.4-4 Sheets 1-5. The SFP walls are similar to the module walls inside containment, which consist of steel faceplates, steel trusses, shear studs and concrete. The west wall of the SFP along column line L-2 is a critical section as defined in UFSAR Subsection 3H.5.5.1. UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 shows the demands and capacities of the SFP west wall at seven critical locations, which are defined in UFSAR Figure 3H.5-10. UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 shows forces and moments under critical load cases, including dead load, live load, hydrostatic load, normal thermal load and accident load, and shows moments and forces under representative load combinations, such as gravity load combination, gravity and seismic load combination, and load combinations with seismic and normal thermal loads combined. UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 also shows required steel plate thickness without thermal versus provided steel plate thickness, maximum principal stress versus yield stress, and maximum stress intensity versus allowable stress intensity. This activity proposes to revise demands in UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 to match the revise design evaluation of SFP walls.
DRAFT 4
ad on t ad o d building ro d buil re cause thermal re cause th rior wall is designed fo rior wall is desig kup of Table 3H.5 kup of Table 3H.5-9 Sh 9
the provided reinforce he provided reinforce nk exterior wall design r xterior wa margin of safety for the margin of safet nues to meet the applic ues to meet the ap ot have adverse impac adverse impac posed changes do not posed changes d ssile impact or aircraft ssile impact or airc d provided steel remai d provided steel rema uration or size of the ai n or size of the ai posed changes do not posed changes of the tank. Piping and of the tank. Piping an esign are not changed esign are not change Pool West W Pool West W D
walls w walls w 35 35
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 30 of 37 SFP walls are subject to 212 °F of accident thermal during SFP boiling. As part of design finalization, the accident thermal load is combined with seismic load and other loads in accordance with UFSAR Tables 3.8.4-1 and 3.8.4-2, and ACI 349-01. The moments and forces under combined seismic and accident loads are added to the markups of UFSAR Table 3H.5-8.
The original SFP wall analysis used finite element model with approximate 5' by 5' mesh and fixed-fixed boundary condition. The design finalization refines the finite element model by changing the mesh size to 1' by 1' and creating two finite element models with fixed-fixed and fixed-pinned boundary conditions. The pinned connection is used at floor to wall connections where the bottom dowel is located above the bottom WT stiffeners on the floor to capture the potential rotation. The results from the two FEA models are enveloped to conservatively capture potential behavior of the floor to wall connection. The results from the refined FEA models are also averaged back to the original element size. SFP Wall L-2 is designed under load combinations with seismic and accident thermal loads combined by using results from refined FEA models. The markups of UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 show that the required plate thickness excluding thermal is smaller than the provided plate thickness, the maximum principal stress for the load combinations including thermal is smaller than the yield stress, and the maximum stress intensity range for the load combinations including thermal is smaller than the allowable stress intensity. The design of SFP Wall L-2 remains in compliance with the applicable requirements in ACI 349-01 and AISC N690-94. There is no reduction in margin of safety for the structure because the design of the SFP Wall L-2 continues to meet the applicable codes. The proposed changes do not have adverse impact on the global structural analysis of the nuclear island because the changes are made to local models and do not impact the mass or stiffness of the global model.
The proposed changes do not impact the ability of SFP Wall L-2 to withstand seismic impact.
Change 4 - Critical Section Tables Update for Auxiliary Building Floors The floors in the auxiliary building are seismic Category I structures and provide support and anchorage for component and piping supports and other attachments. One type of auxiliary building floor system is designed as composite structural steel and reinforced concrete in accordance with AISC N690-94 utilizing a metal deck spanning between the beams to support the wet concrete during construction. The design of the concrete and reinforcement in the floor sections satisfies the requirements of ACI 349. Other floor structures in the auxiliary building are designed as reinforced concrete slabs with cast-in-place concrete placed on precast panels in accordance with ACI 349.
Change 4A - Composite Floor Critical Section Table Update (Table 3H.5-11)
UFSAR Table 3H.5-11 shows the demands and capacities of the composite floor between column lines M and P at EL. 135'-3". This activity proposes to revise the demands and capacities of the composite floor. There are multiple changes made in the latest design for the composite floor, including (a) modified seismic mass by counting 25% of live load instead of 100% of the live load, (b) refined floor vertical seismic acceleration, (c) account for air handling unit loads. As result of the changes in the design, the governing load combinations of the floor is changed from extreme environmental condition which has combined gravity and seismic loads to abnormal condition which has combined gravity and accident thermal/pressure loads. The in-plane shear in the direction parallel to the beams in increased from 20 kips per foot width to 31 kips per foot width. The required reinforcement is changed from 0.41 in2/ft to 0.43 in2/ft in the direction parallel to the beams DR p
RAFT om om Wall L Wall L-2 mbined by usi mbined show that the requ show that th hickness, the maximum hickness, the max han the yield stress, an han the yield stress, a ng thermal is smaller t g thermal is in compliance with the mpliance reduction in margin of sa reduction in marg s to meet the applicable o meet the applica obal structural analysis tructural analysis and do not impact the and do not impact the pact the ability of SFP W pact the ability of Tables Update for Auxil ables Update for Auxi R
y building are seismic C ng are seismic ent and piping suppor ent and piping s m is designed as com m is designed as co SC N690 SC N
-94 utilizing utilizing g construction.
g construction uirements o uirements crete crete
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 31 of 37 and from 0.28 in2/ft to 0.43 in2/ft in the direction perpendicular to the beams. The revised required reinforcement remains smaller than the provided reinforcement.
Even though there is no direct thermal load applied on the composite floor at this location, the composite floor between column lines M and P is next to the MSIV compartments which are subject to accident thermal loads, and the thermal induced deformation in the structures around MSIV compartments can cause thermal stresses in the floor. The composite floor is also evaluated under the combined seismic and accident thermal loads by using refined thermal reduction factor. The evaluation shows that the required reinforcement under combined seismic and accident thermal loads with refined thermal reduction factor can be bounded by the required reinforcement under abnormal condition without seismic included. Therefore, this change activity proposes to use the demands under abnormal condition without seismic included and delete Note 1 in UFSAR Table 3H.5-11.
The design of the composite floor remains in compliance with applicable requirements in AISC N690-94 and ACI 349-01. There is no reduction in margin of safety for the structure because the design of the composite floor continues to meet the applicable codes. The proposed changes do not impact the ability of the composite floor to withstand seismic impact. The proposed changes do not impact the ability of the composite floor to provide support and anchorage for component and piping supports and other attachments.
Change 4B - Tagging Room Ceiling Critical Section Table Update (Table 3H.5-12)
UFSAR Table 3H.5-12 shows the demands and capacities of the tagging room ceiling floor, which is a cast-in-place concrete placed on precast concrete floor. This activity proposes to revise the demands and capacities of the floor. There are multiple changes made in the latest design for the floor, including (a) refined analysis to more accurately account for 2-way behavior of the slab, (b) revised design methodology as approved in in LAR-14-003. The current value is based on a depth of slab equal to 24-inch taking into consideration the composite behavior of the precast panel and cast-in-place slab using the bottom layer of reinforcement in the precast panel for the mid-span positive moment reinforcement. The methodology for designing these types of floor slabs was revised through LAR-14-003, which was approved by NRC and has been incorporated in the licensing basis. The revised methodology requires the floor slab to be designed based on the thickness of the cast-in-place portion only. This results in a reduced depth to the reinforcement which has a corresponding increase in area of reinforcement required. The revised required reinforcement in the 24 inch slab remains smaller than the provided reinforcement.
Even though there is no direct thermal load applied on the tagging room ceiling floor, thermal loads are applied at other locations in the nuclear island, and the steady state heat transfer analysis can result in thermal gradient in the tagging room ceiling floor. The heat transfer analysis of the auxiliary building shows that there is no normal thermal gradient in the tagging room ceiling floor, and the accident thermal gradient is only 17 °F and therefore has negligible impact on the demands in the floor. Therefore, the demands in the markup of UFSAR Table 3H.5-12 do not reflect the demands under accident thermal.
DRAFT me me ity prop ity pr and and delete d
compliance with applic compliance with app o reduction in margin of o reduction in margin of oor continues to meet continues e ability of the composi e ability of the not impact the ability o not impact the abil ponent and piping supp nt and piping supp m Ceiling Critical Sectio m Ceiling Critical RA shows the demands an shows the demand inn-place concrete plac place concrete pla the de demands and capa mands and capa st design for the floor, st design for th way behavior of the slab way behavior of the s Th The current value is e current value is the composite be the composite of reinforcem of reinforce e metho e metho w
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 32 of 37 The design of the tagging room ceiling floor remains in compliance with ACI 349-01. There is no reduction in margin of safety for the structure because the design of the tagging room ceiling floor continues to meet the applicable codes. The proposed changes do not impact the ability of the tagging room ceiling floor to withstand seismic impact. The proposed changes do not impact the ability of the tagging room ceiling floor to provide support and anchorage for component and piping supports and other attachments.
Summary The proposed changes revise the accidental air and surface temperatures for the MSIV compartments, accident thermal loads for the exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building, and normal thermal loads for the PCS tank. The above proposed changes would not adversely affect any safety-related equipment or function, design function, radioactive material barrier or safety analysis.
- 4.
REGULATORY EVALUATION 4.1 Applicable Regulatory Requirements/Criteria 10 CFR Part 52, Appendix D, VIII.B.6 requires prior NRC approval for the departure from Tier 2* information. This activity includes Tier 2* departures that do not meet the Tier 2*
departure exemption criteria of License Condition 2.D.(13) of the VEGP Unit 4 combined license (COL), and thus requires NRC approval. Therefore, a license amendment request (LAR) (as supplied herein) is required.
10 CFR 50, Appendix A, General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants, General Design Criterion (GDC) 1, Quality standards and records, requires that structures, systems, and components important to safety shall be designed, fabricated, erected, and tested to quality standards commensurate with the importance of the safety functions to be performed. By continuing to follow the guidelines of the NRC Regulatory Guides and industry standards, the requirements of GDC 1 have been maintained.
10 CFR 50, Appendix A, GDC 2, Design bases for protection against natural phenomena, requires that structures, systems, and components important to safety shall be designed to withstand the effects of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, tsunami, and seiches without loss of capability to perform their safety functions. There is no change to the expected responses to natural phenomena, the nuclear island continues to be able to respond to the same design basis earthquake; therefore, there are no changes to the conformance with GDC 2.
10 CFR 50, Appendix A, GDC 4, Environmental and dynamic effects design bases, requires that structures, systems, and components important to safety shall be designed to accommodate the effects of and to be compatible with the environmental conditions associated with normal operation, maintenance, testing, and postulated accidents, including loss-of-coolant accidents. The changes in this activity do not alter the structures within the nuclear islands response to environmental conditions associated with normal operation, and because the same design criteria are used before and after the changes, DRAFT
. The Th unction, de unctio rements/Criteria ts/Crite
.B.6 requires prior NRC 6 requires prior NR y includes Tier 2* depa des Tier 2* depa of License Condition 2 of License Condition 2 equires NRC approval. T equires NRC appr ein) is required.
ein) is requir ndix A, General Desig dix A, General Desig n (GDC) 1, Quality s n (GDC) 1, Qua components important components importa ality standards comm ality standards comm By continuing to By continuing s, the requ s, the requ A
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 33 of 37 the auxiliary and shield building continue to be able to withstand similar conditions; therefore, there are no changes to the conformance with GDC 4.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix S provides the earthquake engineering criteria necessary for nuclear power plants to implement GDC 2 insofar as it requires structures, systems, and components important to safety to withstand the effects of earthquakes. As described in UFSAR subsections 3.2.1.1.1 and 3.7.1.1, 10 CFR 50, Appendix S, applies to seismic Category I structures. As described in UFSAR subsection 3.2.1.1.2, seismic Category II structures, such turbine building first bay which is adjacent to nuclear island outlined by Columns I.1 to R, 11.05 to 11.2, and 11.02 to 11.2, are designed to prevent their collapse during a safe shutdown earthquake, to preclude interactions with seismic Category I structures that could degrade the functioning of a safety-related structure, system or component. The proposed changes to the nuclear island SSCs do not adversely affect the structural capability of the seismic Category II structures. Therefore, compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix S, is not affected by this activity.
10 CFR 50.150 requires that nuclear power plants shall be designed to accommodate to identify design features and functional capabilities that demonstrate with reduced use of operator actions (i) the reactor core remains cooled, the containment remains intact, and (ii) spent fuel pool integrity is maintained. The proposed changes to the PCS tank do not adversely affect physical design or the design function of the PCS. The PCS tank design continues to meet the requirements of ACI-349 and AISC N690. Therefore, compliance with 10 CFR 50.150 is not affected by this activity.
4.2 Precedent No precedent is identified.
4.3 Significant Hazards Consideration The proposed changes would revise the accidental air and surface temperatures for the MSIV compartments, accident thermal loads for the exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building, and normal thermal loads for the PCS tank The requested amendment proposes a change to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Tier 2 and Tier 2* information that do not meet the Tier 2* departure exemption criteria of License Condition 2.D.(13) of the VEGP Unit 4 combined license (COL), and thus requires NRC approval.
An evaluation to determine whether or not a significant hazards consideration is involved with the proposed amendment was completed by focusing on the three standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92, Issuance of amendment, as discussed below:
DRAFT ctio ctio afety afety-rel and SSCs and S do uctures ctures. Therefore
. Th vity.
vity.
er plants shall be design r plants shall be design capabilities that demon abilities tha emains cooled, the con ooled ained.
ained. The proposed c The propos or the design function he design function ements of ACI of ACI-349 and 349 and affected by this activity affected by this a dentified dentified.
ficant Hazards Consid ficant Hazards Cons changes would r changes would nts, accid nts, accid ary b ary b
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 34 of 37 4.3.1 Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response
No.
The design functions of the nuclear island structures are to provide support, protection, and separation for the seismic Category 1 mechanical and electrical equipment located in the nuclear island. The nuclear island structures are structurally designed to meet seismic Category 1 requirements as defined in Regulatory Guide 1.29.
The proposed changes to revise the accidental air and surface temperatures for the MSIV compartments, accident thermal loads for the exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building, and normal thermal loads for the PCS tank do not have an adverse impact on the response of the nuclear island structures to safe shutdown earthquake ground motions or loads to anticipated or postulated accident conditions. The proposed changes do not adversely affect the design function of any SSCs contained within the nuclear island. This change does not involve any accident initiating components or events, thus leaving the probabilities of an accident unaltered. The changes do not impact the support, design, or operation of mechanical and fluid systems. There is no change to plant systems or the response of systems to postulated accident conditions. There is no change to the predicted radioactive releases due to normal operation or postulated accident conditions. The plant response to previously evaluated accidents or external events is not adversely affected, nor do the proposed changes create any new accident precursors.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
4.3.2 Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response
No.
The proposed changes to revise the accidental air and surface temperatures for the MSIV compartments, accident thermal loads for the exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building, and normal thermal loads for the PCS do not change the design requirements of the nuclear island structures. The proposed changes do not adversely affect the design function of any SSC contained within the nuclear island, or any other SSC design functions or methods of operation in a manner that results in a new failure mode, malfunction, or sequence of events that affect safety-related or non-safety-related equipment. The proposed changes DRAFT l air and l air ads for the ext ads for d normal thermal loa d normal therm response of the nuclea response of the nuc motions or loads to an motions or loads to an sed changes do not a changes ned within the nuclear ned within the n ing components or eve g components or ev ed. The change e changes s do n do n ical and fluid systems ical and fluid sys ystems to postulated a ystems to postulat radioactive releases du adioactive releases du The plant response t plant response t s not adversely affecte s not adversely a ent precursors.
ent precursors.
ore, the proposed ore, the propos or conseq or conseq pro pro
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 35 of 37 do not change the design, function, support, or operation of mechanical and fluid systems.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
4.3.3 Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response
No.
The proposed changes to revise the accidental air and surface temperatures for the MSIV compartments, accident thermal loads for the exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building, and normal thermal loads for the PCS tank do not alter any safety-related equipment, applicable design codes, code compliance, design function, or safety analysis. These changes maintain conformance to American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) N690 and American Concrete Institute (ACI) 349-01. The criteria and requirements of AISC N690 and ACI 349-01 provide a margin of safety to structural failure. The design of the nuclear island SSCs conform to criteria and requirements in AISC N690 and ACI 349-01 and therefore, maintains the margin of safety. The change does not alter any design function, design analysis, or safety analysis input or result, and sufficient margin exists to justify departure Consequently, no safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by the proposed change, thus the margin of safety is not reduced.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Based on the above, it is concluded that the proposed amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration under the standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and, accordingly, a finding of no significant hazards consideration is justified.
4.4 Conclusions In conclusion, based on the considerations discussed above, (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commissions regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.92, the requested change does not involve a Significant Hazards Consideration.
DRAFT air an air a ds for the e ds for normal thermal lo normal the pment, applicable de pment, applicab safety analysis.
safety an Thes The ute of Steel Construc te of Steel CI) 3499-01. The criteria
- 01. T de a margin of safety t de a margin of sa s conform to criteria an nform to criteria an fore, maintains the ma ore, maintains the ma nction, design analysis nction, design an n exists to justify depa n exists to justify de acceptance limit/criterio ceptance limit/criterio hus the margin of safety hus the margin fore, the proposed ame fore, the proposed am n of safety.
n of s ove, it is co ove, it is co consid consid
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 36 of 37 5.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS The details of the proposed changes are provided in Sections 2 and 3 of this licensing amendment request.
The requested amendment proposes changes to information in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) related to the accidental air and surface temperatures for the MSIV compartments, accident thermal loads for the exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building, and normal thermal loads for the PCS tank.
This review has determined the proposed change requires an amendment to the COL. However, a review of the anticipated construction and operational effects of the requested amendment has determined the requested amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9), in that:
(i)
There is no significant hazards consideration.
As documented in Section 4.3, Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, of this license amendment request, an evaluation was completed to determine whether or not a significant hazards consideration is involved by focusing on the three standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92, Issuance of amendment. The Significant Hazards Consideration determined that (1) the requested amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; (2) the requested amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; and (3) the requested amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Therefore, it is concluded that the requested amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration under the standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and accordingly, a finding of no significant hazards consideration is justified.
(ii)
There is no significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite.
The proposed changes revise the accidental air and surface temperatures for the MSIV compartments, accident thermal loads for the exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building, and normal thermal loads for the PCS tank. The proposed change is unrelated to any aspect of plant construction or operation that would introduce any change to effluent types (e.g., effluents containing chemicals or biocides, sanitary system effluents, and other effluents), or affect any plant radiological or non-radiological effluent release quantities. Furthermore, the proposed change does not affect any effluent release path or diminish the functionality of any design or operational features that are credited with controlling the release of effluents during plant operation.
DRAFT of the of th criteria for c criter t Hazards Consideratio Hazards Consideratio ation was completed to was com involved by focusing o involved by focus amendment.
endment. The Si The S sted amendment does endment does ences of an accident p ences of an acc eate the possibility of a eate the possibility o evaluated; and (3) the valuated; and (3) the on in a margin of safety on in a margin s concluded that the r s concluded that the sideration under the s sideration under significant haza significant ha ant cha ant cha
ND-19-XXXX Request for License Amendment Regarding Reconciliation of Environmental Conditions Inputs to Civil Structural Design Licensing Basis (LAR-19-019)
Page 37 of 37 Therefore, it is concluded that the requested amendment does not involve a significant change in the types or a significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite.
(iii)
There is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The proposed changes revise the accidental air and surface temperatures for the MSIV compartments, accident thermal loads for the exterior walls below grade and basemat in the auxiliary building, and normal thermal loads for the PCS tank. Plant radiation zones (addressed in UFSAR Section 12.3) are not affected, and controls under 10 CFR 20 preclude a significant increase in occupational radiation exposure. Therefore, the requested amendment does not involve a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
Based on the above review of the requested amendment, it has been determined that anticipated construction and operational effects of the requested amendment do not involve (i) a significant hazards consideration, (ii) a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite, or (iii) a significant increase in the individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, the requested amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment of the proposed exemption is not required.
- 6. REFERENCES None.
DRAFT and and adiation e adiatio nt increase in in nt increas dment, it has been dete dment, it has been dete ested amendment do n ted amendm e in the types or signific types site, or (iii) a significan ite, or (iii) a sign ure. Accordingly, the r Accordingly, the ion set forth in 10 forth in 10 CFR CFR al impact statement o al impact statement o red.
red.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company ND-19-XXXX Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Units 3 and 4 Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents (LAR-19-019)
Additions identified by blue underlined text.
Deletions Identified by red strikethrough of text.
- *
- indicates omitted existing text that is not shown.
(This Enclosure consists of 33 pages, including this cover page)
DRAFT g Plant Units 3 and 4 g Plant Units 3 and 4 nges to nges Licensing Ba Licensing Ba (LAR L
-19 19-019 0
Additions identified Additions identif DR Deletions Identifie Deletions Identifie D
- indicates om
- indicates o
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 2 of 33 Revise UFSAR Tier 2* Subsection 3H.3.3, Loads, sixth subheading, Operating Thermal Loads (To), revise text as shown below.
3H.3.3 Loads Normal thermal loads for the passive containment cooling system (PCS) tank design are calculated based on the outside air temperature extremes specified for the safety-related design. The PCS tank is assumed to be at 40°F when the outside air temperature is -40°F. The water in the PCS tank is assumed to be at 70°F The structural design of the PCS tank also conservatively assumes that the temperature on the inside of the PCS tank walls is at 40°F when the outside air temperature is postulated to be at 115°F.
DRAFT
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 3 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-1, Nuclear Island: Design Temperatures for Thermal Gradient as shown below.
Structure (See detail in Subsection 3H.3.3)
Load Temperature (°F)
Remark PCS Tank Walls Normal Thermal, To
[(Outside)
-40
+115 (Inside)
+40
+70 +40 Exterior Walls Below Grade Normal Thermal, To Accident Thermal, Ta N/R N/R +50 N/R N/R +140
- Auxiliary Building Basemat Normal Thermal, To Accident Thermal, Ta N/R N/R +50 N/R N/R +140
- Auxiliary Building DRAFT N/R N
+
T
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 4 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3.8.5-3, Definition of Critical Locations, Thicknesses and Reinforcement for Nuclear Island Basemat(1) (in2/ft) as shown below.
Basemat Segment (see detail in subsection 3.8.5.4.4)
Location Required(3)(6)
[Provided (Minimum)(4)]*
North-South East-West Shear North-South East-West Shear Auxiliary Building Basemat Elevation 66 6 Column line K to L and from Shield Building to Col. Line 11(2)(6)
Top Face Note 5 1.5 Note 5
[2.25 2.25 Bottom Face Note 5 1.6 1.85 2.25 2.25 0.23 0.24 0.25]*
Column line 1 to 2 and from Column Line K-2 to N wall(2)
General Area Top Face Note 5 Note 5
[2.25 2.25 Central Zone Top Face 2.72 3.11 Note 5 3.25 2.25 Bottom Face Note 5 1.85 2.25 2.25 0.47 0.50]*
Notes:
- 6. Thermal loads have been considered in the design of critical sections. The required reinforcement values shown do not include the load case where seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined as the normal thermal loads were assessed to be insignificant. When the seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined, the value of required reinforcement may increase; however, in all cases the required reinforcement is less than the provided reinforcement and thus the design of the critical section reinforcement is acceptable.
- 6. The 5'-0" portion of the Basemat between column line L to 5' east of column line and shield building to column line 9.2, as shown in Figure 3.8.5-3, Sheets 5-7, are not included in this area.
DRAFT 3 0.
0 T
3.
T FTT 1.8 1.85 FT F
2.
FT FT FTT FTT 0.47 FT FT FTT FT FT FT FTT ered in the design o in the design o AF ot include the load case de the load cas RA ned as the normal t ned as the nor RA mic and normal thermal mic and normal therm RA may increase; howeve may increase; howev RA reinforcement and thus orcement and thus DR of the Basemat betwee of the Basemat betw DR mn line 9.2, as shown mn line 9.2, as shown D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 5 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-2, Exterior Wall at Column Line 1 Forces and Moments in Critical Locations as shown below.
Load Combination Mx MY MXY TX TY TXY Elevation 180-0 to 135-3
[D + L + H + Ta 177.8 3.1 115.5 8.8 1.05 D + 1.3 L + 1.3 H+ 1.2 To]*
106.4 5.6 117.0 23.9
[0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 194.9 0.3 155.8 82.8 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 266.4 18.4 27.2 34.0 D+F+L+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 144.3 49.1 144.3 95.5 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym]*
126.6 42.5 149.0 52.0 Elevation 135-3 to 100-0
[D + L + H + Ta 50.8 0.3 89.8 104.8 D + L + H + Ta 82.9 7.6 172.9 24.8 D + L + H + Ta]*
60.0 3.6 165.7 106.0
[0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 45.8 5.0 257.9 44.0 D+F+L+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 63.4 1.9 149.7 47.3 D+F+L+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym]*
87.1 37.0 72.2 53.0 Elevation 100-0 to 82-6
[1.05 D + 1.3 L + 1.3 H + 1.2 To 48.1 8.4 106.1 17.3 D + L+ Es]*
1.8 5.4 15.6 58.6
[0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 44.1 13.8 194.4 130.8 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 42.9 13.8 194.4 130.8 0.9D+0.9F+1.3L+1.2To+1.3H+1.3Ro 1.0 19.2 34.5 122.3 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym]*
21.1 16.0 36.0 128.8 Elevation 82-6 to 66-6
[D + L - Es 93.8 26.5 170.7 31.5 0.9 D + Es 32.7 27.2 182.1 42.4 0.9 D + Es]*
15.5 27.2 18.6 42.4
[0.9D+F+H+Ro+To+Es 18.1 2.3 204.2 83.4 0.9D+F+H+Ro+To+Es 105.7 22.8 230.6 25.6 0.9D+F+H+Ro+To+Es]*
24.4 2.3 11.4 83.4 DRAFTT
.6
.6 T
1 T
3.6 3.6 T
165 T
5.0 FTT FT 1.9 FT 149.7 T
FT FTT FT 37 37.0 FT 72 72 T
FT FTT FT FT FTT 48.11 AF 8.4 F
13 13 AF AF AF AF 42.9 42.9 RAA RAA 1.0 RA RA RA RAA RAA m]*]*
m R
211.1 RA RA RA RA RA RA RA RA R
DRR DR DR DRR DRR 15.5 15.
R DR DR DR DR DR DR DR DR D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 6 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-3, Exterior Wall on Column Line 1 Details of Wall Reinforcement (in2/ft) as shown below.
Wall Segment (See detail in Subsection 3H.5.1.1.)
Location Required(2)
[Provided (Minimum)]*
Vertical Horizontal Shear(3)
Vertical Horizontal Shear(3)
Wall Section 1, 6 Elevation 180-0 to 135-3 N/R None Outside Face 3.48(4) 3.65 2.65 3.08
[3.91(4) 3.12 Inside Face 1.94 2.76 1.52 2.51 3.12 3.12]*
Wall Section 2, 3, 7 Elevation 135-3 to 100-0 NR 0.17 None 0.80]*
Outside Face 1.88 3.00 3.04
[3.12 3.12 Inside Face 1.77 3.00 2.23 3.12 3.12]*
Wall Section 4, 8 Elevation 100-0 to 82-6 0.003 0.03
[0.44]*
Outside Face 1.42 3.04 0.70 1.55
[3.12 1.56 Inside Face 1.01 3.04 0.70 1.25 3.12 1.27]*
Wall Section 5, 9 Elevation 82-6 to 66-6 0.27 0.56
[0.88]*
Outside Face 2.29 3.37 0.87 0.95
[4.39 1.27 Inside Face 1.87 2.68 0.87 0.95 3.12 1.27]*
Notes:
- 2. Thermal loads have been considered in the design of critical sections. The required reinforcement values shown do not include the load case where seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined as the normal thermal loads were assessed to be insignificant. When the seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined, the value of required reinforcement may increase; however, in all cases the required reinforcement is less than the provided reinforcement and thus the design of the critical section reinforcement is acceptable. Not used.
D mbin mbin D
e been consider e been consid DRAFT 0.17 0.17 T
[3.
[
12 T
3.12 3
FTT FT FTT 0.003 0.0 FT 0.03 FTT AFT 0.70 0.70 1.55 AF AF AF AF AF 0.70 0.70 1.25 1.25 AF AF AF AF AF AF AF AF RAAF 0
RA RA RAA RAA 2.29 2.29 3.377 R
0.87 0
0.9 0.
RA RA RA RA RA RA 1.87 87 2.68 2.68 DR DR 0.87 0.87 0 RA RA RA DRRA R
ve been considere ve been consid D
shown do n shown do D
ombine ombine D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 7 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-4, Interior Wall at Column Line 7.3 Forces and Moments in Critical Locations as shown below.
Load Combination Mx MY MXY TX TY TXY From Roof to Elevation 155-6
[1.05 D + 1.3 L + 1.2 To 135.3 10.9 117.3 210.2 1.05 D + 1.3 L + 1.2 To]*
75.5 4.1 229.8 94.3
[0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 21.3 15.6 135.0 233.5 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym]*
54.3 16.9 241.8 199.5 Elevation 155-6 to 135-3
[0.9 D - Es 14.1 1.3 160.8 228.7 D + L - Es]*
28.0 1.0 29.8 231.7
[0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 9.1 4.0 192.2 189.3 D+F+L+H+Ro+To+Es]*
23.5 2.5 39.1 215.9 Elevation 135-3 to 117-6
[0.9 D - Es 3.3 1.3 142.2 140.9 D + L - Es]*
10.0 1.0 41.7 175.0
[0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 9.3 3.7 177.9 161.6 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym]*
11.3 0.6 46.3 184.3 Elevation 117-6 to 100-0
[0.9 D - Es 4.7 2.8 143.9 184.9 D + L + Es]*
6.4 1.5 172.8 107.9
[0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 7.8 2.7 133.8 199.0 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym]*
4.7 1.2 178.9 116.4 Elevation 100-0 to 82-6
[0.9 D - Es 15.4 2.6 90.4 169.8 D + L - Es]*
8.7 2.6 46.6 175.6
[0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 31.0 8.5 166.2 91.5 D+F+L+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym]*
12.8 0.0 6.4 164.8 Elevation 82-6 to 66-6
[0.9 D - Es 23.5 1.3 80.9 49.3 D + L - Es]*
0.8 1.3 1.7 74.1
[0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym 24.5 3.8 105.7 79.3 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym]*
2.5 3.8 9.7 79.3 D
j+Y DRAFTT
.5 T
1.3 FTT FT 1.0 FT 41.7 41 T
FT FT FT FT 9.3 F
3.7 FT FT FT FT FT 0.6 FT FT FT FT AFFT AF AF AFF 4.7 4
AF 2.8 F
1 F
RAA R
4.7 RA RA RA RAA RAA RA RA RA 15 15 RA DRA RA RA DRRA 8.7 R
DR DR DRR DRR Yr Y +Yj
+Yj r
+Ym Y
DR DR DR DRR DR
+Yr Y +Yj+
+
r Ym Y
]*]*
m DR 12 12.8 DR DR DR DR DR
DR DR DR D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 8 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-5, Interior Wall on Column Line 7.3 Details of Wall Reinforcement as shown below.
Wall Segment (see detail in Subsection 3H.5.1.2.)
Location Wall Section Reinforcement on Each Face (in2/ft)
Required(1)
[Provided (Min.)]*
From Roof to Elevation 155-6 Horizontal 1
3.96 4.06
[4.12 Vertical 7
3.60 3.72 Elevation 155-6 to 135-3 Horizontal 2
2.80 3.12 Vertical 8
3.59 3.64 3.72 Elevation 135-3 to 117-6 Horizontal 3
2.03 2.10 2.54 Vertical 9
2.63 3.10 3.12 Elevation 117-6 to 100-0 Horizontal 4
2.29 2.34 2.54 Vertical 10 2.98 3.12 Elevation 100-0 to 82-6 Horizontal 5
1.69 2.54 Vertical 11 2.08 2.33 3.12(3)
Elevation 82-6 to 66-6 Horizontal 6
0.85 1.27 Vertical 12 0.98 1.52 1.56 Shear Reinforcement(2) (in2/ft2)
From Roof to Elevation 155-6 Standard hook or T headed bar 7
0.38 0.44 0.80]*
Notes:
- 1. Thermal loads have been considered in the design of critical sections. The required reinforcement values shown do not include the load case where seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined as the normal thermal loads were assessed to be insignificant. When the seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined, the value of required reinforcement may increase; however, in all cases the required reinforcement is less than the provided reinforcement and thus the design of the critical section reinforcement is acceptable. Not used.
DR ess than the provided ess than the provided DRAFTT 1
T 2.08 2 T
FT 6
0.85 FT FT FT FT 12 12 0.98 0.9 T
FT FT FT FT FT FT FT 7
AFT FT FT AFFT F
idered in the design of idered in the des RA do not include do not incl the load the RA mbined as the normal th bined as the normal t RA seismic and normal the mic and normal the DR nforcement nforcement may increas may DR ss than the provided re ss than the provide DR ement is acceptable.
ement is acceptable. N DR
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 9 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-6, Interior Wall at Column Line L Forces and Moments in Critical Locations as shown below.
Load Combination Mx MY MXY TX TY TXY Elevation 154-2 to 135-3
[0.9 D + Es+ Pa + Yj 6.0 3.5 115.4 170.2 0.9 D + Es+ Pa + Yj]*
14.3 3.5 46.0 170.2
[0.9D+F+L+H+Ro+To+Es 12.0 4.8 124.1 129.7 0.9D+F+H+Es+Pa+Ta+Ra+Yr+Yj+Ym]*
31.3 4.4 24.6 233.1 Elevation 135-3 to 117-6
[0.9 D + Es+ Pa + Yj 145.3 12.2 26.0 38.2 0.9 D + Es+ Pa + Yj]*
24.5 7.1 15.5 114.9
[0.9D+F+L+H+Ro+To+Es 4.5 5.0 124.8 127.5 0.9D+F+L+H+Ro+To+Es]*
26.1 6.2 9.3 132.6 DRAFTT
.2 T
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 10 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-7, Interior Wall on Column Line L Details of Wall Reinforcement as shown below.
Wall Segment (see detail in Subsection 3H.5.1.3.)
Location Wall Section Reinforcement on Each Face (in2/ft2)
Required(1)
[Provided (Min.)]*
Elevation 154-2 to 135-3 Horizontal 1
2.08 2.09
[2.27 Vertical 3
2.59 3.12 Elevation 135-3 to 117-6 Horizontal 2
1.36 1.46 4.39 Vertical 4
2.02 2.37 5.66]*
Shear Reinforcement(2) (in2/ft2)
Elevation 154-2 to 135-3 Standard hook or T headed bar 5
0.01 0.13
[0.11 0.80 Elevation 135-3 to 117-6 Standard hook or T headed bar 6
0.33 0.55 1.76]*
Notes:
- 1. Thermal loads have been considered in the design of critical sections. The required reinforcement values shown do not include the load case where seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined as the normal thermal loads were assessed to be insignificant. When the seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined, the value of required reinforcement may increase; however, in all cases the required reinforcement is less than the provided reinforcement and thus the design of the critical section reinforcement is acceptable. Not used.
DRAFT 0
T design of critical sectio design of critical secti FT e the load case where the load ca FT d as the normal therma he norm AF nd normal thermal load nd normal therm AF nt may may increase; howev increase; how AF provided reinforcement ed reinforcement RA eptable.
eptabl Not used.
ot use RA RA
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 11 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 (Sheet 1 of 7), Design Summary of Spent Fuel Pool Wall Design Loads, Load Combinations, and Comparisons to Acceptance Criteria - Element No. 20477 as shown below.
Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments Dead (D)
-16.15
-22.92
-28.34
-1.34
-1.06
-0.32
-0.32 Live (L) 1.46 0.32
-1.57
-0.06
-0.21 0.04 0.03 Hydro (F) 37.52 12.36
-4.32
-100.50
-14.49 62.14
-9.95 Seismic (Es) 46.21 56.51 183.20 81.72 28.70 103.00 14.79 Thermal (To)
-61.80
-267.70
-51.15
-426.90
-145.50 90.32
-23.66 Thermal (Ta)
-955.80
-444.60
-139.70
-1401.0
-450.00 227.50
-83.16 LC(1a) 32.40
-14.25
-48.39
-142.68
-22.12 86.61
-14.33
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 84.05 51.21 147.24
-60.38 7.15 189.71 0.56 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 84.05 51.21
-219.16
-223.82
-50.25
-16.29
-29.02 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-267.08
-116.11 115.28
-327.19
-83.79 246.16
-14.22 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-267.08
-116.11
-251.12
-490.63
-141.19 40.16
-43.80 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 84.20 53.18 151.64
-60.18 7.46 189.71 0.57 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 84.20 53.18
-214.76
-223.62
-49.94
-16.29
-29.01 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-266.92
-114.13 119.68
-326.99
-83.47 246.16
-14.22 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-266.92
-114.13
-246.72
-490.43
-140.87 40.16
-43.80 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-574.55
-288.12
-121.54
-977.52
-297.00 204.04
-62.22 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-825.30
-421.18
-153.29
-53.19
-5.28 63.89
-15.73 D+L+F+Ta LC(7a)
-397.01
-211.45
-74.69
-427.19
-125.72 132.70
-28.49 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F+
1.2To]*
Dead (D)
-15.54
-11.97
-19.88 0.12 0.10
-1.72
-0.36 Live (L) 0.78
-0.04
-1.18
-0.24
-0.13
-0.01 0.02 Hydro (F) 30.96 4.98
-3.82
-63.41
-5.35 43.84
-5.16 Seismic (Es) 82.85 54.22 125.46 58.55 31.63 87.52 15.70 Thermal (To)
-493.98
-241.71
-55.16
-494.28
-151.42 59.44
-31.16 Thermal (Ta)
-863.45
-406.83
-143.22
-466.24
-453.18 196.15
-90.75 LC(1a) 22.92
-9.85
-35.18
-89.01
-7.58 58.96
-7.69
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 111.43 49.18 99.06
-30.33 24.10 147.17 8.14 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 111.43 49.18
-151.86
-147.44
-39.15
-27.87
-23.26 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-197.31
-101.89 64.59
-339.26
-70.53 184.32
-11.34 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-197.31
-101.89
-186.34
-456.36
-133.79 9.28
-42.73 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 112.20 50.42 102.23
-30.11 24.23 147.35 8.15 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 112.20 50.42
-148.70
-147.21
-39.03
-27.69
-23.24 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-196.53
-100.65 67.75
-339.03
-70.41 184.50
-11.32 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-196.53
-100.65
-183.17
-456.13
-133.67 9.46
-42.72 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-523.45
-261.30
-114.39
-979.93
-288.62 164.71
-62.21 D+L+F+Ta DRAFT 22 227 T
86.61 8
T 18 189.71 T
0.25
.25 FT
-16.29 6.29 FT
-2 T
FTT
-83.79 FT 246.16 FT FT FT FTT FTT
-141.19 41.19 FT 40.16 FT FT FT FT AFT 18 A
7.46 7.46 AF 189 F
AFT FT FT AFT 223.62 23.62 A
-326.99 6.99 A
-83.47
.47 AFF AF 2
R
-490.43 43 RA
-1 RA 40.88 A
RAA RA 1.54 1.54 R
-977.52 977.52 RA
-29 A
RAA RA 153.29 53 R
-53.
-74.69
-74.69 DR
-427.19 RA DR 1.
1.
R 97 D
-19.
9.88 DR 0
DRR DR 0.04
.04 D
-1.188 DRR DR
-3.82
.82 D
125 125 D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 12 of 33 Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments LC(5b)
-624.45
-326.96
-150.38
-10.07 8.26 60.09
-7.70 D+L+F+Ta LC(6a)
-541.61
-272.74
-24.91
-921.37
-256.99 252.23
-46.51 D+L+F+Es+Ta LC(6b)
-707.30
-381.18
-275.84
-1038.48
-320.25 77.19
-77.91 D+L+F+Es+Ta LC(7a)
-353.28
-188.68
-67.78
-437.47
-119.25 88.80
-29.14 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F+
1.2To]*
Notes:
x - direction is horizontal; y - direction is vertical.
See Figure 3H.5-10 for element location.
Plate thickness required for load combinations excluding thermal:
0.42 inches (Maximum)
[Plate thickness provided:
0.50 -0.01 +0.10 inches]*
Maximum principal stress for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
46.33 ksi
[Yield stress:
65.0 ksi (Minimum)]*
Maximum stress intensity range for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
46.3 74.2 ksi Allowable stress intensity:
130.0 ksi (Minimum)
DRAFT l:l:
binations binatio T
6 on 5 on 5 load FT F
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 13 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 (Sheet 2 of 7), Design Summary of Spent Fuel Pool Wall Design Loads, Load Combinations, and Comparisons to Acceptance Criteria - Element No. 10529 as shown below.
Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments Dead (D)
-24.40
-96.30
-20.71
-1.16
-2.27
-0.28
-0.34 Live (L)
-0.44
-2.48
-0.55
-0.01
-0.24 0.01 0.08 Hydro (F) 9.86
-5.49 6.22 8.37
-73.49 16.94 16.02 Seismic (Es) 110.80 335.20 95.73 19.03 93.81 22.15 29.34 Thermal (To)
-215.70
-479.30
-150.10
-99.69
-357.90 16.39 19.34 Thermal (Ta)
-389.40
-883.60
-273.20
-364.10
-982.20 40.42 17.26 LC(1a)
-21.10
-146.72
-21.23 10.09
-106.48 23.34 22.09
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 99.77 228.74 83.17 29.58
-11.59 45.60 51.51 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 99.77 228.74
-108.29
-8.48
-199.21 1.30
-7.17 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-35.05
-70.83
-10.64
-32.72
-235.28 55.84 63.60 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-35.05
-70.83
-202.10
-70.78
-422.90 11.54 4.92 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 102.64 240.85 85.80 29.71
-11.12 45.61 51.47 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 102.64 240.85
-105.66
-8.35
-198.74 1.31
-7.21 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-32.17
-58.72
-8.02
-32.60
-234.81 55.86 63.55 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-32.17
-58.72
-199.48
-70.66
-422.43 11.56 4.87 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-258.35
-656.52
-185.79
-220.36
-689.88 41.93 26.55 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-362.67
-963.64
-260.17 7.94
-144.07 12.21 12.80 D+L+F+Ta LC(7a)
-177.61
-469.58
-128.51
-67.20
-348.29 29.80 31.07 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F
+1.2To]*
Dead(D)
-17.41
-97.25
-17.82
-1.28
-0.78
-0.71
-1.27 Live(L)
-0.49
-3.11
-0.65
-0.09
-0.29 0.00 0.03 Hydro(F) 6.13
-6.31 3.61
-1.47
-51.56 11.49 13.08 Seismic(Es) 75.07 320.60 80.95 15.40 78.74 18.35 26.14 Thermal(To)
-196.00
-447.61
-134.64
-144.47
-333.40 8.42
-4.77 Thermal(Ta)
-361.26
-827.41
-251.05
-409.00
-954.60 32.29
-7.21 LC(1a)
-16.64
-150.28
-21.00
-3.99
-73.77 15.09 16.57
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 65.74 211.40 67.54 11.98 5.48 33.73 43.20 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 65.74 211.40
-94.37
-18.82
-151.99
-2.98
-9.07 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-56.76
-68.36
-16.61
-78.31
-202.89 38.99 40.22 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-56.76
-68.36
-178.52
-109.11
-360.36 2.29
-12.05 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 67.98 224.24 69.97 12.20 5.85 33.80 43.31 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 67.98 224.24
-91.94
-18.60
-151.62
-2.90
-8.97 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-54.52
-55.52
-14.18
-78.10
-202.53 39.06 40.33 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-54.52
-55.52
-176.09
-108.90
-360.00 2.36
-11.95 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-237.57
-623.81
-171.77
-258.46
-649.25 30.96 7.33 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-293.85
-862.10
-215.10 7.87
-109.50 11.32 19.92 D+L+F+Ta LC(6a)
-218.78
-541.51
-134.14
-243.06
-570.52 49.31 33.47 D+L+F+Es+Ta LC(6b)
-368.91
-1182.70
-296.05
-273.86
-727.99 12.60
-18.81 D+L+F+E's+Ta LC(7a)
-159.49
-448.50
-116.74
-111.35
-305.38 17.63 8.86 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F
+1.2To]*
DRAFT 2
T 45.6 T
21 T
1.30 T
35.28 T
55.84 55 T
FTT
-42 422.90 FT 11.
1.54 FT FT FT FTT FTT
-11.122 FT 45.61 61 FT FT FT FT FT 5
-1998.74 AFT 1.31 FT FT FT FT AFFT 2.60 A
-23 234.81 AF 55 F
-70.66 70.66 A
-220.
0.36 A
R 7.94 RA
-14 144 0 A
RAA 8.51 8.51 R
-67.20
.20 RA
-34 A
RA RA RAA RAA
-17.
17 82 R
-1.28
-0.65
.65 DR
-0.09 09 R
DR 1
D 3.61 3.61 DR
-1 R
DRR DR 0.60 0.60 D
80.95 80.9 DR DRR DR 447 447.61 6
D
-134 34.64 6
DRR DR 7 41 41 D
-251 51.05 0
D 8
-21.
21.
D 6
D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 14 of 33 Notes:
x - direction is horizontal; y - direction is vertical.
See Figure 3H.5-10 for element location.
Plate thickness required for load combinations excluding thermal:
0.47 inches (Maximum)
[Plate thickness provided:
0.50 -0.01 +0.10 inches]*
Maximum principal stress for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
40.3 48.2 ksi
[Yield stress:
65.0 ksi (Minimum)]*
Maximum stress intensity range for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
50.8 70.1 ksi Allowable stress intensity:
130.0 ksi (Minimum)
DRAFT
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 15 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 (Sheet 3 of 7), Design Summary of Spent Fuel Pool Wall Design Loads, Load Combinations, and Comparisons to Acceptance Criteria - Element No. 10544 as shown below.
Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments Dead (D)
-20.03
-75.69
-42.72 3.53
-2.18
-0.01
-1.93 Live (L)
-0.64
-1.98
-1.22 0.36
-0.06 0.02
-0.07 Hydro (F)
-4.13
-2.97
-4.10 39.78 3.54 0.99
-4.80 Seismic (Es) 67.42 185.70 113.20 48.28 7.62 5.78 5.32 Thermal (To)
-121.60
-387.30
-239.80 75.83
-107.40 39.64 49.91 Thermal (Ta)
-215.20
-670.10
-416.60 184.20
-269.30 115.50 136.20 LC(1a)
-34.91
-113.49
-67.62 61.25 1.81 1.40
-9.54
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 40.97 103.87 63.52 107.86 10.34 7.18
-3.41 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 40.97 103.87
-162.88 11.30
-4.90
-4.39
-14.04 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-35.03
-138.19
-86.36 155.26
-56.79 31.95 27.79 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-35.03
-138.19
-312.76 58.70
-72.02 20.39 17.15 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 43.61 113.42 69.01 107.15 10.61 7.16
-3.14 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 43.61 113.42
-157.39 10.59
-4.62
-4.41
-13.78 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-32.39
-128.64
-80.87 154.54
-56.51 31.93 28.05 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-32.39
-128.64
-307.27 57.98
-71.75 20.37 17.41 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-159.30
-499.45
-308.41 158.79
-167.01 73.19 78.32 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-267.05
-805.64
-503.54 51.38
-38.58 1.37
-9.65 D+L+F+Ta LC(7a)
-117.40
-375.64
-230.60 102.82
-79.20 30.78 30.27 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F
+1.2To]*
Dead(D)
-23.37
-59.59
-41.62 3.76
-0.81 0.28
-0.71 Live(L)
-0.82
-2.01
-1.14 0.36
-0.04 0.04
-0.02 Hydro(F)
-4.24
-1.67
-3.22 28.34 2.08 1.19
-2.90 Seismic(Es) 75.42 145.64 111.14 44.70 4.30 5.79 4.07 Thermal(To)
-103.44
-329.56
-196.76 87.54
-91.81 42.74 40.36 Thermal(Ta)
-188.49
-561.47
-351.05 198.05
-247.04 118.07 126.02 LC(1a)
-40.05
-89.18
-64.72 45.55 1.71 2.13
-5.10
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F]
LC(3a) 45.29 81.70 63.87 88.50 6.37 7.78
-0.73 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 45.29 81.70
-158.42
-0.91
-2.24
-3.80
-8.87 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-19.36
-124.27
-59.11 143.21
-51.01 34.49 24.50 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-19.36
-124.27
-281.39 53.80
-59.62 22.91 16.36 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 48.45 89.67 69.17 87.76 6.49 7.72
-0.63 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 48.45 89.67
-153.12
-1.64
-2.12
-3.87
-8.78 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-16.20
-116.31
-53.81 142.48
-50.89 34.43 24.59 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-16.20
-116.31
-276.09 53.07
-59.50 22.84 16.45 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-146.24
-414.18
-265.39 156.24
-153.16 75.31 75.13 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-238.80
-668.77
-433.11 76.45
-23.63 2.24
-19.91 D+L+F+Ta LC(6a)
-163.37
-523.13
-321.97 200.94
-148.86 81.10
-15.83 D+L+F+Es+Ta LC(6b)
-314.22
-814.40
-544.25 31.75
-157.47 69.51
-23.98 D+L+F+E's+Ta DRAFT 1
T 7.18 T
0 T
-4.39 T
6.79 79 T
31.95 T
FTT
-72.02 FT 20.39 FT FT FT FTT FTT 10.61 FT 7.166 FT FT FT FT FT 9
A
-4.62 AFT
-4.4 FT FT FT FT AFFT 4.54 A
-56.51 AF 31 F
-71.75 75 AF AF AF AFF AFF 158.79 58.79 A
R 51.38 RA
-38.5 A
RAA 30.60
.60 R
102.82
.82 RA
-7 RA RA RAA RAA
-41.
41 62 R
3.76 3.76 RA RA RAA RAA
-1 DR
.14
.14 DR 0.366 R
DR 67 67 D
-3.222 DR 28 DRR DR 45.64 45.6 D
111.14 11.1 DRR DR 9.56 56 D
-196 96.76 7
D 7
-351 351 D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 16 of 33 Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments LC(7a)
-107.64
-314.11
-196.14 99.83
-67.57 33.65 26.45 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F
+1.2To]*
Notes:
x - direction is horizontal; y - direction is vertical.
See Figure 3H.5-10 for element location.
Plate thickness required for load combinations excluding thermal:
0.31 inches (Maximum)
[Plate thickness provided:
0.50 -0.01 +0.10 inches]*
Maximum principal stress for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
46.95 51.3 ksi
[Yield stress:
65.0 ksi (Minimum)]*
Maximum stress intensity range for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
84.9 97.4 ksi Allowable stress intensity:
130.0 ksi (Minimum)
DRAFT 1
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 17 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 (Sheet 4 of 7), Design Summary of Spent Fuel Pool Wall Design Loads, Load Combinations, and Comparisons to Acceptance Criteria - Element No. 10524 as shown below.
Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments Dead (D)
-35.61
-104.80 0.68
-4.70 7.72
-0.55
-2.22 Live (L)
-0.45
-2.21
-0.72
-0.25
-0.49 0.00 0.10 Hydro (F) 11.85
-1.35 4.92 28.52 16.50 3.71 3.79 Seismic (Es) 76.80 225.60 79.29 53.31 177.00 6.83 55.70 Thermal (To)
-369.10
-433.40 179.90
-215.40
-109.40
-7.32
-59.63 Thermal (Ta)
-696.60
-730.00 329.40
-555.10
-487.60
-13.58
-95.78 LC(1a)
-34.04
-152.37 6.62 32.92 33.09 4.43 2.37
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 57.33 116.69 86.14 88.29 207.34 11.48 58.89 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 57.33 116.69
-72.44
-18.33
-146.66
-2.18
-52.51 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-173.36
-154.18 198.57
-46.34 138.96 6.90 21.62 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-173.36
-154.18 39.99
-152.96
-215.04
-6.76
-89.78 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 61.34 129.38 86.78 89.00 207.05 11.53 59.02 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 61.34 129.38
-71.80
-17.62
-146.95
-2.13
-52.38 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-169.35
-141.49 199.22
-45.62 138.68 6.96 21.75 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-169.35
-141.49 40.64
-152.24
-215.32
-6.71
-89.65 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-459.59
-564.62 210.75
-323.37
-281.01
-5.32
-58.19 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-741.71
-755.24 398.88 19.86 124.99
-105.77
-114.64 D+L+F+Ta LC(7a)
-302.36
-439.4 139.9 136.9 57.2
-2.2
-42.9 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F+
1.2To]*
Dead(D)
-26.88
-136.36
-4.55
-2.71 8.30
-1.73
-2.55 Live(L)
-0.57
-3.79
-0.78
-0.28
-0.56 0.01 0.10 Hydro(F) 9.65
-2.30 3.42 20.28 15.30 2.96
-1.29 Seismic(Es) 71.56 289.90 91.93 54.83 199.98 7.42 64.34 Thermal(To)
-318.13
-400.37 145.44
-220.52
-146.44
-5.03
-40.60 Thermal(Ta)
-622.23
-668.85 285.16
-561.88
-521.80
-9.38
-75.34 LC(1a)
-25.08
-200.56
-2.90 24.13 32.08 1.74
-5.20
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 57.62 146.53 91.38 80.24 229.14 9.85 60.09 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 57.62 146.53
-92.47
-29.42
-170.83
-5.00
-68.59 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-141.21
-103.70 182.28
-57.58 137.61 6.71 34.72 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-141.21
-103.70
-1.57
-167.25
-262.35
-8.14
-93.96 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 60.88 163.95 92.61 80.79 228.87 10.01 60.24 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 60.88 163.95
-91.24
-28.87
-171.09
-4.84
-68.44 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-137.95
-86.28 183.51
-57.03 137.35 6.87 34.87 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-137.95
-86.28
-0.34
-166.70
-262.62
-7.98
-93.81 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-406.69
-560.48 176.31
-333.88
-303.09
-4.62
-50.82 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-633.03
-744.00 335.67
-9.66 68.94
-92.69
-84.33 D+L+F+Ta LC(6a)
-561.47
-454.11 427.59
-279.05
-103.11
-85.27
-19.99 D+L+F+Es+Ta LC(6b)
-704.58
-1033.90 243.74
-388.71
-503.08
-100.12
-148.67 D+L+F+E's+Ta DRAFT 4
T 11.4 T
66 66 T
-2.18 T
38.96 8.96 T
6.
6.90 T
FTT
-215.04 5
FT
-6.76 FT FT FT FTT FTT 207.05 05 FT 11.53 53 FT FT FT FT FT 2
A
-146.95
.95 AFT
-2.13 FT FT FT FT AFFT 5.62 A
138.68 8.
AF 6
.24 A
-323.37 3.37 A
-281.01
19.86 9.8 RA 124.9 4.9 A
RAA 39.9
.9 R
136.9
-4.55 R
-2.71
.71 RA RA RAA RAA
-0.78
.78 DR
-0.28 28 R
DR 30 30 D
3.42 3.42 DR 20 DRR DR 89.90 89.9 D
91.93 91.9 DRR DR 0.37 37 D
145.44 5.4 D
5 285.
285 D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 18 of 33 Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments LC(7a)
-257.42
-450.80 106.88
-147.30
-85.78
-2.46
-34.34 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F
+1.2To]*
Notes:
x - direction is horizontal; y - direction is vertical.
See Figure 3H.5-10 for element location.
Plate thickness required for load combinations excluding thermal:
0.32 inches (Maximum)
[Plate thickness provided:
0.50 -0.01 +0.10 inches]*
Maximum principal stress for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
42.1 ksi
[Yield stress:
65.0 ksi (Minimum)]*
Maximum stress intensity range for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
72.6 74.3 ksi Allowable stress intensity:
130.0 ksi (Minimum)
DRAFT 1
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 19 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 (Sheet 5 of 7), Design Summary of Spent Fuel Pool Wall Design Loads, Load Combinations, and Comparisons to Acceptance Criteria - Element No. 10524 as shown below.
Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments Dead (D)
-7.31
-29.13
-1.51
-1.45
-3.75
-0.06 0.35 Live (L)
-0.11
-0.55 0.21
-0.14
-0.60 0.00 0.05 Hydro (F) 5.04
-0.04
-1.61
-16.58 64.59
-1.48
-20.87 Seismic (Es) 25.64 33.82 32.90 10.45 114.90 2.48 12.55 Thermal (To)
-286.10
-78.70 66.37
-208.70
-130.00 0.86
-1.51 Thermal (Ta)
-616.80
-121.80 116.60
-650.20
-502.40 6.16 3.93 LC(1a)
-3.36
-41.77
-4.01
-25.47 84.16
-2.15
-28.64
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 25.28 4.09 29.35
-14.35 200.98 0.35
-16.27 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 25.28 4.09
-36.45
-35.25
-28.82
-4.61
-41.37 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-153.54
-45.10 70.83
-144.78 119.73 0.89
-17.21 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-153.54
-45.10 5.03
-165.68
-110.07
-4.07
-42.31 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 26.11 7.55 29.29
-14.06 201.95 0.35
-16.35 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 26.11 7.55
-36.51
-34.96
-27.85
-4.61
-41.45 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-152.70
-41.63 70.77
-144.50 120.70 0.89
-17.29 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-152.70
-41.63 4.97
-165.40
-109.10
-4.07
-42.39 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-387.88
-105.84 69.97
-424.54
-253.76 2.31
-18.01 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-646.13
-113.41 80.41 35.38 175.18
-4.36
-31.38 D+L+F+Ta LC(7a)
-217.10
-90.37 46.78
-175.63
-34.40
-0.96
-22.61 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F+
1.2To]*
Dead(D)
-8.17
-30.95
-0.12
-1.17 0.10
-0.16 0.54 Live(L)
-0.14
-0.57 0.14
-0.22
-0.79 0.00 0.07 Hydro(F) 5.35
-0.40
-1.33 8.58 86.46 1.24
-22.66 Seismic(Es) 24.18 33.34 30.34 23.64 161.73 3.85 15.90 Thermal(To)
-242.25
-76.28 48.77
-202.47
-136.67 0.52
-1.81 Thermal(Ta)
-542.05
-110.19 87.80
-643.16
-500.95 5.98 3.24 LC(1a)
-4.18
-44.88
-1.79 10.01 119.85 1.52
-30.86
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 23.37 1.25 28.50 34.27 282.09 5.44
-15.22 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 23.37 1.25
-32.18
-13.01
-41.37
-2.27
-47.03 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-128.03
-46.43 58.98
-92.27 196.68 5.76
-16.35 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-128.03
-46.43
-1.70
-139.55
-126.78
-1.94
-48.16 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 24.32 4.92 28.37 34.60 282.87 5.45
-15.34 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 24.32 4.92
-32.31
-12.67
-40.59
-2.25
-47.15 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-127.08
-42.76 58.85
-91.94 197.45 5.78
-16.48 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-127.08
-42.76
-1.82
-139.21
-126.00
-1.93
-48.28 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-341.74
-100.80 53.57
-394.78
-227.32 4.82
-20.04 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-539.71
-94.05 58.98 41.54 179.68
-5.14
-28.12 D+L+F+Ta LC(6a)
-515.53
-67.46 89.32
-371.14
-65.59 8.68
-12.22 D+L+F+Es+Ta LC(6b)
-563.90
-134.15 28.64
-418.42
-389.05
-8.99
-44.03 D+L+F+E's+Ta DRAFT
-2 T
0.35 T
82 82 T
-4.61 T
9.73 9.73 T
0.89 T
FTT
-110.07 10 FT
-4.07 FT FT FT FTT FTT 201.95 FT 0.35 FT FT FT FT FT 6
A
-27.85 7.85 AFT
-4.6 FT FT FT FT AFFT 4.50 A
120.70 AF 0
F AF AF AFT FT FT AFFT 16 165.40
.40 A
-42 424.54 54 A
-25 2 3.76 AF AF AF AF AF 35.38 5.3 RA 175.
5.1 A
RAA 78 R
-175.63
.63 RA
-34 A
RA RA RAA RAA
-0.12 R
-1.17
.17 RA RA RAA RAA 0.14 0.14 DR
-0.22 22 R
DR 40 40 D
-1.333 DR 8
DRR DR 33.34 33.3 D
30.34 30.3 DRR DR 6 28 D
48.77 8.7 D
9 87.8 87.8 D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 20 of 33 Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments LC(7a)
-184.82
-90.88 35.24
-144.35
-12.63 1.53
-24.50 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F
+1.2To]*
Notes:
x - direction is horizontal; y - direction is vertical.
See Figure 3H.5-10 for element location.
Plate thickness required for load combinations excluding thermal:
0.20 inches (Maximum)
[Plate thickness provided:
0.50 -0.01 +0.10 inches]*
Maximum principal stress for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
20.6 ksi
[Yield stress:
65.0 ksi (Minimum)]*
Maximum stress intensity range for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
20.6 23.0 ksi Allowable stress intensity:
130.0 ksi (Minimum)
DRAFT 1
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 21 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 (Sheet 6 of 7), Design Summary of Spent Fuel Pool Wall Design Loads, Load Combinations, and Comparisons to Acceptance Criteria - Element No. 21402 as shown below.
Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments Dead (D)
-1.82
-17.93 4.00 0.92 0.93
-0.32 0.22 Live (L)
-0.21
-0.98 0.41 0.19
-0.04
-0.02
-0.03 Hydro (F) 7.14 0.29
-2.18 104.60 15.51
-16.65 3.08 Seismic (Es) 36.81 21.41 17.68 139.90 28.75 12.42 12.08 Thermal (To)
-228.50
-181.90 85.52
-291.30
-212.00 11.34 6.92 Thermal (Ta)
-379.10
-378.40 159.80
-783.80
-661.10 41.72 28.29 LC(1a) 7.08
-26.36 3.24 148.06 22.95
-23.80 4.56
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 44.77 2.90 19.03 287.45 51.36
-11.24 16.58 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 44.77 2.90
-16.33 7.65
-6.14
-36.08
-7.58 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-98.05
-110.78 72.48 105.39
-81.14
-4.15 20.90 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-98.05
-110.78 37.12
-174.41
-138.64
-28.99
-3.26 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 45.16 5.68 18.23 287.17 51.31
-11.18 16.59 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 45.16 5.68
-17.13 7.37
-6.19
-36.02
-7.57 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-97.65
-108.01 71.68 105.11
-81.19
-4.09 20.91 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-97.65
-108.01 36.32
-174.69
-138.69
-28.93
-3.25 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-231.84
-255.12 102.10
-384.16
-396.79 9.08 20.95 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-268.90
-468.00 168.35
-17.41 14.23
-18.83 13.88 D+L+F+Ta LC(7a)
-166.1
-156.2 66.6
-107.4
-141.8
-9.3 8.6 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F+
1.2To]*
Dead(D)
-1.52
-18.30 4.68
-0.37 0.72 0.00
-0.10 Live(L)
-0.21
-0.93 0.42 0.28
-0.02
-0.02
-0.06 Hydro(F) 4.03
-0.43
-1.50 92.82 12.95
-15.46 3.60 Seismic(Es) 36.96 21.63 18.85 145.49 29.84 11.74 17.22 Thermal(To)
-192.49
-155.43 84.14
-251.71
-207.93 11.21 8.20 Thermal(Ta)
-334.80
-329.90 141.91
-762.50
-659.55 44.32 29.47 LC(1a) 3.16
-27.81 5.16 129.90 19.09
-21.67 4.80
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 40.88 1.79 21.85 275.34 48.66
-9.92 22.10 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 40.88 1.79
-15.86
-15.63
-11.02
-33.39
-12.34 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-79.43
-95.35 74.44 118.02
-81.30
-2.92 27.23 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-79.43
-95.35 36.73
-172.95
-140.98
-26.39
-7.21 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 41.24 4.55 20.97 275.10 48.61
-9.90 22.17 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 41.24 4.55
-16.74
-15.87
-11.07
-33.38
-12.27 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-79.07
-92.59 73.55 117.78
-81.35
-2.90 27.29 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-79.07
-92.59 35.85
-173.19
-141.03
-26.37
-7.15 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-206.95
-225.85 92.29
-383.84
-398.58 12.22 21.86 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-234.63
-256.17 103.47
-397.15
-399.55 10.60 21.12 D+L+F+Ta LC(6a)
-197.67
-234.54 122.33
-251.67
-369.71 23.96 38.35 D+L+F+Es+Ta LC(6b)
-271.60
-277.80 84.62
-542.64
-429.39 0.49 3.90 D+L+F+E's+Ta
-2 T
-11.2 T
4 T
-36.08 T
1.14 1.14 T
-4.15 T
FTT
-13 138.64 FT
-28.99 28.99 FT FT FT FTT FTT 51.31 51.31 FT
-11.18 FT FT FT FT FT
-6.19
.19 AFT
-36.0 FT FT FT FT AFFT 5.11 A
-81.19 81.
-4 F
AF AF AFT FT FT AFFT 17 174.69
.69 A
-38 384.16 16 A
-17.41 7.4 RA 14.23 14.2 A
RAA 6.6 6.6 R
-107.4 7.4 RA
-1 RA RA RAA RAA 4.68 4.
R
-0.37
.37 RA RA RAA RAA 0.42 0.42 DRR 0.288 R
DR DR 43 43 D
-1.500 DR 92 DRR DR 21.63 21.6 D
18.85 8.8 DRR DR 5.43 43 D
84.14 4.1 D
0 141.
141 D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 22 of 33 Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments LC(7a)
-142.00
-137.45 66.99
-91.35
-141.63
-7.85 9.75 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F
+1.2To]*
Notes:
x - direction is horizontal; y - direction is vertical.
See Figure 3H.5-10 for element location.
Plate thickness required for load combinations excluding thermal:
0.28 inches (Maximum)
[Plate thickness provided:
0.50 -0.01 +0.10 inches]*
Maximum principal stress for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
25.1 28.2 ksi
[Yield stress:
65.0 ksi (Minimum)]*
Maximum stress intensity range for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
31.3 34.2 ksi Allowable stress intensity:
130.0 ksi (Minimum) 1
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 23 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-8 (Sheet 7 of 7), Design Summary of Spent Fuel Pool Wall Design Loads, Load Combinations, and Comparisons to Acceptance Criteria - Element No. 21414 as shown below.
Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments Dead (D) 0.69
-10.62
-2.57
-0.52
-0.22
-0.03 0.12 Live (L) 0.18 0.12
-0.45 0.00
-0.11
-0.01 0.02 Hydro (F) 4.25 0.56
-2.73
-27.01
-31.06
-1.46 1.82 Seismic (Es) 26.90 13.88 36.68 26.35 21.70 2.17 4.34 Thermal (To)
-79.35
-40.69 49.04
-129.00
-119.30 10.01 6.90 Thermal (Ta)
-129.60
-66.37 57.50
-374.60
-374.70 26.38 24.34 LC(1a) 7.24
-13.89
-8.19
-38.54
-43.97
-2.09 2.75
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 33.73 4.16 29.84
-11.98
-22.11 0.10 7.03 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 33.73 4.16
-43.52
-64.68
-65.51
-4.24
-1.66 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-15.86
-21.27 60.49
-92.61
-96.67 6.36 11.34 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-15.86
-21.27
-12.87
-145.31
-140.07 2.01 2.66 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 33.48 5.10 30.55
-11.93
-21.98 0.11 7.00 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 33.48 5.10
-42.81
-64.63
-65.38
-4.23
-1.69 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-16.12
-20.33 61.20
-92.56
-96.54 6.37 11.31 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-16.12
-20.33
-12.16
-145.26
-139.94 2.02 2.62 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-75.87
-51.43 30.19
-261.65
-265.57 15.00 17.17 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-114.31
-96.07 55.47
-35.06
-36.08 2.55
-1.61 D+L+F+Ta LC(7a)
-54.08
-40.93 30.63
-125.65
-122.46 5.94 7.24 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F+
1.2To]*
Dead(D) 0.86
-10.93
-2.70 0.30
-0.02
-0.04 0.03 Live(L) 0.15 0.06
-0.38 0.00
-0.13
-0.01 0.03 Hydro(F) 3.53 0.73
-2.83
-24.72
-26.63
-1.07 1.12 Seismic(Es) 23.63 12.73 32.11 21.80 30.03 2.52 5.47 Thermal(To)
-66.65
-39.03 45.95
-118.96
-121.48 8.32 7.62 Thermal(Ta)
-111.54
-58.96 50.88
-364.47
-375.75 24.84 24.99 LC(1a) 6.38
-14.19
-8.39
-34.20
-37.54
-1.57 1.64
[1.4D+1.7L+1.4F LC(3a) 29.57 2.87 25.06
-12.51
-7.41 0.97 7.08 D+L+F+Es LC(3b) 29.57 2.87
-39.15
-56.11
-67.47
-4.06
-3.86 D+L+F+E's LC(3e)
-12.09
-21.52 53.78
-86.86
-83.33 6.17 11.85 D+L+F+Es+To LC(3f)
-12.09
-21.52
-10.43
-130.46
-143.39 1.14 0.91 D+L+F+E's+To LC(3m) 29.34 3.91 25.72
-12.54
-7.28 0.98 7.06 0.9D+F+Es LC(3n) 29.34 3.91
-38.50
-56.14
-67.33
-4.05
-3.88 0.9D+F+E's LC(3o)
-12.32
-20.49 54.43
-86.89
-83.20 6.18 11.82 0.9D+F+Es+To LC(3p)
-12.32
-20.49
-9.78
-130.49
-143.26 1.15 0.88 0.9D+F+E's+To LC(5a)
-65.19
-47.00 25.89
-252.22
-261.63 14.41 16.78 D+L+F+Ta LC(5b)
-88.36
-71.43 29.84
-36.01
-27.13 3.01
-2.28 D+L+F+Ta LC(6a)
-64.73
-58.70 61.95
-230.42
-231.60 16.92 3.19 D+L+F+Es+Ta LC(6b)
-111.99
-84.16
-2.27
-274.02
-291.66 11.89
-7.75 D+L+F+E's+Ta DRAFT
-2 T
0.10 T
51 51 T
-4.24 T
6.67 6.67 T
6.36 T
FTT
-14 140.07 FT 2.01 FT FT FT FTT FTT
-21.988 FT 0.11 FT FT FT FT FT 3
A
-65.38 5.38 AFT
-4.23 FT FT FT FT AFFT 2.56 A
-96.54 96.
AF 6
F AF AF AFT FT FT AFFT 14 145.26
.26 A
-26 261.65 65 A
-35.06
.0 RA
-36.0 36.0 A
RAA 0.63 0.63 R
-125.65
.65 RA
-1 A
RA RA RAA RAA
-2.70 R
0.30 0.30 RA RA RAA RAA
-0.38
.38 DR 0.000 R
DR 73 73 D
-2.833 DR
-2 DRR DR 12.73 12.7 D
32.11 32.1 DRR DR 9 03 D
45.95 5.9 D
6 50.8 50.8 D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 24 of 33 Load/
Combination Sxx kip/ft Syy kip/ft Sxy kip/ft Mxx kip/ft Myy kip/ft Nx kip/ft Ny kip/ft Comments LC(7a)
-45.20
-39.92 28.16
-114.86
-119.27 5.06 6.95 1.05D+1.3L+1.05F
+1.2To]*
Notes:
x - direction is horizontal; y - direction is vertical.
See Figure 3H.5-10 for element location.
Plate thickness required for load combinations excluding thermal:
0.14 inches (Maximum)
[Plate thickness provided:
0.50 -0.01 +0.10 inches]*
Maximum principal stress for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
22.1 27.2 ksi
[Yield stress:
65.0 ksi (Minimum)]*
Maximum stress intensity range for load combination 5 load combinations including thermal:
22.1 35.0 ksi Allowable stress intensity:
130.0 ksi (Minimum)
DRAFT 1
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 25 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 (Sheet 1 of 3), Shield Building Roof Reinforcement Summary (Tension Ring) as shown below.
Tension Ring - Axial Force and Bending Verification Location Seismic Maximum Stresses Maximum Stresses ksi Fy ksi Maximum Steel Area Required(2)
(in2/ft)
[Steel Area Provided]*
[Design Limit(1) for Ratio Max Required/Provided]*
Section Angles Seismic L/C fa ksi 2 lower 5.625° 9 33 14.31 28.11 15.35 30.07 50 9.21 18.00
[Liner 1 1/2" =
18 (in2/ft)
(Min)]*
[0.51 + 2%1.00]*
84.375° 17 41 13.15 27.59 1 lower 0° 9 34 15.35 30.07 90° 17 43 14.46 29.48 Tension Ring - Shear Force and Torsion Verification Location Seismic Maximum Stresses Maximum Stresses ksi Fy ksi Maximum Steel Area Required(2)
(in2/ft)
[Steel Area Provided]*
[Design Limit(1) for Ratio Max Required/Provided]*
Section Angles Seismic L/C fa ksi 2 lower 5.625° 18 4.83 6.28 7.27 50 5.65 6.54
[Liner 1 1/2" =
18 (in2/ft)
(Min)]*
[0.31 0.36+ 2%]*
84.375° 11 5.52 1 lower 0° 17 6.28 7.27 90° 9
5.80 6.78 Notes:
- 1. [Two percent of the value may be added to the design limit as an allowance for minor variances in analysis results.]*
- 2. Thermal loads have been considered in the design of critical sections. The required reinforcement values shown do not include the load case where seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined as the normal thermal loads were assessed to be insignificant. When the seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined, the value of required reinforcement may increase; however, in all cases the required reinforcement is less than the provided reinforcement and thus the design of the critical section reinforcement is acceptable.
DRAFT
[L
[L 18 (Min T
FT and Torsion Verificat and Torsion Verificat FT FT FT es si Fy ksi ksi Maximum aximu Steel Area l Are Required Required(2)
(2)
F (in (in2/ft)
/ft)
FT FT FT AFT A
RA RA 6.288 RA 7.27 7.27 DR 50 50 RA RA RA RA RA RA RA RA RA RA RA 27 DRA RA DRRA RA 5.80 5.80 D
6.78 6
DR DRR DR DR DR DRR he va he va
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 26 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 (Sheet 2a of 3), Shield Building Roof Reinforcement Summary (Air Inlet) as shown below.
AIS Reinforcement Summary - Horizontal Sections Location (Figure 3H.5-11)
Required - Seismic Load Combinations (in2/ft)
Maximum Required(2)
(in2/ft)
[Provided]*
[Design Limit(1) for Ratio Max Required/Provided]*
Section Angles Seismic L/C Values 5+6 0°-5.625° 8
1.91 2.01 2.38 5.03
[Liner 1" =
12 (in2/ft) (Min)]*
[0.20 0.42 + 2%]*
84.375°-90° 8 24 1.89 2.08 7
0°-5.625° 16 2.38 4.19 84.375°-90° 8 24 2.15 4.27 9
0°-5.625° 16 2.26 5.02 84.375°-90° 24 2.27 5.03 11 0°-5.625° 16 1.73 3.55 1.73 3.57
[Liner 1" =
12 (in2/ft) (Min)]*
[0.15 0.30+ 2%]*
84.375°-90° 24 1.53 3.57 Notes:
- 1. [Two percent of the value may be added to the design limit as an allowance for minor variances in analysis results.]*
- 2. Thermal loads have been considered in the design of critical sections. The required reinforcement values shown do not include the load case where seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined as the normal thermal loads were assessed to be insignificant. When the seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined, the value of required reinforcement may increase; however, in all cases the required reinforcement is less than the provided reinforcement and thus the design of the critical section reinforcement is acceptable.
D rein rein DRAFT
[Line
[L 12 12 (in2/ft) 2 T
FT FT FT FT AFT 55 A
1.73
.73 3.57 3.57 AFF AF 53 53 3.57 3.
RA RA RA RA RA RA e value may be added t e may be added t lysis results.
lysis results.]*]*
s have been considered s have been consider DR nt values shown do no nt values shown do no D
are numerically c are numerically D
When the se When the se D
d reinfo d reinfo D
h
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 27 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 (Sheet 2b of 3), Shield Building Roof Reinforcement Summary (Air Inlet) as shown below.
AIS Reinforcement Summary - Vertical Sections Location (Figure 3H.5-11)
Steel Area (Hoop Direction - Y Local Dir.)
Section Angles Required - Seismic Load Combinations (in2/ft)
Maximum Required(2)
(in2/ft)
[Provided]*
[Design Limit(1) for Ratio Max Required/Provided]*
Seismic L/C Values 3 Upper 0° 9 33 9.9711.91 10.53 11.91
[Liner 1" =
12 (in2/ft) (Min)]*
[0.88 0.99 + 2%]*
90° 17 41 9.25 11.91 3 Lower 0° 9
8.45 8.84 90° 17 7.75 8.08 4 Upper 5.625° 9 33 10.53 11.91 84.375° 17 41 9.75 11.91 4 Lower 5.625° 10 8.26 8.65 84.375° 19 7.54 7.86 Notes:
- 1. [Two percent of the value may be added to the design limit as an allowance for minor variances in analysis results.]*
- 2. Thermal loads have been considered in the design of critical sections. The required reinforcement values shown do not include the load case where seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined as the normal thermal loads were assessed to be insignificant. When the seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined, the value of required reinforcement may increase; however, in all cases the required reinforcement is less than the provided reinforcement and thus the design of the critical section reinforcement is acceptable.
DRAFT 0.53
.53 11.911 FT F
[Liner 1" ner 1 12 (in2/ft))
2 T
FT FT FT FT AFT 911 AF AF 26 26 8.65 8.
f the value may f the value ma ysis results ysis results been been D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 28 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 (Sheet 2c of 3), Shield Building Roof Reinforcement Summary (Air Inlet) as shown below.
Out of Plane Shear Reinforcement Summary -AIS Location (Figure 3H.5-11)
Required - Seismic Load Combinations (in2/ft)
Maximum Required(2)
(in2/ft)
[Steel Area Provided]*
[Design Limit(1) for Ratio Max Required/Provided]*
Angles Sections Seismic L/C Values Sum 0°-
5.625° Max of Vertical Sections 3 upper - 4 upper 1 25 0.13 0.16 0.13 0.16 0.34
[(3) 3/4 TIE BAR @2.8125° (41.36") (8 1/2" in vertical direction) = 0.50 (in2/ ft) (Min.)]*
[0.68 + 2%]*
Horizontal Section 5+6 0.00 84.375°-
90° Max of Vertical Sections 3 upper - 4 upper 1 25 0.12 0.16 0.12 0.16 Horizontal Section 5+6 0.00 0°-
5.625° Max of Vertical Sections 3 upper - 4 upper 1
0.10 0.34 Horizontal Section 7 0.24 84.375°-
90° Max of Vertical Sections 3 upper - 4 upper 1
0.10 0.30 Horizontal Section 7 0.20 0°-
5.625° Max of Vertical Sections 3 lower - 4 lower 18 0.21 0.21 Horizontal Section 9 0.00 DRAFTT FT 0.16 0.1 AFT AFT A
RA 0.100 0.34 RAA DRA 0.24 DR DR DR D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 29 of 33 Out of Plane Shear Reinforcement Summary -AIS Location (Figure 3H.5-11)
Required - Seismic Load Combinations (in2/ft)
Maximum Required(2)
(in2/ft)
[Steel Area Provided]*
[Design Limit(1) for Ratio Max Required/Provided]*
Angles Sections Seismic L/C Values Sum 84.375°-
90° Max of Vertical Sections 3 lower - 4 lower 11 0.21 0.22 0.21 0.22 Horizontal Section 9 0.000 0°-
5.625° Max of Vertical Sections 3 lower - 4 lower 18 66 0.21 0.21 Horizontal Section 11 0.000 84.375°-
90° Max of Vertical Sections 3 lower - 4 lower 11 0.21 0.22 0.21 0.22 Horizontal Section 11 0.00 Notes:
- 1. [Two percent of the value may be added to the design limit as an allowance for minor variances in analysis results.]*
- 2. Thermal loads have been considered in the design of critical sections. The required reinforcement values shown do not include the load case where seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined as the normal thermal loads were assessed to be insignificant. When the seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined, the value of required reinforcement may increase; however, in all cases the required reinforcement is less than the provided reinforcement and thus the design of the critical section reinforcement is acceptable.
D meric meric DRAFT FT FT AFT 0.21 0.22
.22 RA RAAFT RAFT 00 00 RA RAA of the value may be add of the value may be a analysis results.]*
analysis results.]
s have been consid s have been con D
lues shown d lues shown D
umerica umerica D
th th
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 30 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-9 (Sheet 3 of 3), Shield Building Roof Reinforcement Summary (Exterior Wall of Passive Containment Cooling System Tank) as shown below.
Wall Segment Location (Figure 3H.5-11 Sheet 5 of 6)
Reinforcement on Each Face, in2/ft Ratio Required/
Provided Maximum Required Provided (Minimum)
Bottom Vertical 1.49 1.53 1#8@1.125° &
1#11@1.125°
[2.75 0.54 0.56 Hoop° 0.80 1.22 1#9@6" 2
0.40 0.61 Shear 0.15 1#4@0.5625°x6" 0.94 0.16 Mid-height Vertical 0.64 0.69 1#8@1.125° &
1#11@1.125° 2.75 0.23 0.25 Hoop° 1.93 1.99 1#9@6" 2
0.97 0.99 Top Vertical 0.52 1#8@1.125° &
1#11@1.125° 2.75 0.19 Hoop° 0.79 1#9@6" 2]*
0.40 DRAFT 25° 25° T
@6"
@6" 2
T 8@1.125° &
8@1.
1#11@1.125° 1#11@1.1 2.7 2
FTT 1#9@6" 1#9@6 FTT AFT
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 31 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-11, Design Summary of Floor Elevation 135-3 Area 1 (Between Column Lines M and P) as shown below.
Governing Load Combination (Steel Beam)
Load Combination Bending Moment Corresponding Stress Allowable Stress Shear Force Corresponding Stress Allowable Stress 3 - Extreme Environmental Condition Downward Seismic
=(-) 63.9 kips-ft
= 17.0 ksi
= 33.26 ksi
= 30.7 kips
= 8.7 ksi
= 20.1 ksi Governing Load Combination (Concrete Slab)
Parallel to the Beams Load Combination Bending Moment In-plane Shear Reinforcement (Each Face)
Required(1)
[Provided 3 - Extreme Environmental Condition Downward Seismic 6 - Abnormal Conditions
=(-) 16.09 kips-ft/ft
= 20.0 31.0 kips (per foot width of the slab)
= 0.41 0.43 in2/ft
= 0.44 in2/ft (Min)]*
Perpendicular to the Beams Combination Number Bending Moment Reinforcement (Each Face)
Required(1)
[Provided Normal Condition 6 - Abnormal Conditions
=(+) 6.66 kips-ft (per foot width of the slab)
= 0.28 0.43 in2/ft
= 0.60 in2/ft (Min)]*
Notes:
- 1. Thermal loads have been considered in the design of critical sections. The required reinforcement values shown do not include the load case where seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined as the normal thermal loads were assessed to be insignificant. When the seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined, the value of required reinforcement may increase; however, in all cases the required reinforcement is less than the provided reinforcement and thus the design of the critical section reinforcement is acceptable.
D rein rein D
hen the hen the D
values shown do values shown d DRAFT me Environme e Env T
ard Seismic rd Seismic 6 - Ab T
6.09 kips 6.09
-ft/ft
/ft 20.0 20.0 31.0 kips (per foot er foo FT F
= 0.41 0.41 0.4 0.43 3 in2/ft AF AF
= 0.44 in 4 in2/ft (Min)]
/
2 T
A Normal Con Normal Con A
=(+) 6.66
=(+) 6.66
= 0.2 A
=
AF DRRA R
s have been considere s have been consider DR nt values shown do n nt values shown D
re numerically c re numerically D
When the s When the s D
reinf reinf D
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 32 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-12, Design Summary of Floor Elevation 135-3 (Operations work Area (Previously Known as Tagging Room) Ceiling)) as shown below.
Design of Precast Concrete Panels Governing Load Combination Design Bending Moment (Midspan)
Bottom Reinforcement (E/W Direction)
Required(1)
[Provided Top Reinforcement (E/W Direction)
Required(1)
[Provided Top and Bottom Reinforcement (N/S Direction)
Required(1)
[Provided Construction
=14.54 kip-ft/ft
= 0.58 in2/ft
= 0.79 in2/ft (Min.)]*
= (Minimum required by the Code)
= 0.20 in2/ft (Min.)]*
= (Minimum required by the Code)
= 0.20 in2/ft (Min.)]*
Design of 24-inch-Thich Slab Governing Load Combination Design Bending Moment (E/W Direction) Midspan Design In-plane Shear Design In-plane Tension Bottom Reinforcement (E/W Direction)
Required(1)
[Provided Design Bending Moment (E/W Direction) at Support Design In-plane Shear Design In-plane Tension Top Reinforcement (E/W Direction)
Required(1)
[Provided Design Bending Moment (N/S Direction)
Design In-plane Shear Design In-plane Tension Top and Bottom Reinforcement (N/S Direction)
Required(1)
[Provided Extreme Environmental Condition (SSE)
Abnormal Condition
= 14.40 16.23 kips ft/ft
= 31.9 kips ft
= 21.9 37.1 kips ft
= 0.53 0.71 in2/ft
= 0.79 in2/ft (Min.)]*
= 28.81 kips-ft/ft
= 31.9 kips/ft
= 21.9 37.1 kips/ft
= 0.93 in2/ft
= 1.00 in2/ft (Min.)]*
= 8.47 21.55 kips ft/ft
= 31.9 kips/ft
=27.2 kip/ft
= 0.59 0.65 in2/ft
= 0.79 in2/ft (Min.)]*
Notes:
- 1. Thermal loads have been considered in the design of critical sections. The required reinforcement values shown do not include the load case where seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined as the normal thermal loads were assessed to be insignificant. When the seismic and normal thermal loads are numerically combined, the value of required reinforcement may increase; however, in all cases the required reinforcement is less than the provided reinforcement and thus the design of the critical section reinforcement is acceptable.
DRAF an Direction) at Support Direction) at Support W Direction)
W Direction) nt nt (N/S Direction (N/S Directi AFT Extreme Environme Extreme Environm FT Abnormal Condit normal Condit FT
=
= 14.40 14.
16.23 F
=
= 31.9 kips f 31
= 21.9 21.9 37 F
= 0.
0 A
=
FT mum req mum 0 in 0 in2/ft (Min.)
/ft 2
FT FT AF
ND-19-XXXX Proposed Changes to Licensing Basis Documents - (LAR-19-019)
Page 33 of 33 Revise UFSAR Table 3H.5-15 Shield Building Roof Reinforcement Ratio of Code Required Versus Provided as shown below.
Critical Section Stress Component Required in2/ft Provided (Minimum) in2/ft Reinforcement Ratio
[Conical Roof Beams]*(1)
Axial + Bending
[Radial Beams W36 X 395(2)]*
1.33 Shear 8.33
[Conical Roof Near Tension Ring]*
Radial 1.80 1.81
[2.34]*
1.30 1.29 Hoop 4.31
[4.68]*
1.09
[Knuckle Region]*
Vertical 1.49 1.53
[2.75]*
1.85 1.80 Radial 2.85 3.48
[3.55]*
1.25 1.02 Hoop 2.64 2.67
[3.12]*
1.18 1.16
[Compression Ring]*
Vertical 1.24
[2.40]*
1.94 Radial 3.09
[3.56]*
1.15 Hoop 2.49 2.50
[3.12]*
1.25 DRAFT
[3.1
[3.
[2.40
[
]
0 T
[3.56 3
[
]*
6 T
[3.12 3.12
[
]*
2 T
FT FT FT FT