ML19326A245
| ML19326A245 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 06/03/1970 |
| From: | Racquel Powell US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Boyd R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8002030106 | |
| Download: ML19326A245 (3) | |
Text
.
e p.
s s
s
+
4 9
UNITED STATES 1
1
.g. I ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
/ pp wAssiNovos o.c. 2os4s June 3, 1970 Roger S. Bcyd, Assistant Director for Boi;.r Water Reactors, ERL THRU: Robert L. Tedesco, Chief, EWR-2,
,L SEISMIC DESIGN MEETING WITH THE TOLEDO EDISC. COMPANY FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR PCWER STATION - ROCKET NO. 50-3M A ceeting was held with The Toledo Edison Cc=pany (TEC) on May 19, 1970 to discuss the seismic response spectru= to be used in design of Class I structures and ec=ponents.
The purpose of this =eeting was to permit the applicant to justify the seistic response spectru used in design of the structures and ec=penents to ERS and its ccesultant, John A. Blume & Associates.
The meeting attendance is enclosed.
Fbiloving the applicant's description of the methods used in arriving at the seismic smooth response spectra and time-history acceleregram, ERS and R. L. Sharpe of John A. Blume & Associates indicated to the appli-cant that the proposed seismic spectru= did not provide a sufficient safety =argin for the seistic design of Class I structures and cocponents.
DRS and its consultant informed the applicant that a s coth respense spectra developed frc= the 1935 Helena Mentana earthquake using the upper average values vould previde an acceptable cargin of safety. The applicant was also informed that the tire-history acceleregran being developed by Dr. Idriss would be acceptable with the =cdification Dr. Idriss indicated would be made in the 10-to 20 cycles per second frequency range.
Ihe applicant was also informed that if the design had pregressed tcc far tc permit using the above recommended spectra and time-history accelero-gram an acceptable alternative veuld be to develop seistic design criteria sicilar to those proposed for the Midland plant.
The applicant indicated that he ves not prepared to make a commitment to modify the proposed seismic spectru: at this time. We indicated that early.resolutien of this matter would be required.
At the conclusion of the discussicn of the seismic design criteria, R. L. Sharpe and E. G. Kost indicated there vere several areas in the PSAR vhich needed further clarificatica before they cculd complete their review of the plant. Ihe following are the satters discussed and the
=anner of resolution.
1.
Mathe=atical Mcdel to support " fixed" bases analysis. A ecpy of the 3echtel calculations was given to E. G. Kost. No further action required.
8o02030 %
o
.g o
Roger S. Boyd. June 3, 1970 2.
A=plification of Vertical Accelerations - Bechtel described the canner in which this a=plification would be accounted for in the design.
R. L. Sharpe indicated the discussion was adequate and no documentation was required.
3 Damping - Bechtel agreed to, justify and docu=ent the cancer in which dacping values will be applied to structures and components. Documentation will be in Amendment 6.
4 Personnel Lock & Equipment Hatch - Bechtel indicated how the seismic analysis and design would be develcped. No docu=entation required.
5 Seis=le Analysis - Bechtel agreed to clarify the use of the word " impractical" as used to define when a dynauic analysis would not be perfer=ed.
Documentation of the wording agreed on will be in Acendment 6.
6.
Piping Syste= - The applicant discussed the cethods which will be used to analyne and design Class I piping systems to meet Class I criteria. The applicant indicated it would document a state =ent of criteria similar to that propcsed for the Midland plant in A=endment 6.
T.
Equipment - The applicant described the procedures used to assure the Class I equipment will =eet the seismic design criteria. No documentation of this catter is required.
8.
Dynamie Parameters for Foundation Materials - The applicaut described the range of these parameters to be used in the seistic analysis. No documentation of this matter is required.
9 Peak Ground Motions and Response spectra - The applicant was infor=ed of the ERL position regarding an acceptable seistic response spectra. The resolution of this natter by the applicant should be within a week and will be documented in A=end=ent 6.
Reh m., $
and R. Powell Boiling 'iaterFeactor Branch 2 Division of Reactor Licensing
Enclosure:
List of Attendees
m LIS'" C:F ATS*TEEES TOLEDO EEISCN C0!9AN Y DAVIS-EESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATIO N
.v.A. v. 7.Q., c. 10 AEC-ERL Wocdvard-Clyde Assoc.
R. Tedesco Y. Lacroi:t R. Pove11 D. M. Idriss A. Cardone Jchn A. Blume !c Assoc.
AEC-ERS E. G. Kcst R. Maccary R. L. Sharpe F. Schauer Eechtel R. Shev=aker H. W. ~4ahl D. Iange J. McGeady A. Erc=erick A. 31ngatan CO
,,C ledo
,nd., S CC,,0.
L. Eeratan 7
2
-500 l
k