ML19330A930
| ML19330A930 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/11/1980 |
| From: | Mccollom K, Mark Miller, Paxton H Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-SP, TAC-11299, TAC-13152, NUDOCS 8007290789 | |
| Download: ML19330A930 (80) | |
Text
j -.
1 a
s%d&I1kl.y,
r-
's UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
^
.cccxETED D
[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION usNRC THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD F
El i 4.1980 >
42
?
g!n:sofib S C M ?
Marshall E. Miller, Esquire, Chairman Deggggases f
Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom, Member gl.
g}{p,.
Dr. Hugh C. Paxton, Menber Ng
[g ~
s
s s
)
In the Mntter of
)
)
PORTLAND CENERAL ELECTRIC COMPr T, et al. )
Docket No.50-344SP
)
(Troj an Nuclear Plant)
)
July 11, 1980
)
INITIAL DECISION (Control Building Modifications)
Accearances Maurice Axelrad, Esq. and Albert Carr, Esq.,
Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, Axelrad & Toll, 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N. W.,
Washington, D. C.
20036 Ronald W. Johnson, Esq., Portland General Electric Company, et al., 121 S. W. Sal =on Street, Portland, Oregon 97204 For Portland General Electric Company, et al., Licensee Willia W. Kinsey, Esq., Bonneville Power A63inistration, 1002 N. E. Holladay, Portland, Oregon 97205 Robert L. Jones, Esq., 3onneville Power Ad=inistration, Office of General Counsel - A?
Post Office Box 3621, Portland, Oregon 97208 For Sonneville Power Adninistation, Intervenor Frank W. Ostrander, Jr., Esq. and Richard M.
q/
Sandvik, Esq., Deparecent of Justice, 3p 4()j \\
500 Pacific Building, 520 S. W. Yanhill, l
Portland, Oregon 97204 For State of Oregon, Intervenor THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS 80072903 D h
8+
2-Nina Bell, 728 S. E. 27th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97214 Eugene Rosolie, 215 S. E. 9th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97214 For Consolidated Intervenors and Coalition for Safe Power, Intervenors i
Joseph R. Gray, Esq. and Henry McGurren, Esq.
Office of Executive Legal Director, U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C.
20555 For U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Staff e
6 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO.
I.
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1
1
')
A.
ULTIMATE ISSUES 3.
PHASE II EVIDENTIARY HEARING 3
II.
FINDINGS OF FACT 8
A.
DESCRIPTION OF THE BUILDING COMPLEX 8
B.
DESIGN DEFICIENCIES AND OBJECTIVES OF MODIFICATIONS 10 1.
The Wall Problem 11 2.
Objectives of the Proposed Building Complex
,2 Modifications 1
C.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS 13 D.
STRUCTURAL ADEQUACY OF THE MODIFIED COMPLEX 16 1.
Criteria for Determining Structural Adequacy 17 18 a.
Determining Structural Adequacy b.
Seismic Input for the Analytical Model 18 2.
Determining Structural Adequacy of the Modified 19 Building Complex 20 a.
The STARDYNE Analytical Model 21 b.
Sources of Nonlinearity Accounted For 23 c.
Load Determinations 24 d.
Capacities Determination e.
Comparison of Capacities to Loads 27 f.'
Building Displacements 29 g.
Influence of the Wall Problem on Structural Integrity 30 h.
Conclusions of Structural Adequacy 31
11 -
PAGE NO.
3.
Seismic Qualifications of Equipment, Components and Piping 33 i
a.
Floor Response Spectra 33 b.
Qualifications of Safety-Related Equipment, Components and Piping 35 c.
Influence of the Wall Problem on Equipment Qualification 35 d.
Conclusions on Seismic Qualifications of Safety-Related Equipment 36 4.
Conclusions on Meeting the Criteria for Structural Adequacy of the Modified Building Complex 36 E.
MODIFICATION WORK AND EFFECTS ON SAFETY OF PLANT OPERATION 38 1.
21acement of Co'ncrete Walls 38 2.
Installation of Steel Plates 39 3.
Welding Bemn-Column Connections and Rebar 40 4.
Protection of Equipment During Modification 41 5.
Maintenance of Fire Protection During Modifica-tion 42 6.
Prevention of Interference with Operator Actions by Modification Work 44 7.
Seismic Qualification During Modification 44 F.
ADDITIONAL CHANGES RESULTING FROM THE MODIFICATIONS 45 1.
Relocation of Railroad Track from Control Build-ing 45 2.
R2 duction in Size of Existing Equipment Hatch 47 G.
RESOLUTION OF INTERVENORS ' CONTENTIONS 47
f' iii -
PAGE NO.
H.
LENGTH OF INTERIM OPERATION AND TIME FOR COMPLETION OF MODIFICATION 48 I.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 49 J.
POSTHEARING AFFIDAVITS 50 1.
An Additional As-Built Wall Discrepancy 50 2.
Anchorage and Support of Electrical Equipment 53 III.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 54 IV.
ORDER 56 APPENDIX 4
f c
I I
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
j
)
PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, et al
)
Docket No.50-344SP
)
(Trojan Nuclear Plant)
)
INITIAL DECISION (Control Building Modifications)
July 11, 1980 1.
PRELIMINARY STATEMEh"I A.
ULTIMATE ISSUES This Initial Decician concerns the ultimate issue of whether the scope and timeliness of proposed modifications, required to bring the Trojan Nuclear Plant into substantial compliance with NRC Operating License No. NPF-1, are adequate from a safety stand-point.
This issue was defined in Section IV of the Commission's Order for Modification of License issued May 26, 1978 (43 Fed. Reg. 23678, 23770).
This ultimate issue of the adequacy of proposed modifica-tions from a safety standpoint, also involves the question of whether operation of the Trojan plant can be conducted safely while~ such modifications are being performed and prior to their completion.
Interis operation of this nuclear plant was authorized in Phase I-of this proceeding by our Partial Initial Decision issued
December 21, 1978 (LBP-78-40, 8 NRC 717).
P:.esuant to that Partial Initial Decision, an amendment was issued to the Trojan operating license authorizing interim operation of the plant "until further order of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board issued in conjunc-tion with the decision on the scope and timeliness of modifications from a safety standpoint..." (Id. at 747).
That "further order" is one of the subj ects under consideration in this Phase II of the proceeding.
The background events of this proceeding were set forth in the Partial Initial Decision (8 NRC 717), and they will not be repeated in unnecessary detail here.
The May 26, 1978 Modification Order resulted from the discovery by the Licensee 1I a..d its agent, the Bechtel Corporation, of several design eirors with respect to the-shear walls in-the Control Building at the-facility.
This Modification Order found that these design errors reduced the structural capacity of the control Building, that the originally intended seismic capability and safety margins should be substan-tially restored by appropriate modifications, and that operation of the facility in its as-built condition would violate the facility license Technical Specification 5.7.1.
However, the Modification Order.further found that the Control Building had adequate structural capacity to safely withstand the licensed Safe Shutdown Earthquake b/ ortland General Electric Co=pany (PGE), ~he City of Eugene, P
Oregon and Pacific Power and Light Company, the licensed owners of the plant referred ~to collectively as the " Licensee".
i l
(SSE)2/ for the Troj an facility (0.25g peak horizontal ground acceleration).
The Modification Order also provided that any person whose interests might be affected could file a request for hearing.
A number of persons availed themselves of this opportunity for hearing and were admitted as intervening parties to the Phase I evidentiary hearings (8 NRC at 722-23).
The Licensing Board also ordered the-bifurcation of the proceeding into two phases (Order of August 25, 1978).
Phase I involved a consideration of and decision upon the question of interim operation of the Trojan plant prior to codifi-cations of the Control Building, and culminated after evidentiary hearings 'in the Partial Initial Decision of December 21, 1978 (LBP-78-40, 8 NRC 717).
The instant Phase II of the proceeding involves consideration of the structural adequacy of the proposed modifications themselves and the safety aspects of their implementation.
l 3.
PHASE II EVIDENTIARY HEARING L
Written contentions were required to be filed by the inter-vening parties in Phase II of the proceeding, and contentions were i
filed by the Coalition for Safe Power (CFSP) by Eugene Rosolie and by the Consolidated Intervenors (CI, consisting of Nina Bell, David 2/
That is, the facility design cust be such as to insure that, s
should there be an earthquake providing the defined level of vibrating ground motion at the site, the structures, systems and components necessary to bring about a safe shutdown of the reactor will recain functional.
See 10 CFR Part 100, Appendix A, Section III(c).
H.
- 3. McCcy' and C. Gail Parson).3/
Following oral argunent at a pre-hearing conference on March 29, 1979, certain of the proffered contentiens of both CFS? and CI were admitted as issues in contro-
~
versy.
The a#-# tted contentions of CI were subsequently dismissed because of the failure of CI to comply with a Licensing Board Order co=pelling responses to discovery requests from the Staff.4/
At the Intervenor's request, CI was consolidated with CFSP, and CI was bound by the responses to interrogatories filed by CFSP.
The contentions viich rs=ained as issues are as follows:
CFS? No. 3 Plant Staff review of proposed modifica-tion is inadeouate to assure no viola-tions of Technical Specifications will occur (Tr. 3011-20).
CFSF No. 4 NRC Staff review of proposed modification is inadecuate to assure no violations of TechnicaI Soecifications will occur (Tr. 3046-51).
CFSF No. 12 Licensee has not provided information which shows that the plant can be operated during nodification work without an undue risk to the oublic health and safety (Tr. 3055-59).
CFSF No. 13 The plant cannot operate in a safe condi-tion -dhile the nodification work is being done -(Combined with CFSP No. 12, above.
Id.).
CFS? No. 15 Licensee has not identified all safety equip =ent or equipment needed for safe operation of the plant that would be 5/ ntervenors Colunbia Environnental Council (CIC) and Stephen M.
I 1
, illing'- e-failed to file contentions in Phase II, and accord-ingly _ hey were dismissed as parties by the Prehearing Conference Order (?hase II) cf April 12, 1979.
2'/See Crders entered June 5 and June 15, 1979 and October 17, 1979.
1
affected by proposed modifications (Tr. 3062-63).
CFSP No. 16 Licensee has not made adequate plans to protect all safety equipment and equip-ment for safe operation during the
]
modification work ~ (Id. ).
CFSF No. 17 Performance of modification work will hamper the ability of plant operators to respond to any emergency properly and thus poses an undue risk to the public health and safety (Tr. ~3063-65).
CFSP No. 20 Inadequate. assessment of the effects of drilling in the Control Building walls during modifications has been made (Tr. 3078-83).
CFSP No. 22 The effect of the steel plate on dis-placement in the Complex'has not been completely analyzed (Tr. 3094-98, 3108-11).
The Licensee filed a_ motion for sucmary disposition of CFSF Conter tions 3, '17, 20 and 22.
After hearing from all parties, the Board granted the motion for summary disposition as to CFSF 3 (Tr. 3485), but denied the motion with regard to CFSF 17 and 20 (Tr. 3498, 3513).
The Licensee withdrew its motion as to CFSF 22
~
(Tr. 3314), and CFSP voluntarily withdrew its Contention 4 (Tr.
3615).
Accordingly, the contentions considered at the Phase II evidentiary hearing were Nos. 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20 and 22, suora.
i The Intervenors also sought to raise an issue concerning
-the adequacy of the Licensee's existing security plan to deal with l
the modification work.
At the 3oard's suggestion, all parties stipulated a. procedure'under which a Staff security expert would i
review and evaluate the security plan in light of the Intervenor's
i -
5/
-concerns over the modification wor _,.-
Subsequently, CFSF requested this security review to include several incidents which had occurred at the.Troj an plant after the original review.6/
The security review was performed as requested and the evaluation showed the security plan to be adequate while the modification work was being performed.
Although CFSF indicated that'it felt that the Staff's review was not adequate, it gave no basis for this view when requested to do so by the Board.1/
No nexus was shown between the incidents alleged and the issues over which this Board has jurisdiction.
Such matters
~
are therefore not relevant to this proceeding and cannot be considered here.El 4
All parties prefiled their written testimony according to the schedule set by the Board at the March 11, 1980 prehearing con-1.'
.ference.
On March 17, 1980, Licensee prefiled the written testimony of Donald J. Broehl, Lief W. Erickson, Richard C. Anderson, William H. White and Kenneth M. Cooke on matters other than-l structural adequacy of the modified Complex (Licensee Exh. 27).
In addition, Licensee prefiled the written testimony of Richard C.
Anderson, Willian H. White, Bimal Sarkar and Patrick Chang-Lo on IITr. 3090-93.
5/ r.-3402-12, 3527-30, 3583-89.
T I/ r. 3529-30, 4682-83.
T b/ owever, the Intervenors may request the Director of Nuclear HReactor; Regulation to institute a show-cause proceeding >:LE they have concerns about security at the Troj an f acility.
10'CFR 2.202;
'Fortland General Electric Company (Trojan Nuclear Pland, ALAB-534,-
s 9-NRC 287, 290; n.-6.(1979).
i i
- 1
,.. ~ -
-.. ~,,, -,,, - - -
7-the structural - adequacy _ matters (Licensee Exh. 28), as.well as the testtrony on these catters of Licensee's independent experts,
Professors Myle J. Holley, Jr. and Boris Bresler (Licensee Exh. 29A).
t The Staff prefiled.the direct written testimony of Charles M._Trammell, III, Fred Clemenson, James E. Knight, Kenneth S. Herring and Drew Persinko on matters other than structural adequacy of the nodified Complex (Staff Exhs. 12, 14, 15 and 16).
On March 21, the State of Oregon prefiled the testimony of Dr. Harold I. Laursen on the structural adequacy of the modified Complex (Oregon Exh. 2).
On March 24, 1980, the Staff prefiled the testimony of Kenneth S. Herring and Drew Persinko on structural adequacy catters (Staff Exh. 17).
Finally, Licensee prefiled its answers to questions previously propounded by_ Dr. McCollom (Tr. 3531-35),
on March 30 -(Licensee Exh. 30).
The Phase II evidentiary hearing was held in Portland, Oregon on March 31-April 3 and April 16-17, 1980.
The only limited appearance-statement from a cember of -the public was heard on March 31 (Tr. 3792-94).
Witnesses were presented at both sessions by Licensee, the State of Oregon and the NRC Staff.
CFSF attended the hearing and. cross-exacined witnesses, but presented no witnesses of -its e m.
The Board conducted extensive examination on all of the direct evidence ~ presented.
When the hearing began on March 31, the Staff's prefiled
~ testimony indicated fthat resolution had not yet been reached-between the Staff and the Licensee with respect to a nu=ber -of the t-
=-
catters that had been described as unresolved in the Staff's Safety Evaluation Report (SER) filed February 14, 1980 (Staff Exhs. 13A, 133).
With respect to nonstructural matters, the Staff indicated q
2 that all matters were resolved by the close of the first hearing session (Tr. 4480 (Gray)).
The illness of the Staff's principal structural witness (Tr. 4476-83) caused a delay in the resolution of structural catters.
However, the Staff subsequently filed revised testineny which reflected that these matters were resolved to the Staff's satisfaction (Staff Exhs. 15A, 17A).
Thus, there were no controversies between the Licensee and the Staff before the Board for resolution at the hearing.
The record compiled for Phase II comprises more than 1,000 pages of transcript as well as the exhibits which were admitted into evidence, as listed in the Appendix attached hereto.
1 II.
FINDINGS OF FACT 1
A.
DESCRIPTION OF THE BUILDING COMPLEX The Control, Auxiliary cnd Fuel Buildings (3uilding Complex) are interconnected by their foundation systems and floor slabs.
-The Auxiliary'3uilding is located between the Fuel Building at the east end of the Building Complex and the Control 3uilding at the west end and is supported laterally by both the Fuel and Control Buildings, with the reinforced concrete floor slabs acting as diaphrag=s to transfer lateral loads.
The connecting floor slabs
and walls interact when t..Jected to seismic forces (8 NRC 723-24; Licensee Exh. 24, pp. 1-12).
The Turbine Building, which is closely associated with the'.,_osed modification, is adj acent and west of the Control Building.
The Control' Building is a box-type structural system with its ground floor on rock foundation at elevation 45 feet, concrete floors'at elevations 61 feet, 77 feet, and 93 feet and with a roof slab at elevation 117 feet.
The Control Building is composed of a structural steel framing system with steel beams and columns supporting reinforced concrete floor slabs, with shear walls designed to resist lateral seismic forces of an earthquake.
Most of the shear walls are of a composite-type construction (composite walls) consisting of a reinforced or unreinforced concrete core between tuo layers (wythes) of reinfor:ed grouted masonry block.
The two block wythes generally sandwich the structural steel frame so that the steel frame members are embedded in the concrete core (Licensee Exh. 24, pp. 3-12; Staff Exh. 13A, p. 1).
A railroad bay is
~
located at ground-level in the Control Building between column lines 41 and 46 with large openings in the east and west walls for train access.
The Auxiliary Building is approxt=ately 115 feet by 62 feet with the longer dimension running in the East-West direction.
At the lower level, the north and south walls are ccaposite walls and the other walls are of' reinforced masonry block.
Above eleva-cion:61 feet, the exterior walls are reinforced masonry block and
interior walls are reinforced casonry block or, for shield walls, cocposite walls.
The walls from elevation 93 feet to 117 feet are reinforced masonry block (Licensee Exh. 24, pp. 3-13).
+
2 The Fuel ' Building is approximately 62 feet by 180 feet with~the longer di=ension running in the North-South direction.
rioor slabs et elevation 61 feet, 77 feet and 93 feet provide con-tinuity with the Auxiliary Building.
From 93 feet to the roof level at elevation 138 feet, the structural system is steel framing rather than block and reinforced concrete walls.
Most of the lateral resistance of the Fuel Building is provided by the enclosure structure for the holdup tanks and the spent fuel pool (Licensee Exh. 24, pp. 3-13).
B.
DESIGN DEFICIENCIES AND OBJECTIVES OF MODIFICATIONS The Control Building design deficiencies that led to the Order for Modification of License of May 26, 1978 are:
(1)
Both the horicontal and vertical reinforcing steel embedded in the inner concrete core of the Control Building shear walls is generally discontinuous, in that it is not anchored to the steel beams and columns of the Control Building's steel frame as required by appli-cable codes and standards.
(2)' Misapplication of the applicable code ACI 318-63 shear design formulae in cocbination with.the applicable limiting 03E seismic
/
o.
loading resulted in less than the recuired amounts of reinforcing steel in the shear walls.
2 As a result of these design deficiencies, the capacity of the 3uilding Cocplex together with the contained systens and components
~
to withstand seiscic events is lower than intended (8 NRC 725-26; Staff Exh. 13A, p. 2, 510; Staff Exh. 17A, p. 3).
1.
The k'all Proble=
In late 1979 during a plant shutdown, the Licensee reported deficiencies in certain double-block walls (wall problem) in the Control Building Complex, which could influence structural integrity and support of piping in the event of an earthquake.
Because the wall problem introduced uncertainty in issues that led to interin operation, the Board issued an order requiring further information on the matter and specifying that permission of the Board would be recuired for resumed operation.1/
The Board held
.a hearing on Dece=ber 28 and 29,1979 for expediticus consideration of the matters in this order.
Testimony of witnesses at this hearing satisfied.the Board that interim operation could safely continue when per=itted by the Office of Inspection and Enforce-nent (Tr. 3443-46,-3L4;-50).
Although both Licensee and Staff viewed the wall problen as an independent enforcecent matter, the l
3 card did not agree and it asked to be kept informed of further E
cevelopcents.
E/ odification of Order Partitting Interic Operation of Trojan Nu-M clear Plant, November 30, 1979.
We L
,t 4
Subsequently a report by the Staff's casonry consul-cant cue'stioned Licensee's. assu=ed value of _ allowable stress in nortar bonding the double wall, " collar joint stress" (Staff Exh.
4 19).
This led to Staff's requirements for short term M situ tests i
I regarding collar joint stresses and ill-defined long term' tests.
i At the prehearing conference of March 11, 1980, a Staff witness
- castified that double-block walls enter STARDYNE analyses and explained the Staff's desire for a " confirmatory" test program (Tr. 3344, 3603-14).
As a result, the Board continued to view the wall probles as a potential issue and asked Licensee and Staff to j
provide evidence regarding it at the evidentiary hearing.
4 2.
Objectives of the Proposed Building Complex Modifica-tions Although the as-built complex was'found to be capable i
of withstanding-the 0.25g acceleration of.the SSE specified for Troj an-Nuclear ?lant, the design deficiencies both reduced the i
conservatis: and-design targins with respect-to seismic capability below ' : hat ~ intended for - the life of the plant, and reduced the operating basis earthquake.(03E)10/ capability below that required J:n.t the-operating license-(Staff Exh. 13 A ', p. 2; Licensee Exh. 28,
~
_ pp. 7, 7 a).
The: Licensee proposed modifications intended to add. strength to the Control.3uilding, to tie the Control 3uilding bS/That ;is,; the facility Inis: be. designed so that, should there be an earthcuake providing that defined. level'of vibratory ground notion:at.the site, the plant.nonetheless could continue in nornalE coeration without -undue risk to the :oublic health and' safe:yE(10 CFR Part 100, Appendix'A, SIII(c)):. 'The 0.15g value assigned to the 03E by the seisnic criteria _ pertaining to the-Troj an f acility, nisf no t inLpresent dispute.
L
-together in a: better way, and to minimize the impact of the modifi-cations on operation of the Trojan Nuclear Plant (Tr. 3705-07, 3764 (Anderson) ; Licensee Exh. 27, p.15).
4 The objective of the proposed modifications is to 2
substantially restore the seismic margins and conservatisms intended in the original design.
Such are relied upon to account for
~
. uncertainties in analysis, design and construction as well as assuring that older plants, such as Troj an, do not need,to be back-fitted to meet newly-generated seismic design requirements that may be more stringent than those usually required (Staff Exh. 17A, p. 3).
C.
DESCRIPTT.ON OF PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS The proposed modifications to the Control Building include four new structural elements:
three parallel walls running in the North-South direction and a steel plate added to the west wall.
The railroad bay through the Control Building will be closed off 1
by two of these walls, and the third wall is an interior wall crossing the current railroad bay (Licensee Exh. 24, 551.2.6, 3.2.1; Licensee Exh. 28, p. 10; Staff Exh. 13A, p. 6, 520; Tr. 3703-05 (Anderson)).
The four new structural elements proposed are:
(1)
Adding an interior shear wall on column line N in.the Control Building railroad bay structurally connected to-shear walls at column lines 41 and
.l
46 and to the underside of the floor slab at elevation 65 feet (Licensee Exh. 24, p. 3-3; Licensee Exh. 27, pp. 8, 9).
4l 1
(2)
Adding a shear wall on column line R in the Control Building railroad bay structurally connected by bolts and grouted reinforcement steel to the existing north and west walls of the Control Building (Licensee Exh. 24, pp.
3-2, 4-5; Licensee Exh. 27, pp. 9-10).
(3)
Adding a shear wall along column line N in the Control Building railroad bay structurally connected by high-strength bolts and grouted
~
reinforcement steel to the existing N line wall above elevation 65 feet and the walls at column lines 41 and 46. (Licensee Exh~. 24, pp. 3-2,~4-8; Licensee Exh. 27, p. 11).
(4)
Adding a three-inch thick steel plate onto the outside face of the R line wall to further strengthen the west wall of the Control Building extending from column line 41 to beyond column line A6 and between elevations 59 feet
.3 inches and 97 feet 3 inches with structural connections to the existing R line wall by the use of high-strength steel through-bolts (Licensee Exh. 24, Fig. 3.1-2; Licensee Exh.
'27, p. 10).
The addition of these four structural elecents will add strength
'directly to.the areas of the Control Building where the inherent
' structural ~ weaknesses were brought about primarily by the railroad.
bay openings.
In addition to the four new structural elements, structural improve =ents will be made at several locations involving welding of beat-cole =n connections and connecting of discontinuous rein-forcing steel.
The six structural improvements proposed are:
(1)
Welding of existing bolted beam-colucn connections on the south side of column 46-N beneath elevation 77 feet.
-(2)
Welding of existing bolted beam-column connections on the south side of column 46-N beneath elevation 93 feet.
(3) ~ Making the existing horizontal reinfore-ing steel continuous at the following locations:
-(a)
In the 41 Line wall at column line Q between elevations 45 feet and 65 l
l:
- teet, (b)
In - the 46 line wall at colt =n line N I
between elevations 45 feet and 61 feet,
- (c)
In the 55 line wall at column.line Q l
between elevationso45 feet and 61 feet, and
16 -
(d)
In the 55 line wall at column line N between elevations 45 feet and 61 feet.
4 2
Making the existing horizontal reinforcing i -
steel continuous requires removal of existing block and parts of the concrete 4
core in walls to expose the reinforcing steel (Licensee Exh. 27, pp. 12, 13).
Certain ancillary work, not a part of the structural enhancement of the Building Complex, will be performed in addition to the major structural. work described.
These include:
modifica-tions to safety-related equipment, components, and piping necessary for their seismic qualifications to the new building response ipectra, _ installation of a new louvered section in the Turbine Building wall along column line 41,. relocation of the existing Turbine Building roll-up door between column lines S ' and T west
- to col-line U to provide an air supply for the emergency diesel
- generators after closing off the railroad bay, alteration of the railroad ~ spur outside of the Control Building, and installation of i
a new-floor slab at elevation 54 feet 6 inches in the closed-off portion of the railroad bay to acco==odate use'of that area as office space.(sLicensee Exh. 27, pp. 13-14).
'D.
STRUCT"RAL ADEOCACY OF TliE MODIFIED 'CO.OLEX J
'Archs other things, the May 26, 1978 Order for Modifica-L eien of License ' requires that the Control 3uilding be brought into
- ~
substantial-cocpliance with Technical Specification 5.7.1, of the Trojan Operating License and to restore the intended design cargins of that Technical Specifications such that:
(a) the Control Build-2 ing OBE. capacity of 0.15g is met using 2% damping (FSAR Table 3.7.1) ;
(b) the Control Building OBE capacity of 0.15g and SSE capability of 0.25g are met using a yield strength for reinforcing steel of
'40,000 psi (FSAR 53.8.1.3.3) ; and (c) the masonry portions of the
-Control Building walls comply with Uniform Building Code (UBC) requirements for reinforced grouted =asonry (FSAR 53.8.1.4).
1.
Criteria for Determining Structural Adecuacv The criteria for determining structural adequacy of both the unmodified and modified Control Building are complicated by the fact that the major shear walls of the Building Complex are generally composite walls consisting of a reinforced concrete core placed between two layers of reinforced grouted masonry.
The provisions of the USC applicable to masonry are not applicable to the cocbination of casonry and concrete caking up the cocposite walls.
The U3C does provide for use of testing as an alternative to the coc.e tor =ulas.11/
b1/ or exa=ple, existing building codes do not deal with the type F
of construction cresent in the Cocolex in which a steel frame is
.e= bedded in ec=p'osite walls (Tr. 4120 (3resler)).
Cocposite walls, as used at Troj an are not addressed by the U3C (Licens ee Exh. 23, p. 28; Licensee Exh. 30; Staff Exh. 17A, pp. 41 42).
Consequentiv, the requirecent in FSAR 53.3.1.5 that " concrete block walls he designed to U3C requirements for casonry cannot be cet for the cocoosite walls of the Conclex for which there is no applicable code' provisions (Licensee Ekh. 29, p. 48).
- Instead, in the. absence of specific code provisions for corposite walls, a test ' program was utilized to provide the infor=ation and capa-city criteria that' building codes would have provided (Licensee Exh. 25, p. 25; Licensee Exh. 29A, pp. 5-c).
1 a.
Deternining Structural Adecuacv The appropriate criteria by which it can be determined whether the requirements of the May 26, 1978 order for
-j Modificaticn of License are met include :
(1) the specifications listed'therein are us'ed in the analytical model; (2) it is demon-strated' that the codifications would bring substantial compliance with the seistic design requirements of the Troj an FSAR as refer-enced by Technical Specifications 5.7.1; and (3) where substantial literal conpliance with those requirements is not possible due to the type of building construction, then conservative engineering judgments using alternative equivalent methodology are used.
The capacities of the new reinforced concrete walls and the new steel plate to be added are deternined by two i
codes not referenced in FSAR 53.8, ACI 318-77 Code end AISC Manual L
of. Steel Construction, 7th Edition, respectively.
Their use is consistent with that section's requirecents regarding these caterials (Licens ee Ixh. 28, p. 47 ; S t af f Exh. 13 A, p. 69, 55.2.1; Tr. 4405 '(White)).
b.
Seiscic Inout for the Analvtical Model The seismic input criteria for use with the analytical codel were provided for in the FSAR 53.7, and all such specificarions were used accordingly except for the derivation of thel loor response spectra.
A new artificial time history with i
cir:erent.requency ntervals troc that spect: ed in cae ::..R was developed, which better characterizes the action described by the
ground response ' spectra.
The new frequency intervals selected for i
the ground response -spectra are in accordance with current pract ces as set forth in Regulatory Guide 1.122.
A reassuring result'is i
that the new floor response spectra enclose the one used for the original seistic design of the Building Complex.
2.
Determing Structural Adequacy of the Modified Building Comalex The modified Building Complex was modeled and analyzed, with the three dimensional finite. element STARDYNE computer program used 'for evaluation of the current unmodified Building Complex for interim operation (Partial Initial Decisien, 8 NRC 717, pp. 730-33).
This model generates loads, displacements and floor response spectra using'the specified seismic input discussed abcVe (Licensee Exh. 28, p. - 36).
The determination of the structural strengths (capaci-ties) of the composite walls unique to the Control Building was derived froc test results, with proper application to the individual wall panels in-the-codified Building Complex prov' ed as an alternative in the UBC.
The various potential effects on the collection of wall panels of having the steel frame e= bedded in the corposite walls were also assessed and accounted for in the analytical codel.
Sicilarly, the added~ walls and steel places were analyzed;to _ assure that the appropriate amounts of shear wall capa-cities would be realized.
c
a.
The STARDYNE Analvtical Model The analytical model was based on actual knowledge of the -distribution of mass within the Building Cocplex, and the s
2 requirecents of FSAR 53.7 with respect to lu= ping masses were com-plied with (Licensee Exh. 28, pp. 37, 40; Staff Exh. 13A, p. 12, 53.2.1.2.2).
The stiffness of the structural elements in the model was based on taterial properties of those elements (Licensee Exh. 24, App. B, pp. 3-5 to B-5-c).
The analytical codel assunes linear elastic behavior and-does not directly nodel potential nonlinear behavior.
Nonlinear behavior, in turn, could result in a reduction of stiff-ness of the structural. elements, a change in its natural frequency, and a potential for change in the seismic loads imposed on the structure as a whole (Licensee Exh. 28, p. 22; Licensee Exh. 29A,
.pp.
13-14).
A reduction in stiffness will also result in an
~
increase in displacement.
The change in building frequency affects floor respcnse spectra and may therefor affect seismic qualifica-tions of equipment,-components and piping (Licensee Exh. 28, pp.
29-30).
The potential nonlinear behavior was evaluated
.using.the,STA2DY3I analytical codel-through additional iterative analyses and postprocessing of the results predicted by the linear elastic codel-(Licensee Exh. 28, p. 39; Tr. 4422-23(3resler)).
- Thus, the effec:sief nenlinearities and. stiffness degradation were accounted for withiappropriate b'roadening of the' floor response spectra (Licens ee 'Ixh. 2S, ' pp. 38-39, 72 ; Tr. 4385-8 6 (k'hite)).
Included in the analysis were the effects of cyclic loading froa earthquakes and resulting cyclic degradation previcusly verified in the wall test progra= (Staff Exh. 13A, pp. 15-16, 53.2.1.2.18).
The result-ing seistic analysis was performed in accordance with the applicable FSAR criteria on seismic system analysis (Staff Exh.13A, pp. 10-15).
b.
Sources of Nonlinearity Accounted For
' The sources of nonlinear behavior considered by the Licensee included cracking that develops in the concrete of the wall panels (Licensee Exh. 28, pp. 33-34) and potential lack of connectivity between wall panels which are partially separated by embedded steel columns (Licensee Exh. 28, p. 34).
The nonlinear behavior of the c_acking in the concrete wall panel was accounted for through the use of stiffness
~
reduction factors derived from the results of the Licensee's test program (Licensee Exh. 28, pp. 35, 38, 40 and 44; Licensee Exh. 24, App. 3, pp. B-5-c, B-5-d; Staff Exh. 13A, p. 62, 55.1) 3ecause the stiffness reduction is a function of shear and norcal stresses, iterative STAEDYNE analyses were performed to evaluate the appro-priate teduced stiffness properties (Staff Exh. 13A, p. 63, 55.1.1; Licensee Exh. 28, pp. 38, 44).
The potential lack of.connectivity between wall panels resulted in further investigation of three telated variables
- the arount at vertical reinforcement from the baan-colurn connec-tions of the steel framing systen used it. deter:ining stiffness in
~
the codel, the nor:a1 stress parameter in detarcining stiffness, and the overall bending parallel to the component of the earthquake being censidered tending to change stiffnesses at each end of the wall.
The Licensee initially used the embedded steel frame as vertical reinforce ent in the analytical model (Licensee Exh. 26, pp. 40-41).
To remove the concern of the effect of this' potential nonlinearity, the Licensee submitted an evaluation indicating the impact of neglecting the contribution of the beam-colu=n connections to stiffness with appropriate consideration for the result (Staff Exh.13A, pp. 63-64, 55.1.1.1; Licensee Exh. 25U;
~ Licensee Exh. 23, pp. 67-69; Licensee Exh. 33).
The Licensee concluded that the normal stress paraceter contributing to wall stiffness consisted of the dead load of the portions of the wall above the elevation under consideration (Licensee Exh. 28, pp. 41-42).
The potential effects for reducing this dead lead considered were the effects of creep and shrinkage, i
stiffening of bezzs due to encasecent in concrete and the effect of changes in cean wall temperatures for exterior walls.
The potential effect for increasing the dead load considered was the vertical grcwth in rhe wall panels in an earthquake due to the development of flexural cracking.
The vertical growth was found to more than.
cc pensata fer the potential reduction factors even when panels were subj ected to stress -cycles (Licensee Exh. 25Q, Attch. 4; Licensee Exh. 25U;-Licensee Exh. 23, pp. 43, 70; Licensee Exh. 32; Licensee Exh. 3 3 )'.
Seismic loads create a nonlinear " gross bending effect" which tends to increase compressive load on one end of a wall which is parallel to.the component of the earthquake and to
.~
decrease the available nor=al stress on the other end of that wall.
This, in rurn, results in an increase and decrease in wall stiffness in the local wall areas (Licensee Exh. 28, p. 43; Licensee Exh. 29A, pp. 13 -15 ; S t af f Exh. 13 A, pp. 6 6, 68, 55.1.1.3).
Although the STAR 3YNE analysis did not account for this gross bending behavior, evaluations by the Licensee assured that overall stiffness would not-change subsrantially (Licensee Exh. 28, p. 43; Licensee Exh. 29A, pp. 13-15 ; Licensee Exh. 25Q, Attch. 1,2 and 9; Licensee Exh.
32; Staff Exh.17A, pp. 29-30).
c.
Load Determinations The STARDYNE, linear elastic analysis predicted the magnitude of the seismic loads to be resisted by the modified Building Cc= plex and predicted the distribution of such loads among the various structural elements of the modified Building Complex (Licens ae Ex'.
24, pp. 3-11, 53.3.1).
Postprocessing of results, iteratite calculational cycles, and supplemental analyses performed, as described above, have accounted for 'the effects on predicted loads of the influence of stiffness reduction.
The relative load distributions among the caj or shear walls.will not be changed by the stiffness reduction from dead' load reduction and neglecting the bear-column connections
-(Licensae.Exh. 23, pp. 31, 45).
Reductions in stiffness due to
. gross bending effect will be offset by an associated change in shear capacity to satisfactorily account for potential shifting of
- load from panels on the tension side of a wall to panels on the 2
compression side (Licensee Exh. 25Q, Attch. 1; Licensee Exh. 28,
- p. 70).
An overall reduction in the stiffness of the modified 3uilding Conplex due to potential nonlinear behavior would not result in a significant increase in the total inertia forces to be resisted by the structure, since the natural frecuency of the codified' complex approximates the frequency which corresponds to-the peak of the ground response spectra (Licensee Exh. 28, pp. 30, 38-39, 45-46 ; Tr. 4424-25 (Holley)).
L i
t d.
Cacacities Determination
~
The composite wall capac ties were determined by the Licensee. by_.use of testing as provided in U3C 5106 and S107 (Licensee Exh. 28, p. 48; Licensee Exh. 29A, pp. 5-6; Licensee Exh.
30; Staff Exh.17A, pp. 41, 42; Tr. 4420 (3:esler)).
The Licensee derived capacity criteria from the results of a test prograc using 23 rest specimens which sinulated the parameters of the existing walls of the Building Cocplex-(' Licensee Exh. 24, App.
A., pp. A-1 to A-5).
The =aterials of construction, the aspect ratio and the thickness of test specimens were sicilar to those of the actual walls in :he 3uilding Co= plex (Licensee Exh. 30; Staff Exh. 17A, p. 45).
i m_
7
- 4 9.
-The test l program was adequate to provide valid infor:ation on the behavior oft co=posite walls and allow the deriva-tion and verification.of capacity criteria (Licensee Exh. 28, 25-26 ' Tr. 4468 -(Laursen) ; Licensee Exh. 29A, p. 8; Tr. 4431,
)
pp.
-4444-(3:esler); Tr. 4431-32 (F.olley)).
The behavioral characteristics of the test speci-rens were used to-develop.a theoretical double curvature shear capa'-
j
~.
city of individual wall panels as a function of the percentage of vertical 1 reinforcing steel and the vertical or dead load acting on the wall.
Capacities derived by application of this equation ignored the bond -between the steel colunns and the composite walls (Licensee Exh. 28, p. 49).
This reflects at least the same level of conserva-tirs.as. code Equations (Tr. 44'31 (Bresler)).
To arrive at capacity values, the Licensee calcu-
"latediche-double curvature capacities'of the individual wall panels
-for a given wall using the theoretical flexural equation.
Each is.dividual wall panel's diagonal tension capacity was also computed based on the.'iower bound-diagonal tension capacities derived from the test results.
The lower of the panel's double curvature and
- diag:n'al cension capacities cultiplied by an appropriate capacity reduction factor, was then considered to be the ultirate seistic l
capaci y'of'the panel.
The.ultinate seistic capacity of an entire wall was - hen obtained by-s'- ation of the capacities of individual panels ' Licensee Ey.h. 24, pp. 3-lS-b to e, 53.9.2.2 Table 3.5-1 cand -2,f11gs. 3.5-6.'to-ll: Oregon.Exh. 2, p. 7; Tr. LLL5 (Holley),
iLiL5-56 (3:esler),J4463L(Laursen)).
g 5
1
w After later evaluations were requested by the Staff, further capacity calculations were made such that the capacity projected for a given wall be selected as the lowest capacity for any of four potential modes including single curvatuqe flexural and sliding failure in~ addition to the double curvature flexural and diagonal tension failure capacities.
Potential dead load reductions were also considered in the determination of the walls sliding and.
the single and double curvature capacities (Staff Exh. 13A, pp.
71-74, !5.2.2.1).
Licensee satisfied the Staff's concerns in these areas (Licensee Exh. 25U, Attch. 1; Licensee Exh. 28, pp. 53, 55, 77, 79; Licensee Exh. 30; Licensee Exh. 32; Licensee Exh. 33; Staff Ezh. 17A, p. 31).
In all determinations of capacities, the design se,rength of the reinforcing steel and.the design strength of con-crete were used even though; tests have shown that actual. strengths are larger than the design strengths (Licensee Exh. 24, pp. 3-13-e, 3-23, 3-27, 5!3.4.2.2,'3.6.1.2, 3.6.2: Licensee Exh. 28, p. 45).
The. transfer of. shear forces from existing struc-tu al ele:ents to the new ones will utilize a post tensioned bolt
~
sys:e: :o clatp.the new and the old together and roughening of the adj acen: surfaces to assure.adecuate functional resistance. -The resulting co=hina:icn should assure the full capacities of the new walls'(~_ic.nsee Exh. 28, p. 47; Licensee Ixh. 33; Staff Exh. 13A, pp. 69-10, 55.2.1; Tr. 4365 (White), 4519-21.(3rcehl)).
g u
,27 -
- e.
Coccarisen of Canacities to Loads The capacity of the modified Building Complex to resist both the SSE and the 03E must be established.
Since the OBE 4,
2 governs the design of the Building Complex and satisf action of the
'03E design criteria would also. constitute satisfaction of the SSE design criteria,'the controlling load combination and acceptance criterich is that of the 03E (Licensee Exh. 24, pp. 2-1, 3-20, 152.1, 3.5; Staf f Exh. 13A, pp. 17-18, 53.2.2.1.3).
This criterion recuires that there exist a cargin of 407. between the calculated loads and the corresponding ultiaate capacities of the modified Building Cocplex (Licensee Exh. 28,-p. 58; Tr. 4423-24 (Holley)).
Capacity to force comparisons show that all but 2
two of the minor shear walls in the modified Building Cocplex had.a
=argin of at least 407.~between ultimate capacity and unfactored OBE loads _ (Licensee Exh. 24, pp. 3-21).
Each of these two minor shear walls contributes a very snall percentage of the total shear O'
-capacity'of.the Building Co= plex.
Loads predicted but not carried 4
by these two walls vere readily shown to redistribute to the adjacent
~
=aj or shear walls (Licensee Exh. 28,.p.
39 ; Licensee Exh. 30).
X reover, no' substantial deterioration of these walls would be-expected = fro: an 'SSI (Oregon ~ Ixh. 2, pp. 7-8 ; Licensee Exh. 23, p.
23; iicansee Exh. 30; Tr. 4362-63 (White)), and no equipment would be 'i pacted by any wall degradation that cight potentially take-
- place (Staff Exh. 13A,t p. 33,'55.12).
g
- v
-tW w
e w
iv w
m L.:
The Staff requested further evaluations of seismic capability assuning further conservati<. as of wall capability, i.e.,
single curvature and sliding ' capacity failures, neglecting contri-a butions of bean-cole =n connections in determination of stiffness, i
the gross bending effect on stiffness and load distributions, and reduced coefficient of friction for the bolted connections for the R-line zad N'-line walls.
Since most of these might have their impacts on the seismic capabilities of the added shear walls on N-line, N' line and R-line, the added conservative analysis does o axist (Tr. 3532, 4369-70 reassure that the intended capability (Chang-Lo) ; Licensee Exh. 28, pp. 59-60; Licensee Exh. 25U, Attch.
1, 4; Licensee Exh. 25Q, Attch.1; Licensee Exh. 32; Licensee Exh.
33 ; Staff Exh.17A, pp. 27, 38-40).
The evidence shows that the potential effects of these uncertainties in behavior and in the application of test results to predict behavior and capacities have been properly accounted for by these additional analyses and evaluations perforned by the Licensee (Staff Exh. 17A, pp. 35, 39-40).
The results show that capacity to force ratios for sone individual wall panels for the unf actored 03E nay fall below 1.4 for the worst possible com-binations of dead Icad reduction, gross bending and single and double curva ture behavior.
However, redistribution of forces in s
the wall will_ occur so that _the capacity to force ratio for the entire vall cull not be-less than 1.4.
Thus the walls will maintain substantial cargins in capacity even wheh uncertainties in structural behavior and applicarien of test'results'are accounted
.h,,
I t
- for by ana'lyzing the worst possible,ombinations of loading and
' structural-beb:2.vior (Staff Exh. 17A, pp. 39-40).
f.
Building Displacements.
4
~
Consideration of building displacements is neces-sary to verify that (1) adequate clearance exists between adjacent structures so that any displacements induced by an earthquake (interstructure displacements) will not result in contact,_, and physical damage to the adjacent structures and (2) neither r.lative displacecents between stories of a building (interstory dicplacement)
'nor interstructure displacements will adversely affect equip =ent that is attached to more than one story or which runs between buildings.
The displace =ents for the codified Building Complex we're deter =ined as part of the output of the STARDYNE analysis used to determine structural adequacy (Licensee Exh. 28, p. 60).
The STARDYNE. analysis provided elastically calculated displacements which accounted for the ncnlinearities due to the material charac-
~
teristics of the walls.
Supple = ental calculations were performed ~
to account for the addit-icnal nonlinearities considered under i.
structural adequacy evaluations discussed previously.
These addi-
. tic'nal nonlinearities would result in calculated displacements i
increased by a'facter of 2.1 over that calculated initially for the i.
-codified Building Com' plex (Licensee Exh. 23, p. S0; Licensee Exh.
_23U;_ Staff lExh
- 17A, p'. 32).
L
<*-h*e Awm ApW m megi.+e
.h9-f -
30 --
The structures adjacent, but not connected to, the
- Building Co plex.are che Containment and the Turbine Buildings.
The difference'between the available clearance and the sum of a
calculated' displacements multiplied by 2.1 for the 3uilding complex-i Containment Building interface is quite large and do not present any potential for-Enpacts during an SSE (Licensee Exh. 25H).
The available clearance at the interf ace between the Control and Turbine Buildings in the modified Building Complex
- will be reduced at elevations 69 feet and 93 feet by the addition of_ the steel plate to the west wall of the Control 3uilding (Licensee Exh. - 25E).
By removal of a part of a concrete floor slab at elevation 69 feet and of part of the flange of a steel girder at elevation 93 feet in the Turbine Building, the resulting clearances between the Buildings at these levels are respectively at least 2.5
~
' inches and-2.0 inches (Staf f Exh.17A, p. 52 ; Licensee Exh. 28, pp. 61-63).
Even after including-the added factor of 2.1, there is ample clearance since _ =aximum reduction in gap is 0.29 inches and 1.10 inches,-respectively, at the 69 feet and 93 feet levels between' the Control and Turbine Buildings (Licensee Exh. 28,-pp. 61-63).
g.
Influence ~of the Wall Problem on Structural Integritv Evidence concerning the wall problem included results of;the short t'er= t e s t p rogr an.
Collar-joint shear stresses for
~
standard weight double-block walls were within the range assured by i Licens ee,- butlfor heavyweight. block walls they were~ les s than b
b i
~.
.-~.
4 Y
+.
expected though still greater.than the postulated allowable value.
~
. Licensees' witnesses explained that there are.no heavyweight double-
< block walls in the Control 13611 ding that are relied on in the STARDYNE model and that the' heavyweight block walls in the' Building i
Complex as a khole contribute less than 2.5% to the total shear resistance of the 3uilding Cocplex (Tr. 4893-94, 4729).
This.effect on-structural integrity is therefore considered negligible, but there retains the =atter.of adequately supported safety-related
~
-piping, discussed cost.
h.
Conclusions of Structural Adecuaev The Board concludes that a thorough and extensive analysis has been =ade of -the modified Building Complex and the effects undergone in the event of an SSE or 03E.
Specifically, the Board finds:
(1)
That an appropriate seismic input criterion is used in the analytical codel; t
l (2)
That the STARDYNZ analytical codel, I
augmented to-include the effects of nonlinearities and repetitive earth-cuake events was an appropriate and i
'accep table 'co del ;
s (3)
That appropriate seismic analyses were performed resulting in a conservative assessment of the behavior of the codified cceplex subjected to 03E and SSE events;
. =
~. (4)
That the seismic loads for the modified
~
Building Complex have been adequately
' determined taking into consideration the appropriate potential nonlinear behaviors; (5)
That the capacities of the walls of the modified Building Complex were properly determined through appro-priately derived characteristics based on test results and through proper consideration of potential behavior unique to the wall construction; (o)
That the assesscent of -the capacity to force'ratics for individual walls and wall panels was appropriate to meet the criteria previously stated (SII-D, suora) ;
(7)
.That the relative displacements between the Building Cc plex and adj acent structures have been pro-perly assessed and that the avail-able clearances are sufficient to
^
preclude building contact in the event of an 03E or SSE; and u
l v
1 j'
',t t
P (8)i.That the effect of the " Wall Problem"
~on structural integrity.of the Build-
'ing Complex is negligible.
~3.
Seismic-Qualifications of Equipment, Components and Pining To satisfy the criteria for determining the adequacy 1I of the modifications, the safety-related equipment, components and'.oic.in6 in the coe.Lfied Building Complex must be seismically
~
qualified to withstand the 03E and SSE and continue to operate
. satisfactorily.
The method of seismic qualification to the original ground level response spectra at elevation 45-feet which was specified' in FSAR 5 53.7, 3.9 and 3.10 was also used to determine t.ne seismic quall:1 cations or equ_;pnent, components and piptng ror the codified Building Complex (Licensee Exh. 24, App.
3, p. 3-1, 51.2; Licensee Exh. 28, p. 64).
~
a.
Floor Resnonse Soectra The SSE floor response spectra for these floors in the.as-built Building Complex above ground level were redeveloped-during -?hase I of t'gese proceedings to account "or changes in the
-s 3uilding_Co= plex responseLdue-to the design deficienciec.
They must again?be. redeveloped due to the proposed codifications.
Although
,..iil" Safety-related" refers to - ecuipcent, compenents and piping to be seisticallvicualified as identified in 10 CFR Par: 50, Accen-dix 3 and'further identified in Regulatory. Guide 1.25, Revislon
- 3 and 1.29, Revision 3 (Licensee Exh. 28, p.
54; Licensee Ekh.
2/,'p. 3-1).
F V
L s
/
l
+.
the~03E response spectra were not addressed in Phase I of these proceedings, they =ust_now be developed to account for changes in Building Cc= plex response due-to both the design-deficiencies'and t.ne prepcs ec tocien. cations.
The~new 03E and SSE floor response spectra have i
been generated using the artificial time history and frequency inter-t vals previously described (SII-D-1-b, suora) and the STARDYNE model (Licensee Ixh. 24, Ac c..
B.,
- n. n.. 3-2, 3-3, S52.2.1.1, 2.2.1.2).
The i
resulting response spectra curves were then broadened to account t
-or variat.ons in cass and for variations in stirrness cue to l
variations in the codulus of elasticity and in the stiffness reduc-(
tica factors due to dead load, shear stress and experimental uncertainties.
The response spectra curves were also broadened on the low frequency side of the response _ spectra to account for potential _reduct' ion in stiffness due to the postulated occurrence of cultiple' earthquakes, the potential dead load reductions, exclusions of the bear-colurn connections from vertical reinforcement ratios,
the potantial influence of gross bending and potential vertical slip s
I alcng the e bedded colunn; (Licensee Exh. 24, App. 3, pp. 3-5-e, 3-5-f,
!2.2.1.4; Staff Exh. 17A, p. 34).
Theseehfectsaccurula-l tively result in-a total broadening of LlT, on the low side and 107.
l C3 the high side of the peeks of the respCnse spectra associated with the structural frequencies (Licensee Exh. 25U; Licensee Ixh.
-23, p. 5_).
1
9 23 s
Qualifications of Safety-Related Equipment, b.
Cormonents 'and- ?icinz ~
Licensee i.as cade a co=nitment. to evaluate the
~
seistic qualification of all safety-related eauic. cent, cocnonents n
2 and= piping in :he Building Co= plex using the revised response spectra-develoo, ed abcVe.
Modifications will be implemented to assure quali-fications based on these evaluations (Licensee Exh. 24, pp.
4-4,
~
4-8, 5-1,
!!4.2.1, 4.2.5, 5.2; Licensee Exh. 24, App.
3, 551, 3-6; Licens ee Exh. 2f G;. Licensee Exh. 27, p.13 ; Licensee Exh. 28, pp.64-65a).
Influe.nce of the Wall Problem on Equipment c.
QCa,_1I1 Cat 10n Much of ~the safety-related equi cent that had been supp:.-ted by double-block wells, generally piping required for-shutdcwn in rhe even:- of al earthquake, has either been through-bolted
,ut e.ne cisputed va,ue or.
or anchered e,_s ew.nere ( t r. - 4 o c. 5 ).
m acceptable collar-joint shear strength of the heavyweight block walls cas ts uncertainty on seistic cualification of. equipment that o
Licensee a~ reed to resolve is still suc. a. crred' there. 'Conse:uentiv.,
3 i
re=ainLinz 213:ivines of the Staff before. cc. eration is resuced-af ter o
--_._en_
--_ c.
- o
__--.--,, cng c,_o2,ose5
.o22:;ca'*onso 2
o-
. u.,
3 i
a :c:plish tnis (Tr. L695-97, 4699, 4742-46).
Staff's witnesses i-
~
.,,.,- - n c,.. a,.. a c n....,u. - -,,,,.. c_ :.... ;,.
--a a-
.u,--,----a..ne_,.
--a s
.,. ; : 2,;
c a
l procedurs, raet.One nicensee,sEp:cposed retnod of strengenening
?
l 1
l-
- f
~.%. 6 g. -.?_one em._
~,3,.a.
.e a.
=- - - c g f _ n._ :
J u.
l,
- J,..%. ? a.
%. ~.
~
.._~.~3 p--g, s
v o
7
-c l-s..e _ _
n _ e s - way w e.... a. C a. s s c-.f
(~_.. r ? "' ? _ r. /,
c a -
s u
u
=-,;
.n. n n. _ n -
4 C ;.. u w
-a c-s c.
t 7
e it
- 4792-9c).
Licensee has agreed to confirmatory testing of support anchors in double-block walls, although loads have been reduced (Tr. 4701-02, 4743-45).
1 in view on the 7icensee,s agreement to resolve m
a recarning cousle,o,cc,.< wa,,
Issues berore resucing operation, anc the negligible influence of these walls on structural adequacy, the Board is persuaded that the wall problem has been explored adequately.
d.
Conclusions on Seismic Qualifications of Safety-Related Ecuioment n.
-u.e ocaro, m inds t.nat t.ne Laplementation of coc...tri-n cations deterrined by ac. o. lication of the revised resc. onse spectra to all safety-related e uipment, cocponents and o.ic.in? in the s
2 Buildine Cc= plex will brine compliance with FSAR recuirements and C
O tecanica, Soec,rications 5.7.1.
4.
Conclusions on Meeting the Criteria for Structural
.i.decuacy of the Modified Buildinz Conclex The evidence shows that the evaluations of the croc.osed codificaricas of the Buildine Como. lex and the safetv-related ec.uio.-
o tent contained therein have beer. made apo. rco. riatelv. to assure, uo.on completion or L pterentation et-the resu, ttng moc ttcation, t.nat
- h. a-2 e ' a e-
- = b l # s '..a. d e S v' ~ ' s i v, (S.I-D-1, s
=)
.,#11 be a=.'n##ad.
n
..,. -,,..r,. :,.... s s y,o s
d- ' ';r
'.. - c-a. ---= ^ 4.... 4 - a a..
a.
a'
.v a o
a a
ww
---a-ag ::..:n3-c.
~. %.. a-%.. a c - 4. 3-..%. 9 :: A w.43,9 a---
- . ~ %..c so a:1 2A
- m. m e, c-u-
.v u-m 6
w u-A o s t e n..
-%s n s-yas2d ~n####-w - Ca #^w"s.
U o# esso"C V..-' l. e
.s U.. o l ' a ***
7 3
v-m.
f G.. J J - %waqi J-..m
- s -. 4
%.. a- -.. g l., J -
G.. C
-wJ swJ 3 Se
-m f
~. %.. e s o
. 5 S
.w w
w D
-j@
D u-ww---
a
w
L l
/
f.
- 37.-
desig: Land evaluation -to be both reasonable and appropriate, and
. thst the. criteria-had been ~ applied properly to the. walls of the
~
3uilding Complex. LThey. concluded that:the modification design, in their.- j udg:ent, would-bring the Control Building into substantial i"
cocpliance -with the originally intended design (Licensee Exh. 29A,
- p. 17-; Tr. 4422-23, 4445-46' (3:esler and Holley)).
Professor Harold'Laursen concluded'that the proposed modifications would restore - the.caj or shear walls to necessary margins of capacity
'(Oregon Exh. 2, pp. 7-9; Tr. 4669-70 (Laursen)).
In. addition, the Staff testified that the Licensee has properly accounted for the licitations in STARDYNZ and for uncertainties.in structural behavior and in applyine the test pro-a gran results with the results that the proposed codifications will substantially' restore.the seismic margins and bring the Control
' Building into substantial compliance with the requirements of the Troj an License (Staff Exh. 17A, pp. 39, 54-55).
3ased on the uncontroverted evidence in this hearing, the Board-finds 5that the. proposed codifications satisfy the required criteria stated ~ earlier and that they are adequate froc a safety
.q standpoint.
Upon satisfying that icplementation of the codifications can be acec plished in a safe canner, the proposed codifications to tha C:n:::l : Building should be~ inplemented.
s t.^~
i
- -E.
MODIFICATION WORK rid EFrECTS ON S.A.FETY OF PLC'T Ou. vo :m 10 r.
Installation of massive plate 8> the
...t.wa a t.e excention at-plant is expected to be in operation during the Control Building i
toct:Leation vorn.
The possiale influence on safe operation was exacinef in detail and.o. rotective measures were devised where appro-priate.
- 0..:Jactives were-to protect safety-related equipment trom techanical dacage and deleterious effects of dust and vibration, to I
prevent interference with operation by noise or Control Room traffic, and to raintain seismic qualification of equipment and effective enervene.v c.rocedures includin access for fire protection and for a
o
=
-sare snutgown.in e.ne event of an earthquake.
Maj or activities, placement of new concrete walls,
-installation cf steel c.lates on the west wall.cf the Control Build-ing, anf exposure and joining of steel colu=ns and beans, are cescr: cec :e,cw and protective reasures are spect,1ed.
1.
Placarent of Concrete Walls The concrete walls to close the former railroad bay of
~
the Centroi 3cilding and to provide internal structure are poured 4
as an early stage of acdificatica.
Footings for these walls cust c ant.: that are e,ow crade.
ce o. acec arounc 0.:o. nz anc a caa,e d_uct.
x t
%cnQ.:19*
g-i n %a. n gy g a f..: -%..
se.,
a.3:%1 a..
- r. v,., -
a n - 2,..,-
.%. a.-
u n-a a
a w--
s---
u-g..,.:
~ %.. a. :,g
-.211
%a g..e T qsgad.a..
-Toaya-(T s ca..g a a--
2 s*.m.. 97, my.
w --
m o---
s f,
f-s
.'37 9 'i6).
r.o wg a o "
u'.". a-C o ".. C * * * *-
J 4-~i"
'.'. A
';1.
~sr..po*a**":
u-os-
--y-;
w
-a
-a o n - %.. - - J %'7 e
~w ' ~ e " 4 2---
~...# ~ '#II a e '- I.". e n # n
- o C " 's.a~ # #u---
1 0
2*'
w 4
--a c m..a a
---a-au-a-ny.
3 %..a. : o ~~ ~ s # o "
"w.*- *=s*w w*1'-- w#'T
- ~'~.=-
- e n..
- n-' :t -a
--m - a c w a v
~
,--w--
w-w
-..-~,
o
9
- 39'--
Lbattery roon : ducts -such!that ventilation will be caintained
. (Licensee Exh. 27, p. 40).
Otherwise, no safety-related equipment wi.,1..ce c2.sturbec.
i 2
Steel plates-1 'to 3, positioned as discussed below, will constitute part 'of the forn for the west wall '(Licensee Exh.
27, pp.147-45):.
The new walls will be joined to the existing structure by neans of bolts and grouted rebar (Licensee Exh. 27, pp. 3-13).
2.
-Installation of Steel Plates
?reliminaries to plate installation include the follow-l ing:
Concrete floor slabs and steel girder flanges of the Turbine d
i Building -will be trirred-to provide scace for the clates and to 1.
maintain clearance to the Control Buildine with the plates in place o
- (fr. 3733,:4506-07).
Holes for bolts to - secure the plates, drilled through the west wall of the Control Building, will be positioned to avoid reinforcing steel.
Finally, the hole pattern will be-transf erred to::he plates and matching bolt holes drilled in the shoo..
4 Ei=vht three-inch thick steel plates are sequentially
).
brought into place through the Turbine Building, raised to the n
turbine floor (II. ca feet), jockeyed into position, and lowered 4
. into'otace aza_nst e.ne west wa,,t o r e.ne Contro,,au cing.
- nev.
t are secured by bolts through the wall' (into the wall for plate 7) and" j:ined by welding to form a. single reinforcing plate (Licensee 4
9
,. _. ~...
J,U,-0 s
" C.u O. nen t to we 'erotecteu c"rinr this c. roCes s u
a.
c.
m
- Z.~.. ns; a
j cons, sts or cour groups or cayle trays t.nat pass underneat,n froc the Control Building to the Turbine Building, and the q
duct bank and piping below ground level.
For the first seven plates,
~.
ranging in weight frou 2,700 to 24,000 pounds, nargins of safety on and t.e errect
.nanc,ing equiptent vi,tl be at, east a tactor or :tve, n
cf accidental dropping along the west wall will be limited by
.i ci.
,<..th an ac...tional.. License recurrecent energy-ac sor;.ng naceria,_.
for installation of plate 7 (Staff Exh. 13A, c..
90), the Staff azrees that these clates nav be installed while the plant is s
cperating (tr. 4 c, c, o, - o / ).
Seismic effects added to a droo. of c. late 8, however, v _ n.. s _= "_ e c, l =. *w sk_u*.down 4"_ _. = c "_ 4_. a d d "u. 4_ '..o,
.n. - - e d"m - a "... - a.. = 4_. u,
J c a n c _3 ;.ng c: ::at 9/,000-poun-p,. ate.
ror t..ais reason, c,ne p,. ant a
wt_1ce snut coun wnt,_e plate 8 ts ceing novec :nto postt_,on and secured to the west wall (Staff Exh. 15A, pp. 19-24).
Special
-.,e.,C w _ n, J,-,.,;,a-c3.x G 8 o v, o, o. ~w t o a, e...... ~ u.. a v,tu,,a J
_..w----
v -
w
. v ta 7
e b
'v.'n A e ~.~. e o, l 3 "u e # s s e.4 "..a s..o"l d-
.E' 41
'#1 C
k u.
. c _ i _f. 3 J_
~ %.. s. w e,e a"wO,po6 r _
w
~
-,76), c ~ 4 bb 4..c
- n. " h.. a-
- 1_00 c.#hb4...a
~0
~
_a ro..."
'.n.
o fus_..'o.. (?...
o v
e y
- .g
. m.. o k.. o. a- *.k E l o *qg glg*w-2 a
- - ~ d s m... g l. d~wy g m.g *. e ". h.u..
caa i.
mm om
=. s t.a c a..
.=.%..
..s ors---
w.
. ~
\\
w 1
J-4g3ww C..o 3;. G. g g. b _4 =. 3.
-g 3wJa l um
-w -~
ah Y
.J Jeg g
gd 7
3
= *.e..-.--
J
=.g
/. 3
.m tw-w s
se.
..A y v 3. w _ v s., -.
. J m..a h.. v. w., s - - -..q
- a. s.
T y k...
0 ".
m.
o" i, "... } c _01. 7 } \\)
4-a
/7 J -3%
3 2.-
- 3 J3
. b e.
-, y
- - ~
..% w v.
u
( u.4m e m.. a n " Z s e.. -
mmA
"..a. %. c.
e a....' g'- -..m..
- "s*22..;
2 m
s.m
- s -. -
1
\\
". k.. a.
.e.i. I ' a..
., r ~... v ?.
4 s y 3__ c. If
- 1..J.J.,,, % 3,
,, % iv...,
j
.3
..-ww-.
1 dg
.e....
O m
..g.v
. d m. 3. 3. s C.
d e..
a m M g
ag9w
.vvGw
- vCO,
@m.
.m..
Ab
.M e.m..*-.-w.3
_m
.*w
.Aw dw..%q g
wC
.wu.
rea,uire exposure ofL he steel bv. removal of concrete and block.
To t
~
t-f
- the extent practicable, this will beidone outside.the control Build-ing cr in _ the forcer ' railroad bay.
Nevertheless, there are locations where~ cables-in trays may be subject to damage from dislodged frag-i ments or dropped tools unless protected (Licensee Exa. 27, pp. 24-27).
Secause sinultaneous exoosure in all six locations could.reduceLseisnic resistance unacceotablv, the Licensee proposes two alternative work sequences in which structural. capacity is L
restoredLin aach of five phases before proceeding to the next phase (Tr. 3 708-12).
Evidence denonstrates that either sequence will L
- maintain adecuate resistance to the 0.25g SSE (Tr. 3906, 4463-65, l
4620, 4653).
t l
I a.
Protection'of Ecuincent During Modification
.c arety.relateu, equipment wit..ata noctricatten wor,s areas consists prime # 'y' of cables in trays.
During tri--# ng o f Turbine
- Building-floors and ' steel flanges, drilling holes for bolts that succor: steel clares, installation of bolts and washers, and 1
exposing steel for welding, nearby-cables will be protected from droc. o. ed frartents, ceco.onentsHor tools.
This will be acccre.lished a
by steel cove ~rs for cable trays and by scaffolds under massive such as. steel wa' hers while being' positiened (Licensee Exh.
. pieces s
,7, e. n. - 2,-30.
_ era.crar> cr.enin s e.nroue,n vn ca ternado-driven
__; s s :_,_ g
- __a,
. e,.. _ a_ -_. 7 :.,,-
m t n g a y,, g y _:,_ _ ;_ o-o :_ _ _ _, _.. :,, =. 2 1.,,
.o
- _. 3 i
. criteria (..uncens ee - xn. 2 /. 2 0., 2/
,_3; Star:- _xn.
. _ i., 3 0.. 21-32).
I z
T w -..
y.
3.,
.--r
42 -
to be protected Iroa dust generation curing qu;prent the above: operations e:etends to electrical relays in the Control Room and equipment in. the Switcheear Room.
Methods of protection O
will include water sprays on drills and collectors,-temporary enclosures about work areas, and, if necessary, fans and ducts (Licensee Exh. 27, pp. 31 and 38; Tr. 3786-83).
-ecause os, seismic qua3.rication, v.,bration is not t
f expected to-inr uence sarety-related equipment.
l' 5.
Maintenance of Fire Protection Durinr Modification The nodification work can complicate fire protection in ' the following ways :
There will be additional combustible caterial 'such as forms for new concrete walls, comporary enclosures-for dust control, and scaffolds and wooden cribbing'to limit acciden-til' droc. aine cf steel plates and washers.
Splatter from weldine or o
o slag from. flare cutting could ignite combustibles.
Some fire barriers will-be penetrated by bolt holes or openings to expose steel.
Finally, access paths for fire-fighting could be blocked by the extra workers and equipment that will be required.
p
,o_nenever wood 1s In Cw.e neignoor..com c:- sarety-re3atec u
a 6
.equiptent', fire extinguishers will be nearby and the area will be
- inspected-at least-hourly by a fire patrol (Licensee. Exh. 27, pp.
.35-36;. Staff Exh. 13A, pp. 26-27; Staff Exh. 16, pp. 22-23)
'.:he re t
coss;o_e, woo wil.t ce recoved.cercrenanc roc any area where there l
(Y. ' 3 a _).
_s-wo-' o_
._---.3 M
MN MY
---.-.3 i
+. -. -, -,
s 44
-.A.special permit is required for welding or ' flace:
cutting. LThis permit provides for a fire watch near the work that 1
must rerain-at least 30 minutes after coupletion.
' It also requires f,
}
protection of equipcent -and cables,_ which will be accomplished by either firepretf blanke'Os or rotective barriers between the work and-equipment.(Licensee Exh. 27, pp. 31-32; Tr. 3753, 3783-84 and 3339-90'; _ Staff Ixh. ~ 13A, pp. 24-25 ; Staff Exh. 14, pp. 18-21).
Whereffire barriers are breached bv bolt holes as in 4
- east anc west wa 1s or t.ne Control sutiding, t.ne notes will.oe plugged terporarily until bolts are installed.
(This will also raintain Control' Room ventilation.)
Where there are larger open-Ings, as :or expcsure or co, urns or weld.ng, e.nere w-,1 ce e tt.ner
- a continuous fire watch', or a te=porary fire barrier, fire detector, l
and _ a fire watch patrol (Licensee Exh. 27, pp. 32-33; Staff Exh. 13A,
- n. o.. 2a,-c0.
Ehere ~will not be a~ large number of workers who night interfere-with access for fire or other energency, sixteen for 3
4. s m _- 1_1_ _, m _,n c -.,, 2 o-_-
3 c-a,o 0_c_
- t..c n e < c. -
4 u
mo.
ou..,..
as:.. s s
(Licens ee : Exh. 27, p. 78). _ Training _of workers and supervisors will o.rovide for evacuation to the Visitors Infor ation Center in the
- eyent c:- an energency (.. Licensee -xa.
2/, pp. /
-//).
wo access
.,L..,s c _ c. c. c. c s e o
c...y a
,_c-..: ~ u.s an._.>,-,-
- - _ e, _ ~ 8.. n.,
n--
_--c...
-v.
-3 oC.eratiCO and one always w,33 ce unoostructec ov. CoCiriCation wor,.<
U
'g*
e_
U 4,8 4
4_
is.
u -- _.....
9
-c..
i,,.
.c--
.pp. 22-s ).
T l
ywwe--
wwe-,se e
2
- 44:-
.ne Start.nas ceterntned, anw, - c,ne maar, agrees, t.nat r-; c e,..s. e,_. cs co. a. o
- c- ~u e c-a-; n : a..-.; v,
, c-..s u o s a._ ; s :7 v a_ c n :umal n
-m.
Specifications,;primarily fire protection and Control Roon ventila-tion requn.renents, during codt : cation (Starr cza. 3_3A, p. 00).
-9
-e e
6.
Orevention of Interference With Operator Actions Ev.
.\\,o n.. -.i:iCation Wor,.<
3,.
n aucttron to potential interrerence with energency action, as discussed above, operators could be disturbed by workers in the Control Econ, or noise or dust from modification work.
There will be some drilling and bolting th::. ugh Control roc 3 wa,,s, out at a distance froC Contro.is anG instrunentation.
u Although drilling will be from outside the walls, workers who will col 3 a_u
.,.-.e._. :o c,
con __o1-a,d de.o4&s
.4,3 x,
c, e-o_
- ..s _ a_ o_
s 4
m
.c u -
e-.
s.
- (LLcensee -xa.
9/, p o.. 3, and o, o- ).
Tye s,ni:t suc.ervisor utl.i prevent 1.
interference with operation by workers or excessive noise, and the-NRC's Resident Inspector also may halt work, if necessarv,, until
.e,ol-o -
a '.. 4 - ca ch..as.e=.d wo.a.du e.o'se ( T 4. =....= =. =. e.k..' 7,
- o..
v a
.a w
. c 1...3.c--
- 1,
, a..
s,o._.0 S a..
- x,.,..
1, 4, or. 3 3.
.ca_-
v Gua1494_C,e o,.. v... :, n - yo C' ;_ ::. e r :_ C,..
- em n
/.
s---..a
-Jo. %..o1a e::an..)-
"%. a c.u
..y e f.t :4 - o 6 -,,.. z o
'.s. ( :,6.w g --..3 T
-1 a-n s-
-o
. %.. -'re..*
- _ s. 4.. a. c. s s i s 4 e
- - - s - a..= ~ s o#. k.. s 7 uJ 1 A #..;- F -
.f _ c_.v.
.- J e.6 3
-o i-~
r x_w-ov oo-
=
., = ~. %.. a. m u, u v,,v.
- o : C n..- _ c.. c:. :o -. e.., s a :. 3 a :a
....~:
%. a.
-n
-,. c.. _ j..
c-s o
3.
>-.s. ; '
- r...%... 9 7.,
ge.
60 7).
' * :. %... k.. e s..v... 2. f a c: -
/*.
e nn s -._.
c.m.
u.s
,f
-e..
a-'-,
' '.'. '. s '
' ' # #-_C=~,.*..a'
'.' ' 1- %e 'f'__~
o o -
. c ~ ~... =. ~..=.**~ ' '..' *. *- # ' *
~
"'" ~~
v.
a.
.%.. a ' C w.. w _ v, n.
., : p :.. -
a.,_
n _ u..n.. = - u....:,....,,-
.:,.a nn
<.--_a c..,
.3-c w--__
-in I
4
r-.
staal plate (Licensee Exh. 24.
c.. 4-6-a).
Either alternative sec.uence c.rocosed bv. the Licensee for steel exo.osure and reo.lacement of concrete will caintain seisnic capability of the Building Complex (Licensee Exh. 27, pp. 69-71; Staff Exh. 15A, pp. 27-29; Oregon Exh.
'i 2, pp. 9-10; Oregon Exh. 2A; Tr. 3708-10, 3903-Go, 4341, 4461-66, 4 o' 1_ y 91_
Temporar-effects of sodification work on the seiscic qualification of equipnent are forestalled by the described ceasures to o.rotect eo.uio. cent and b/ c.lant shutdown durino installation of o
- c. late S because cf uncertain seismic effects (Staf f Exh. 15A,
- o. o..
19-24; Tr. 4019, 4113)
At Intervenors' suggestion, both trains of equiptent for maintaining cold shutdown will be operable during installation of plate 8 (Tr. 4102, 4305-07).
"tL.Si.!LT. T."iG 7Lm. 6 W7 0D T.7 7_ C.A.T. T 0"a 5
.ns D T ~. I rJ".N.U C U. A "i C "c.3 7
m 7_n ac.gition to O.e codirications discussed above, e.nere n
will be other changes in existing features of the Building Cocplex
.oy c, os ing ort-tye ral, road trac,.< tnrougn One cnanges arougnt aoout cne Contro out,cing anu; t.ne recuction in size o. tne equiptent n y.ei.4-riod
- o. o e,6 o = w..o C v-.. w. o 1 3 "" 4 7 A 4 - -
k 4. w o w.. e
,.,. r 4 C,,
- s..., w..w..
s r
u a
---"5 at e_eVation 00 200t.
ns_A-
~. _:
'.s. :. e m_. e-.m.v_
.t_..nf:m.~_
A m:
2,t' um 1_.
._nn _ s_ e_ q ~ _ m_ e.
m 2.:*.n k
~3
.%.. g r
- 3..., c
-.,j s_3_gn__
(...
3 3.. 1..,
L.. a.....
cu.
.c h h.. nw p7e*q4 4a " h..w et. yh.-
- h.. c e n d. I *
- N a n. c. 2 m. 7 f g.S g
m wo.El.s.g g m.6 Sm A
..==w
=
w
--w
.ww A sg w.
s J
-w w..
=s
. g
- 3 J*-me d "g...
- M J - m
," m a.. e.. m l-3,, J
- M 4. 7
},s geg w b. a.
w o
k.
.! =. =. k.. g.
m e. y w 3
---*-"5 3
vw
..v-
-- - ~ ~ - - -
.j
....c'.N.
-T
- ,'-.a 2 -
..-T b,:. -: --
-,4...-.
o.5, -
9
%..t...
d..
O. n. c.. a. C O..
Oj csc 4.
.w a
ccs.c.
j
u 3.-111 be sprovided _ in the north wall of the Turbine. Euilding railroad cay.
_.ne casign o_, t.ne alternate air inta,r,e was rounc to be
-adequa e (Staff ~Exh. 13A,_'pp. 40-41; Staff Exh. 14, p. 58, Licensee i
2 Exh'. 24, p. 5-5'; Licensee Exh. 25I,;F.g. 15-1).
A new ra'ilroa'd spur to the Fuel Building is recuired as an alternate to the path being closed through the Control Build-
'ing. 1The railroad spur was initially. designed through the Control
'3uilding as a matter of convenience and efficiency to serve both the Turbine Building and the Fuel Building (Staff Exh. 16, p. 5)
Since there is no need for loading or unloading railroad cars in the Control Building bay, there is no safety-related impact of removing it and providing a spur to the Fuel Building (Staff Exh.
15, p.
- 5).
Since the railroad track in the Turbine'Ecilding will--
be terrin~ated ac L the face of the new shear wcll at the west face of the Control Euilding, a bunping post will be installed that is only designed to prevent a typical train loading frca impacting the west wall when the, train is traveling at very low speeds (Staff Exh.
,x.n.
1,/ A, c.. 50)-
now-to,
- c.. 0; Statt exh.
,.3A, 0 0.. //.-/S; Star:--
2
-ever, One Licensee nas in place ac.aintstrative procecures to contro,t 1:the ::varent of trains on site (Staff Exh. 16, p. 5).
Also, the
.e 2-z
-w-.c_..
- -- Cc-d s,..
- - v,-.
Cww w'd._O.
O,y,w w C C w.. C.: - - w - 4... o w..,.
w
.<a.... -
w.,
u.c u
_d wC w
w -;.
g. = * = 4,Ju.D==g gwd de.0=w.
w..
JMs
%c.-w..sw@
I.g a g a p h o e. k..
J ll w-wwL ww w w e n ',.
J. J' =
- g. c 3 =. & w. N hy
.. G w.w.
=
f.=
w
=s
- ..a m
w w
4W v
.. c.Gd3w o =#
'w '7 *.
"w'.*.
- ^ 'w' "w 3' 4 # ^
^
-..A. s.
. 3, %...J - *
.. y.- J.g.on wg Owww
~.3
^
7--
e-o
-2,...
6 w..
w
.ww w
G w
..w.
mm.
.$ }
T. *.%... ?$,
l}* A$
S
... C e w.' =..
K gg gpag
,s,-
(
w---
s w
-w
---.ww 1
k 1
e 47 -
The Board finds;that the proposed codifications.co
=the' railroad spur and the proposed administrative controls on operation of trains by Licensee' personnel when inside the security 4
. area are acceptable.
i 2.
Reduction in Size of-Existing Ecuionent Hatch The existing equipment hatch into the Electrical Auxil-iaries Roon of the Control Building at elev4 tion 65 feet on the
. east wall approxicatelv tidway between colu=n lines 41 and 46 will d
be reduced in size frem S feet high by 7 feet' wide to 4 feet high by 4 feet wide. - The large hatch currently allows larger equipment to. be brought into and recoved from this elevation without need for dis as s enbly.
After the reduction in size, disassembly of some equip ent-will. be ~ required ir order to fit the smaller equipment hatch, or use of an alternauive path such as the Control Building _ -
elevator or Auxiliary Building access ways (S taff Exh. 16, pp. 2-3) 4 No: safety significance for this additional disassembly has been identified.
The.5 card finds that neither the performance of the 1
.coci: cation worn on t,.,.e equipment.natch nor e,ne rec.uc. tion in size
'cf'the hatch has safety significance and thi.e codification is acceptable.
-, n y,-.-..
n..,
.,. 0..
n, n- _:.,.
.-s..-
.2
- .e
-u.
x.
-..s
.v2 mu s..
u, a
- u.
The-C ntentions in issue in this proceeding are C?S? Con-ent'.cnt 112, 13, 13, 15,-17, 20 and 22. E.Our findings of fact
- i..
w ;-
w
_ :ase 3
-2, su::a.
J t
48 -
above haOe[encCCpassed all substantive Oatters raised by these con-n tentionsfanc, casec on our review o: the entire recorc, we :Ind that the' original concerns of'the Intervenors that brought the 2
contentiens into issue have now been addressed in a satisfactory canner, leaving all of the contentions upon completion'of the evidentiary 1 hearing without cerit.
All of'the contentions are coveredLin cur' findings under Sl
-E, snora, entitled Modification L,.orn an,
- ects on Sa:ety.o: u, tant Operation.
t.
.,C1.s 0 R,.s.,: 0u. r.,u.,,IOS. u.JD, 1 1:.
rOR C0,:
- 1u t
c s
1_y - t lOs.u 0:,
.a.
.s
,,03t: tC n.
- zo3, Based on the evidentiary record in the Phase I hearines on o
interia cperation, the Board found that the existing 3uilding Cocplex1had adecuate -seistic ' capacity to saf elv, withstand a 0.23eo SS- (eo,e.c 733).
tn O,ne event or one or more sets = c events or-
. v 0.-03g or larger, the Troj an Nuclear Plant must be brought to a cold shutdown condition and be inspected to determine the effects,
if any, cf the. earthquake.. Operation cannot resure under these.
circumstances without prior NRC approval (3 NRC 743).
Nevertheless,
--l
.since t..ere cay.:e soce errect in t,.,ie event c:-
seistic events-above
-0.C3,-because there may be:some time depend 2nce of the seismic 3
-,, c _:, :..,
--f s
c...
2._n,--
u.e..cf o,
,a,,q, 0 :=-- ;ns
..-n v-.
n-u-
a a. n
-a a X.
n 2 : ~ t n... :-,
-a-a w : cu o: _o ;; ;; C c-u u-n-
- a-
--a,
..s,
-- oc-.s cyp-v,s-c e
-a
--f_:m-u-
- o :
f-s m
--: _2_
f v o 'u." 1 s - d ' '..
('3~c~#~
. -s e - y: ^ n v* *..
f--w 0
~
---.s'...
17n*,'
"y "y.
7" n.3-4
^
--a-
.C..
- 1 ').
^-
,--.T ny+-
.4-.---p y-y rim.-.vg
f -
w y,<
- wr
.1-U
--. 49._
one evicence sacws..tcat it wil,_ ta,t:e ac. c. roximate,t
,0
=cn:hsLto co plete'the co ifications as currently proposed.
The
~
d Staff has re-tiewed ~ the codification work schedule, has concluded i
that it is reasonable and has recocabnded that'a license condition 2-
~
be L:pos e'd recuiring completion of the p-posed codification work wi~ thin a. period of-12. months from the duce of authorization (subj ect _ :o= exrension for circunstances beyond Licensee's control)
(Licensee Exh. 2 7. c. o.. 86-87,- Staff.Exh. 13A, o.. 88: Tr. 4018-19 nat such a conc.. tion o.rovides ac.o.ro-(_trar: ell ne Board rincs t.
i priate assurance that-the codification prograc will be completed expedi:Lously-(Licensee Exh. 24, Fig. A-1; Staff Exh. 13A, p. 88) and that the design intended cargins will be restored in ~a timely fashion.
I.
T".,V 7 3. 0"..'.m.a'~AL Cn Ns'_ D7.W... I O"., S
~
.snt,e no issue was raisec, in this proceed. ng as to tuue 4_pa-is o.
...e
,f.o,yosec
,.ow;<.
4 au ons aau s.,. e c-w
,..e. _
c w
4 a
o
..'L_.,_._.m._..uc-,_
v u
o ant ~ li0en3ing action.authoriZins the3, an environCental analysis
- ca
.---: o*;*
"s,h. 3 da b '
M..-Q ~, s.s p "w e..
"3M M.9
. f.
A9 "W
b m g wy _ _ o
- M T
gg
-a w
-u
- a. w. o m. w n _g c _,o m _ u _ c a =. 4 o %.. s..J l l a..o t ". a. s bt l. *u=
i_n.. oE M.. 4 1 E a.; e "u I
e J404a E.
e n1F. " c =a "m. m..C D.
O a
-_v a
s O
_._My _ c M.,G
_6.~
M..._.
h_.,g- _. _. _ M_ M-#
c
- M.. g_,__,9
- A Q
w Exh. 13 A,, pp. 9 2 - 94,. ' S 8. 0).
Based on the analysis, the Staff 2,
,w ; :
....:.a.-...a ww.......=
e..
w w
_.n
..w7.3 y.oyvJ,.
ww 6 Vw
..,t w.
w "ya C ". 3 *w w ~w3.~ c "., ". o ". = ".."v # " v* "..*.C "..'w G" =
T...y :.. V.._ c.. r. g 7 3
,. c p.. ~. 4 3 n..
. =...
S w
w A
,..wg s.
- 1__wf=.m...%.,M w a _ s s _, '. c 0
4 A a f-o--..".
MW
- O"
".v
' S
'Ngm-3c.98-3'
- f. L p W-.cu_MMvu
. A
-s
,M.M.O E
_.w
. The evidence presented in this regard was uncontroverted.
,w. -e :Inc :.:a: ene Star.:,s cone,usions as to t.ne environmental-impacts o:-
- ne proposed moc.._.: cations are acecuate,y supported by the environmental analysis presented, and that those conclusions
. m, e
,, s. 4 : < a d.-
u----
J.
- 3 0 S..:... 3 -,.,,..a.. o. -.,ID.,,,V,u. S.-
_r
.l.
An A:'ditional As-Built Wall Discrecancv Cn Ma.v 19, 1980, after the record was closed in this f
Hearing, the licensee inforced Mr. R. H. Engelken, Director, U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Cc=nission, Region V, about conditions found in the - south wall of the Auxiliary Building adj acent to column line.55 between.colurn lines F and N from Elevation 61 feet to Elevation 93 feet which was not connected to the floor slab at
- - - Elevation 93-feet-as assumed.
The wall was assumed to be connected cnd participate as a cinor structural shear-resistine element in a
the STARDY'.?E finite ele._ent analyses of the 3uilding Complex.
The Wa:
c-,_so f
.-..J. Cas
,.c-.wta3
- c-. e. c-,
-e s u. c_ < n.
o_
n. b,. e.. c-.. s t
u oc u
y
~ e. ~..'
c-T.1 ** s ~-p fC. ~. a. *
-y
- o - a s. v. e. ". ". = 1.= ~s e a ' b =.n. e o ~'a t'.=. = ' a v, = ~v 'u v r =, 3
~~-
v e
reet. loor sla.o.
A J - -m ya.. j 9 :- ~'..4-
- 7. %. a.
o v p.a ; - : o'..
.v m a
- = "7
. ~. = A.
n 3.=..*w=~
nn
'*~.
^*
~*
a-v a
--w-d o w w J.1 4 %..
~
.o._. '*T. 3 3.
% 7ua-Qv w g..c o "
an J-TJaa..
ea. r ~. c-... o.s e,f o.
s v. 0. /
..m a
01
-f m..
4-a.*=-.
.O
- e.
- ... e 7 'r. c.
J.e-m, v-.. c..
- A 7n.1 C.: O n.. A c..u
?-
J c
-.t 3
--v-e v
G a m..a.. : T
- 3--
J e-J:~.aa 2n 1 ~,.; n.
- 1.
- a,. 4,
.v. - f v
.. - --. a.. : #. C '.
.: ?anu a.,
sv, T4p...s.3- *).V...
.O n k. a..
- 1.. {.T a "f.,
v..a, 8 - o...=.. J. 3
^%J 7 3 3. =. p. s - 7 y..a %..
y u--..a wy w
9 4..J
.J,
.*,. J",
..-3,.,..'v-
?Jw-4c-4.3, J a
- 3. w -.T..
3
- O, ^ q 4
4.. -.- J ".4.
.t v.
.a-c.
sw,
w O w -- y e 3
~
M f
f 31 _
change of Troj an Nuclear Plant-operation from codes 6 to 5 in pre-
-paraticn)for a return to power-after refueling, further inspection
-had identified -no additional walls-that were not connected at the 4
. top, although 11 other walls were identified as not yet meeting 2-the criteria docznented in Supplecent 3 to LER-79-15.
The 3 card was concerned about some of the inplications of;these reports'and the conditions described therein, particularly regarding'the Auxiliary Building wall which is not adequately connected at its top to inarfacing structural elements.
In the study'of the structural adec.uacy of the Buildine Ccaplex and in a
the codifications proposed to correct these conditions, the Board In relied on the analyses using the STARDYNE computer program.
the model, all walls were assured to be in a state of construction
-,ats concern was-which we now t. nc ror t..ais wa31-cru not exist.
..a t
reflected in an " Order Re.testine Licensee to Suc.c.iv. Information bv.
4 o
Affidavit"' issued by the 3 card on June 2, 1930, in which the Board rec.ues tec c. e 7, c ens ee to suc. o.,_v e.ne rot,_owine in:ornation:
u o
=
- ( c') 7.% a.
n e., n p o :~
~o %s. o.o C n..,.
a.. ~ e,
u v
ww-c.
. ~ t.. S u,.i.4_ a y o ~. a.n.. L 1c 1
.4 1
n - L.. e _..,1 7. d (L ')
v %.a.n c1 7_
vw
.u- - -
u o u
.,a * *4_. 4 Aa C a _ra w. a-
. -4 7_1_ h2 ro kn.,
- a. v. e
.4.. a,4 s w e..
v.
7..w%4 4_:
<ne_e c-_a.
o ~.%..a_ _
s.. n. h..
n a -
w-
-3, u
-u
- ~4 -. t... a 3 n: Cn...an~:
n:
a - %.. %r== u, M.. A.
a v v.
ww....J f d./
o.s. w w..
n e w
w.
www wa
-(%
t f...f P
MO -
-...a uC.$.w O
QM
= %.. M.. M
.s-.~..... L _ - g M.. M.
g M.
f W%.
g w.
-w==
C'I. 3 w s g-en=ta.wup gn.. M wwsM
{'
' e - %. 2. w. 3 w
ww l
I L
I
. c u e,,
C.. oc wne r,,,u v,,..: o..
.o S w,.,... c-,.
(.m) w c ;
ovu. ---. u -
~u-
"e a _1 - "otmd 1
- o am,v ou..o-k 2,.4 1 c'4 "_ ~ Cw' _p _ o_ v_
l s.
3 y,. -
u..,..- d e -.'.C _' o_ 9_ C V..
_u d.
The Licensee responded to the order in a letter tranScitted to the 2
2oard dated June 16,.1980, with affidavits Containing the requested w_
cw_nn.
w In aC,Itton to ne oraginal c..SCrepanCj ceSCrtaea aoove.
r n
=<
y_j -:Ca_,See geu-i tas -
y,.
.v a t,. S y. <, v. 4.,..,
u,
=:=~C e v..w,,.:...c-u : u. n a-u a
u S a ~ o_ f S ' c"s. ' ' ' C S - c n,
'u,.'." e e ' 7.
u *_." " e l-
. 7
..C ".. " o ".. ~ o *. ~- ' ".. C o S o ' ' o *w A. 7. ~w ' a,_-
u..e.i.' - v. 4 1_ ' ' _ 'f ' u i l d _'..e.
". h. _ c e o _#
~'.a.e
- 4. ". o_
n o ".. -
u4'_m'..,7 c.id
.o i.n.
A_
ConforcanceS related to inCo plete Construction, two incol>ing 1
-s..e
,So,.......
a two f
a-uw u3
~c--,
.uue o3, o A.
4..m C.., e. e e w,..- 4,-
- 00u u
w...
u-
~w g l e.b.,
.e.. A - h.. a. b.. _e _ u c 3t c, f ". o v c ' =. 4 o l d Ch ' "..? $ 3. 2 ",", e S "w
" b...' *u "w a a" "uo "u 4 -
w.
o, iCp 1 E3ent e d.
A fourth nonConforCance related to an interference 3
betWee". rein orCing doWe.S IroO the Sla'D above and a Steel beaG a "uC n ~w"j p.#C c" I.
S,.,3,,n _.f..o~
L.. a. 3 ' o c *..
T *n e u# # # ~ 'n "u o"u C o n #^ "~.u' ".. " e "s ' a' fw
- u
-v w
u J
a a r, o - v. c. <ue e unn c S a-,.. c C' *a :3 '"
C-'cCp.
u.
..-11
..u o
- .. :..: :. C a.
o m.. a
.,do-
- e.,
C C ".. ' #. H. w' "...:. '. m. *. *. " " * # ~."< 1 2. c' 9.. '. e d.
..v.
u
- _#w $,.tS d e-a u c". $ -
b..c.
_.1 o
"wa.
C.' jeu $sw^_.w%ee Q
9 4
4 W O
w v.
W
,A Qf
.ff n *,<
.6
.v.w,.
.-a S
O-*
i.
w -...4
%... C y o.
f g... e W.
f, w C... w *. * *=* }.
6ww-w.3
{
w
..s6 ww
.. e wy J
..h_
_3, s,.
.as-.;
,:,,,..:, n.j
=~;-.w..-
=...
- 2...
- z... z..
-.:n.
.3
_ %.. a. =. b - y. m..
a-2 :
.v J
w w
v-yw.._
7
.ug LwyG-s..
- n. -
- o. e. v.u,..
<d O,:
a
.w..a,
- - m. j*.
' 's.. n 8-a1..-c.
~~ T
- L... :,. -
n,-,'
n-me s- -
s A.
a..
.w--
k 1 * * *
=*
's*
- 4...
. w.... c. M
.e
- h. a-
-.-la J
w y g 4......~
m.. i....a.J..%..43..
w.9 3
.iw.w...
j
= b..a-S g-e.
a w
a w
s w
3 vt..
h..
Omw. - s t.
A.
I 1
l l
l
u c3 -
The ' Hoard finds this: an acceptable resolution of the noncon:ornances ciscoverec in connection wit.n Lc,a-c0-07.
2.
Anchoraze and Succort of Electrical Ecuioment 2
In another connunication-dated June 12, 1980, and sub-sec.uent to t.ne c osin or the evicentr.arv record in t....ts c.ro ec ectne, s
s
- - u c u..a. 4 o n Jsowi C o.
7-p
~~.c.::
o o,.-%..
.o uue 3cc-a*s-c.,.en,Aon T.e
-r 4
on
.ne-d c
3. _
80 l concerntnz a.ctentr.al derictencies in ancnorace and suc.c. ort of z
2 safety-related electrical equipnent at sone older plants.
Although
- . ; z c-.,_ a
- u. c-t p co,e.- au:d essoc 03, un:s-. r,.. o. -_n. ; o,-
n,- 2 m c :- --
n Notice were not directly related to the Control 3uilding design i
deficiencies or proposed structural nodifications, it requested that Licensee o.rovice a srttten resc.onse to tne _,otice.
The response by the Licensee, in the fora of a letter and affi~ davit dated June 27, 1930, described inspections showing that nc si.gnificant deficiencies brought out by the Notice exist v.i e v e r w. e,t e s s,
-u.e c: ci a.a..:. -
w-m:.s e ua
... l u v.. c- -
u o j -- v -....
c us v_
y
.cu w..-
L-ca -:
c ;- sa et.f ueTo e;.
-1 3
1 k.
-n o-. e r.. 4 c r... - -,3 _ _.
'o Con 4.
n.ie C o n c t,,s, a o n w u c w f-----
--m w
co>
.a de e.id c-a.k..v- - c' d,
w
-A e l =.. w. #. c c-7 -' a.,u #- y _e.... '.'a o,. c o, e.1.v, s "w o, p o L C u w u c
o
%..e ta4: ;3 y'n'; a-ery,-;
.a n
~4 m._c-
.. c c-o s
e s
3---.
a o-y v
w.
.s
.w
- e -v_91 nre On T.,.. 0 y. 2,,
v
...3 :n a. ; C o....1- - - s u k.~e - 1r
- o c
c
.-c
-vu u
..~
- =
- ,,...u. z-n a.. e w.. O -...-.ww na.. o ".. =.'.'t s w*._# = "6 "J
" o 6 6 s 'e 'w C c w
.a w* 'y '7. w
=
^-~~#
-a
-;u t-
.w w
ww w
w..c--
p,a )..a.
- 4
..-ga
%...c g e n,.
3. w.
~ %.. w. - ~%n
.d
.u.t-Q-
-w
-weep.
q y. w w C =.2..s.g g m. E.f.
3 l....2-'
.ym e
.v y
e-.
gg g
eg g pq m
gdw.
q gq gm.
ww
.a. m. w -.
v-..
e p....o a
.-..~5myu c-
-$.4....g..r...3g.s+a f,.1 6
.-43 3 ?..
i i
1n L
,11.
C Os.C.,u..,. C a,.,, p':
1.a w 1
.s t
st ints proceecine concerns tne issue or wnets..er t,ne scope and o
time Iness or proposed moditications, required to cring t.ne p, ant 3
into substantial compliance with Operation License No. NPF-1, are 2
adecuate frca a safe'ty standpoint.
We have reviewed all of the evicence suonitted.av the c.arties relatino to t..ais issue.
..e have o
.,,. n, s c _ u a. -
n c r, c,., s-,.-w..s 2
a 1 a. o -,s n o-..u=-.as a 1_.
o.
una.
-. o.s e,s e u ve e u
e
-m of law submitted by the parties.
Those proposed findines not o
acoo.tec in e..nts _nteral Decision are nereov. re;ected:
Based upon our consideration and evaluation of the entire record, - e conclude that :
1.
The proposed nodifications of the Building Complex
- ms_ :n cc o.da..ce
.,-i.S.
-'m e -.. e"..d -
- 4. 0.. : u s a_
3, a -.:
2 uw.
m
- nmo-._ o.
%.. a. Ope.a-.:mm-3 u cene. so- :c m'n :n tue T:
ea n
-e n
to
.n,e
~u r.s cnc Conal ~,AOua-O
- u.,.
,,n..
- a..s.
s.lo j a. C ~m a-.
c eww 4
~ %..a_. G n.,
w a 3 5.. - 2 m..e a_
~ %..
n mye.,~L on. o#
-%1 9_.
r%.g
- a. -.:
.c g e...c s. a-n u--
s "u.. ob. u' *. " 4 " 4 ~ 4<-- Gs 2""wo^c"4~^d
' V, d
~. %.. g o i. a-..,
-..C lu # r..o
--.a v
f
- a A
w..~.. a,-an nd, g,u
. %.a e r, e _ c-w :.i g -
C3.2-,
cs
- 1
-a w
ua
- n- % :m ~ %.. g A
a w.. u ;. _ v g. d ga -
~ %..'e
~6a.... g
.a. m.. u
--.~w..
n n
- ..w'..;
nn n
-e u u
---.3 2
a nn,
- o a. -w..-
, au.. : - %.. m, e.
a, m..-, u 3g g _ : n.. 3 p.a__
%a.1,..,
n.m w
s
~v ww..
m.'.+.
.-.y c :.... a., '.
,:2-
~ %...a %.. a. t. %..
w,,.. A, w%...=.=-
,= % e = ~ J a =. n
).
~ %... 3 e;-..*
-. O * ~ c %. 4 3
.. s w a w.. w..
a-o a
3 w
-s.
q/
%. g.
6 %.. a.
us--
..-)
n.3 4..O Gw.
G -...e v.-4L-6@
y d..,
-...E
..A.$1sd e m. 7
%
- e. J
.-~...~..-.1.A.,
6 2
-e
--. 3 vf
~
q-
- m
. g =.... ;7 -
n...a, 3
t-Cn,;o..-_..OnS se
.cO
,n :.n Cu. 0 >e.
a c.. ;-
+.. a.
.,.. a-u u
- n n n..
- f3 ; anC a.
~ %.. e
% e w O m.. C.,m a A n
% e. l O..
. 4_3_1 uv A_
4.
w a -
s
.s,
- w w ---
s-
. a a's', a '
- 0 "..S g o -.. a.c.,._aq a
c 4.
_ne issuance Or t..ais Operating stCense amendr.ent i
m.
e g
Jeu _ O _ r 4..
i.n.. r %.. c. 0.de.
- k. a_l C.4 41' ' 1 no* be 4
=S c
2 s
4...; q ; C c e o g k..a.
CC "~.C n d o _#.". S a c.d S e " '. #_ "w"y O-CO S
~~
w w
- 4
-J ne.,bley - s -. C,.
- h e. a_ c-1_ * %.. c,.. w a c. a u,j O u:
w o
O.
A.".e L S S u an c e o r t..ais aOenCnent LS in aCCordance t
C,rm;aa-;ca s e_,.l;__
a_ O.: e %..a.
~3 e %.. 10 ri.o.,v, O
- w v
_m m
a ED.U.11CaO,le reSnirements have been
~10nS and a
.L 3
SatlSIled; anC
,0 g.: : 4_ c. c-v _; n n s..; ;, s a ~. ; s.:./
~m a 0ae_
u
-ue --myOea;
~u a
e
.s...
v.
O:-,,2y
,,, n;,2 Oy ortnging the COntro, 3",Cing
<w
- o. - m _ = ; -
- -to s.basc-.m:-,
C O s, ;_ a n C a.
..; t.. v. e C n ; m c-,. e ani.
u u
_c_
~u
.ie 0"ee.m'"'n.,a 1_ _'.C =_.S u,
u a " ' c ". J. /
.1-O-.
. a.^..o?
2
-2 m ' a_ C ' # # # * -
An u. g : ;:n..= v. :3.n S Cu ~ e c %..". ' C u '
"y a a
~. % g _',a _ =. - - - -
s
~; nn
- 3. 7. 3-a,-. 3 ~ %..c ~u
( a')
na. C O e.. n _ O.
- 2. 4_1_ C _:..
%.. a a-a t
e' 1
3
-w w
w u
0s.~7
.., t. e. -
_7 ". s C' e.p : u o.1_3 e h-A -
0 y
- n. c-,y.9...:.. u.
w.a.a a.n.
e
-a 3
e s
wv a
s. 7,. 1.. (b} r L. a_
.".S m.. a _ _m i_
7 m
?. g s
- a_
k
_ c-. _, _4 _ a_ d_
%.,.. T Q '.O
--ca O
f O
O OY m
wcDa%
--_Fu _. 3 v--
,s----
wj v.
s.
33 c-u
.. a s_...,
a.
3._4 a w* C..-)
3,-
n:
n..S
-L.
..-.3-c v.
v s3 G.O
-v-O.
4 e '/ - b.. c.
f
- f, j* 3 0 f3,.
I.
J O.
.... a - %
J.. g~
3 =. 2. b n
JVw v-g O.,.I.
.3
- 3. _
a.
. - _ e.e..a.
.%.O ~..3 P-...m'-
jw-.
n
.S. a w.....
m y
vw o
i.
Em-
. 3..:... _E.%--.
a. *
..:<.=.k..
=. k. a
- M.,
. 3 m 2
.3... a m... 3 e-..
w-
..s ww 7
4:
Om.
.'.m..fa..O v
_ %.. =3 3m.... * --.....
% S J-.=-
-as
1 i
9
_ 5o _
.V.
OyW
,t t
..~. c.- c :- u e
,.f acco_ u,.n.e
<.a_~.u.. ~.u..a. :
a yh. c-. e _= o _ e,
t s o.v 3 = =.._=. D, :-
_a Act Of IC54, as atended, and the regulations Of the StClear Regula-J tory CO::ission, and 'Oased On the findings and Conclusions set s,n.3
. i u, -
-..3_ g, g
~O". O _~- aUC'a'"
O..c. u~ " " O ".
D..a. ? u.: a F ' O D6 '. S
-o w.,
os w
- ~.. C,on.s
.t--.s. a-a.s,. _ e, -...a ~. 8 ct. _.. w..C
._ Z a C
~O Cn-eo a s S ~. a n...
_..b,S r
c.
3eC_.g.;.O"..
_ ".. c v w " _ u.' "..w ^ ~".k
~ k. a C 0"-_". 4 SS C7. 'S
- s ?"l.a*w.4.On s,
a
~^^
T n. d e. ;. 21--
^
w a
u 6 -
-0 a"a d ~. O
- 4.. S "u. ~. %.. a a,_ - v 7,. # =. a 1_.# c a.. c. a
.e.. a.".. dri.e 7. w o..'. +- 4 ' d v v o, a. a -
7 n
o w
m._.. e _
3, 1 e... w... m e s. a n..
_=
O u# *. ~._. ' C a' 'w ' ^ ".. S y.
on e
.io.
a. 1 o~.
so-t.3 T.eu c 6. 3 3 c -..~. o.
7 w
v
.a 1
'a v ". '. e =
". '_ ~ m.
"_ 'n # s
- 1. # C a"..S e S
Po w'..e C^s" u.0 -
"#1'4.3 0"
.h. e "_ _ O,i an.
"f " O "< ' a' ' 0 "u.".
- c. C C o n. C * " #.0"u s~ *.
~*.
c m ".. Cr..a".. ". S s*' u' l_ l C O D. ~
- 17. i.*.*.
_0
,_ O *.f ' "..a?
1
- cw;'-. a. n,/
C. O n ~ %. a.
a :_: a C e :_' a C' a ~ 8 O: ~ ~n a a.
2
- T
.. a t. w.... e,.. ~
~O n
- u u
n.
A,.
_1 s.o.
_,L, S c-a
,.,--..a-a.
as
~O-O..s..
0,e_uw_r. 3 L
_-c
.a awwa-an
-a-e o
e w -...c a.
.u.
.v a
D, "' V *A 510"..
5."
- 11.'e 2"w~a" CO fe.
- v _. 1. a. -v a ". 3
. h. o s
s w-F aC
'u /_.~y 0 = ". u' _4.. a? L #
- a. n. c e N '. 7.
- 1. -.
9. C.1_1_
4 f
,, ^ ".....~.- - ~ ~_ C "w ' 0 "..S.
..r. o C. 0 0. ~. "..' '
-'U L.'. C.' ".. ?
_ _, a ".. S.$ a.
a 6.-
1 p Ooga,A..
~w. ;.
v, C' ;., _
%,1
..: ~
.%.. s. d. n., a.; r o u.. a.
- g n
2,,
e
- 7. 21 J :. 3
- n. _ l.a. wa
~0
~. %.. c. L* O.. ~. ~. v~ 1_
2 4. v
~w w-u S 2
u---_
~n ac 6
a
...~
-1 n.:.~=.:,..,'~..,
- n e. a.,..;,,w
-, a-. C. a.
O O a ~. -..w..:s.'.
~. u.. a.v v
u c.- e
..O.~A,...D.
nC.:
1 -
_J--
Ja:
~ ~ -.
.. 4 3. c...
.a.w65 f
3 v-
..<~.%..
307_
w
.s -.
.c. e n n. _,2. :..,., a.
- 2 O.. :.~%.**. %. a 22
- - - - - -... -.-_ ~. % a.
" a.. : ;. '. '.. 2 :
- r n,1,
' : c_ - e _ -. w
-e s-wu
-s-4 n.
y.
~-nt.. *+....n.*-
- 2..
- 2:
y
-. 3.....- 1 2 ~. %.. v-.. g %..
U
.--g-
- s
........e
-J 3
e
.a T. r a
'.... :... ~ : -
.C:,;,... '.,.,. ~,
- a. -
- c. O
.,.f~=
.3_
sa 2
Uh
._~;...-,J.~...m...
f'*2 _ w..%*
T.. %...
n_ ~ (*l.-
.a.t -
0 s
O...,
f t
g-.O..J.O J
57 -
c..
v...= ~. ~ a.. a-O t'..a..
T. h. c.. *~.~.u '~" al.#",-'a".y' o=
-g. o_ v..,0.1 :___ed C c._o, i_ u.<,
v..a. ~ b..
- 1. 7, l o..o n. )
.a...v, 4
v w
deviations or changes froo the foregoing documents shall be accocolished in accordance i
2 with the rovisions of 10 CFR part 50.39.
The e
Control Building r.odification progran shall rurt.ner be su.j.a ect to t.ne ro,owing:
(a) ine coct:: cation progran s..at,_.ce comp,eted x
not later enan 12 contns crea t.ce date c:-
this amendaent, provided hcwever that such cocpletion date cay be entended by the D, rector or,.suc_ ear neactor,.segutation upon c e m. : T a ~ '_ e. n o =~.".s = - - d #. -
a s %..o"...t ~.. c ~ '. ~. = ~. " "..a u
..~
e s
rication c.rozrma :s necessari,v. ce,av,ec m*
i circumstances wholly beycnd the control of r J n a..s a a.
- su. a n c.,_,.
n.,. C.>.: ; C C _J., n
- u. u,.,,.
, e a..
s w.w C C ~._"y. = " A d,
- 7. #_ C e ".. o~ e " C ".. #. # ~ # w~.. ?. C. ' '_0 ),
I u
s "7 -..d.#. 3
_ 3.1 a " # ". 3 ' o # ".. 'w ' "_ #_"_.
o ' e _.a P. # ^ "..
3" 97
.o Comh.la. m' a p m. o_ Coc-a sL
. - _ L. a_ ow_s..a,
._ a~
w
..C o.i _lg_
~m.
A -m me w
w a _ c _ )_ m, l_.c "_ g Y., g.
S
- .h. e _ e..m _ _c i l
_ _ - _ l_ a. n..
g.
J ch
- s
- 7. 9 -
gp q %..... J. wc~a~"&
a.. a _ J.
,d 4..
- b.. s-bo_-
-k
- 1 aa e..3 1 C.%.. r.
w w
y l =* 2
- b.. y.
.$ ),
E e.. e..
= %. g a m a. l l =. J. m..
[1,' % 2 ew h
a..
-v
.S
--a v.
~~.
g..
M M
- j
- mph M
)
HW-m e% %WH_R 4 y*-.
c--_v----
..3
._a
-~a w
. k Edw
..e...J*..
. k.. b =,. I. ; =- n a a m..
.p-g
- d w w
/E 7 * -.. - =. 4 o %..
"s
..u w.O.G
.a
..w
-J ws
.3_A "w <
%.. a-
/ ^
a
.m s,
- 3.,,4 e
J. ~.%.. ** )
4.
n %.. a m o
w w
-. e-,.,: o t,a.,., ;ns,
,a_s p,_,. e s u-..g m,. _ a u u-,. c f
m e4 o une.,,1
.s<.%.
v._ bo1. s
.a2, s.,,3 u
u
.s m.
During the installation of plate No. S, boch
~.
trains of safety-related equipment necessary tar caintenance c:- a cold s,nutc,cwn conc.. t r.on i
-w s..c _1 se ope c.3_._,
- o.. <. o.
e,
. u..e,,m s a,_ l a -
x tica, Diesel Generator A shall be started a,,..
3..,,e.
u.,e-e34,4
.] v o_..e.c.4 e.
(c) Solid steel cable tray covers shall be installed over cable travs in work areas where cable daccge is possible froa cwCt>en.al d. opp.;u.3 c.= S. e,u p,.a.,. --u..a-w c
..cauc A.--<.3
-s u u. e.. 4 n 5..,1 1.a t On.
s 4
~
un..
v.
2 4. e..- ~. C n O. c w. o. s 'ua i_ t % e c..,~ c- % 3..: a,%..e.
(d)
.1 n
A n
wc w
a 40CSe Sole responS131 Lit */ S n a,_ s.De to Cv.
".t.w. B S
~*ne,p.any
.a_..,J.
..%..: n %..
.. a.- %..
n
~
1 w
w-c.
a..c,.1 1_
a.*.*.
a '.
- 7. ^. c^ a~ ~. z.C u*. l. ;' 4 ".. a~ ' c w ". # C ".. a' am t
~~
f k
ac eh..
-3..c*o.3
--*-e ww......-..-awe
.e w*
u c-Oca
.s.. p. t g
..p M qm c_.
T.,mi.9,
%. 3 S. '. :.. m. g,
c.. m -. _ u$ _ S
[c.3.,
J 1
4 n
,.e n
. 3 n
.c
<, v v u s
- o. 1 a 3 :., e e_ s. )
._,_:.,5
.u-
~. n.
- %..,....,s ;- ; : :, c-m.:
n-v.i A.
a.
. c-9. c-...
M..
b..e
.=C.. t.
c. O.].
( M..o M
.. M. :s.
g
-M M.
.6
.s
- -..u.. : - %.. -
.--..w..6w.
c. 3. c a.
..O
.s c
=w a
.w.
J.*
a_
..s c o - %..
J. a.
f. d a t... },
b C.d w n....... _..
s.
su j
- ..C.,.J _3
+-
3.,
.-a-c.
2:-
... 7
-.. :=-
C.S a..=--
E
. -. ~ -. - - -. -...
. COServa:Lons Or all COr. Oust'310 C.a'*erlais accec to suCn saterv,-related areas.
(e) Scaffolding and tinber planking shall be installed against the R line wall in the Cable Spreadino Room during the installa-o tion of the steel plate washers at each
..k..e e a 006e3*
u,1 nt-e..as%.iev 1 CCc-w4,.
w
. ucw n
urO3 OntO a Ca'31e trav Could exceed C.aree C
"f C a d.
c" ".. d bSl l: -
eew.
T*. o.
3, 7 a"..'A.# *7 s..u l bs u.
A h e a..:,,,-,
%. 0 % u u O s. a-i,.,,.. = u., O
'11.a.
.: n%~
.s w
.w m
n 0:- a cropped washer to e.nree reet er less.
(.3 )
.f.'*.v, C C '.. d' ' "" * * #. O *.1
".v'0 ". '.m'.
' k.. o-d#eSol w.
- e. C ~..b '- a~ '_ ' n. "..,? 's. *.
- E ' =. r..# n. n c~ # #
o. r..s v -. v -
va s.
c 2 1..
..%. 4 m h C O L3 7 C % C o e... 3 O. c- *e %.c.., 7
.w
---tv
~ e u e - c,. w e
.u. d O
a 44-~
A
- S webv.4 c %.,1 'i 1
,D.
ca -2,. 0 - a-1.,
u.
uuw O *.
G.. e w, -
o nsi-- - " e d
,s b' a g' a v diagol ea-a-J c-"-
", c-
-3 n
^- --
0.,s.. u. 4 C m...
c 2
. %.... 3 -.. c. u m. g -
(3) -..
- m.. a r.
%.. o_
4-k
. b.. a.
e n.,... ~. %.. c,.
3
'.. o. w n.a S.! : a m.. e
.'..e
- a. g
- v..
Aa u. a_
- :.. a o y :. s~ 9 -
r v
- s.
-~
- -. a. u-.. s ~. :..n 3
. %.. c. - C n... a-..,
- n. y :.. O,..
..O : o-2 a
5 n
-..ek i.e.,, -,. - 1 1-.,*-
t,
.. %. 4 3
w..-aw
...b1 v-C-w.
....i 3 0 OV O3 3.eJ-
., J
.=.1t..,.
=.
3 po
.... ~
- a. 3-.,
,3.
o.-
J
.v c..'A m
- s... r.
e.2 s m =o o
w.-.s E.n.C... w.o.J w.3 wwi n
m e. O w.
.f
.w. -...
..O
%. 3. %.1-.Ou
.5 J*
q
....J
.S.
u....
. J -.. a f.
.3.O C-O O..G-.
- - ;..~. 3. e.
3..* y *.
...3 % *.
w
[3.g.
3 7%
J 3... J - 3 J
.c-0
-D-~
w..,
go
/
60 -
1
~o
.o o s.. : mo,,,
- c...u.
,.,-,..S o
cc.n-.e.a-c.
f. o r. a. a d
",s '. *. k..
- k.. a ". '.s
",4'.. a ceo.c-kiv reduced Control Roca noise level.
4 1
(h) In the event that the NRC Resident Inspector 4e t e.. 1'..e a-
'n w= *.*'..e c no-..uc. '.on a-w_"4 v
4 e
o i n
'n, r i..e C. :& u u,1 nt. 41..; a 4 eS o.sO Cm...
O..
u Control Roca iS generatins excess ive dust,
.e..
o.
cm.c..<s o,
.,., us,.
,s-e
..-m_,..4-o-m o
4 -
_4 p. m,,f.
1-f c o n m,. o 3.,. e,
3 s
c c..s u -.. - - < c,.
o3-n3 s
. -em-m S..u,,1 3 21 v d.. - 41_
D.. O,. 4,. c e
av s.
u..-&
Corrective I.eaSures ' nave 'Ceen ta:*en.
1
(,.
- a..,_ - u o-.. o.
a' a ~ ^. ~ " $ 1.'. L e c A. '7' *.
3, -
e v
j
....3
..on'.
<s
<,1 a..2.'O.w, 1
o e.. %..u,,. c.,. e,.,.. a 7 4
.. c
--.t w
w
..4S s, i l s S 0.
4*
3.,
r-.S,C.4 Cn os-.3-.o
..v-.
ww
..o. '.s. (e..,
javu'aco...,.3),
L c, e t.n a. a, S 'n e n.1_
s:
.s a
w 3
,. c yi d o.
3"4 s'Ol= bs a *.. #" _ c' *. a' O
"y *. O
- o ' 'v u
f c3 a :
.o.
S..C..
e.g, C o-...,
C.
-3.n a.
'. %.. a-,1,,.
c
,s
,a &
1A J
a.... ; v,..,. L.,.. :..,. a C.,..,.'c..
wo-o n
--o
~v (J' ) D.. - < qe
- b.. e. l. o 2. 4. *.1 4, - i. n.. e b.. o.
n,3.
....A.
.7a..e.
- w...
m c.
3
...o
.311-o =... e C v".. '. ".1'.I-I, ' ' # '. N # ".. ~.., ' # ". S " ".. ~.. ' I--
4.
.s a...:. 3 1 ',,
l
%.. a. vyjsa-.a-e: l n -.-
J -
a.,.. e.. a -
a-a-
w v..
e 2
.s.) -. %. r.
g
..g
..em...
%3-s,.. Z ~ * ;.
O m p,.... s.
s..
~~.
s
...3
/.. J
- 7-......c..s..
f e. m... J 4
..aJ amg
. o.
w
....-Q
.w ee..p Jp
....S I.
......J.,..a.
.%....=...3...
%. 3.. c...
J J
A v-
=. %. 3
.J.. J i *
-J Vy. a-c...*..
~. %. 3
..n... J. g...
!u 61 -
"'.... n '_ m'v* O 0 ' '-
', ' ?
('1.
=. '. a.
b'-m,.*.aws~
v" '_ a. a_o s..
or Fabriccte 1534-white) sh 11 be usad Over all cables in areas where Cadwelding, 4
welding or cutting will be performed.
2 (1) The Battery Room exhaust duct shall not be disabled unless an alternate, equivalent means of Batterv. Room ventilation is first provided.
4-
,11 1
- u a w - - _ u, u a O.. CF p7awea-
- O k o.
(
') o_
O.
u u
throug.no, a tenporary energy a sorcer e.'< ^. 8 a d #. 7 s '.q c-1.1_
b e.* n. 3
- a l l a d "w O "y ". a ^ l '. u#.
.7 2
o v.%.. O4 - L. 3 1
CCmp.n,e-4.,e su.eu
'ne
,11.C.. O&8 7*
w -
..c
.-s u
u.de. 1 v.r.,e c o.. o.. e. = '.. w.. ak.
e "..o. "... o#
.e...
e accidental plate drop.
(n).An energy absorber shall be placed on 4,
,, 3
-n
,1_c-we 4
s.2_o.
O ua
..s--
en c-f O. late /.
?c).x n,u
.;..u-%...c%...; ;., -,. o n. o a. %.. e ;.,
.,D _; 1_ _; e p-a f.-o i
a s
2...n. ' 1 k a,.
u.. g.s. - c 1
-gu
.n. ?.... % a..
w..% %. 3 A
w w 4.
s s-.
y
... a. _2 1_
- a. w4 p a.n. d V. s
~.3g
. %.. n. n. c "..i m. - 2 1, c 3
me
-d w_
y v -- - y b.s c v-.. f.....
4... :. 3. %.. 3
. ~.- - - - -..
c-. 3. 3
=.. O 3 j-2 f
-w.
J c w J L.
w.
]7ac.3-v.
- .. O. c -.i. w e.,,
~
t--, (,....- ~. :.,.,....
-g.,
?-)..,.,.....=..,,
=-
mgp M
-}
m &.
e.
,q qep
,.a M
M g 6
-u...
a.. j - - -.
c
..a.
.-=...
-..---- a; f
.g-,..a.
Q : = 4. *. a.. - =.
- a.. 2.. a.
.g. 9. 2 -.. *. 4...m a.
w so-
.v 7.w E
- e2 -
%. e w,. o. 1 4., A o..k. s_._
- n,2 L.. 2 o-
. %.. w-i l.
e e-,,
--w-u
.u w.
m...
..t..s 4 ' e,.
,,c2.4-,-
4,..
s.,. o_
_1_ c 4., o
.t..
-o
.e v..
...w-Roon or Control Roca where wall recoval iS 1
neceSSary.
(c.) Piping SvStecs, ec.uio.nent and cocr.onentS t.. e C '.. u. " '_,'.'u". ". '. i '. " / r. u =.1
- "_ ' ' ' 4 r. o e.-
- e.,m 2
u 2.
S a e s,.,,,. Cw, a n o.
O Cn _,s. n..<. =. C.,w.,...,u
_C,
.u w
..L u
m e.,., ~ a _,
v_r
.d_ou, C.O a, p s.
.r e. n m.u a n ~.,. C c-t w o 0
c v
..'..'.*L". 10 Cr.:. '=.w
'L. 0 e L' '. d e '.'...' ". c-1 u ea 4
^
u.
O r u.' 1 ~ ~- w
~ ^ ".
S.*.a'
" S *w :.
a' n' ' S ~w ' u^ u'.i y
~
uv n
4-1 e;
..i. :. ~. %.q3..t. 3 S
,.?
CO cuL
-..C...C't e. 6
'**0 U"
-4
.. s ac.w u -
- u... v, L, c k..o u - u. '. c. wC"o"w u,1
~...ou' ##c w,.4_ 0 "..
C d...
aw
..r.
.s.. r..
.,... c k.. c.._,,
o p.p:n3-.
4 c.,..
.__.2 3-
.u
.. o.:, t equipment and c;cponentS necesSary to
- 4
.e.. 1_1 w,
- s.. <..,4w.. S wCnC__4_On 4-n,u S... o a
u.n.
L
. o
- v. -. -. a_ n., a..,
..e
.,L,..e
=
w sw w
w --
.6 w..ww v
v
.ws n
w wCw.
..J c.b e.. G a.
no e
6 3,
P. 9. " g Gw g. ] [ *.
(.)
..a.3.
S * " Q ". ].
F*
-.. a. "...O Q.3 g.a. d _6
",s w..
g
... m.. G
.J. v.. c..
P.oe*D y
C.2..wk O.3. 6, n y m...
ne
^
,. p. pm*
an s
waw w
v 3.w.%..=. awa qw
-wm,.-
vw..3 Juws a.
( w. n. s%
3.Vw.O b.
.V w'
w
...). ~z-,
..9 n,
a..A nn
- u.. v. 3 3...1
- .. 6 0 ~ %.. C ~*
..J
~~. 9
.4 1.. O w
2 3-~%
.2
. q.2 2... %
l.
f.
.22 qv2
~ *s v. %..
.~
(w....Ju.-.3
--. C/
w..
w wy
%.3
- w -,.
- a.,J. -.J
.. %...J. %... k. 2......
.V g
7
.s-.
~w.
.m
-w 3
.a A
m _.. 3 l 2
..,, J
- m.,..
s-..
~
en.,.
e s,
- w.~-w..$
%s.
.. -.~'
3
. 3
... *.w w.
.=wa.).
- J
,J
- - w s.m. c u s
. a.-
7 ;......
s.
3=vw.
=3.J J-.
...J=
. %. 3.
...J..
.%.. w 3 3 9%..
wo..j s..
I i
1 l
4
s ; e ;,.&
..Z1 C ; c,.
.c ~,-
uuo G,:,
c.t; c
i-.
- a. r..k s.. / ~ a. s. e.
i s.. 2 - 4..
o.
- n. =. c. h.. o w. i n. n. s,. s ~u # c m..
3 a -
w-n -
(t.e.,
nortrontal, vert,ca3..17 up anc cown)
These tests shall be designed to demonstrate j-
~. %. = -
t.. a. ;.e' d s".- a..= ".h.
o' t..e ehc-. w w n. ba u
developed by the orcut.
If any test result O
4-
- u. -.. c,,. s s,,,.,
~.,e
..e..
.,, 1.,
- n
.e.~-- -e ao~w,.- -
u,..
-u a.
( s ) s-.acu,c a crop c: p,ates
,/ cr 3 occur cato
. u. n oisw-a-s a_ l ~,
- h. e
'u c a._ s.s-a a-s 5..a 7 1
-ao,-
w 4
- a
-v v
u the circunstances to SRC irrediate'v.
Plates 1 thrcuch 6 shall be recoved and a... c3,.
- , e - a c ~
- n n u, c,
- t..., a s o-
__ c c,.t ~e w_-
o c.
~ ~,
a, D s- ~. c-..~w ; c- ~c e C
~ %..e s a. ~ ; :a C ~w :~sa C: ~ u.. a.
uv L
w w-NRC Staff that o. late removal is unnecessarv.
( *w j. go o g,i-a o
- e. 3e C o d s "w t' ^. l. v'c - -
.~..a"
'w.'. e s
'"~
C on *.. ^ 1 3"w # ' d i..c a.l l s d ' _ 4.. e.,
.b..a _ow###4-o C:~2 Cu.-.$.f.
s %. c,.1 1 % e S.. D ;; e C - ~ o
~w.. e k
.s s 6
w en 11 r. _..-
u:
- v - w v
,3
--3sw-e r
-u G,uS.
(1 "D a ~.. c 1.. = ~ c..r, ~ i.- uO n !; sR
..a~
.,A
??z..,-
- w.v
~~
--.. ~ -
-.a l
.^=
3.,n og
.c o ~., C o "s ~- "h
~-
-. ^ j~
".C ".
--w..
w e.,.,s -
.3 4-2a r
- r. / i, e..'*
O.. cJ /1 '. '
s s
.... ~-
s c2 =. J ; 6..J. :, 2 :- ~ %. a.
~*
- n. -
u.
~
.-3_
.c
-- --. J c. S w r. : c - :..
.-6..c.t
~.%..-.
%.. a a-c.
..c;.
,,.~.
3
. e... $. %.. u9 : 3., *n.". ^s 1...,
m,.
c.
-.s:
a
- . '.....- ww-T.,.., s
~!T.
- 2..
c,.. A-
.s
~
.:.~. e -::
...o m s e
=-.,c. o s e,.4 u.i, e a s c,..-.
- n. 4s s
embedded or encased bv 2*000 psi s
Concrete.
(2)
Columns 55 N' and 55 Q may not be exposed concurrently, and the s econd or these may not be exposea..aerore tu.e concrete encasing tne :trst nas s.. m...,2 -:a n :
. u m, <.,.. e A.
, cn. o, e3a...
2,000 psi.
3 30 C O,L 'd~.n s Cav.
e eZo.cseC a 3 0*.' e u
Elevation 65 feet before concrete in the new N' wall has attained a
- +
cowy
,a--ea v, s.-c,.o.3 c
J,s=co
,-a.
e.n, d
- h.p - a*a*
COM.CenPe ou e '.3. s
'.i u.. A 3 4e a
t u-s om
.s
.-~4
..a 1 1. a, o e, c..
t
- e'vum_cn 6s-
- n.. u s 3
.s o
-=--
e c~. 9,,. e g ; y e a-.,.. = % cG g w w w, 4.. >. A n
m
?, 0 e,0.- a. v K'3..=.e.
.-.. A. T'a..-
(L
- n..,... = p,
='a%n~v4 0 n.
<a
- E,.
i % '.
-J
/"S*
- e. 4. C p
", /
-ce.,
C O...,
n c..-
v..
o 3...
.. - c a.a
- - - -. - -i-
.1..-
- v. y v.2 0 '4 L.., 7 c-..
D3 a
a2 /$ =.
c,.
n-
,- ~..%. e a.a. n A
_m..
~. %...a..m.-3_..--
a
.s w..w s
J.
~,. %. d.
%.. c a-w,
..._a c.... a s.
u v..
c w v-s..
n..2-~
~
y-h m m. = J.. c A.
- g a.
.m_.. o. c..; -.
e-~
e e
c.. A
^,* *. *
- 3. s
.p
,s n
.... a
-,vw J _ s.,.
r3ue:.
.', ;v =.....,
..-n.
'.,. u a...
--.2
.... - c a.-
m *..
. 2
.. y v a e: -
a
.--w..a L
. t,
v.
-a to-e u_;;,an ---
_z,... u.. _
. c..-
4 a. c, v
u c - 4 4_ n c- -
..a,,
u.
e..
,se-
_4, 9_,.-.., 0 s
3 m
v.
- o. s t concrete.
(5)
Above Elevation 77 feet, colunn 4l R cay not be exposed unless the new concrete in R Line wall below that elevation has attained 2,000 psi cc=pressive strength, and columns 41 N and 46 N are embedded in t're m..d./cv e..-=ss'
_ n.
o.e_ e A_n.a l.
.. = '. '1 0
2,000 usi concrete.
(u) ' # or "uo
"'.a-4.. s - = ' 1 u, r. i r a of e'a,.s 7,
th. a-e-
-v u: t s.
-u
- u. c..,
u co..v-e a e.._w o._n,wa
.. c.:. _
s m-attained a cc=pressive strength of 3,500 m
4o o
. o e..e :.. o a,., c-w _.,
C.
p,_c-,.
o, s t.
2..4,.
s v,
-v O,ne ConCrlte,Deninc O.3 ates 7.
/ s n a _3_
.r. ave
.c~-o.~~-..
o
},s"RQ u
d 1
u?"24,uqu 4
- A m.p s. o $ _ s.r o-vv
, -3 u--$ 5 s
- o. s i.
_,,6-w "-
e.
(t Am.
-. A,y m _ _c.. o-ts. c _:.
g
.? m,..
es*
mes c
u.
vv-y
,, C v u, w.,v.., - %.. o..,i.*. - --
. ~..-. 3.:..,.
n -- e e w
w Aw b
=
m -vw
- - ~ m.0 3 - )-
---Ju
- 24 A
] * :..g
. %.. a-
-.,--,.-..e.
~m a
y--a c
u-.---
-v 7 - v _-
C =- _ a n., -
... e ". 2 :.. n,
%.. u, *. - - % =... u v-...
%=..,...-,
=a
=.
=a:
u..a, 3. A--
,. 4 s. %.
- c %.. -.,
z.
w...v-...p...
- 7... A.
n
..u
.ww
- - w.. _, ; y a 2 -..
S...
s %.., ~-
%.. u., -
an*,
3 -. 3 -..,
m,.
- a. z,.
a
-%g* *
- * ; ~af
-- $ ~'.
w, O..-
sG
_..---ws.
s t 1
I J
- 6o _
9
- o..
.s.. o _ O ulO.,,
u,...=.m_e...s on,-__
a,
.- e
,.O
. x.. e a-1, es 2 -
u u..,
Tectnical Specifications in Appendix A to r acility Operating License,.s,:
3_.
3 (a) Sectica 5.7 Of Appendix A shall 'ce anended in accordance with Attachment 21-1 Of Le. con.e.eo e v.%...
33.
(. ) A tec_nica,. ap actrication anu,
,ases :Or u
n 0-
.O d 4_ & _# - o
- _^.. c n n.i_ c_ -
- h. e C O.. _. O '- 'u'_ld__'
a o
c
_u
'#4# con #C--#nc
- O S.. a 1_1
'w $.
v' b
^
- : O "..
bO'."ws" ou
_ a _
um
- c. e. a C '."'. *... a' l_
O_E
?_ #. C A ".. s c s_. r s'n..', 3.
^ -
33 7o'O,
-^?
ac^v^-ma ce w'.h..
1.0 Cr. o.s 4
T e is : _ m..o. _ C R_ D 1. E D,
4..
s u
2.762, 2.764, 2.783 2nd 2.736, that this Initial Decision shall
- ...e
- a-,.,. y.L_L l,, a d n.=,. C n -.. S e. :.... ~,
. u..., ::--,. C ~w:_n,..
a.
u,e s-_:se u;..,
u_uc.
v
_ v t.
- . a_
_ m-c u c.u c a.
- k..a..=.^_.
f
_ O u w"j
've w v,s u'
ru.
-a o-o w..e C v^ -..so ou e-s l
stD3eCC to anV, review Ou!Suant to Cne SCOVe-cited Ru,les 02-T. 4_ e_
a 7_
geni-d v,.. _. e y De
- ~u_mL. 4 ', 4. 3.
-.'m i a)
- 0. _. C ~w. w e.
T v..u g,f 4_Cr..s O e %...:
4
.-wu e
w a
c v
u _ ~_ n_ _ - a_.. ; n. e O.
.%. i. a'
'-5__- "O^#=E 0 "...
1
~. c, - ( 1_ n, )
f u;. -
a s
.a e
-[
f.
- f. m %. _..
- =.-.m.vf a.N.
u.
u u -j o
.~ %.. <q $ )-- k q.* p 4
- f f
,m.,,. M P h.. a
.. - 3 f. _ A m...*
gg-g..me v
a a
(,#, - Q) f e.7, i. -%c ger3au g:
- s..e ". 7.~F g e: )
- a. c
.,. ( m....
e s _... m.2 g-
~.% s.. - % J a:
- 1 a
_ _ ' -.. ~.,
f * ^)
- ...- n
o
+_v-
- t..= :_ ~s. %.. :,.. ~%...:.~_..
- c... '
ya v-
'...u
- s. v
(! ^)
f.,. ; q :.. ~. % a.. -
\\' a ~. :
1 -
n ~: _%.,. % : a.:.
.n.-
.%. 2 1.;,; s n
- .J
-a
...a w
s-.
O__
t
-~.-s~~ ~ ~
s y.
~ %., 2
.~,.... :
- 2. 2,,.. a_., a. e.. n.
,w
.u O
~2 -%:
-.. m
- a. a. a..:. ~ 4a
- e.. n e,
..v
.3 s
-.._s
--.3 a_
p, =. 2. 3. m... 2 _. _, '3
[ ' s%
^T)
- )
-' )
_.s..
... m..
- m. : ~. %. ;..'_ 3A4 q-
^'
l'l.)
(". a....h_ a_.
C, nc.
v_4.a
...--g zz..
~~
- 7. e.. C.
O.. s ~.
,"3 0*'
C
/ /
s ne-w e
=_
f--;sa
.s.
L
.... e C c' s~ =-
C-
'**'..*.P
,C,',c~##),
c '..~;r O '_' n a #
~=."y
. #. ' t*
a '- #+-
A.'.'.
^
^=u",.
-?-
c' fu.
u...
.v
~ = - -
^ *' y " S.'. "u.'. O n ~~. O,
'u,.s. a v. " e ' t.i O n s.
a m o -.. C, 0 ". ' '..
y uy
=...
Iu #s s,
O'~'ro.
D.
~ =a-ns,-
c. r - -,
n
,1 g L 3.1 v.'1 L L-0.-10 L t.7 d.4 v
==
L,t C r.,.m. _ -,.G
,: O.,..,3 0,
'V )
f
/ <f
, dRW
/bMfly L __.
,o Dr. Kenneth A. :IcCollom, :lenber w
s s
a-M a -;4..rvs
~..
a j
Dr'.
,,ug'h
'n
- Paxton,
,,exaer c.
n 57 //
l c'
% / '$!$
,, ar s. fj;-jp-C ',C,+g /*' t' s>
,E
/6 V V ~~'d 'R j
c.2. t i,er, C.na :.=n sn n
n a,t l
.,e..
- =;.
- v. _2 -., -- -.. a.
3,.e2
- ,. :.. c_ o this ll-h day of July 1950.
hee i
t
.toD7'.hDIy i
=...u.. :. v a. v :,:,
1.;...; C t c waa e,
=.. w C..C e-r=,.
a--
s c.aa; u w,-
Into s,,o.
Licensee -xhio,ts I c.ents..tec
-vicence i
y
,,Repor: on Design Moc..rications 30eo a676 4
t.
for the Troj an Control 3uilding"
( t.,. -1
,,,o
, cs
-_av'._sa"-- u'._c"ch.
c 2.s.a, ; >-;_ c,. 4.
25A Licensee's Letter to the NF.C enclosing 3663 3676 A. A Q s m-,_ :. :0 _
c-L ;_ v n
.s. 0,,,; c' e
'D V
_5 a
cpC: -:
- u, v..
o 1 c.1 - ~ 4. ~ ~_ O ~ %. > c_
"y OO.Gsed 2 3,
- a s _..g w
~%e
,,.Ojc.n Cu,nC v,1-m, L: _: :: n _ inn.
C u:
m 2
u-wx_v a
y a - e. ;. 3
('su.--
.. - 1_1_
c.._,
- 3-s y = C ;
.a m..
g
.cs
..cc-wc v_
3 s*
f.iess un-
- 4 p._ c 3.,.
m,.. d 1 c.. e. 1
~.
u-e *u. - -.'_.. - u n o r.)
d s m
,o-#
.u yonsa-s y'.' c.. w ec o
( 7. e. L.,,3..f s u i O "l, 'Q)
SQ s.---
us 233 T _i a o... s _a 2_ ' a-1 e ~ ~. a _
- o u %.. o.
N.'o.sc 14 q 3 0' ', 0'
~
sev.
m u
m O
v ]- c _ ; E {, cu On u.O l e u.f e w.
Or
,3 wO =w. { n 2-3 n
-w.
e a
y.
, n / w, c.
q-
, _/,
,! ? " v* ]
Iw g a. C "'v']
- i f
-Q,
$v/h
. n..s ' a I S y. 3 9.* *O
- %.. c.
N.s ).&
- 4_ C..
N. k. 3 9~f I*CA9 q a
c.
u u
w Ju M
$s" * ? S c { **,
- b* l. *O
- b..e "y
cM*wA P. C. a* ] e n...c a t' w
L wgG-o a,w ws j
-w w
u,. f..M.. _$
O3
. s 6. O 0--
s.
m
. Oa.
qt9.c% f.
h
.. N. O.] a a..
-cu;--
4 m
v..- - n w q
- 0, '/.3 (v.m-
'n 3, 19/c) 0
-s-,
4:enD Lice.see,s,_atter to ty..e ns.RC wita 3c<os-20/o b,.. IeC..e1 O 70
%u
- s. 3.-, C.. a c. S e, =- - - - n A.
y.
y=c
..sy s,
a t..e 20 c,ues-. ons or c.a'f 1c, 3o,i9 or.
(w....a
& _7, 1 0, /,0 1
u -
u v...S33.'s
.c. w-
.e
- %. 3
.'O. A. 4 -%..
7 A, S 9
^A
=
n i
n 0~ )" =w T
-c JC/s s
c s
A--
s ss C5
- h. ' ' h.9 8 b.. ". $.1_
-Q Y a. s* -] " "'. a* 3_ a"
- C. "y c*
- c m ej ww y.
OJ,. b.. e
- O
,8 5,# j..
1_ 0O,
- 7J 7070 r-.
sJ b, 6 6 5 6 - v. 6 0
..- j v-s
( w.,. m.. a- ') 3,. O _/ v, s
S sw/
s w. O. u...(.,). $-
.O
...O.
. n.% w svsw w
-s.
- v..n. ~yO r. a p -.a
- v.=.
2.- 1 2 ; g'.. e 1-
.9 'Q..r 2
y y----
a;
.J.:
%.. a.
T,., m. s.
- 1. T L,
- r..., m ; n.. a.. sn:....z.
s
.. _..a g...
...3
- y.... '. '...
- O.
- 3.%.
b
.; ; y
- "*O,
_. =.
,y.
w._
.i y
t _ "'
3, A. m -g i
g
+
'w j a r
+ -;
- o i
i l
I a.,
79 3*gjg
. - J..;w a%
.3
. I.f.=. k..
), ~,,[
w
,...; ; a-
,. w-.
-w;5.w
- 7. 3 a. b..., g $-
J
,p..%; e..*..,,.
. 3.e.n. v.
--1;
'.~
.w
,.w.
L
(
.., e b-.
s. 2
...:~.... ; a... L.
..~A
., bm
.... ( w....
l 25 e _-*
e 3,
s
._j., -,
)
i
..j i
c
. Ac,m.;
oa s--
Into "a o.
- ; u-e n e n_, v..h c_ o
- e. s
_cn__: :<n:
=..,s, : ;_ a.. n a
- -.s 25H Licensee's letter to the NRC with 3668 3676 res: cases Prec. ared b-3echtel concern-ing cost of the cutstanding cuestions 4
of May 18, 19 79 (July 6, 197 9).
J
' o' 3s 34'i6
'L. C =.. S a = ' a-
' e *e -.=-
.o.ha v.. o.sC ~ 4 -'u 2al d
~m resa.cnses o.recared by 3ech:e1 to URC cuestions cf July 20, 1979 (August 13, 1o / o, ).
s b
o
' c' c' o' 3676 o t..e "a.sC v4 -'.,
o:y T c,_,s.a-m o ' s s, 4 - a -
.s 1
' e cb.. e _ m o "....C ofeu-- sa..s,_ 2_,.._ a_d kv,
...... o m
,7, 19/o c...-.:c c:
,- y-s 4..
.a (deptetser 3,
13 /,. ).
.o/6
-2 9 ;..,.s
.. censee,s letter to tye o..C con tr:1ng acem 3
s discussions ccacerning timing and content of PC-E-1020 revisions (ce p
,m s - _. 9 6,, e, 7 a, ).
-c m
25L Licensee's letter to the "RC wi h 3663 3676
,s_ e-ra_nd c.,.
,ec..-,,_.o u
..,o-fo n a c s-u
.~
.c t.ne ARC staru questions severa, c:.
Seo.cember 14, Sec.tenber 28 and October 2,1979 (November 21,-1979'.
r 25M Licensee's letter to the NRC with 3663 3676
. a c,on.s=s 'y. =y e. a d ka v, R a -k.. v e 1-r.o
-0
~
--w sa..a u,1
., : ~ u. u - v:r Suu,::-
e _:
p..,s ~w v.is n--
a v-a..v
., - u v
C3% - -%a.
C e D, ' a.s.s c- ~ O F,,
a e n
- a.m..k o..
C u-y
,-J-~
~ ~.,
y s.
v a
/ n. o. e..b..sem 7/,
7^
--A C, w-... O v e-. 9
, C, "/,Q b
O s.6-u (Jc-a 1 3 't s ).
C\\
~s L--
lo=~w u o
~..% a V. O. s er 4 ~.b..
^ % %.?
7'*A l
u 4-
-.I 'a*
- : c o... s s a--
a u-svse so.v n
- s 3 9... a.a s e -- m g :: d
- y 3 g c *.a.r. s i e.n
~u a
--. _.. -.- c:
- m a_..
- a. s t,,
d ~w, c-ec._:u,m,a n.:.
a-a C2fu _%c. 00, vC nbo.
9,
,.2__%. *
- m C2%
c m
-s w--
- ^ ~ O,
(' ?, a C a_m.k a r Oi,
- 9 '/. ')
2 m.. 2 0,...+ %. s.. ,
s--
O
>s
-w
. w T:42 2.,
-sJ
~
2.. a c. ',a, 1.
~. c-.
O ~. %.. s.
' ' D.w 4
-.w-e r
1: n s.
ss<
. u a, -.......a c a -
3. c. s.=4 L.1 O.3....
-Q
- %. 3-3
-ww
- h...n ' q m c. -.. ;
.., h t..
s
,a n
v-
-m...
- Q, e.. A-9
--y.1~%a.
- - y. =-...%. s v.
Cr ~
2.
$)-,,C
\\sc94*
J-9
..G.y.
%k.
s) s r.,e s
..u:.,, e.. u -
....O
- - _ e..s-,_ a_ s u..:u:
s
-g e,r:- _:: =_ z r.,. : a_ e. m-a_
r: n n,
23?
Licensee's letter to :Pe NRC with 3668 3676 suc. o. lecental material a. rePared bv.
9 e
m
=
. p.l_ a e An e O -.r. a_
- O D. O s a. C ocCr-aa-O
.s -
p 1
- c - c..s go u..a_
7.
c.t
.n..
(
..a-a f-t :
e";
- -.,=-.~-.,u.,
O v..=...: :
o --..: C:.a u
u.
u
=
n c,. a. a-. :.,..s n.- v.=y,o,
- n.Occ-.
.o g -.~. a. a.. n..sae.
14, : o v o.,
,_s
-s,
-.2
. a.
- s. a. r.
e
-4
_ =_ 3 s _. - v e l. v, (a m-...'-
- 92, ' c30).
c
-s
_s a--
u--u..a,c b
Lcuu--
.D
- e. u-,- aa n
3D:su ss/O
,,2 a-nn rin n-2 4 a., c-. =. d 'c,i 2... 2.1. e.= 3 0.d -
7 -
1
- c..
c
..a-. y=.~ c.=--
- a
- ,-. o
, n,., c.. a u
.... '. ~.,..
e... v, r. a. ;... a-z., :.., uy. a
... _,, a
,.. a_
O.
J.=.. - n- ?.
1_ 0 4. 0 4.. -1 " ~4 n e, s,
n-
--. a-
. --... c m a c.. u 3 C... a.,.,. a c a e n.
m
/7ab ua-v 13, 1930).
\\..
v.
e.,. n J O v<
J o,/ c
-n u C a.. e t...,-
1_ c u *w e. e O un3
.3 a a--
e o.s T,.
s es s
a us T,. so caa,n m = v e.,.---
a v. a. e..C a. C n
-un.a.u-e, a
c--
. c
- i. ~r O ~ e o s.e n..
O' O#
e
. a. g a -.. c a
.T
.s s
-u,s w -k.a.,
Og, 10/.,
". n..,..p
- i.. c.
G c' us - --
a-j v
c a1
('_ L O...-..
41,
- v. : a a c L.._..
cau Aa. O 3.,.
-c-
-c-y v-.
- 1.. 6
- - 9, 6
'awwe.
uO e%
vi.~r..; r h 3 e" G. c; v :
e Jo MD u _ C a... e.,. a_
o J~
l '... -.. a.7, n
s
.s
.s _ m u a
."s
-b
" e C ' ~. e l ' " c- *.1 * *. 3' a' 9a_ s o C'.
(....c.c,n s
)
- c,Si 157; v o r
- - u.
u 1 p-ya-
_O
- e. %.. a.
o;.
. C =_.. - a_ z.
J we s
.N. --
.s v.
s es a
-. -.. - c..
.m, C " ".3, ". S ' i ". o-.
,". a. n ? *.
4
~
o.".
c v
c a 2 z.,- -. = a \\ -, a.
- s. a-v. *..,-
. - /
n-
==.n....
s,
g w.4 f.,i )
ss
~.,
3. /
,,s
..m. aws,...
...u..
svv.
- 7. a
- c..
w 9.,,
-3
.3
- v ~.. a. a.
a 3
wV w
e w
3..s a.a-
. r. s.
- a...
'.m... 7 n%...c*-
g - L.. a.
aat.
w w
' = m.. w-.
.z, - n
- 2-
.n. - d y, ~. 0,. a... c _-
.3,...
wc--
a
, 3 e n.,. j n-
.....2..
- c....f a_
.. n.....,7
...--w w-
.n.a. -..,-
..,.,5 w/
t L
- J. A 0 %, - ~
.O..O.-
- a....c. o a... - *,
.. a.
- t.... a e..
s
,%~
n
. u., ' C a
- z :.. ';; :.
- ....a.
s
- .s a.a.*
o-
..%..i n_. ": 3..
-. u. _a
- . u. _l
.z..:.c*.
a...;. -
~
u-
.... a.....U:*-.,.
'..%,..,.,./.-
,u.
J v-
.. ~ -
......-.3..,
O... ' - -.....,3....s--.
- $?\\
I.,
- q vj
a n ;..... c u
.L3~o u
- : a
=~:
r..., c., : _ s
..oo.
r a n u,n we e a.
s--...g a-a c...
.--.r 25W Licensee's letter to the NRC with 3663 3676 design criteria prepared 'oy Bechtel 4
1 s...s o us
.va.ca 91,
-o.
t.,.e n :,- u,,.,-
l a. 8 n).
25X Licensee's letter to the "RC with 3663 3676 2,C*tiCnal in'Or2ation O.rGD.ared
.D 'I A
3 a
'.a r. a l -ce=-A#.6
- '. a
~
-.-"=a-S '" ' -
a c
I
-o---- ~7, 10 3 '.
e.
(v.a C3
.O
)
uws
-s y
9 - / "~
2 s,.1
.. Co"
- 3. e,
'.**..e"C".^
" ~s. - v^ a * -
aO
~
2 7
o 9 7,
,~L c, / g 2.CC 0.: e s d 3...,a. ;
...., s u u
3-m the State of Cregon (Septecber 17,
, al a'.
a)
.s 26B Licensee's supplemental responses to 2669 3675
,t e. -.r O c-,. u,
- .c d ;, a 1.,,,..-~ 27, 1..
u
-uw--
3 au 1979 frcm the State of Oregon (mJeDruarv 1.' S u
a s
pin j
- m. *.9 w
c-ff 6
e q -.
f
.e, 2 - ~.a eu c.
a s
c v,
s s
L... e, -s d w..,, -.,,,. a T~~
~-.
M
-n a
w i.62,.i
.u-vu-on
..s w.av,
--a
.. c C... a,w,..
O.
t
,3 yJ u.:4 :: ee va,..O e..
- J..
A -
i u
m--
e.
l T o;>
- s v 3 ').
( f e u'n
/,
.u -
ra -,
o. n c.ersen, 34.co.
-aas f
S u.censee s estironv 9
a e
o.
a1 II C t.
1
- b.. s.
s..-..pa.,, au L-.c.
nC g p 3. a C.,
_a -.
Owu w
-.uc c,s,. c,..f L.. ( v..., n u,,,
- v..e. u -: : as n
o,
.,u,
-w 1100 o
.' 4. 4. 0 Li?7 v.n. s e r :-~~~s2-c.
yo a-3 4 n z...: e en oc ca
- y."a c
e s
-c.
a E
7e* ae
!" p, e.... a l '... { l M.i ~,
- h...
..J
..,d a,.
.3 y
A - w j c..
vv
-v-w U.
n ~ m
- v.... 'b s.
I.
b.*.q' l S3, T.
d.3 %.
a
--m-e
-4f V.
V-w3Ovm O v
/ v..c- - w 'a 1 132' i
,3 4.
s v--a s-u;L3.-
(
-.vu
'^^0 1 '7
.'. -. =-. e. r. c#
,"c'4 9
^
-,3
s'"-,-
- c. '
n-J.
L.*.., I l c.,., u.=.
.I3 a --
0 '. $ $.
{gD*
3-2 E
A mE
- f.... * :y.--~~~~u.
3...2
.=
s n
g3..
s e s s-
-sv s.s....
-i O-e.
7.. s.1 2-as--.
--.a---.
s
-3 s
[. O.
,.$ $.s
$ O.
- 2
- 7. 3.= y.*...* 3 a
~. %
.M.,s v,- ^. * *
.a
- 3....* O. 3 s
w s
..w P.s A
O. * : %. 1....= *. 3. v s.
. a
- 2. m...m. a.
O.. a. e-.
o*.
y Y, u v..'
g, g, 2 - 9.m.
-=
3 9,
.. as
.a g
(
..-w s-, -,. ws
....J. - w.9
O
- 3
.a
...... ~._cu
,o
~ A n_. t = = =_ =_. '-
=.-' e _...
n_
".s o.
L ' c a_..e>.s e =.: %.. 's : -
a t-
__a 33 C, ic.e s..u s a c in O ra,t _eStimony or-
- , a 4 /
- u5a, s.
i Mr. R. C..'.nderSon and Dr. Willian
.r 2
3;oU.
- u...., t e o
- v..c-._. c, s 2.,
s.
/ -.-
- w a.r -
,e
~-*s n3)
,i
..s w....e n a.
a
...sa, a. a O
..s n.
- w n
na m
u s
w v
s?,
? 0,v U
('.i.n r 41 7,
0^
^
n.. o - * ** c... a o V..Es a %..
J y -
x--aw-1 w-m n M - p
-s sw nC.
a; v v 3
- s.m e a w 6.Sc,a.r-o 1
u n
me O ".u:?s?. Vuavo
..a O. s. u u -.I
- sv, a
ca-c-en-Ou;
< - s~
sss c ~. ; ~
C... a. - ; m n.. a.
7.
e *. w c ?-
w1 s.C,Q
(
3-,.1 l a,. a w - a1 0, c 0.
e os f - - -
3,
-,3 r
- i. - -
- n. 3
- m,aj
- - -..i.S n:., - u,,3 C v. + O.5 n._1 - _ a-mu b..u---. e n,.
a sr
~a m
A a
v
.,. a
.u.
CL_1c.,
v 0.4.,.. u V..r. w c-y T.n.-
b"
- o_. g... %.. v:
31 e
es
,. 1
., g o,... v,
.,3.,13 D m-..-), a.
.,....a_
.p --
.i),
..a 1are u70V a. w u C.~.~ Ge S
- /3 G /
,t u C a...c 8 a., a-
]aw pv e.,3...~.
e )-
m-q s
uw
- g g.* ?..r-g..t.d f, e D.GT
- a.,3 _ e..g a-Cn v
s.
_. 3
... u s
.c ; e m..
(.tra.
.t.%a :nv ' 7, o~ (,,.. r y
' =.a m e.
n.. n a uv.
u.
fv s
c
."*g,
- 2. u-.
U. C *w* d ". ' '.
.i
.,s.,<
3,
.~-.w
- h. -.
a. - *..
.. a.
..n 3v 5, 1c,o'O
---.=-an. - Col.
1'_*.
('.d.c 3.
s;
-O 1
?~O
/. ~ 9 ~ -
-C" ? $-
r.
- 3 S O. C n a-S uO s,r..e D ~u c ::- --
u - - =- o..a a s ' s
~
01 w
c u.
v e-
.0.
5",
1 0 "e,O n
C..a q.4. v-. s-n.
s o C O.2.- n..
-7 v
fs c, u c.
% e-.
-1 9 ~/ 9 T.
-w s,
-001 70--
/.
t:
/. 0 0 ^
7 3 - o... ca w, o.. '.-. a. c. n. e.. S e. m ".. O. ~r Se.s 14.a a
w--
-u a
%2-J a n c e.a a - -
9C,
- C, 7 0, S n=
r
- n.. a -. :
u s-a s
CO
-ss0'.
,G'*a....--.,
O,
)
.c-;
..- -,,,2 3 0 '.. O. ~,a c-
> ; 71
/;9qq
".q r
- 2, =-.. e s.. t -
a...
cof,..-
7 0,,
ema-
,e--
v c__
a y.0
--v.,
. 3 4
P.
../,
s, 3. m. a. - a.. -
v-
- 07Os
(.s....n..
-0,
--vs)
-a
/ ^9.,
9 9 w.c.-
fs Nw-=
"s--
O.
g
. = -
a >
1 -n n
. a m
J.
---m
- 3
-a
_bdJV..a-
.w 4
- ...."b
.we..a
.e C,
~.
L
. ]C t g/
3-.-.
U Q e ". D w...
GLCw
~
y s
e
(.c..-j..
w-,
,s 1
...g
.A W W M
".e=""
g-s*
e
. m.-
g
- **. m e yg Y
g h
s.M
..M M.
M.
' d T
u-s.
w.d.=
=d
- s s
.i...
.a.........
.., -t s e w
--.l
-. - 'T. a C..=. :.
09}
'. 0 *
- 7 7-
. a...o.. ' a. =
3 9
M*
- .=
- a. - o.
'.- l.. ?.
. a., - - 3.q
,,. a s.
w-sw a.
%,R-...
. !) /
' l 3
As-ed g
t..... C nu T., 0
..L
-'a t_::--
2.c..
aA v..; a
~'o.
s:ca Saa.
v...,.%...;. % :. -
a -,,
._m.~e
-_ -.i -
.3 3cG
' icensee 's reso. onse to N?.C Staf f 4823 4321-22 r6,..s,t cn 12 o_7 Dece.,a_
99, 197, 4
, 3. w* 3.
L
(.,.=.. c..1 2,
.+ o 01,,.
L v,'.2 3
.,.-. c c ~.. _~, o,,, c.,. e,..
,, v. c..t c.
=.s= v, a. c.t
~ a s ~. '..w.., o = C
.f o s '_ ~a
- v...,,.,.,.., mA c.
a u.D 1
1,
- c ; ty).
- 1 o /a Lv
- . a v 6 j
n A
..t:
-..a e u r
wv 1300
...,,..,,.....-S C tr.,o
,.,..t,.,,.
... ~u, s. o n s.
e..-
6...
.i G.
.s.
- 1
'w': C c -
- 2. -Jf ~.'.,._:.O....
C t- *h,., 7ie s...
4 Q Q r.
40"iJ' a
v f
v.
we
-_T, T @ n *i.. f v, : n - C c 3 c-._2 1_1_,
4 1
2.
6
'w J.
'. ^. ". S C '6'.".. e l.
E.~.'.'s' O. '.'* e ';', c' '. a d,.
u.. a S '.". e '- ;r b
44 w
d oa-,,,nu
- 7. 2.1..., - : O n.. e..
o
-a,-
53
-fv.-
..o * : c o. 3 -2.3 3 m. ~,. A Q~ e..:.Cn On a
Q q.,4-t,, L t.
.., a. B e,.,, A L w :. C,.,.
.w, a
v..
(,,;, Cn,
m0
's
~
003
- n. = =.* C a C =.
- C '> 3 c..~.1 v, =.'u- ' " c. ~w.'.O n %g~
~ * ':-w.. :
'2. 3 n'
-c v
%a 1. u.2 t' #.9..a N*.. 1 e. s.. p n.,
v,,
O.,. ~.. -. :. n,
o 7
2
- -w
-w
~ %., e C v, u _
y#
2.-
C.
- ,.,a-C3
- a. O J. a S :
c..,
a u. v..
c s.
a.. -
' /.
1 c, 0' V ).
e
('. O D....
C.,31 D_,. 4 1_ C _:., -
.2.,.
.3 v
C:
c., n '. a, C,
~.,
S :
.i.0o;:
L m o
- 1. :
~
u
.c-s s
- e.......
-2a3
- a. C n e
~
u.L
.: :6j
.c 2
O '.* :.s s s
c.,2.-
u 1 O,. ',. C )
- a,,. - ( v. 2- -.. _. - -.. !,
- ;
c.j s
?
! n'*
L.-. v., a.. 6
- ('/ n.,
' ) '/ -.,
-',a..
". 2 s.. :.,..
~
.n
.6 s
..6j w-
%.. s
.:. L' :
A
- 3 :q~ %..
a.;. c... A ;
c.
p.
A.
~ m
. G. a.-J 53
.., A.
7.fI..a
.a C.*
'.J 1_ ; m.t p 3..J..,s.
.C.
.s 9
2.,. -w..a n..
y...
3., J.3
, _ O.. *,. a. A
..t a.
s.
?.'.*,
%.s
' h, ;' \\...
w
..w
.. c.
ss).
,4 *.
2. %.. q i n. A."
/...'.. %.. J s...l
- 1. s;
- * :.* C w c,..J J. d...:...,.*
s-vv.
s
- 2. '_. *)
.*o a.
.....y
..-..v v..
v.--
v...
t o
- 1
..A..
~ I.
-l -s
,...n.~.,... -..
....~s.
,s
,, /
s...
- q'
- .r.--.:J
.4
,.J,,..
s:
s.-
-r.
s 2..,
...1-
. *=.... -
a-
... ~
- 3. -,....'.a a.. - -...
'...3 c
O.
.- 3 J *.
- a
.. l 7..c. 0 e.,
,,,........ea s,
~)
v..
1 x......,.....'...:.,a.,..,
-..s w..
.. - '. **,.. *J
', w(*.., c.,,., : J 3
(*. J: JJ
.a
....=..v..
7...*.
j w-
t
- .A
- s
...t. i ;_
.,u
.L"CQ c.,...,,.-
. 3. _..
- u. c..
3
- e. -.. - =
s.,
..e..-
. :.. -,- a s
.s n.
/. ' -
%.2,
.d Cuc -
3_ S a..v
.s.
C.
C.:1 c-. a. n S.
L m
O s..v I,
s.
w C '.1
" *. S "w '2. O.'. S U.. 2 7 3r d P.1"a
.. c,.-
e l 1,
0.,.3.1 C C c u:e.,.,..
m," - t..
o.e-4 1,. m ad S...,. a,n, d
.a w-
_- v s.. C-a.,
. C.., Cz., y
.=.=a-.., C ~o ~. 3
~3
.G, t.
-. t.
.i
-3
- v.,. 3 o
,w.,.,,, c
- v..,v.s.w a - -
,.:..v CuS
.... w w. e.,
.s v a w..
w..
c,v.a_, C u-7,,c5O')
s m
g.
L n 0 7,
( y ~w *.,. &..c...q 17
' :. k
$7.c.:~:~ m, S :..,.,,. C :.
.\\ S.,m-o...,.
ws
~
.1 r.
..,..q c.
4
.. O C '1 u'. o.
aC soc, r-
.....-.7-2,C 3
..C... e. r 3.r f-.
v..
4
, C., C, q.:wL L..,.3
=e.,4.....
e
.w6-.-,
w.
V..e. A : :. : L c.
v. 3
. %.. c- ".' s m
(' V., e.
n 1m.wv-
-.s m-m
-m
.v v. c.t v
~ o r, )s u.e. 4 7 L aC, ( v 2..,.,., 9 ~'.
e
=/Ov g
w..
w
~aa~.' ~-...v, c *.
L.50L L579 1 ~o,.
~.,-~..C*.-^==.=.-'=r.'
L n
.hc., q 9 'l
.=1"*
.==..u "s', y.* o. 6..-
4.e..* <~
4.
s
.V C,s.
- I. c v.. :
..a,.
3 e-
. p
,.f.==*.*m-.?9._.
w
.. p,= ; t,d! a, P O *... *.r. e
. _w.
v
..m..
,w ww c
- o. O., O C y A. : :_ 4.,u. -. :c i. AO..S O
.*.,1.
A rO] c,.
~
n.
..v w
w.i.
.6 cc
,q. 3j
[ o.,. g,. c. s. c..
rj..l' w.g 7 g
- 3. a,.-..m..e-c, s
a s
v..:.S C t< c a1-
-+ 0 u /
4 t',J /
/. n
- 1. 0 o 3.
4,,. C.,
v s
,,. 3..=w-v s
~.:,., p. :
a. :. :,._
~ _
- c.. a < e.
e_
s : 2 - 3..
..s 1c80) 99, T 3. a.,.. o.c
- p. o 's. m.
As
.e c
- 1. ~
- v,,_.
6-331-s$1-1 3, -
n:e,C, 0.5-m.&= a.; m.. (. :
z, :
,. : ~
.6.3
.v.
.a.s
- 6. a 1 s..
,~..v,
.,.. d.,.. D.
. t'., 6 4. 6 G 3e,.
=.
.e G..
.C O V. l
.'s C.
-.s..
- c. 3 P
. G 6
". L,.
.,,.g..-
q-.%
-S
~
..'-. O. ;
ww a..w
.f.,
., 3,., y, m w...g w...
9 3,.
3
-su.
U C.= 3.
Lp
.J v,
- v...
l s.
f v..
J
. w w. w...
1 =. ~ ~. a A,
~
/.-a p, m, *
- s,.,.q-9.s v.,.
tta a O.s m-
.3.,.,
T.* m. a... a. %... e.
. '.l u.,
.v..
...... :2 U.,.. /
w.6 e**O..
L C ' 1.,
- d'
,, :. :a.. :.. c s 4. -
e :.. -
3.C..a.
3
,..'), -, --
1 m.#h y*..... ? !
p.
.m.,..
--v 4
s
\\.".%d-a edf V
- . s
..Cd
.-C30 w w.. 9 s.w..* *..
.a. m.
.. ". -,3 a.. a, l
f * -.
- 34
%./ V 6
iF.aO*w
.,..C 3 d
.'../
....,e. o 2.
.m u..
.s -
j.i.
s m,,e.
3, a
e,,.=-.
p.
.J
~.
Q or
.s.
4 y,.....
.'l
/..,.,: 1 v...O*
..A Js....
... O 42 4.".s.
A
..'...=..f
=...-
m.-
t
. ; =.y., s
_s. -
_s q
4.,
.....,3.,.,.-
.J
'w
~~
~ ~.,,. * -. -
,1
~ ~.... '.
1
~....,>.'.*3
0.
. 1 - :.
s....
.. m..
.=..
a..-.....
- . awe
-e=
.m,,a....
?
=~..
....;. 3 2
ag
..;.;.. =J s
~,.
........ :. ' a a,
~ m~.....
..&.w.
~
~;,,....a..'..:...... *.:...
+ **
m S7
. e :. -.'-
- h
,..,e.
gy. g
,p
,,./*
.4
..".'9...
..,e.
,,..... 2 g..
ts.
1 b
.. A n.. ;. r. u, ;
i n.. u,J 2
~ ::
". i. m c.,- : : r,,:%u us T
=.n.i-
_aa
.,. 4. : a,.. u n, "o.
or.
.i e,7 i s.~
- ^v 0 - 4 *- a' s, 7-u-
o.
C-.
r I "r * *y*
C #. a' "u S ~w ' ~ C '."..a?
s--
~3
- u'. S *. *. 7 a
m.
e.- u e =\\., -u O-
...u,r OS c S s.. na-
?,-%r.
.ce: r...,. _. 4.O n O L J
e c,.134u.4O n u-1 2
n.
d
-.c--
l e rJ)'
6..;
3..
Q'.*.,, -
,3,.r
,..s. 4 L l i.
3 6 o p.. 4..
10 us
.u..
.,. c a C,. -
(. cr. a C v. L u j, 'er l. ).
. a n..
r-
.s-
- /85
^~
'L4. v, tm.. e 2. u, 4O'O,^
9/
Te.u - 0
- o... r... r.. 8.':
,a o
1 w
- 3
.c u.
~~
. 3 s. L,1., O u-.
a.,.
u-o..u3 c,-
.8 cc-
.u 3 a
.v su A1 3......;. e.
.. S 0 p.
.... a l. l..e>
4,... -
.u
-),
..u..
4 L,3 _1.c..
- O.nua,
( a',. 4.1
- 7. 7,
- 4
/
--3
-.s
..c.uu o
1 0, o% A v
nCC"CCeC Ts. 3
. -,. "J. 3.. u-a
~
- e,.a Cr-
~. n. e n n..
a
,,n.,..,.
. J a m...
a
-.v..
s--
.iO.
_s.c J. u u
. ca..
". z..a..._a... r p: =.. p _ m T f 1. i.o. n,.
- a. q.
c m..
LL*]
- 651 9
s v.
s s-u
,e,.
p-_
(' s.
ye-a ab..Ca-V_
w..a-
-bcb.
V Q p. a,= 1 J Q=. S,. e =. t. u3 1
, J p,=..
%.7 e.O v
.. o -. - -..;
a
..1-
'3
'.f - d 4 J i a,J. r...g
.r
( f. a. 3. '.q 9 1.,
i
..s 1 C, 0" 0
.s.q., ;. 1_ 2.. a...
.9
...o
.i s.q..,..n...g e.. v o -
6.3).
6.asg 9
-.4
'.. : %m i a.
~... - c =. q. R a t.=.~. u.4.. 3 - %.. e A
c c
gs
.e
- a,. u, t 2,,.. C ~..
~...3
.' *. O D, O S s.
o^
6".O"'---'.'-~~.'^"..
u 1
r ^ " *
- C '-
c P,,u_3-- 71 2-e
..,.2.
.... i,
4 ov....
.s
.-u.
-6 s w a w -. 3 e