ML19332B399

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Category I Masonry Wall Design

ML19332B399
Person / Time
Site:	Zimmer
Issue date:	09/10/1980
From:	Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Borgmann E CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
References
NUDOCS 8009260671
Download: ML19332B399 (5)

Text

TEIUl r

[ ping

,o,,

UNITED STATES

{ }, s-q g

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y

E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

'49.....,d Docket No. 50-358 Mr. Earl A. Borgmann Vice President - Engineering Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company P. O. Box 960 Cincinnati, Ohio 45201

SUBJECT:

CATEGORY I MASONRY WALL DESIGN We have reviewed the information provided by your letter, dated July 18,1980, on the above subject. We find that we need the enclosed additional information in order to complete our review.

Please advise us when the information will be provided.

Sincerely, T.4 C. O Robert L. Tedesco I

Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/ enclosure:

See next page 8'009260b7)

o V

a

\\.

Mr. Earl A. Borgmann Vice President - Engineering i

Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company P. O. Box 960 Cincinnati, Ohio 45201 I

cc: Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esq.

Dr. Frank F. Hooper Conner, Moore & Corber School of Natural Resources 1

1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.

University of Michigan Washington, D. C.

20006 Ann Arbor, ".ichigan 48109 Mr. William J. Moran Charles Bechhoefer, Esq., Chairman g

General Counsel Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel l

Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i

P. O. Box 960 Washington, D. C.

20555 Cincinnati, Ohio 45201 Mr. Glenn 0. Bright Mr. William G. Porter, Jr.

Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel

_ Porter, Stanley, Arthur U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Platt Washington, D. C.

20555 37 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43215 Leah S. Kosik, Esq.

3454 Cornell Place Mr. Steven G. Smith, Manager Cincinnati, Ohio 45220 Engineering & Project Control Pmyton Power & Light Company W. Peter Heile, Esq.

4 P. O. Box 1247 Assistant City Solicitor Dayton, Ohio 45401 Room 214, City Hall Cincinnati, Ohio 45220 J. Robert Newlin, Counsel Dayton Power & Light Company Timothy S. Hogan, Jr., Chairman P. O. Box 1247 Board of Commissioners Dayton, Ohio 45401 50 Market Street Clermont County Mr. James D. Flynn, Manager Batavia, Ohio 45103 Licensing Environmental Affairs Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company John D. Woliver, Esq.

P. O. Box 960 Clermont County Community Council Cincinnati, Ohio 45201 Box 181 Batavia, Ohio 45103 Mr. J. P. Fenstermaker Senior Vice President-0perations Mrs. Mary Reder Columbus & Southern Ohio Box 270, Rt. 2 Electric Company California, Kentucky 41007 215 North Front Street Columbus, Ohio 43215 Dale D. Brodkey Assistant Attorney General j

David Martin, Esq.

Division of Environmental Law Office of the Attorney General Office of Attorney General 209 St. Clair Street 209 St. Clair Street First Floor Frankfort, Kentucky 40601 Frankfort Kentucky 40601 h

N

9 Mr. Earl A. Borgmann cc: Andrew B. Dennison, Esq.

200 Main Street Bataviat Ohio 45103 Robert A. Jones, Esq.

Prosecuting Attorney of Clermont County, Ohio 154 Main Street Batavia, Ohio 45103 i

Resident Inspector /Zimmer

\\

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 58 New Richmond, Ohio 45157 Y

4 i

I

... _. _., - -,, +.

?

/

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON MASONRY WALL DESIGN 8

0F j

PLANT No. 50-358 STRUCTURAL EJGINEERING BRANCH 1.

Provide a copy of S & L Specification H2174.

2.

Indicate if masonry walls in the reactor building at elevation 475-6",

marked ABW 1-17, ABW 1-18 and ABW 1-19 (drawing A-188) support the d

floor slab above.

If so are these walls designed as bearing walls and what other walls are in this category? Describe in detail how these walls are analyzed and designed.

3.

Provide design floor response spectra for the reactor building floors at elevations 475-6" and 570-6" which were used in the design of the masonry walls.

4.

In table 1 no thermal loads are listed.

Provide your justification for neglecting the thermal loads.

l 5.

In your sample calculation on page (6) provide your justification for neglecting the eccentric moment (pv x e), noting that it will exert a torsional moment on your idealized beam.

6.

Indicate the damping values used in the design of Category I masonry walls.

i 7.

Provide sarrple calculations which contain live load (L), operating pressure differential (Po), accident pressure differential (Pa),

safety relief valve discharge load (SRV), and loads associated with a loss-of-coolant-accident (LOCA) for the masonry walls listed below.

a.

Reactor building, west portion, elevation 570-6", Mark ABW 5-19, Mark ABW 5-20 and Mark ABW 5-23.

b.

Reactor building, west portion elevation 546-0", Mark ABW 4-20.

c.

Reactor building, east portion elevation 475'-6, Mark ABW 1-17, ABW 1-19.

Calculations should identify all the loads and load combinations as shown in table 1.

Provide response spectra used, and provide details of wall connection all around. Discuss and substantiate all assumptions used.

8.

In response to the staff's information request No. 3 you stated that the concrete masonry walls are designed in accordance with National Concrete Masonry Association's (NCMA) " Specification for the Design Design and Construction of Load Bearing Concrete Masonry".

From the stress criteria established on the iusis of NCMA specification as shown in table 2 it is noted that tension in flexure is allowed and type f"='

)-._

4

,e of mortar used is N, which has the lowest strength among the three types of mortar.

In staff's opinion, to rely on the tensile strength of the concrete masonry wall for seismic resistance is inconsistent with basic design philosophy of concrete structures for nuclear power plants.

Furthermore, compared with ATC-3 (Applied Technology Council) allowables recmunended, the NCMA allowable tensile stresses are much too high, especially if these stresses are multiplied by a factor of 1.67 as indicated in the last column of table 1.

In accordance with an article in the August issue of Civil Engineering (p.56) ATC-3 is proposing the elimination of the use of unreinforced masonry walls for any walls which are not yet installed and reinforcing those walls which are in place because of the unfavorable seismic experience with such walls.

In view of the above observation, it is requested that consideration should be given to the elimination of the use of unreinforced masonry walls for future construction and providing boundary support for existing walls, unless extensive tests will be made to substantiate the NCMA allowable tensile s' dresses.

9.

For the examples submitied with your letter of July 18, 1980:

1) Discuss the effects of 3 components of earthquake loading.

1 2)

Indicate by reference to the drawings, the locations of these walls.

3) Discuss and justify the appropriateness of using the uncracked moment-of-inertia under simultaneous loading.

4) Discuss and substantiate the mechanism through which ccmposite action of multiwythe walls is assumed to occur.

10. For the span #1 (Figure 1 or Figure 2 of examples submitted with your letter of July 18,1980) discuss the attachment of the wall to the floor or curb to justify the simply-supported assumption.

11. In the masonry wall support column design, discuss how the loads are transferred from walls to columns. Discuss and substantiate the adequacy of the anchorage system used to transfer these loa-ds.

12. Some of the masonry walls seem to be supported at one end and not at the other (e.g. ABW35 on drawing A-192).

Discuss the means of support for the loading and stress levels in these walls.

I

-