05000266/LER-1981-009-01, /01T-0:on 810714,per IE Bulletin 80-11 Analyses, Contractor Reported That Four Control Room & Two Battery Room Walls Did Not Meet Revised Criteria for Seismic Event. Caused by Reanalysis Per Revisions.Supports Installed

/01T-0:on 810714,per IE Bulletin 80-11 Analyses, Contractor Reported That Four Control Room & Two Battery Room Walls Did Not Meet Revised Criteria for Seismic Event. Caused by Reanalysis Per Revisions.Supports Installed

ML20009G853
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach
Issue date:	07/28/1981
From:	Fay C WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
Shared Package
ML20009G852	List: 05000266/LER-1981-009, Forwards LER 81-009/01T-0 05000266/LER-1981-009-01, /01T-0:on 810714,per IE Bulletin 80-11 Analyses, Contractor Reported That Four Control Room & Two Battery Room Walls Did Not Meet Revised Criteria for Seismic Event. Caused by Reanalysis Per Revisions.Supports Installed
References
IEB-80-11, LER-81-009-01T, LER-81-9-1T, TAC-42896, TAC-42897, NUDOCS 8108050149
Download: ML20009G853 (3)

LER-1981-009, /01T-0:on 810714,per IE Bulletin 80-11 Analyses, Contractor Reported That Four Control Room & Two Battery Room Walls Did Not Meet Revised Criteria for Seismic Event. Caused by Reanalysis Per Revisions.Supports Installed

Event date:
Report date:
2661981009R01 - NRC Website

text

f6RO FORM 366 U. f,. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 17 77)

LICENSEE EVENT REPORT CONTROL BLOCX: l l

l l

l l

l PLE ASE PRINT OR 1YPE ALL REQUIRED INFORMATiON) i e

jo Ji j lWl Il P l Bl Hl 1l@l 0 l 0 l -l 0 l 0 l 0 j 0 l 0 l - l 0 l 0 lgl 4 l 1 l 1 l 1l 1lgl l

lg 7

d 9 t ~4NSEE CODE 14 16 LICENSE NUM8ER 25 29 LICENSE TYPE Jo 67 CA T 68 CON'T lO11l 3[ $ l L l@l 0 l 510 l 0 l 0 l 2 l 6 l 6 l@l 0 l 7 l1 l 4 l 8 l 1 l@l 0 l 7 l 2l 8l 8 l 1 l@

?

8 60 61 DOCK ET NUMB ER 68 69 EVENT DATE 74 7S REPORT DATE 80 EVENT DESCRIPTION AND PROBABLE CONSEQUENCES h ITiTl l On 7/14/81 Licensee received information from the contractor conducting l

,g;3, ;IEB 80-11 " Masonry Block Nalls" analyses that stresses in four walls in g ;the control room and two walls in the battery room would exceed the ig,,, ; revised acceptance criteria in the event of an SSE. Failure of these lO l6 l l Walls Could impact safety related equipment including the plant bat-g ;teries, electrical distribution panels, and control boards.This event is PB Unit 2 is also affected by gbnt.l

,g,g,, reportable under T.S.

15.6.9.2.A.9.

7 8 9 80 C DE CODE SU8C DE COVPONENT CODE SUSC DE SU E

10191 1 zl zj @ Lxj@ l z l@ l z l z l z l z I z l z l@ Lz_J@ LzJ @

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 18 19 20

' SEQUENTIAL OCCURRENCE REPORT REVISION gp go EVENT YE AR REPORT NO.

CODE TYPE NO.

@ l(jf,j,RT l g l 1l l-l l 0 l 0l 9 l y

l 0 l 1l lT l 9

l0 l

,21 22 23 24 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 AKE A

ON ON PL NT ETH HOURS SB IT D FOR1 08.

S'U PPLt MAN FACTURER L_zJ@LFj@

[ z_j@

l zl@

l0l0l0l0l [YJ@ {@

lZl@

lz l 9 l 9l 9 l@

3J 34 35 36 31 40 41 42 43 44 47 CAUSE DESCRIPTION AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS h liloll Overstress was discovered during reanalysis of masonry block walls in l

[T7T] l accordance with IEB 80-11. Corrective action for these wells is des-l i 2 l cribed in detail in Licensee's letter dated July 17, 1981.

Modifica-g

, 3 l tions included installation of clip angles and structural steel supportp.

ii l4l l All wall repairs will be completed in October 1981.

7 8 9 80 ST S

% POWER OTHER STATUS IS O RY 32 [i I s l l G l@ l 0 l 0 l 0l@l N/A l

g gl Bulletin hIb-NY DESSYT$~y W/E wo l

1 1

44 45 46 80 ACTIVITY CONTENT AELE ASED OF RELE ASE AMOUNT OF ACTIVITY LOCATION OF RE LEASE l i l 6 l {_z_] @ W@l N/A l

l N/A l

PEaSONNElExPOSES 80 NUY8ER TYPE DESCRIP1 TON l i l 7 l l 0 l 0l 0l@[z J@l N/A l

Pt RSONNE L INJULS so oESCn. prion @

NuveER li la l l 0 l 0l 0l@l N/A i

7 8 9 11 12 80 i/4 ' a St^P%'N

'^c'"" @

[zj@l N/A i9 l

7 8 9 10 oE sCRiPTiON @

NRC USE ONLY l 2._Ld $st81N/A i

l l[ll;;;,;[g;lg 8108050149 810728 68 6 80 5 PDR ADOCK 05000266 C. W.

Fay 414-2'77-2811 o

n

(

S PDR p

o

Attachment to Licensee Event Report No. 81-009/0lT-0 Wisconsin Electric Power Company Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-266 and 50-301 During the afternoon of July 15, 1981, the Wisconsin Electric Power Company Nuclear Engineering Safety Review Committee met to consider information received on July 14, 1981 from the Bechtel Power Corporation regarding the investi-gation of masonry block walls at the Point Beach Nuclear Plant.

Bechtel has been retained by Wisconsin Electric to conduct masonry wall investigations and analyses in accordance with the require-ments of IE Bulletin 80-11.

On July 14, 1981 Bechtel reported by telephone that their analyses of several of the walls in the Point Beach Nuclear Plant control room and battery rooms indicated that in the event of an SSE stresses in these walls exceeded the revised acceptance criteria stress limits as established during the meeting between Licensee and the NRC Staff on June 9-11, 1981.

These walls are identified as wall numbers 19 and 20 in the battery room and walls 111-1, ill-3N, 113, and 114 in the control room.

Details of the wall locations and the proposed corrective modifications were provided to the NRC in Licensee's letter to Mr. Denton dated July 17, 1981.

These modifications include installation of positive shear transfer mechanisms (clip angles) along the wall boundaries and upgrading with structural steel l

supports to relieve the flexural tension overstress.

Block wall 20, the north-south divider wall in the battery room, has already been modified to eliminate the SSE-induced overstress condition.

Modifications to the remaining walls will be completed in October 1981.

On July 15, 1981, the Wiscon sin Electric Nuclear Engineering Safety Review Committee evaluated this information and determined that continued operation of the Point Beach Nuclear Plant pending modifications to these walls was justified.

This determination was based on the following considerations:

For walls 19 and 20 the degree of SSE overstress l

indicated by the analysis was small with respect to the factor of safety of approximately four between the stress allowed by the acceptance criteria and the ultimate strength.

The remaining walls, 111-1, lll-3N, 113, and 114 had higher SSE overstress conditions; however, it was concluded that a failure of these walls would noc preclude the ability of plant personnel to safel shut down the plant using the remote shut-down panels as necesrz,ry.

It was further observed that the I

T '.

. Point Beach Nuclear Plant is located in a relatively inactive earthquake area and the probability of seismic activity with ground accelerations equaling the SSE design for the plant within the three months necessary to complete the wall modi-fications is exceedingly remote.

This event is reportable in accordance with Technical Specification 15.6.9.2.A.9.

i l

\\

l l

l l

l d