ML20010A089
| ML20010A089 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 07/30/1981 |
| From: | Leech P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, ISSUANCES-OM, NUDOCS 8108110052 | |
| Download: ML20010A089 (27) | |
Text
.
r#
g 3.
JUL 3 01981 Docket Nos.: 50-329 OM, OL 50-330 OM, OL /
APPLICANT: Consumers Power Company FACILITY:
Midland Plant, Units 1 & 2
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF JUNE 30, 1981 MEETING ON SEISMOLOGICAL INPUT ISSUES On June 30, 1981, the NRC staff met in Bethesda, Maryland, with representatives of the Consumers Power Company (the Applicant) and their consultants to discuss site specific response spectra and seismic margin criteria. The meeting attendees are listed in Enclosure 1.
Site Specific Response Spectra T. R. Thiruvengadam of Consumers Power Company described the scope of a Weston Geophysical Corporation report submitted previously to the NRC on response spectra applicable for the top of fill material at the plant site.
The report is Part II of three documents entitled, " Site Specific Response Spectra, Midland Plant - Units ! and 2," and is dated April 1981.
Z. A. Cybriwsky, E. Levine and R. J. Holt of Weston Geophysical then der.-
cribed the report with the aid of illustrations from that document. These illustrations indicate the soil characteristics and shear wave velenities measured at various locations (primarily in California) and present response spectra developed for the top of approximately 30 feet of fill at the Midland site.
The soil profile and properties of natural and fill materials at the site were presented by N. Ramanajum of Consumers Power Company. The figures in show the parameters that were used in " SHAKE" code calculations to evaluate the dynamic response of the ground surface in the diesel generator building (DGB) area.
E. Vanmarcke described a study made by himself and two associates at M.I.T.
of earthquake motion amplification at the top of the Midland site fill. As indicated in Appendix B of the above report, he concluded that, in the DGB area, the response sp4ctra at the original ground surface may be amplified by a factor of about 1.54 in the neighborhood of 0.50 Hz. The ratio of response spectra generally decreases rapidly for higher frequencies and it falls below 1.0 at frequencies above 2 Hz.
o!dOhj, A
PDR ome< >
" "*"'I DATEf
" "* -m e2.
- Nac eowu sie iio so,uncu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
x
~
~
.JJL.1 0 E31 J. Kane of the NRC Hydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch requested the Applicant to provide the plots actually used in the " SHAKE" program (relationships of strain vs shear modulus and damping). The Applicant was also requested to calculate tne present the shock spectra, amplification factors, and rates of response spectra at elevations 634 and 628 for variations of Cases A, B and D (see Enclosure 3) where the full initial ' shear wave velocities are used with the nomalized shear modulus vs shear strain curves to establish the curves actually used in Mc " SHAKE" code for the full layers.
In making these calculations, the Applicant was asked to adopt El Centro and Lytle Creek (Allen Ranch) records scaled to 0.12g as outcrop of Saginaw bedrock. Anticipating receipt of the above information before July 31, Kane said that the Geotechnical Engineering Section plans to complete its review of Part II by August 15, 1981.
The June 1981 Addendum to Part I of the Weston report pertains to response spectra at the original ground surface of the Midland site. In answer to the staff's inquiry as to why consideration of records from the 1966 earth-quake near Parkfield, California, were not included, the Applicant's consultants (Weston) responded that they do not believe the Parkfield data to be appropriate for Midland. Their reasons are essentially that: (1) the accelerations recorded at Parkfield are anomalous because the fault ruptured the ground surface; (2) the recordings were nearfield; and (3) neither of those situations prevails at Midland. Robert Jackson, Chief of the Geosciences Branch, stated that the response did not fully satisfy the Staff's concern. Consequently, the Applicant indicated that further study will be made of this matter and the Staff will await additional submittals before determining its position on the site specific spectra at the original ground 2
surface.
Seismic Margin Review Criteria J. W. Cook of Consumers Power and R. P. Kennedy and J. D. Stevenson of Structural Mechanics Associates presented draft criteria (Enclosure 3) for determination of seismic sr.fety margins of Category 1 structures and compon-ents necessary for safe shutdown of the Midland reactors. This proposal will be evaluated by James Knight, Assistant Director for Components and Structures Engineering, and his staff. Further discussions will be conducted by telephone as necessary to clarify the proposal. These discussions are expected to result in a formal propossl by the Applicant on the review criteria.
i l
Paul H. Leech, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 4 Division of Licensing Enclosures :
m As stated j
..%La.
m.:.tBn........ A:.(Bh.
fkE;p,E $$ 9;.0E,$ES, i ~m 8,,, gg m
..neechas..s.Hud,M/[
,,EAdensam,,
.g]...h.... g q,l g,
. 2.7./81
..../2.//./ 81 7/
om>. 7..#..F..
/. 8.1 7
I Nac 'ORM 318 tlO 80l N RCM O2 40 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
" " * * *2'
MIDLAND Mr. J. W. Cook
~
Vice President Consumers Power Conpany 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201 cc:
Michael I. Miller, Esq.
Mr. Don van Farrowe, Chief Ronald G. Zamarin, Esq.
Division of Radiological Health Alan S. Farnell, Esq.
Departnent of Public Health Isham, Lincoln & Beale P.O. Box 33035 Suite 4200 Lansing, Michigan 48909 1 First National Plaza
- Chicago, Illinois 60603 William J. Scanlon, Esq.
2034 Pauline Boulevard Janes E. Brunner, Esq.
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103 Consumers Power Coapany 212 West Michigan Avenue U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Jackson, Michigan 49201 Resident Inspectors Office Route 7 Myron M. Cherry, Esq.
Midland, Michigan 48640 1 IBM Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60611 Ms. Barbara Stamiris 5795 N. River Ms. Mary Sinclair Freeland, Michigan 48623 5711 Summerset Drive Midland, Michigan 48640 Stewart H. Freeman Assistant Attorney General State of Michigan Environmental Protection Division 720 Law Building Lansing, Michigan 48913 Mr. Wendell Marshall Route 10 Midland, Michigan 48640 Mr. Steve Gadler 2120 Carter Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55108
Mr. J. W. Cook.
^
cc:
Commander, Naval Surface Weapons Center l
ATIN:
P. C. Huang White Oak Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 Mr. L. J. Auge, Manager Facility Design Engineering Energy Technology Engineering Center P.O. Box 1449 Canoga Park, California 91304 Mr. William Lawhead' U.S. Corps of Engineers NCEED - T 7th Floor 477 Michigan Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226 Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.
Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Mr. Ralph S. Decker Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Dr. Frederick P. Cowan Apt. B-125 6125 N. Verde Trail Boca Raton, Florida 33433 l
l l
l
LGicV5sureT ~
LIST OF ATTENDEES MEETING WITH CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY ON SEISMOLOGICAL INPUT 155UE5 JUNE 30, 1981 AT BETHESDA, MD.
Consumers Power Company J. W. Cook N. Ramanujam W. Cloutier D. M. Budzik T. R. Thiruvengadam Consultants to Consumers Power Company R. Holt
- Weston Geophysical Corporation Z. Cybriwsky
- Weston Geophysical Corporation E. P. Levine
- Weston Geophysical Corporation P. Shunmugavel
- Bechtel Power Ccrporation E. Kausel
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology E. Samaras
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology E. Vanmarcke
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology R. P. Kennedy
- Structural Mechanics Associates J. D. Stevenson
- Structural Mechanics Associates NRC Staff E. G. Adensam J. D. Kane G. Bagchi J. K. Kimball R. J. Bosnak J. P. Knight E. M. Brown A. J. Lee A. J. Cappechi, Jr.
P. H. Leech F. C. Cherny H. A. Levin N. C. Chokshi D. D. Reiff G. V. Giese-Koch L. Reiter L. W. Heller F. Rinaldi A. K. Ibrahim R. L. Tedesco R. E. Jackson J. Thessin D. C. Jeng
- 0. Thompson Consultants to NRC Staff P. F. Hadala
- U.S. Army Engineers (Vicksburg)
H. N. Singh
- U.S. Arny Fngineers (Detroit)
6 O
O g
' Enclosure 2 4
e9 9
ENCLOSURE 2 SOIL PROFILE AUD PROPERTIES OF NATURAL AND FILL MATERIALS i
e e
. L I
l y
COMDINATION SHOP y,o3 EVAPOnATOR BUILDING
(
COOLING
, TOWER 4
'O OILY WAST' O
S' " ^ 5 '
EATMENT TANK FARM AREA HYDROGEN RADWASTE l
TANKS BUILDING -
AUXILIARY BUILDING
^
\\
/-
0 s
som I_I UNIT 1 l
}
UNIT 2 f
CONTAINMT.
NTAINMI 0
1 i
ADMIN. AND SERVICE BUILDING TURBINE BUILDING hl SERVICE WATEd\\
PUMPSTat CTURE DIGID DiESEt O lGl0 GENERATOR GUARD I BUILDING HOUSE CIRCUL.
WATER INTAKE STRUCTURE 35200 CONDENSATE COOLING POND STORAGES TANKS DIESEL GENERATOR FVEL Olt STORAGE TANKS ~
_ sum
,o I
i il I
i i
tiIit i
i i i i rrw O A \\
l E
j k
u w
w w
FIGURE 1
(O Site Plan OA_o
,oo.
1!
00 4CALE IN FEET
~-
-e
~
SEAR UAVE (S) VELCC1"I OF UATURAL MATERIALS (WESTON GEOFFISICAL DATA)
Ori5 im C3 reun
.EL6o3m % -
__ sur{am (oc,5) Ela GoS Q EL553 23cofhfSec Vs :
90 Fed EL 465, _
m 2co Feth C L165
<v_
py scooit[sec (R*c k) vs :
FiGt. 2.1
, - - ~
- - - - - - ~ ' ' - '
' ' ' ~
SITAR ST2E':CTH (C) FROPERI"I 0F IIATURAL :!ATERIALS (DA!TS & :?00RE DATA) st sos,p
- w C,rou.nd Sur{ ace (octs) Ele, G o '$
O rihi na{
y
,~
//
~
c 4 Ks{
( T ILt. )
/
Et ess s/
6 Ksh (T ii-L )
c:
E<.,
h
_.4<>,
/
1
//7 EL 365
~
_~
m
'3 R.a:a5/.
' ')
(tense s and.)
l EL 7 65 g4j-
~
(R.OCK.)
(F lC : 3]
3
30E NILE AIID PROPERTIES OF IIATEML :MTEPM I' b"D C ri ksimhk C, r o u n d.
Sur$atg g}g gag g {og )
p%p v = ase felsee c:4tst 4 :'i2 p.f (,,ce)
M' 595 s
, /V s.esetelse, c 6 mst 4, m ret o<.<3 7/
s 553 Y t
(I'L' C i O Ks-t ID b
-t
[
MS : 1300 fk Sec
/
4t.5
_.7/
/
C; & K5h dt:136 PCf k l )
/
Ng: 3eco {t se c,
/
/2 563 v : seee fe s,c na: e,s7 4.
ss pq s
2 ' :'. '. '.
- b. s e saa)
EL 2 kb
/*/f
- / fp "5 : 5=a f els.c s
9 5 pe,r (Kac')
t (n cv.9)
I L
n cOuaiNATiON SuOr C.
p g3 EVAPORATOR I
BUILDING
(
COOLING Oo' TOWE 4
C;( ! 9.1 t,
2 OILY WASTE STORAGE &
p TREATME VT Uk U Vs TANK FARM AREA /
~
'CII 7, E,9 HYDROGEN RADWASTE l
TANKS BUILDING.
AUXILIARY BUILDING
^
^
y Q
g I,I
)
UNIT 2 l UNIT 1
(
NTAINM,T.
CONTAINMI
\\
0 1
1 ADMIN. AND SERVICE BUILDING TURBINE BUILDING
[
l SERVICE WATER t
PUMPSTf3 OTURE I
ulalo si DIESEL alsala CII 13,14,15' ' GENERATOR GUARD I BUILDING @-
CIRCUL.
HOUSE CH 16'17'18 WAT R INTAKE STRI.,WRE ss2co CH 19A,20,21 9 CONDENSATE COOLING POND STORAGE TANKS DIESEL GENERATOR FVEL OIL STORAGE TANKS ~
f I
i ill ili i
l'i i
i i t ITN m
A \\
'~
n w
w, wt w
i LEGEND:
FIGURE E
G CROSS HOLE SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY TESTS g[gg p[gn 0
$_0 100 1% 200 SCALE IN F EET
. m
)
b S
C I
(F
)x xa 81
)
7 c
1 es
/
0 6
t 0
1 f
5
(
1
!tC s
V se l
Y o
T f
I I
e X
l r
l o
E B
V 00 E
0
,1 8
8 V
1 A
L AU 51 R
A E
[
S l*
l 4
3 0
1 0
5 i
r C
se lo I
I ero B
0 I
,0
'0
'0
'o 3
2 3
i l
a-3 3
3 3
l 2
1 0
9 E (q 6
6 6
5
3 0-05 2
00 02
)c 2
e 1
s
/ 0 i
t 0
f 5
s1
(
1 e1 l
s o,
V 0
I I
1 e-l Y
rl T
oC I
B Co LE 0
V 0
yf lt i
0 s
E 1
4 VAW RAE 1S O
0 g Ni 12 05 lf s0 s&
e2 e
l l7 a,
o A
I I
9 6
e1 e -
r-r1 1
ol oC i
BC B
'o
'0
'0
'0 o
1 2
3 i
l 3
3 3
3 3
l 3 2
1 0
9 E6 6
6 6
5
~
CASE-A cnracle Ele ros4 gi.
//
3 c, Ib F o u.'rs cl a k i o n, E le.. G 2 6 7 io j
J s120 pc{
Vg soo Io G5o {t/gge
- c. ion pg t
p g,
'///
vs: eso to eso felsee c:soo psj A no pq
.i
,,3 vs - eso it 'see c :. 4 k sy Je: is o pc{
(witu) ~N '
- 7/
vs. eso felsc c: e x4 A izo eq wo
/$
sss Vg
,s.es_ge;,,,
c.e a
- 4. iss to
/
c.~
4
. y
- c. e m A = ies s
,,.s_
. se,
/
nico
/
/A ss, i%sfck Mg: 30o0 jt RA: 8 5 '/.
t:
( m mse s a ma.)
FtCm 7 2Gs i N,,
si ss=see iels.c o,o 99 go c o
e 9
DG-29h DG-28 DG-32 M-31 b
h DG-30 DG-18 DG-19 DG-14 DG-2oO pa_9 h
M-8 Q
va_21 DGe 000 2'l DG-10 DG-23 0
DG-22
'O
~15 DG'2k DG-26 DG-17 DG-12 DG-16 DG-DG-1-
-H
= l S O' DG-1 H
PA DG-2 DG-3 O
Q NORTH DG-5
~k DG-6 E
O DG-25 DIESEL GENERATOR DUILDIIG AREA I-
- b
( NOT TO SCALE )
GraMc C A $ & - Ib ( From ber_in k N:s. 3 C3-9, tc,-ib,2 c,-iq
~
4 3 c,-S Q f Ele. 434 eke 618 7
/,
6 F m a
ow El. G18
/
9 5 : S ee to 450itfsec c: too pt{
k: 120 pc{
(FiLQ 5,3 n.
9s: 65 to aso w s.,
za.: soy. 6, i2. p:S u.a.a.,$,e.,4) vs: 65o it/see c:4us{
4e : i2o pc{ hi'O
-- Q ' ' 596
[
<st 4 :i2a Pcf h i' o c: 6 ss eso te so.
Z sss E/
.a s...,s rct o. o 5=eso,w,,,
4CoS V s,. so 4 9s.,
me<st
- 4. ee s o <o E: Mf soco{t Ed : 85 /.
t V$:
3ec
. ).::.
(ye n se. sa-O F i C1. 6 A
~-
~
Eg qq3 ikd lik n Ys : SooO f t~ 's t C d: li6 f'
( RO C k. )
t m
C AS E - C ( prem bor;(Mai.3c,-te,.Sc,2o,3c,2-ona ut,-s2)
({af3
~"
"-n d ak ;e w Ele 62 e> 7 3 C' o 5
EL4ta so ie(see RL - ss y Je s sic Pc{ (. Loose s anO
.: :l
,5 - G oo to
((/
to eso itlsec c - soo psj
/t.isope{(sici.)
vs: (.s o
/<~
CI k i
DINO f' Iu)
Y$ ; 660 f
$4C V
V,/
-q s
.. r4 ai<o es,gs.,
e
/
553
/
- c. e s1 s
.ss e.,
e.<o
,,. e so,,. s.,
/
s.,oco4ejs.,
< =. <
4.., n mi o sss
.l.
ys-sooofe/s.c R1 e 5 /-
J : '" P'f t
- c., ::.-
(2 ms saa )
G F\\Cn*.bl'>
su ass
- w a:a d: l 6 C
$
- 50o0 f t $4C t
(gggg
C A S E - 3 (From hog ner soy, %. 2, h -g, a c, 4
"" E V C, - 4 5 and. S c3.t ( }
EL 416 [///
3 C7 6 Pouwd.ahiew Ela G7.6 O c: ico pi{
4es do pe{ (FILL)
Vs : Soo to 45o f t set 8 5 '/.(memse so,o
{
} EL 595 4: 135 Pc Ns - EbSo f t Sec RcL:
t et Ss3 I : llo f tf
(.71LL}
KSf VS: 650 f t See c: (o t
EL553 V b
8 Mf gg-23co f t $ge C:
/
E L 4(43
/7 6 Mh
[
Scoofb See 6 b
)
Ct yg-E L $ fo%
vg : Scoo fk Sec ES/*
D*i SP
( u-s sas)
.-l.-
F \\ C, b t.
EL tr 3 e
our ms NS: 6CCC fDgg
]g. 3 4 g {ae, (Regg}
-+
n+u as.
a 4
~.m m.
,w 1
THE PURPOSE OF THIS PRESENTATION IS TO SUGGEST A DRAFT j
CRITERIA BY WHICH MIDLAND NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SEISMIC CATAGORY I STRUCIURES AND COMPONENTS NECESSARY FOR SAFE SHUTDOWN OF THE f
)
REACIOR CAN BE EVALUATED TO DETERMINE SEI.9MIC SAFETY MARGINS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SITE SPECIFIC EARTHQUAKE DEFINED FOR THE MIDIAND SITE.
e i
1
SEISMIC MARGIN REVIEW A.
STRUCTWES TO BE EVALUATED (a) CONTAIWENT STRUCTLRE (b) CONTAIWENT INTERNAL STRUCTURE (c) AUXILIARY BUILDING-CONTROL TOWER (d) SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE (e) BORATED WATER STORAGE TANK (f) DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING B.
MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS TO BE EVALUATED (a) PIPING SYSTEMS - 3 to 4 (b) TANKS AND HEAT EXCHANGERS - 3 TO 4 (0) VERTICAL PLNPS - 2 (d) MOTOR OPERATED VALVES - 310 4 (e) ELECTRICAL PANEL B0fRDS - 2 TO 3 (f) ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT RACKS - 2 TO 3 (g) ELECTRICAL CABINETS - 2 TO 3 (h) HVAC COMPONENTS - 2 (i) HVAC DUCT - 2 (j) CABLE TRAYS AND CONDUIT - 3 TO 4 EVALUATION OF COMPONENTS WILL INCLUDE CONSIDERATION OF ACTIVE PS WELL AS PASS 7.VE MODES OF FAILURE.
l l
LOAD COMBINATIONS LOAD COMBINATIONS TE SEISMIC MARGIN REVIEW SHALL BE CONDUCTED FOR THE FOLLOWING LOAD COH3INATION:
1 U = 1.00 + 1.0L + kEsm WFBIE:
U = LIMITING LOAD ON THE STRUCTW E OR COMPONENT D = DEAD LOAD L = OPERATING LIVE LOAD DURING NORMAL OPERATION PLUS ANY LIVE LOAD OCCWRING AS A DIRECT RESULT OF EARTHQUAKE LOADING E
= SAFETY MARGIN EARTHQUAKE LOAD sm E33 k = COEFFICIENT AS A FUNCTION OF DUCTILITY LEVEL
[3] THE SELECTION OF THE COEFFICIFNT OF k = 0.8 ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE STRUCTURE OR COMPONENT CAN WITHSTAr0 A LIMITING DUCTILITY /J. = 1.3.
FROM REFERENCE 3 THIS RESULTS IN A REDUCTION OF SEISMIC ACCELERATION ItOUCED RESPONSE OF 1/)4.= 1/1.3 = 0.77 FOR STRUCTURES OR COMPONENTS HAVING DOMINATE FREQUENCIES BELOW 2 Hz AND 1/ 72/4 - l' = 1/ [2 x 1.3) - 1 = 0.79 FOR DOMINATE FREQUENCIES IN T K 2-8 Hz RANGE.
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FOR PASSIVE COMPONENTS (STRUCTWAL Ato LEAK TIGHT INTEGRITY ONLY)
TOTAL STRESSES RESULTING FROM THE LOADING, U, SHALL BE LIMITED AS DEFINED IN THE MIDLAPD FSAR EXCEPT AS,FOLLOWS:
(a) A SEISMIC COEFFICIENT OF k = 0.8 MAY BE USED,FOR THE COMPONENT OF LOAD, Eg, EXCEPT FOR TON-DUCTILE Ato BUCKLING FAILURE MODES WHERE A COEFFICIENT k = 1.0 SHALL BE USED. ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, A DUCTILITY > 1.3 MAY BE USED. THEREFORE, THE VALUE k (. 0.8 DETERMINED AS SHOWN IN REFERENCE 3.MAY BE USED.
j (b) ACiUAL MEASWED OR SAMPLED MEAN MATERIA' PROPERTIES MAY-BE USED RATHER THAN SPECIFIED MINIMLN YIELD OR CRUSHING STRENGTH.
a (c) CURRENT ASME/ACI CODE LIMITS MAY BE USED PROVIDED MATERIAL SELECTION AND FABRICATION REJJIREMENTS ARE COMPARABLE TO CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS.
FOR ACTIVE COMPONENTS (MUST OPERATE OR CHANGE STATE), TOTAL STRESSES RESULTING FROM THE LOADING, U, SHALL BE LIMITED TG NORMAL CODE ALLOWABLE PLUS 20 PERCENT, BUT IN to CASE SHALL EXCEED 0.8 TIMES YIELD l
OR TIE ONSET OF NON-LINEAR BEHAVIOR.
4 i
e
TABLE 2 Damping Values - Percent Critical to
}Used in the Seismic Margins Review for Passive Components Structure or Component Percent Critical Dampig Large diameter piping systems 4.0(1)
Pipe diameter 12 in.
Small diameter piping systems 3.0U)
Pipe d'ameter 12 in.
Welded Steel Structures 4.0(3)
Bolted Steel Structures 7.0(3)
Welded Steel Components (2) 4,0 Bolted Steel Components (2) 7.0 Reinforced Concrete Structures 7.0(3)
Prestressed Concrete Structures 5.0(3)
(1) These values are based on test performec' by Westingnouse Electric Co.(6, 7)
(2) These damping values are consistent with damping values defined fgr welded and bolted structures and by review of existing test data.t8)
(3) R.G.1.6108E damping levels shall be used as structural damping in generation of floor response spectra where total calculated stresses in the structure for the SME do not exceed 1/2 yield.
(4) Damping values used in evaluation of active components shall be reduced in the sanie proportion of CBE to SSE damping values as defined in Table 1 of R.G.l.61.
~
All Seismic Categsry I Structural Elements Required for Safe Shutdown Do In-Structure Shear & Moment Diagrams Developed For the SHE Exceed Those N
No Further
' Evaluation of oftheSSE(gyaFactor Structural of > 1.25 J in the FresuencyRange Elements Effected of is Required i
Interest i
,Yes Scale up by the Ratio of SME to SSE Shear and Moment Diagrams the Calculated Stresses Determined from SSE Loading Do Resultant Calculate Seismic Stresses Exceed No Acceptance Margins for Limits Defined Structural elements in this Effected l
Criteria Yes Identify Structural Elements Requiring Additional Analysis III See footnote 3 to Section 41 for development of 1.25 coefficient as reciprocal of 0.8.
Figure 1 - Screening Process to Select Structural Elements for Seismic Safety Margin Evaluation v
AllSeismicCateg2ryICompon$nts
~
/
and Distribution Systems Required for Safe Shutdtwn 3
Do the Applicable
'No Further Floor Response Evaluation of Spectra Generated for Components or Dist.
SME Exceed those of the No Systems at that ESEbyaFactorof11.25 Floor ::kvation within the Frequency is Requirad Range of Interest Yes Select Sample of Components which Tend to Be Sensitive to Seismic Loadinq_
. I sede, up by the Ratio SME to SSE Floor Spectral Values in the Frequency Range of Interest the Calculated Input Seismic Motion and Stress or Deformation Resultants from SSE loadina Do Input Seismic Motion or Stress or Deformation No Calculate seismic Resultants Exceed Margins for Componen Acceptance Limits and Distribution Defined in Systems Effected this Criteri Yes J
Identify Components & Distribution Systems Requiring Additional Analysis t
Expand Sample of Like. Component or Distribution Systems based on Those Requiring Additional Analysis See footnote 3 to Section 4.1 for development of 1.25 coefficient as reciprocal of 0.8.
Figure 2 - Screening Process to Select Components and Distribution Systems for Seismic Safety Margin Evaluation
SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTICN A SIMPLIFIED APPROACH INVOLVING A LtNPED PARAMETER MODEL SHALL BE USED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
(a) TWO CONTROL FREE FIELD SITE DEPENDENT GROUto RESPONSE MOTIONS ARE DEFINED AT THE TOP OF NEW FILL APO AT ORIGINAL mADE LEVEL (TOP OF TILL). FOR BUILDINGS FOUrOED BELOW THE ORIGINAL GROUND LEVEL, THE ORIGINAL TOP OF TILL SPECTRA SHALL BE USED AS INPUT AT THE STRUCTLRE FOUNDATION LEVEL. FOR BUILDINGS FOUNDED IN THE FILL, AN ENVELOPE OF THE TOP OF FILL Ato TOP OF TILL SITE SPECIFIC SPECTRA SHALL BE INPUT AT THE BUILDING FOUNDATION LEVEL.
(b) SOIL STIFFNESS VARIABILITY SHALL BE BASED ON A BEST ESTIMATE OF SOIL PROPERTIES PLUS UNCERTAINTY BOUtOS (c) RADIATION AND MATERIAL ENERGY DISSIPATION (I.E. THE SDIL DAMPING VALUES) ARE ADDITIVE (d) DAMPING VALUES USED IN THE ANALYSIS SHALL BE DETERMINED AS FOLLOWS:
(1.)
MATERIAL SHALL BE TAKEN AS 5 PERCENT OF CRITICAL (ii.)
RADIATION-TRANSLATIONAL (HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL) TO BE TAK5N AS 75 PERCENT OF TFEORETICAL VALUEElJ (iii.)
RADIATION-ROTATION (ROCKING Ato TORSION) JQ BE TAKEN AT 100 PERCENT OF THEORETICAL VALUEL13 (iv.)
LOMPOSITE MODAL CAMPING VALUE IN EXCESS OF 10 PERCENT OF CRITICAL SHALL B5 M TIFIED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS IF USED.L2J
[1] AS CALCULATED BY GENERALLY ACCEPTED METHODS, (e.g. VIBRATION OF SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS, BY F.E. RICHART, J.R. HALL AND R.D. WOODS, PRENTICE-HALL INC., 1970
[2] FOR RIGID BODY MOTION NO CUT OFF IS DEFINED
}
MEETING
SUMMARY
DISTRIBUTION 4
Docket File
/330 OM, OL G. Lear fiRC/PDR S. Pawlicki Local PDR V. Benaroya TIC /NSIC/ TERA Z. Rosztoczy JUL 3 01981 LB#4 Rdg W. Haass H. Depton D. Muller E. Case R. Ballard D. Eisenhut W. Regan R. Purple R. Mattson B. J. Youngblood P. Check A. Schwencer R. Satterfield F. Miraglia
- 0. Parr
.* : l, c3N J. Miller
- f. Rosa
- //\\
f l, G. Lainas W. Butler R. Vollmer W. Kreger s' f E
' ~y F. Schauer L. Rubenstein 0.5 "..." 0 5 'tMp$r J. P. Knight R. Houston 2/
1 )
~R. Bosnak T. Murphy
-t
~
- l
//
R. E. Jackson T. Speis
' > S *-
Attorney, OELD W. Johnston
\\9f
/
M. Rushbrook J. Stolz
/.%
ff(.
ole (3)
- 5. Hanauer Co' n2 ACRS (16)
W. Gammill R. Tedesco T. Murley N. Hughes F. Schroeder D. Skovholt NRC
Participants:
M. Ernst C Butler R. Baer J. Shapaker C. Berlinger C. Tinkler K. Kniel J. Long G. Knighton K. Parczewski A. Thadani D. Hoatson D. Tondi S. Lewis J. Kramer E. Ketchen D. Vassallo P. Collins bcc: Applicant & Service List D. Ziemann R. Gamble E. Adensam R. Birkel D. Hood P. Leech J. Kane J. Kindall W. Paton l
M. Duncan l
-