ML20040F638
| ML20040F638 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Limerick |
| Issue date: | 07/01/1970 |
| From: | Case E US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Morris P US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20040F238 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-81-385 NUDOCS 8202090448 | |
| Download: ML20040F638 (4) | |
Text
, N 44?
" *y [.f.%.
[
g % a -,{
.e.
,- en
,s y,
I, y.4
-8*-
ie
-t
- < r...~~n. x.-
x.
,u..
,...c 6*
y
- '. ^,. -. =
f r-y_
~~, _
~;'x
',,..,. y c- -;,
'-l.Q.
(?
y
- -:- ll '
' : ? G. ' }..,,lw~.,..
s,,,..
r...,..
.. :. 7 N
,y.
.A i
9, '
....L...*..
3.,..
s
'L.*
y'-~-',,.,
4 ' -c.
~..
s
-j L
L r * : '.'. fk: 1%ID.
i l- _
~
-E,_
j'4: ' ' * ' '..} :,
f*.,
~
..s.*
. ;v g
., x. * :,,';
'~-.
r v
- - k, g,. ' ;[.).. '.l.
s,.,-y y i
.' ',. t.7. g j'.
Y5
~
u
,' (-
g A-o -
~'
. &.....;*J j.~:,y.y:
~ :
- J.l ;'* 2.., -h.m %.
?
.) ;
. :. :. w...
... -; q.
g
.F,..,.. y ~., c...
. s,.......
,.w -.' m. ;....
.v, -
..,-~.. q,.i ;.
.nv
..e
- n. -.
.. e,..: r s.
. v.;.-
.a Feter A. Morris, Direetor Mf ; ;.W 't :!".Q'<%@d t.,. '@ F:./.M;,..;
.n.,..
..~ n * -
.,2
.o,;-
,.s...,.-
r
."-T'- 7 I
s
' ' @? % ~
b:'
?[ )
' Division of Reactor Licensing 1., .'i ~ :." N
- f
^.
w ~.
.s.. " :. -.. :
v-
_a
.. ;,.4.
j. - -
- q.....;.,g.. -., AND. 2,.m.i.'1.'.O ?.M ' '.',.
T p
LIMERICK GENERATING STATION IEITS NO. T:
'O
@Y
~, ' ;-': -. C: ~ =..
.d. DOCKET NOS. r. W AWD 50-353-T~.. +
~ c.
^d 50 -
- ..~
- q. v: -
/
, 'l u-
- +,.-.,..... " -
- .g
.~
Adequate responses to the enclosed ;11st.cf questions, prepared by thej7.,
DRS Mechanical Engineering B_ ranch, will be ; required before we can , s.
$t complete our review of the subject application. These questions M
concern the material presented in Sections 2 and Appendix A and B of 1
FSAR covering seismic input design criteria for structures, systems, y
4Pj and components.
Y
.a.;:
The DRS seismic consultant, Newmark and Hall, have not completed their 7.!
initial review. Their requests for additional information vill be 9
- t...
submitted in a separate transmittal.
9,s i-
- L N,. *.:*-
k
- .},*[
3-
--., u.5 ;, -., '
.g,-
?q :.< - -
.r
.~......
~
.m-
..,,j - F
.... Original;, signed.'by..... - :. '?...~ ~ r.'
t
.. ~ -
J
, ' ~ ~
'd,.
- ,,,..p.'
..n
~
- E. C. Case.
4
~
n Edson G. Case, Director P.
Division of Reactor Standards
-)-%
Enclosure:
p Pm List of Questions fg i
e M
c t
l cc w/ encl:
f3 R. Boyd, DEL R. DeToung,'. DEL R. Maccary, DRS
~
~
,W D. Knuth, DRL gr l
A. Droserick, DRS
- 0 G. Lear, DEL l~.
D. Lange, DRS.
^
bec:
E. G. Case f)
~
Dis tribution:
'(
GE h-Suppl. Docket File 50-352 & 353
- s..
DR RF a
.DRSgMEB DRS:SEB
,g
/E D'RSE IR pygf g
omet >
c y' #.
vvw.
- Matcary,
- Cade
,3,
- me,
La..n..ge': eve
.e p.,
T M-om*
..6-30-70.
.f-30.-.70...
. 7.l -70..
7
p ---70..
rorm Arc. ass mn.S-ss>
u.s. soc =om= w oma am-o.m..sw M
R202090448 811019
- Iy#
~
T
_Ji acer a
Q,
..,~
_ [f '
. 'V.~'
i.i*
6.
. - - _q
<.~.-
p'
- p.,, ;- g -
4 4_.~
- -. ~,
- z..
.q..
g 3
..t t
r.
g
.y a
p:. ;
. 1 r --
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQ EST..,. -
- dy;.V '
qY
<t
- .- ~
13
?>
l....=,.
... T
^.
,:4.
n.
.:. w...
x x-7.
LIMERICK CENERATING STATION UNITS 'NO. ; 1 ' AND 2 Y.,. ;'.#;.,. '.'.
j,.
- w,-
,a 9 T,.w(..y,. -
- v 1-
.DOGEET NOS. 50-352/502353J.
f.1 l
.e 1-r * >.<-.
v
- 4-x. w.,,;
. : -:.:,.n. g;.,.
ifs g.r y,"
- A:
M
~ ; -, ;,. *
..",.8.h,... g..
,p.- 7 $ ts
- T-y
- r
.=.y.y z -,-
a. ;e s.
7'
' [-
..... P "#, R.';7< ;af - wr',,, 6' -T 249tF '
A?
A.
Structures, Systems and Components
~.1. !
.~....
'im T -
^.
1.
.- s- ;.-
..s
~w... -.....'
J.
,.1. ' The proposed TID seianic'-design spectira produce a p'eak amplification J-T h
<;f,f '" :.,; L q.
l
- ::.p-?.;
q-
- - :a..-..
factor of approximately'2.2 ?for-27. damping., Nistorie seismic : records.
-p; 3:.j.
.,,,., ~g :g
)..
x
- . '.,. c.,
- ( :..
r,,
have resulted in. amplification factors in.the range of 2.5 to 4.5.'
.h 3
4~
- n Provide seismic design spectra for the site which includelsore '
_L, x
appropriate amplification factors, and include the effects on the p+
N:p.
predominant period range which define acceptable seismic design
- 2..
spectra considering distance between the seismic disturbance and the 2:
^2 ;
,A e
0;
~*
site.
. ' ~ ~ ~ ' '
~
.. % ;!d ' ll. ~ <.
', 2 ; ., ?l c'u
~-
, -.'.) :i' L
g:p -
- 2.,...@:'..,
~
-a
.2.
Specify the criteria *vbich will be used in the determinationMf the h
3 e
~
s time history (ies) associated with the seismic design spectra of the de
^{
..s -
site, and describe the time histories utilized and the enve' loping' y,
=zg technique employed.
g ng 3.
Provide the bases for the -selection of and conservatism in damping
,z
,g h
~
M factors, and relate these factors to the associated construction
.p.
t.
code allowable design stress limits which will be used.in designing M
~
structures, systems, and components for the Design Bases Earthquake
~
=-
(DBE).
. ~.
- 4. - Equipment spectra response curves for various locations within the building structures are not directly'. obtainable from the proposa,d c.
modal response multi-mass neismic system method.of en=17 sis.' liovide p_'
^y..e..
)
3 gf
. ~:
7, y
g
ynwww:1 -
, :.G.r...z. m,,w
.1 v.:.w -*
s.,.
~?
a:
..,,.w...-
y O
- m. -
_p;x <
qn \\
M_
d n
f.'
M
.~
-, nc ~
~
Q l,
.. 9.,: ~
n,n y s
?.
~-
i:
. ~.2. -
2 -,.% y, p :s ~'
w-m -,_ -
v
. 3...
- w p
. %.v c
.' g a
.y
~.;
1 the basis for and the conservatism.in the.use of this method,'either...'
p
+:'.--..'.
l
. ay.s. '
.c
. I by demonstrating equivalency to a multi-nass tim'e history method,.~..it i, j I
- 1
.. ? -~.
1
..J s.
~
'.v..
...v
-. l or by submitting' other theoretical or experi, mental justification?.;,..
~g
~~
a
... ~.
..,.,... ~
. a...
.v..
gh
-, \\
w.
j
$., J ' '
~-
w
.~
g
~.c The proposed ~~ static.se.smic design analysis for Cla.ss I seismic 1~
~
d n ~
5.
. G.
e 4
w c w ^....,7.,
y.
structures mainly or entirely belou site grade mayL.not always-be '..,.
b m.
- '....3:~9 y.v.'.
-i ? T.'
-yy 7-
~
-r. p ff.g;'.
f.
, Justify ;the;use of this method ~by demon-sufficiently conservative..
-..., w.
4,:,
u M
strating equivalency to a multi-mass dynamic met. hod of design,O'~,' :,g.
m&
analysis.
- O
'I,~
- j..- ], - l
~'7"_.y...
i 2' 0 f65 Q-C%
g,'
The use of the static loads equivalenti to the peak of the floor' N.
6.
spectrum curve in the seis=ic design of piping may not alvasys be
%m sufficiently conservative. Provide justification that the use of g
wr
-w, this peak of the spectrum curve includes the. contribution of,all.
${
h
[..
- ' " '; -s. K.._ --
'.~. J ' s : b 27
~
significant piping dynamic' modes of respohs'e'under. seismic -' '
4
,+,-
,. _os C
M excitation.
+h*
r
- n..
The classification of all piping having frequencies greater thanb.-
4 7.
ty under seismic excitation, as appropriate for design as rigid g}y 20 h:
g4 systems, may not provide sufficient conservatism in some cases.
m 2.:
Provide the basis -for the selection of 20 bz value by demonstrating 50 that the earthquakes specified for the site and building response characteristics either filter or preclude higher frequencies.
List all Seismic Class I structures, syste=s, and components'and 8.
the associated method of seisnic annlysis or ewpirical (tests)
N d
methods applied in the design of 'the respective structures, systems,.
-.. ~.
~-
and components,. including applicabl'e design; stress, and strain '.
~
j
~
,i
-~
_ criteria which will be used. ',. ~
-1 2
v.
~.
8
,.y 2
,s 4
gl L. *. y *A,'l.
. s}-
l l
~
- ,.
- % ~ -..
+
.)-
_ k
- i Y,..l.
m*
1
- sb
~
~. 'v. ~
a.
j,;;. m.
c.
,.L. \\ y.,,
~ ~ -.. -
p'.
~..,
~ ' #,
. 3 x....
=**** hm s
a 4
Y.. -
- ..g s ss., 2
...]
y ' 4' s r.
~.
,n
..~;.
., %.;. *V:...;.s.,,.;~ - ~.**;..
e
..,. ~.
..~.'
2 m
.f:
- t r.
w* w v.s.
3,
..z,....
m
.y.-
, J.,.
(..,
},',h.Q:..,.
- 3. y -
,,~'a.
i. e g' s...-.,O g.^
-..... '...o j'\\.,
4.
s,
+
-r
~,.a.,
=
s
-s,..,,,,f
..L'
..t.
r p
s.
r,...
4
, p..,*.k g
.c
..r.
-..w v-
- m...
S.-. 8.
s i
.c g
s g-
-%.a.a.. J.y..',..;y,C. -
s..
q-a v,
j c-
.3. ; Reactor Vessel Internals-.w'.v.5 4...-~
+
..m
.R
~e...
- e m,:u.,. m. p y...y _~.--
~,m.s..;.
.~.
- +.<
. ~
[li. With respect to the reactorp; essel-internals /-s' static design adlysis # '- ~
' <.. *. :.1 m. - :. Q.., - * ~ ' r. - -
.=
...w-,,. -
- s....,_ ~.g 2.;.
is proposed which,may not.be.sufficiently conservativeQ..h.?.
?
. Justify the g:p', M,
.s y
-.m
-r..
, e... --....
-.... M y -
..s:.
,._.~.+..y..
..g;-:
- m.. p'
. use of this, method by de,monstrating equivalency.to a multiMass dynamic. ',
- .~y
- 3. e 3;. ;...,y._p.
. a
- 3. -
n g.
- xs
- ~
~
~
~
method of design analyses.or other experimental data.whichiconsiders..'?,..
(.
).
. n
~-the following individualfdy'n==ic response's[.M4 e,..
<>,:.yy[f.,'s a.; ~..*..
..:. : -~; r.: w M. Y.
. -c. ?
N. w~
b YiG
. ~Y.;^
'N,,i
. e... e
. w,g 7,-
y*+r. p 4,1-y.
.,,...c..
....,.=,.<n..u..
.y
/
w., b.
a. [. r,-
- a. ' Seismic loadtngs of Abe Vesign,3 asis Earthquake ;(equivalency;.'.i
.s s
~
7
~
.f i
~
- 1 to lg static load),
l
- b. Blowdown hydrodynamic forces under postulated loss-of -coolant
^
f accident conditions, j
t i
. '[
4.
...,. 'e,Ijading. combination.of the Design Basis Earthquake-and[ loss-of-2
{
"*[..
- s r,....,.r. w;..,.,... x..
.,v 3-
.a
- '. ~.
coolanc accident conditions.
'. : ^ -
w s
- d. Vibratory excitations induced under'nousal reactor operating -
- f.
y.*
conditions.
a i
l
(
'1 s r
l 7
~
1 i
l
- a.
[
I
.~
j
~
.- ?.
. rs s
V, a
g,, '.-
..s~
s..
,2.s
- o
.? T
~
j..
.f.
z.
n
- ~
]
,. *;1.:
g. y. s.'..
-.. L:,..
x
- ,.- ~
,.,'y q..,..
.r.~~.
s.
-.s u.
-x-m
.a
.s-y
- n.. 2.., -
- *. ' *. < ~
-[c. 2
~. d.
a...
p.,=
e
. ;f,, -
y%
.2*
~
i.,
..
- r ' '. * *. * * ~ '
e
. >.*Q
-e..-,.s.%,
N..
- (.,,...,;.,
p' e,
.;; y %
.g'or.f.'
..s.
..g;...-
e
-. -.,. ~,
.