ML20041E892
| ML20041E892 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 03/04/1982 |
| From: | Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Clayton F ALABAMA POWER CO. |
| References | |
| IEB-80-11, TAC-42861, TAC-43966, NUDOCS 8203150227 | |
| Download: ML20041E892 (5) | |
Text
.
I f
DISTRIBUTION I
Docket File k l
l NRC PDR l
MAR 4 1982 Local PDR ORB 1 File D. Eisenhut Docket Nos. 50-348 OELD
[%
4 and 50-364 I&E (1) g E. Reeves t
C. Parrish
,gl 2.
ug Mr. F. L. Clayton NSIC 4
Senior Vice President ACRS (10) 7!
"91 1982>
Alabama Power Company C. Trammell Mc-a m: tv /
Ly^ F Q
p4 l
Post Office Box 2641 FRC f
%m,' I Y..r.'lA '
Birmingham, Alabhma 35291 I
Dear Mr. Clayton:
SUBJECT:
IE BULLETIt! 80-11 MASONRY. WALLS JOSEPH H. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLAllT UNITS 1 AND 2 r
{
We are reviewing your responses to Inspection and Enforcement Bulletin 80-11.
[
We need additional infomation to complete our review.
Please provide the l
requested infomation shown in the enclosure within 45 days of receipt of i
this letter.
l t
OMB clearance is not required for this request since it is being sent to nine or fewer addresses.
t l
Sincerely, l
5/
L i
Steven A. Varga, Chief l
Operating Reactors Branch No.1 Division of Licensing j
l
Enclosure:
r As stated i
t cc: See next page I
i OR
\\
-OR J.1.
ORB 1 9
i Qr mmell(
omer >
m....<
ERee rs arg
.g.g.....
......j..
... j......
sunume)....................k...j.......
m6 8203150227 B20304 bFFICIAL RECORD COPY j NRc PDR ADOCK 05000348 usam mi-mm G
PDR..
Mr. F. L. Clayton, Jr.
Alabama Power Company h
cc: Mr. W. O. Whitt Executive Vice President Alabama Power Company Post Office Box 2641 Birmingham, Alabana 35291 Ruble A. Thomas, Vice President Southern Company Services, Inc.
Post Office Box 2625 Birmingham, Alabama 35202 George F. Trowbridge, Esquire Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N.W.
0 Washington, D. C.
20036
)
Robert A. Buettner, Esquire l
Balch, Binghan, Baker, Hawthorne, Williams and Ward Post Office Box 306 l
Birmingham, Alabama 35201 George S. Houston Memorial Library 212 W. Burdeshaw Street Dothan, Alabama 36303 Resident Inspector l
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
Post Office Box 24-Route 2 Columbia, Alabana 36319 i
Mr. R. P. Mcdonald Vice President - Nuclear Generation Alabama Power Company P.O. Box 2641 Birmingham, Alabama 35291 l
James P. O'Reilly Regional Administrator - Region II
}
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street, suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303
I
~
ENCLOSURE REQUEST FOR INFORMATION I
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING BRANCH JOSEPH M..FARLEY UNIT 1 AND 2 IE BULLETIN 80-11 MASONRY WALLS Based on the Licensee's submittals (2, 3], a technical review was
)
conducted. Before a final technical evaluation report can be issued, the Licensee is requested to provide the following information:
1.
In both Units 1 and 2, there were a number of safety-related walls which were identified as knockout walls which, as indicated in References 2 and 3, have safety-related equipment in the proximity and are supported on that side by structural steel plates designed to protect the equipment during a seismic event.
The opposite side of these walls requires no additional modifications.
Provide a brief description and detailed drawings of these steel plates and explain how these modifications will protect the equipment in the event of structural failure of the walls.
l 2.
The crawings of the floor plan and section views of typical concrete masonry walls in Appendix D of the submittals [2, 3] are not legible.
Provide a set of better drawings.
i 3.
In Section 4.3.1 of References 2 and 3, the Licensee indicated that the differential floor displacements present no problem to the concrete masonry walls.
Provide sample calculations to justify this position.
4.
For severe loading combinations, the SEB criteria [4] suggest factors of 1.5 and 1.3, respectively, for snear reinforcement and shear carried by masonry and factors of 1.5 and 1.3, respectively, for masonry tension parallel and perpendicular to the bed joint.
The Licensee used a factor of 1.67 for all of these cases.
Explain and justify use of a factor of 1.67.
5.
In Section 5.2.2 of Appendix B of References 2 and 3, for severe loading combinations, the Licensee introduced a factor of 1.67 for allowable bond stresses.
Explain and justify the use of this factor.
6.
With respect to damping, Nuclear Regulatory Guide 1.61 allows 4% for reinforced concrete subject to the operating basis earthquake. The l
Licensee should explain and justify the use of 7%.
l t
7.
With respect to equivalent moment of inertia in Section 7.1.1 of Appendix B of References 2 and 3, the Licensee stated, "For walls in which two-way spans are considered, consult with the chief civil engineer for analytical approaches." Explain this analytical j
approach.
t I
e nWin Raemth Cenkt i
A DMmen af The Fremen m
l l
.. 8.
In Appendix C of References 2 and 3, it was not clear how the higher modes of vibration were accounted for.
Explain and justify the 4
method used to account for the multi-mode effects.
9.
With regard to acceleration, for walls spanning between two floors, justify use of the average value of the two floors instead of the envelope for the two floors.
10.
Submit a summary of technical evaluation results (stress level) of the as-built walls and indicate moies of failure.
Also, explain how l
the modifications (both internal and external) will eliminate these modes of failure.
11.
Indicate whether the seismic motion in th'e vertical direction is accounted for.
12.
Explain how the loads from piping and/or equipment attached to the masonry walls are accounted for.
13.
Indicate whether the potential for ' block pullout was considered in the analysis.
i 14.
With respect to the load combinations, the Licensee's submittals [2, 3] did not provide any factor greater than 1.0 for components of the combinations.
Explain and justify this deviation from the plant's FS AR.
15.
It is the NRC's position that the energy balance technique and-l arching theory should not be used in the absence of conclusive evidence of their validity as applied to masonry structures. Based on the technical presentation of these technPraes [2, 3], the following areas still need extensive investigatior. before any conclusion can be made for both Units 1 and 2:
a.
Energy Balance Technique o How can the ductility ratio of the masonry walls at Farley Units 1 and 2 be determined?
o How can it be guaranteed that the brittle mode failure will not take place before the ductile failure?
o How can it be guaranteed that a failure mode other than flexural yielding will not take place first in the block wall?
How can the possible stiffness degradation effect be o
determined?
i i
i l
_nklin Rese_ arch._ Center l
- o The analytical procedure presented in the submittals was only for the one-way wall panel with simply-supported boundary conditions.
How can this procedure be applied to two-way action walls and different boundary conditions? Are. there any test results to validate the procedure?
b.
Arching Theory o In the event of cyclic load (earthquake), how does the arching theory handle this loading case?
o Are there any test data to validate this theory as applied to the masonry structures at Farley Units 1 and 27 o How can it be guaranteed that the wall boundary condition will be rigid enough for the theory to be valid?
o The submittals introduced only "one way" arching.
How can this theory be applied to "two way" action?
o When hinges are formed in the walls, the capability of the structure to resist in-plane shear force would be diminished, and shear failure might take place.
Also, this in-plane shear force would reduce the out-of-plane stiffness. How can this phenomenon be *ccurately determined?
REFERENCES t
1.
" Masonry Wall Design" NRC, May 8, 1980 2.
F. L. Clayton, Jr. (Alabama Power Company)
Letter with Enclosures to B. J. Youngblood (NRC)
May 12, 1981 3.
F. L. Clayton, Jr. (Alabama Power Company)
Letter with Enclosures to J. P. O'Reilly (NRC)
May 22, 1981 4.
Standard Review Plan, Section 3.8.4, Appendix A
" Interim Criteria for Safety-Related Masonry Wall Evaluation" NRC, July 1981 5.
Uniform Building Code International Conference of Building Officials,):.979 6.
ACI 531-79 and Commentary ACI 531-R-79
" Building Code Requirements for Concrete Masonry Structures" American Concrete Institute, 1979 00 Franklin Research Center A Dhemen of The Fransen m