ML20069A276
| ML20069A276 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Dresden |
| Issue date: | 11/12/1979 |
| From: | Newmark N NATHAN M. NEWMARK CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES |
| To: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20069A188 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-82-399, TASK-03-06, TASK-3-6, TASK-RR NUDOCS 7911150252 | |
| Download: ML20069A276 (2) | |
Text
..
s..,,.. a - 9
,.cu*a%g*wc e,no ls Ig.
3h i
e..
{}
HATHAN M.
NgWMARK CONSULT'NO sNotMesRIPoO seRysCRs 12f t CivfL ENGINEEmsNG autLOIPeG U8eSANA ILLANO'S 9180'
)
12 November 19/9 J.,
t Mr. Darrell Eisenhut, Actin Director Division of Operating Reesters
9 office of Nuclear Reacto1F RMistion M
t D. S..Nucleer Regulatory Cossaission
,Qy i
Washington, D. C. 20555
'i
.1 J
Dear Mr. Eiscahut:
.s
~..
,M.
Although our,SSRT. report ca Dresden 2 was virenally completed g
,recently, and ready for, final editing and reproduction, we have received f g$
g' word of,a revisid,,canyutatioKo.f the turbine building destga parameters
[YQ, made by the applicant's a===M ant John A. Blues Aseeciates.
1 t
This revisior has provided acaenti'of 'inie~his' and shear areas for the turbine building 9
{
ctructure.whimb are'insrsised bEseveral orders of magnitude over the corresIpondia'g'} slues ~origlaally" computed by the Blume or--h-tion and
[,['
~
S used la our present dr~ aft repott..
^ s y
When these increases are, taken into account, as appeart= ate g[
, cetimate of their effect" lands to change's in forces and stresses in the f
tadine building resctor'c'sa'#ai-ae building connection, and to moderately
- a
~
- { 1arge' changes!,ginaially; inc4 eases,'in the in-etruc ure or floor-response i
opectra for equipment.
M
- - ;=z,
Although our calculations'and studies in our report were I
int a only to give only approximata estimates for checking the capability of the facility..to,res.ist'the postulated earthquake environment,
/,
.it is'our feeling that our previous' estimates any be too inaccurate even f
'Tfor this' purpose.-
s
". ]v. .
~
W 5ence, two alternaEives exist with regard to issuing our report.
Q These are as follows:
<' Ar..
-A
, w...
~
wc.:
s
~
.}-
(1) We'amy, issue,sur rep; n.s. ort with suitable cavests, after some further minor sedit:4,s.al' studies and estimates and recommend that the d,
licensee revise the design studies,and report on the turbine building-($
~
reacter building junctice forces and stresses, and the floor response spectra, paying particular attention to the most recently determined physical g
parameters for the ' turbine building and to a proper 2 or 3-D model for the combined strucutres. Then we would be able to help you review the rpplicant's analysis by further checking before you give final approval.
I i
s
' c.
hkh 9,
e s.
~
a 7 911 I SL
~
p
~,,...
n - >
?
4 es I
- (2) We may choose to refine the model and the calculations under contracts between !!RC-DOR and either LLL or EDAC, to make somewhat more definitive estimates of the s51smic capability of the plant and equipment; but these will still be only approximate estimatas, yet somewhat more reliable than our current values. To do this will require at least 4 to 5 months of effort at a cost to NRC of possibly 75 t6 100 thousand dollars.
~
We shall then issue ohr report,' but we any ha've to face the possibility that i
~
the results might be uncertali enos h'~ thaf we ould have to ask the licensee s
w to make further analyses himself, 'and we shall probably have to review and check these.
,2 5
s 1
- The final decision as to which course of action to take must be made by NRC,~
We' era prepared to go ahead under either basis.
[
a
.'. sfrg ;.,%
.t 37 ctw < -r w
-..a
.c
.;m a
_.' This'1etter was discussed is a conference call with most of the
,1y 1
member.s of $$RT.
',c a qi
+
.9 p
3:
. c < Ji
~
Yery....truly yours,
<cd
+'
f
~
\\
W. M. Neuenck,
- lg ";x l
'6 :'? i 9
/Chairasa,SSRT c
s,My i
- dp
$[. s
.r np cc:
R. F. Kennedy l
J. D. Stevenson
)
F. J. Tokars
.g l
W.'J. Mall
- 4V8, D,"N[Crutchfield' ems..
t
' N.T A.fLevin' C.: Mofmayor S}q
-r
- gh l
,3
>f.,
g M 'b ^,.
P.S.
Each author of each chapter of the Dresden report is requested to send to N. M. Newnerk and W., J. Hall by 5 December 1979 the changes required in his chapter of the report as required by latest analysis from Tom Nelson in a letter dated 2 November. We should probably give ranges in numerical values rather than single values. We shall plan a meeting on 6 December or 19 December-either in Chicago or Urbana to review the report and to plan the
. future SEP programs.
4; s
a s
S t
}
g b.'
l 6
3 4
i m_.
_7 -W %g es._%"M
'