ML20126M262
| ML20126M262 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 05/29/1981 |
| From: | DETROIT EDISON CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20126M255 | List: |
| References | |
| EF2-53332, NUDOCS 8106150324 | |
| Download: ML20126M262 (450) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:- Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Report No.: EF2-53332 Supplementary Seismic Evaluation Report Volume 1oN2
.a :
bY \ The Detroit Edison Company May 29, 1981 2 3/06/50329'
.O ABSTRACT In response to a March 12, 1981 request from the NRC staff, Detroit Edison evaluated seismic design margins of the Fermi 2 plant for seismic spectra greater than the design basis earthquake. This report presents the results of that evaluation, including the development of site-specific ground spectra, floor response spectra, identification and evaluation of essential equipment, and evaluation and over-view by an independent consultant. The results show that sufficient design margin exists to assure that systems necessary to achieve safe shutdown and cooldown will con-tinue to function following the postulated site-specific safe shutdown earthquake. O 11
1% TABLE OF CONTENTS Section and Title Page No. ABSTRACT ii LIST OF TABLES xii LIST OF FIGURES xiii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1-1 1.1 Program Description 1-2 1.2 Summary of Results 1-2 Appendix 1.1 Text of March 12, 1981 Telecopy A1.1-1 Appendix 1.2 List of Documents Given to the A1.2-1 NRC Informally on May 12, 1981 ]. \ 2.0 DEVELOPMENT OF SITE-SPECIFIC GROUND RESPONSE SPECTRA 2-1 2.1 Horizontal Spectra 2-1 2.2 vertical Spectrum 2-3 2.3 Long-Term Development of Site-Specific ~ Spectra 2-4 2.4 Reference 2-5 3.0 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS 3-1 3.1 Synthetic Acceleration Time-Histories 3-1 3.2 Structural Analytical Models 3-1 3.3 Method of Analysis and Response 3-2 Spectra Generation Appendix 3.1 Overlays of Response Spectra A3.1-1 from the Site-Specific SSE and the FSAR SSE A iii __ __ . _ _ _ . . ~ _ . . . _ . . . . _ . _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ - - - _ - .
l
) ,f-) TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
U Section and Title Page No. 4.0 STRUCTURAL REASSESSMENT 4-1 4.1 Program Description 4-1 4.2 Assessment of Drywell Structures 4-1 4.2.1 Reactor Pedestal 4-3 4.2.2 Stabilizer Truss 4-3 4.2.3 Sacrificial Shield 4-3 4.2.4 Drywell Shield Wall 4-4 4.2.5 Spent Fuel Pool 4-4 4.2.6 Dryer-Separator Pool 4-4 4.2.7 Tabulation of Original Load Combinations 4-4 4.3 Assessment of Reactor-Auxiliary 4-5 Building and RHR Complex Structural (} Components 4.3.1 Reactor Building Mat Foundation 4-5 4.3.2 Auxiliary Building Mat 4-5 4.3.3 Reactor-Auxiliary Building Shear Walls 4-5 4.3.4 Reactor-Auxiliary Building Cable Tray 4-5 Hangers 4.3.5 Reactor Auxiliary Building Super- 4-6 structure Steel 4.3.6 RHR Complex Mat 4-6 4.3.7 RRR Complex Shear Walls 4-6 4.3.8 RHR Complex Cable Tray Hangers 4-6 4.3.9 Cable Trays 4-6 l l 1 l l iv l
. = ,
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section and Title Page No. l 4.4 Primary Containment 4-7 4.5 Torus and Torus Supports 4-7 4.6 Buried Pipes and Conduit 4-8 4.7 References 4-9 Appendix 4.1- Structural Design Review Package, A4.1-1 Volume 1 Appendix 4.2 Structural Design Review Package, A4.2-1 Volume 2 5.0 EQUIPMENT SELECTION AND EVALUATION 5-1 5.1 Event Scenario 5-1 5.2 Identification of Systems and Components 5-2 5.3 Equipment Evaluation 5-3 O k/ 5.3.1 Mechanical Components--Principal 5-3 Systems 5.3.2 Mechanical Components--Auxiliary Systems 5-6 5.3.2.1 Residual Heat Removal Service Water 5-8 (RHRSW) 5.3.2.2 Diesel Generators 5-9 5.3.2.3 Diesel Fuel and Lube Oil 5-9 5.3.2.4 Emergency Equipment Cooling Water 5-9 (EECS)
- 5.3.2.5 Emergency Equipment Service Water 5-9 l (EESW) and Diesel Generator Service Water (DGSW) 5.3.2.6 Control Air 5-10 5.3.2.7 Essential HVAC 5-10 l
)
5.3.2.8 Drywell Cooling 5-11 O v l
() TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section and Title Page No. 5.3.2.9 RHR Complex HVAC System 5-12 5.3.2.10 Torus 5-12 5.3.2.11 Motor Operated Valve (MOV) Actuators 5-12 5.3.3 Tnstrumentation and Control-- 5-13 incipal Systems Hil-P613 5-14 Hil-P617, P618 5-15 Hil-P621 5-15 Hil-P622, P623 5-15 Hil-P628 5-15 Control Rod Drive 5-16 Nuclear Boiler System 5-16 Reactor Core Isolation Cooling 5-16 Residual Heat Removal 5-16 5.3.4 Instrumentation and Control-- 5-17
' Auxiliary Systems 5.3.4.1 Emergency Equipment Cooling Water (EECW) 5-17 5.3.4.2 Control Air System 5-18 5.3.4.3 Essential HVAC 5-18 5.3.4.4 Drywell Cooling System 5-18 5.3.4.5 RHR Complex 5-19 5.3.5 Electrical Components 5-20 5.4 Items Requiring Further Assessment or 5-20 Documentation Appendix 5.1 System Summary Charts AS.1-1 6.0 PIPING EVALUATION 6-1 6.1 Large Bore Piping Stresses 6-1 6.2 Instrumentation and Control Piping 6-3 Stresses 6.3 Large Bore Piping Supports 6-4 O
Vi
- . - . _ . _ . ~ - - _ . _ . _ , _ , . _ _ _ _ _ , , . _ _ _ _ , , , , , . , _ , _ , _ , _ . ,. . . , _ . _ , , , _-,..,_. _ _ _ . - . _ _ - ,
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section and Title Page No. 6.4 Instrumentation and Control Piping 6-5 Supports 6.5 Equipment Nozzle Loads 6-6 6.6 Valve Accelerations 6-7 6.7 Evaluation of Class IE Conduit 6-7 Supports by Generic Analysis Method 6-8 Assumptions 6-8 Conclusion 6-9 6.8 Generic Analysis of Small Piping 6-10 Procedures 6-10 Results 6-10 Appendix 6.1 Large Bore Piping A6.1-1 Appendix 6.2 Large Bore Piping A6.2-1 O Appendix 6.3 Instrument and Control Piping A6.3-1 Inside Containment Appendix 6.4 Large Bore Piping Support Loads A6.4-1 Appendix 6,5 Large Bore Piping Support Loads A6.5-1 Appendix 6.6 Instrumentation and Control A6.G-1 Piping Support Loads Appendix 6.7 Equipment Nozzle Loao. A6.7-1 Appendix 6.8 Valve accelerations A6.8-1 7.0 INDEPENDENT EVALUATION 7-1 7.1 Purpose 7-1 7.2 Site Ground Motion 7-2 7.3 Energy Absorbing Mechanisms 7-3 0 vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS Section and Title Page No. 7.3.1 Damping 7-3 7.3.2 Inelastic Response 7-4 7.4 Facility Response Phe.1omena 7-5 7.5 Internal Equipment 7-7 7.6 Generic Facility Evaluation 7-8 7.6.1 Reactor Auxiliary Building 7-8 7.6.2 'RHR Complex 7-9 7.6.3 Internal Equipment 7-9 7.7 Specific Internal Equipment Overview 7-10 7.8 conclusions 7-10 Q 7.9 Reference 7-11
8.0 CONCLUSION
S 8-1 I viii l l l r --
. . . . ..m._... . _ , _ . . , _ _ . . , _ _ . . . . _ . . , . . . _ . . . . . . . , . _ . , _ . _ . . , _ . . . , , . . _ . . . . _ , _ , _ _ _ .
() LIST OF TABLES Table No. Title Page No. 1-1 Additional Clarification Provided by 1-4 the NRC Staff on the Conduct of the Supplementary Seismic Evaluation 4.4-1 Allowable Stresses in Primary Contain- 4-10 ment 4.4-2 Calculated Stress in Primary Contain- 4-11 ment-4.4-3 Seismic Re-evaluation Summary Table - 4-12 Primary Containment 5.1-1 Scenario for seismic-Induced Loss of 5-23 Offsite Power 5.2-1 Principal and Auxiliary Systems 5-24 Required for Safe Shutdown and Cool-down 5.2-2 Generic Essential Equipment 5-25 5.3-1 Loads for Certain RPV and Internal Components 5.3-2 Hydraulic Control System 5.3-3 RHR Pump Anchors Bolts 5.3-3A RHR Heat Exchanger and Anchors 5.3-3B RCIC Pump Anchor Bolts i 5.3-4 RCIC Turbine Anchor Bolts 5.3-5 RCIC Pump Suction Strainer 5.3-6 RER Service Water 5.3-7 Dieshi Generator Components q
\
ix i
(} LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Table No. Title Page No. 5.3-8 Diesel Genctator Components 5.3-9 Diesel Generator Fuel Oil 5.3-10 Diesel Generator Lube Oil 5.3-11 Diesel Generator Lube Oil 5.3-12 Diesel Generator Fuel Oil 5.3-13 Emergency Equipment Cooling Water 5.3-14 Emergency Equipment Cooling Water 5.3-15 Emergency Equipment Cooling Water
'5.3-16 Diesel Generator Service Water 5.3-17 Emergency Equipment Service Water 5.3-18 Control Air O 5.3-19 Control Air 5.3-20 Control Air '
5.3-21 HVAC Ducts 5.3-22 HVAC Duct Supports 5.3-23 Essential HVAC Dampers 5.3-24 HVAC Return Air Fans 5.3-25 HVAC Centrifugal Chilling Units 5.3-26 HVAC Emergency Makeup Motors 5.3-27 HVAC Emergency Makeup and Recirculation Air Filters Units 5.3-28 HVAC Multizone Climate Changer 5.3-29 HVAC Chilled Water Pump and Motor 5.3-30 HVAC Rupture Disk O X . , , . . . . . _ . . - . _ . . _ . . . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ . _ ~ _ ,
() LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Table No. Title Page No. 5.3-31 HVAC Coolers 5.3-32 RHR Room Ccolers 5.3-33 HVAC Equipment Room Fan-Coil Unit 5.3-34 ' RCIC Pump Roc. Cooler 5.3-35 CauAe Tray Cooling Fan 5.3-35A HVAC Equipment Anchors 5.3-35B Drywell Cooling System 5.3-36 RHR Complex HVAC 5.3-37 Instrumentation and Control--Principal Systems 5.3-38 Instrumentation and Control--EECW 5.3-39 Instrumentation and Control--Control Air 5.3-40 Instrumentation and Control--Essential HVAC 5.3-41 Instrumentation and Control--Drywell Cooling 5.3-42 Instrumentation and Control--RHR Complex 5.3-43 Electrical Components List 5.3-44 Requalification of Electrical Com-ponents with 7% Damping - Horizontal 5.3-45 480 V AC and 260 V DC Motor Control Centers (ITE) 5.3-46 480 V Switchgear (ITE) 5.3-47 4160 V Switchgear (ITE Imperial) 5.3-48 Battery Main DC Fuse Cabinets 5.3-49 Batteries and Battery Racks and Their Mounting (C&D) O Xi
. , . ~ . _ , , _ . --
LIST OF TABLES (Continued) O 2 Table I No. Title Page No. ) i 5.3-50 Battery Chargers and Their Mounting (C&D Batteries) 5.3-51 DC Fused Distribution Cabinets (Square D) 5.3-52 120 V AC Modular Power Supply Units (MPU) 5.3-53 Drywell Penetrations (Conax Corp.) 5.3-54 Terminal Boxes and Terminal Boxes Attached to Drywell Penetrations (Hoffman) 6.1-1 Large Bore Piping Analyses 6-11 6.1-2 Seismic Re-evaluation Summary Table 12 Main Steam and Recirculation Piping (} 6.4-1 Grouping of I&C Piping Load Changes 6-16 6.7-1 Ratio of Allowable to Ultimate 6-17 Stresses 6.7-2 Horizontal Accelerations of Class IE 6-18 Conduit 6.7-3 Vertical Accelerations of Class IE 6-19 Conduit 6.8-1 Reactor Bldg. Seismic Support Loads 6-20 (Eas t-Wes t) 6.8-2 Reactor Bldg. Seismic Support Loads 6-21 (North-South) 6.8-3 Reactor Bldg. Seismic Support Loads 6-22 (Vertical) 6.8-4 RHR Complex Seismic Support Loads 6-23 (Eas t-Wes t) 6.8-5 RHR Complex Seismic Support Loads 6-24 (Nor th-Sou th) l s '6.8-6 RHR Complex Seismic Support Loads 6-25 l (Vertical) 7.7-1 Building Zone Comparison 7-12 xii l t
O LIST OF FIGURES I Figure No. Title Page No. 2-1 Comparison of Fermi II Interim Site 2-6 Dependent Response Spectra with LLL and Weston Geophysical Eastern U. S. Rock Spectra for Magnitude 5.3 Earth-quake 2-2 Comparison of Fermi II Interim Site 2-7 Dependent Response Spectra and Exist-ing Fermi II Design Spectra 2-3 Fermi 2 Site-Specific Horizontal 2-8 Response Spectrum With 7% Damping 2-4 Fermi 2 Site-Specific Horizontal 2-9 Response Spectrum With 5% Damping 2-5 El Centro 1940 Vertical Spectrum 2-10 {} 2-6 El Centro 1934 Vertical Spectrum 2-11 l 2-7 Taft vertical Spectrum 2-12 2-8 Olympia vertical Spectrum 2-13 2-9 Regulatory Guide 1.60 vertical 2-14 Spectrum, 0.1 9 with 7% Damping and DBE Spectrum with 5% Damping 3.1-1 Horizontal Response Spectrum and 3-4 Synthetic Time-History for N-S Component of El Centro 1940 3.1-2 Horizontal Response Spectrum and 3-5 Synthetic Time-History for E-W Component of El Centro 1940 4.4-1 Drywell Elevation View 4-12 4.4-2 Containment Vessel - Shear Moment 4-13 Diagram - SSE - 7% Damped Site Spectra ( xiii
-r ---,.y. y w, .- , , ..y- w... .,,#_ - - , , . - - - - . . , - . - - - -
r- -- - - - .,- - - - , _ - - _,
LIST OF FIGURES ( Figure No. Title Page No. 6.1 Histogram of I&C Piping Support 6-26 Loads 6.8-1 Reactor Auxiliary Bldg. Revised 6-27 Spectra, East-West Excitation 6.8-2 Reactor Auxiliary Bldg. Revised 6-28 Spectra, North-South Excitation 6.8-3 Reactor-Auxiliary Bldg. Revised 6-29 Spectra - Vertical Excitation 6.8-4 RHR Complex Revised Spectra -East- 6-30 West Excitation 6.8-5 RUR Complex Revised Spectra - North- 6-31 South Excitation 6.8-6 RHR Complex Revised Spectra - 6-32 Vertical Excitation O. 7.2-1 Comparative Ground Spectra - 7-13 5% Structural Damping 7.3-1 Influence of Ductility on Design 7-14 Response Spectra 7.3-2 Influence of Ductility on Acclera- 7-16 tion 7.4-1 Ground Acceleration Spectra - Various 7-17 Ductility Factors 7.4-2 Ground Acceleration Spectra 7-18 7.5-1 Comparative Envelope Equipment 7-19 Spectra - Reactor-Auxiliary Bldg. Excluding Crane 7.6-1 Maximum Permanent Internal Equipment 7-20 Plastic Deformation Envelope Spectra Evaluation Xiv 1 i i
1 O
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By telecopy on March 1, 1981, the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff requested Detroit Edison to evaluate the Fermi 2 plant for a higher site-specific earthquake than the' current Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) design basis documented in the Fermi 2 Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). .The text of this telecopy is reproduced in Appendix 1.1. In a meeting on March 27, the NRC staff elab-orated on the position stated in the telecopy. The staff requested and Edison agreed to provide:
- 1. site-specific spectra acceptable to the staff to characterize a safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) of magnitude 5.3 1 0.5 at the Fermi 2 site, and
- 2. assessment of margins available in the design of
(]) structures and equipment which assure that systems necessary to achieve safe shutdown will continue to function following the postulated site-specific SSE. Additional clarification provided by the staff is summarized in Table 1-1. This report responds to the staff's request for a supplemen- 1 l tary seismic evaluation of the Fermi 2 plant and documents I preliminary results of that evaluation given informally to the staff on May 12, 1981 by Mr. L. E. Schuerman of Detroit Edison. A list of the preliminary documents given to the staff on May 12 is shown in Appendix 1.2. O l-1
I 4 1.1 Program Description 1 The supplementary seismic evaluation program implemented by Detroit Edison in response to the staff's request for infor- j mation consisted of six parts:
- 1. development of site-specific ground response spec-l tra for a magnitude 5.3 1 0.5 earthquake at the j
\
Fermi 2 site, '
- 2. development of floor response spectra,
- 3. assessment of the integrity of key structures under the effects of the new SSE,
- 4. identification, analysis, and assessment of equip-ment in systems required for safe shutdown, l
l [} 5. identification, analysis, and assessment of piping j and supports in systems required for safe shut-down, and
- 6. evaluation of the program and overall margin assessment by an independent consultant.
l These elements of the supplementary seismic evaluation pro- l gram are described in sections 2.0 through 7.0, respec-tively, of this report. 1.2 Summary of Results In its Interim Safety Evaluation Report (SER) for Fermi 2, the NRC staff indicated that the seismic design basis of the Fermi 2 plant presented in the FSAR was considered accept- , able. Detroit Edison believes the seismic design basis of the Fermi 2 plant remains adequate and believes that the 1-2
results of the supplementary seismic evalution requested by the staff and reported here confirm that adequacy even for an earthquake substantially higher than the design basiy earthquake (DBE). The results of the evaluation confirm that safe shutdown of the Fermi 2 plant can be achieved under the site-specific seismic conditions prescribed by the staff. O O l-3
O# TABLE l-1 Additional Clarification Provided by the NRC Staff on the conduct of the Supplementary Seismic Evaluation (a)
- 1. The new site-specific earthquake is not to be a new design basis earthquake (DBE) but Edison is required to evaluate and assess the plant capability to achieve safe shutdown following the new higher earthquake.
- 2. Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA) loads and pipe break loads are not considered coincident with the site-specific SSE. For piping and equipment, normal oper-ational loads are considered with the site-specific SSE.
(} 3. Operability and functionality are considered for key equipment and components.
- 4. Survivability may be assessed in terms of ultimate structural capacity using actual material strength (not Code required limits or material strengths). However, code required limits should be used as an index in assessing margins. l l
- 5. 10-20% ductility may be used where appropriate and justified. Higher damping values may be used if justi-fied by commensurate stresses. However, damping should not exceed that allowed by Regulatory Guide 1.61.
(a) From Detroit Edison's March 27, 1981 meeting with the NRC staff. l l t 1-4 . 1
.- _ .. . - . . . - _ . . . . - - , - - , . .- . . - - . , . ~ . .
TABLE l-1 (Continued)
- 6. . Structures, systems, and components required for shut-down and cooldown must be assessed.
- 7. The reassessment shall be based on a Regulatory Guide 1.60 spectrum anchored at 0.19 9 or a site-specific spectrum based on an 84th-percentile spectrum of 5.3 1 0.5 magnitude earthquakes. In lieu of the site-specific spectrum, the Lawrence Livermore spectrum, adjusted to include far field strong motion effects and justified for use as a Fermi 2 site-specific spectrum, may be used.
- 8. Racks and panels may have additional margins due to use of conservative spectra and damping. Some may be
{} assessed by inspection and judgment.
- 9. Buried pipe and duct must be re-evaluated in light of a soil spectra application and ground motion effect.
- 10. Probabilistic approaches may be used in areas of extreme hardship.
() 1-5
( APPENDIX l.1 The following telecopy was received by Detroit Edison from the NRC on March 12, 1981 and retyped by Detroit Edison: As described in the Fermi 2 Final Safety Analysis Report (Section 2.5.2.1), the Fermi 2 site is located within the Central Stable Region of North America. In the current staff Operating License review of the seismological input it has been determined that the design response spectrum for the Fermi 2 site is not consistent with that currently acceptable to the staff. Discussed below is the staff's current view as to the best approach to specifying the con-trolling earthquake (and associated response spectrum) from the Central Stable Region.
/~) The controlling earthquake we would currently require to be V
used in determining the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) for the Fermi 2 site is similar to that which occurred in Anna, Ohio in March 1937, and has a body wave magnitude of 5.0-5.3 (m L ), and Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) of VII-VIII. 3g We have observed that the recent July 27, 1980 Kentucky earthquake also had a magnitude of about (m bgL ) 5.2-5.3 and occurred in the Central Stable Region. The following alternatives of characterizing the SSE would be acceptable to the staff and are contained within the l staff's Standard Review Plan (SRP) Section 2.5.2. The Anna, Ohio earthquake of March 1937 is the largest historic earth-quake (in terms cf intensity) in the Central Stable Region. This earthquake had a MMI-VII-VIII and should be assumed to occur near the site (Appendix A, Part 100, SRP Section 2.5.2). Using this intensity and the Standard (O
A1.1-1 l
I 1
Review Plan approach (NUREG-75/087) indicates that the ( Regulatory Guide 1.60 standardized response spectra be anchored at 0.19 g as determined by the trend of the means of the intensity acceleration values in Trifunac and Brady (Seismological Society of America Bulletin, V. 65, 1975). An alternative method of describing the SSE and response spectra resulting from an " Anna" type earthquake (and other similar magnitude events) assumed to occur near the site involves using the magnitude. Magnitude may be a more realistic estimate of earthquake size than intensity (see for example the Sequoyah OL review). Therefore, a descrip-tion of the SSE can also be obtained by collecting represen-tative real time histories for a magnitude of m bg" L 5.3 i .5 (this corresponds to a M g of about 4.9 to 5.9 using Chung and Bernreuter, 1980), and epicentral distances less than 25 km at rock site (the plant foundation is on rock). Such a collection has been made.by Lawrence Livermore Labo-ratory (LLL, Draft, Seismic Hazard Analysis: Site- Specific Response Spectra Results, August 23, 1979) but it would be beneficial if you update this data set as necessary. It is the staff's position that the representation appropriate for use in establishing the SSE is the 84th percentile of the response spectra as derived directly from the real time his-tories. We are available to meet with you as soon as possible to discuss the above approach in order that the best available data and method of describing (input) vibratory ground motion can be utilized for the site. A1.1-2
(~s APPENDIX 1.2 LIST OF DOCUMENTS GIVEN TO THE NRC INFORMALLY ON MAY 12, 1981 Fermi 2 Site-Specific E. Q.--Equipment Qualification Reassessment--Part oC B. O. P. Equipment. o Spectra Acc61eration Comparisons--Design Basis vs. Site-Specific o Report of Safety Margins on Reassesment o Sample Computations and Overlays of TRS and RRS Fermi 2 Site-Specific Earthquake: Structural Reassessment Structural Reassessment Calculation No. S&L 6139-38: SDD-Deco. 004, dated May 6, 1981, consisting of: O I. INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY II. RVP PEDESTAL III. STABILIZER TRUSS IV. SACRIFICIAL SHIELD V. DRYWELL SHIELD WALLS (BIOLOGICAL SHIELD) Structural Reassessment Calculation No. S&L 6139-38, dated May 6, 1981, consisting of:
- 1. Reactor / Auxiliary Building--Shear Walls
- 2. Reactor / Auxiliary Building--Cable Tray Hangers
- 3. Reactor / Auxiliary Building--Superstructure Steel
- 4. RHR Complex--Shear Walls
- 5. RHR Complex--Cable Tray Hangers
- 6. RHR Complex--Foundation Mat Al.2-1
APPENDIX 1.2 [} (Continued) Parts of Original Calculations to Show LOCA and Other Forces for the Following: o RPV Padestal Calculations (Part of, P.33 through
- 47) dated March 3, 1978 o Stabilizer Truss Calculations (P. 55 through 58) o Sacrificial Shield Calculations (Part of, P. 150 to 188)
Fermi 2 Site-Specific E. Q.--Equipment Qualification Reassessment--Part of B. O. P.-Equipment (Electrical and I&C) = () o Spectra Acceleration Comparisons, Design Basis vs. Site-Specific o Report of Safety Margins on Reassessment
- 1. D. C. Fused Distribution Cabinets (Square D);
VDP No. EF2-39,121C; 3 pieces of equipment listed.
- 2. Battery Main D. C. Fuse Cabinets VDP No. EF2-39,120B; 1 piece of equipment listed
- 3. Batteries and Battery Racks and their Mount-ings (C&D)
O A1.2-2 [
APPENDIX 1.2 O (Continued) VDP No. EF2-39,122C; 8 pieces of equipment listed.
- 4. Battery Chargers and Their Mountings (C&D Batteries)
VDP No. EF2-39,123C; 3 pieces of equipment listed.
- 5. Drywell Penetrations; 2 pieces of equipment listed
- 6. 120 V ac MPU's; 4 pieces of equipment listed
- 7. Terminal Boxes and Terminal Boxes Attached to Drywell Penetrations (Hof fman) --2 O .8. 480 V ac and 260 V dc MCC(ITE); 5 pieces of equipment listed.
- 11. I&C Equipment--3 pieces of equipment listed.
- 12. I&C Equipment--2 pieces of equipment listed, o Overlays of TRS and RRS, (3)--2; 130 V dc Battery o Sample Calculations, (3)--6; Battery Rack o Overlays of TRS and RRS, (8)--2; Seismic With-standability Test; MCC A1.2-3
/~T APPENDIX 1.2 V
(Continued) Fermi 2 Seismic Re-Evaluation of Piping and Mechanical Equipment: Piping and Equipment Selection o Event Scenario o Identification of Systems and Components o Main Systems o Support Systems o Piping Systems to be Evaluated o Equipment and Components to be Evaluated--Generic Essential Listing Equipment Evaluation Summaries ()' o NSS Equipment o BOP Equipment (Mechanical) Evaluation of Piping Designed by Detailed Analysis o Piping Structural Margins o Large Bore Representative Stress Values with 2X Vertical Response Spectra Large Bore Support Evaluation i o Large Bore Snubber and Support Loads o Large Bore Pipe Support Loads Representative I Values with 2X Vertical Response Spectra. Pipe Hanger Load Assessment 1 O A1.2-4 l _. - _. . . . -_ . _ . . . _ , _ _ _ - , . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ , _ . . . . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ - . _ . - , , , _ _ , - . - - _ . ., l
APPENDIX 1.2 O- (Continued) I&C Piping Support Evaluation Equipment Nozzle Loads Requalification of Class IE Electrical and Control Con-duit ' General HVAC Duct Support Qualification HVAC Duct Evaluation RHR and RCIC Seismic Assessment O O A1.2-5
i () 2.0 DEVELOPMENT OF SITE-SPECIFIC GROUND RESPONSE SPEC- ! TRA The seismic spectra used as the design basis of the Fermi 2 l plant are presented in section 3.7 of the Fermi 2 FSAR. ! These spectra were developed prior to the present guidelines used by the NRC,.those of Regulatory Guide 1.60. In the March 12 telecopy, the NRC staff stated i ts position that the SSE response spectra should be defined by using either:
- 1. the standardized response spectra of Regulatory Guide 1.60, anchored at an acceleration value determined from the intensity-acceleration rela-tionship of Trifunac and Brady (0.19 g), or
- 2. site-specific response spectra developed from real I , time histories of earthquakes whose magnitude is i()
I 5.3 + 0.5 and whose distance from the recording station, and foundation conditions are considered j representative of the Fermi 2 site. i . In the March 27, 1981 meeting, Detroit Edison committed to l 4 the development of site-specific spectra. Detroit Edison hired Weston Geophysical to develop these spectra. The l development and basis of an interim site-specific spectrum to permit the supplementary seismic evaluation to proceed l are described below. Further, long-term development of a
- site-specific spectrum is described in Section 2.3.
l 2.1 Horizontal Spectra i i An interim site-specific horizontal spectrum was developed from examination of two site-specific spectra developed for ) a nearby earthquake of magnitude 5.3, recorded on hard rock ) 2-1 4
, ,, ,r. .., . . _ _ - . _ . , , . _ ,.m. , . , ,, , -. .. . . ,,, m., , ~ ~ , - - _ , , , _ , ~ . ..-_,,m.- ._ -
sites, like that of Fermi 2. One of these spectra was U's developed by Lawrence Livermore Laboratory and presented in their draft report entitled, " Seismic Hazard Analysis Site Specific Response Spectra Results," dated August 23, 1979. The other available spectrum was developed by Weston Geo-physical for an eastern U. S. hard rock site, based on a nearby magnitude 5.3 earthquake. The 84th percentile of these spectra (the percentile specified by the staff) were similar to each other and to the Regulatory Guide 1.60-shaped spectrum in the higher frequency range (frequencies higher than approximately 4.5 Hz). As shown in Figure 2-1, the interim Fermi 2 site-specific response spectrum was con-servatively assumed to have the shape of the Regulatory Guide 1.60 spectrum anchored at 0.15 g in that higher frequency range. The low frequency portion of the interim site-specific response spectrum is controlled by the large, distant carth-(} quakes. In the judgment of Weston Geophysical, the lower frequency range of the Fermi 2 seismic design spectrum ade-quately reflects the influence of large earthquakes in the New Madrid area and in the western Quebec seismic zone, both more than 500 kilometers from the Fermi site. Thus, the low frequency portion of the interim Fermi 2 site-specific spec-tra shown in Figure 2-2 is the same as that of the current SSE shown in FSAR Figure 3.7-3. The interim site-specific horizontal spectra were transmit-ted to the NRC by letter dated April 15, 1981 from W. F. Colbert (Detroit Edison) to L. L. Kintner (NRC). In an April 28 meeting, the staff indicated that the develop-ment of the interim spectra and, therefore, the spectra themselves, were acceptable. These spectra at 7% damping and 5% damping are presented in Figures 2-3 and 2-4, respec-tively. 2-2 .O
,,. .,__,,..y, .,...-.-,-,..,,y__ ,.,..,,y , ,...-y,,ry. - , , , - - ,.......,c,-.,,,,,_.y. ,,y.,,,,.,..,-m.,_ .m... . _ _ _ _ . . . -- -- ,m_% ,
(~) 2.2 Vertical Spectrum v Section 3.7.1 of the Fermi 2 FSAR describes the original vertical seismic design basis of the plant. Vertical floor response spectra were developed from four vertical time his-tories presented in Section 3.7.12 of the FSAR and in Reference 2-1. These four spectra are redrawn in Figures 2-5 through 2-8. Sargent & Lundy re-examined these vertical time histories to determine a site-specific verti-cal spectrum in conjunction with the site-specific horizon-tal spectrum. In accordance with the guidance from the NRC staff, the expected vertical spectrum is assumed to be a Regulatory Guide 1.60 spectrum with 7% damping and a maximum accelera-tion of 0.1 g, two-thirds the maximum ground acceleration of the horizontal spectrum, 0.15 g. This was compared with a 5% damped spectrum based on the average of the four vertical () time histories used previously. The Regulatory Guide 1.60 spectrum and the average time history spectrum are shown in Figure 2-9. Comparison of these spectra shows that the former exceeds the latter by approximately a factor of 1.6 at the dominant structural periods of 0.081 seconds and 0.059 seconds. The data used to obtain the average real-time spectrum included gaps in certain frequencies. The original records of the Taft and El Centro 1940 earthquakes showed missing l data at a period of 0.06 seconds. These missing data would l tend to drive down average spectra developed from these records. In addition, the consistent time history for the site-specific spectrum is likely to be 10% higher than the l spectrum. For these reasons, Sargent & Lundy recommended that the FSAR design basis vertical spectrum, which is based on the four vertical time histories, be multiplied by a f'N 2-3 V
factor of 2.0 to bound the Regulatory Guice 1.60 (" site-specific") spectrum at 7% damping. The FSAR SSE vertical spectrum multiplied by 2.0 was used as the site-specific vertical spectrum in the supplementary seismic evaluation. 2.3 Long-Term Development of Site-Specific Spectra This supplementary seismic evaluation was based on the spec-tra discussed in this report. Weston Geophysical is con-tinuing to develop site-specific spectra for Fermi 2 using real time histories from nearby earthquakes approximately 5.3 in magnitude and from more distant, larger earthquakes, recorded at rock accelerograph sites. These new spectra will be developed considering the updated information on geologic characteristics at strong-motion recording stations and strong-motion records that have been digitized recently and made available to the public. O rae metaodo1oer for fureaer deve1ogmene of eite-eeecific response spectra involves selecting strong-motion records based on the following criteria:
- 1. Similarity of station geologic characteristics to those at the Fermi site. The geologic character-istics at Fermi, as presented in the FSAR, will be compared with each accelerograph station. ;
- 2. Magnitude and distance of each record. These will conform to an acceptable range of magnitude and distances that best represent the SSE.
The selected records will be processed and response spectra will be computed for each record. These will be averaged and the recommended spectrum will be displayed at the mean 1 and 84th percentile levels. Comparisons of these spectra 2-4 1
with the Regulatory Guide 1.60 and the Lawrence Livermore O- rock spectra will also be made. 2.4 Reference 2-1 Sargent & Lundy Report SL-2682, " Seismic Analysis of the Reactor Building--Auxiliary Building Complex, Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2," prepared for Detroit Edison Company, September 1974. Revision. Oa
)
1 l l 2-5 O l l
~
~
% 0,
./, 9 'o +> of9 s.
. FERMI II INTERIM SITE DEP ENDENT RESPONSE SPECTRA
- /] ENTILE 9 REG. GUIDE: 1.60 s .& LAWRENCE LLVERMORE SHAPED SPECTRA -- SPECTRA FOR 5.3
- GNITUDE EARTHQU E E RDED ON ROC ' SITES s
84I ER ITILE WESTON 0 PHYSICAL g j SPEC R 5.3 MAGNITUDE to EA QUAKE ECORDED ROCK SITE h
!E e_
/ \/
O': /
~_ /
_ i 5% DAMPING
, , , , . . . . . . , , . . . ...i 10 8 10-' 100 10' PERIOD (SEC)
COWARISON OF FERMI II INTERIM SITE DEPENDENT RESPONSE SPECTRA WITH LAWRENCE LIVERMORE AND WESTON GEOPHYSICAL EASTERN U.S. ROCK SPECTRA FOR MAGNITUDE 5.3 EARTHQUAKES FIGURE 2-1 2-6
./, 9*' 'o +> o%
y9 0,4 s. FERMI II INTERIM
. SITE DEPI:NDENT RESPONSE SPECTRA 10' 9
EXISTIflG FERMIII DESIGN SPECTRA R z C-10 id
/ \
O -
/
"I -
\ \ \
l l 5% DAMPING 10 2 lo ' loo 10' PERIOD ( SEC.) C0FPARIS0tl 0F FERMI II INTERIM SITE DEPENDENT RESPONSE SPECTRA AND EXISTING FERMI II DESIGN SPECTRA FIGURE 2-2 2-7
~ . . . . ,,,,.. *,/
f/ ' , K t.C p, p w rq Gle PH f j sG A *. 4 Y 'p
. / *
/*% ~
/
- 5) .
f - - - _ _. D_ <
, -i "
~
O.,o.-4
! .' i ,,
c
- A . '
.I ,
'~ ..
/ .,,
t . . J .
,,,4 s .
L. :
.g ,
.... g.:
o 1 ,<
- s. ,, .
. a. U '
, ** hJ {
- f' s \.
; ..
- 3 e's .
v
..t .p
- s. .
. i
/, , . ' * .. .*
'O e
/ , ,
O * * '. j f
** a, .
- s. .J ,
i.. e ,
. ..\ ,*
,1 ;, e ' .* . .
..v-
.,f..
. ~ .
. .e,. ,
~.,
- y. 't".
~ r-e r-
\
a , .9 . , .
.s
~.
. t ' ' ,
- s /
i-),
.h = _' .
. . . a.
. ,3 .
.i., . ..
n
.*. r.
- v. , .
- t. . ,
s-
. . s
. . . , ./
. . .;. g . . - '
'l . i' -
l .'
..'} * ,
,- . '.. I
- s .. f.s
- gy.,4 ..
,* . i.
e,,,
= ...
.t..,..: . ,
. .t, ..
..i... r
.e,,. .. ; , , ,
.. . * . .e . ,, . ....8, 0 .. ..w' *.
* ..- - . , ;s ,. 3
. . . . e.'
,3 . ,,. ~
j ., g . , ,r.' ,
; l.
'g , , ' ' .;... ; . j, 'g..:3 .'
. /
*: . y. , ,,
1
.i i .
..! 4*, *' g
, ., [ ,
\ . h I. . r .;* .'. .
, i, ; .* . ' " *; ., . ,s . s: .
-.,....., :y.
s . . .g s
. ,. # * =
. s. ..
,,o .
, e,. .
- r
.,.. i
,.., o .) . .
.1
* . 3 ,' '
.\ '- /;' , .
- (.
'.. :.{
4.. : y, ..t' #, .-
* . ,t . ;
i .ew . .': . r . % ,,.; . .e. . . . , , ,
. * **r . *
.t*.*..n.c....',,= , . . 4
.e. ,' *, *
- e. :
1 , p
.,s..-.. a g ,i..=u ... r s , .
t
..*.<a '
9 ..g -
. t .. ( ,. .;, i % ..- ,4 f.. . . .
n . . . . .
.j. jo-o,. e ' . .*. f. ' .
.;;1. 04 e
.q ::
...... ...s-3 103 ;
'" n.
- 0. 4 . . ..s.. .
.' : .$t . . , i.*y.
l .f. t'..e ', t hI
' ; r .j. . PE9100 .- C'iEC) '. Sed No.
l; w* $ ,'.W.,.' * . F i* *. P* M.m. P' PO.
;,* ,*. t . .
. d a. l. .
J* i-
, :8
** 8 k* . .
., i.*
s
* ,}
- N , N .1 O* .' ,
.g h
.g p
*. . e , 1 ,
ty . , a . ,, .
'r,. . *.y.?.
,N *
- 8. .
. . J. ,
. o.u g o ., . . o .
.4
- 3 !,' ,.* . ...,.;,.. . ..
4, *
~
.q .#'., '.4
.* ! } 7: ,
(..O ;s ; * # '
.il/ 9 *%
;c 7% DAMPING M- O '38
't l g.:i..
N,Kr; u . di .
-i
,,. a,. . , O. f .,
d.. .
- )cy q.l. ,'k,'.3 .FIGURE
{.%.0.4,I'd* , q.r.,' i [. !. . . i . 2-3 . . .
) .. , ...- .. .,' Y . ..
.*.ge ....,....: ..
. _ w, . . .. ... .. .. .. .: . : ..
.n . .. , .. . ,.
i'.*.%,.......
. .. .. .t I1.
r
. . s
.f .
lz.s;l
. - 4 .. . j: . .' .
4 5. *.M ea'; . -iZ,' *
' ,i E '. .' : ,. ;: ,
. f. . k'(d ,,
s.
. . . , . .. . . s . . . t ., .,,...
~
. _ . . - . . ; .f-.. ;;,,, . ,- - - . . _ . ._.,,.,~.gy , .
- ... ...c._ _---%,,
-.v .. , , ,
.-m. , - - - _ _ . . _ _ _ . . . _ . , , , . _ , . , , , ,
- ._ . - - > -_ _-m -
' .-o.......w 8f 836 l, !)81
/
- j$ k MC9,9O%dOU CSo m plCAt "A $ l 4 f a
= .
4C
- V.
e _ o * , .
. Is W
,a.
s i, , *
?
s'. 4 /
- s. .
"n. u * . . }
,f , '
. . ..y
. ..a .' .
+
x h. U O ~
, t .. '
e.
.3 ~ . : . t
., y ...
= I g.,,
r., { ', ., *
;I .; .
. ..y., . .
O ..l ** t ' 1 s .
. ,i 8 .
. ' l. '
a v i , .
.....J. ,,
. . . . '.- i ... .
g .. *is , . . 8 i
., p*I
.at,' '
\.
- 4 4 4 ,
- , .. *: ' ., l
*i. 1 e-
."1.. 9 i
\
, . - :- : \ ' <,.-t .,. .i V :c,.r,r ] '
.i i;
+
i- .. , .
.a. .,s,. .
r ..g..., .1. ,a k,.=. , . t
,8
..;i . . -
,g
* .,.*!)!
1 / )
- s. .gh .-
= . , s
* ,i . . .
- t. . . .g r . :;
. j. l
. , i
\
' . . .<s- .( !.,-! ..if..=
- r. :..'
- t. .,'aa
. . l
..s. . .s. .
A,. :' ',. * .
.- . l v,e..i.... 4
., I
, , . / . ;. .
v
- 4. . . , .
. ; } u, , . ,., . . .., .; . . , - ,
4
.i,
. M.t . t . *c s
. { .s .
* . . -~.iff i .u .. gy.3 y .s u:,.w p . ....? .: lo e ' t . 300 y .
- l. . t ,.
,,e.;
gy
, i .; .. .
.;p$.1. $.$'i'-[. I ...-' "*- "-
.i .. . . . . ' .*, .,] ,h
; .[g . . ' .
.j,PER00(SEC)' L,i Pe.u.[
~
}. t
' AE
... .. v, . . ..
- v .<: :. .r.: .
'...:<, .- I . . a . .,.. . -
;, ,;. .;ty...
.. .- .y. .t., ' . .:. ., t. .
. ' \. . .O3 m '
- u.5 0.>$
i4 ' ,
'I g*n - -
- i' ,i .
i* :, ;.. T.i,! d.. .n,3g . . 5% DAMPING ' (1g..i.i';t),t* q y, .
,?...20.' t.g . ..' N. up
- w. ,
- r. m . : n. , a
.t. .... qM FIGURE 2-4 o.43
- ..!,1..g . . .. .i ;, 1
+ .
.r - *
- 9. ; .. - .,..s., '
8.rt Q...s*- 2-9 r;. . 3,q,4
, .u *.
0.05 i n :' t . .
. '. .. .c -
*)c
, , , ' '. f,*, -
; "t j ,
.,s.. ay.a , w. h.
. . t . . . ,. .,. ,'. . . , ,
. m.
. ... .. .... * < .s s + ..
.n. s
. .i.. -. . ..s 1 ..
- . - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - -- m.O m p;-
m._ .. - . _ _ . ~ -
-.-a.a.-_ __==_ _ __ _ _ _ r E_
i
CALC N8. CRLC NS 8 11 0-3 SRRGENT & LUNDY raescCT rcant REv 0 u3 scus . PReacCr se. stas-as 30 RPR 81 ORMPING 0.050 PAGE A941YC '
' SLS (NI)-18 5-4 l FREQUENCY IN CPS 60.0 20.0 10.0 5.0 1.0 10 0.6 i i 20.C. ,i , , ,i i
iiii i d ,e n ,i i ,i ,i e, ,i i ii , i , ,i , i, ,, , i -
, i , ,i ,i,,, , i ,n i t ,e ,l ,i i, ,i , ,e , i , ,i , t, , u."20.0 15.C[ ~16.0 10 0 0.00 .
- 30
~
10 3.00 5.C0 3 .00 5.00 -1 0.00 4.00 ,4.00 3 0C -- 3.Cc e - 2.00
.Ob5 2.00_ :
e 1.C0,, ~1.50 z , 2 g 1.CC. _
,1 00
- p -
g 0.80,,, , 0.20
~
E ~ l
.J 0.60 _ *.60 m
l O 0.60 - .00 a - 1 0.40 , _0.40 l l EL CENTRO 1940 2'
' *UU VERTICAL SPECTRUM ,-
0.20 ,.
, _p .20 0 15 O .ts 0.1C r .
- 3. 10 0.03
-E / N ,/ 7 E 0.CS E/
- 5 0.Ct, \/ E
-0.0n g,3 fiiie init i i iis not iiie it iin,le..e i i eii nei i ,i, etti d3,gg 0.02 O 0 03 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.15 0.20 PERIOD IN SECONOS 0.30 0 40 0.60 08010 1.5 20 FIGU.RE 2-5
, RESPENSE SPECTRUM 2-10 SPECTRR N8. NSUE RE3P8N ELEVRT18N
.1 DIRECT 10N RNGLE L8CRTION ELCENTR040-VERTICRL
., .. . . - . .. - _ . . - - . - - . -. .- . .-. ~ .
. l CALC N8. CALC NS 8 11 0-3 SARGENT 4 LUNDY eReseCr rERat REv o !
Q' 30 RPR.81
.c m secas . rReaECT Na, a139-3s
""P!" 8 PAGE l R941YC. 1 SLS(NI)-18 5-4-81 l FREQUENCY IN CPS 50.0 20.0 10 0 5.0 20 t.0 0.5 to'C -iiii's iii i i iii iii e iii iiis iiii i ii i ''''siii ii iiii iii3
'20 0 15.C _ -16.0
= .
10.0, . 1C.3 P 2, 8 00 _ ,0.03
~ ~
8.C0 ^ . 03 5.C .00 4.C _ _"..C0
~ ~
3.0: [
}3.03
~ -
m - - 2.00 2 03 Om p : e 150, ,1.50
~
2 2 1 00 t 0 - 5 h.C0
. g 0.30 , _J.DC ,
5 : : g C.6; _ 3.30 8 C.5C - .50 cc ! 0*M- ~ EL CENTRO 1934 ~ 40 l l VERTICAL SPECTRUM 0 30 _ _3 30 l 0.20 _ _C.03 C.15 3 16
- g '
0.1C M
~Ss -
D/ ' 3 e.es V \ 3 1C 3.ca E O b a 2,:s g,33
~
,iii iiii i e iii iii i iii iiii ii,i iiii i , leik ii, ii,i iiid.:3 3,73 c.02 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.cs 0 10 0.15 0 20 c.30 c.e o.cc o.ac t.o 15 2.c l pd PERIOD IN sEC8HOS
! FIGURE 2-6 l RESPSNSE SPECTRUM 2-11 SPECTRA N3. ! H30E RESP 8N ELEVRTleN t 01 RECT 18N RHOLE LeCRTION ELCENTR834-VERTICAL L._ _2. . _ _. _ _ _ _ .__ , _. _._...._.... _ _ _ . . . . - . _ . , - .,-_.- _--... _ ~- l
,u van g s> -
i CALC NS. CRLC NS 8 11 0-3 SARGENT 4 LUNDY PReaECT rEant REv o O ENotNEEAs PR6 JECT N3. B139-38 v .
"""P!"8 88 30 RPR 81 PAGE A941YC SLS(NI)-18 5-4-81 i
1 rREQUENCY IN CPS 80.0 .20.0 10 0 8.0 1.0 10 0.5 t0*0 iiii '
' i' ' ' e' i i's iii# i ''''s i ii ii iiii i ai i ii i i i e i ii iiii iiig 2' 0.0
~
16 0[ 15.0 10.0_~ 10 .0 8 00 _
- b
~
, _3.00
~
6 00 's 5.00
-t .03 0.03 4.00_ _4.03
~. ~
3.00" ~
~3.00 2
~ ""
- e b 2.00 , _2.00
_ 0: s 5
;1.50 e t .50_
~ ~
2 - . g100_ _1 03
~
0.30 [J.D3 y
"J C.60 0 .53 8 0.50 TAFT VERTICAL SPECTRUM dJ.63 a - -
0.40 _ 3.40 O.30 , , J .3 3 ' 0.20
~
b A ~ 0.20 0 16 J 'M %'I \^ g i. 1.13 E
/ 5 E I ^
0 10_ _3 10
# =
0.0s 1.03 0.C6 1
~
.8k.09 0.0s ' ' ' '
.Os 0.02' ' ' ' .03 0 0.04 '0.Os 0.0s 0 10 ' ' ' ' 0.t s 0 20' ' ' ' .30 0 0.40 0.80 0.e0 1 0 .0 0 PERIec IN SECSNOS FIGURE 2-7 1
RESP 8 HSE $PECTRun 2-12 CPECTRA No. N6DE RESPON ELEv8TISH 3 o! RECT!ed RNoLE LeCaTIew Tart -VERT 1 cat .
CRLC N3. CALC NS 8 11 0-3 SARGENT & LUNDY eneaECT rEant aEv o ENGINEERS PR8 JECT NS.'8139-38 i O 30 RPR 81
$"!N8 j - 8 '
A941YC SLS (NI).18 I 5-4-81 FREQUENCY IN CPS 80 0 20 0 10 0 8.0 2.0
' 10 0.5 "O*C' 6
giiii iiii i ''ei i iii iiai e 'i i i e' i i i iiie i
' '_ i' ' ' e' i i iii i i i ,'
i i i g'20.0 16.CF_ ~ _ 16.0
~ -
~
10.C .* 10 0 E : 8.0C( ~ 0.00
- ~
~
6.CC 0.00 e 5.0C
~ 3.00 4.0C 4.00 3.0C ~
~3.00
- ~
03 - ~ b 2.0",. [2.00 E E : 1 5,' ,,,
~1 50
= -
g 1.CC [1 00 < g 0 30 _
~
ja.go w - _ g 0 6C _ 0 60 8 0 5C 3.sg
* ~
i 0 40._ = - _G . 40 0.3 C[ -o.30 OLYMPIA VERTICAL SPECTRUM : 0.2C -- 3.20 0 15 i /\ i_3 15 m/ 01C _ y nis v 0 10 0.C3 i _ w _0.03 0.CS, : / :
.C3 0.05 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' \^ ' ' '
0.C2 ' ' ' 0. 03 0 04 0 06 0.08 0 10 0 15 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.60 0.8010 15 20
.05 PERISD IN SECONOS O n aaE 2-8 RESP 8NSE SPECTRun SPECTRA N3.
N00E RESP 8N ELEVRT!aN l 4 O! RECTI 8N RNOLE LOCRTION eLYMPIR-VERTICRL
CALC NO. CALC NO 8 11 0-3 SARGENT 4 LUNDY eR0aECT rERnt REv 0
- ENGINttas PROJECT NO. 6139-38 RMP!NG 0.050 30 APR 81 PROE ,
R943YC i SLS(NI)-18 . 5-4-81 i rREQUENCY.IN CPS 50 0 20.0 10 0 50 2.0 t.0 05 gg*s %i
, i i iii t
eisi i iniit i i i i i iea iis i e i iiii iisi e i i e e iai i i ie i inti vet ii i aii ii ia ei iii i g~g,g , c 15.0" -
~15.0 C
-10.0 1 E- d*10. *"
e.04 ----- 0.19 RG 1.60 SPECTRUM - 7% DAMPING ; s.c:P . VERTICAL SSE SPECTRUM (AVERAGE) 0 00 g, :t-5% DAMPING :,ce h: 4 00 _4.C0 E : 3.0 h- [3.C3 e _2.00 C, Eb 2.00, E E
- . e 1.30., _1.50 2
I g 1 00, r- _1.00 I 0.!: . 3.23
$ C :
u s - W
! 0.80, 4 83 e-00.5, - -t3.30
=
0.40 r - _3.40 1 b 0 30 , ,,, _3.30 0 .20 -- - _0 23 0 16
~
' ^
~
0 10 f j v %e : 3 .15 0 10
~ '%
0 0e r t-
.x ( :
2.0, e i it ieie i t t t eie t iii eire' i t t t ier! t i i w t t *i et it 0 02 0.C3 0.04 0.0S 0.09 0.10 0 15 0 20 0.30 0 40 0.60 0.80 1 0 t.5 20 O ecateo ia stee"os FIGURE 2-9 RESPONSE SPECTRUn SPECTRR N8. NSDE RVERRG ELEVRTION 1 DIRECTISN RNGLE L8CRTION ELCEN40.34.TRFT.8LYMPIR
. _ - - _ . - . , . . , . . . _ _ . , _ _ _ . _ . - _ . . _ _ . . . . _ _ _ . . . . , . . . . . _ . . . . . - - _ . _ _ _ . - . _ . _ . - . . _ _ _ . . . . _ . . . . . - . . _ . ~ - - _ . - -
. = .
3.0 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
)
This section summarizes the methods used to develop building response spectra from the site-specific ground motion spectra discussed in section 2.0 of this report. 3.1 Synthetic Acceleration Time-Histories Two synthetic acceleration time-histories matching the 7% damped site. spectrum of Section 2.0 were generated for use as horizontal forcing functions in the supplementary seismic evaluation. These time-histories were developed by repeat-edly modifying the N-S and E-W components of the 1940 El Centro data until the spectra they provided enveloped the ground response spectra discussed in section 2.0. These envelopes meet the acceptance criteria of NRC Standard Review Plan 3.7.1. The synthetic time-histories and the site-spectra are plotted in Figures 3.1-1 and 3.1-2. O The vertical forcing functions used in the original design basis seismic analysis are described in Fermi-2 FSAR Subsec-tion 3.7.1.2. In the present reanalysis, the vertical seis-mic base spectrum was obtained by factoring the average of the four spectra discussed in FSAR subsection 3.7.1.2 so it resulted in a spectrum equal to or above two-thirds the Fermi site spectra discussed in section 2.0. A factor of two was used to bound the site spectra with the design basis l vertical spectra, as discussed in section 2.0.. 3.2 Structural Analytical Models Horizontal Seismic Models Fermi 2 FSAR subsection 3.7.2.1.2.2 describes the building models used in this seismic analysis. The damping values O 3-1 1 (
used in the building models are consistent with the damping values given in Regulatory Guide 1.61. The reactor pressure vessel was coupled with the reactor-auxiliary building in this analysis. The RPV model is pre-
-sented on GE drawing 761E774, Revision 4, dated September 5, 1979.
Vertical Seismic Models The vertical seismic models used in this analysis are pre-sented in Fermi 2 FSAR subsection 3.7.2.2.1.2.
.3.3 Method of Analysis and Response Spectra Generation The horizontal seismic responses were obtained by a time-history method of analysis using the Sargent & Lundy com-puter program DYNAS. In the analysis, the two spectrum con-() sistent synthetic time-histories (north-south direction and east-west direction) described in section 3.1, were applied simultaneously. The acceleration response time-histories for the slabs and the other structural nodes, and the maxi-mum moments and forces in all the structural members were obtained from this analysis.
Response time-history motions obtained from the building model seismic analyses were used as input motions to the Sargent & Lundy computer program RSG which generated hori-zontal response spectra for 1%, 2%, 5%, 7%, and 10% damping. Peaks of the spectra were widened by 10% on each side. As discussed previously, reanalysis of vertical seismic response spectra was unnecessary. The response spectra obtained from the original design basis vertical analysis l 1 O 3-2 1 j 1 l
, , . . _ . _ . _ ._.__._m.. _ .
l 4 discussed in Fermi 2 FSAR, Section 3.7.2.2.1.2 were multi-plied by a factor of two to obtain the response spectra for the present reanalysis. Overlays of all the response spectra from the site-specific SSE and the FSAR SSE are shown in Appendix 3.1. l l l O 3-3
, , - . _ _ _ . _ , - - . _ . . . . , _ . ~ . _ _ . . . _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . , . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . - . _ . . - . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . - _ . . , _ _ _ . -
FREQUEtlCY, CPS e 100.0 50.0 20.0 10.0 5.0 2.0 1. 0 y
~
50 0 , 20.0 .. 10 0 7% A9HP:A'4 5.0 e E g 2.0 - e O @ y20 - , 05 - y PA
'I '
02 -
~.
' O.1 --
0.05 0.5 10 0 01 0 02 0.03 0.1 02 h PERIdc.GCC. HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRUM AND SYNTHETIC TIME-HISTORY FOR N-S COMPONENT OF EL CENTRO 1940 l FIGURE 3.1-1 3-4
- . . - - - . . . . . . . - . - , . . . - - . . - . - . . . , _ - - - - . . . . . . . . - .=. - - -. -.
. 1 FRECUEtlCY. CPS 50 0 20.0 10 0 5.0 2.0 1.0 50.b000 _
20 0 1
. i 10 0 I? D 'I!PI.'Zr I O
en G0 "E N20 = 5 O d
.i$ 10 m
0.5 02 ' k
? .
01 0 05 0 01 0 02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 10 PERIOD,'SEC. HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRUM AND SYNTHETIC TIME-HISTORY FOR E-W COMPONENT OF EL CENTRO 1940 FIGURE 3.1-2 3-5 . ~ . . . ._ __
O
/
APPENDIX 3.1 OVERLAYS OF RESPONSE SPECTRA FROM THE SITE-SPECIFIC SSE AND THE FSAR SSE. The 50 figures in this Appendix show Reactor Auxiliary Building and RHR Complex floor response spectra resulting from the site-specific SSE overlaid the original floor response spectra from the FSAR SSE. The original spectra were drawn for damping values of 1%, 2%, 5%, and 10%. The overlaid curve from the site-specific SSE is based on 7% structural damping and 5% equipment damp-ing. The spectra are numbered as shown below: O o Reactor Auxiliary Building Horizontal Response Spectra--Figs. B29 thru B52 and B57 thru B60. Vertical Response Spectra--Figs. C12 thru C20 o RHR Complex l dorizontal Response Spectra--Figs A8 thru A13 Vertical Response Spectra--Figs B9 thru B15 l l gg4 A3.1-1
. _ . . . . . _ . , ,ammuma i
i Of10 $ S1TL 69a.c n 9I t. tpATH bMG ' St'lWI C KCAJS tLsMidf - Sf2.cTRA ov4RLAfp
) K.ScHHoL2d-[,A4%N9 CVY'Rt. Af of A cctL.GKh* ho tl Of v'AL.u e s pu,z To SITE SfG cIP'C GA F1l1 4e4A Y 2. l$ SHOWN OV"A GRAVI T Wc C 1'lAlGJM ir Df SI( Gh5JS $$2 floof F/c 4 fo "s#- Sf6c (6 A .
Th. OR s 4 td h(, SfMCffh WGAL 98WN Fo$If,Zl,$lANPl0fQhw19144c4sRVf5, Trig OV6A Lair) Cuf,VR. $HoWd xnA J5 FRom 5/ f C G r i c,t r,1 c. 6 A rt f M M A K f-7l* SfRHLTHf&L % Pid% F04 6 l LM Ifm6^)f OkMPIN 9 TMfr., OVt. A L A W) <fE c.Tg4 AR6 pg d W Af fod KgAC To& , Aq 3 lLj AA 'j J4f l p p/N{ M Y) [yfe Rode & o COMfblX o ^l TH fe. FO W o4/tN Q PI G yt R Q g e FBAcTo6 hUFILIhnf $4169td 4 , tt0Rl20d76t,. RlbfoN S t $9& C TRA - YlQSo h1) (1984 09$ ANY) 0 $7 TitMit f)$0. t V F.f, fica b Rgsfo NM Sf dc rAA - Flq). C 11 TMu c'lo -
. s u eoneLes MoK170MfAG SG$fonst SPt e rg A -
flG S . A 3 1H 6c4 A lb
;Oh
\ j+' , VEKTICA L Reif0Ns4 SFtcT8A -
FIG 5. 69 Tnny SIS e t i
-6 U .
. A 3. i - l 700R BRSE i I
8
. .< c us ao. # 5 p / # / l'ere t c.\e. no.
SAF.GEfjT4 LU110Y 'sz -pg gn
. ,,, o ,,,
' E NGINC E R S .
c -c -~ x s.v.i,-n.w.o I sco-s.t.w-arew en. Ce r - 9 6 M OlT 6bM
~
.sket DINN Prepared by Date d,
- I $ * / 0 Project Eweo FEEm i nevi,,44 sy HMs o. 4-lS-X Proj. No. '3916 6 Equ4. No. ActroW by Date I'
.,v e . m /
$1TE 3PEclR c7g 7AMFe9 g,)g.gg S$ EQUIPMENT DAmtmc o . . . u u u u .,
i Rt .' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
- M0 in i
- e . _
me a: -
- u u . so 10 M a , _
o
- :~
le 10 r-l% DA MRIM G
~ :
.u "
( ! . f,-2S j E ts ! i
- esz :
( )l
/l rloh :
u -
/ v, _
u g .
" /, N !
>l; g
r- I r- NR ',Q s,.
/ \ // T IN i f -
// \\ y / %'s .
's
} ., -
// .--dV (/ / N WN -
I
/PS\\y ,/ r N
////
>f Q4'AN 'NN ,
N
- .)
- / /-/ -
N x. sN 5R s $ J J N
/- N 3 -
" \\Q '
*n ~.n 7
\
D . i
\ NA --
i d
. n g a a ."
I \-
~
.k
' ' , , iti,,, ,,,, ,,,, , , , , , ,,,,-
.3 i e . ,,,, , ~ , , , ,
C .e .es .# .e6 .a . .u .2 .3 .4 ,5 .4 .s u i.5 a P4 58-
,d TORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA excavation i DESIGN BASIS E.'.RTliOUAKE
! REACTOR AUXILIARY BLDG.
* " ^ " 3"ET SLAB NO. 1, ELEV: 583'-6" NORTil-SOUTH DIREC"'IOM Br A 3.i- 2 ,
.-c...__ ._ . -
- ~
seccina von W ) $ h W. csic. No. SARGENT4 LufiDY 1s uciNecses pg-gggy L. o ,,, C **'C ^ X Saf ety-R elated Nen-Saf ety-R elated P>oe of Citnt QGTlE'blT ED\ Prepared by 6C'M Date b6*E Praiect EhlEIC~ O EMI Revowed by Mlb Date d -b *1 Proi. N o. MD Eevio. No. Approved by Date
,m T, A $1TE GTECIFIC 7X MPG Sg EQulPMM7 DAMP mG 5-l "o - Bi o n a w u u u u .s .
no- ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '- ' ' . - - ' - - '
- no
~
tie ~ lio no c6 . Le ~_
- ",e
~
u - - o _
, le .
~
,u
- rl % DAM PIM G u
/l v .' 5 [ '
~
t, 5% u i [ s < loh t, _ , , u o
- I
< ^1 *s .
a ' o 8u - e 5 - J //W + s
', k
{" -
//v' t! N K \ - ., i b
~
j y ,7 Y f YN .n h N
! /T-$# //# K A'4 ! .,
; .. / /// ~ N[/[ N Y :
- y V~//[ $N. _,
i
- --jV 'th y
~
,o % .
2
~
- . cs g _
~
- ,iet iie i iiia i r i i i t ii iit I2 s e it ,t et i t i i ,,, #
g i e
.c .e .n J J 8 5 .6 Le LS u A D .e4 .e6 .os .1 V eww. sa.
~ HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA e x c a va ri o., . DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE
' REACTOR AUXILIARY BLDG.
i SLAB NO. 1, ELEV: 583'-6" s ec c y = 4 o 3.so EAST-WEST DIRECION ep l 4 3./ - 3 _ ,
1 1 ancr=< ron WWAe/ cae. No. SARGENT4 LuiiDY
= e Noine sse s A e fg __g g , g ,,,
j C " 'C ^ " X Safett-RelatM Non-Saf ety-Reisted Pace of
.lMt EGY DbN Precered by I' " M Oate d- 'E 'I Project ERRtco FEEMI Re, w by Hus o ,, 4 16 X Proi. N o. M66 Equip. N o. Approved by Data Frew mcr.CP5 g X SITF. SPECtFiC 7 fo DAM Ps NG D D 30 le 10 U 5 % F Q VIPM ENT
!.O Le 1 AM PING 5/3]
- c. _,,,, ,,,, , , , , , , ,,,, ,,,, ,,,, ,,,, , , , , ,, ,, ,_ no ISO , 110
~
ce , iao to _ _ to se so 4 it 10 o _ _ to rl%
' ~
?
~
DAMP IN G - 7,
- 25d ..
. I /[ -#
\
1, O', h 6/ cd i L,
- g :
Le _ p q , to
/// \ / .k \ ' -
e - A r / r--- -W \NN t -
'g {
l -
///// TN \M -
?
W I$' - I .\ /## \\ -
,{
j ,, L A dd/# %\ -
;,j 3
h ) b
. #pj yx :
i f NN
.n , ,
.15 c '. y .
os
.as .e.
~ ~
i i t t t te t - t y n e i e i e it t t i i i e it e iii i t r i i i iii it t 'y f C .6 .N A .N .08 .I .D .2 .3 .4 .$ .4 .8 L8 LS 10
*- HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA excavAvio DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE REACTOR AUXILIARY BLDG.
SLAB NO. 2, ELEV: 613'-6"
" * ' "4 " . " D -31 "A3.l- NORTH-SOUTH DIRECTION p
necerna rea [ M Cele. No. SARGENT4 LUNDY
- ENGINSEsts gg - jgfy / n ,.. o ,,,
C "'C ^ Q X Safety-Related Non-Safety-Related P89e of Ant D G"T'sZo\T EiC)ME>C W preonesd by %M Date 4-6/E proj ct EE M ICIC cp FstMi n.,;.w.d by MMS Date 4-Ib E proi. No. M OO Equis. N o. Approved by Date uennn.cn ,u v S:Te EPEc.i I:~tc. 7'/o RAM PlNG
- 5% EGO IFfAEMT" DAMPsNG .5/se/e /
O 35 2 3 is il te LO 5 Co .' 'i ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '- M'
~
~
no _ iu in no _ _ u: 1" 40 u 1.3 I , . - - -l% DA MPIN G ,_ u
! / ,, - -7_I# n
-.3,$
~
. u 5 , fi-l$c l u n : / :
I ~
- 1. L5
~
- /
L' u
- Ai V X \\ ~
- /f /
i
\ / NN- N '
.s n - fj! '
\l N N 1 i -
//// . /\ h \ '
7 i -
-/8// \\D \ ~
.. f
.3 A .
x j#/ VWN ~ 5 l :i. # / J 7
^
%F -- '
NW N 5 ., 7-
# \ % N a 2
NN
- 3
- \ ~
.n
.45
\. \ -
~ 3 _
%\ -
3 s .
~
a m
~
f g g g g g g g iig g t i f f f if f if 'f , ,$ g g g 9 9 99y t t t t - I f f g y i i a .a .u .e .es .ee .n .n J J '*. A e ' U U " 'V " " ' *
. HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA
, DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE
" C ' T^ T ' "
i REACTOR AUXILIARY BLDC. l SLAB No. 2, ELEV: 613'-6" c er evaa wo B -32. ! EAST-WEST DIRECTICN A Ll-5" - - - - -
l W encrea von / care. no. SARGENTtLUNDY
' E NGINE E R S - <
.,fy,,, ' g r _pg g R ,,. o ,e j
C*'C"Go X Saf ety-R elated l N on-Saf ety-R eis ted hp
=.
of Citnt DGT D T DG hepar 6d_bv 6Md Date 4-$ 2 Noen EEMIF-\co FC M t no,e a by 9AS Oste 4-i?-E hoj. No. MOO Equip. No. Approv,d by Oste
%. us / x 5ITE SF'EC IFIC. 7 7'o DAMP t NG Sc/o E4 0 iP M Ed 7" DANipffM 8/'/
U 33 8 W is 13 to Lt .) me .>> - >>< > > > - i i ii>. ..>> , . ., ,... , , , , , , ,,, no a' . iu te _ ico as _ to u --- to se r~ l Po DAf 1 P! bJG -
>. o o
/ 7 20 E ~
y
./ :
o of
/
- ;( / .
' le .
10
- / -lo% :
+ .
. g, 9 \/. t, O,,
y . s r i . t3 K I L'
~
/b \ -
to si ,. , x ss _ l l
'3 A/ // i \tX i -
{ -
/ // / \ \ \\ -
', {
? -
;4- /// / \ \k \ -
{j - 9.' /#/ \ '\' AN -
~
.. _L If/ Y%\ ~
[, l W J ',
-J ir "
?/ N'% s y J
" s\y
\ h\ -
- N % :
- N % :
.D 1) x g ,
.:s . to g .
.c
~
b. X
- os I 8'
.a .co
,, ii,, , . , ,,,, ,,,, ,i,, , , , , , , ,.,, ,,ir eg
.e .e .a
.m .m .1 .u .2 J 4 .5 .a .s to to b .a LS V -
IIORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA excitario DESIGN BASIS EARTIICUAKE REACTOR AUXILIlsRY BLDG. occcTa* ao
' M B NO. 3, M: H1'-P i A3. s g E5 - 3 3 NORT!!-SOUTH DIRECTION - %. . _ _ . r . . m . . .r. _ . . _ _ . - _._- ~ m.m m - ~~ - s
. ~ c r ,. . ,oa, g c.w. No.
StaGENT': LUNDY e N GINEC at S g v " g'g - S g ; 9':. E_. Ro. o.i. f c ~c A c c, X Safet/-Related Non-Safety-Related Pp of Citnt DCMT WSN Prepared by 6M Da:e d' M 2 Proied EM ra.tco FEEEMi now by MMS o.i. 4-I S -W_ Proi. No, MO Eevie. No. Approved by Date
,_, en y. y Ss rs 3re.c \ pa c. 7 Yo WPING 5 % Equi PM EMT DA M P #NC, e n a w to u to to 5/1 c./ a / .5 co. .... .... , , , , , , ,,,. .... ,,,, ,.., , , , , , -
_ mo 15 0 11 8 , _
~
~
- e ; _
in it - - LO
~
ao r-l % DAM P N G 'So
~
[ ,, - '2,% ,, u -
~
\ /
,e <u
- / -lcN :
l ym,, ~ r I --.s u 1 4 u _ e y d
~
, * . -l u l'
. / /// f , .\ MN
- / /bl/ I \ \ X\ "i .:
m 8
/ / /// \\ hN i k -
/ //// \\ h\ \ '.a*
~
f' - m / M/ \ N\ NN 1., !
/)'[/
4 f '
's#
/ /
\ Nkhk U
] ,, ~j 4
!_M,p '
s NNh.N y 3
- TN\'N i
- , DN -
- - \ s%\ 3
.D
- A
'N 1.u A
g*.
.5 i n 1
.a ,
8
.m
~
u
~ ii ii'
- ,,i, iiii i . . i e5 iiii ..ii ,
i iiii i iii i i i g i i i , .O .e .84 .5 .96 .es .1 .D J J 4 .5 .4 .8 Le u LC
~
HORIZONT?.L RESPONSE SPECTPA excavAviou .- " DESIGN BT. SIS EARTHQUAKE REACTOR AUXILIARY BLDG. h A 3 i -7 Of 5 SLAB NO. 3, ELEV: 641'-6"
*" c Ta ^ "o 3 04
) ) Dull dl h, EAST-WEST DIRECTION
I . snctna ran Y h* e M. ISARGENT4 LUllDY g g g g gpf n, o,,, ~ 1e N GINE EM S . E C " 'C ' N Saf ety-R elated Non-S.stety-Related Pm of Clint N ZOl~T EDISOM Prepared by 4M Date 4 -ifs -E j Prciect EM ElCCP NEM l Reviewed by WMS Oste 4-16 @ ! I Proj. No. M66 Equip. No. Approwed by Date
)
, ' StTE Sf'EC\A C ye/o R A M pg N Q l l
5% EouiPMeMT DA M P I NG te n a a to is to to 5 /i s / al .,
' ' ' ' '' ' ' ' ' '4 MC me .' 'i ' i i i<' ' i i i l
b ne _ _ a. te,, _ 20
~
to ~ 18 l .. 1.. f'\% DAt 1 P'I kJ G ), , y
~
[
/d (,
E l t/ # E, . ,
- / -lc% :
l~ l f I O, ; /p q i i z, 1 i
/
/ b Tk i :
g, . ,
- ig 4/ / / \ \\\ t
/// / / \ \ \b:'- ! - 'a t
j
- , 4 // / / \ \% ' -
i
? -
//// \ \\\ -
', k j fjg
/
NQ\ - j { '[*
- j. - -
#fs# 9n. ' -
', j J
g \, ,
\ _
- .l N -
M - l x .
. i, e
.:: [' _
to a ', - os
~
.o6 .c4
.(fk ,~it t i erit i i i t i e iii t iie ir ii iiii e i i i il i i e i iirt
'e
\ n .os .m .e .es .es . .o .: ,,
.3 4 .s .6 .: to LS to Pwud. Sar.
HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA e x c l YATI ON !9 , DESIGN BAS:S EARTHQUAKE A 3 , .7 j{duni REACTOR AC.:ILIARY BLDG. SLAB NO. 4x ELEV: 659'-0" oney A uo 4.gg [ LILIl= - NORTH-SO C"" f DIRECTIO:! -
S MCTM A fr O* Cale. No. SARGENT%LUNDY E NGINE ERS . ' fw(gg pggg (, o ,,, ; mecaoo X Safety-Releted Non-Safety-Related Pxe of C1':nt DET 2OLT ASW Propered by 6C M Date d ' E *77-p,,;,n EM CiCo FEEMi R.,;e.,d by W45 - Dat. 4 - (6 -T<. Proj. No; 'D *I O O Epip. No. Apprmd by Oste i
% .ces X x SLTE S PECI Fic ~7#/o dam plus l 6 7's E4L> LPM ENT D A M P I N c, 5/is/gl l o n a a to u to to .5 me .... . .. i i . . . i i i .. .,i. . .. i,,, i i i . > , i.
x.o tie , _ 110 Ce ,, . 14 0 Le , , LC 40 W
,c-l % DAt1PI NG -
1,
- ~
- 4. / - -2 % u g, , [ io s
- j
/
y( -tcro Le L',, 5 - IIk
/ /
- 5 t, g, . . \ -
te
/ /// /_ \ \% \ -
_ + /// / \ \h\ - i - V /// / N t\ \ -
'i
? -
/ //// 'N\\N \ i
{3 '.'
.. / #// %,\\ C, !
s .- , .- w s ,3 j .,, .
" , x/ / h /
\ -
,4 $
N s s , ,
< N ~2 NM, ~
.ns 5 Y ~
.U
.3 , q .
.10 d
4 - _ g _
*** .06
. 'it i e tt i e t +
i e i ,, ,iii , ,,, ,,,, , , , , , , ,,,, ,,,,j s ) E .e5 .M .e5 .86 .es .1 .0 J .3 4 .$ .6 .8 Le L) LO
%) _ .
' rww. sec. I HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA axc TAvsow ; DESICN BASIS EARTHOUAKE A3.s c) i REACTOR AUXILIAPY BLDG. enefMA no (2 3(., ' SLAB NO. 4, ELEV: 659'-0"
- l EAST-WEST DIRECTION
snevna con M c,ie, wo, SARGEHT4LU110Y g 4 vgg.-fg g (, g ,,,
@ g
> eNGINEEms C " C # " C' b Saf ety-R elated No4f ety-Naisted fm
_c[ clan, C ET % lT e m:tsoM Preowed by %M o t. 4 - G l'P-Proim EMcCO FEEM\ n% 6, yWs o,,, 4 -is -7z Pr ej. N o. 'D'l 6 O E nvio. No. - Approved by Data m -)( y S I T E. SP E c t Pi c 7 "/* D A M P ' N G' S */o E AU l'PM E.t4T DAM PlN7C 5/18/6 / o 25 m a u u to te .i no - '# ' - - - ' - ' .. .. .... *- , i < . - - '
- no n.
no ce . . 10
~
s,o
) 16 u *r u
r-l / DArqP IN G ~ u o
~
' C 27 '
u go -
).o
- -IO7c -
) *e lo lq'\, -
~
u r r . 3 u ; u
- / \ :
- 1,
/ '/ ,
/ /
. . 1
\ \ %\
a
+' / // / \ \ T\
e ~ 6,
/ / // _ \ \ \\ -*,i '
' // / \ N .g\ -
f -
. A ~
7/ \ W\
} l n 2
/p
NM -
',' _ j!,
; /' NR f,
.1 yb .
c
, l 1
.3 _
k y .
.\
~
.c . $ 08 I ~
.Ge
[~] - iiii , i,e i i i i i i i i i iiii .ie i iiei i i i i i i it ii >i I ,, i A .> .e .o .= .. .. .i .o .: , .3 4 .i .. .: u u u 3 HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA e x c e ration DESIGN BASIS EARTiiOUAKE A 3, ; .,, , o REACTOR AUXILIARY BLDG. SLAB NO. 5, ELEV: 684'-6" e n cin A no % 'n y 3 ll
seterna con ' c,;e, g o, SARGENT4 LUNDY Rn Date
'ewssNesas. 1
* * ' C ^ #'
N Safety-R elated Nors Safety-Related Page of Citnt D 6I ECII EDISOO Prewed by 6C M Date d-d '7E Project E N E tc. o FEE Mt n m ,, yys o,,, a.ic.7t l Pro). No. M OO Equip. No. Approved by Dets r< w .cn y y - SIT E .5P F.C I F n c 7 % D AM PI MG G G Cu, LPM E.MT D MPl W G; Yi /el c n a a u is t c, . . . . .... . . . . . , , . .. .... .... ..., . . . . . . ... m
~
lit 11 0 te _ _ to 10 [ U se so se el Fe DAM P IN G a....
~
gg / g
.: E -g% i u
I 'n // - u
. : -lo% :
n i , Le u / '\% iu i
' ) \ ^
u'
// /_ / '\
.. \\ -
/ // // \\ \\ \ -
{
~
# -/ // \NTNN -
j M 4 // \ \\ \\
?
Ij -
/ /C '/ \\ \\ .
,{
f ,' m F [f kk \\., - VA
~
E i , S - w%x K \ i
.25 j
. i N-h' T -
[' 15
..: i .
.D . .
.:: ~,, i oc
[ ,g
~
n i e i eete i e e t + r i i e i t *ii.iii, e ire i ,'1 i r i i iii i! ! r ". g
.c .e .m .s .os .ns . .1> .2 . .5 4 .s .s . to u to p.w. w -
HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTPA e xc e ravion .
, DESIGN BA3IS EARTHQUAKE A 3 I - 18 .
REACTOR AUXILIARY BLDC. cecevna ao /h.~5 6 SLAB NO. 3, ELEV: 684'-6"
1
- A SPECTRA Fon Cele. No.
SABGENT$l. UNDY
' ENGINEERS -
72 1 gg>,y__ n ,, . o.,,
< C "'C ^G C N Sa f ety-R elated Non-$elety-Related 'h8 of
[/
% 9 Citnt D E T P. c T MSOM hnwaf by W MM Oste 0 N g,g WF<O FEEM I Revi cf by W6 Date b W5 Proi. No. WO Equip. No. Aptwoved by Date
- m. us % A St rE Me.c.lFi c. 7 W D AMP / N 4 5% Ecv PMEN r DAMPIN G 5// 6/ 6/
. a n a w u u to te 5 mo _i 'i ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
~
n, ", 110 co - 14 0 LQ - ,, to r7% ' so
] /t --
2Fo DA MPIN G - te u r /'u sx - - u ).: Oi A \ Lo u _
- ; ; n
/ A 's\\ \
i L, Lo
- f. /
/ / \ \\
s s b 3 a i 8
. / /.- / \ \\ '\ ~
.s .
ff 'l \ \\ \ ~ j i -
// / \% Y ..
A \ f . - \\\ ~
,I l
!3 _
,i
.3 j k( s NNw + :
J
\\x s\ x s
\ \ \
\
~
g
.o : s y- .
.!S ,
~ .10
.03 '
M
.M .N 1 i i i 1 t 1 f 1 i f f
- f iit f f I I I I f f f I t f f 1 i I I t t I t I I t If gg
.c .e .m .e .m .m .1 .n .: .3 - .e .5 .6 . to LS to Porind. Sec. _
HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA Excav4teon DESIGN BASIS EARTHOUAEC As.#-12 , REACTOR AUXILIARY BLDG.
** *"^ " ~
3 i CRANE ADJACENT TO COL. ROW 17 NORTH-SOUTH DIRECTION
- ~ _ ...;
s n e r=4 rom M c4ic. No. Std10ENT& LUNDY .g , gg_ygga 2,. o ,,, eNo Nesas. C ~ 'C ^
- X Saf ety-R elated Non-Saf ety-R etsted h9e of Citr.t DCMT Prnated by M2/%M Dete 0 'I'd Project EDJRlc o FERM i aevie.ed by HMS osi. 6 -l5-M Pr oi. No. 3'l OO Equis. No. Approved by Date y,,, m y v Mi rE. fPEc u~ic 7 % D AM PlNG S% E vspmec S ~1AMPiN4 F// 9/e/
gg n m to is il to Le J ag g , ,,, ,,i1 i i , e i i i . .. .i1 . iiii iii. . i i i i - '. MO
- a. : .
m
~
- n. .
- 10
$ o f' #
g [ \, c 24 D;,M Pi t! G u o t \! , sh -
\y (,[
! 5 u ,
u
~
[ ~
/~% -
/ \ u U : / '
5 LS
,_,, s s
/ /// @
L U
~
}
~
,.x / \ ic L8 '
- // I N// '
\\ \
. //, W\ ~
G
* - /// W\ ' '
'k '
// %\ ~
.. k
~ i .
/ %\ -
3 py ,j g 4 :
.4 .
i
\;
k\ : ', 5 N y\h i :
~ .,
i
. %~- i is
}
.D ,,
\ -.
~
.a ,,
.06
.h
- i i i e t t t ii * ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 05
[d' i e ii i,er i i t t
,a~ .es .e4 .e .as .os . .L5 J. a '.4 J ' .6 .8 Lt U U tww. sa.
HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA exceraveo DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE A 3.s - l '3 REACTOR AUXILIARY BLDG. CRANE ADJACENT TO COL, ROW 17
. encraa no 6 do nRT-WEST DIRECTTOM
.nce . ,o,
&fbC/ cm. u .
SAF.CETOT4 LUfl0Y
- e N GIN EERS .
_.f M g4-sg Q 3 ,. o.t, l
- c -,c a o o X Safety-Related Non-Safety Related of Pe98
] Cli:nt D 3 OII DIMO Prepared by N II Date d '2 73 lProset EM Ft.tco FEit.M l R M by t4 MS osie 4- ' #2 l Proi. No. Y OO Equia. No. Approved by Oste ;
%m gg $1TE SPEC \F \C-. 7 9'o DAMPtNG, l D 31 2 13 5'/o EQUIPMERT TAMPlN4 5/18/B /
10 10 10 LO .5
- m. _,,,, ,i., , , , , , , , , ,, ,,,, ,,,,
._ x, ne _ _
it0 me - saa 10 [ 10 43 60 1, 10 u _ _ u
- ~
1s 3.o t 10 f m : : 2 2 C23 ts
- -I Po DAMP IN G :
- , -2 % :
Lt , , j , L
- f
.8
' / -
8 _ j 4
/, / MN i t
{j -
/f NA #f ,
4
'4
// %
~
i
'/
O
~!
x[(/ AfV
% )%
3
.D
- l' b ,#
N._
\ -
04
\ -
\
M .CO
~
Ld on, ( i iii iiii i i e i . i i ir i ! 1 i i iiii iiii i i i i i i r iii i
.)
f] .O .03 .N .M .06 .08 .1 .D J . 4 .) .4 .8 Le L5 10
" * ' HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA excerArion
, DESIGN BASIS EARTHOUAKE REACTOR AUXILIARY BLDG.
p , _, ; 4 DRYWELL CONTAINMENT cncTa4 no /3.Q( 18'-0" BELOW RPV INVERT.
- - - - _ . - . _ -_ , ,, " ^ o "' " c ^ ' 'T M. . C.TF c Jr "
- /
SMcTmA rom [ Csic. Nt I SAIIGENT4 LUNDY 4 vfg _ g yg l 1 e N GIN E E ms ,, j
)
C"'**"* N Safety-R elated Nor,-Safety-Related Ps7e of
'l Clint DETCoiT mwM --
prene,ed by CGM o.te 4 l 'tZ : l Proint LERCico FEEM I g w by WH5 o,te 4.lS.R l Proi. No. 3#$ 6 Equip. N o. ApprW by cate
%. us -y y, SITE S eac i pi c. 7 '/o D AM P I N G 5 */o E g v i p u s,9 T 2)Ampi n c, S/s s/e f C 11 # 2 to 13 to to .3 ne * ' ' = 1 ' , - .. .... , , ,. . ., , , , , , . ,,, ,
_ no
~
11 8 _ 11 0 me _ _ n) Et _ ta y 40 to is te 4e _ a
* ~
- ?
le _ to -% _ to p", : E el% pgM p; as ! 2% : Le "
? to I 1
/ J\ '
', i W
/< %A ' -
/ /r \ h -
// / NCN .
]{
~
.4
- .. - t .4
/ N N -
3 v \ \ 5 N4W
~3
- . / (/ i 2
M # M :
,e M h .3
- 4
# m
. . 4j _
~
= .
\f ~
e.
.u -
i
.ii, ,,,, , , , , . , ,,,, iiii ,,,, ,,,, , , l, , , ,
u,, ,,,.f., i.
.sr .e .m .e .m .os . .o J .3 4 .5 .s .: to L> to O Pwn 5=. -
HORIZOt!TAL RESPONSE SPECTRA DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE e x c ita ri o* i REACTOR 1,UXILIARY BLDG. avl - IT DRYWELL CONTAINMENT onctaa no /3.f2, 18'-0" BELOW RPV I:WERT.
. , . - - - - , . . . . . : mve c"'"''' "T"""" -
w .; . . ,
SARGEfjT4LUt/DY sescin< eon f) e
/ !c,q_y,~
J (- g rNesNEsas. c -,c ^" X R ev. Date s Safety-Related N on-Saf e ty-R eis ted Pew of Clknt MINIT EDl5CM Preoered by 60 M Date 4-15 -7 7.- Proieet EM E1CO i:EE.M ) %, gyg g,,, q , ; e, ,g Proj. No. 3906 Equio'. No- Appr W by Date arm. cn v v $1TE $PEciFiC. 7 % DA MPMG, e me _.... n a i, g, g3 MD,bDC g tf Pl % 3fd6/ , tie - 110 3"' -
, [ tao
- 1. '
- i -
_ so se - - _ 1 0
~
to - u > is -
, 7,
~
-169 DAM PlN G Di L1 / v2n
[. I - g, /
,9 r. % 0 [,
A lll NW -: All \\N - i
/N N \ ,0
{ fh % \ - [ j ~,
/// DN I
,l p
%.u
! // !
- y. ,,
.n
~ [ N h 3 l
o
.o
~
- i
~
y - M
~-
1 1
\
_ s j i X 4 1 c ~ i
.a l
I g t t i f rt ff I I ! f ' l f t ! f I f f f I f 1 i ' f f f ' I f I f ' ' ' M
} .ss .en .e .os .as .s
.u pw.s. sa.
.2
.) .* .S .6 HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA
.8 Lo L1 U excitation DESIGN BASIS EARTIlOUAKE
; REACTOR AUXILIARY BLDG.
A 3. t - lb i DRYWELL CouTAIN!1ENT ceterna so 3-43 6'-0" BELOW RPV INVERT.
,.j-_.. -r- _.- ----~r nn nn snt-u2 Iy r-in"*~ -
snerna rom MM I talc. No. SARGEidT4 LUNDY p4 gZ --96,F.2._ n. cat.
'2 NGINccm s . /
^ C"'C^" X Safety-Related N on-S4 f ety-Relat e 6ge of l ct:1, DET EonT EDISobJ preo. red by %M ,
oste 4-E 7E l noiect E Nietc o FEI Mi Re dny WMS o.te 4-15 W-
. l Proj. No. 'D #I O O Equip. No. . Approved by oste m m scre Spects tc. 7 % D A MPt 4 6r 5 7. E.qu ipMgp-- DA M Pl4 % //g/6 [
o n . . u u u a .> Co .' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ***' i a a ' ' ' ' g M0
- n. : : no C4 ,. ,
iO O u LG u . 60 it . 50 u _ _ a
~
~
10 30
~
I el% DAM pa; G : 9 10
- u. .
^
e , r . u u 4 u
/T / \\L -
~:
/// \\\ -
i
# // \NL -
' ii S / // \ \ S
\
f , -
/ // Ts\ -
f j 'N M
,- : y / //
., j
. 5 I DI 5
\_\\.N . -
g N N "N\N j
~
# \\ s
~
7 . 5 _j / t 1( E
.n . s
- g :
C
- g :
W
. g,7 .
3
. \ \ -
.m a
~
n t i t eite t i t i
- t i e t i eiei iit i iii i i i r i e i iir i n ' _ y>
w e.02 .e .e4 .e .m .0: .1 .o a J 4 .5 .6 .: u u u Pw w.5* - HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE excav4ve " REACTOR AUXILIARY DLDG. A 3.l - f 7 - DRYWELL CONTAINMENT cncTaa wo 3 44 6'-0" BELOW RPV I!NERT .
.~t,...n .-e- - . . .,m- n.m n- . = EAST WEST DIRECTION w.,.
.nern vo, f& / ca. no.
SARGENT& LUNDY
'E N GIN E E 84 5 .
f6 /fg -56P5 n o. o ,,,
._ c -ic *c o X Saf ety-R elated N on-Saf ety-R ela ted Pege of
] Citat D GT O CIT ASO M Preowed by NM este d $ lE l Project ELJ Rico FE EMI anw by M A"> 0.te dl-!5 ?E l Proj. No. MOO Equip. No. Apprend by Deto frewsnn. CPS P -l 51TE .5"PE Ft c '/[+ D A M Pih)4 o n a m . to uSfA4vlPMco to r Damps 44 to
/e/e/ .3
- m. _,,,, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,, ,,,, ,,,, ,,,, , , , , , , ,,,
._ 2 ,
ne is.o ne _ iao
~
- a. -
-,io as 6e se u o _ to te .
u
'( . _
te C, 5 E u
- -l% DA M PI NG :
Le gfo $ _ j , , Lo.
~
g .: - r x I i - ff% JnN l -1 : \ k j, ' lN % & j.c E
// N % -
;s!
Y /
/ g .J , ,
, >.s i n u N
++ g 2
%Q :
.,, x\ 1,,
D . x -@ a 1 - g . N .
. o.
f,iit t t t tt t i t t
- i t i e t t t it iit i ieit , i e i i i iiir ie t
's 3
-S a .e .m .e .m .m .1 .u > .3 4 .3 .s .: to ts to HORIZONTAL PISPONSE SPECTRA e x c e rAvion l DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE A 3. t - ig , REACTOR PEDESTAL
* " * * "
- 18'-0" BELOW RPV INVERT.
6*U ' NORTH-SOUTH D I RECTIO'._; _ . _ _
seceraa ron M Csic. No. SARGENT4 LUNDY _.,__ 2ewsinsens.
#d 3 4-;2474_ n .. o.t. l
/G C ** 'C ^
- K Safety-Refsted Non-Sef ety-Related Ptee of f
L) Citat DGTCOlT GSOM Prepared by %M Date d I S - W p,pg Eu elco FGrzM \ R.vw by WMS osie 4-6R I Proi. No. M88 Equip. No. Approved by Oste ; Frm. CPS A' M SITE SPEC IFIC. 7 */o D A u plMq o n so is is 5% EQ U 13 to IPM E WT"to M M N 9 7/lG/el 3 l me .' ' ' ' ' ' a u - >>>> s 'nu .s t n =* = > . - - - .. tco
- ! : l the . _
no l ce . . nso l
~
l
.e _
iao l
- 7 so u .
1e 5.0
- 4e , _
to
~
~
is . ., 1:
*i to e : j :
l : LS ts
- pl% DAV PIN s :
te _
/
M - - - - .- t, x -
,y 1
j ' N
/ /
? -
/, ', N-~%. T -
?
Ij ' U -4 W\ - lli 4 _.y p/ \ x
\ ,
~
4 3 / V
/ \.x\ IN' i
- fgS N Wgh c . 3
_, d ' ' 5 . ., g _
.ns E
J % i .s
.D ~
m
. y _
~
N
.:2 _
N-i m
- i . l b . .os I
~
( .
. iii erir i , , , .
i i e ,i viii , , ,, iiii , , li i i , , , i , , , r J
,3
,e .m .e .es .a .: .ts .2 J .4 .s .e .: to ts a O.a "*
~
HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA excirAv' " DESIGN BAS'S EARTHQUAKE AM'N REACTOR PE':ESTAL 18'-0" BELOW RPV INVERT. ceteva4 wo E, % EAST-WEST DIRECTION p, 1 w , -7,, - - -
-y- , , , - e -m a ----r - , . - - - - , - - - -- - --,
sneva4 roa @ hW Cafe. No. , SARGEflT& LUf!DY gg .Edd;f.2 ' ewsweems. n ev. o.ie c-.cAoo K Safety-R etsted N w-Safety-fleisted Pete of Citne DET2O LT NSOM Properes by 6'-, W) Date d-!SUZ Project M E t CO AMi aevi,,,d by WW5 oste 4-IS-Tr Proi. No. E18 6 E quio. No. Apprend by oste
%. ces 'g z StTE SPEClFic 7 */o DA MPI PMr o n m se to u 5% Ecolpae0T u hpiN6r to S/18/8/ .5 no ... . > . - * . - . . . ... .... - . .. .,>> . > > . . . .. ... no
~
lio , [ 110 to _ _ me Le [ ] tc as ao u - to o _ _ u
** ~ "
1e , lo
~ ~
L1 L5
- elVo DA M PNG :
u f Lo
/ %. -
r+ /+s N N - j - 4-.-'/ A \ \ -
,i d/ l % \ \
?
l {$ - 1// \,X \ -
/// vx -
i.. W i
/ //
/ NNN i
- M - -
V %\\ -
~
d Jr ~ m s - V
~
/
/
]Ns\ ,
- / :
.o _ .
.n l .c $' ,
{ [ .to m
- i X - ,
N -
' ~
.c .es l 43
~ -
i2 ii ni,i i i i i . i i i,, iiii , ,,i iiii , , , , , , ,,,i iiii 3 l Qc l
.c .es .e .oo .es . .o rwu ser.
.2 J 4 .s .e .s to u u ex citation HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA DESIGN DAS*S EARTHQUAKE A31-2o TOP OF REACTOR PEDESTAL cncina no 3-N . -
NORTH-SOUTH DIRECTION
/ s Cale. No-SARGENT4 LUNDY g-- .. . m.... - f " S l. '34e M a. 0.e.
t c ~.c ao o K Lf uy-R elated Non Lfety Reiste % of Cime CE"T 2C iT Eid 15cN J henared by
':A-M Date 4-IB ~2P_.
h5i ct MUR1c.O Fsr Mi Rw W by MMb Date 4- IE ~l?. hoi. No. M66 Equip. No. Appo M by om smancy, ces x 4 51TE SPac mic. ~/% oAqpna4 o n m a g, ,, SV Eey4pueq7 g4ypu;c, s/j3,/g 7
- m. ..... .... . , , , , , ,,,, ,,,, ,,,, ,,,, , , , , , ,
ne - iie me ~ 110 u
- to 4
to -
,. so to -
,. ic 4e to
~
le :
, _ ;, t, 5
- L1
- -l% PA VIPitJG :
u
~
-2E
., i LC I .Mu _ N y.
~
l.^' % % - ' ;- {
~
-A R K
** ' ~
,s l){
f
f
// 't NN I s., : __/ // \ \ -
d
~
i [
\
//
// \ bYK i l
ON J o \ s
- / _
J
.o b E 3 l 1
t 1
,o ~
1 Ns -1
- l m 's 4
,a a* .
.a f ,- ii >><i i i e < -
i ,i,, ,,,, , , ,, ,,,, , , , , , , ,,,, ,,,-
# 83 M E~
Q 88 .85 .1 .D J .) .4 .3 .6 .8 Le Li is tw< sa. ~ HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECT.*G cxcirAtion DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE A3l-21 TOP OF REACTOR PEDESTAL cereva4 wo EAST-WEST DIRECTION r---.~..-~ ,., & Y h _. _
__.m_
- / , -
" C7"^
m sal GEfiTMUtlDY
#0" h ' Calc. flo-
-. le NmNasms . R ev. Date e-.caoo g Safety-Related i
i fion-Safety-Helow 4 g I rC&nt DG~IECIT i E D it o bd Prepared by 6C J'1 . . . l Date d-IC lE Proie" EME)f.o FCMi R M by WRs o,,,24 1 P'8i N8- Nb fevip. No. f parend by Date em. us s 4 SWe S PE.cir:tc 7efo D4Mpmv; e n a a se u u E0WFMEN~T ~P 4 ,M R Id 4 8 /1 8 / 9 / me. . .... . . . , , , , , ,, ,,,, , ,,, 3 _ m, ne . :
- l% DAMP ltM :
[ 2%
/ / _ 10 0 LD _ !
l , f/ 10 1 i to /\ . Q " u i L \\ a it
~
j, [ 1e O :- i .
~
L5
/
LS
. 6 .
~
Le
~
//
f-b.% T
" N\ LQ
; .: ~
// / \ \\
7 5
/ 4 t \\ - 8;
- 1. -
_s
# '/
\ %\ ~
k ' {'
}$; _
/ V
~
4 - i
., L,#w
}"
/ Kk % T,"
~
M : N\ x s m
.5 ,, .
O ,
~
( \ .
.14
\ . ;
\ . #
.PT-, ' ' ' ' '
(Q A
' ' ' ' i e i i .
i i,., i,,, ,,,, ,,,, , , , , , , ,,,, ,,,,.
'a ,
m .m .e .os .e .1 m .2 .3 4 .5 .6 .8 u u A 3. # - 12
==x -- ;:
, excavario ' HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTR.T i DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE A .qq RPV, 14'-0" ABOVE RPV TmtrnT f
_A , , S P2 C Tft A FOR ! Calt. NO. SAHGEliT4 LUtiDY 32 -34 g 2 1e N G8N E E 54 5 .
-f m n n. o.ie
_t c~c^Go % $4f et)-Related N vn-4af e'v-R eletd AM of
~
7 Citr.t DETDIT h: MSCM Prensted by WaM Date d A; 7 l 1 Project EM@\CO Pt=.R M \ Reviewed by MS Date d-IO E l Proj. No. M86 Eowin. No. Approved by Date pm, ces 3 x' blTE S PE.ct F t c. ~7 % C)4 M Pl N G o n a - 5% Ecmpmern 2%Me,NG s/to/a / a se u ze u .$
- m. .... .... , , , , , , , , ,, ,,,, ,,,, ,,,, , , , , . . ,,, .
m. ne no DAMP IN G : [ gl% e :
- m. v m, u: ll l --:u ,
6e il 4 60 is / #I U u
/,-A\ o J
u \)k '
~
\ n
~ ~
( ge (. :
~ ~
O5 - f - LS Le _ , , l j, -- - Lt a '
/ / / \ (\ -
. ; / / \ \\ -
$ s fj / T NN i -
{g- -
/
f / \ X~ v, t
]!,
) / mN .
4 8 I .45 5 y r a w N?
, / 5 g3
% s \
2 _ A 1 : N : ( 3 A\ -
'3
\\ -
O 8 3 - j
~ * ' ~
.O ot N -
- - 1 E , .06
)
~ ~
i iit ,iii t i e i i i i ii t iii iir i iit i e i!e n i i i iii iiit f l
.52 .33 .04 .45 .06 .08 .1 .LS J .) ,
4 .S .6 .8 L8 L3 LS O A 3 f -23
~~-
1(ORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA l
*
- C ' T^ r ' "
. DESIGN BASIS EARTilOUAF.E i l RPV, 14'-0" ABOVE RPV I:NERT.
ecceva4 wo S.To EAST-WEST DIRECTION 3
* - - -e+n .e o s a,w r ,-=_ . - * = = = - = . _ _ - y - .+ . emus - . * ===---- , , . .
d snerna e oss e,,,, y ,' SARGENT4 LUNDY
'e N GINE Eft s .
v yg _ gg ,,' g,,, O .
" ~ ' " ^ "
DE*T WO \T ClSOM
* ''-"* "-*-"- +- '
Citnt Prepared by %M oste d 16.M Project NDC O NM I Rwiewed by NMS Date d -lE l?. poi. No. M86 Equip. No. Apprey,d by Date e, ncy. us X l' SITE SPEC inc, 7Vo DAM P/ A)Cr g n a u 5% Eoviemm DAM PING, S//a/s < is is to u .5 ~ me .>'>> >ii- i i e i i i , , ,, , , ,, ,,,, ,,,, , , , , , , , , ,
,, gg
- :~
11 8
~
110 C8 - 16 0 U ,. LO
~
Le d60
!N G u
f -l% DAr 1P - u
/ 2%
u _ r - ., i I /\
! \
E u ) - u
/
~
\
4 , ( : y ) u 4 - u
// \ \ \ -
,g
/ l>f- \ \\ -
V
/, // X \\ - ', I E -
// /' ,
\\ \ -
h. 3 { f ,,, - \'\\ wxy
- 3. - - ::w// ,!
- s% \N ' :
J '1 h s\\ \ \ ( ,, " , i \
.35 _ ss ,
.15 1 .
*N . g _
.10
.a: .
3 . m
\,_ _
.c ~
\" .3
/ iii- iiri i i i i .
i i iii 11 1, iiii ,,i, i l, i ,,,, , 3 i i , ,,ii , a .o .= .. .. .. .i o ., . .3 .. ., .. u a u tww. sa. < A l' *2 + HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA l e x c 87A r i o* ' DESIGN BAS IS EARTl! QUAKE
! RPV, 54'-0" ABOVE RPV INVERT.
oneva4 wo P> 'T I ' NORTH-SOUTH DIRECTION I l l
. . _ _ , . . _ - - , _ . - , _ . _ _ . . . . . . - . - . . _ . _ _ _ _ . - . _ - - . . - - - , - . - _ . - - . _ , . . - . _ . . - . . . _ . . - ~ . . . _ - . . . - - , - .
. -s , ,
S P1t C T pl A FOR / h Cale. No. SARGENT4 LUfiDY 1 eN GWEE ft s .
$6p/4,71_ n ,.. 0,,,
c -ic a o o K Safety-R elated Non-$a f ety-R ela t ed % of Cihnt CETgoiT Eb\scM Preewed by FoM Cete d -II *~l Project E ME\ c.O FGEMI Reviewed by WMS Oste d-Ib l?-- Prol. No. V 66 Equip. No. Approved by Oste
,m ,c,5 g x $l rE SPECIFIC, '*/ % D AM PING Ifo E.Q0)PugM7 DAMP /M6
.5//e/g /
c n a 10 it il to to
.5
'' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' i e e i r > J 2q 0 A0 i i
- no
- a. : .
~
g, , _ 30 u~ ,, i
- Wo oaf 19 IM C,
/ a it
/
r /
-2% ._- u
/
" A o
/ /) .
1,
// \l h
- n 3 _ ; ic 0s i #1 % \\
L, LS .
~
u 4 g
\gg
~
- to
_ j ff
/7- m' '/ \ \\ ~
n .s _ j j, _ 3 gg - h- -
,/ // \ - U _
^
.6 k I -
/ / 5 \\
~
!3 .3
* ~'
-e.- N
', s' J
\ xx\\ N
% N \N\ :
. \s -
J _ g
,3 .1)
~
~'
.: x _ ao L- : -N ~ a
- ~
l .66 b
~
.,J e i t i eiei i e i t - t i i ii t eit ' ' t i t 8 ' ' ' ' 4O g
.cr .c .e4 .e .h .os ' .1 .o 1 a .4 a .6 .: Le LS u
** HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRIs
"'** DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE
. RPV, 14'0" ABOVE RPV INVERT.
. EAST-WEST DIRECTION
, , _ . . ,,. , - - - - . - - , ., , , ~ . - .
- A . A r fv\,,,, C,lg, p g.
. 5 Pt c T m A rom ,
VGENT4 LUNDY g --Jg ff' 7
,,,. o ,,, ,
e msiNesses.
,i of I C"'C^' X Saf ety-R elated Non-Saf ety-R ef eted Pete 4, 9.ME Oste D -1 4 Clux: "DE:'I Co lT ASOM Pupared by EMOco i GEMI nev,,,,e by W , SIMGM oite 4 ?4 -7 4 moi.a Approved by Oate hoi. xo. 9#18 8 Equip. No.
,_, ces y x sn e se s e. wte 7 ?'o D A M PI NQ 5 '/o Eg o g g ga e-- .Iwa p,g g 3/l b/ 6 /
to ., e n m a s. u to _ m. a, ,,,, .
~
110
- n. ,, -
io .
- u. _
iu u: _ u u _ u it u o # i
.' i f l4 DAMP ltJ 6 n 1.
- -25 ~
$c
~
g t"" - , (' etWe : j u
}l ' _
- /
- r w d 1,
L' Il . > N x t
.s .
~
Il ~ 'J \ 'N i 3 8 3 /!4 % NN i 0 A i - / \ Al- NN 4\
!,, I.
{ , -
/ , x\ / /// Y \\'
FW N.A 4 i j
# \
A \ N\\\ f
- / /
,)/lyY /
- a d%
/
\. 3 J .
, / Kp e-
~
\] :
j k% d\\ f,,
~
2 l M h- N
%;W:; '
.c .
- C~ -
Nv C'
.86 ' ' ' t ' t 1 E
i iii init t i f i t t i e iii ! rit i - i iie i,tr i j 4 J .6 .8 L. LS U
.6 .M .5 .M .06 .I .li .I _
f} -
~x x HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA 43.e-2c DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE excavAvion SACRIFICIAL SHIELD, ELEV: 608'-0" EAST-WEST DIRECTION CPCCTRA NO .
--. ,,,..n.. ,, --- ~ ~ --
- $=
snetaA roa MM Caf e. No. hARGENTMUNDY frr-#- S( ~46fL a n. cer. ! e NGINC Eft s . C "'C ^G o ;K Saf ety-R elated N on-Saf e t y-R e's t# Pm of ( 4 M WAC Date NK Citnt VE~TEo\T E' C IS O M Prepared by Proi ct EUR\C o FEEMi R n e.,,d by
, W 61GGH osie9 7_u'N Proi. No. MD Eeviv. No. Approved by Datt y v v S Fr E $ PS.C (P\C. ~7 N P A M lWC1 u
5% EQulPu?N7 u 2MuM P/ N S 8/G/el a n n . . u
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' - U '
' '4 ' ' ' ' ' ' '
R0 l10 ILO "- - 14 0 C0
~ :"
u~ -
- 60 u
- 10
~
10 f "\b hAf7Pl NCr g y -- -sr. m [ l t
-fs, :
u v' - 5 i // ' /\X : 0 U. , l Yu f l -
\
^/\'\\
- , / x ~u U - , . , .ef// e V V x\
- /, i .\ / W // F \ !\\ ~ .:
g .: , jj gg j j , jj g y x3 E - /, \V // // tN \\
.. ;)
i -
// p\ /// T \' \\ .3 e / / 3 % \ \\ 1 .s !
pMbC[ o s
\ k N y
.3 .
a - W\ : ,
\s4 .
1
.N\ .,
5 -b ! ,,
- '} \ I wuh\ t.
.c - _
. u if I i f f ' i t ' ' ' ' ' ' C5
" , , ,, ,,,, . :i e it i f t t i i ii<
e r 1
. - a. 4 a a u o u
'o
. .. .. .. .. .. a .n .
w s,. p, , -27 , HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA l DESIGN BASIS EARTHOUAKE
; SACRIFICI AL SilIELD, ELEV: 627'-11" i EAST-WEST DIRECTION
- /A 41.
.ncv., ,o-
# coc. so.
StaGENT4 LUtiDY 1e wsw e e sis . M fg. .14 7 2.- n ,, car. c ~ 'c ^ o o X Saf ety-R ele Non-Saf ety-Related Pm of citnt MTDIT DMd Prewed by "~ E oste 9 N 4 Proi ct E h3f C. c. o Femi nev,,,,e ny <'. W5 W)C s os,e 9 N N Proj. N o. 39 OD Equip. No. Apixowd by Date
,m y v SIT E S ecP \ p tc, ~) Ye DA sh Pt M _
se/o sa w pa w , O m p, 4 c/ie/st c 13 2 to is 13 to Lt .S as ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
' '- M0
~
is.0 ns _ _ ce _ . 50 LO Le ~ . 6, to 50 14 , - U _ sc , / ,, ! rl3 DA MPit JG : 1,
/ #s :
- / f 6'4 :
1, ~0 ' i LS l[ /(10 % L;, ~ LO
- m. < ,x .
#c N LN 4 '
{ -
#/ V s \\ -
i
#/ , r X_ \\ -
'a 4// / lXN \\ l
'3 1
f} ,, -
// V /, i %% ~
i as f // N k% s ? ',
' Y /
Aw / / f :
- M/ J' G
= :;: s ~ %
.g .2
\ l
.o i0
~ _ stn-- m , l@ as A 'a A ,
.06
~
i i ir iiei i i t t ' i i iii eiii i r i i iiii r i e i i i i i ' ' i ' ;5 3
,f J ,, to le a .e .m .e .o6 .os .I .D .2 .) .6 .s LS eww, sa.
A '3. i - 28 HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA excavation DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE SACRIFICIM., SHIELD, ELEV: 608'-0" encTam wo p.M NORTH-SCUTH DIRECTION
1 i e
- l sneTRA FOM Colf. No.
SARGENT& LU"DY
'E NGINCG m s .
)
**'C^* N Sa fety-R eisted Non-Safety-Related Foog of l Citnt %YdT NSN Procued by M i S AhC5-- Oate9D D Proim Eh1 En d.O FERM \ now 3, u , su g;,w o,,, ci. N . q l Proj. No. MOD Eevio. No. Approwd by Oste
%. m gx SITE SPEC \F \C, 7'd DAM PPM o n = = a u Qo Ec.ur t em Eq7 bau mpi A) ce 5/, / 3/6 / .
no .. - . .. . . . . . . . ... .... .... .... . . . . . - -
- no ns .
iu te .u I
~
16 _ to u - u u u o - u u
~
flg DA MF IN G n Q-2% :
~0 i -
JIIt/ -Ioro - u i - u j
\ :
L* ,J -
\\
~
. _; j -
LC
*3
// / / /W <\ -
/
i
// / / \\ \\ -
,{
7/ //-- ' M NN -
?
/2/// \ W \\ -
f j ~., -
#/// \ WNN -
;,. j
., E.
s om
~
mdM % % ~ i
#- - g-
' m\ -
, S h ,
~
4_+ :
~
l
.15
,, s - LS c .
(- ww )
\
g W. 1 g cs J N
.M ,%
I I f f f f ff f i ' - I
, t t 1 if ff 1 I t I f I I if I t t t i i t if . 1 f f f g
.se .m .es .e .e6 .as . .tS > J .a .s e .: to u u l A 3 s-29 HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA c x c lTA TI ON ,
l DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE
- SACRIFICIAL SHIELD, ELEV: 627'-11" i eneTmA wO r3 6 o NORTH-SOUTH DIRECTION
~_ _ ._ _ - _ . . . . - - . . - - . , _ _
st,3 (gt) _13 M M MEMOT 3# 5-4-si . SAeed / o .f. 9 sweera4 sr oe I c , ,,' g ,'
~~
l 3;.D2* .MT .; Ull:DY d __ _ o c mcas. -- Is 0 "' C "'C 'G o X. 54f.ty..Reisted Nor h'c.r-l' Nted of 3:_ _ cant 'C ~.ICIT EDl5C M rrered b < MM cat, t. 72l PtWeet Ela c!co FE'c.MI 3%,m mas 3m 4.!,s:n.i itsi. Pf o. Mdb _,E, uip. No. _Avroved by Cat, frm. us V 3; Tl7 E S P 501 F: c '/ DAM PlN -
,, 33 ., ,, 1, u ,) % EGVIP(p ENT D AMpl%
x, _,,,, ,,,, , ,
,g, , , ,,, ,,,,
- l 86 l 11 0 +' t g ,
1;a
. +
1
- l 20 , :----
1*.3
' ' ' d u r i 1u
{ -l u __ u to l l
~
u r-u l 7
;u
" ~ ' 4 1 :
, u I ' '
lo 1 o - 1u
'V : ,
~
},$ I.5 2
L, -- , - 1% DAMPlNG . f i ii ..
-7 ..- 2% DAMPING ,
.__ _! ~ .
' _3 4 -
., f f i i -6 1 .
.s
)
- y. ./. . f-
- 5% DAMPING i Ty~-~ l- 1
.e
?
.5 l -
/ / (
' q- -10% D AMPING -- '
i .5 'e a . 5 d / o - 5 i, c m 4, .4 ' ' '
, _ _f W .
4M
*3
, . ._ A N '3 g f I s'
.g
-D "
i \ ~ \l -
.2
.j 7
'N k km 1.,
.2
.35 ,-
7 N' N,
' .N 15 Ic -
%. ,e
-i .
r TQ._ I : . g
.e I- I '
-- _ ____ l
. I! ' _.i'. n a ! .__!-!
, , , l. , ,,'.a fV p.G ,,,.
.9)
.04
.05
.06
.C1
.i
.I
.13
.2 '
.3 ,
4
.) ,;6
.8 i1 Le LS U b
A 11-3 0 VERTICAL REFPOMSE 9?ECTRA ' excitation DESIGN BT.SIE CARr!!C.UAKE REACTOR CONZAI::: E:c SHIELD sacev=4 wo d-!? EL. 583'-6", C13'-6
_ --m_.,_._.. . . - - SLS(NI)-18 5-4-81 A ffa r/, ee f C/ewu f 'h #
- 2. o f .9
- - =
s re c roe n von t., \ , y a.
- c.
- n :
g v , * . 6 a.1.,.
- v
- g f.9 e6.s. *as .tyr -
.::e wmcene s l03
""'C^* d Saf ety-Related ! Fon-T.staty-R elat ed he cf Cli:nt -W I N Frersetd by N3'M Grt i *'C Prcie ct E W .tC O FERMl Reviewed by M6 nue -bW
-Proi. Ns. 3 '7 6 O Equip. No. Aosterad by
- - _ -- et -. l
,,, c,3 x , Di'T E. SPE c t F i c. 7 */c DAMPING 5 e/o E.qu s PM r.N 7 DAM PW G e n a w to u io me ..,,. .... , , , , ,,. ....
to Shale.1 *
~. ,: m lio J
- .i ;%
no ~ A iao
~ ! -1 so - - A. o
._ .=
d 1 so _.. -% L J u l - u (0 , io
~
to . u u 2
~
u
,- 1% D AMPlNG }u u -
p 2% DAMPING
~
}
'u -
f',A Z v- - - 5% DAMPlNG _._ te
- n. :
// l i I /
'10% D AMPING
--- r W
// \
- 8
; h. ~-P -
?
~
=, f , q. ;
4 V l\. i 1 ?
$.3 .
j m, g ^
~
lh ,, > _ _\ \ u
~
Y
.4
(
/
LPxY,4% 5
/ \'
i y/ 7 x x N. N ~
*u.~ 2 N ~ M n
N N>N NN.. g 1
.a _
~
g __
. io -
.a .
n l _
.N
. ii, ,... I, .Ii - ii,
,3 1 i iiii 1 ir ,,,, , , _ . , . , , ,,id,i,i.3
.er .a .oe .r> .o* .os 1 .n .2 .) .4 .s .s .: a u to -
~
rsr t. se. M '. 3I ~ VERTICAL RCSTO"SE SPECTRA excitar8m
"'"** DESIGN BASIS CARTHOU.GE I CS REACTOR CO;C; 7::" Erit SilIELD !
l ,
SLS5NI)-18 A Y M o d S 6
- 6H h "O "
5-4 81 . 54 e e t 3 v /- 9
-= seccynA ron Cet. No.
10 3/C.CEiff4!.UilDY
.ent.em ens 1' e , ,, ,
V C C ^ G o X L f ety- R e'.a red N on-Sa f e ty-R e's tt ri P::: of
\
Cfknt CEWotT EDisotJ pewed ey s>e o M oie43-E Proisct EWC FEWI nevitymt by M% oeie & l W - l Proi. No. MOO f ouio. No. , Approved by Oste rew,, crs y v STE S PE C \ F\ C. 'l Yo DeMPIMG 5% EQuiPtAEar DAMPI N 6 5/ta/O o n a w .u u a . to .3 me ,' 'i ' ' ' ' > > > 'i- >i i i i' ' < > ' i > >- '
; no
~
lio 11e no ,. _ iao
~
ao - ! - to u i i so l io So 4e ; . Ao lo 1o p . d ; i ;
- 1 -
i , u L5 l : 1% D AMPlNG : to 6
/*
V
>N 7 /
2% D AMPING ', ,
~
to g
.8
[ j7 7, jV y 5% DAMPING { ]
/[/ I - 10% D AMPlNG
~
.e A l 'M -
j . ', -
/// .
A\ . 1J du / t\ 7\W x
. /
\
/
m r I J .
/
/
, N x NmN . . ,
A .
/ s . . - -
~
a
%N 1._7 \ -
.o _
a-
.n l C8 l
.e ~
os i i ie ieie i i t - i ir i t in i iii iiie i i i i i i ie ii t 'iv
,, ! r c3 a .o .e4 .e .oo .os . .u .2 ' J. 4 .5 .6 .: to ti u PerW, Sec. - . -
A3.;.3t VERTICAL RESPO!:SE SPECTRA . excav4riou DESIGN DASIS EARTHQUAKE REACTOR & AUXILIARY BUILDING *.iALL
, ,, e y ,, , ,, o d.14 EL. 583'-6", 613'-6"
st.s(No-la /? f-/oclem ea f B " S-4-81 neet 4 of 9
~
seccinA von Cate. Ho. 5/.1CEi;TS LUi!DY
-cNcm ens, R n. Dere fm .
) C " 'C ^ " C' X Saf ety-R elatcd Non-Safety-Refited P::: of Cient M G CIT EMOM Premred by Y'M Date 4-9*R Pro;ect E W.m FERM l Revimed by HRS o,i, 4- 16-R Proj.No. M OO Equio. No.
Arctorad by Date
%, c,, y y SITE SPEC I F IC 7'/o DA M PlNJ G 5% EQQlPSEQT D AM Pl% 5/18,/6l n n to is se u to to .)
gg, , ,, ii,1 . . . . i i i i ii ii,. ii,, .... i , , . . , , ,
._ a0 '
tio _ _ ito me _ tas L5
] 10 to to 10 10 40 ,
40
~
~ ~
. it 10
- Y
- 1% DAMPlNG f3 .6 10 V j /
2% DAMPING j
- -b - 5% DAMPING :
- f y .
t.' // .
/10% D AMPING ~
to 2/ \A / . - Tl '\ V i W.
}'
Al 1/!/ /
)Y \\\
E
?
( 'l -
//// ,_ 1 \ \% 2 f
j i //YF~ \ \ \\\
~~,
'l!
J Ef
////
\\ DR N i
-, l
/ .
4 2
~ 'v -
s -
> l
~ i, E /- s
\x N .
i, D
/
\ N N N%h i i 2' .
2 .
~ '
2 . C'
.h s ,rk 3
- i , ,, , it. i i . . .
i i i ii iiii iiii iiii 1 , , i i , ,ii ' i,iJ n j V .st .c .04 .5 .06 .os .1 .15 J. J, 4 .5 .4 .I Le LS 16 ; em s - - A3,;_33 VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA c x c irm os DESIGN BASIS E.?.RTHQUAKE - REACTOR & AUXILIARY BUILDING UALL
,,ceva. wo _c. .l_ g EL. 641'-6",
~ . - . - - - .,- . _. m , . _- _ _ 659'_-6"
=-. & 684'-6".. . _ _ - - ._
sLs (r;I)-18 /?fVocAe m e,< T /d s-4-81 c4yt r 49 I SVtCTRA fcn is No. SCGE .:74 LUij0Y p e,- g ,,,
'es=mc:as _
L e - .c a c, o g S'IH1' 0 *I* td _ Non-!.efety-RetstM pm y I
'l C'ont M Y OlI EDMN Prec.ared by 6GM 0,te d -6 * '-- I l Proint EYDCC EE2M I Rnitwad by HHS o,i,4-iS-72 l lProj.No. "db 6 Equip. No. Approvad by Otte
,, ,,en y y SlTE SPEC)F.lC 7% DAMP 1NG n = u u 5% Ecoset4E47 u DAMPINCi 5/1els (
o w t. . no .' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' > > + - - ' - mo tio ,. , no no _ _ me LO ~ (0 l o it i0 4' u 10
~
g
- - 1% DAMPING .
~
/
- v .-
'.0 ,.
e 2% DAMPING - [ u
- s. .
t . j
,- -- 5% D AMPING kJu -
- u
. 'g 7
j - o -- - --- 10 % D A M P l N G .
- ,I -
,/ // t [ -? ; [ to 7 // /l i .'l\ < .
_3 -
't"
/ /i \ \i\ j f // ' \ M i i
/ I/ \ \b
*f j I,-/ // \_ \V% -
f' f' \ \N'N !
- x X -
b4 v ,___ t'
,2 N%
i \ ^ ,_
,, K --
N9 N N l .,, o, . 1 E
~ '
I :e _ l - I 1 ' .~3
. 8'
[ , , . i i ,,i it,i , ,,, t ,e i i ii 1 , >
.6 ,1) ,2 .3 .4 .5 .4 .8 Le LS .te p 42 .D .04 .06 .08 .3 'w/ y $g VERTICAL aESpot:SE SPECTRA A 3. i- 3 4
- t
- c 8 A a DESIGI; BASIS EART!! QUAKE REACTOR BUILDI::G SLAB l seceva. Ao d-lG ._.
EL. 5 8 3 ' _- 6 " _,613'-6" '
~ e:- -m -- _y- -
_- . z l l
SLS(NI)-18 A //0 6/e ture f "8
%4-R1 gpg g , y
* *-*""*" l 9PECTAA p02 Ca'e. Nc.
I"e.e ..'.2e a06. r= 1=',% t* =p d gpei dm li ., I' g I v
'c N GN E E f4 5 b - -
0'C 10st:
' #'
- N k f et v- R _t!s ted N 36-k f e ty-R ela ted Pnq o'
- set VEWOIT EDisotJ p, ,,,, , g %m g, g _g g, f Prc. :t E.WICO Ft=:EM [ Revi:wed by q g g, Dated-I,*_E D f Pre.i. No. ZOO Equip. No-Apprend by g, rr m. us ); x SITE $PEclFr fYo DAEPIN G I l
w n a a 1, ,, WoEQglPMENT DAMPlNG 5 8/61 me . i r. . ,,,, ,,,, ,,,, , , , , , ,
,_ no tit iu
~
ut _
~ ,
SC - . '. 0 g 9 i
*s
_ i _ _]u it I b ' u u . _ l. <,
. g -
1% DAMPING i
/
- is "
- / g- 2% D AMPING _
{ ~/
~
to c- - :: 5% DAMPING " h ' I[ b,k j [- , [7 3
- 10% D AMPlNG :
i Vu - i
- [' .
u ; '
,E
* - - LC
/ // 8
-~
AUg
~
, ~, -I- // fi ,
y -
/ // / / \ i \\ i 8; O
I // / r M W- < - i { '.3
/ // / \ \\ \b 'i -
'f j -
e j / \\\ \% , ! -
" i
',1 " / \\' s% !
r , 7 x N y Nj( w-.y s +
.27 , ,
- \ N -
.u A \ <
2 NQ% N j
~
- r. t
._ _ .3,
~
U _ l = i.a i .
.a. - -
.c.
f.o_' E .c
.N 3l
' .86 .a ' . ' ' ' < .u ' ' ' 2 J r ie i
.1 iiri 4
i
.5 .*
I i ,
.s u
, ,i, u
u in - h,<.sa. A31 -M VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA
***^*'" DESIGN BASIS EART!IQUAKE .
REACTOR BUILDING GLAB EL. 641'-6", 659'-6" & 684'-6"
~
enevaa no d - 17 r -__- _ _ __ _ _ - - - - - - _ _ _ - - _
-~_-,__...--_._....
SLS( )-18 AEN6/ F m ee b , 5~4 (), ee f 7 Oh 9 ; s et e rna roe ' Cale. N s'
. 0/J.G E .T & LUTlDY mucin: sus. R n. 'D e te
*~'#^"
X $4f ety-R elated tion-Sa f eiv-R ela te<j Pr.M of Clic e MIROiT DIMM Prwred by YC'M Date d
- 9E Pro!e:t E M IC O EEEMI A rdewed by HHS. o,,, 4 R.
Proj. No. YOO Ecuio. No. Approved by Oste
"* h 1 .
' SrrE SPECIFIC ? 7d DAM PIN G o n 5% EQUlPfAERT ' DAMP it% 5//e/;j ao is to 13 to to .5 mg .i ' i- i i>> > > i e i i a i i i si . ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
6 i ' Mo no
~
iso me . su Lo to I to ao is So to . u 1% D AMPlNG E g to io
; ,/ 2% DAMPING -
- j / - 5% D AP. PING -
to f \ f 10% D AMPlNG ! Lo
- n 4
off 1%( I
/" gg
!N%
18
7 i
1/ 1 i
'\ K -
{
-W / r% \ \N -
f'
! . 'l, 1/1// / \ \ h _
l! l
- FN i N \\ \ '1 RN E,//e-// /
\ \'\ ! ,
-p
[ p
- / .
/ - / x . X , :
.o ,,- V/ -
/ %% 9 i
.1) 3 - N hk
. to .
.c [ '
.a
.h .M
~
t ' i e er?, ili
- t , ! t it ie it t'
'Og ir e e iiie i i i i i i e iii y e
.= - . . .- .- .. - >- .> .. ., .- .. " " <-
nn k . A 1. ) _3 r, VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA c x c a vAview DESIGN DASIS CARTl! QUAKE l\ AUXILIARY DUILDING SLAB . T s,cerna uo c_]g EL. 583'-6", 613'-6" & 650'-6"
st.S(NI)-18 s-4-81 kIb U" #'" t),m t 6 o }- 9 r SPLCTRA FOM "*'** j fA! 05.'TS LUf!DY 2C NGINEE RS .
- f. n. Oste
* ~ ' " ^ " X Saf ety-R elated N ort-Se f e ty-R elate d fa;s of l Client UU N OlY D 6 c3 Y Preosted by MM Date 4-3'~IE Proien EOaco fee Mt n o.. . , , , , . yas g,,,4.g.g Proi. No. M86 Eovio. N o. ,
Apprend by 03i, erm. us y, STYE SPEC.mc. ~7 fo DANPING y 5% E qVlPM E M DA M PlNC, 5// e/ 6 / w n a io to u to to ,5 mo _i - i . . . . . . , i , ,,. , , ,, , ,,, ,,,, , , , , , , , ,,
- l 110 no
\
~
. 1 "8 - no
)"
~
" ~ - 1% D AMPlNG Lo
~
io ,
! to
- 2% D AMPING
~
./ ,7 l
~
a 5% DAMPING
,; 1o
~
! /
-[
~
3,
~
[ rn Y - 10% D AMPlNG' : Le J X i L$ t LC T'/ /
/ / /r/ \\
/- ,
/ .id u .
1 - 4 / /l/ / U # ; - :
// / / e' \\ \\\ i i I ,, -
/ / /// \\ \% -
( l, [ //// ,
~
%Y7 -
\\ ' x% L
~
i // 1 J -
* .)
~
\
K- 1 . :
, y ve .. -
*U -
.15
.c
, -Ng g
- M l
I I I I I f*I I ' - l g t f t E t I tt I t g g g 9 ,9 gg , 9 , , ( , , , , ,9, R .E3 .te '.05 .06 .2 .U ,3 l
.1 J_ 4 .S .3 .8 10 LS 60 r,, ,,,e, 5,. . .. -
A 381 -37 . VERTICAL PS.?PONSE SPCCTRA
***^" " DESIGli SASI S EARTHQUAKE -
AUXILIARY B".;ILDING SLAB l sereva4 wo . d- ld) - _ _ !!. ' . EL. 643'-6" & 677'-6" 1 o
/4 NocA r- Fu t- U )
. sLs(nz)-18 5-4-81 g ), ee.f cy a f cy neccTmA rom Csic. N o.
!:A'.i'jEi!T 4 LUf!DY a.,,
L-- R o.
>cNo:Neems.
Q C "'C ^ o o X Mety-RebtM N o n-Me ty-R eb t M Ne of V - c i ,, ,,, C E.TC oiT ED\$chJ he ared by %M care 6 IG IE Froject ENICICO fEMI R n'M by NNb Dste 0-I0'*72-Proj. No. 3%O Equip. N o. Apprend by Dats rem, ces y M SITR SPf.C WI C; . 7 d/o CA M Pl% o n = i. 1. u5% % UtPMENT 1. DAMPW4 t. WIBhl .i ag ,i . . i iei i i i i i i iiii s is i iiii >iii i e a > ' '
' . .40
~.
I lie [ 110 14 0 CC ,, 10 LTe [ 40 to
~
S.0 il 48 - 40
=
f 10 16
'.8 11 gg 'g- 2% D AMPING i
- - LS LS 3
~
g - 5% DAMPlNG to
~
Y - 10% 0 AMPING to
/ / s \ V r .
_/ /!, . - A% - I 7 8 { - f' /y \ \ - { _i/ // /\ \% -
?
/" // '
N\' \
^
"f j.' ,
/ /! /
.\ \\ \ ~
'.,, j .
f,
- . //
r \\\ N \ N g - i
\N
~
- A#
,' / / s - _
y ' g
'15 li
.22
-i
'NG~ h,, ,
, 13
- A [ M
.. .c4 m l
~
i i i + ,eii i e - i e iii t , ii i i ii e iii i , - i ig i iii i i i n' . c,3
.y i i
.ar .r) .se .n .cs .os .ts .1 .3 4 .s .4 to LS to ig .
. ,. x _
A 3.1 - 33 VERTICAL RE3PONSE SPECTRA ' c x cirAT s on
' DESIGN BASIS EART!! QUAKE AUXILIARY E*)ILDING .
. cerna wo . C ZO. .__ CRANE LEVEL ELEVATION '
-. _ _ .; ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ __. __ -
CUENT DER 0IT EDISON li SARGENT&LUNDY "5' oeson w "co"" cm
. O I! P,_u
, 2
' _ ,o
, m a==== .
e>e.no a s,n. .. .
!O ! tat eTI AL S s'. M . $
t m y x SIT e. SPac Qle '7 % DAM P N4 Ws Env nom en i- DA M pmG< 5/t 2/s a s a a u u u u > l me .....
....j. ..*. x ' s .
- .==
me t<.;,. l ies
' as u . : i
. u
~ ~ ~ ~ - j, . .
l . u . .
'n l
u . . u. o ,, e u u
. .. .. . ., .s .
, 7 u
E ll' pl% DAMPING l l j u , .
- 2% DAleING - -
i , , u O 5% DAfGING l I l l
- - 1 .
' f/1O% DAMPING i; e :
M ' ..-; ,1
-l _///f. . , _
i - i i
//// i l lj -
Ii X. //// ', * "' 1,g l
- ; i N // I
,, (.
~
! . t i I /V N 7'/-/ mmi i i
! I y
IJ f _ xK V;
> i i i l
- 'i N s
//h '
I i, N
. ,% /[ l , j
, v J -
II,. l I
\k,k__. 3 N .
.m I
4
.N\VA
,, u w.
.5
'y W
,A ,
t M- . ., t ! ' .* 7 3 t_ t t t iete t_ i _f _ i i s e 1 i ttie r ir r e >*i i t t i '
.. 2 .o a a .. ; u u u was, sa. -
A . U .. . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . - .~ HORIZOhTAL PLCOR RESPONSE SPECTRA " h.l
! DESIGN BASIS F.ARTHQUAKE
~
"i A31-3T -" s#'8 -
- l COLPONElGR.H.R. SLAB COMPLEX, NO. 1 .
NOR & SCUTH , - a.rc,a m v. .,. em, nso
- __-._-:-v...= ..- : n n- ,-nc n n n - ,-- -... ~ . = - ----- - - -- --. - - - -
, . . . . _ . . , .__ - -. ... - ~ . _.. .. _ . . _ ._
i .SdRGENTELUNDY " "" " DESGN BY - CLM
. EEI"
~ EV, 2, 7-B-80 immmam-
.( CHECKED St-. S0'4 I N 8 84. N & f U aksa n.s.n
- IWifl&La % 8f 5 mg %v .5i r e, S PE CI F t C 7% DAMPING
= = = = _
u 5% u Ec;uuPm w Damp u q 5/jg/asf me .- .- - - - > ii>>iii.. . . .<i, . . <. i > . > > . ma
~
l l : u ~ u
!
- g m -;- l
, . as
. i l'-- i i .
M U
,_ l t . s .
~ * '
.; u . I U u 1s ig pAgpygg u [ a
~
I 'i o% DAMPING -u u E [' / -10% DAMP:I
-55 DAXPING i
u u p/p. l [ j l
. ._, . . .. j l T u
/ i,
- . , i ) c
.!'l . .
~ '
! l l
.C , : e - :
. / I u
>n1 1 \ x, s eTT 4 'xx, >
,3
{' -
#/ r-- 4 ' N N. ! i i -
i t -
/1/ / \( tX N. . . i 6
- 'j -
i _i i nu \ N NA - ! f .')% 'i- ' ,
!: I / // i NN NA ' -
.a 3
s E
- W! / -
! y ,
.. \\%N i >- .
i t .
. s 2 .=-
.t i -
, .3
- N :
1
~ i :
1 .D _ >
\\w; -
2
> * ~ '
'. i
~
, i
'[ b", '
j m ! - ,s ]; ,~,,,, ,,,, il. , eli er ,,,, ...I,,i. ,,i, , , . . ,
..i :m
- a a m .e m .a a .u a > A J a .
- u u u 1, v4 sn.
I . Jn 'V
~ HORIZONTAL PLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE 1 ** l B.H.R. COMPLEX, EAST - WEST '. .. . A 1-9 4 COMPONE}?? SIAB NO. 1, '
E -5 t.LEVATION: 590'-0". <a _
--,ww... --,-,-.--~..-....-,~.-...,_...m..~,.,_.,_--.,,,...m,,.., ,e.~,,,,_,..,_v.,,~, . . . , _ _ . . , . - , . _ , , . - . . _ - . ~ , , , - . - - - - , ,
- a. cuwr o m m m son SARGENT&LUNDY '" " ' " " ^ '
".t SL-3147 OE$1GN BV cr' 'I ..
iEN C34NEEAS .- NED BY
.W.i . REY. 2, 7-15-60 ,' 411. 700, 1
- I DAT4 e 4 +s 6 74 ie ONtT4Att .f. A e 3 j ,
%g .x-A. S ITE S Pc.C. l Fi C "7 %s PAM Pl NG !; 5 % E:qu i pm ecy DAmpig s/f e/ Je/
li s a a a u u u u me ..... ,...; . . . , j;!
~
'I as
' .i g ,.
) l 1 -
ce a,
!]
~~;
!, - 4 , , t i .
u
', 88 l
- s u -
u u u l u
# ,.--- g% DAMPING , _
~
i fg2% DAMPING l u
; 5% DAMPING 0% DAMPING :
l u ' u IN /. 5 s I i 5, o
,O .
ni j ;
, u
/ t l.v.L '
u < i
- 1 ,,
i I F
// M fi\N i // 7/ x Av 1
i i i i
- ,, i 3
! i r/ ! _X \ h i -
,, i '
MuMNNN ! !
,, 1 f M' ///. NM N%I -
., j ,
P ,~ c f/ ' I '\ NhX T i ,
>t . '
- I i
! I ' '
\\ !
l - % K - 8 .-
,x :
xx u i . Ng I
.m3 --- , 7 , : .a
' ~
! I _
i,,4li 1
%\J
. . . , { .ki,.32 4 g,iiilriyi i e i rlt Li ,iei o _,l , , i i i
, ,l,!. .
) , .. . .i .. 2 a ; u a u
~
1'O i
/ HORI20t&AL PLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA '
DESIGN BASIS EARTIQUAKE
.All-4(
R.H.R. COMPLEX, NORTH-SOUTH 1 I ./ -
', COMPONF15
. A to
- , SLA B UO . 2 f 7
s s> r. c sn m r.w . A,vs nu ,
~ ~~
': CUENT_ D2TF.0IT EDTSON SARGENT$LUNDY
"" " El!E ^
_, DESIGN BY cDt REY. 2* 7. U M i iRNGINEEAs - ND EY 3GM ---
~ )
t t Y. W 4. f 4 M.$ 6M47tA U
%m : A S TG SPECI F i c. 7 7'o DAM P l %
59'o Ecu g e m gg)7 Dyspin s 5ligj,q t e a a a se u u u .t 'l au >>
'i>>5 - i - - 1 >'- .> - i ;' i i i - - - -
'g at t
;i ne ,,,
et
. ; i , .
as ,
, we as : , l lu l --
i-.. r- , , i , T, i~ ' is w
! f7 lh -DAMPING 4 DAMPING ,
u c 4e
~
x$ DAMPI.NG ! Eo I i ///T /*""* . . . . . . . . . i i, p , A I u I y 5-I[M(i 5 u O u J n l
~..
r i_3.x . u.
'1H / : /
~~
%\ NM i -
j g
,g
- 4 /// / \\ \'N I
.v # / \N N N, ~i i l
,3
/ ///
' O \h -
ji '
. 4 .4 . II _ ..t. 4
! 'g j
W
- . : / l i :
.t 2 ,
.5
~
\ :
,', LS
- i :
i .
'U
, . j, J -e U
. ~~i , I j i,1 -
88
, . I j \'N .
.as I
h _- ,*
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '! ' ' ' ' ' J-A ' .1 ' ' ' ' , tl
.at .a .N 5 .46 41 .2 ' ' ' ' .) ' ' ' ' . 4 - J .4 .4 u u U w sn -
. . . . . . . . . . , . . . ... . . - - - . s .
HORIZOITAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA A 3.t - 4 2 . DESIGN BASIS FARTHQUAKE , .. - l J A-11 l R.H.R. COMPLEX, EAST - WEST l ,_ S i i - l CO,MPONE?.'.T.mm a c,,IA, B n ieNO. 2 J
,-~,m. m. ,. - . , . . .
....-,. - ,,, _ . _ . . . . ~ - - - . - . - . _ - . . - - _ _ , . . . . , . . ......-,,.-..-.,.--.-.-_---,-m_. -
ri SRRGENT 4 LUNDY sees acatuarom ;; dm- a cenru:X a cutexcx i u, p7gg.
'ENB1Metas - Ots!OW srECTAA AY Ja!NT/8tAs a X m s wro a m av toz en Encu stor l ! 02 APR 80 -
DRitFING 0 010 0.020 0.080 0 100
! 107FEV .
APPENDIX A
. ~ '
,, ;; SITE S PC-<: mic. 7% DA M Pi h3C, - . . . - - -- - . st, nu 5% E:GuiPMeAy;- DAMPJNC) REY. 2, 7-15-80 ,
i
' 20 0 Ale /6/ 19 0 FREQUENCT IN CF8 50 20 10 96 00 0 '
i i , ,'
-o.o
+
to.c .il i ini i ' a' ' ' i i' ' ' ' n* - i iiii vive iii s 'i i s i iii 's i e i.
~ t s.f, 38.C I
_to.n f 10.C$ l 8.GC f :.cn
" 1% DAMT ING ,,
I' g.cc _
=
- /,, 2% 0.V.I DIG' .,
; g,ge Ca'G ING f'
'l - f /' 5 v. .m I. 4 0c
,. f- ,. ^* " " " T'"-
.m s.. ,,
- r . ,/,//, -
. aa 2t-
=
3
~
t .33 1 'i- Y .8C':: /L\h : 1 - *i .__ ///#,N
,/ /,
\ ,\(
E 2 02 E = - ' s.ao s c.sc-l- e.. wC -
// //
)
\\ X N -
ti ,, ~
/ \ \ -
3.e e.4c bh _.
\\
5
. p.x 5
,_ s
- [ N X% ~
s .so
% s T ~
~ --
3.t3 !I 0.tc - 0 15 0 15 l-1 5
\ g\y 3 3 10
\
O.lc 5 k.as e.e f m\ -
;c.cs
.I 0.c iiii siti 9
,,g
- ein iti _i i t t i iei iter _1- e i i t_ iis
'l g,g _ t i i i i n t_ eine e i a.oe o.os c.to 0 1s 0.to 0.30 c.6a 0.so 0.60 1 0 15 t.o
. o.02 0.03 0.9 O .
^'<-43
__tet soara-sovra . .. ~l HORI200fTAL' FESPONSE SPECrEA - - ' -- -- -- - - l ' ELEVATIW 6 3 7' -0" - 1' _.--i.0cmm er sus no. 3 , . . . . . . A-12. _'>- REVISION No. O . .
o, P SARGENT 4 LUNDY oestograrvhewesen u.6Je i entncats otstow srcerns at .:smust.as s v ! t! . Penna wrocuco av ler 88 cacu stat li 02 APR 80 onnttxo n.oto c.oto o.aso o.too }
>l( 108FEV APPENDIX A l
v v- SLT'E SPE c iFl <. '7 76 DA M PIN G , L
.*I 21.-3147 * ; 6 % F_<Qu iPM ENT DA MPi4G Sh6/a/ arv. 2, 7-15-80 t
l. TSt0UtdCY tM Ct8 l 50.0 20 0 30 0 30 a.eeieins 3.s gg *- -in si ae a 's i e n e e i e i e i e i i i e t i i ,3 0_,t i i 3 .0 ( l iiis a i ii i>> 1 iii siii ,a i i si,. i iei sei , , ai ai,g l - .
. ~
38.5
- 18.0
- t -
10.C . g09
~
' 0 0C,",
0 0e 9.0 -
# ~ .00 77 -2% DM )IN 3 - .
-l, 0 00 5 8C j . g g g, ,
- l. 4,:e
- / W WM " 00 Seat ,
.00 im .
t z 0e
- .0c
,/r/q .m i
- l 1 30 7
1 8C - 1
,,.0, g>/ < / 1 . < -
4 00 8I / \\ b_ i[ b \ [,,[ E /zulf \\ h . 0.c - n -
,.,0
, e.sc ? Y~ Y - N =
~
s.sa ,j g.se . 3.30 _ r s -" N - 1
! N -
2
- < -_S,gg gg x x\
3 =I8 1 01F g .. 3 10 e.10 _ 3 c5 o es g l
- r -- --N :_
i g.oe 3.os f e i t] g titi seit i r tin att i eit l g,g " t i_e_ insi i t_ ie int lt i1 t i t i t 1.8 0 01 0.03 0 04 8 34 0 05 c.10 0.18 0 20 0 30 0.40 0.80 09010 t.0 , . FEA160 IN SEC8H03 i A t i- 44 . _ _ . ...__...... -. l I DRE EAST-1.'EST . MORIZ0hTAL RE5F0tiSE SPF.CIRA ~ ~ ~ " ' ~ . . . A-13
' ELEVATION 6378-0"
- Final
;-- loCATim PDOF SLAB NO. 3 .
. . REVISION -
- 30. 0 . . . ....._... ,
l
.. ,,y~...
.. - -. . _ -. _ - L . J L.: ;- -- ' _'_r.
m~ \
.n_.= ~ _ . - -. - - ~ . . . . - . . -- - .. . .. .
i W4 318 L .t _m e_ u* .*g, i SA!? GENT &LUNDY
"*"-'"'a ," " - = Oi?F ' ' 'E N Gly R Ests oe m a . - - _ .. REY. 2, 1-b. tw. -
_ gy y 3,i{ , N v SITE- Sr.ec.tr i e 78 0AMrs % : V **
- 5% EQuirmEw h%eiw .
.DAtt o * *s t * . .
l
.S/j e/g , , sunms <, . . > . . . . . , , . . . . . . . > > .. .. ,, ., r.a ji 'i ! t' '
me . M, ~ ~ -- u
- l. ..
M i i ,
..'A u .
+ ,
-- .3u I t * >
u -. . . . . - . .
-' u
- 8 i I !' f u ----
. I , . I 1 ll -u
. 4e 1.
-j !I I -- d, u 6 I l
t i1 ;
.u I * '
. "u i . .
..:.... lsIil-u- -
.u
- i l r
u 1. i . l . . . - I! l t I
. u t .,l l .l, s
u
!. _ _ i*. -_ i.
1 : . u 4
- i ; i !
i;2 {, -
. a ,
i 3 t
... _i 6
{ - l 1 { ,i;. i. l g l% DAMPING l 4 g4 lJ 2% DAIGING
~ ' ' '
; I- i -
/. 5% DAMPING 3 7d ,
r l . Im 10% DAMPING . <
,j y .q/
[. - 2 : . . . . . . _ . . . _.3 - if 4 1 - , [i 2 .. _. - i i ti A i . - -
< __p
?
,/ - :
I;' , ! l .' l l 3 :
.s .
~a
- i j s e
+
. .a_a id
' _ L. - -
L 7
~
mx x! xh- - x ;t hl i 4
. 'T - _
s ., ._ MN
.- i
.u -
._ n _i i
>, ,1, ,!,,,, . i ~z a
.a
.=
.e
.u
.u a .a i . , ,
a a
' A>, \ t\'. l l , u, < , Iu.
.s . u m sa.
/~\
o p _g . . . . .
...3 1 .
i
- VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA ! ,f .
iDESIGN BASIS ?.ARTHQUAKE B-9
, ,/ , . R.LR. MMPLEL WALLS AND ._ M.'.: ,
iSLAD NO. lA, ETEVA, TION: .. 590'-0" - e . . . . . . . . . . - -
. - - . , - - . . - , . , - - - , . . . - , . . . . - . . , , , , . . . . ~ , - , . . , . . . . - , . . . - .
1 L. CUENT DETROIT EDISON . . . . . . Ol!E ' SARGENT&LUNDY 1sNotNEmmsk Mffs m gySGM
- m. 2, J-g. 80 ,
! SITE SPgegpge 7% DAmpiq eev. see.
l
. f 1 . 6% EqdlPMm r CAMviN 4 .a,. ,..a.u Sj,gjg,
-numu g w.s
'2
- m cps i a m .' s u u u -
u > l w .m ...
,;. , , ,,,. .1 x,,
. I l l ~
1 RA 9 -6 og g l ,
- \
- i , .
i i ..
- t u . ,
u e
.i n -
u
' ". ._i.
" e-l% DAl@D;G "
- g :
- i f, ---25 DAlen:o - :
~ y , unuo .
i . DAMPD;G - u
~
l1 - ' u t : .r > < =' s : L // / \i
- ! :u "O j' l l[j Q , l i j -
/1 / tt / \ L\ _, . .
~
I-/;/ I \ S\ i - j ,a 1 _ l - i /// Y
; \1 __ i t
- I l'/ / 7i / W \t - -
i / H / j \ \1 -
, f M /M 7 , .
x \ \1 ! .
. ]
L V WM : - : MA i i , i I v\. i
'r i XN h, \, i i
e . -
*T -
=
i i , -
,\y xvxvi7 xx..
- , . i s v .x ,x . . .
~~
3
, i I i N N \ \i_ _-
. ., .... , ,,, ,I, , , , , ,,,, .... . . , ,,,i , M ,'% K .... ..,,1.,,
. > .. x ., n a > .< > ., u u u Mm. sa.
- 0 .
A3q.4s " . . . . .
.. ,/ '
7 vl' (. jVERTICAL RESF0!iSS SPECTRA .- '
;DESIGil BASIS EARTHQUAKE
\
R.H.R. COMPLEX, -
- i. ' #'- " ~
B-10
\. .% .e. . . ~-
. ; SLAB NO.1B, ELEVATI0ll:
590'-0" l
.}.
--M_%' ,-W"~ .
.ng ~
1 SARGENT8LUNDY DESIGN BY
""P C w.
. . "" EEF '
CN58NS EE - CHECKED BY SGM
* ~ ~ ,' y ; SITE $PECnFac 7Fo DAM PIM6 . m. m ,
ih
~
N* E.WIPMENT DAMPlN6g 5/IS[8 / '" *'7'
! . . =m.u <cr .
I e hway.cn . m 2 a a u 11 to u J l g.... ....,. . . p: I i m a . .j c-
~
. . 1 f .
e us . i
- - -; , u j
. . 1 1, ,
i I u . , , a I
-l
- u - . _ - . ..... .. .
. 1 , . i 4.
o i ! t I u s I i {u _I
, 4e . i i o i
~ ' ,
i 1 . I e I i I 3 u ' '
. -.-; 18 l 71% DAMPING ; . : 2% DAMPING -
I
! t,
-5% DAIGING l % DA"2"
'u U
i i 1
, J .
- / [-A
,a ,
E ,,
~
l c' - p , I (, c) u - __-g/ l , i-o
!/ .M\ Y _\ \ I ,,
. i i . . %,
i : - ' - U I /I '/\\ t b i . f ,, n . .q' ,4
/ L \ \k < '
i
? -
1 __. i \' x\\! - t, ., e2
\ >
\\q ; t
~5, - - ti s \\.\i i > :! ,,
q-#/.
// '
1 \- MN 11 i _1 i i N . i , , i : . e _- .2 x - I I' Ei a i i \ \\\ N \\ ' i s 5.1 I ; 5 l 1
.- ( il l l \ !
*n-- .. %. .
+i
.\ N .'-, N' N .:._
'..d.
4
.as ;
g .gm A
~ ; i .,
i *
. th \ "
.86
,,,,l,i\l,4,\,Y. -
s -. . - - - - - ' ~ -
.h
. , , ,,, ,,., .I.
2 1 2:. .
,i,.,, ,.,. ,,. .
i .. , _. w .s , .at .2 44 .te .tle J .25 J J 4 5 4 .I Lf L1 il i N4 m .
,.... . . _ . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 O A*'-" :vs:tercAt asse0Nss sezerna i t--. . DESIGN P. ASIS EARTHQU;.KE '
j' -
. R.H.li. COMPLEX ,
' 3_ g
,- :- SLAD No. IC, ELEVATION: 590 0 - .-
...a
* . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . "' . . l A. .
O'*A" 7 ~.C "~ ~~M*.' ~ 'w.%.- T..'. 7 EE.,~.W *~4 G ~"wE h CEE M S1f '~' . - --
c - l
! SARGENT&LUNDY " ~ " " " --
UESE " DES!GN BY 00 EV 2 > 7-15-M
- ;cuemaan._ - m. m .
- ; scre seecine 7% oAme,%
5% E'qu(FMENT- lhm,PidQ *[," ,,.b y f gggg.l . innuo .< . ,c. 5 1 I i
. % o's m a a a u u u is . .:
. as .- 1 . .. . .. ..... ,, .,.... . . . . i . ... .... .,
- . ..I , I i
i~ i' - i as -
' es
, . i i , -
-l 'l : l 3
--l
-., i- i ,
as
.! l
-~
i .
, , , ,#e 7*-a- g , g ==g ,s u
i - i !
.. u .- I i ,l ,i .
- i
- _...i. i
.I . l l ; .
1
- u. - '
- v
! 'l. l '
l l ll u , l t
- . l l i u 1
' I l
- I :' ! -
1- 1
- I
.i
.i i : i 3
- s . . .
. i
~ l g ..
. u ' '
l '
- t. i
),
- ,c! 1
, u i
i l
, ,' I.i i .=-., .
1 6 - { .i l . I Ou [ l .: . i .i i -i 1 i *,_*i i_. j ,I - j i
- e i
, .- , 6 I. s 6 * -
'g
- i. i i iii. .
*g
' i ! .
- p. -1% DAMPI!!O , -
j _
-2% DAMPIlto .
l I I !i! ' 41;DAMPIN3 I f-I E ! e m ow. l 4 il
. 2 s
"x ,, s- /= -10% DAMPING 1
. 7 . . ; . . . , .g . 3
{ : ,
- ; V ILd l..._D m Js l I i il f .,
I_ p ,' .3.. $ ~ M;r/- -i - - - - \- l li, i S
, , 4 ."
. i i _
.. i ., .
.m c ll N - -.r..#
I;
--l . r 6 r; ,
. -- -,[i
--- -i - -
. .a x +,' !
~
y y xxi. . l i Tj ~\ !\ D i . _, l
, , , .... ,!, , , !.. ,,, ,,u_.,,,'.... .1, \ Mll . . . . . . . N, l
.m .3 ,a .m .a. .m .: .ts .: .: 4 .s .4 .a u u u
, 74 5a. .
tp .. .. ... . ... . . - ...... ..-.- - 1V A3 8-4 VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA' e
* , c-
,. 3 DESIGN EASIS EARTHQUAG R.H.R. COMPLEX,
- 5 12 WALLS, ELEVATION: 617'-O" . ..._.
- g g . pg og e .e . . * . . . . .
, .o e.
e __.f g % .5, opp;;p.= 9e o- ----mn-- -- - - i.. - - -
9 1 eseamse l _ _ _ _
.=
p i SA3GENTELUNDY _ . . . = My* f* -
*g " ,_u_n
_, & m .. .
~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~
x .3tTE SPECIFIC. 7% DAMPl4Q
~
l 5 % EQUlPMENT DAM PIM @ ' " "
- DATI ; "
- J f 7a !
e 6// 8/s/ . awmd a . .<. s o I
% &s a m u m..
35 . u u u u .t
..T.i . .
.I.,,,..,....,,,,..,,l, ;
p . '. . ,j i - l . Ii ti . - i
,i l
I t I g _ m _- . -.
'. i - -
e
. t i
.I $
i , i , . _j -
~ ' ' ' "
, u .'
i
--> ! ' I I '
i
=
1--
, u, .
i ) , 4
. - ..t u 1
- u l I .4
) ,. .t.. 4
. 4? l
. : l .-l% DAMPING ;
"<3
= l i l u DAV2D:0 ' :
E '$ DA!GING u l
. u 7
k '
, g: ' 10% DAMPING 8_ . , _.
1 l i 1
- ,, 'l
' I'!
u .i I i.u
- - - ; i *. . .
g, :: g l, l ; .
.i , :
i YTl
# /.A / /.\
' w \ XA i
I . t - 6 i 4,i
/ i % '.
x' If/
' 2 3 i 1 n , !h,.v e 1Uy, y W i i I i I :
/i .
", j e
- g. .
/
i
.~
i i I 8 f N- ,Q ' I
! e.l >
d l l ,
~ . t ,' *
* , q
)
l l _.
- J
+
l t ' ;
- I a f !' . l i .tp - .1
'- i. --
,' 2
- - t ,
! 1 d
- n
. .s ,
d l xxn " 1 I
~
r-l
; j i
_l i pl 4 6 -~ l- ---l j ghh
, _P
.N_ NN i
i -- i i
'~ ' J, , j _,4 eer eete r # +
it il,,,i !.tri' . . i , ,. i !r . I. I t s
- .22 .n .t4 . 5 . M .M .t .5 J J .4 J .4 J u O M ww. sa. .
1 O' NI'N VERTICAL RESP 0tiSE SPECTRA
/# 't !
- DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE i s
, R.H.R. COF* PLEX, ; -
/
* ~
3-13
. ,/ . } SLAD No. 2, ELEVATION: 617'_O" ; ,
. . .. m. .- *
- r- - '
we h m+e _m.--p y-..,m. y _ s, , , , , -
PROJECT FE'RMI-If APP 5 ! SARGENT&LUNDY DEStGN BY c . .<. S e e < 4 R .
*NZINUGRS CHECKED BY M.MGe.
~
~ ~
h . ,3 ); SITE SPECIFIC 7N lhliPldC1 r say. n a
. ' ~
7
/
ih N0 6 QUIP %e._4T PAM PlNC 7 . ean i
. g/;gg f . twemt m ces a D a n .u u u u .s i' as . . - i 14 . i ii
, . 4 . .. ..i. .... .... i- , . . , , , .. . y.
1i - J
- Y
~4 --
l1I 1 '4 . j as .
~ '
M ,' v l
~~ --
_~ l' - l 'i u ~
=- -
l 3:
. u' I I " ' .. -
- l
. U .
l e
~ . u "
I
- 4. .
'u . U i 3 ,- u _
i Ry
- i . . . . .. L , 1 j 5
u 14 DAMPING $., 82 2% DAMPING
~ ~ ~
1 - 51 DAMPING I
, .: 4 .a g
~
i
/ / ,/10% / DAMPING i
1
.s
~
i ) ,/ -, l-l.,.---..-...,. --
! 4.s1 3
. / / l !
5 ., E /m i r
! lIi r _ , i u. ! /
l 1 l ._ n ,:
=
3 Z ! fi N /e / < \. /
~
*, 1 t _ i . I a
, _ ._ __1_ I 4 l l } kmv -
.i
+ _ __ _ ;
.i '
.5 !/
~
j I i ;
\
i L i \
\ I
\_ b\h ^
..s
^ ,N .
x , ;. .
-. . . . . r - -- ;
- - - A '
s6\N Ai .. &- . - - - - l 1"x
,. _ ,_ !- 3 i f 4
't i . i,}' -
I
. A . -
x y e ei ,et, t _i e tIi ,,,,, t ,,. ,,.. . . ,1,, [] .I ,,,. ...
.R .D .M MM .as a .ts J J .4 s A .t u u L2
.. - - . . ~ . . . . ... .. FwW. f r
. VERIICAL RESPOSSE SPECT.%
Oi , DE.SICH BASIS EARTEQUAKE
- R. M. R. CCeG' LEX . .
~
, WALT.S, ELEVATION 637 '-4" '
. . ~
, , B - b.
A3 '-n i . . g.
" ' " ~ " ~ * ~ ^
-~ '
~ '"
'~ d ' ' ~~~ ~' ~%
- 1
.i..-._ . . . _ . _ .
ree i .- g e er 4<t - is,ig,ge@" ..p,i yef /jjMh., Q,PRGENT4LUNUy
"' orstc8 prou, n sa:uos. r,3 E*mr: s .
- WS WDENE3 p 20t M GCH SIOC 04 RPR 80
/o -
navl*1"~ . 0 010 c.c2c c.csc o.tec iL 980riRR ! -y P, SFIE SPECIFIC. 7#/o PANPlMG an. 2, 7-u-so f8 5% E@ tPMEu'r DAMpig ' F8tEQUENCY IN CP$ fc.o 20.: 10 0 *30 .0 1.0 :.? i,i' ' ' ' 'iis ' ' ' ,3.i' ' ' ' . ' . ' . . . * - j 2; .c'-- i'i ' e' , ' . . . '
. . '. ; i .' -
' ' ' ' '.' r' i l . . i g i. i i .i i 1 i .
4 i i e' : :
- e. .e *
- l .
l.i i h
-
- A +
,:. : g...
.i . ..
-,.......p....
..:. . j p. j. _ i
- i i : ,
s .:- .. . . . . . !.
. ; .- ... .. . 1.
- .. 5 i
- l l' '1% DAMPING I i i
,, . e:i . _ .. . ! ! '. . . ; . .r - '- ! - -- U :
i a
~ ' '
! . .'. .. . _ '/_.d2%..
,I . . . . . . . .5 4. DMiP.I.N..G. DAMPING .
_ _ . .~~ 1 i 1 l : 1 101 DAMPING j ', ; ~ I \ 4 0C ,:. . - -- r-f ~iI - -- * ~ l-- -
--.3--
e i
. * =
4 l
- ~ * ~ ~ -
- r
,'::t .s s ! -
3.::$. . . . .' . . . . ..s . . : -. .
- t . * * *
. *
- _ ; i . l -
- . ; o, . t . i . [
r ; g g : .
*.s. :.g:L. .t......
s
. s ,..} ..n l .
e .
'J i
- I il . h, - l 1 1 l : I y
. . u,
, , ,3 c... ,.
. is
- 6. _ .
6 _. - l Y [,-
- I 8 k
....\ . u . ...
. .. . . M.s .:
P a. I 2 i .t
- c -
. $ 2 2 . .
- p e
. i gA-- !
t t e
. . ;. m . . . . .. '
i...-- . .. i c \ y . .
~. . .
u . is .
.; ,.s; . . , ..,,c,..>...4._ . . . . . t...,
. . . . . . - . . .; . m -.. ,....
w s ' I \;' . . ~ . .-*; g . r; .
,,.,s.
L.. e
- . . . ....t c: / / *
. s s
c . u,
,o t
. 3 .. i s
e._.... s . 7-.' e. . g . - ;_ s l
.e.;e, / . , - /.;_..-. _ . 5 g- \ .. 1 l i. . _L O..
, .___.____.i... .
/ i
\; - 1 l
3 l
\_.I
- i. I ! ! ! [
c.2: ;. .
. s . . . . . . . . . _ .
Sg s. , . _- -
.L f %
~
l .
-.\
\
W
\ g t .
- e; - ~ .. q . . . . . . . . . . . .
I e .
. l ,
. . e a
!.. R
. . , et .i . . . . _
_ . . _ . . _ . . . 3 .jg-. .: . P.s..'N. N. A 4. . . .. i . : r.r. r. -_ . . . -
- h. 2 c . ~.r.
I t I
. s .
\ .h .
g .l s ,,.%.% s . t t .i g..rr o..;5 1 4..: t.1.1 i i : i i e it.1 L i- . =. 0.02 C.;) C . '. 4 0 . .' 6 C .01 C .4 C .t..:.J.' :.15 d.'i+'.2d 3 C.)O .dC C.A0 0.00 1 0 1.?
- MRIC IN SEG".M Q
V . . . . . h31-D DBE VERTICAL RESPOSSE SPECTRA
- EI.EVAIION 63 7 ' -0" .!
$~15 IDCATION RCX)7 St.AB No. 3 .
Final
. REVISION So. 0 ,
,r-3 4.0 STRUCTURAL REASSESSMENT
(_) 4.1 Program Description The structural reassessment was performed using essentially the same models as were used in the FSAR, with site-specific SSE structural response spectra and associated structural loads as described in Section 3.0 of this report. Detailed analyses, reported below in this section, were performed on selected structures associated with the drywell, the reactor-auxiliary building and the RHR complex. The drywell structures are discussed in section 4.2; the reactor-auxiliary building and the RHR Complex structural components are discussed in section 4.3. Sections 4.2 and 4.3 refer-ence two volumes of Sargent & Lundy's " Structural Design Review Package," attached as Appendix 4.1 and 4.2. The evaluation of primary containment structural integrity is presented in section 4.4. The suppression chamber calcu-(')T w lations performed earlier were re-examined against the new site-specific spectra. A detailed re-analysis was deter-mined to be unnecessary because the accelerations used to design the seismic ties envelope the peak response values from the new spectra. Section 4.5 provides more details on this re-evaluation. Similarly, the buried ducts and piping design calculations were re-examined against the new site-specific spectra, and the ground particle velocities used in the design were determined to be conservative when compared to the postulated new conditions. Section 4.6 provides more details on this re-evaluation. 4.2 Assessment of Drywell Structures This section describes the assessment of the structural adequacy of the following parts of the Fermi-2 plant under p 4-1 v
O the loads of the site-specific SSE with 7% structural damp-(/ ing: o reactor pedestal o stabilizer truss o sacrificial shield o drywell shield wall o spent fuel pool o dryer-separator pool 1The drywell structural components were assessed for the fol-lowing load combinations:
- 1. DL + T g
- 2. DL + To + SSE
- 3. DL + SSE where DL =
dead load plus applicable live load (if any), (from previous calculations), Tg = thermal load at operating temperature SSE = loads due to the safe shutdown earthquake, including horizontal and vertical excitations The horizontal SSE response spectra are those reported in the S&L report SDD-DECO-003, dated April 18, 1981. The ver-tical loads were calculated using the FSAR SSE vertical response spectra (originally given in S&L report SL-2682, dated September 27, 1974) multiplied by a factor of 2.0, as discussed in Section 2.0 of this report. The reactor pedestal and the drywell shield wall were analy-zed by design sections. Their capacities are represented by interaction diagrams plotted by the computer program COLID (
according to the ACI-1977 code. The adequacy of these sec-
)
tions is assessed by plotting on the interaction diagram the-load point represented by the most critical load combi-nation. The structural steel components, the stabilizer truss, and the sacrificial shield were assessed by compari-son of the principal stresses from the most critical load combination with the allowable stresses. The structural components assessed were found to have strength adequate to accommodate the specified load combina-tions, including the site-specific SSE. Additional information on the analysis of these structures is presented below and in Appendix 4.1, a copy of S&L calcu-lation (i .e. , report) number SDD-DECO-004, Volume 1 of the
" Structural Design Review Package".
4.2.1 Reactor Pedestal O The assessment of the reactor pedestal is presented in Section II of Appendix 4.1. 4.2.2 Stabilizer Truss The assessment of the stabilizer truss is presented in Section III of Appendix 4.1. 4.2.3 Sacrificial Shield The assessment of the sacrificial shield is presented in Section IV of Appendix 4.1. l 4-3 l l 1 I
4.2.4 Drywell Shield Wall The assessment of the drywell shield wall is presented in Section V of Appendix 4.1. 4.2.5 Spent Fuel Pool Though not required for hot shutdown, the spent fuel pool was reassessed to confirm that it would maintain its integ-rity under the loads of the site-specific SSE. The analysis is presented in Section VI of Appendix 4.1. The analysis showed that the combined loads under the site-specific SSE are greater than the original design loads by approximately 3%, well within the margin of the original design. 4.2.6 Dryer-Separator Pool Like the spent fuel pool, the dryer-separator pool is not (} required for hot shutdown but was reassessed to confirm that its integrity would be maintained under the loads of the site-specific SSE. The analysis is presented in Section VII of Appendix 4.1. The rethod used was like that used to assess other drywell structures. From the interaction dia-grams presented in Appendix 4.1, it is concluded that the dryer-separator pool would accommodate the loads resulting from the site-specific SSE. 4.2.7 Tabulation of Original Load Combinations In response to the NRC staff's request, a tabulation of LOCA stresses is provided in the appendix of Appendix 4.1 for structural components in which the stresses from the site-specific SSE represents more than 10% of the allowable stress. These are the reactor pedestal, the stabilizer truss, and the sacrificial shield. 4-4 (
, 4.3= Assessment of Reactor-Auxiliary Building and RHR
{ Complex Structural Components 1 1 The assessments of structural components discussed in this section are presented in Appendix 4.2, a copy of the S&L l calculations shown in Volume 2 of'the S&L " Structural Design Review Package." 4.3.1 Reactor Building Mat Foundation In section 1 (S&L calculation no. SF 0003) of Appendix 4.2, the reactor building mat foundation is shown adequate under the loads of the site-specific SSE. 4.3.2 Auxiliary Building Mat i In section 2 (S&L calculation no. AF-01) of Appendix 4.2, the design of the auxiliary building mat is shown to be ade-() quate under the loads of the site-specific SSE, 4.3.3 Reactor-Auxiliary Building Shear Walls In section 3 (S&L calculation no. SC0001) of Appendix 4.2, the design of the reactor-auxiliary building shear walls is shown to be adequate under the loads of the site-specific SSE. 4.3.4 Reactor-Auxiliary Building Cable Tray Hangers The method of sampling and analysis of the cable tray hang-ers is presented in section 4 (S&L calculation no. EE 0013) of Appendix 4.2. The design of the cable tray hangers is ! shown to be adequate to accommodate the site-specific SSE l loads. O 4-5 -.. ..._ _ ... _ ,~. ._._ _._..~..- .__ . . _ _ -
4.3.5 ' Reactor-Auxiliary Building Superstructure Steel The method of analysis of the superstructure steel is pre-sented in 'section 5 '(S&L calculation no. SS0001) of Appendix 4.2. As discussed there, the design of the superstructure steel, including the vertical bracings and column rows, the horizontal roof trusses and roof mem-bers, and the crane elevation steel are adequately designed to accommodate the loads of the site-specific SSE. 4.3.6 RHR Complex Mat The design of the RER complex mat was found to be acceptable under the loads of the site-specific SSE, as summarized in section 6 (S&L calculation no. 1.31.1) of Appendix 4.2. 4.3.7 RHR Complex Shear Walls In section 7 (S&L calculation no. 1.30.1) of Appendix 4.2, (~} the design of the RHR complex shear walls is shown to be adequate to accommodate the loads of the site-specific SSE. 4.3.8 RHR Complex Cable Tray Hangers The. method of sampling and analysis of the RHR tray hangers was the same used for the Reactor-Auxiliary Building hangers. Section 8 (S&L calculation EE001) of Appendix 4.2 shows that the design of the hangers is adequate to meet the loads of the site-specific SSE. 4.3.9 Cable Trays The cable trays behave as essentially rigid bodies. They were designed for a load of 100 pounds per square foot, but are actually limited to a load of 40 pounds per square foot. A V 4-6 _ _ _ - . _ _ . _ . ~ _ , . _ . _ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ . . . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . . . . . _ . _ . ~ . . .. _____
{} In the-judgment of Detroit Edison, the design of the cable trays is adequate to assure their integrity when subjected to the loads of the site-specific SSE. 4.4 Primary Containment The structural integrity of the primary containment under the loads of the site-specific SSE was evaluated by exami-nation of the most highly stressed point. From Chicago Bridge & Iron stress report number T23-00-A-900-RA-005 (File no. B2-204), the location of highest stress is the drywell shell at the embedment interface. This is shown in Figure 4.4-1 as location "10." The acceptance criteria of the original stress report are shown in Table 4.4-1. Shear and moment values for the containment vessel resulting from the FSAR SSE and the site-specific SSE are shown in Figure 4.4-2. The original horizontal seismic stresses at () the critical point (#10) were multiplied by the ratio of the shear forces and the moments to obtain the horizontal seis-mic stresses resulting from the site-specific SSE. The original vertical seismic stresses were multiplied by the factor of 2.0 ratio between the FSAR SSE vertical spectrum and the site-specific SSE vertical spectrum. These original and revised stress values are shown in Table 4.4-2, excerpted from the CB&I design report with annotation by Detroit Edison. The table shows that the combined stresses of the highest stressed point are well below the maximum code allowable of Sy = 33,800 psi. The seismic summary table for the primary containment is shown in Table 4.4-3. 4.5 Torus & Torus Supports The structural adequacy of the torus and the torus supports was assessed by comparison of the original CB&I seismic s design loads with the loads resulting form the site-specific l k- SSE loads. In the CB & I design calculations, the . governing 4-7 l
O design loading was conservatively assumed to be 0.46 g for the SSE, with the torus evaluated on the basis of yield strength allowables. The site-specific SSE gives a peak response of 0.42 g to be evaluated under similar conditions. Because this value is lower than the design value, the design of the torus and torus supports is considered to be adequate to accommodate the loads of the site-specific SSE. Evaluation of torus design under normal operating loads plus the SSE will be conducted as part of the Mark I containment plant unique analysis. It is expected that this evaluation will show that the conservative design of the torus is ade-quate to accomodate these loads. 4.6 Buried Pipes and Conduit The following paragraphs summarize the effects of the () recently defined site-specific spectra on the seismic design of buried pipes and conduit. The site parameters affecting the seismic design of buried pipes and conduit include the apparent shear wave velocity, the maximum ground particle velocity, and the modulus of subgrade reaction for the back-fill. In the Fermi-2 design, an apparent shear wave velo-city of 2500 ft/sec, maximum ground particle velocity of 7.2 in/sec, and a modulus of subgrade reaction of 50 to 100 lb/ 3 in (depending on pipe diameter) were used. The apparent shear wave velocity and the modulus of subgrade reaction for the backfill are physical properties of the medium and are independent of SSE level. Thus, these para-meters are not affected by the use of the site-specific spectra. The maximum ground particle velocity is a function of the {} earthquake characteristics. The 7.2 in/sec velocity used for the design at Fermi-2 was based on a 0.15 g SSE and the i 4-8 I
, - . . . . _ . _ . _ . . _ . . _ , . . ~ . _. . , , . ,
l l reference 4-1 for strong motion (a > 0.1 g) earthquakes recorded on firm ground. For the Fermi-2 site-specific SSE, a ground particle velo-city of 6.0 in/sec would'be appropriate, based on engineer-ing judgement and reference 4-2. As larger ground particle velocities lead to higher stresses, the 7.2 in/sec value used in the design is conservative, and further re-evalu-ation is considered unnecessary. 4.7 References 4-1 Hall, W. J., Mohraz, B. and Newmark, N. M., Statistical Studies of Vertical and Horizontal Earthquake Spectra, Report NUREG-0003, January 1976, for the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 4-2 Hall, W. J. and Newmark, N. M., " Seismic Design Criteria for Pipelines and Facilities", Journal of the Technical Councils of ASCE, Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineer, Vol. 104, No. TCI, November 1978. 1 l 4 4-9 1
O !? e, }\t.L_ OWABL E -- - STRESSES O O p i .
; POINT APPLICABLE TYPE OF ACCIDENT OPEPATIHL _ CONDITION CONDITION FLOODED + CONDITION Q
l[ CODE STRESS OPERATING DESIGN OPERATING DESIGN OPERATING DESIGN g i j BASIS BASIS BASIS BASIS !! ASIS BASIS >
,, EAPTl! QUAKE EARTIIQUAKE EARTIIQUAKE EARTIIQUAKE EART!! QUAKE EARTilOUAKE o
'# 'b . A ASME III-B MEMBRANE S S S S S S lx l1 m y m y y y ,5
; BENDING (.6 F y) F (.6 F ) Fy 1.5 F y 1.5 F y b
. i- N
- l. B AISC BEARING (.9 F ) 1.33(.9F y) (.9F y) 1.33(.9F y) 1.33(.9F y) 1.33(.9F y) -
i ( P LATE) o SIIEAR Z (.4 F ) 1.33(.4F (.4F ) 1.33(.4F ) .8F .8F 4 COMPRESSION CODE 1.33 CODb)CODEY 1.33 CODE 1.3b CODE 1.33 CODE Q
- e - -
r l C. ASME III-B MEMBRANE Sm S S S S S y m y y y
- D ASME III-B MEMBRANE Sm S y Sm Sy Sy Sy j .' o E ASME III-B MEMBRANE Sm S 8m y y y y BENDING (.9F y) Fy (.9F y) 1.33Fy 1.5F 1.5Fy l
l F AI BEARING (.9F y) 1.33(.9Fy) (.9F y) 1.33(.9F y) 1.33(.9F y) 1.33(.9F y)
- . SilEAR (.4Fy) 1.33 ( . 4 Fy) (.4F y) 1.33(.4F y) .8Fy .8F i N .375 f'c .626 f'c .375 f'c .626 t'c
.8fc, .8fc, G ACI V BEARING .250 f*c .418 f'c .250 f'c .418 f'c ,
m i i , W AISC % < ~i E (FILLET 4 SHEAR 15,800 psi 1.33(.4F ) 15,800 psi 1.33(.4F y) Y
.8F .8F E
,L L GROOVE) . C. D , S i 9 ,l
; t$
a m 5 {y & , h TABLE 4.4-1 b 1 E o ALLOWABLE STRESSES IN PRIMARY CONTAINMENT *
. . s i -
,'..'.'e......
j
. . . '. f
'..'.p..~.. .
CHICACO OCIDGE & IROft5 COMPANY ' 9 .. gy p ),j3 M / k fs M t 'a v. %s (a - o " m m GW -
% OX 9L
%9 \: n
( W 'D '
)ut i
. 'u @ .2 - I' 41 w i o$ a. .
....:. . . . + -
4 y q 4g 4, rg- - 3, - -
- to 9
1.a M V z , f -g - i.......~...*p.- .; I (
. . L;d y N g y $ .g L3, k. 7. ,
0 M N to 0 ^e {\s,..t p %' y'. . @ 3 I ', N- cy . . . Os ). 9 4N . - .1 . , k Q q' g-b ' f Q)~ f @ kC ,- .:- '
$ N a > N 2 k'j;f ),. 2
' st ~ .
$$ g
% j
$ t'l 5C * $" .3. e7. o 'j. E -.% & W r 6y + ct M' at T
e
=e ~ dl h g le N Y ^
ID D
- . ky xN
.t g. o e- so -
o r-M 4 o. .s o to. . l M*%. . g
.es g
b ta g- 4. 0 N ko S sb- I ~i Z
- s. m r- & %.
s ~ n.
,y91c w
Q }t Qs g e v % m
. . . c.
~ n o
~.+ r .mN 9 m z
h N t s R{."An a m b N- 4. 4 N g ~ o 0 i,p t.P P. %_ . P 2 3 .t N cq o V .9 4 g .. w 1 %. e N to - sn G-o %g N m N. vi4 N d .D og
.h D' s l i '
- ~
~ h3 $
m
\s a T o O '4 ,gA N s.s m o - -
B s) Q s3 N CO CO 7 N I t b I i u V +s 4 N m m cn % M N N ON9 o A l s N I % o S & v tg u g g 4
& Ni% O
\
6 A j^4e ; A.,. y '9 A ( 4 d
!C
q n '4 e l4.s v %w v k t ,m e w o
%a 9
ia%s {, w Q t -
+ i +
e n .<, Qs , s., % i s., 0,4s ... N ( \ E t x' % Ns
%.)
No e t d+ g
)s ;!
4
\ N- g I
.4 N
g
%e --
.: o N, n
a , < t i
<- u % < t -
t u
-i jl g,
0
}
i
>t } .. .
< g w{
; 3 %( a 2
...u ... ..
Dew !' . ~ < is m n . , < - .:,,1 G
** j . . ,-
c..-ce .
- a . S Sco 'z cu 4-11 \ '. <. . ,,,, g,j, -
, . . l l'. ; l a c>.t. .
i',,, l'i .. ... ; '/,qls-o'Mo'
,
S s.Iv> i, i 1. :t Iif 1!,l e ii)],l1!,' l, ,4il 4i ii !;:illI4 ,iI! , i ! ii ,i .
. - .% a + .. (
N'ILdbbL (' L b- V d,i l o tJJ . _e_.f."5r c t E > (,L4.5 i CHIC AGO CT.'lDGC (, IRON COMP ANY OAK QROOK ENGINEERING $ q TAOLE ce MjGLES I b 1-O '~c( 1 = %.0 00' '
}O P,O[ % A_D ,, p ._,,g, a , g g'.5 5 5 ELEV. = 311. 9E3 -'
k _*3*30475 FACE OF FLAMGE ,_ $ } ,, ,,, _ . _ _ . , _ _ hg 4, _ $ ,. . i], c . 3 ELEV.-(N1.5 fI r. , 3,
- $ - 7._4. 6 6 7_.
.. . _ _ *T,-- , g . .,
*6
- t op og i TCA CF CYLIND,ER
~[,a '7 a thj(,,o ELEV. * 'e 5 5.6 O'2. .
p_._yg, at 8 - ' 'i.~: . 0 3 i STAV
*3 t's J.piso_ E LEY.= Cr W 9 2 B >
M to - i .t'1,tG3 j + l: L Tw( yll-1,[4000 ; EL E V.= Ill],.9 0&[ I R = U"3 ' v'2 14 9.G'f o , "
- - - - - +
2 ELEV.e f.4.774 R 'l - s s '
. ~
ELEV. e t/R f'l'13-dly
- M 3 -
- 1. .fii s
4 i ELEV, ffd .'19 {
\ .. .
s b_ UPPEQ ELEv.:.c,o 6EA_MS_d, 6 N,/g(4
~
\ h--l-" i
- - x N
.A , -
L
'w3 ,_
'i EQUATOR < I ELEV. 5 % O
<rta c /
/> ELEV.=+,*;~l.i.,IB( ' '
/- r. _ _ .
LCWE D EEAMS _.I~ELEV'.s5p.565g .
/
h~ 1.yENT [ ELE.V.=5'l6.500( 1 ori ir e ,, e r; r i r I LLEv. 7 't. 61! % , ..,.; :
,, r ar .r t: VE e J r_, __
[
--*W ELEV. tlo.083 '
7- - i .. ta V .S.E. h.e_t,- _ . . _ . /
\
~-
ELEv. SU 1.4 6 4 y. [
--Tun p l .B&
Q 'L Tco cr Ea. int ELCV.=
~*
p.vta i
.. .Uq(d 4-13 ~~ "
i DRYWELL ELEVATION VIEW
<' '.. E V A T i ^, N g,,,,, ] .F!'_ e,,,,'. ; e,,,,*
s ,._,. ), /: sh,I M of--
. , i 4 r. s C- . . . . . .. . C : i . ;.*
- _01'*-
1~ ~e. '.) - Us** R * " " " -- ""
~'
,,',,,,,,,,,7 :-%: : ;-, . * - .~ l e .t :
cmeas SLS (::1) - 1 : , .ited April 23, 193' O . 1 EL. 670'-78 " - I k EL. 662'-6" - - - 30 - I k' 405 l I k 124 EL.640'-Oh" l
' k, l 881 ,
k - 139 I EL.635'-Sh" _ _ x, 2395 k EL. 624'-107" 8-608 \ k 9387k' , EL. 616'-0 1" 618 k \
^'
\16200k' 639 \
E L . 6 0 7 ' - 0"[ a O
~- '
\ 23o6o* '
k \ EL. 597'-0" 652
\ .as o N k,
'333) .
g [IQQTE)
\ 34420 0. ' G EL. 585"-3 7,, 678 E
. - -(3_58} l.Sg 46080 k '(20, ;aq) \ ,
,..c2
\ -
*EL. 56b'-0" k \
k'{g 688 I,79 51550 . g Q s j _ ( .
*s~
ssof) YSHEAR gi or,1E N T A B O U T X A /,1; h CEICW AL 096 \/A L,V '
. ~fSdO. 13 . Cf.C.hl_-RE,P,@T") _ _ _ , , ,
A@ FSAR fiq 3,g -}g CONTAINMENT VESSEL - SHEAR MOMENT DIAGRAM SAFE SHUTDOWN EARTHQUAKE - 7% DAMPED SITE SPECTRA Il O FIGURE 4.4-2 oi-i i, 4-14
Appendix 4.1 Structural Design Review Package Volume 1 of 2 (Sargent & Lundy Project No. 6139-38 Detroit Edison Co. Design Assessment for Seismic Re-analysis Volume 1) O e
/ .
O A4.1-1
Appendix 4.2 Structural Design Review Package Volume 2 of 2 (Sargent & Lundy Project No. 6139-38 Detroit Edison Co. Reevaluation of Structural Components for Revised Seismic Response Spectra Volume 2) i l (~)h n l
# e<#
1 i I i 1 l l l 0 l l A4.2-1 l
A (-) 5.0 EQUIPMENT SELECTION AND EVALUATION The approach used to demonstrate the seismic design adequacy of the Fermi 2 systems involves the following elements: o A scenario is identified which describes the way in which Fermi 2 would respond to the postulated seismic event, o Based upon the results of the scenario, systems are identified which are required to shutdown, and cooldown, the reactor, o The components associated with requisite systems are identified, and o Components are evaluated with regard to seismic (} response. The information contained in this section addresses the above process as it relates to selection of equipment. Sec-tion 6 addresses equipment interconnections, including noz-zles, valves, piping and associated snubbers and supports which are qualified by detailed analysis. Section 6 also describes small diameter piping elements, such as tubing and conduit, which can be addressed by generic analysis. 5.1 Event Scenario The postulated seismic event induces a loss of offsite power (LOP) that is similar to that presented for " loss of all grid connections," presented in subsection 15B.2.6 of the j Fermi 2 FSAR. Table 5.1-1 presents the scenario for a seismically-induced LOP. The scenario is characterized by early, automatic control of reactor level and pressure by 5-1 1
the RCIC and SRV, respectively. Following stabilization of reactor vessel level and pressure, operator action is taken to cooldown and depressurize the reactor. As indicated in subsection 15B.2.6.5 of the FSAR, the consequences of a LOP are not significant:
"While the consequences of this event do not result in fuel failure, it does result in the discharge of normal coolant activity to the suppression pool via SRV operation. Since this activity is contained in the primary containment, there will be no exposure to operating personnel. Since this event does not result in an uncontrolled release to the environment, the plant operator can choose to leave the activity bottled up in the primary containment or discharge it to the environment under controlled meteorological and release conditions. If purging of the primary containment is chosen, the release will have to be in accordance with established technical specifications; therefore, this event, f-s at the worst, would result in only a small increase in the yearly integrated exposure level."
5.2 Identification of Systems and Components Based upon the scenario in Table 5.1-1, a list of principal systems required to safely shutdown, and cooldown, the reactor was developed. In addition, a list of auxiliary systems, required for principal systems operation, was deve-loped. The list of principal and auxiliary systems is con-tained in Table 5.2-1. Finally, a generic equipment list was developed to reflect the types of components which com-prise the principal and auxiliary systems; the list is con-tained in Table 5.2-2. Appendix 5.1 contains a list of I&C and electrical components associated with principal and auxiliary systems. The list is useful because it shows the relationship among mechanical, electrical, and instrumen-tation and control components. 5-2
l l I 5.3 Equipment Evaluation The equipment which comprises the principal and auxiliary systems presented in Table 5.2-1 is characterized by mechanical, electrical (power), and instrumentation and con-trol (I&C) elements. These elements are evaluated in the following sections. Piping is evaluated in section 6. 5.3.1 Mechanical Components--Principal Systems The capability of the following RPV and internal components to accommodate the proposed higher seismic loads has been reassessed: o Top guide o Core plate o Stabilizer o Shroud support {} o o CRD housing CRD housing restraint beam The assessment was based on the following:
- 1. Horizontal loads were taken from Sargent & Lundy calculation SDD-DECO-003.
- 2. Vertical loads were estimated by multiplying the SSE vertical loads in G. E. Report 22A5676, Revision 1 by a factor of 2.
- 3. In the Sargent & Lundy study only half the CRD housings are accounted for. Tha CRD housing and CRD restraint beam loads are approximated by doubling the loads in SDD-DECO-003.
O 5-3 i l l
. . ._ ._ - . _ . _ . _ _ _ =_ _ ._- . . _ - _ _ _ .
For this study, the core plate and top guide new seismic () loads were compared to LaSalle 1 loads (LOCA and Seismic) as shown in Table 5.3-1. The Fermi 2 core plate loads are bounded by LaSalle. The Fermi 2 top guide vertical load is bounded by LaSalle's vertical load but is 18 kips over LaSa11e's horizontal load. However, due to the large margin the top guide is judged to be within design limits. For the RPV support, the margin for moment is so large (221,000 in-kip versus 1,152,000 in-kip allowable) that the support is judged to be within design limits without need for further analysis. Due to the large loads on the shround support, a stress - evaluation was performed as shown in Table 5.3-1. The results of this evaluation show that the stresses are within ASME Codo allowable limits. In summary, the RPV and internal components evaluated are , judged to be acceptable to accommodate the higher seismic i p loads. With regard to the control rod drive (CRD) system, analysis of hydraulic control unit indicates considerable margin remains upon application of the revised response spectrum. Details of the evaluation are contained in Table 5.3-2. I The RHR pump and RCIC pump acceleration values for horizon-tal and vertical directions were determined as follows: 1
- 1. Original static coefficients:
l o Horizontal: 1.5 g o Vertical: 0.14 g x 2 = .28 g 5-4 l
, _ , . _ . ~ . . . . ~ . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ - . ~ . . _ . - . _ _ _ . _ - _ , , _ _ , _ _ . . . - . _ - -
~ _ .
- 2. Response spectra curves
.O
- o. Horizontal natural frequency: unknown o vertical natural frequency: greater than 33 hz Therefore, from spectra and dynamic methods cur-rently: accepted by the NRC, use 1.5 times the peak of the curve for horizontal direction and, the zero period acceleration (ZPA) value for the vertical direction. This results in:
o Horizontal: 0.825 g o Vertical: 0.11 g x 2 = 0.22 g
- 3. The equipment was originally qualified for:
o Horizontal: 1.5 g o (} vertical: 0.14 ?
- 4. This assessment is based on vertical seismic loads that are approximately twice the original seismic loads. It was judged acceptable to use a hori-zontal load less than that originally used, to offset the increased vertical load, because the stresses are calculated using the combined verti- ,
cal and horizontal loads.
- 5. Since the response spectra curves are unique to Fermi and the 1.5 x peak acceleration was used to account for unknown frequency and multi-mode response, the response spectra curves were used in the horizontal direction and the original seismic used in the vertical direction.
5-5 i l
- - ~ . . . - - . . . . . . - . . - - , . . - . . _ _ . _ , - - . - - , _ . . - . - . . . . - , - . - , . - - - - - - - . . - - ~ - - . - , - - - -.-
- o Horizontal: 0.825 g \/ o Vertical: 0.28 g Revision of the RCIC pump and RHR pump calculations resulted in stresses at the pump critical locations, considered in the original calculations, to be less than the allowable values. Therefore, the pump is assessed to be acceptable for the above seismic loads.
The RHR motor was qualified for 1.5 g horizontal, and 0.14g vertical as stated on the motor outline drawing. Based on values supplied with the motor it was determined that the additional vertical seismic load will provide shaft thrust loads that exceed the maximum allowable value at the motor thrust bearings. Increased load on the thrust bearing would result in a decreased service life which is still adequate to assure the 12 to 18-hours operation required from this equipment. () The RCIC turbina and turbine stop valve have been analyzed and found to be acceptable for the acceleration values listed in item 5 above. However, the turbine oil piping cannot be shown acceptable with regard to the higher verti-cal seismic load at this time. Analysisaof the RER pump anchor bolts is summarized in Table 5.3-3, the analysis for the RHR heat exchanger (and r anchors) is summarized in Table 5.3-3A. The analyses for the RCIC equipment and anchor bolts are summarized in Tables 5.3-3B, 5.3-4, and 5.3-5. 5.3.2 Mechanical Components--Auxiliary Systems For the remaining auxiliary systems, associated with the Fermi 2 " balance-of-plant," a general procedure was devel-oped to provide a quick but highly conservative method for () 5-6 1 1
l re-evaluating equipment subjected to the new site-specific () spectrum. This procedure consisted of performing the fol-lowing steps: l
- 1. Identify equipment's natural frequency (s).
- 2. Identify the acceleration values (for the north-l south, east-west, and vertical directions) used in the original equipment seismic qualification.
- 3. Identify the new acceleration values (using 3%
equipment damping per Regulatory Guide 1.61) for the new site-specific spec't rum at the same frequencies used in the existing seismic qualifi-cation.
- 4. Divide each of the acceleration values in Step 3 by the corresponding accelerations in Step 2 to determine the " acceleration increase" at each
(]} frequency of interest, for each direction (i.e. , north-south, east-west, vertical) .
- 5. Select the greatest " acceleration increase" found in Step 4 and multiply each of the old stresses /
deflections by this ratio to determine a conserva-tive estimate of the new equipment stresses / deflections. An additional multipli-cation factor of 1.5 is used for flexible equip-ment when an " equivalent static" analysis was used in the original seismic qualification. l
- 6. If the new stresses are less than the material l yield strength and the new deflections within the deflection criteria, the piece of equipment is considered re-quclified. ,
i O 5, l
() Note that the above procedure was intended to be used as a "first-look" type approach. No initial attempt was made to separate the seismic stresses from the stresses due to weight or normal operation. Since an elastic analysis was employed throughout, no credit was taken for any plastic action which might occur in a structural member subjected to bending stresses. The AISC specification permits plastic design with steels of yield strengths up to 65 ksi. For a rectangular steel section, it can be shown that the moment necessary to cause plastic action throughout the section, i.e., plastic moment, is 50% greater than the moment neces-sary to produce yielding in only the outer fibers, i.e., elastic moment. Also, the new calculated stresses are compared to the minimum code allowable material yield strengths, though the actual material yield strength may be considerably higher. Thus, the new stresses and deflections calculated using this procedure are highly conservative. Therefore, if these values are less than 20% over the allow-able, the equipment is considered requalified and no further analysis is considered necessary. If the values do not meet this criterion, a more detailed evaluation is performed by increasing the seismic stresses and deflections and recalcu-lating the new overall total stresses and deflections. For mechanical equipment originally qualified by test, the original test response spectra was showing that it enveloped the new site-specific seismic response spectra. Summary tables (including calculation sheets) of the seismic re-evaluation for each of the necessary pieces of mechanica'. equipment are contained in the following sections. i 5.3.2.1 Residual Heat Removal Service Water (RHRSW) The analysis for the RHR cooling tower is summarized in Table 5.3-6. Table 5.3-6 also contains the analysis for the RHRSW pump and motor. (]) 1 5-8
() 5.3.2.2 Diesel Generators (DG) The components for the DGs include the following components: Component Table 1 l DG Skid Assembly 5.3-7 Heat Exchanger Stack Assembly 5.3-7 1 DG Skid Piping 5.3-8 Jacket Water Expansion Tank 5.3-8 Air Receiver Tank 5.3-8 5.3.2.3 Diesel Fuel and Lube Oil The components in thic category that were analyzed are: the fuel oil day tank (Table 5.3-9) , the lube oil strainer (Table 5.3-10), the lube oil filter (Table 5. 3-11) and the fuel oil storage tank (Table 5. 3-12) . O 5.3.2.4 Emergency Equipment Cooling Water (EECW) The components reanalyzed for the EECW are: The EECW pump and motor (Table 5.3-13), the EECW make-up tank (Table 5.3-14), and the EECW heat exchanger (Table 5. 3-15) . 5.3.2.5 Emergency Equipment Service Water (EESW) and Die-sel Generator Service Water (DGSW) The components reanalyzed for the EESW and DGSW are: the DGSW and EESW pumps (Table 5. 3-16) and DGSW and EESW motors (Table 5. 3-17 ) . l I O 5-9 i _ . _ - _ . _ _ . _ . - . _ . . _ . _ . . ~ . . _ _ . . . _ _ - - - _. _ - --.
I 1 5.3.2.6 Control Air I p \ b I The components of the control air system reanalyzed are: ! the air compressor (Table 5.3-18), aftercooler (Table 5.3-18) ,and the receiver (Table 5.3-20). 5.3.2.7 Essential HVAC The essential HVAC includes components on the air and water sides of the system. With regard to ductwork, the stress reports that were evaluated were chosen through random sam- ! pling. A buckling criterion was used to determine the l allowable moments that would insure duct integrity. This ! criterion can be considered conservative because credit is ! not taken for the stiffeners used in duct construction and also because the criterion assumed simply supported edges. The ductwork stress reports were evaluated against the new seismic response spectrum in the following manner: For tha q O duce ena1yzed by e eeeeic eelemic method, ehe 1ereese caem i of the new seismic response spectrum ZPA over the analyzed ZPA was used as a multiplier on the OBE reactions. These new reactions were then compared to the allowable values. Likewise, for the duct analyzed by a dynamic method, the worst ratio of the new seismic response spectrum acceleration to the analyzed acceleration for the different modes was determined and used as a multiplier on the OBE reactions. The results are summarized in Table 5.3-21. The HVAC ducts and supports were designed to a generic seis-mic design procedure (Edison file B9-711) which states that ! the duct supports were designed with a safety factor of 5 on the worst combination of weight plus OBE loading. Th e r e~- fore, a detailed evaluation of each support was not neces-sary to re-qualify the existing duct supports. Typical duct support calculations were made. As a result, it can be O 5-10 4 l
l l i stated that the duct supports were designed with a factor of l safety of five on the calculated OBE loads plus weight loads and are therefore re-qualified for the new seismic response spectrum. The generic HVAC duct support qualifications are contained in Table 5.3-22. Other essential HVAC components reanalyzed are as follows: Component Table Dampers 5.3-23 HVAC Return Air Fans 5.3-24 Centrifugal Chilling Units 5.3-25 Emergency Make-Up Motors 5.3-26 Emergency Make-Up and Recirculation Air Filters Units 5.3-27 Multi-Zone Climate Changer 5.3-28 Chilled Water Pump and Motor S.3-29 HVAC Rupture Disk 5.3-30 (]) Switch Gear Room Coolers, EECW Pump Room Coolers, and Control Air Compressor Cooler 5.3-31 RHR Room Cooler 5.3-32 Equipment Roomm Fan-Coil Unit 5.3-33 RCIC Pump Room Cooler 5.3-34 H7AC Equipment Anchors 5.3-35A 5.3.2.8 Drywell Cooling i l The components of the drywell cooling system, the drywell cooling fans and drywell coolers (and anchors) are addressed in Table 5.3-358. The drywell cooler anchor bolts were found to be stressed well over yield. They will be replaced by anchors of sufficient strength to accommodate the site-specific SSE. O 5-11
{} stated that the duct supports were designed with a factor of safety of five on the calculated OBE loads plus weight loads and are therefore re-qualified for the new seismic response spectrum. The generic HVAC duct support qualifications are contained in Table 5.3-22. Other essential HVAC components reanalyzed are as follows: Component Table Dampers 5.3-23 HVAC Return Air Fans 5.3-24 Centrifugal Chilling Units 5.3-25 Emergency Make-Up Motors 5.3-26 Emergency Make-Up and Recirculation Air Filters Units 5.3-27 Multi-Zone Climate Changer 5.3-28 Chilled Water Pump and Motor 5.3-29 () HVAC Rupture Disk Switch Gear Room Coolers, EECW Pump Room 5.3-30 Coolers, and Control Air Compressor Cooler 5.3-31 RHR Room Cooler 5.3-32 Equipment Roomm Fan-Coil Unit 5.3-33 RCIC Pump Room Cooler 5.3-34 Cable Tray Cooling Fan 5.3-35 HVAC Equipment Anchors 5.3-35A 5.3.2.8 Drywell Cooling The components of the drywell cooling system, the drywell cooling fans and drywell coolers (and anchors) are addressed in Table 5.3-358. The drywell cooler anchor bolts were found to be stressed well over yield. They will be replaced by anchors of sufficient strength to accommodate the site-specific SSE. 5-11
5.3.2.9 RHR Complex HVAC System c:) ' l l The seismic requalification analysis for the subject system, which includes the diesel-generator room ventilation, is contained in Table 5.3-36. 5.3.2.10 Torus See Section 4.5 of this report. 5.3.2.11 Motor-Operated Valve (MOV) Actuators The original seismic qualification for MOV Actuators was performed in April 26, 1972 by Ogden Technology Labora-tories, Inc. on an electro-hydraulic vibration machine. The test unit with motor was scanned in each of the three major axes over a frequency range of 1 to 35 Hz with a maximum acceleration of 1.0 g to search for resonance. Since no resonance was found, the test sample was then vibrated for a ( period of ten seconds at each even integer of frequency from 4 to 34 Hz in each axis at an excitation of 3 g. Tne unit was operated during each dwell through one cycle from open limit to torque switch seated position and back to the ori-ginal position. The test unit was then vibrated for a mini-mum of ten seconds at 35 Hz in each axis at an excitation level of 5 g with the unit being operated as indicated above. As indicated in section 6.6, the maximum predicted valve accelerations, as developed from the piping re-evaluation analysis, do not exceed 2.0 g. Since these new predicted accelerations are less than the levels to which the MOV actuators were originally qualified, it is concluded that ) I the original seismic qualification remains valid for the loadings associated with the revised postulated earthquake. () 5-12 1
- ~
- 5.3.3 Instrumentation and Control (I&C)--Principal Sys-tems Table 5.3-37 presents the seismic requalification of I&C components associated with the principal systems.
The major I&C components for the principal systems consist of local and control room panels. The following procedure was used to evaluate the control panels:
- 1. Determine test data available that is applicable to the panel being reviewed.
- 2. Determine the ZPA for the floor region where the panel is located from spectra provided. For the horizontal
-direction, use the Square Root of the Sum of the Squares (SRSS) of the N-S and E-W data for the appli-cable ZPA. (Vertical acceleration is twice the spec-tral value.)
- 3. From test data, determine the maximum measured accel-eration transmissibility in each direction, regardless of frequency or location on the panel, multiply this transmissibility by the ZPA from (2) above to get the maximum acceleration in each direction.
- 4. Combine the three directional accelerations by SRSS to give a maximum acceleration.
- 5. Review the list of essential devices on the panel and determine the lowest fragility limit for all the devices in any direction. (The fragility limit is that acceleration which, if exceeded, will result in mal-function of the device.)
l O 5-13
l l l
- 6. Determine margin by dividing the maximum acceleration O's from (4) above by the fragility limit from (5), sub-tracting that resulting ratio from one (1), and then multiplying that value by 100 to obtain percent.
The above procedure has a number of conservatisms. First, l the horizontal ZPA combination is applied to both horizontal I directions (if N-S and E-S values are equal, the result is about 40% greater than the actual case). Second, the maximum' test acceleration is used, regardless of its location. This means that in most cases, the essential equipment is subject to acceleration values substantially smaller than the values used in the evaluation. Third, the acceleration value used is the combination of the highest values in all directions, regardless of whether they occur at the same location or not. A C/ Fourth, the composite acceleration value is compared to the lowest fragility limit, regardless of direction. The actual fragility of any essential component will undoubtedly be greater in the actual direction of that acceleration resul-tant. This procedure was followed in all panels with the following l exceptions: l Hil-P613 l 1 ! l Here, the essential items were located lower in the panel and compensation for the height was included in the analy-sis, but all three directions were still combined for the l determination of margins. O 5-14
I
, Hll-P617, P618 Height compensation was included in the analysis here, also, as in Hil-P613 above. Margin was determined based on the combination of the three directions of motions compared with the lowest fragility limit, regardless of direction.
Hil-P621 , Height compensation was included here, but the combination of the three directions of motion resulted in a "g" level greater than the minimum fragility level. A second calcu-lation was made with the larger of the two horizontal ZPA's O applied to the horizontal direction with the largest trans-missibility value (the smaller was applied to the direction of less transmissibility). The three directions were com-bined (SRSS), and then this value was averaged with the ori-ginal acceleration value. Margin was determined from this ! average "g" value.
] This analysis is still conservative because the use of the largest ZPA with the greatest trans-missibility is conservative, the use of the combination of the three directions is conservative, and the use of the average value, averaging with the original value (a conser- )
vative number), is conservative. Hil-P622, P623 These panels were qualified by w :s of essentially identi-cal panels built for other plants (Zimmer and Laguna Verde) l which have much higher ZPA values (.55 g and .87 g, respec-l tively). i f 511-P628 This panel was qualified by similarity to Hil-P617. ; O 5-15
s The following comments are provided with regard to the oper-
\ ation of principal systems:
Control Rod Drive No I&C equipment is required since the shutdown scenario involves a LOP which will cause the HCU's to effect a scram. The HCU's are hydraulic / mechanical assemblies. Nuclear Boiler System ' Safety / Relief valves are used to depressurize the reactor. Remote-manual control of these Division I dc-operated valves is from the control room via a relay cabinet. Reactor Core Isolation Cooling RCIC starts automatically and provides make-up water to the /~T reactor as required during depressurization. The operator V uses vessel level instrumentation to determine the RCIC flow set point. Essential RCIC protective instrumentation and control is required to protect the RCIC turbine. l Residual Heat Removal
- 1. The shutdown cooling mode of RER is initiated by the operator before the RCIC turbine trips due to low steam pressure. Instruments provide the shutdown cooling low pressure permissive of 110 psi dome pressure.
- 2. Torus cooling is not required. !
- 3. Head npray may be used if necessary.
- 4. Only one RHR loop is required with one pump and one heat exchanger.
5-16
- 5. The recirculation pump discharge valve is closed via
(} swing bus power. This is necessary to isolate the recirculation pump.
- 6. RPV low water level #3 interlocks for shutdown cooling isolation valves are powered by RPS power.
l
' 5.3.4 Instrumentation and Control--Auxiliary Systems l 2
H5.3.4.1 Emergency Equipment Cooling Water (EECW) Table 5.3-38 shows the seismic requalification for I&C com-
-ponents associated with the EECW system.
The EECW pump will be started manually in the control room, upon LOP, after receipt of the EDG load sequencer start sig-nal. The:EECW pump start permissive signals are generated by non-seismic qualified pump suction pressure switches and make-up tank level switches arranged in one out of two taken [} twice logic to normally de-energized control relays with contacts in the EECW pump start circuit. Since the switches are non-seismic a failure of the switches in the right com-bination would prevent pump start. DECO will reorder the switches as seismic Level I devices. The EECW pump differential pressure control valve and EECW heat exchanger outlet temperature control valves will not be utilized in this analysis as Fisher Control Company has recently informed Edison that the valves are not qualified to fail to the designed failure mode. Manual valves and bypass lines for required flow paths will be analyzed to ensure system operation. If possible, DECO will requalify the valves or replace the valves with qualified units. ( )' 5-17 l l
l l <g 5.3.4.2 Control Air System D Table 5.3-39 presents the seismic requalification for I&C components of the control air system. The Division I control air compressor will be started manually in the control room upon receipt of the EDG stat't signal. DECO has had no uuccess in retrieving seismic qual-ification documentation for the control air compressors con- ! trol panels. Thus, we are assuming that the control panel is not seismically qualified. DECO will pursue having the I panels qualified. I l 5.3.4.3 Essential HVAC l Table 5.3-40 presents the seismic requalification for I&C components of essential HVAC systems. The Control Center HVAC system has been analyzed in the recirculation (]} (" chlorine") mode with auto start. The majority of the air operated dampers will be manually opened or closed as ! required. l l 1 5.3.4.4 Drywell Cooling System l Table 5.3-41 presents the seismic requalification of I&C components of the drywell cooling system. I No instrumentation is required for operation of the drywell cooling system under the postulated scenario. The two-speed cooling fans will automatically start in high speed upon l receipt of the DG start signal. The drywell cooling system controls re-evaluated seismically, consist of drywell local panel H21-P328A, relay room cabinets (H11-P898A and Ell-P889) and COP insert Hil-P808B512. O 5-18 l
y 5.3.4.5 RHR Complex \ Table 5.3-42 presents the seismic requalification of I&C components which are located in the RHR complex. The fol-lowing systems are identified: o RHR Service Water o Emergency Equipment Service Water o Diesel Generator o Diesel Generator Fuel and Lube Oil o Diesel Generator Ventilation o Diesel Generator Service Water o Diesel Generator Control Console o Diesel Generator Load Sequence 5.3.5 Electrical Components Electrical components which supply power to principal and (]) auxiliary systems were requalified generically by equipment type and manufacturer. Table 5.3-43 provides the locations of the equipment described above and the systems which the equipment serves. From each equipment category, a single component is selected for requalification according to the most seismically limiting location. Table 5.3-44 provides the accelerations for various locations within the Fermi 2 facility. 5-19
The seismic requalification of the equipment listed in Table 5.3-43 is addressed in the following tables: Equipment Table 480 V ac and 260 V de Motor Control 5.3-45 Centers (ITE) 480 V Switchgear (ITE) 5.3-46 4160 V Switchgear (ITE) 5.3-47 Battery Main dc Fuse Cabinet 5.3-48 Batteries and Battery Racks (with mountings) C&D 5.3-49 Battery Chargers (with mountings) 5.3-50 O a dc Fused Distribution Cabinets (Square D) 5.3-51 120 V ac Modular Power Supply Units 5.3-52 Drywell Penetrations (Conax Corporation) 5.3-53 Terminal Boxes and Terminal Boxes Attached to Drywell Penetrations 5.3-54 5.4 Items Requiring Further Assessment or Documentation The following specific items were identified during the evaluation process as requiring further analysis, documentation or requalification. O 5-20
- 1. RCIC Turbine Lube Oil Piping
(,,) L./ The lube oil piping, mou:ited as an integral part of the RCIC turbine assembly skid requires a detailed dynamic piping analysis. The original assembly was qualified based on static coeffi-cients.
- 2. Emergency Equipment Cooling Water Pump Suction Pressure and Make-Up Tank Level Switches.
Qualification records for these switches could not be located. Requalification or replacement is required.
- 3. Control Air Compressor Control Panel.
Review of the vendor document package revealed T that the control panel was part of the compressor (J s_ qualification as previously understood. The panel will be qualified by analysis or test.
- 4. Drywell Cooling Fan Anchor Bolt >
The anchor bolts were found to be overstressed (1.8 x yield) and will be changed out with high strength bolts.
- 5. Diesel Generator Fuel Oil Transfer Pumps.
Seismic qualification records could not be retrieved in time. The vendor has been contacted to resubmit the records. /~S U 5-21
() 6. Diesel Generator Control Console. The review concluded that the test response spectra (TRS) is less than the required response spectrum (RRS). The console will be retested or requalified. In addition, certain parts and components are identified in the tables for which original seismic qualification review and reassessment is still in progress. Corrective action will be taken if warranted by the results of the reevaluation. O 5-22 f O 1
TABLE 5.1-1 SCENARIO FOR SEISMIC-INDUCED LOSS OF OFFSITE POWER
- 1) . Seismic Event Causes Loss of Offsite Power. (LOPA)
- 2) . IDPA Initiates Isolation and Scram Via CRD.
- 3) . Diesel Generator Starts and Accepts I. cads.
- 4) . ' RCIC Starts Automatically.
- 5) . SRV's May Open on High Pressure.
6). RPV Level and Pressure Stabilizes, Based Upon the Operation of the RCIC and SRV's.
- 7) . Operator Action is Taken to Cooldown and Depressurize the RhV O to 95 es10, usias sav eaa 8C1c ia Torue soottoa soae-
- 8) . RHR/5D Cooling Mode Initiates - RCIC Trips.
- 9) . RHR/SDC Cools RPV to < 200F.
- Transient Ends -
5-23
TABLE 5.2-1 PRINCIPAL AND AUXILIARY SYSTEMS REQUIRED FOR SAFE SHUTDOWN AND COOLDOWN Principal Systems 1). RCIC 2). Nuclear Boiler 3). RHR - Division II
- 4) . CRD Auxiliary (Support) Systems 1). RHR SW - Division I 2). Diesel Gens - Division I 3). Diesel Fuel Oil & Lube Oil - Division I 4). EECW Division I 5). EESW Division I
( 6). EDGSW Division I 7). Control Air - Division I 8). Control Center HVAC - Air Side *
- 9) . Control Center HVAC - Water Side
- 10). Drywell Cooling - 4 Two-speed Fans Only 11). Diesel Generator Ventilation - Division I 12). Torus and Attached Piping i
l I
- Essential HVAC O
5-24
, , , . ~ . . _ _ . . . . . . . _ . . . . _ _ _ . - _ . _ . - - _ . , _ - , , _ _ . . . . . _ _ - . _ . _ . . . . . . . _ _ - , - . - _ . _ , - - . - - _ . . .___
O TABLE 5.2-2 GENERIC ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENT Drywell Coolers RomtCoolers Electric Tray Electric Conduit Hangers I & C Tubing fir's ! Switchgear Relay Room & Control Room Racks .O Batteries & Chargers Diesel Generators Underground Electric Ducts Underground QAI Pipe (RHR Caplex) f(N Operators Punps & Motors Control Center Ceiling & Lights Valves O 5-25
l O. Q O: i
^
TABLE 5.3-1 5 LOADS FOR CERTAIN RPV At!D IPTERNAL COMPONENTS i I i . j Horizontal Vertical Allowable ! 1 Top Guide (Shear) 350 31.7 687 kip (1) , 9 i ' Core Plate (Shear) 347 361 687 kip (1) i Stabilizer (Load) 513 0 2,765 kip (2)
-RPV Support (Moment) 221,000 N/A 1,152,000 in-kip (1) l RPV Support (Shear) 679 1,191 2,600 kip (1)
CRD Housing (Momen t- 507 N/A 18,870 in-kip (2) l . CRD Housing (Shear) 14 Negligible 4,400 kip (1) ! CRD Restraint Beam (Load) 14 N/A 266 kip (2) ! Shroud Support (Moment) 276,000 N/A 347,900 in-kip (2) l Shroud Support (Shear) 1,176 1,031 1,434 kip (2) I i i [ (1) From Fermi 2 mathematical model 761E774, Revision 4 (2) From equipment design spec. or analysis i I i l i
}
O O O " l ) ; } ' TABLE 5.3-1 (Continued). ; l ' LOADS FOR CERTAIN RPV AND INTERNAL COMPONENTS 4 i i Vertical- Horizontal' i Load Force Force . , i Plant Combination (kips) (kips)
\
t l Core Plate LaSalle 1 El 423 471 ! 1
- i. Fermi 2 New Seismic 361- 347 1 1 .
Top Guide LaSalle 1 B2 40.8 332 > 2 . j Fermi 2 New Seismic 31.7 350 l. i ! Load Combinations 1 ! El = NL + (U - Delta P) + SRV + SSE ! B2 = NL + (A Delta P) + Chg. + SRV-1 + SSE i I i I . 4 i l l l i
htritMAL tLt.blXib LU. Nuclear Energy Business Group ; ENGINEERING CALCULATION SHEET , NUMBEA . CA?C T //' /C/
,m i- ,) SUBJECT N * ' ' - I- A A- A BY
#- - SHEET _ b O. /'_
@m 11Nb%KJ G4-t'{e u -
j lb:n! +I;: j e l!: ~ ' **y ":.!
)=0 C C ,,r'.5 l- j?
- f ' > s /*S !*'
){ $#'* fS lw **'ae w $s Y #l/ C '4 o' sA & f ff
) N ($ { .*
ri < m.,.. t c ., .n Le orx ic a k r. &>< p ru. o< s f' Q JF1 # n t .A f * ** .4 Yo 69 h ft{ r ( (*** g Y Q /1ftV* %t ( i:< n ic a .,, .?,. . . n .. w n ~u.,,n...'. a u_
!:cclc.{.,.a. ..
.- i e . a s 'e : t ut l s; e rc o. u ; o .a. ..
W .
,,,, ..v if ,
-p :
1 ch Deq, ,L c , rj l 94l l / .52 9 2 cy em: p t i ip. f S g 55 cc j I f r/ w',r"e'e; a s ; i y ;g. 3 33y/,3o ._..4 i
"' 23 0 ABS 4c-l 7 7'l ! T l' ' 3l i .-
$ [
q^tl ;> A es ay /03/ i/ 7 &.. 276 c ==> l}c'c : . 4:4 lt ) D e sr > c. - !: d: c. J Ia rc < . : s s n '.s . l: .< <Q Su PeJ. 4 : u, s/o. i rich o) Fce .\ 'c v. lcod Yv,"*<d. ?k e c /c v 's 'm , :i s!> o w . . c r- nexf pa e-H an' M' ec)'. 1 4 ex c u d: eles.9 - v a hi.2 _ r r' y f .52. C S f')**.,l 7 \ h
\%./ ,
bd h *J S I( SOI
' -d **- . - - s. -e . _-
.r3
O GENERAL h ELECTRIC r/n/S/ ss so. s c, ./ p NUCLEAR ENERGY OlVISIONS REV fe r m. .' '2 Cler hce, f l Cal V cn r/2c 2.l 5l>icud sc <ppor& V =- V'- 'PA + do (su 6 nef M 4 44 (shr. s supp.r V= CBE loed + C-6Hc /es) ( Ref. 2 ; pef. y J coa A -s- )t
= -
.3 2 0 ~ yc] ( abs c e>>. Li n a-lo n , )
= -
273 xpr Af A = - 6' r k'j" 4 = 34 P6 ( Ref 1 ~ A = iP. uz v o' h * ( pef +, s" c )
\fo = - sp A '= 39 x2sjM =
Ef2. zy x s. A'=)rf4'~* Ref .3 , i .pu t u /can % rb ' * " d- h e r -e--
--> usedfor a ud sf = 3 y s.sa Refi.
V = ~ ? ?_3 + $ 2r - 892 P Y :
=
~ Jo30 9f ksi }
ld.cS : V 0 r/sc Cu o, cf r C BE' l cod **,d Sk hc lo a d ,, b e r.e C85
}o cel it , )o e, d o,, +he pi g y,'o v s OBE lcoel ( /89.fr p,
)
( Ref. 3, shr. J
-]K % C8E loacI : Cold s)v/down a ce th3u a H.a. 2 ooc /
C BE lood 5 (Fac+<W 2 0 )( Fa cht /. Jfrb ( +* bl* 0-* d v*lWe !" Ver +i fal Se n s en. C OBE m oi m unn Hember fce.) 1 'o
- l' F 7T X ff. 63 y 7 == 3 7 0 kso
([ee SH ido. 7/, 7 y . .D n o rn'C Ar*dt E " l"
- J
- pau r<o , s ~ , H. / > 2 Ari 7 t, eev..t) or se a-Ref. 2
^v- _ , . , - . . . , . _ , , . . - . , , - . _
S N/ s u o. q a h (']; GENER AL h ELECTRIC NUCLEAR ENERGY OlVISIONS REV ,, p4, [o e m ). f
)0 $+rc .:C Eve'/uahnm
.]- l n,a> cra a C+,c; :, n . g, , c ; .g, l, w ]
, JD r : n .' i .,
;-/:.c f a J/r.e i, y j. ,z s), , . ,) ,Jx .c ,,
., (
cy,)i n l< r p i . p . . . .c c <j "e r, r <' dy ,, g e
> > c tr , C Propc,JivC f H
\ j %
/
Y~ ,' - h-C det n ecc.le >
?
/
s
, l
. . g,
( Rel. 5 Panc J A - f 3 9. ) h
- a2 -
),/
r'
-, v. .
- w. a. t l C, = f 9 37,;-
ha =/n tar " f~- d ' ,w ' (' i 7 R2 = 'j 7. y " N ' lI l y ' or , , , , , e , ~ h = 14 ,
- 64 p> - - l s1
%=22c - g, _
I s-1,ro., J , a p p o< l / o o d's 0 3 -I-l pneasc , e m.; ,. , m / /. .s v '= n 2 f^' r" U I cd.. Jn - r .t.w ' P
.., l, y/
S A ic ..:t i
. th > L o,nr:4 a a! /e cd al. y A _
+
Je , w in s ~,s s m ,; ... w s, J
l GENER AL h ELECTRIC F/ /# ' ss ~o. r g 4 NUCLE AR ENERGY DIVISIONS O - _/ a , ,,, , 2 REV , y,,
<)) E .[/< < ~ c v e < +, co l /e. ot v'
'I v '--- V + -
(M v n/ 2/s i
=
/ 03 ( - 2 ( 274no + n 7 4 < ' 6 )/n.s-
=
47s7 xf: C ii ) D u s t< . L u ,'.s<l l caci al. g A %d cy b.,]er (4 v' - v' - 6157 -
> rr ca 2 < 7 7. g O
V = //./ r .p /,,, j, GE) J3r,< <sy ,..e,.Lic x .. rra;
]<ae>>s,+y ( hf r p<y A p )
n n c. < , ., >> . n.c>,,broa .S~trenes ccc < i>> t% sh rc u d cy h., der R an ' - P21,l V, 2 R: tt tz Pi = p ,',0n3,,y P t.
= i. o n Q? ig.)'- i.e Ocv .or)' _ ii, ;
2 (91 rp . 2r.) aw
= - r. 2 ur,- .
_ R 0, - h Lt i e tv 6N>r)- i.o c ier . b c) : y# _ n O . 2>c h 5 - - _ , ~ - - - . . . . . - , . , _ _-- ..._., . , . . . . _ . . _ - . . _ , . - - - . _ , - . , - . . . . _ . . - _ _ ,_-_a.
a - -- --- 4 R
- b j
*. a i 8'"'"^'@'"' ' " ' "" ' d '
O NUCLEAR ENERGY DIVISIONS 7 , REV , g, [ r; -
- r. , r. . . ,. , 2 n ,;
2.
> friscou Mr e + s }> r o % k = f - $g~ = f. 6l k Si J
l
/} ll:nu< blc - %. ;;
Zale o s,1 z ,,2 Q = , g, ( y ,,. (San 2 :.~ E n. . i,a e . e llco. lc) 3-l1 cn-/..~. . g ,, , .. ,a,... c . r. ,, i/n.& N> x P~. ~y tJ+e ' y s~u n ~. y ( pc .g p.y x A - 7vo) 3-2-1 G e ~ , . +, nd b&
.2TTV Ru ggo 4
A i ! j
- . g-
# .y R, = ,
$""'l#l
-' E .
f ,, t i I L
% 4 /
O ,
-P
~ ~
o
,..,dr**w.r..m.,-,--..-#.,e- 4, ,,-.p g .. e . ga.wrp i.g .,m H. ,gety t e a pp,, g _y 6 , _.p-, a -*v--- - ~ - . + .
l GENER AL h ELECTRIC y,/n/7, soo 7 /f NUCLE AR ENEftGY DIVISIONS
- 2 m.. x, ts.) w ,
,$2 r m ,'
( r y 2-2 c /c u.il o N e - j ))g
~
,>i n y . ,1,u >>, }.c co f -* G e > d r a St, es < o . i fe > > r, c ccor c
,- s,e suppo,+ phu. n,a piaz .. s s,c : ,,, s 6vue or c iiiodsbd at a cc ,,.po ri s's be a r> u el J
/e.,3 d , c <p.n / n c/;r s o ,, ex. b e nn. , -sic v+ae/ we.//
c..s sie a,, , a r.. ) c a, az (4.c py s-p )
^
is s cc es , fc, e ./cu/a n (v ef. 9 :n y cr MC Ref r psy /-7u, O ""0 vi herz M= s? /80"4 (R, x'r %
) + 150
,8 x [kef 4 mr D}
~
/ "
$ (2 ~ 72/ )
^
- R, % = 7 7.c
,;,0 =
0.i307 v, = i i. / r.f s/{,,a y = m , , , - i- ,= i.. ~,7
.sf = 03f l-b e i" ox s i>> u n> s Ttte r s i o > Je.' s s't e c c u ts ,,; &a 6vud @
O(=.27/Pf-M=tofusf+ pop.irV-.ty.vy 0 = 9.2ie ,h - k; s . r- - . _NP
, f
s e , GENER AL h ELECTRIC r//'/F' sue fof9 NUCLE AR EP.. GY OlVISIONS ~ f (f m' . b REV 'ho , r. ho G yo,,,e ) . cs /culata A //cw
- b!<
' .z 6..#) . C4 :ne,s sus e; L oo J,n 7 ;20ca,m M . - - w. s n.
.$no n .'le r O
+
AeE g.,g
- rate 23 g-o . 2 e ,2.p t 99.u- '2 vs-. or 0 7su A//rw aile siteit= c5
'" - ' f . --
+ & = .n . 3 - s ,
& = 80 ksi
.de,r w s n ., ,,,se., s. ,
r/>e prio,o,y /cen/ r sendiy av er ed widi,,, c,// cwa /,,,,;e o, ass O +11e is cn,,b.nahk /
/ea4 5 l
l N 1 O . l A "" - - mw~ - - . _ , , _
l GENERAL ELECTRIC CD. Nuclear Energy Business Genup
, j ENGINEERING CALCULATION SHEET l C NUMBER DATE 1._
~ SUBJECT BY_ SHEET 9 OF . k ,_, l
/?e eren u
/ /cYer funi I. R. kcba n I Dai a e . n Dah.J r/</e/
~
2 bc ry<> N'e+cs fron 1. R. kobsq 3 Relc rp q' t c<<+pu/ da %/ 4/'9 7f ,
-{n- dew L oed.c DRf' E /3 -//o - 4 $ l
+ S'+ro s c pop art A ne,hed D /t)= a 13 - 3.cy - 5 /
5 R?V C+'m Pefcr+ by ("onIur Sc,,Eny<hn ' , V,Pj'^/t. t 7 7 l ~ / 9 f ---l O t 0hren c / ec cl: Euclus-4 A > D A re a ,,g .,, ? c l 2 5/4/'g /
.(fer n- i?l ) DRf A n -4
> > As I
t
. I i
N i O . l 4 l m s pe. i.: w .
' * * ' ' ' ' , **%wwg . sees e %. . y_, __.e
)
, ,,j .
m y5 (/) ) w 4 TA13tE $.1-2 itYDRAULIC Cof3TRui. LitJIT . SEISM IC HE- EVA!.IIATIOt4 ESMMh( TA!d$ Method of Original System, Staueture, ComponenL Qua1ification Re-Evaluation Resu1ts Description Conclusion and Eemarks Spectra % Analysis Pargin Test Analysis Report i Spectra 8 Comparison Marqin Report. 5 of Fig. 8 Safety Ilydr aulie Cont a ol Unit , X DRP 147- BS C16 dated 1300% DRP 147- 1300% The new peak response MPL CllD001 CllD001- B6 4/18/72 Itori- CllD001- llor i zon- spectra curves were N*S-5 B29 Vertical zontal, N*S-SA tal 1.05 q's horizontal capa-830 B29 6 500% 500% bility of the HCU is C6 B30 Verti- Vertical 14 q's = 1300% margin by C16 dated cal test, horizontal All dated 4/17/81 r 4/18/72 tiorizontal Vertical was 2.8 9's peak vs 14 g*s capability by test = 500% margin, therefore the ilCUs are acceptable. l l i
e
- 1 i
s d < k n 6 - r i d 6 y a re 0 m nJi e ot f R i ci = t nl d aAa w n l u o a upq x cm-l ue a l l _ n aPr M A _ o c ' ' i R e s dI r I u l c h eR a" c s s w o n o aet ttl #
""# ax l l
C M A AcB" t ao ' "
- n y
- i t %
gf e 5
- % rof 1
- a a 4 s P S 1 t
l u s4 d s i e . e st hs R yr ct l o ae1 n ap t e1 o ne th - i AR AS1 t _ a _ u n l i .
- a q
_ v % r A. a E N _~ - M _ e R n 33 l ao I rsI . . - N ti qq C O cr . ii
- 3 S A I
T E. _ eaq ppi PP _2
- R !
l B _ SmP SH 3 O t. A o - - NE , C I
'. C V l
l A T _ 3 / - }
- AN :E AQ - I 4 g q 1 t P R M a 5 0 l
b M M r 1 1 t A U C IU c T P S M e = = R S l p g
, y l
i I a S A A k E n S in . go 8 c ii l5 rt t 7 a7 Oa r n6 rC-c o p o3 o s5ht2 0 fi of e i cl - i R dCno0 dl EDAB1 oa s hu tQ i e s s M y l e a Y n A _ t o s e N
. T t
u
'n o
p m o C n
,o ei rt s
r2 up o0 ti h1 cr c1 _ uc nE rs AS _ t e
) SD pS mI uP m P e p t R m
_ s iu l _ y RP _ S 4 A 4
4
. t
,t . a . ' c ~ . {L .,
- /.
O EOU T P:"~iT I ! ;T1 FI"I'I C":
- h. . + '
1) fthln Pon t P A<UC acH & PUMP pis e Etj c : c c c z, A Ot, ) I % " Av3 C hoil & c-r 5 7v r., S . A L'ist At9 b U d]
- 2) E^UIi'"7:7 J;" ATI0'!: .
.EEMC 70 IL But L bu/6 30C..~OibC& ELEV. EA l ' -I l ~ 2 'L To 6 % E 7 ,TA Q '-I & LT E? F/.
( 5:54 , *A'l) (/2411f)
- 3) DY':l "I C C U
- D ?.CT' ' I .~.~' I C .~* g , z . I$. l.o
!!atural frc quen:;-(n) /rG T. 335~.
OBE dic.:Inc f a: t .r A) . A . D3S da~. pin; f : tor /J . 4 . .. SE3 qu.@.c d::pinc f ae t.:,r 3 ., flotc: 1 f lo.:ce t naturn'. f r. 5T:c n: / 1 ; . ; , ti.. . .. .i - is con:icere:i r . m 4) RESP::"C D>"'>a V .. ..
- e. .
y 'p ra: llo r th- O .: th ': . n n t. CLL /! J : o. Fit; !!o . /J 4
- S' 3 Eas t-llc s t Compancnt SLL
. Vertical Camponent SLL Fic : o. M.4 . c - i l ( fe :. T 06f.s<( -
.5) ACCELE9?,7? O' S p'Lg gldL G ttc e / EC A.f7A L. ...,..,.,l..,
v... ._,.s. ic.,I O t ..,3 21 c., o b i527iCnL - . . . ...... . ,..s. ,i .
^' ' 4 ZPA (::.- .) .16 9 . /Sg Z P A ( I .'ll . ) . f5 o ,j5n ZPA (Vert.) . ici~9 U. tU M N ct.s a d.c; a r.m.)
.. e g5
# , jg L'T.N s 77 w c..)
or.ri l PZ/d: (::. . . ) ~
~
equip. PC?l: ('ic r t . ) n.A $ 4.d y VALLOY (:!.5.) VA 7 VALL N (2.'li.) 0 . A vitt:r (vert.) . ~ 4. > v
-t--'- --n,. - - , - - , ~ . , . _ , , . __
, , _, _gppQ, eg. e@ 9 CCe e gyC nn
? ./ 7 2 /,/ y-RHR ?>n^ AstK M3
- 6) RESULT 5 OF EXICTI!:'3 SEISMIC CUI.'.IFIC ATIO?!
C01:PC:!?;T CALCULA;sp yIgLp 3p:.7':p.--
- Mr.-
~ , ~ -
( ., ; ) - , 7 . . . ,, ,3 [ , , )
. ,},? y.,o K' HR PUMP Ma x. TL.ht:>ILE fis7M n r ? =, c,e ,sy
/ U C H O ld. /O S , 0 0 0 tm,a.,)
40 > CQO 2CLTO M AX , CHEnM 22,000 60565(.07 Y i 2' BOLT b ME72Y NSSUh Eb TO 6E Ld EMK GC 7 : mPCMEllT
%AMCnoe ,~
- a.c> an c c e=
\, lAl THE E't!57 I N C, l' u t Mcg,. gcg; (. p g, g, , 7pg p gc ,g-VA L UE S VJ Ef 6 A :s u ME b .
- 7) RESULTS 70.7 :.,.'l EER CUAKE Thc ncy: ct cccc: ar.d dclic: tion: ::= bc con:cr . a ti ;c ": c:tizat. 5 .
by cultiplying the old rceults by the larcc . rati; f:u .- 1. ecction 5
- ..I . . . . . <
C0! PC:::::? :;i-l/ Attc;;A;Ls 3;y;3.;- I o,;
- n:: -
m: - ( --4 ) 7-- (-.> (,...._) .
.....7p..
R H/2 Punt o MM. TEA /2Ils SO q5, (o 105,000 b ,y Lwa stwa MA,/c No,q g.7-3 , MRX. 6HEfB lo 6, 4. 5 60585 yeasq . ics.g , los, c;o losM
,ouw 4L :-
g g - cpo s u F=, e b .
) .
O e
- . , - , , - , - ,,,-.e--e. , , , , - , , - - - = - - - - - -- . . - ,
.,---. - ,..-,.,... - - .,,.e, . , - . . -,7
f* ( f> ( \ V) D TAtuE 5.3-1A RilR llEAT EXCl! ANGER AND ANCilORS . SEISMIC RE-EVAI.llATION
SUMMARY
TAlti.E Mettiod of Original System, Structure, Component Qualificatiora Re-Evaluation Results Description Conclusion and Remarks 1 Spectra % Analysis Parqin Test Analysis ReporL i Spectra i Comparison Marqin Report. 8 of Fiq. 8 Safety itHR h.it Exchanger and OK, see report Anchors
$Nh'IC'.'?,.y .h ' ? ,* r hii :. 'b n
v .
$E P. Sp E !v.
. u. -
.w re ., v g/3 L'
RHR Haar Exwnac,a Emw., w Desieu % ( E) A9227 AJ , rev l , Fits Do R 3 -/0 ) Desisu kss EgwooAns - R osacaru - /. .f G YS A*T ICA L, ' O ./ 4 Ca AccEPTAM L t Tn ( alt W : UGO ITMS , /SMS feClio- 7M
@ $cmpr.a.TvrC Tke. heat exe%yc u>as ,nocMcA tof%c uns % aHaebcl lar9e boca Ned euk:. u- p>pmp in A. pipinya analpa . TL muby
' ac c efevaTio,,s re 91n, balw, to k frew k cripd RHR.- 03 l19 CTata Rteam -
MCOf, , bOI AdC0 ff%ieon r ((1) X i , E
~105 0 .006 0 720 .005 .006 .co1
(& Hea1 Eu.G w y medeI is shou , in cles19 . cpu, sc71- rc3) Obviaval g , no a,-plificolio , occur so %T 1h cs ce el etations UsecA m '\hs eveduc3 ton arr Tk EPh values frow b A ype pdc SER ARs @ 7% Srduc70mc hit >wA : Fi3 CA (u3'-6") , EM = .16fo a 2 = .% 6 Q Vent m J Noounyw 61 5 Fs3 B3 3 ('e H i-6") 3 EPA = .3rG EW F
$ E39 (6-6') 3 ETA . lo 6
[vaico Yewi i%Wi% - Us.1ir 2 m SER 'SSE GAL vA nou V O22 % h g )9 3
. .l
- ~[14(e-n: no prob}A in k hor /EcoIctf C//reci/oo ct5 Tl -
de ss e hasIs 1.56 is itn vek reafee Th., & SER vedbe of C 40 6, ~T1.e Ve t itcc0 $ f a cceleecQ u a- vduc is oppro xwitely hee. h cle s ig n be. c i s . Noueven cmg
. con s ,eled i .- c F % ver fiedt 4 o re ct s o.- m us1 melvele tLi deae)weif f so %1 et beiter indiedw, =f tk mag n,+vele ef increareci loaci is ob ta mecl by.
cons sc\ces 9 dem elweijk t + sei.rm ic
~ 1. 36 G
- 7o in creAs c = M 7o in c.e en c e j,,q s Suck a sima.Ll u necease. ss a cc e p%%\ e. bg % fc How.9 lxj ic :
I. % eva.lvetur was p e e for~ eA 6 et s e=\ upo n th spees k 1soa re cju ,een ent:, . H o we.ve,~ hed , % y e Q exc u evTlsne cirws sn ho % ko es tan ted wkn verDco) direduss14 ( F, le Pd- 230 indrede s I.76
. i.s hij hlu '
I s l<e \ g %aX \t was a na \ ped %T wa g cesycJly 2 . Se ns ~ , s. a c c e\ ec a%- of L Hx meu e a o n ly one cispecT of % ches s3 m . Noeele. \oacle %cl infernd pres: vee mus4 aho be cows selved . Uneler avr senerno , TL: PsR. sp%. c4ees n1 epeccte v & \ seveced ho ur.s c<Her 1k sTmm mo% sea. ss a so 1bd 4h<-J noee le Icacis ud sn4:ena) pressore. Stresse.: ac.y he 19 no-eal . M macyn c<vsM\e for sea ssE loadin would be lup k r.
- 3. Tk \oads/strenes cluc To koc seodd ed <eetiu./ ac<e/<4,nr ace. com b>-aA hy d.sc\v4e wn . TL. slea sy n h o cacAd eseceM% ss 4%eetsw % SER Sx value (I.s s. ves o.s s)
(enc s us io - O Tk t% Yea.t Exc%y a acle 7vald, derped %
% SSA. 55 E .
J
,.v , + - - . -- ,,,-n-,-,n. r.-, v.,,- - , , , . , - - .-,w-,-, , ,n.--v,. , . , , . . . , , , . , , , , , ., --,,-,c.- . - - , - ,
e 3 rs V , o. s= , o d
- c:. ; ) .~ .
i I i v..
, . - ,. -4 . m 3. - ..-
C. : - t .:a - -
,,.9 ,
e,,, .3 - . .$ 2 C'. C b 5'5A 't' O' ' " G.,.u i,,n . sS, .. 5
.. , . , ... 1 r,...
48 e. af M ( pe/ af w aJ .ar o' d %
, e.,-
r.v, r.sa . ,. . l . . d T ri i%,a' 68COTR PIP 0950655^0 211FERS2ts'.o
- EE:59:: ^5 5 ,
s.. FET.HI-2 5';5-16 ~!
- 1119 aESICU.1 -EA! "C "; #-
Ev<iLCD:.0 ."is;"NSE 5FE;TAA F*C3AT.LE PAe**.M :fR x,Y A.53 2 EXC:'ai!:N S. - ', T ' 0J** v'r ( 'n, A >: r 5 '. F x., ; ,' .' e.. x. ' .' . ' ' ' . . ' . 3..'. 5 5 =' L". *. .r s F . F< 5 ' 2 S . : 4,.
- E l-1,Y A'.0 2 RE57 N5d5 ACE Sa5ED l$ 58D' ,
N00E ACCI.E8:T!0s5 IN G LNIis. 04 AL'G 7 9 EE:U ? ANT ASIS N0;E x Y Z
, 10 .001 .C05 ...". .Xe GLOB
.. , ,. 3 4 ., u c ,s ,,.
.,.a . ,. c. ...> .. .
C' 0 3 ' m ^'s reA 031 .0** I
.006 .0C6 . 003 .CC9 GLOS 730 1
O .000 . 000 .300 t V? GL O'4 735 . C00
. d. .* d 4
([ 4 ) 'J ~ *. T
./
,,d
... . .' *- } .
I 1 a, - .
* . .,g v .3
- w. u .
*r J s .
4 . e.
.?.
g O
- s n ,
. k o 4
_ i r 3 _ a s m s ' _ e e , H n p 0 - d x 8. 0 _ n e w 90,
. a o 6 g; l l 7
_- n nd a ie c l a 2U o wi ' * , i s of l s 8
. u l i 0 l 6 0 c ot w
_ f a o 9 0, _ n s l l 1
. o e a l ,5
_ C hs c a 00 Ti " 11 d
- n y l i t qf e 1 e 9i
_ t rof 0 y
, a a 6
_. s P S n t l _ u s8 e s i d h - e st eot al
- R yr ht
_ l o c oui
- n ap addc" o ne t lal "
i AR tl eaI t A( rc' a _ t! u n l i a q A v % r N E a _ - M e
., H n
N _ ao l S O _ rsI I I _. ti fT. T cr . 3 C O A E. _ eaq D I s ipi . . I. l h SmF g q O3 h t l i i f A A o F F 3
- Oll V T .
C E _ C - Y y 4 5 N E R .- I 5 0 E A R l A M a 1 1 l - . A MP C l M r I l i t 0 0 T U P MS S c e = = I l p g C E a S V I S n A A C i n H go i ii l 9 rt t a6 Oa r rc32 c o o fi p ht4 m ofi e cl e R noct dl AI:Di oa hu s t Q i e s M y X l a _ n A t
- s
_. e T t n e n o p s t m l o o c n B
,o r
+ ei o rt h
_ up c 1 ti n 0
~ cr A 0
- uc 0 rs s l
'p o O t e SD m
P m u E 1 5 B e _ t C s I S _ C y I _ S H P _
< ' I
. J -s l } l) j';
U.
- 1) EClli P"? 7 I T E;TI"I C/.-'IO?!:
A/)C//r/2
#2c,H:" .'" M -
AC/C /5/Hf rzs M e r/ r/ ce c /
. 2) EOUI P!'E;7 '.0lTIO:i:
'. gmc A r- /.dci/clitG-. Ei A -in .::: nT (St gy r!-r J
- 3) DY'il"I C C" W/ 0??.?T rTI CSg, ', , w . n
, e su. r . 1,u ..- i llatural fretuen:y(c) p/ ~/13 :::. L :st
~
.cs. -r 7 / --
OBE dr. ping fa: tor NA ,
^
DDS dan,rinc factor // 1 SER qua.c da= pinc factor 3 __ 5 Note: I f lo. c at natural f requen:y 1 33 -!a., - io con:idcrea '-' . (:,:' ye /e ' ,-
)
,e ;
O ~' V 4) RESPO::..E CPECT'A
.:.....'.. .. : ~7 L Zi :' 2 :Ei _
}{ orth-South Oc=ponent LL Fic :;o. /.# /~ j 3 I'" <':',)
F, ; 3 ',r . 1:ast *licct Oc=ponent GLL Tic : o. /, '- Vertical Co=ponent SLL Fic : o . f. ,- # c-// '. -, - ,
- 3) ACC ELER ATIO':S ,,
r ( M., t'-f]
". .J ft~n -.-.*
.)
u.v.1.s .o.. . . . s1 n ,.
- . .1 .
.: w e,: . .
e. Ir...-., a. d.) ZPG((hL 7S ) s' 0./Q o. u. :.Dy zpA (Vcet.) . n , i r = = . 2. f p2AK (::.5.) O /Se g 59 'E MA'S=SS Hot' req'd , pstu e...( :- ~.; . ) . gg .<.s:. gtg, - g,7 7 $g . o, fsg g ,ygy./, : p. a, equi p. PSAM ('ler .) VAL).%" :.S.) VALL;."i Z . .'i .') t
/
(, VALLI.'i ('.'cTst . ) b o r r ---,mg. . , . - . , , . + , ++--m-- ~ , - - ,e. ,y,- - - , - -
i
, .r . .~
# W 2 - *
/
1,, 4
-f.,e
/
,^ '/ .'*
l l e Q) [l7 .g.l.m
. ,a , O .,. . .f. [ .,. wi y . ,., e r. T .- , ,.e I ,..i. , . . , I . I ;.1, ,., I 0....
lf )/ l 0 0' '., 2"v ' .'. .. . '1 ','e..',vt,,..'.") '!' l ~: l . './ .I,',,."
- s. . .1 .
*=* . ,,.s
.s .e ,., s. *. '. t.
.e.
..e
(.., (, , i g ,, y , J. y
~ . .
t t - . . e l. > .r.
/' .;- :.
t h' e j../- 4 ' ' . *) . ~* p s .; , , < '.C <) S t.l) Civ v2'C o I s j D.
'k
.a c. t e .
- s.e.L.s. vL.. L . , pqy *** .. c., ...
pg a v . ... ge p
) .....a
-I gpng. c.,e. , a. %. . . . . . ., 4. . ..J. r.e .d' .sg .<r +..ta....-.* . ... ..b., . . . l by tll&4w . ,.s4
- 1. 4
.o
- 6. .k. e. 014 ts. .e.!
. .i a o e
- b. s. + k. v.3 1
3...L... GCCt.LCn 5. Re - Cn 'c . '". A !) ', L ;&*C~ C'.t MC .s
. ' r- /.- --
rn.s (19. ., l~ f ,< 3 's . + '; t.: ! " n d .' .
. . .:.. ..I ......
CO,,.Pc...
. . . . ... . ,. ., . . . o t .,.A. . . , . - ...:..: .,..: 1. - , ..m .
64 ,0 . . . . - - . . .. L
- ,, y i., ,
1 ( ...... . ~, ~ t a' ( - to,' n 6. E n ips,i: cc,m /A
' / l 4 , ' *, /
, ; -' ;. " n ',1 (irnnhc<h'~~,W Q ,, ,, y,d.gJ., r .-
I c ,:e.. :' . e ) .
,.,~f
' A ' . .t I
4clh ty t'e: N , ' l' & . /. . ce *n') . . . . c,w,ln$..: '.& K.
. : . :;s *
; ;,"l,. l').~,-
n " -
(.,,. - . _
.. ,# g . / Y "
, l
.,,o,.
E
. . . - + .',-.
s .. D .~ u t:,,,9 ; L). : . 10 , : '.. - + m ~y. l s / C. ,. (f,r .~ .* 1 I
. "T ? e C'lk 3 0,l'll$
rw -~ (s) U (s) 9 TA15LE 5.1-4 i<CIC Ttl!< DINE AMCitOR BOINS . SI:ESMIC Rt:-t'VA1.tlATION
SUMMARY
TAllt.E Method ot Original System, Structute, Connponent Qualification Re-Evaluation Result 11 Description Conclusion and Remarks t Spectra % Analysis Margin Test Analysis Report 8 Spectra i Comparison Marqin Report. I of Piq. 8 Safety itCIC Turbine Pls i E51010002 N Anchor Ag = 1.5 q Piq. 3 N/A Attached -13% In the original calcula-Bolt cal. tion, these anchors were DC 5369 A = .14 q Piq. C-Il assumed to be stressed item 2 at their allowable lim-its due to the DBE. These stresses were multiplied by the largest increase of the 3-directional accelerations. The resultant stresses are 15% greater than the new allowable stresses. , Due to the highly con-servative method and assumptions, these anchors are considered to be safe and requalified. 4
J1 I lf A V
~
- 1) F UIP!'U;T ICP;TIFI'/, TIC : .
d n c//c r & .% 1% r- /?!C 7:'b(1C
- 2) E Q U T P " ? 7 !.0 1 * ? I O!I :
. g.,c/ce Q v , , -l ir, e & JJ- A 't e n Cr ?
- ca. e vc '-0 )
DY!! /J'I C C'? /,:) A'"?! ."~'I C S ,.,,-
- 3) m,q . w ,, r, , ,. n
*r,' -
flatural frequen:y(c) ,e, . - M 2 :: . (:st n,c- ':t6- - OBE damping fa:t:r /,' A : DBS damping fa: tor /'. ' ' SER quake da pinc factor . 3 '4
, Note: If loelect natural f r e q u e n y >~ f ? " , .' '
is conciderca ri -' : . , ,.tt ,,- . c M 4 c..{. J ) N- k) RESPO :.~ E C PF."T '.i c c. l .,> . . PE , : Y.i
^/* F; '
C "- '- l{ orth-South C: panent CLL F1c :::. East '!!cct Oo:ponent SLL F1c ::o. 't,'" 3' '3- ' J Vertical Cor.ponent SLL :'i c :; o . ./A F - J - / ' (. '
- 5) ACCELERATIO"S Cusio Chun/,2) -
evi c 1)
~
.?!bbq g --
9 E!g5' 1,? ./ C = (w /; l Db! '1 .!, (:1 '.)
- v. ...
A' " #
'2 l '- ZPA ('/cr t. ) C'. / Odr 0#2*'D PZAK (::.S.) /. Sey SS'/;"IN 'S* ~D
, g,, 3,g[ '. F2.% s . . SJ 11ot~ req'd ,
p3,.y ( ;, ,.;,) ,,gV
' for ricid equip. T'". (Ve .)
@ 6 l 1
1 VALI.r (:i . 5. ) i l 1 " V : ( .. '.'i . )
", N ( ALLEY (*!crt )
4
,+ -
E'.e - s .g n> .. - i, ~ e-a,,<.e *
. _2 pu c /2 i
..,,f.,,.,I ,,.,.,, I n..
7)/ v$ )f
) R e. ..cA,1.m. , .,., O .. :..f.T
.. ,.I..,,
.. ..I.-..I C0!'.PC'*i::T AL.'r' L /.T.';D Y I El,'.; ' ' V L l'; ;' l e. . *
!!M;': . 'T' (--i)
- '; '" ( - -- ) / ..
-)
/30/S.S 4C) CC C (!ewird /2 S,+'~(d' :c) /V-.
. C */%. " ~ ; C ? "C g ,,. f; 6 : 1.29 C00(Shmi') c oc ,r. i.. .
l A U
- 7) RESULTF FO "? !; ' .".'l S *' h' '" " AK I The ne'.: ctro::o and defic tic". :.n bc . . . . . . . . .
. by .r.ulti. p' yint; thc ol:i rc:al t - cy the 1:.r; : . : ... : .- -
section 5. (f>,,.v. 67 /,S7)
,&~ mu.m: ,
;. .., -. . > :. g
- s. .. .; . . . . y_
_ fo pic]
. , _ . *...t ./
.. , C ( y' C O! ,.1%,... .. ... ...
.. .. m,
. .,.a.
. . .. =*
- n. .._ L .y . .
?. ! ,al ". '. . . ~ . ' ' ;' * ~ ( - '. ) ' '
, ( '.) (-
- ~
. t t'. '. " . *
- f 80lb $R1r 4A 3 434Cf C 3 ao op., Sw , v.s r . ~
l 1
/ 2 5 'c . $2 :
' > j r -
( . C 7 ? . : * * ~ . ~ ]
- .Is^6.
i '
,.!*' <c-- ./ .
. I
~
/0$j C 0 C,':t M.d m > ',
l s50//.fQrTnk $IT100 f - t
- 1. i T
- - '.e'
' "?. ') /. '.' O S
. I tr. ..
.t . . l
. l l
T l
=w.vv-.-+-v. ._y..y y .,.m.__ __ , ,
. - - . . - . - . - - _ . . - . . - - . . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . _ __ _______\
1 TAPJ 4' S 4-5 RCIC PUMP SUCTiott STRAINER ,
~ SEISMIC RC-!; vat.tlATION
- SilMMARY TAHl.E h -- . _ -. - _ . _ , . . . - - - . - -
i Method of Original l System, Structure, Component Qualification Re-Evaluation Results } Description Conclusion and Remarks I
- RCIC Pump Suction Strainer Margin Spectra 1 Analysis
! Test Analysis Report 8 Spectra 8 Comparison Margin Report 8 of j , Fiq. f Safety e 4 i j leslie Co. Strainer - self X PI-2tl6 5 g - florz. N/A N/A N/A N/A Strainer is requalified. i cleaning 3 9 - Vert. DBF accelerations used in ! ! Leslie Doc Control 3 for the existing seismic l report: qualification are larger than the new quake T00-00-D-900-DA-001 accelerations at the 4 L100-00-D-900-BA-001 strainer location. Vuo-00-D-900-BA-001 1 4 1
't
{ I a ! 5 4 4 5 i 3 a t i j t i 1 4 4 4 6 i 4
---,_m_ -
_- _ r_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I 1 e"N V e.. d 1) EQ_UIPMENT IDE'ITIFIC ATIO?I: LM t IE Co. S pt Ar NE7L
- 2) EQ_UIPMENT LOCATION:
Ren t.ror/ Aux Bulu O1% Svu-6MEm r A.A
- 3) DYMA!!IC CHARACTERISTICS
!!atural frequency (c) Hz.
OBE da= ping factor f' DBE damping factor 5 SE2 quake da= ping factor 1 % Note: If lowest natural frequency 1 33 .iz, then equi =ent is concidered ricii.
- 4) RESPONSE SPECTRA
%)
EXIST. North-South Component SLL Fig :~o. iv . 4.
) F4 3 O,4vne uen.)
s East '.'!ect Co=ponent SLL Tig : o. W.A. / Vertical Component SLL fig No. 4 A- C'# >*d'#
- 3) ACCELERATIO!!S EXISTI:!G SER RATIO CT LpE a, cU/.J:E ;" j: ./:er ZPA (:1.S.)
ZPA ( 3.'.'l . ) . ZPA (Vert.) [ PEAK (ll.S.) 7 Not' req'd pggg (3,..;,), ] 5p Wl5
. 6,I ./8 for rigid equip. PEAK (Vert.) 3 ,26 x 2x l.5 26.
! VALLEY (II.S. ) V ALLEY ( 3.'.'I. ) g ' ( VALLEY (Vert.) _ , - . - , ~ . - _ .,
e s
,)
TAIVE 5.1-4. b g RitR SERVICE WATER , St:12:MIC RE-EVAL.DATiorJ StrMMA RY TA t!!.E
- - ~ -- . - _ _
Method of original System, Structure, Component Qualification Re-Evaluation Results Description _ Conclusion and Remarks 4 Spectra % Analysis Margin Test Analysis Report 8 Spectra f Comparison Margin Report i of Fiq. I Safety RilR Cooling Tower X Ok , see report RifR Service Water Punip and X See report Motor a
n pp G, , 3 -G, 5n/ Ss 'lj ENRIC0' FERiil HUCLEAR STATI0li O uni 1 2 : RHR EQUIPMEt!T REEVALUATION' SUMARY
;, USING SITE SPECIFIC SEISMIC SPECTRA_ l l
, EQUIPMENT NAME: RHR COOLING TOWER EQUIPMEtlT NO.: -
SPEC. NO.: . i , i LOCAT10tt: RHR COMPLEX i s EQUIPMENT CLASSIFICATION:
@ ACTIVE O PASSIVE j p
i OUALIFICATION METHOD: Detailed design calculations and computer space frame analysis i j ORIGIN 4L QUALIFICATION DOCUt'ENT
REFERENCES:
{ A. Sargent & Lundy EMD File EMD-011785 dated Janusry 16, 1978.
'B. General Arrangement RHR Complex drawing by Sargent 4'Lundy ~
f j M1 through M10. ; l
} C. The Marley Co. Residual Heat Removal Service Water System ,'
) Cooling Tower Component Design and Design Calculations, t i~ dated February 8, 1974 j
i i a l REEVALUATION: PREPARED BY: DATE: I'#~ i REVIEWED BY: DATE: PROJECT NO. 6139-38" O APPROVED BY: DATE: EMD FILE NO. hte-0/17Fa v > I _ _ _ _ = - a >
.8 ' '
..'OY li i l Page 1 of 3 l. .
l _y . _. - .- .-- - . - - - . -,- - . . -- - __. . a, . . . ,U l
- - r=: 2 " : -
/
O- - 34w EVALUATIOR
SUMMARY
~
E' ORIGINALSEISMICQUALIFICATIONf4ETHOD: The RHR Cooling Tower was analyzed as a vented structtire since the missile proof structure is open, top and bottom, I htts allowing air passage in the performance of the structures cooling function. Design for static pressure drop across individ6al coniponents proportional postulated. to total pressure generated by three psi tornado The seismic design was based on a response spectrum an.ilysis.
~
M?chanical equipment components were analyzed as* rigid since shipping forces up to 10 g's substantially exceed seiniitic requirements. l Thermal expansion is allowed by system restraints theri by excluding system. thermal loads from design consideration within the REEVAIBATICN METHOD: The new response spectra curves were ccupared with t he G values used in original analysis and the seismic response of tlu systems as a whale ws considered. Tornado loads were the governing loads, l A U'
Reference:
EMD File No.DD-011785 p --- . _ _ _ _ i Page 2 of 3 l - ' 'I 'OY 5 . y.- -- - -
.m -
_ ~. - . . ._ . =mp- !
r) /g O . RESULTS A. FIT.T.: Stresses are very low. B. FLIMINATOPS: Stresses are very low. C. FIII RETAINERS: Their' analysis is based on the Tornado loads which . are higher loads (governing loads); stresses are below allowables. . D. ELIMINA'IOR RETAINERS: S,VE AS ABOVE. E. MECHANICAL ECUIPMEt7P:
- a. Ancrer holts: Stresses are based on Tornado. loads. Stresses are below allowables.
b'Embedment : Same as above. (Stresses are very smll)
- c. Branch Arm Pipe Support: Stresses on bolts below allowables.
Web of Supprt OK. Stresses very small. 3/8" Pcd OK. Stresses are small.' F. " HEADER" SUPB3RTS: Their analysis is based on the Tornado loads which are higher loads (governing loads) . Stresses are below allowables. G. SPRAY SYSTD4. a.1" & 1 1/4 dD pipe:The analysis of 'the systen is based on the governing Tornado loads. Stresses are below alloaables.
- b. 10" #D Branch Arm pipe: Same as above.
- c. 18" #D Header: Same as above.
COMMENTS Tornado loads were the governing loads. The structural integrity and function of the ecoling tower will not be affected in the event of an earthqaake or ' tornado. O
Reference:
EMD File No.EMD-011785 SAflGEUTMUT.'DY v Page 3 of 3 - r -- - -, , ~ a , ~ c . . . .; 1,; _ -- __ d
i 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - -m._,,,
- )
c E"RICO FEF"I NUCLEAR STATIC.1 R h,g)4 l O. , unt1 2 ' i RHR EQUIPMEllT REEV.\LUATIOil SUI'."ARY
,, USlf1G OITE SPECIFIC SEISMIC SPECTRA ]
- i EQUIPMEilT fiAME: RilR Service Water Pump and Motor EQUIPMENT NO.: Order 5:.301213 SPEC. fl0.:
P4500C002A,28-R3000C005,6,7,8) 3071-134 111aA' , LOCAT!0ft: RER Complex Elevation 590 EQUIPMENT CLASSIFICATION: @ ACTIVE OeAssivE QUAllFICATICN METHCD: Dynamic (A Multidegree of Freedcm ' Modal Analysis with Computer Program 1 CES-STRCDL)
. j ORIGlilAL QUALIFICAT10?! DOCUf4 Erit REFERE!;CES:
1 A. Mcdonald dated February Engineering-Analysis 4, Company BirminghEm, Alabama 1974 B. Gene 1. ra ement RER Complex Drawings by Sargent & Lundy C. Goulds Pumps Drawing Numbers: N-302275 & N-302276 i
]
i R 1 , II
. .a REEVALUAT10;i: -
PREPAP.ED BY: . /* DATE: J' ~ ' ' 8 ' i REVIEWED BY: DATE: PROJECT NO. 6139-15 *
,. APPROVED BY: DATE: E:10 FIL E NO. E".0-002582
" [ . ,
S/,ilG EF.'T ' ' '.::. D Y Page 1 of 4 ' _. ..,,4,.. l s _- T -- ; ~~_ '."*"*"~~Y ~~~'^ T '! 2 *
, .h \
y3
,/.,l
([) EVALUAT10.1 SUl:l1AP,Y f . ORIG!flAL SEISl'IC QUALIFICATIOil METHOD: . A multidegr'ee of freedom modal analysis was performed using the computer program ICES-STRUDL. Type of elements used in analysis beam. The motor mount was modeled as a variable cross section beam to account for the holes cut out for access. The moment of inertia of the reduced section was cbtained by assuming that the pipe sectors act independently when the load was applied. This l gives a lower moment of inertia. An equivalent beam was uned to g model the bowl assembly. I Both the high water level and low water level was checked. The east-west earthquake gave the highest loads.' Shaft is sup-ported at sufficiently short intervals. An orthogonality check b' was printed out to show that the mode shape and frequencies are ,f g accurate. Damping used for OBE 2%. %.) The natural frequencies were in the range of 0.51, 4.3, 13.2, t 13.7, 26.9, 45.2 Hz. ' Seismic Loads were combined with normal operating seismic loads and stresses were compared with allowables. Qualification was done by analysis.
- Natural frequency of equipment is given in original seismic qualification.
REEVALL"4TICN NCO: The new response spectra curves were compared with curves used' in original qualification. The additional stresses due to new more conservative G values which were added to existing actual stresses and the results were compared with ASME code allcwables.
, The allowable stresses are from the ASME code except for the i shaft and coupling which are not covered by the code and the stresses due to primary bending. The shaft and coup}ing allowable was established to be in general accord with the code and the primary bending stresses are per AEC regulatory guide 1.48.
p . q) : .
Reference:
EMD File No. EMD-00258 2 SARG E.'lT ( L U:.~0Y I P a g e ., o., 4
-_. T *,, u
i 4 /\u n'., - 1! COMMENTS , , To. assure continous, uninterrupted operation and structural integrity of the system it is assumed that stresses are within the allewable recommended. In our case we have regions that exceed the recem-mended allowables. Since a conservative analysis was used we feel that the small exceeding of allowables will not effect the Structural , integrity and operability of the system. . e i . .
~
in
- V i ,
f I I \ i .
.o
Reference:
EMD File No. EMD-00 2 5 9 2 I Page 3 of 4 S A R G Ei.'i '.d u .'.i U e s o , . , , , ,,,_ e
.,i e -~ , , - . , -,w-.. r - e- w w -- - - - - --~w ' ' - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
~
1 .. 1 g i [ ,-
' y b
.n
~
RESULTS I I -
SUMMARY
OF STPISS AND ALLO *r/ ABLES FM THE PUMP isRE GIVEN BELChi i Ir.peller Clecrance New Adual Allo ~au e s 1 Eax. Colem Stress . 3 Lengitudinal - 3.2013 15,000 j Circurierential
]3,690 15,000 Support Bolting t
' 4,8,25 25,000 1 Ancher Eolt -
, Shear ! 7,529 10,00.0
. Tensilo 16,299 20,000 r3 Colu e. Flange: cnd*Eolting h M &.ltir.; (primary r.erire.e ) 13370 25,000 -
i H Redial Flange S:ress , 14,540 12,600 i Tangential Th.n;c S:rcs: 6,471 12,600
- Bolting (Stress Due To Frir.ary Bending) 42,680 37,500 1 Motor Eciting - -
, , .2,541 . 10.000 I
Mex. Shaft Ccelined Stress , 14,585 15,000
.i t + e
- Fax. Coupling Cerbined Stress 15,435 15,000
') , 1 Max. Shaf t Deflectica (in./ foot) -
.01 .01
- 1 j
- Imads due to primary bending stress in the pipe plus primary 3 membrane stress exceed allowable. ASME Code does not pro.ide q
allowable stresses due to bending but AEC Regulatory Guide 1 1.48 does. J
- Material SA 283 Gr. D. Actual stress exceeds allowable. j ASTM A-582 TP 416 . Actual stress exceeds allowable. I I
Assumed pressure for the system 150 psi.
,O g
Reference:
EMD File No.Epp.cece M ,- y i Page 4 of 4 SARGENT *:LU.'10Y el { .
, % ,,,,j j s l I
5
w x
' J- J J -
TADIE 5.3-7 DIESEI, GENERATOR COMPONENTS SEISMIC Hl:- a: val.tlAT ION SUMMAltY TAlti.E Method of Original System, Structure, Component Qualification Re-Evalualion Results De sc r ipt ion _ Conclusion and Remarks Spectra % Analysis Margin Test Analysis Report i Spectra 4 Comparison Marqin Report i of Fig. I Safety Diesel Generator Skid Assembl. , X Ok, see enclosed report Ilea t Exchanger Stack X Ok, see enclosed report 1 I I i k
. . . rA p- v.--m.,,,
d : ENRICO FERMI NUCLEAR STATION te (N i O UNIT 2 RHR EQUIPMENT REEVALUATION' SUBMRY l [USINGSITESPECIFICSEISMICSPECTRA ,_ I EQUIPMENT NAME: EQUIPMENT NO.: D/.ud Gew.an SA'd A//chd /*f ; l SPEC. NO,: 3c 7/ -/ 7 LOCATION: R H P- C=% r ; E / Sfo
} EQUIPMENT CLASSIFICATION: CACTIVE OPASSIVE QUALIFICATIONbETHOD: .
An&!<.4 ORIGINAL QUALIFICATION DOCUMENT
REFERENCES:
EMO Fib E00/859.' 0"
\
cm .suf<,~ f y , & g oswik 0
/* '#
g,wy,,saa &L L 19 "- ,
. r
? .
1
\
l
. f l
, 1
_ ! I PEEVALUATION:
. PREPARED BY: ,
(>' ffp7M DATE: f!?/ I REVIEWED BY: DATE: PROJECT NO. 6.139-38 APPROVED BY: DATE: EMD FILE NO.
" 1 j ' Did,G5llT b LUTlGY Page 1 of
,,,.,,,,,g l_ --mm. >.mn. v. n., -
.,.,. *m ' ' * -(
oJ /, 36 G L/ ' EVALUATION
SUMMARY
ORIGINAL SEISMIC QUALIFICATION METHOD: Ev o,M. .bhek um asd nh A Mg M 2sW.J Sdhl,y sli n.u.4 H<.a nd Ca v-e dL*gzGL dinc., IT ahi k.y J. Jg,An .Q L w est .-l b :.! w ie [cnelo S b h f v.m G y' duppM L.uw M dahbmr 4/ w Co.LM OA E liv- dre W
- jyps df b7m - ]l.11 djtGw HM Ac k $" n%'-hbIMTrushlul "f/A % M u a e u tnAm .
}pamvuGa. Ru w(en ce,-p-4 p & , gwL<~ 4 [mLou /ryuin.
% 04wy//kn> m REEYAlliATION METWOD:
4 e e.h.Eev4 e la wLL [ vsp.mc.is4 N h[M Q l, k L. va.u Mf.c<. .e. Afeelk ML hm & " Y "' '
] ,z,, ; i r ws..Le~> ^^' L '^^ 07 '^ "" W^{
94,[6.$ba% W r-A,, "@; L 5.a ve ow % . Ok '
'x y,. t; auesm **
,,.& ; k..'
I O./J. W{ f
~
a s O
Reference:
EMD File No. I il Page 2 of l SACCULI' l.UllDY !j 1 _ . ~ . . .t.
~
- M*M - swanserve me,am-___ _ - 'CA4O
~~~ l f* f d
- l RESULTS
%lau Fu ae ss% '}rn s wlw ch kVe~ wA a la Arj.n( /s caa. rnoit , lla. %two'n w hAL% 4 4 4 d r< cd s M N-4 /. 6 9 , f !J - / . 3 7 , Y .^ kd II'l b wdW AGk b-m /C. s ua l d o n cvu. ' weal;ed. % } J y Rb b 00 psi IA .1A. do wn .ha,W
\\ooof:tlc))onLb- '
- SI 3 oc PS' P'}l(("tj 3 3 y5 s est l &n*bh -
0
% bb * *
. l 8 I <* I f.Si 0 .
COMMENTS 4 L)r'IC R Cm.fr.%
. Th 4.L~a.rk cl.u.< t~0 Tm hehwA g osrth W - Os t-L St villu ' G r$% " '
', 3 / s :.l a a t m l y $
& O " L " '~-
Dind go uf~
.juspm Af<uCL - .
Reference:
EMD File No. . Page 3 of Sl8CEi.'TOLUrj0Y
* - 7Noted u te 3,
t . f- . - = - ud I ENRICO FEPf1l NUCLEAR STATION O i I UNIT 2 i RHR EQUIPMEllT REEVALUATIOff SUfiMARY USING SITE SPECIFIC SEISMIC SPECTRA _ EQUIPMENT NAME: I eab Exct,o/nger sbo.c( Aixm bly . EQUIPMENT NO.: - SPEC. NO.: 3071-19 LOCATION: R H R. Cowpleg E L 59o' EQUIPMENT CLASS!FICATION: YACTIVE @ PASSIVE l
, QUALIFICATI0t1 METHOD: .
A no.\ y S IS i ORIGINAL QUALIFICATION DOCUMENT REFEREtlCES: l E M 1> Fl\c W 03 /659 Co n lei e kj .hi.A m n. G r>$ lysis Norb he t L J a a-yc, m a an,.JG l-, ca u ara w . O ' I Af'hib/,l'?T.i. f I I 1 REEVALUATION: PREPARED BY: ,- 7 " DATE: 3 Il j REVIEWED BY: DATE: PROJECT No. 6139-38li O APPPOVED BY: DATE: EMD FILE NO. t ' Page 1 of N.'i.$ O!!![I '.;[i!, Y/ i, l -- _
l _ . _ . . . _.
,, 'l l'l lI-,s
]- -
EVALUATION
SUMMARY
ORIGINAL SEISMIC QUALIFICATION METHOD: LC:] b v.% f \G d i.ds [ u.s. w q s % '+ . n.A. %_. Ac5.ai,. m M hy. - wl (Gy , . p,,,c na (gcz, , f, Q ff ,,,, ,, ,,( coa wl.111) w.' va
';. .., d- vahA[L % .y 5 m ]%.t
[vyw.wu m 'tkcs'oR'.
<ww.vlw /u.ols vu.ce,b.v,y,,..y Cddc.t . ,.(, -
sntu uc.a scu.h g J.wd.Lruk u . ' - REEV'ALUATION METHOD: p A c : :.'s :.Er,- Vals.u W d L ' k ,.4 y ,f. Cc. u ,/ c. o'). 9 4 u f.0. "r.o [ M [a . . u. G. e,l % A k k Mu L r,-ia. d u . ~, (w 6 e 'aU'er.\ kY'm (~A. 1u a .s. :e.. w A.f a.l~u3 b .% a f f T' Ude S 5~^ ' U WAV bA Q ups,4auSu mLk hal.2M) U Ora GA* whos'k q ,;I. g lcado cnrm.m .ag. .on- J.,;it..u w( mkar. diu eC'.^ .M __ n Abre au $de /a A .142<4GL " h/ as -:A Am . O d
Reference:
EMD Nile No. I i Page 2 of l SAilGE.'T,,e..~., Mf):.'SY !! .
. 2 .= . "'"'2^=:_
^
T "' ~,. ~~ . . . T.Tv - y :<- :- ~~ . . . ,. ._l L 2:':. - . - _ _ .
j$ g 4 RESULTS ac~funC m Q m
~~
%r& L a. b & I.74?r.a.wi m ,n w
w ILA v u.b' ed. cG >cd; % . eng ek ouA. s[ n y% Stwtm %.w y q m gg. , C lo m @ S o li ~ loo 56 P si (S h *h.) a.llowc6k 4 GoooPMC6 3 C law y $uc%.] ~ qqy'f P$E l allosbLs. 2.9 7 0 0 PS <* y Jd. cy aft $cLM 25q5 lblL noke 18 L t 6lk l ollow& atraan,c,sje.c 7 l ps,& 2'r 700 psi
- Ja e Gls qy8 ips- '
14 b~b o A A' ~ LW 6' 219 P s s' l sho weA!.< bge),k 6I 30 o fis'
bO '.\ b I4 'l 9Y l S}% bleUN S864 PSs' l b dr4. 29 wotW COMMENTS Y% L VMcm t.eQe+C2 tj .helaryw heL NU e
G MiwA A"E' 1 \ nu.cL kapu' Ny j v;< n2Ajlne ?&l04GLmwm k}"" ,a 4&/e w - h~ j i l
'Re fe ror.00 : E.MD File No. l Page 3 of SARG .'I S LUR07 l -,a ~a,~ c, n , j i
D
\ s
[V k r a m e R d n t t r t r a r o p o p op n o e r e r er i s u e e e l e e e c s s s n , , , o k k k C O O O n y i t qf e
% rof a a s P S t
l u s8 s i e st R yr l o n ap o ne i AR t a u n l i a g v %r E a S - M T e N R n E N N _ ao O P OI rs8 ti M T cr eaq O A E. C I t. l ppi 8 l B SmP R A A o
\V3 5 O V T E A -
R E T Y H C i E E t A 1 B A N i M a r T E CI I lP G i t
. M S c _
I S e _ E I l p _ S E a S _ E S n _ I i n _ D go 8 _ ii _ rt t _ Oa r _ c op fi ofi e R dl oa hu s tQ i e s M y . l X X X _ a n A t s e T _ t k n n e a n T o n p m o i o s C n n a k
,o p ei n rt g x a up E T n
ti i r r cr p e e uc rs i t v P
/. t e SD d a i W e c
I K , i k t e R e m S k e c r t G a i s D J A y S ( 1
M.
- n. -
'l . .
j ,. I
'/)'g EllRICO FERMI ilVCLEAR STATI0ii O
I ' l i UNIT 2 i l RHR EQUIPMEtlT RECV.ALUATION~ SUI'lt;RY .
- USitlG SITE SPECIFIC SEISMIC SPECTRA __
4 EQUIPMEilT FLAME: d'4 e.( 6c nchell e shd [f /go ' ECUIPMEtlT No.: SPEC. No.: 307/ /9 - I ' LOCATION:
; . u . Q, G,q4x , g c 59' g l
l EQUIPMENT CLASSIFICATION: CACTIVE 2 PASSIVE < i OUALIFICAT10N METHOD: A 'n o.* D'{s *6 h
; i
)
ORIGINAL QUALIFICATION DOCUMENT
REFERENCES:
i M D ?~.' !.T .it j
!.^.
C: 1h39 , C%,,ho,;a'li'n; 0.~nu\y M s l i h fC, c,.. t/a.Vou A G m p.-r.v.. h sh o& % -fi IN ~[ 14A M&m 66, [r w eN
<3 N <
l yfl 'r* : ( A .'.1.C f- * *
' ]
i
.l l l
REEVALUATION: J t
, 1 i PREPARED BY: ,
~ .'; I: DATE: #/'
n REVIEWED DY: DATE: PROJECT t'O . 6139-38 '; b b . APPROVED BY: i DATE: EMD FILE NO. t l
.,- c g .:.
l m? t . . t.: u. .. ,, . e h ., ! g Pc.go 1 of . \ a.
]
_w J
> j) sic o-EVALUATI001 SUl;luRY ORIGINAL SEISMIC QUALIFICATI0t1 METHOD:
Uln?- O. n o.l. , i, .\ q' c., p ]., v m ,gg / Hu :!.% wr Ce nls, h lhsp.3 m 4 4 34qg, Lv o.]&Er~ M $. w. A gd % w & n, n, ;- ( Af < s L,. . REE'/ALUATIOff METHOD: R > tw. Ik nn 5 A{" "#" O b c e o. bra.5eaf ~ 0"f~" A k.1ut wL &yi, en e n risj'e.a b : b b h..:. bd ;l)M& y - la c.1 *' gj,./,! A% [E** $b ?v ><
+ r wn en M c E o '[ ER g f 9 Q3. n., u u e[,[Al,u A * #""*
\ 6'l f' 4 IC o,,j;ad. Co.d,!'.s um L A by K^ uOc "'l-Qjgui u , ,r,r $, ctSt us b k BEG 0
- t 1
Re f e re r.:e : EMD File No, I d [. 1 I, j Page 2 of l SA.'lGE JTitu!!DY
,l[
. ~ e a . . . ,. u ,
_ _ _ . _ _ w. w w w. s m, ., % , w i, % , , n, = .% ,. . . #"^" ' i
A er em ' umake* *mEBee a e g
< i 4js'f i
._._ RESULTS
~ . - . -
dx nu. , mwn Q., ;b es cu (E .a af > m ti; / "itwr hafna e Af*
- Ik
,[gcaclde.aaaA L & A'[ ,l '^ ' '
a m a r, ru v n , ~ ~ A k A H " y b y % ^ & > A v. w llio'j AO.uc , ll L x 2o 5 7 ,,23 c3 g p3; f) die s.a 6k idl%i : .2 To o c f S ( I
- COMMENTS OrrvlM: , , L v s ri ~n u w /1l % rs :v'!E skinJ.L , ,L &', . ,, , ,.,
u , i \ yLjuA. b Iia , h <.ah ,/ >nn 4 h 4.a)em ,4j,a(L . l l ' l
'Referorce: EMD File No.
Page 3 of S AR G E!.'T ':l.Uil0 Y
.-,,,,,,,,,,, j aJ
a-
. 1 1
1 f ENRICO FEPfli flVCLEAR STATI0fl I O 7f l utu12 l RHR EQUIPMEtlT REEVALUATION'SUf2tARY
,, USING SITE SPECIFIC SEISMIC SPECTRA ,
EQUIPMENT NAME: 7.?c4c! 'do.'.Q. Ex[xhheo Jbok ;
; EQUIPMENT NO.:
, SPEC. NO : 5 o 7/ -/ #/ i I .
LOCATION: / y , p, , (,,,,
/J g ,
l i EQUIPMEtlT CLASSIFICATION: CACTIVE OPASSIVE l i j OUALIFICATION~ METHOD: . livcIyst$ - 1 s ORIGINAL QUALIFICATION DOCUMENT
REFERENCES:
I ; t; u fc.L yy co l65 9 ' Gdo h, } /Jukdc 6.u!;;(a,1 I m l
, '. .jm h
[o ekt # kis.$n Ex,bt. A i .m buk nn C= 0 Ig kAD.d Q9,%,r'n. I REEVALUATION: PREPARED BY: ---C DATE: - -2 f/ . REVIEWED BY: DATE: PROJECT NO. 6139-38 O ) V APPROVED BY: DATE: I EMD FILS NO. l Page 1 of S/mGEFriLU my l }g 1
.= _. . _ _ ,,,, ,,,, )
evs. 9-&-- ,e ,- v +yvevy r- g -n - n e .r,-my , y- , , - - ,-,m---- .-,+,-,,ww- - - -
- v esme-+-w-,w w .* -- m-- ,
- l
. l .
)1
'P
?
O ' EVALUATI0fl SUMiMRY ORIGINAL SEISMIC QUALIFICATI0f1 METHOD: ' Wm i% A0 I{+, a: , ~ . , ' ,d}}n," ,,.u..l w . . . . , ik .fE .rk % pj ,, J ,% ^ !b d 'II N ,$'w!c w .r. w c h l u l M a dl'- u'ru 9 nG <
/,.; 'L Nc, k L >.: y a d m $. !c u i.. < GL :. ' CC. .. G, ,. uj. :,
4
- x ' e, 't't g, w A.{. - 4 :.'.'.14% G{ V. b b f~ J' N * *0 Y ' *N
.. u L ~. > e ,() < ?.' w w & /b, Gder b.6 M. !c., c , ,., %
,0 wb wa hs l+ 14 G /D LW . '
REE'/ALUATION METHOD: 0v<pl.nwl.E'r li !? u O u 2'L~a.) f,2 : . . . c . . ::..'u ' ! i~.1
.l1. . Q K G' G 0.bk
(. : e. cbi.a.N .'d . !r .* y,r sia /* b bL ;l' ' *-% Aj')<'GL ,
. 'kt.n .br
.u t' 'i. ![/e' W. r p( i. I' < , '. . j., c ., p.
.}}