ML20205P828

Forwards Addl Info Re Electrical Cable Tray & Conduit Sys Seismic Damping,Per NRC 860318 & 0409-10 Requests.W/Cw Lacey 860514 & Sc Sorensen 860519 Affidavits Requesting Figures a, B & C Be Withheld.Figures Withheld (Ref 10CFR2.790)

ML20205P828
Person / Time
Site:	Washington Public Power Supply System
Issue date:	05/19/1986
From:	Sorensen G WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
To:	Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML19298E001	List: ML20205P828
References
GO1-86-0068, GO1-86-68, NUDOCS 8605220075
Download: ML20205P828 (5)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:Washington Public Power Supply System P.O. Box 968 3000GeorgeWashingtonWay Richland Washington 99352 (509)372-5000 P R 0 P'R I E T A R Y. Docket No. 50-460 May 19, 1986 G01-86-0068 Mr. J. F. Stolz, Project Director PWR Dire.:torate #6 Division of PWR Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

NUCLEAR PROJECT N0. 1 EVALUATION OF ELECTRICAL CABLE TRAY AND CONDUIT SYSTEM SEISMIC DAMPING FOR WNP-1

References:

1. Cable Tray and Conduit Raceway Seismic Test Program - Release 4 (Final), Test Report #1053-21.1-4, Vol. 1 & 2, December 15, 1978; Vol. 3, May 1980; Vol. 4, March 1981, ANC0 Engineers, Inc. 2. Washington Public Power Supply System letters to NRC G01-85-0177 dated September 25,1985; and G01-85-0171 dated September 6, 1985; subject Evaluation of Electrical Cable Tray and Conduit System Damping for WNP-1 3. NRC letter to Washington Public Power Supply System; subject same; dated March 18, 1986 4. NRC/ Supply System /Bechtel/UE&C meeting, subject same, on April 9-10, 1986 The WNP-1 project currently uses 4% and 7% equivalent damping for analysis and design of electrical cable tray systems for the OBE and SSE respectively, and 2% and 3% for analysis and design of electrical conduit systems. Bechtel Power Corporation has completed evaluation of electrical cable tray and conduit systems for WNP-1 to justify the use of higher damping for WNP-1. The primary justification for use of the higher damping values is provided by (1) Bechtel's Generic Cable Tray and Conduit Raceway Seismic Test Program, and (2) actual testing of representative WNP-1 cable tray systems to site-specific response spectra. Enclosures 1 and 2 provide additional data for evaluation of the cable tray and conduit damping for WNP-1. He Enel Char.q e '. 24 X 1 iNP v WGd i INf hA 0hokso g6 g5 A 0* g, PDR A

Mr. JF Stolz Page 2 May 19, 1986 G01-86-0068 This letter and its enclosures are a follow-up to the cable tray damping report submitted with Reference 2 and the NRC request for additional information (References 3 and 4). Bechtel's program has been reviewed by the Supply System and our conclusion is that the OBE and SSE damping for the WNP-1 cable tray system can be increased to 20%, and that the OBE and SSE conduit system damping for bolted, trapeze type supports can be increased to 7%. The Supply System requests the NRC's review of the information for application on WNP-1. Approval of this material is of importance to the Supply System during the extended shutdown period in order to facilitate design preservation and packaging of this item. The use of higher damping would more realistically predict the system response to seismic loading and would alleviate the need for design modification. In addition, use of higher damping would optimize design and installation of raceway systems not yet installed. The Supply System therefore requests that the NRC complete the review of the submittal by June 19, 1986. The Supply System and Bechtel Power Corporation consider Figures A, B, and C of Enclosure 1 as proprit

• ry and, as such, should be withheld from public disclosure under the pcsvision of 10CFR 2.790.

Appropriate affidavits executed by officials of the Supply System and Bechtel Power Corporation are attached. This letter exists in a proprietary and nonproprietary version based on whether or not Figures A, B, and C and the affidavits are included. Fifteen copies of each version are being transmitted. Very truly yours, G. C. Sorensen, Manager Regulatory Programs

Enclosures:

1)

Response

to NRC Request for Additional Information (References 3 and 4) 2) WNP-1 Site Specific Performance Testing on a Typical Ca!)1e Tray System 3) Affidavit of Mr. CW Lacey 4) Affidavit of GC Sorensen hDNk 21 4 ) V Mani/UE&C (897) E Revell/BPA (399) N Reynolds/BLCP&R NRC Document Control Desk

• Nonproprietary Version t

J

h. p. s State of California )) ss County of Los Angeles ) AFFIDAVIT OF CHARLES W. LACEY Charles W. Lacey, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. That I an a Vice President of Bechtel Power Corporation ("Bechtel"), for its Western Power Division. 2. That, except for the matters expressly stated to be on information.and belief, I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein, and could competently testify thereto. 3. That I have been specifically delegated, by Bechtel, the function of reviewing the documents discussed herein and am authorized to apply.for their withholding on behalf of Bechtel which is the owner of this information. 4. That, based on my information and belief, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") has requested production of certain documents by Bechtel to be used by NRC personnel. 5. That, based on my information and belief, the following documents are among the documents sought: a. Acceleration Input - Conduit Damping. b. Comparison of Multi-Tiered Cable Tray Systems. c. Relationship of Connection Stiffness to Damping. 6. That the documents identified in Paragraph 5 are Bechtel documents. 7. That the documents identified in Paragraph 5 should not be subject to public inspection and copying because they are Bechtel's procedure-describing Bechtel's means and methods for performing calculations relating to the design and construction of nuclear power plants. As such: a. The documents contain trade secrets of Bechtel. b. The documents contain proprietary and confidential commercial information and data of Bechtel. c. The documents contain proprietary and confidential j discoveries and records of Bechtel. 8. That the following considerations are applicable to the reasons set forth in Paragraph 7: a. The information is held in confidence by Bechtel. i-i

) b. The infornation is of a type customarily hold in confidence by Bechtel and there is rational basis for holding the information in confidence as set forth in Paragraph 7 above and in this paragraph. c. The information is being transmitted to the NRC in confidence. d. The information is not available in public sources. e. Public disclosure of the information is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of Bechtel for the following reasons: 1) The information is valuable to Bechtel because it represents unique approaches and capabilities for i resolving complex safety, technical, commercial and industry factors to comply with applicable laws, statutes and regulations. 2) Substantial and significant effort and money have been and are being expended by Bechtel to develop, acquire and maintain the necessary expertise and capability in these highly specialized areas. 3) Others would have difficulty in properly acquiring or duplicating this information which includes special applications of theoretical principles, complex analytical procedures and sophisticated design techniques. 9. For che reasons set forth in this affidavit, Bechtel requests that the documents listed in paragraph 5 be designated as exempt from disclosure pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790. [ _ Charles W. Lacey Vice President Bechtel Power Corporation STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss County of Los Angeles ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this /b # day of M'7o# 1986. O m aL 10 ANNE E. llENRY . i 1 h NOTARY NBUC-CAUFORNIA 2 LOS ANGELESCOUNTY t ,fr -, Q v g, com spwcr 22, p 5 6dfar"y Public _ /g4 1 gf )

G g BEFORE THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMtISSION

Subject:

Evaluation of Electrical Cable Tray & Conduit System Seismic Danping for WNP-1 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) COUNTY OF BENTON ) I, G. C. SORENSEN, being duly sworn, subscribe to and say that I am the Manager, Regulatory Programs for the WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM, the applicant herein; that I have full authority to execute this oath; that I have reviewed the foregoing; and that to the best of my knowledge, informa-tion and belief the statements made in it are true. The accompanying affidavit executed by Mr. Charles V. Lacey of Bechtel Power Corporation identifies certain documents which Bechtel considers to be pro-prietary information: These docunents, being submitted to the NRC by the Supply System in support of our cable tray dauping evaluation, are handled as proprietary information by the Supply System. The Supply System requests, for the reasons stated in Mr. Lacey's affidavit, that these materials be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10CFR 2.790. i j ( Date: /7 [A/ , 1986 f /C' 'G. C. So[ensen, Manager Regulatory Programs On this day personally appeared before me G. C. Sorensen to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledge that he signed the same as his free act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. GIVEN under my hand and seal this j 9 day of %w ) , 1986. V ~ O.%. % h.Q d Notary Public inh for the State of Washington Residing akdQnad) h) - ) .. gg e,

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ENCLOSURE 1 e RESPONSE TO GENERAL CONCERN 1 1 e RESPONSE TO GENERAL CONCERN 2 3 e RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC COMMENT 1 4 e FIGURE A ( PROPRIETARY) 5 o RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC COMMENT 2 6 e RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC COMMENT 3 8 e RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC COMMENT 4 29 e FIGURE B (PROPRIETARY) 33 e FIGURE C (PROPRIETARY) 34 e RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC COMMENT 5 .35 e RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC COMMENT 6 36 e RESPONSE TO NRC REQUEST 1 48 e RESPONSE TO NRC REQUEST 2 49 e RESPONSE TO NRC REQUEST 3 50 ENCLOSURE 2 e WNP-1 SITE SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE TESTING 51 ON A TYPICAL CABLE TRAY SYSTEM LIST OF REFERENCES 64

e, e r ENCLOSURE 1 RESPONSE TO NRC REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING EVALUATION OF ELECTRICAL CABLE TRAY AND CONDUIT SYSTEM SEISMIC DAMPING FOR WNP-1

I B RESPONSE TO NRC REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING EVALUATION OF ELECTRICAL CABLE TRAY AND CONDUIT SYSTEM SEISMIC DAMPING FOR WNP-1 1. GENERAL CONCERN 1) We have general concern about the test set-up described in Reference 1. The earthquake time history input is achieved via a hydraulic actuator which is inclined at a 45 degree angle to the horizontal plane. By using this method the time-history in the horizontal and vertical planes are not independent as required in SRP Section 3.7.2. This appears to be a fundamental problem with the test program in that it makes it difficult to endorse any of the results since the SRP criteria are not followed.

RESPONSE

The objective of the generic Cable Tray and Conduit Raceway Seismic Test Program (Reference 1), was to determine realistic values of raceway damping and other dynamic properties for use in design; and not to seismically qualify raceway systems by testing, in lieu of utilizing analytical methods. Both IEEE-344 and U. S. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.100 provide requirements for testing, and permit biaxial testing with either dependent or independent motions, whereas the SRP Section 3.7.2 requirement for three component input motion pertains only to Seismic System Analysis by analytical methods and does not apply to testing. In order to simulate biaxial seismic motion, the generic raceway seismic test 0 input motion was applied at a 45 angle, providing simultaneous excitation in either the vertical plus longitudinal or the vertical plus lateral directions. 0 In choosing the 45 relationship (i.e. horizontal equals vertical) the floor response spectra of many containments and auxiliary buildings were reviewed and the equality of horizontal and vertical motion was deemed appropriate. In the case of raceways, the modes of vibration are symmetrical and are dominantly either horizontal or vertical; therefore, they would be adequately 1

1 P a excited by vector biaxial motion. As the different modes of a given raceway generally have quite distinct resonant frequencies, it is acceptable to have dependent test motion between horizontal and vertical (i.e., vertical and horizontal responses will be randomly varying in and out of phase even though the vertical and horizontal inputs are in phase). Independent biaxial test input motion is preferred in non-symmetrical cases. The raceways are structural systems with distinct vertical, transverse, and longitudinal modes. This was verified during the generic testing, hence the test results are not affected by the vector biaxial test input motion. Results of recent tests using pseudo-triaxial input motion substantiate the results obtained in the previous biaxial tests. The results of biaxial tests are ccmpared with the results of pseudo-triaxial tests (on similar tray support systems) in Figure 15 of Reference 2. The data, while limited, indicate little change in system damping when three axes rather than two are excited simultareously. There is some indication that the use of pseudo-triaxial input motion tends to equalize the damping in the longitudinal and transverse directions, although any shift is relatively small. The damping trends exhibited by the biaxial testing are also exhibited using pseudo-triaxial input. For the aforementioned reasons, it is concluded that for determining realistic values of raceway damping for use in design, it is acceptable to have dependent Diaxial input test motion. 2

t f a I. GENERAL CONCERN (Continued) 2) The previously approved damping values for the plants listed in Reference 2 have been evaluated on a plant-specific basis without any generic implications. WNP-1 damping values must be considered on the same basis.

RESPONSE

The purpose of the evaluation (Reference 2) is to document the applicability of the results of the generic Cable Tray and Conduit Raceway Seismic Test Program (Reference 1) to the WNP-1 Raceway Systems. In the evaluation it was verified that all characteristics essential for high damping were present in the WNP-1 Cable Tray Systems. Appendix "A", of Reference 2 and the enclosed response to Specific Request 4 compare characteristics of the generic Cable Tray Systems to those of the WNP-1 Cable Tray Systems. Since the WNP-1 Cable Tray Systems are similar to the generic cable tray systems in all characteristics essential for high damping, including catJe fill, input motion level, tray and support configuration and details, it is concluded that the results of the generic Cable Tray Test Program are spplicable to WNP-1. WNP-1 Site specific dynamic testing (Enclosure 2) performed after submittal of Reference 2 confirmed that high damping exists in the WNP-1 Cable Tray Systems, and further validates the applicability of the generic test program results to the Cable Tray Systems at WNP-1. 3

r II. SPECIFIC COMMENTS 1) The comparison between the tested and the WNP-1 installed systems contained in Appendix A of Reference 2 is addressing cable tray systems only. Provide comprehensive information pertinent to electric conduit supports which would enable to assess similarities and differences between conduit supports installed and those tested in Reference 1.

RESPONSE

The Recomended Damping Curve for WNP-1 shown in Figure 1 of Reference 2 is applicable to conduit systems with bolted trapeze type hangers. This recommendation is consistent with NRC Regulatory Guide 1.61 damping of 7% for SSE loading on bolted structures. Results of the generic test program (Figure A - Attached) for bolted trapeze type conduit hangers are consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.61 criteria for damping of bolted structures. The use of 7% damping at WNP-1 will be limited to conduit systems with trapeze tipe bolted structures. The conclusions of the generic test program essentially confirms the criteria of Regulatory Guide 1.61, when the conduit systems are subjected to input motion with ZPA larger than 0.10g. Hence assessment of similarities and differences between the WNP-1 conduit support systems and those tested in the generic test program is not required. For conduit support systems other than bolted trapeze supports no change to the damping ratios utilized to date is proposed. 4

O F a II. SPECIFIC COMMENTS (Continued) 2) Appendix A to Reference 2 appears to contain information limited to hanger type cable trays. Provide comprehensive data which would allow the staff to assess damping for cable tray supports other than hangers, i.e., floor or wall mounted. In your response provide also the information pertinent to type of trays, connections and the corresponding data pertinent to electrical conduit supports.

RESPONSE

The generic test program (Reference 1) evaluated cable tray systems supported on a large number of different hanger configurations ranging from very flexible to very rigid. Representing the most flexible were trapeze supports without bracing and the most rigid were those with cable trays directly attached to the shake table. The results of these tests for both rigid and flexible systems are conservatively bounded by the recommended damping curve shown in Figure 1 of Reference 2. The tested cable trays mour.ted directly to the shake table represent those cable tray systems rigidly mounted to floors or walls. Damping test data for rigid systems are shown in Figures 13 and 14 of Reference 2. To date, in excess of 2,000 dynamic tests have been performed as part of the generic test program. Numerous tray support systems have been tested, ranging from rigid to flexible, and the effects of a broad range of parameters have been investigated, including: type of cable trays type of support configuration - location of tray splices - number of tray tiers - type and spacing of bracing weight of cables anchor flexibility cable ties 6

b Likewise, similar attributes were evaluated in the generic test program for conduit supports. Damping for WNP-1 conduit systems is discussed in response to Specific Connent 1. Details of the generic test program and results are included in Reference 1. i l l i 7

O r a II. SPECIFIC COMMENTS (Continued) 3) Provide a quantitative assessment of categories of cable tray and electrical conduit supports according to type of configuration, type of support, connections, cable arrangements, material, etc. Indicate by percentage and the number how many supports fall in each category and specify the structures where they are located.

RESPONSE

Out of a total of approximately 3,500 Category 1 cable tray supports at WNP-1, 3,112 supports have been installed. "As-Built" drawings showing details of the installed supports such as support location, configuration, number of tray tiers, member sizes and connection details, have been prepared. The installed supports configurations have been categorized into 55 typical types. Detailed calculations have been performed for the qualification of each of the 55 typical types of supports. The attached sheets provide a tabulation, that lists for each of the typical type of support, the following: o Location o Sketch of support configuration o Type of support o Number of cable tray tiers o Support attachment method i o Number of "as-built" supports of this type o First fundamental frequency in the vertical and horizontal direction of the combined cable tray and support system, determined by the equivalent static load method. i I 8

01 'l i 0 Y 2 3 O, S-9 9 5 s@ 44a b b ul 7 2 L W W W Y f G 9 9 e J 3 0 V D E $e Jd a e S S 0 3 2 0 J J $^ p t-- 0 4 4 d + d yY E o u w a w 3 o 6-g 9 1 1 [ 0-r i a 3 4 $e 2 3 2 .g J to { S v 5 J e 7 2 2 F f ul 2 ul F f !2 h h d 0 g o 2 7 a 0 V p 5 ci l \\ L sg x 2 h 2 3 _0 0 & J L ~ 9

l TOTAL b.oF As.suiet saets. = 36 L 2 ' COMP. BY :M 4[22/8(e W M P-1. TK AY SUPPORTS No.oF TYPICAL C4HERic MoPELs = 5'> c t A. s.s -I cus'o av: _SaF 4/zz/s, I aV N Moc>si.L No. OF TYP'E. OF No CF QuA1.tr. M E T a ot> o p El D@ C-ofF GUR.ATion g, E SON S W RT WW Fga. Mme@ HE I kSS. / N[ k( e3.o2o2 CE.lt.W./' 3 fV (7 WE.LD To ovEEHEAD STLj hjo AS-ButLTS g* I\\ C o w c E E.T E. ANA\\LAE5.LE N E.xPAusto64 SoLij E.Mse.O 19./ s_4s sTauT To wat.t (TN R) Ja I 'i x, 9 o 6 TRAY / 4'fR) fT. OZO) \\e CEtti94 7 =)O WELD TO oVEEuei:AD STL, fi o l (Y e V% s, o K1 PT-oyot co4 ceiusc r fy-r4 pTRAY % N wc'o To 7 o v e st w e A o s r t.. x N K iN (T'f8) as l*/ s ~ ~ M N l .X 'N

e e S T 0 W l P $d ~ 04 s e s Oh 0o oJ 1% P = W = PO OW til 2

l-

[A d0 f 3 r-c- M U $ [ e" Y + l c ul t-is a L g 9 p p A Gf LI- @ c/ 4 +5 c.pI M a wed ? 1 G H o% a el 6 r Zhc g k h ~ g r. G 2 4,g 2 e 2 E F J Ph 3 3 L = 4 Q VW u o.

• *E o

a o Y 1 2f 4 s o g S o

d O

p g O Q L + or 9 9 o t-t--

• h L

L [. 2 0 = s i g 3 y s 2 ~ 2 o x r e a 2 6 D+h h-J4 0 11 e---

C ~T A 1 A 1 E '~ ILe

a. kI 0

or g $a2l4 N2D s 9 8 E4j Wk$ 5 0F Sb W d b a F AWg $2 g 9 Ed '02 J d ) 2 F d g g. - 24 WO d0y2 y p-3 3 d2M V 0M d t-y t be i, i, i. u ii ! Gf Ll <4d @M M c.$ A a wm g H g ur N ed, ~ k W ed e e a l se 1 e Hy F j ag y d $5 j~ 244 = c 3 u L If .4 0 j

1. 3 ii 6

4 1 pl g OP ? e? 9 e-e s e! 6 B 7l 0 i V[ g 2, T g 3 ol N 6 a t m

1. i 0

12

4 -m 9 E ~ r r f t> W QW g ~ ~ 4 .' O Of bhJ 1, asa 0 W8 8 4 s s 0 id f

b h b

+ 2 r. h... O m + x A O M.3 G! uli L y,l 58

1. 8 8

F it a. Gf u_ tbt/ s+% J Q c +,8 3

u. V)I

@ y Oyl j 0 16! T ~ ~ k W g' e I 1 t-( g x r'w F J + h ., g y d F M u A B El ' N .a e o a egl 2 2 3 .a d A so o-r- A A ggl t t t oh ? O Ih! k. 2a. O. ~ E ( J . {- w. 3 g 3 4 y i L 3 ~ 2 05

Or w!

O tb .t + E _D p

r t s l i -m e 0f, m }$ 0 4 N n e wa dse 0 0 af g 3 U$gG S5 eVW H 2 9S to$ 035o g g 24 o 5 M$ t a-6 n

== h E 5O $ cl* 5O a

u..

IA H OV A VJ .2 7 y e i Zh A p i 4 B q; yg a w 64 4.a e 3 3 o F J rh g a a o v oJ4 y d bW 'u d IL 2 L hE ~ e 2 67 r t g

• zv'1 h

jd 4 O o a e n u g 9 a o4 oy 51j 0 0E 2 q 1- ~ ~ l a g E 0!4 T s si m 14

C f .A T $'j kW d 3 3J to 8 i4 i 0 J J k5 4@ j $k 2 &> g. Es o a _ ^ d 04 W OU ~ d iE, 3 d 8 WI S5 VGd $0 2kb f4 0 %2 (154 i~ ~ y N., G 0 0- - 30-0 r 04 "45 a o b H oe 2 Y d :Ed F 00 y --4 W 8 g g g g }ti d d 0 0 0 0 Q L 0 d P J J J y d FW L 1 E o t a 2 e m 1 3 n 8 W 8 a O b m. m m oP O. O O. Ih b. 2 s s r s 3 4 s d [ 3 s 2 s li 0 5 d s [ ! 1A .a + 4 0 15 -r

nr 5 r + F j it o r. s' @ <d .d3 44 2} o 7 Ed 7 Y a 0W t$ # d b 2 W $2 g o@ E *2 W,o 0 W w3 1-o rz E* 09 P0 02 2 e} 2 Y 9 ul e ul1 1(ag ee f4 0s 2 E O

• dW 4d Ud d N

M5 0 m A O TT bh 5* bb a o H oe a Y A D i .2 + + 7 h kh O k $ gg g y -g hI 2 s y QPW u u. b } 2 6 f P* E j ul 5 8I b B) 8 969 2h i ts t 7 s 0 E g 3 4 g ?. }.........Ni-l j t .\\ ~ ~ ,d r e a ed 16 -.m,

e "~ h C e e P M E9e $4J h' $ Oz y O f% ~ = 4 o2 g U0 Sz 3=d 2g$$ rg Ay5 0g 3 F .e 24 0 e 7 A 0 M 25 hh $ N* h r$F a wt n bc t 2 e f 4 te 1 -a s 3 yy a g 4 3 y Q e w U. o L %E a f N T 1 i r-tv) o NE 3 E D L o o l b 2 N g N / Y .// // \\ / g g., '/ T ,/ N/ 7 /\\ ll 3 l l \\ f 9/'. t I, x u. f t s m e w s s ~ ~ws. y 2 P,c Y_E i Og 4r 4 P

d i' hD 3

D I': 6 6 6 2 1 +d @O 37

W M P-1. Tg. AY SUPPORTS C L A s s-I q of li u o p p.t_ No. OF TYPE OF No oF QuA1.W. M E Tti o n o p DI-D-.h_yFl@KATt _T Y P E_ %f75 SLWP0fET_. ROH45 Fgee. A9cuoRME Gr St5 ce,_im

== T o % ss-mosu,s e7.oso i hgsto o%1tHE Ap ST t.. gy g g u e w L,L L_ L M u l-i 8'., ,.4, i d eT-iooz n w-uu

t. s, c-me re.

• /

fs= 7 '* " * " / " F-T-mv mew _o W_ /I STKoT~ B PT-ioc c, 35 wxuu 4 pvm i ll U V EE.T. g Tams

i T _O ~ o $ d "E Ed 0\\f A e i 4 F 0 d @. [fW d N Oh$2J 2 N J b 0 tf 5 0 *2 4 %s f1Wda9 dNd 0u 0 J ho d2 seE ggp U'1{3 aga 2OWg$ 00S d0 A 24 xo g 204gr 5 "O $ *N 0 0 {w s_ e-eE 5 c:= O d' & el.= a.c w ol b Y 92 f ^ !~ Ts 0 1a '#r Y $ et g la e 4 w e 3 .~ d dl F J 'h ( y d hW ~3 d T' a. gF d N Si zJ\\ 2 g Jd 4 A 0 0 0 D L 0 N N oh T Sh t-0 V i u._ 0 0-i 7 m N '\\ \\ 4 3

• (\\

^ \\ \\, 2 u. f l ~~ ~~ ~

a

o a C \\$ 19

A c-Fbd ~ T 9> $6 = 44 Ek g 4 Ed f4 22 o 2 Q = OT g; h 2hh ah $J YFsv I~ S WJ 9 W*E 2 6 E2w2 gW = ho d2 d4 E J F W g ggg 24 f zB-05 z V g. E f'h 7, { 9 0 9, M u i, n u et s. e a. W c4 e2.: a

u. m b Y 9[

N 5 26 i t 4 k @B a e yy ~ 4 we 1, g 2 ~ d U Nb '8 ) 3 2 U 8 4 d V W L

1. E o

} 45 n sa .e o l h s N T OPl 2h r A l-i L a a. 2 i s N ,i 1 A 41

E

~ ~ ~ ~ z 2 j1 3 3 2 og '? 3 n a s g, $l a + 4 \\T 20 -v-

9A h E + 0 b h 7 14 a 0\\f A d QQ gy r = Og ts .g ab h0 o W 7 d2 2 C E = = as s $ o 1 14 D gf,

• f ~9 r,

u, ee es sm em a w oi .o e I I 4 n sa ( = <a yf @ u. kk. 3 ? d -l 4 J rh ,4 4 4 1 0 F 5 2 2 s A e s a0 2 e 2 3 m jd 0 0. o at a a S OP l b 2 s a 7g 2 s Y I ll u. s-s ss m j o, ea a m 4 G 21

T d 4 Ed 04 64 W @P d F l d ed d 4 0 4-t-2 Wn we o F N di 0 4 *2 2 e2 w; W E] 2J U V*!*i U*S O

• Sw${3 od dd 4

ho 9D at JS023 21 d2 050 $$+44 Om 0 U $0 ~ 0 t wg a,, s =, r me e g, w ww @J w J, wa b T N hk i EE Iu$ 0 1d ~5 t Es ts d et i i D e u d de 5i s 33 0 J ph s*7 d3 L 4 24 3 y d e m u L tE 2 'g e 3 sd E 9 8 O gl o g or 4 4 9 2h t t t = x 2 0 N f W ~ ( ) s, '( 4 f 5_ ) / / 1 f w ar-2 0

U s

s 2 m 6 q 22 - ~e. t-e- -w --r w-r- -ave -w-w w -- - - - - - - -

9 1 f' o 4 ( oG ,b. 5 m i .e pE t o A ,, N .e D R 7 O ,m O O gH L c. E HH y T. c cN E EM eA T P* S .e MA m x s e"

m. 3 e

T P). 4 3 2 3 i g L n A E. 2 1 1 e UR = = a c v g e QF f$ tg o0 T a _.T us., S. u F5 t I O 5_ A-i S r g R .H c e 5 HE E x v Y N V l A S FT C T S F O.R e

g. A Eo o

T '- O f> r YtW o ~ i 1 -P F@ O M o0 t i N5 W 4 L - E E 0 pP 0 m oy 2 M] N-e e 4 s o 's / i / f i T A f l g N g , y / se u G s i F kd N h g f-B M S G ye I l, 4

W M P-1. TK. AY SupeogTs C L A s.s-I g3 og g nAcc>EL No. OF T Y PE.OF No. OF QuAtlF. b4 E.TH op of ELD 4. C oMFiGuRATiou T_Yf="E. SUPT 4 StyroRT_ IToH55 FgEe. A9cuona-4E

Gse, l

.e p PT-2c)ll '2. 3 c En'tNA i Tm1 hv= 32 WELD To i 3' vem. g is acra .~a Star EL. I .j 1 I i 4 '. ;.. - ,,. q. j j e- -Z Cl> 2C) CElLIN4 l titan hv' D // // l vam. bt+ V /' s t l ,,s.s e,. - -,-en u,, -,. -

h. /

"r'/ cascans vest. -9,i3 .s u, -...a u n To tuALL s

9 e g g. o c i T> b s E ] ,'E C = w ( 4 oG .E 5 w A 1 T pR p o -Eo o

• MMn o o t

T 3i g t C 4 T. c s - D o' e b Au 'T 3 an opt e* MA CMT w o s e T

r..e-3, 5 9 g

gL a A s. t' I e QF 5, b(= e ug 'v 5 u F5 1^ 1 m g T. Atu s I C4 y H '8 s t t a i oO T e s HW-v +i T a To l i v 4 H ms. F T. - 4 l, q [ O 4u m x .R a t Eo l \\ i T u Pr 'x L J P 1 t. YO Ew e c_T S C c 1 t P F 5-T OF w oO \\ i NS W ) 2 2

t. E-Z A o f

2 o p 0 o E.S pP 2 2 m-6 oY 2 A T T T-T- S P MT P P P 4 84 o i e T r A g. g, \\' \\ u s G L t L F M N~ o _ C,. 4. D. S L. S E G 9u, i l l l l! I I 'i!I ll1l

=-. W M P-1. Tg. AY Suet >ogTs C L A. s 5-I g 7 og gcg Mopnt No.OF TYPE. OF No. OF QuALgF. M sE.Tg4op op ED_-.E_MFl@KATioH yye g. styy4 stWrostT E0H45 FgEe. AncHoltME ~ Ty 456 NS i PT.4lO2 49 chi-lLL AG[ u(& WELO To We v i NAtt. p,3 ST'/ conegaTs i st y *e si.9 s a.rs i W E Mospie/ sTauy w I W L i 3 9 *.r ; - W\\ r,5, a PT-4 t il ~ 3 CEst \\NG[ $Ic. 5IZ WELP To 9 emme vut m uut e lC c.oN c.gs7g. 5 Tg u-Fwop E%PAe45 ton tha-g / w-l

• *ED E[5TftuT l

TO WA"[Fuooft. I l z u a u i l PT-4113 3 casti,ac/ llfl6 fy=15

• T* " 'AD j

gg / STL [C.ne4cSETE. d*II I Exg msm mg/ u SED E [$TRui T suutu l 1

9 m 8 o T =_ h -~ M g 04 h d 4 b o x n O a P 4 = 2 ) 24 ul D s y. b T $M d r. g fl E a d e.d 4 4 u? unc# w a um @ T C Wi ~ g g,3 A ^ r 4 @ gg e e-e }e;4 aE 3 3 2 1 E J h g g g y 0 W v o o a WF N a 1g g e n 2 e n g

j e

x A N h gl T T SP t t 6 h 2 9. k \\ l g 3 s s s ~ 4_ s. y s LL s 2 i 2 0 ~ d lil 5 i Y! i\\ s N \\7 27 ---e---

4L na y h g 0 ( \\ blM I .a g 8s oe oc l10 g P2p u s,g F y; y e a Y) D 04 e e d d1 26icr 14 as 3 VWW r Mr d I v e a a h. WL Wed WW

u.

• 9 Y

O F k I 4 ? $v f f F 4 p d [ % (Jkh jd we 42 J 4 4 d F W 2 0 2 1 I N A N C 2 0 0 to n 1 g $d o o D L ^ SF T i P i r e I e a. y e 7_ 3 \\ 1 I ~ 0

t) ;i I

d tA e 28 r-- -~- ,:-a.w -e--.

l

11. SPECIFIC COMMENTS (Continued) 4)

Justify the statements contained in Appendix A to Ref. 2 that the differences between the tested and the installed systems have no bearing on damping. ~

RESPONSE

As previously stated, the purpose of the evaluation (Reference 2) was to justify the use of higher damping for the seismic design of raceway systems at WNP-1. This justification was based on establishing compatibility between the WNP-1 raceway systems and the generic test program systems (Reference 1), thus demonstrating applicability of the generic test program results to the WNP-1 raceway systems. The applicability of higher-damping at WNP-1 has also been verified by performing dynamic testing on a typical WNP-1 cable tray system utilizing site specific configuration, materials and hr.rdware and subjecting it to postulated OBE and SSE events,(Enclosure 2). The results of the generic test program have revealed the following,to be significant parameters essential for high damping. 1. Cable movement must be unrestricted so as to permit friction between the cables themselves and between the cables and the trays through relative movement; and 2. Sufficient input motion must be present in order to produce the required amount of relative cable motion. The evaluation (Reference 2) confirmed that the above attributes essential for high damping are present in the WNP-1 Cable Tray Systems. The differences between the cable tray systems of the generic test program and those at WNP-1 are evaluated in the attached sheets. In each case, the differences are reconciled, and have minimal impact on the damping as is evident from the trend of the test data of the generic test program. 29

Because the recommerided damping curve (Figure 1, Reference 2) is a conservative lower bound of test data obtained from the generic test program, the combined effect of the differences between the generic systems and the WNP-1 systems will not affect the recommended damping curve to be utilized for the design of the WNP-1 Cable Tray Systems. In addition, WNP-1 project specific performance testing (Enclosure 2) on a typical site specific configuration, materials, and hardware, confirms that the recommendations are appropriate and conservative for use at WNP-1. 30

RECONCILIATION OF INF-1 Als GEERIC TEST PROGRAM DIFFERENCES FOR CABLE TRAY 5Tslun GEE RIC TEST PARAfETER PROGRAM INIP-1 RECONCILIATION 4 Configuration i comparison i i

a. Number of 5 (Max) 7 (Max)

These differences in maximum number of tray tiers Tray Tiers have minimal impact on damping, as the prime parameters essential for high damping have not been affected. Figure B (attached) provides comparison of damping for Cable Tray Systems with 1, 3 and 5 tiers of tray. The trend indicates higher system damping with increasing number of tray tiers. Thus, the difference in maximum number of tray tiers, between e i the generic test program and the WNP-1 Cable Tray 1 System has no negative impact on the recommended damping curve (Figure 1, Reference 2). i

b. Hanger Spacing 8'

10' (Max) These differences in support spacing have minimal I (Typ. As-Built impact on damping as the prime parameters essential Spacing is 8') for high damping have not been affected. In I addition, WNP-1 site specific testing (Enclosure 2 - - w i Section 4.0) was conducted with support spacing of 10', and the results indicate that the recommended i damping curve (Figure 1, Reference 2) is conservative

• for use at WNP-1.

I

c. Dead Load 2200 lbs.

3800 lbs. These differences in maximum hanger loading have per Hanger (Max.) (Max.) minimal impact on damping as the prime parameters essential for high damping have not been affected. l The maximum hanger dead load is a function of the number of tray tiers and hanger spacing, and as was indicated in the reconciliation t of items a and b l above, the noted differences in number of tray tiers l and hanger spacing have no negative impact on the recommended damping curve.

d. Transverse B-22A (P1001)

P1004A, Generic Test Program bracing configuration ranged Bracing (Figure 2,.

Each Hanger from bracing each hanger to no bracing at all. 1 Reference 2) -(Figure 4, Results of generic test program indicate bracing has l Reference 2) minimal effect on raceway damping. In addition, results of performance testing on WNP-1 cable tray t systems with site specific bracing configuration and details, indicate the recommended damping curve to be conservative.

r GENERIC TEST PARAMETER PROGRAM WNP-1 RECONCILIATION

e. Longitudinal B-22A (P1001)

Structural Generic test program bracing configuration ranged Brace No Bracing, I set, Channel Every from bracing every other span to no bracing at all. and 2 sets of 4th Span Results of generic test program indicate bracing has braces minimal effect on raceway damping. In addition, results of performance testing on WNP-1 cable tray systems with site specific bracing configuration and details, indicate the recommended damping curve to be conservative. Connection Comparison

a. Overhead to Double 4-hole Double 5-hole These differences in connection details have minimal Vertical or double 4-hole Gussetted (T-17) impaci. on damping, as the prime parameters essential Member Gussetted (Figure 6 for higher damping have not been affected.

The (Figure C) Reference 2) results of the generic test program indicate that cable tray systems with a wide variety of fittings

b. Hor. member Double 4-hole Single gussetted; and connection details provide damping in excess of to Vertical 5-hole at bottom the recomended maximum of 20%.

In addition, site Member (T-17), others specific testing (Enclosure 2) was conducted utiliz-4-hole (P-1331 & ing WNP-1 fittings and details, and the results P-1332) Gussetted indicate that the recommended damping curve is - w" (Figure 4 - Ref. 2) conservative for use at WNP-1. Figure C (attached) indicates that damping increases with the use of

c. Transverse Unistrut 2-hole Custom-made half-connections that exhibit higher moment resistance. -

Bracing Angle fittings moon bracket for The types of connections used at WNP-1 will only double side various angles serve to increase damping, not reduce damping. (Figure 6 - Ref. 2)

d. Longitudinal Unistrut 3-hole Tray side rail Bracing flat plate bolted to Structural C6 Channel (Fig. 4 -

Reference 2)

II. SPECIFIC COMMENTS (Continued) 5) Provide information regarding the method of anchorage of the supports of the cable trays and electrical conduits to the structures.

RESPONSE

The supports are anchored to the building structure by: welding to building steel framing members such as beams, girders, or o columns. o welding to plates which are embedded in concrete. welding to surface mounted plates which are attached to concrete by o expansion anchor bolts, o bolting to strut inserts which are embedded in concrete. The response to Specific Comment 3 provides information on the support anchorage for the installed WNP-1 cable tray supports. 35

II. SPECIFIC COMMENTS (Continued) 6) Provide detailed information how the evaluation of damping and the comparison between the tested and the installed systems was conducted. In your response, include the extent of analytical evaluation, examples of the - procedures followed by the personnel performing the walkdown, their qualifications and similar information which allow to assess the depth of the evaluation process.

RESPONSE

The evaluation for the use of higher damping and the comparison between the tested generic systems and the installed systems at WNP-1 was conducted in the following sequential steps. a) An initial field walkdown and drawing review was conducted to obtain a general overview of the WNP-1 cable tray system characteristics. b) A detailed review of the WNP-1 Project documents including the following listed below was conducted. 1. Design Criteria " Seismic Analysis and Qualification of Seismic Category I Cable Tray Systems", Rev. 1, UE&C Report No. 6702-C-EE-3E-01-F 2. Seismic Response Spectra "UE&C In-Structure Seismic

Response

Spectra for Category 1 Structures (ISSRS) for WPPSS", Rev. 11 3. Details " Tray Support Systems Notes and Details", UE&C Dwg. 9779-L- -306096, Rev. 22 36

4. Tray Layout Drawings o General Services Building Dwg. No. 9779-S-303400 o General Services Building Dwg. No. 9779-5-303405 o General Services Building Dwg. No. 9779-S-303411 o General Services Building Dwg. No. 9779-S-303413 o Containment Dwg. No. 9779-S-303677 o Containment Dwg. No. 9779-S-303678 c) A detail field walkdown was conducted to inspect WNP-1 cable tray installation at various floor elevations and locations throughout the plant. During the field walkdown, the following parameters were inspected for evaluation and comparison with the systems of the generic test program o Hanger Configuration o Fittings and Connection Details o Bracing Configuration und Options o Cable Fill o Cable Tie Downs o Methods of Anchorage o Support Spacing o Type of Tray and Tray Splice d) A detail calculation review was performed by the Architect Engineer (UE&C) to determine the range of fundamental natural frequencies for the combined tray and hanger systems utilized at WNP-1. This information was utilized by Bechtel to identify data from the generic test program that would be representative of the WNP-1 cable tray system. The data obtained from the above items a, b, c and d formed the basis for establishing similarity between the cable tray systems of the generic test program and those at WNP-1. Utilizing appropriate and applicable results of the generic test program, a recommended damping curve (Figure 1, Reference 2) was prepared, which was the lower bound of the test data. 37 l

The above evaluation and field walkdown were conducted by individuals who were not only thoroughly familiar with the generic test program, but who actually participated in develop ng details of the generic test program i and assisted in the preparation of the report. Members of the walkdown and evaluation team were familiar with the parameters essential for higher damping and conversely what parameters inhibited higher damping. Field observation and design document review data was factored into the evaluation (Reference 2). In summary the recommendation for higher damping was based on walkdown observations, methodical review of the drawings, design criteria, and evaluation of available test data from the generic test program. See the attached Resumes for the qualification of individuals who performed the walkdown and evaluation. 38

NAME A. H.5 TAD 3IAN POSITION Project Manager EDUCATION B5, Civil Engineering, American University of Beirut ) MS, Structural Engineering, California Institute of Technology MBA, Business Management, Golden Cate University

SUMMARY

Present 5taff assistant to the manager of engineering 19 Years Principal engineer for structural analysis, earthquake engineering and computer applications in civil / structural engineering 3 Years Civl! engineering assignments in the United.5tates and overseas involving hydroelectric projects, commercial facilities and advanced concrete design studies EXPERIENCE Mr. Hadjian has had 24 years of experience in civli/ structural engineering on a variety of design and construction projects. Early in his career, he held responsible positions on hydroelectric, industrial, commericial and fossil power plant projects. Later, he was involved in development of advanced concepts for design of nuclear power plants and was the coordinating editor of the most recent revision of the Bechtel topical report " Seismic Analysis of Structures and Equipment for Nuclear Power Plants." Currently, Mr. Hadjian is serving as staff assistant to the manager of engineering for Bechtel's Western Power Division. In addition to i providing support to engineering management in technical and management activities, he serves as a consultant on a tarlety of earthquake engineering problems. Mr. Hadjia is also engaged in code and standard activities for both the American 'ociety of Mechanical Engineers and American Society of Civli Engineers in the area of seismic design of structures and equipment. He serves on the A5CE turbine-generator foundation committee and is an advisory panel member for the Sandia containment integrity project. Mr. Hadjian has been active in organizing the seismic division of the Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMIRT) conferences and post-SMIRT seminars on extreme load design. Mr. Hadjian is presently serving on the editor'lal board of Nuclear Enri'neering and Design and is a reviewer for National Science Foundation grants in earthquake engineering. He has also lectured at several area universities. Since 1970, besides preparing several written discussions of papers and j participating in numerous panel discussions, Mr. Hadjian has pub!!shed over 30 papers in technical journals. He is also the recipient of the 1973 Safety Award of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers of Great Britain. PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIP 5 American Concrete Institute; American Society of Civil Engineers; Earthquake Engineering Research Institute; Scientific Committes, Int ernational Association for Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology; and Seismological Society of America REGISTRATION Registered Professional Civil Engineer in !!!!nois and California 39 d I --__...__r___._._,____._.-,_-- . _ - _ _ _ _., _. ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _,. -. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, _ _. - _. - _ _ _. _ _ _--_ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

NAME R. B. LINDERM AN POSITION Engineering Specialist EDUCATlON B5, Civil Engineering, Utah State University MS, Civil Engineering, California Institute of Technology Engineer's Degree, Civil Engineering, California Institute of Technology MBA, Golden Gate University

SUMMARY

Present Engineering specialist for special problems 30 Years Bechtel engineering tasks in seismic and dynamic force 1 l considerations on a variety of projects, including dams, nuclear and conventional power faclittles, missile f acilities, and industrial complexes 2 Years Civil-structural engineering assignments on the design of test facilities for U.S. Naval Weapons f EXPERIENCE Mr. Linderman has been with Bechtel for more than 30 years, during which time he has specialized in seismic and dynamic force considerations in the design of dams, nuclear and fossil power plants, hardened missile sites, and industrial complexes. He is presently an engineering specialist on special problems with nuclear power plants, which include seismic equipment qualification, missile impact problems, seismic designs, and other topics. As project civil-structural engineer, 1 he coordinated the Sudden Differential Group Displacement Study for the Bolsa island Nuclear Power and Desalting Project. Earlier, he l completed an assignment as project civil / structural engineer for the Nike-X power systems studies which covered the operation of diesel and 1 gas turbine power generating systems in a blast-resistant environment. Mr. Linderman provides consulting services to projects on preparation of PSAR's, FSAR's and specifications, as well as technical assistance on special topics such as dynamic problems including seismic, impacting projectiles and shock loadings. He consults for projects on designing i facilities to resist ground shock and overpressures resulting from nuclear weapons or other explosives. In addition, Mr. Linderman supervises, prepares and reviews guidelines and topicals for the termo nuclear power group. Subjects are: Design Culde for Design of Structures for Missile impact;. Tornado and Extreme I Wind Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants; Design Guide for Design i of Structures for Tornado Missile Impact; Proof of Operability of Active Valves; and Standard Specification for Seismic Qualifichtlon of 1 i Category 1 Equipment. M r. Linderman is also a member of various standard and code committees. They include Recommended Practices for Seismic Qualification of Class IE Equipment for Nuclear Power Generation l Systems; committees of the Structural Engineers' Association of Southern California; and the ANS 36.9 Environmental Envelopes for Light Water Reactor Nuclear Power Plants. ) i l 40

In research, Mr. Linderman has conducted hydrau!!c model studies of hydroelectric projects. He planned, conducted and reviewed the cable tray and conduit raceway seismic test program and prepared the cable tray design guide. He was also involved in the test program for missile impacting on reinforced concrete panels. PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS Member, Stru.t ural Engineers Association of Southern Caufornia; Member, American Society of Civil Engineers; Member, Seismological Society of America; Member, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute; Director, Applied Technology Council REGISTRATION Registered Professional CivD and Structural Engineer in California I i I f e I l 41 11/34 (1,A) i )

SHIH-YU TUANN EDUCATION: Ph.D., Mechanics, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md.,1965 SUMPARY: 1984 - Present: Civil / Structural Group Hope Creek Power Project 1981-1984: Civil / Structural Staff, SFPD -1981: Research associate in the field of finite element methods for engineering application in various universities and institutions in and out of USA. EXPERIENCE: Dr. Tuann is currently with the Hope Creek Power Project. He is responsible for pipe whip restraint analysis. He was involved with HVAC support, cable tray support and seismic qualification of plant equipment before the present assignment within the same project. Earlier to Hope Creek project, he was senior engineer of Civil / Structural Staff of S.F. Power Division. In that position he served the projects on special assignments and coordinated project works on testings of cable tray fixtures and c,f seismic qualification. The special assignments and overhead tasks included buried piping, stress in buried tank, design aid to sloshing in rigid tank, machine foundation, heavy loac drop, equipment structure interaction. As a staff member, he was responsible for reviewing the desi n 5 criteria, spe;ification, test procedure and test results in the areas of electrical raceway, HVAC support, instrumentation tubing support, seismic category I equipment and equipment supports for seismic and hydrodynamic loads. Prior to joining Eechtel's SFPC, Dr. Tuann was research associate in various institutions in and out of USA. He was associated with the University of British Columbia, Canada, where he conducted research on finite element method for flow problems from 1974-1978. In 1978-1980, he was with the University of Miami, FL, and worked in the field of heat disposal in coastal region with application to Turkey Point, St. Lucie, and Crystal River power plants on environmental impact. 42

WILLIAM (BILL) BIEHL III Educaticn: BS, Engineering, California State University fullerton, 1975 Summary: Present: Senior Engineer, Chief Civil / Structural Engineer's Staff 7 Months: Special Assignment, Houston Office Chief Civil / Structural Engineer's representative to project 6 Years: Civil / Structural Design Engineer on nuclear and, fossil power generation projects Experience: Mr. Biehl is currently a member of the Chief Civil / Structural Engineer.'s staff responsible for technical support to projects for cable tray and conduit raceway support systems. He is also responsible for the Bechtel Cable Tray and Conduit Raceway Seismic Test Program. Mr. Biehl also is responsible for the planning of and conducting test programs for specific projects as requested. Other responsibilities include planning and conducting jobsite walkdowns, preparing acceptance criteria and acting as liason with other disciplines. Prior to joining the Chief Civil / Structural Engineer's staff, Mr. Biehl completed a 7-month .special assignment in the Houston office. He was responsible for evaluatin'g existing cable tray support systems andtestablishing a cable tray and conduit raceway supports group. He developed the design criteria, prepared schedules and budgets, reviewed procurement specifications, and recommended contract awards. Before this, Mr. Biehl was a Civil / Structural Design Engineer on various nuclear and fossil power generation projects. While on the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station project, Mr. Biehl was responsible for construction specifications, procurement specifications, HVAC duct support systems and miscellaneous structural design. Prior to his assignment on Palo Verde, Mr. Biehl was responsible for miscellaneous structures design and design of the Auxiliary Building on the Plant Vogtle project. 43

WILLIAM (BILL) BIEHL III Experience: Mr. Biehl's first assignment with Bechtel was on (continued) the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station as a Civil / Structural Design Engineer in the cable tray and conduit raceway supports group. Mr. Biehl has accepted various special assignments during his career with Bechtel resolving field related problems. He was responsible for assessing the situation, preparing a plan to resolve the problem and was responsible for executing the plans. Professional Affiliations: Registered Professional Civil Engineer, State of California Member, Structural Engineers Association of Southern California, Associate Grade ~ Member, American Concrete Institute February 1986 44

PERSONAL RESUME p NAME Luis J. Pons DATE February 1986 CLASSIFICATION EngineeringSupervisor-GradaJ ORGANIZATION & LOCATION Western Power Divison - San Francisco, CA 2%" x 2%" GLCSSY BIRTHDATE 5/12/49 CITIZENSHIP USA ORIGINAL BECHTEL EMPLOYMENT DATE 11/19/73 RE EMPLOYMENT DATEIS) N/A NAME OF SPOUSE Sandra CHILDREN'S BIRTHDATES 9/4/79 and 4/14/82 PHOTO DATE MILITARY SERVICE & RANK US Army Captain Inactive Reserves. PROFESSIONAL LICENSES AND SOCIETIES Licensed Professional Engineer - California (C-26356) Member: Tau Beta Pi, National Engineering Honor Society EDUCATION AND PERSONNEL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS DEGR EE. CERTIFICATE. ETC. SCHOOL MAJOR (OR SUBJECT) DATE M.S.C.E. Stanford University Structural Engineering June /1973 B.S.C.E. Santa Clara University Civil Engineering June /1972 OTHER SIGNIFICANT INFORMATION (Refer to instructions before ::ompleting) ' Personal & Family: o Health - excellent o Married - two children Language Capability: o Fluent in reading, writing and speaking Spanish 45 s Pase 1 of 3

a NAME Luin J. P m . f. %H3RK HISTOR'Y DATES COMPANY. DIVISION OR POSITION HELD,

SUMMARY

OF DEPARTMENT RESPONSI81LITIES AND FROM TO LOCATION AND SUPERIOR SIGNIFICANT ACCOMPLlSHMENTS 6/1973 11/1973 US Army Corps of 2nd Lt. - Attended Basic Officers Engineering Training Course - Fort Belvoir, Virginia Training in Construction, Construc-tion Equipment and Methods, practical design of Civil Projects. 11/1973 12/1978 Bechtel Power Corp. Engineer - ~ San Francisco, CA Responsibilities: Supervisor: S.C. Desai Design of structural steel & rein-o forced concrete in several facili-ties of a nuclear power plant. o Computer Programming using RASIC and FORTRAN Communications & co-ordination o with client & vendors. Respon-sible for several structural pur-chase orders. o Technical Report Writing 1/1979 10/1980 Bechtel Power Corp. Resident Engineer - Pottstown, PA Responsibilities: Supervisor: M.S. Iyer o Evaluation of Field Change Requests and Non-Conforinances - o Co-ordination between Project Engineering and Construction 10/1980 1/1981 Bechtel Power Corp. Group Leader - ' San Francisco, CA Responsibilities: Supervisor: S.C. Desai o Analysis cf Block Walls on the Limerick Project 1/1981 1/1982 Bechtel Power Corp. Group Leader - San Francisco, CA Responsibilities: Supervisor: S.C. Desai o Field Support - including Resolu-tion of Field Change Requests, Non-Conformances and Other Special Construction Problems. PAGE 2 of 3 46

WAME Luio J. Pons ,f WORK AISTORY DATES COMPANY. DivlSION OR POSITION HELD,

SUMMARY

OF DEPARTMENT: RESPONSIBILITIES AND FROM TO LOCATION AND SUPERIOR SIGNIFICANT ACCOMPLISHMENTS 1/1982 12/1982 Bechtel Power Corp. Group Leader - San Francisco, CA Responsibilities: Supervisor: S.C. Desai o Design and Analysis of Electrical Racewways, HVAC Ducts and their supports 12/1982 Present Bechtel Power Corp. Group Leader - San Francisco, CA Responsibilities: Supervisor: J.W. Benkert o Equipment Qualification of Class IE Equipment W 9 PAGE 3 of 3 47

1 i O 1 s RESPONSE TO NRC MEETING REQUESTS REQUEST 1) Compare all-bolted vs. all-welded connections. What was tested for generic tests? What was tested for the WNP-1 tests? What was used in actual WNP-1 installations?

RESPONSE

The advantage of the all-bolted strut type supporting system is the ease of fabrication and installation; therefore, welding of the connections would eliminate this advantage. For this reason the all-bolted connections were tested in the generic raceway test program. Figure C indicates that, as a general rule, as the connection moment resistance capability increases, so does trie system damping. This trend is expected to continue for more highly moment resistant connections. The WNP-1 installed support configurations do not utilize any all-welded strut connections. A partially welded connection is used at the support to building structure, or supplemental steel interface. This type of connection was tested for the WNP-1 specific test program. The damping realized in the WNP-1 test program is comparable to the damping of the generic test system. Although the system damping is slightly affected by the type of connections used, the major contributor to damping is the relative cable motion. 48

REQUEST (Continued) 2) Provide information on the stress-strain relationship of strut type material? Is the material ductile or brittle? How does it compare from manufacturer to manufacturer?

RESPONSE

The following data is based on information from B-Line and Unistrut, manufacturers of struts. Both types of strut sections are manufactured to ASTM Standard A570, Grade 33, and have equivalent mechanical and chemical properties. - A review of test data supplied by both manufacturers shows that the two strut sections are, indeed, equivalent. The pertinent data is as follows: Manufacturer B-Line Unistrut Yield Strength 34,000 psi 37,000 psi Ult. Strength 51,000 psi 50,000 psi Elongation 33% 37% The two strut sections exhibit classic stress-strain relationship for ductile material. Since the strut sections exhibit similar behavior, there will be no effect on system damping from using one manufacturer's strut sections or the other. 49

REQUEST (Continued) 3) What is the relationship between damping and stress level?

RESPONSE

Substantially higher damping than that listed in Regulatory Guide 1.61 was achieved in the generic test program for rigidly supported systems, as well as for flexible systems. The rigid systems did not permit any permanent deformation of fittings during testing. High damping was not a result of plastic deformation of the connection fittings or on stress levels, but rather, the major mechanism providing high damping was relative cable motion. Results of the performance testing on a typical WNP-1 raceway system (Enclosure 2), did not indicate yielding of the connections, and/or stress levels exceeding elastic allowable values, yet high damping was experienced. [ 50

9 i ENCLOSURE 2 WNP-1 SITE SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE TESTING ON A TYPICAL CABLE TRAY SYSTEM

WNP-1 Site Specific Performance Testing _ On a Typical Cable Tray System 1.0 Test Objectives Principal Test Objective: 1.1 To verify the structural performance of a typical multi-tier cable tray system, constructed using WNP-1 configuration, materials, and hardware, by subjecting it to postulated OBE and SSE events. Secondary Test Objectives: 1.2 To verify that the actual damping ratios, determined by measuring the response of the typical WNP-1 cable tray system, are in excess of the recommended damping ratios, which were based on a comparison between WNP-1 cable tray systems and the generic test program systems. 1.3 To obtain typical WNP-1 cable tray system test response data, such as resonance frequencies, mode shapes, displacements, and support loads. 1.4 To verify that the typical WNP-1 cable tray system fatigue capacity exceeds the fatigue requirements for the required numoer of stress cycles resulting frcm five Operating Basis Earthquakes (OBE) and one Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE). (SRP Section 3.7.3 - 3) 1.5 To demonstrate safety margin of typical WNP-1 cable tray system. This was accomplished by testing the system to accelerations higher than the postulated SSE event and observing the effects on the structural integrity of the system. 2.0 Test Configuration The test configuration consisted of a full-scale four-bay, five-hanger, six-tier cable tray system. The test system was constructed utilizing WNP-1 51

hardware, bracing arrangement, connection / anchorage details and loading, and was representative of a typical WNP-1 cable tray installation. Plans and sections showing details of the test system are included in this enclosure. 3.0 Test Procedure The following represents the procedure that was followed. The testing was conducted at ANCO Engineers, Inc. Laboratory, Culver City, California, in October, 1985. 3.1 Set Up 3.1.1 Install configuration on shake table. 3.1.2 Torque all assembly bolts per WNP-1 project requirements. 3.1.3 Calibrate all measuring transducers. 3.1.4 Verify shape of Test Response Spectra (TRS), 3.1.5 Install cabling. 3.2 Preliminary Tests 3.2.1 Input random motion at approximately 0.10 g(rms)' coupled transverse / vertical (T/V) only, for approximately 120 seconds. Record on FM tape. 3.2.1.1 Determine resonant frequencies corresponding to transverse and vertical motion, damping ratios and response " mode" shapes. 3.2.1.2 Note any system degradation, repair and retorque assembly bolts as required. 3.2.2 Input random motion at approximately 0.10 grms longitudinal (L) only, approximately 120 seconds. Record on FM tape. 3.2.2.1 Determine resonance frequencies corresponding to longitudinal motion and " mode" shapes. 3.2.2.2 Repeat 3.2.1.2. 52

W 3.3 Performance Tests 3.3.1 Input OBE level event, coupled transverse and vertical plus independent longitudinal (T/V + L). 3.3.1.1 Verify TRS envelopes Required Response Spectra (RRS); store time history on digital tape. 3.3.1.2 Visually inspect test system and note any observations or damage. Photographs will be taken of noticeable damage. 3.3.1.3 Measure and record torque valves on selected bolts as directed by WNP-1 representative. 3.3.2 Input OBE level event as in 3.3.1. Repeat 3.3.1.1, 3.3.1.2 and 3.3.1.3 until a total of five OBE level events have been completed. 3.3.3 Input SSE level event as in 3.3.1, Repeat 3.3.1.1, 3.3.1.2 and 3.3.1.3. 3.4 Fragility Test 3.4.1 Increase actuator gains by 30% and repeat 3.3.3. 3.4.2 Continue increasing gains (input) by approximately 15% incre-ments, repeating 3.3.1.1, 3.3.1.2, and 3.3.1.3 each time. After three increments (TRS at 160% SSE), gains will be increased at magnitudes selected by WNP-1 representatives until either a fragility level or the limits of the shake table are reached. 4.0 Test Conclusion 4.1 The typical WNP-1 cable tray system performed satisfactorily when subjected to site specific OBE and SSE events. No failures and/or loss of structural integrity was observed. 4.2 The actual damping ratios determined from these tests exceed the 20% damping ratio which is recommended for use in design at WNP-1. 4.3 The tests verified that the fatigue capacity of the typical WNP-1 configuration and. connections exceed the fatigue requirement for the required number of stress cycles of five OBE's and one SSE. 53

4.4 The tests demonstrated that the available safety margin was in excess of 30% for the SSE event loading. The actual safety margin was indeterminate since the table limits were reached before any failures occurred. 4.5 The tests confirmed that high damping exists in the WNP-1 cable tray systems, hence validating the applicability of the generic test program results to the cable tray systems at WNP-1. 4 54 4

.c

• s#9kmM4'4m'E9'32Wmt%Mie.wrdnmm-194: =526.c@=uGMWDMGMWx.yv -

esuntAL COMPUTATMN SHEET " Q *'s, j - *g L'%WSS umm. \\- Tir.A.y TOPTSITEsT Co.imcumamoel. .. summt:r I#2 GTW s 4 me. &O %.C' .+= R M .- c 4 P. a,, h- ,a ( ~ er at 7 g e.n f',., a-i eo u% 5k't' g e u.rn tag o <-+ w e

a. - i 3

i ps z #, . m, j. rte e 0 od 47 a% is,g o. g f [ J. d N 4: 2 1 .u t

u. -

M k d 1; ,p$ = f, C?,4#6 g 1, z i g ;. s w. ~ n e .c y . kU [d h - N j, - d w ){ % 5 5 Vi 1 th 7 0 p 3 f ;.$ ~ -[ 'd 'T + 4 3 :

w c

5e n, t, s. e g v. de k h 'l. I., J 4 v bt 4 g e e @ .. 3 e d f l L* U. 3*AJr U\\. 2. g '4 g, .r e a , -4, -"c =a3 2 -c =.: 4-w ' m-g j g% a .e .r t_ g _ ( It b + "^ ? b$ h b o h.. t p:#:p w m M V l .h g p ag r g n m. p t ,a _.c (

• O *O,'

J C ul ;t 'w p'E'f,, 's

e. T j tG oco et n:

e 6.55 o \\ e va c a ( fe t [ Gi -2G o-0 ] g-gli --o $4 [ .W[ . *2Jhdd v i Eb_cL f g a

.Y *'

^ ry s m 4 4. 55 5*h :

=

.,, - GENERALCOMPUTATKWSHEEF" . S u g s g _e n ig n e e n s " *5 c"o,,,",# IAJPP55 u,.ms 1 ~ TitAy? LMs.CfirstGaw.umame4 .c...wj. ;...cp. .,w. c t ga g - ..~?& ZO..:l$7Q.~.* ; gvtr.K...,,. w,k"' % ~,. r \\. ~ ,v... ,,,,,. ":. y c,, % . 4.f. r:. - -7K.r .>,,,,y,,,,, 1 l .,,;,. - >.,.,. :. q. y;.'..m.... ! n. -l :.. c ',.. ., 3.- -t. ~** f %, c ~ ,\\ .s. ......: =d e;c. ' 7 a w. %[-. T. ~u u .;;. Q;., s. ~ .?ls . -."* 5 rm) J. e c N VJ [. . -. y /4.; .; r

e

~ L S'r c e o uaa; r ..o ~h- 'kkk ~ /k/ ) { ...g:- . :/

l..P ' - h, *, "-

Q,,. g - Q.T,;... i ,~ ~ . m.<. 3 m .s.9 y. -:: ..gt:. .i . ';4 \\4\\ e. u e-

1. /

) g, ,e '. [, 3 * [;:[...,,., -

3. '

4 C. G Xt3> D P.1

e. -

.'A - \\h\\ NA i 4

--.l

...t m - -f N g"+nec saav.a.r

• ~ ' --

-.. y_ _

JGhMff"fN w as w w Sctsustd l ~ 7.'f.' '. \\W /# $ nam v m[tW". '~ en [.. ;. ,3 F 'ste ws.tr.uc. iVw .~ w/w r$.Lw (rve) .g . (teamus. 40 m -un,' e l ( \\4\\ /d/ i \\\\\\ /// l ~ 'j 1. - E 7ef _pch 3 CSY ANCo> / \\T V /// ~~ J ~ 7A / \\Wp/ L.. ? < E / ,M., w m l l' Ma/ + ~ l Ss.cmon ts-s m l h :: Au wwwim To a s. Patre m e 56 l W Ans,es:s.e e wwou:n.s, ._._-_.__.-----s

seasoner ammme GENERAL.COMMJf'ATICP6 SHEET up i b6 UMffM I' wThY t 9 %. hus.T OuPWsom*ftod , '. ~ - ' 3.54 'MTIC.A WS 2' ~ ~ ~,.. '.,. ~. -,- .. y, :. .I[fN ,*h. NY,'.b', 2 ( A=LL WW,61lll>ggein t"I:3. E l'E R FO M E:D '*".T,*p.C. c 6T E,, ' 7,,.i J" g;g4;.r M M.f#t h ew asmasic a - ' ' ;:. S"'C. Aws c.e.g:ngstero. WEdice.'s.. t c .Wf.. \\ 7sp: l v 1, s - 3 w s.- 4 ~ ",. '.

• W

..,3 4, .l-. ,Tinrre). .. G,s '-d r I (l LV1 .} i 'au,;,. .b .. ~. : -g %,j,,, 3 .=- , =. e y.., At2G2' ~ ~ ~~ ..(. . - -..'] .2.. A.. f; t,. ..t- .. v.& ' ~ q;, "y< - i < %l' g". ~. i,,

• /_, (".

..T r y 3 e. . f.g.....-...4.

• 7.(T~t

.,t . -~

u..

,:., t-tr.,... ar.;_,._.,s. ......,.- - gg .g.=e gg g. y [ *,,',*, T.., *. i e. ,, ' - 4:4 _. g. ,gpq g (gg.. g D \\ I' ..T. -r -a Y..,1. DDr ..\\. h. x ' c... $T&rtM% et gtocq r y-y.. ( . J'T.), s 6* )., _ 'T '_, \\ '. - ,g l'5L AS7.!4 ~ ,6 , p.*. >.. 6 , _f Rt - ., - L ' -...K. r .. L,- -r ~

• ...,f i

8 s L 'a. 1 s . -/ ,,,,t.*'., .g .~ if ......r a \\ I....._'..;.4 4.. ? l [, l i, s, AA.TICESN86TE. TRAY Hof Otou.W ,m, _ y Was.y Moonistic% r. . ha ~ 4;,.. cuu:= ein.wa,wrummamanes.... - @ 5ensa sacrCrrs h ? I'r.w E. c'er w[if4 soiT f.T+-7+=37awneesotts <,

E

[,

• • o As24E'.wAswee.

,:-(TYF7T(wespedePr=4.os '. [...,g .t ' ts'* \\ ~ 1. v 1 ,..... c...,. .metss . u m A=.

i. y'z+*spr=.T. a. A ur

,c.;f.';,., .G uh H.un.w/iicio

• • % yO y. yQp s.

ta.srsur uurs. u%

• s.

~ 3 m E "" kDN D YOROQG. kW hTTCDs a' t a. .e .. so 1*T-uss u.a. M'N:** L.Senes e '$ lidae META 6.

• C***8het5f%camr. t=stwe. I'"!co.s.A.

57 2cy. Pt Les Fiss Fie.ce$ /

@peateghneers c"o, toeess ) o,,,m i Y d N 40 04) ) comys Au Wu:t oinc To 1s,s.besse s'c ms e.=wrme vie _om6s. - jn w o.auun QV.A. fY ***' WW. y % 'A Crxn> 4; xn.. / \\'W / 1 _ gl.]fs . QE gg.

1. 7.

p 1,y) a;. J ,0, e . Ai2c% g .c . J~... < - ] y., m g t. m .=a \\ '_ [ hlZo2 Y s. -t 's. ICT'TO I .C F p3 . 8 '...._. i '\\ T5E*.'T Meso Doi ma c' @._ "...i

p. y _e._s s a s _.i32 3_or(s a. e...

s l _Ptoo4.A \\ K@ 'S,o ...,Y .w/.'ibocw.st IF.o Ho.5eut..a i j.. . i...~.._.. _.(m ) T__.\\'."./.. J_ T 6 fr m>~K mpg i ~~ . (T'f 3) s. I i. i ). 11

*.' _ g-5T1.

.3.. W* A52&. Aszt4K I_ _; 1 i : i. 1 -,(TYYr.'). 5 .- _ i.- . s 1 a _. l .3._.a._......_. .L t 't.. - i. \\ i .... :..r. 12 - y \\,

y.

.'.4 vat. Tit & MATE. rzAY Hot.O Doi.uN + - i \\ s hw Moodsanc't hn-g;. ~ et.e emex.tuttaa.m.scs. + C+ s e u.a. a n o (r z 2. h Y P-w z c-tal'2* 4 set.T N+ 8 Wsp.1,.7 set.ts ? F / y uo As,24iha^nsa. .e 2 (T'm) Tanqu 54 e w -2 f f s's. [ .I ev wets 5 [ c 7pM

l. At.L T.S.To Est. M oT 7

...; *,.i t.e '2 + % u x. w/ e ie i c. y A.;v\\.'.;,.s g-umTmen suTs 9 on ' ,a . v.. Vi\\ SEcmm 52-M

z. T==u Ai so 3T.,

,s u. ,, a)C FT-\\.5T.. U.9. M$rA4 & sen.to wrth '.f hGeo METAL 3, Tom. msg. g son.1:p To . CoutuvT St'A.c tu r**st'pt. !*too.s.A. 58 gg,, ,,,,,7,, e.

i GENERAL. COMPUTATION SHEET i gg, f-m E$LOPPSS unms I .3 i su m T8C A v 3 0 9 N S-(T8L5 C8"mcoeMe 4 (a TrCAYS i 4.s. Wtt_osac To as Pt.sr. song S'Y Aws cEw.7tmaa WEbosa % r. E ge f; y Y/ s_ g. rtM - vfrd @ [ '6 MZ-b b ~ .h '{(,' I-f N'. 3 . 2 (u.O 1 f

1. Mmia 0

g A12oz s ~ y h\\24.. ( - (jp \\ -s v i \\. " .[. f 1 go* Y {A1202 N-J .._'\\, .[ [.(TTN .k# g I,.. ..%,~ % T z A Y H.oi,o p e w a c _i r__ WI E 7-w.+ s m _ i m oi (.u o...._ __ ~ _.__,. 3 Fq)j, ..GPW . // "+.socw.aT so H=. **.v...p.. w2 ,,l-TRA'T(T TPQ 'h{

• iaA12, g )~

~ ...,..._.,.._./_. ~ ~.. _ ..- ^.... 's. - M.2tt A S7.1 <-{ g,). 4@ Z, Y l n t.. l. 3 ~ MAbst MccQ BEW.T. F Q: [ Crfm J

l (Poo4A (sh QM-3 -% %]

--G h@ y [ W .= u s. r 4 I c.4.u c.a. na,ss 0 !. AL_b Sot TS To SE A*347 (m" A, u.u. w/ A-ioo '2 u.a) '2. + ec.* w supsicsvtewr wTs, 2 'weic.a.Teo. As S.- Au eTi. ism.

• n 3E.CT1oto 5 2,_g,

,,, 7,,'5 A m a. N is rrt u r. I ,,,,y,,,,,,,,,,,,, 85c FT_ tr5,b L1.N-4.TcRQue 3[* Sci n To

3. Foc' H As.gr Moon Pb r.ACVCT 1

Zo FT L% FT;ntBE.cE.h DETA44 5, ScE. Ss.c. St-L - 59 r-~. -

.~ ~ ~~.. GENERA 4 COMPUTATION SHEET-i e. e' D'I P T*" 5 S unmr ~ l' ~ sumac /I~ICA2' 5tM"TS. CTESE C8HA'L3":"'T'ICM) .,;i M.. Cp"1"'pl" Mat'S ., s/3 g ( 4, _..~..p;.%.*p..y. . ;. '...m:'M. o.^-Mi.l.u1. As r/V3EL.criteC. Ttp St. Ps'stproft.e l (.. ~: , p. ~ a. .. i. :. 4.d;>.b 7. ~~ . Tp ~ 35n.1. Ansi; ca.it.Tu*sW.C Wi:.LD*1t5 . k, : - .'2&. ".Y;a t.*:: - ;.. ~., C' *..% .,,%...G. '. 2.g. '..'-;. 3 h ...~...".;,,,,n.. w.,4.... 4

• j e.

.ap 3,~ -~j.; y.r. s ^ sj - .li,TYP. 777R,4 - 1 l.h ,,.[ .'h k- ~~ ~ n ~.. .... A l f .'.' r MM~ ~~ I ~ .(,TyL}. 4*- .( .~. y . e. . ~,.

• ? --

p.-Srit"AamaJ: , h

,. ~. (. c;4an,3qa,.s.

g ..;J,.. g ,. f.:. PICOI q .s

e..

f.y -p-T ~

...y.

m o. e. 7 w 7 >4 -... 3. -u. ~ -2 \\ ~'((. 1,'d;;' t : ~ ,; ' - Srrlain '. [. Dkgcog-. ',,,,.. ~ ' c, -

.' -: c C

s .. _.. =.

5..-

.g '...N.., ?.. v.: = Tsen,T H_a.s.o p Cn7.^ . + .., '. a. . P. 6. -. % %. I.2 2 3. o I (,5 4. C ,. 'oc4.A J M._..H. ', y <. c- .. ';. ft e i' i-y

1.u / f e h.eirfiter Hc> Socr..a t

n s'; = - y 4.~ r. n .t..,. r. ?. c

c. 5;.4 ('.

T**Mu 6+i toop wf.i .r. .\\. . -.,..: -.... -... ~. - ..~ r --r,. ,s, E i ? - ]h ^ .. p ;. M '% A S &] 7 ,,- - - - =,, [ I [ { ..s ' [. ' . t ::. . p..r ; y.,. r. g-. ?- ......i,....,.,- .c 3

1. a r-M o,

c ....a.- t.-s . -r. .i. v. . 7.. g.,.. y .r -r j j e L -._.2. , I . J..., f e A4.TitEllD4 ATE.TerAY Hos.Cr touaN L -ht p MoonaStic'T' g").. l ~ + . cr g P @C.aNG.(NRE!CPEFENCli,,, 5==== anco(ret.dI;

• hk@4-hagASertotTs

] Ptia, I c-e ta[ t *qn sos.T z .' 3 4..-"* A - AMO A5Z41JtaA swasur., .. = wan. ;.r .m n., r .g-c. ;-b v M,..- } ^, .McTES. j '~ N LT.--

1. As tc. Set Ts.To se. A.3oT C t.h. '-,,,,,.

I g,,.' ;g.,-g.\\ i. .g N +, UM-A-too 'z, l g. t ~

s 3

% ~ '-V yp\\'k*.t sa.esuensa4t nettomas. SurecsTestuurs.. - t c e ,,k. " tset 1tsr mrivsvaThee.,s. e'M C"CM* O"' *E. AU.- 3 f.,,.d MEst, uu ts Aseg, ungg3, 4 b( '- ECTlolc $4-$4 r Teemus. Av so.sve. ret'di'. mA L.t J u- .s. .._ 5 o PT-us. s. u 8%sra.i.===.m g Aice muTu. 's.twraw. app so ms.n:,. c.- ': C'*h** t*Sf*5ctts, t*5PlpT !ron.* A. 60 .g p7u gggg_

GENERAL COMPUTADON SHErr macrumo t.8F F g id s-- c "o,,, $ L O P P ' S S unms -. I wTeAv Miris. (rasf Co wicomadio 4 <srTR AYS AL.L wsuowc. To es. Osw.woimW ~ &y Ata 5. C e.it. M ss o. S 'D E1LS' O... e fh @ f b z.sk # .g,. f. .{y93 h yg* ~ -- g.', b (gy) .t 'g -1 .C. : * - '.] t .I' E 5A12o2. Y 4 El.904A .[ E.(T'ff-).b .f..'... (~F g ..t.- .s %TzxyHos,o m a 47 "...i I i. #- ' ~ F.W +199-112'3-bl (se.d... 1 O[ 'f - @ g i..., 3 .W[I "4.jhoew.aT'..ir.o.He>. tuei.r 2 -.,...r .To+drm d NAl2C2.1 ' . n i.. i 43 e.. i. ...'g' !.- )......i b. 1..

',....&2tt AS7,14K i.'

hA .- C tt..... .4 a 1- } G _.: a e s i '_.i._ ... ',3f* '..N i.'.:_.;..'..]_. ~ %f. . e . r2 - ' s AL Tstfr.RNATrs. TstAY Hot.o h'on i ..'r ' c-cesP eham taTWEs-ENes. -e e. . u. _e. w/ g +.oi r qi>

.g 73

~o % 24 w .n=. 14 A t # M e e u. B s:AG E.T. g' I . mm .nm.s. s L A..tu sos rs.To se A so r. O er) .'z + 5 \\i. t.H 9 W *[ A-loc'2 e.,h. su scur % rs moic.xtar; As ~ 4:. 4 sE* ~ 5 .Av o r e wa-

• 2 oar-wsw=@.Se.cTim Es-ss 2.r% '2 E % r.rs.A=.-

.,r_1. .. u. a. ., E Efr.'Co.EMEC.Tio n W

3. F o m ' 4 A L F V o o 4 ' 8 E:A cxd.T.

PT-son-use. 'z"4' Pbsue.R.sTret.rt- ' Ps-9227R:s ' Nuts. DaTAtts, Sc.E Ste. 51 si-61 >m.. ~~~

. ~.ur. .e ^ ' ' ' e g g w. i W PFS unms l' anciTirA.v-sons erest N-A ,./.., ' O Mf.s.,.. -yens., ca -ii; 1 4.. u.; 9 + :..n -:+&..s..'....:,': u

.w,:

..i " ( h 71JE:Q'DI,',*,fi[I. ;..;g,'.. - - * ' i. -. - !^Q4.jj{.f. ECC CP ' MA.TelittA,t; t e..,. . ~. v.. ~ Re Ganamurt.a,.~ %cr-GTsca# ' %ApufosscR.t Ptim

@' ; 73cr

"" T-lT-micAccs t-S ~ - 6 ~. E.14@ mp. moo a. sucser hb . GA ' fee 3" Hx.ucr sours-ta/wts c - G4. - '/*x.t%* meo. wm comeuwses m. ~ 3 o. ..AS 213,. SCAcKGT b SO AS 2rw scAcwxr

3..,.d...'c 50 P.uk Ha cr ma cup =(M-132'Hai) b

,1 g,c .- ScrM*=4.socr.ar -itty Mrr soi-t. - t._o p%> uci_tp w/AS241 CWAWER. N... d -;-- tcr l-fetw wx wasseur-. g aa; 43 pt. m y, p g g f,i;/ Smeg, 6i'. f*. 3% MSPuestFPMbuF. ERHS 9041"Y/@ . Mi l gk,- 'th'at'[seedInc=Mosat.t + Waw.wo uure.ti.u.) .h' g. j5[xT57 cts *.E' , ',I.ig '.f90 ltf+x(g % b ecc.y f,[ h !.' -[Q.(UntSTw.utMuT',Pto1o I l 'g. M. PwL-NY (. 44.". p ms~ox126*L) CO T.-IS4ar-coiz-z44 9 4't 4, S . {'= 1

• ~ '

A.'? h,.- l ~ ~ ~ ' ,s -y., ~ .~ o e 'e e ? ~ 62 ,1 t / 7 .W

i M *' *

• ameanAs.comeurAnoe swser o

g g essneers msamse ."gy WNSS umn 1 ~ suome-Tu- %mfTs.s:r c.amumm.d 'TseAv srt Acw.s s G-Pbtt r op M ATER.\\ %.5 (couT'rf) N %4 Recs. n =mry sm/ cases.sertoo ue. cnunc n toMLe, Plocs4A, unt+TzuT @a f-s!.st c AszG2 suPussTm.vr l b. [ 3 *d Lcpico n u Ntsymivr g_

a..

b ta a'-d t c. Aizer m. wax.swur s. io' di c. w too4A uussvaut @a b 4 101o' LG. R 12.6% NPWEM# h ic Co. IkSure.c sTsuT *#, A-\\cc '/ SY Aac.o M 2 ~~~ 1 a. 1 2 4't 4. fr[cci OutSTm.27 ~ L-2 2f G' l & A.\\2o2 SufElt.STC.r7 a _L 1*2555 -40. Sue REstsT. CA. AMP gstut lP2593-4c. Stdr Kastst.h? b c e T C To s,3- )!' S G P Km.s4 L w F s.arunwrm.at d._ J_ SP2553-Ic3 St.ae Itasts. c AMP __ $__ 3 **t4H5t %* 8=.tw/Ptoca nut 1.b**ST h T_, e a 4 4 Sk4mi'4.%wo.s Tw/*-toe z aut %eemstmumsx mco e S 4'casues.HoecsCneecos st Cle38! ~ ~ ~ l. A 8 la I"cmausv_n9mus.st c 97 QA _ _l._ _ l'o. V : 5 Km.a *ws. P5-too We-r 4'ac.c.cm t. es.4ee )#4,10-dQSTD.lt1480 META 4.CoNOutT 3 44,1d-at.a.~ ~ ~ ~ ,A ;j_ l'-d LG. FPiooca ' t.)MtSTWut 6-1C l'-(4 \\ G. A\\2co SuNir STROT h b 11614, W-5OM Saatt.S"RMr n2 % wa,6 - u @S l

• j I

-l P.' itt>, l" uai s.N T C W tz-I 63

o.. ' LIST OF REFERENCES 1. " Cable Tray and Jonduit Raceway Seismic Test Program - Release 4 (Final)", Test Report #1053-21.1-4, Vol.1 & 2, December IS,1978, Vol. 3, May,1980, Vol. 4, March, 1981, ANCO Engineers, Inc. (Forwarded to NRC January 21, 1980 via letter from R. J. Kosiba of Bechtel Power Corporation to Dr. F. Schauer of Structural Engineering Branch, NRC). 2. Nuclear Project No.1 Docket No. 50-460. Evaluation of El. :trical Cable Tray and Conduit System Seismic Damping for WNP-1. Letter #G01-85-0171 dated September 6, 1985. (Proprietary) 64

P A TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ENCLOSI'RE 1 e RESPONSE TO GENERAL CONCERN 1 1 e RESPONSE TO GENERAL CONCERN 2 3 e RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC COMMENT 1 4 e FIGURE A (PROPRIETARY) 5 e RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC COMMENT 2 6 e RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC COMMENT 3 8 e RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC COMMENT 4 29 e FIGURE B (PROPRIETARY) 33 e FIGURE C (PROPRIETARY) 34 e RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC COMMENT 5 35 e RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC COMMENT 6 36 e RESPONSE TO NRC REQUEST 1 48 e RESPONSE TO NRC REQUEST 2 49 e RESPONSE TO NRC REQUEST 3 50 ENCLOSURE 2 e WNP-1 SITE SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE TESTING 51 ON A TYPICsL CABLE TRAY SYSTEM LIST OF REFERENCES 64 a}}