ML20210C558

Notification of 870518-20 Meetings W/Util,Franklin Research Ctr & Nct Engineering in Framingham,Ma to Discuss SEP Review of Design Codes & Load Combinations

ML20210C558
Person / Time
Site:	Yankee Rowe
Issue date:	04/30/1987
From:	Mckenna E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Nerses V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TASK-02-02.A, TASK-03-02, TASK-03-05.A, TASK-03-05.B, TASK-03-06, TASK-03-07.B, TASK-2-2.A, TASK-3-2, TASK-3-5.A, TASK-3-5.B, TASK-3-6, TASK-3-7.B, TASK-RR NUDOCS 8705060228
Download: ML20210C558 (6)

Text

--

. Docket No.50-029 MEMORANDUM FOR: Victor Nerses, Acting Director Project Directorate I-3 Division of Reactor Projects I-II FROM: E. McKenna, Project Manager Project Directorate I-3 Division of Reactor Projects I-II

SUBJECT:

FORTHCOMING MEETING WITH YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY - YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DATE & TIME: May 18-20, 1987 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. (May 18) 8:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. (May 19) 8:30a.m.-12:00p.m.(May20)

LOCATION: Yankee Atomic Electric Company 1671 Worcester Road Frammingham, Massachusetts PURPOSE: Audit meeting to discuss SEP review of design codes and load combinations (see attached summary of review topics)

PARTICIPANTS: NRC Franklin Research T. Cheng A. Okaily E. McKenna Yankee Atomic NCT Engineering l B. Holmgren T. Tsai J. Parker G. Papanic, et.al.

/-

E. McKenna, Project Manager Project Directorate I-3 Division of Reactor Projects I-II cc: See next page DISTRIBUTION:

See attached page

~McKenna.

PD(I-$()i( kab y/3(/87 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY 8705060228 870430 PDR ADOCK 05000029 P PDR 1

I

" Hr. George Papanic, Jr.

Y:r.kee Atomic Electric Company Yankee fluclear Power Station cc:

Mr. . lames E. Tribble, President Yankee Atomic Electric Company 1671 Worcester Road Framingham, Massachusetts 01701 Thomas Dignan, Esquire Ropes and Gray 225 Franklin Street Roston, Massachusetts 02110 Mr. N. N. St. Laurent Plant Superintendent Yankee Atomic Electric Company Star Route Rowe, Massachusetts 01367 Chairman Board of Selectmen Town of Rowe Rowe, Massachusetts 01367 Resident Inspector Yankee Nuclear Power Station c/o U.S. NRC Post Office Box 28 Monroe Bridge, Massachusetts 01350 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Robert M. Hallisey, Director Radiation Control Program Massachusetts Department of Public Health 150 Tremont Street, 7th Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02111

f

• s Request for Additional Information SEP Topic III-7.B Yankee Rowe Nuclear Power Station For the Seismic Category I buildings and structures at the Yankee Rowe Nuclear Power Station (YNPS), SEP Topic III-7.B requires the comparison of the structural design codes and loading criteria used in the actual plant design against the corresponding codes and criteria currently used for licensing of new plants. -

In a letter dated July 3, 1985 (1), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) requested Yankee Atomic Electric Company (YAEC) to perform three actions in order to resolve the remaining open issues under SEP Topic III-7.B. The two Licensee submittals [2, 3] represent their response to the NRC letter regarding (a) snow loads and (b) design codes, criteria, loads, and load combinations, respectively. Based on a review of the aforementioned licensee submittals, the following information is requested:

I. Snow Loads Submittal [2]

1. For each one of the eight buildings or structural components evalu-ated in the submittal, please provide the technical bases and justi-fication for excluding all but dead and snow loads from the applic-able Ax ranking combined loading cases (see Section 10.4, [3]).

2. Please identify all the loads that were combined with the normal snow load of 40 psf to evaluate the critical plant components described in the submittal [2].

3. Fpr the turbine room structure under 125-psf extreme snow load case:

a. The Licensee submittal indicated that the turbine room roof

.. decking does nqt meet faulted allowable limitt for this load case (the maximum al'lokable snow load on the roof is 65 psf). Please provide the detailed analysis which led to this conclusion.

b. For the effects on the building columns and footings, provide the technical justification of not combining the extreme snow load with that of'the turbine hall crane load as well as their contributions to the corresponding margins of safety.

c. Provide the technical bases and pertinent calculations, if any, which were used to reach the conclusion that failure of the

. decking will not impair the function of the components necessary for safe shutdown of YNPS.

I 0%

4. Please provide the analysis procedures and detailed calculations (including margins of safety) pertinent to the roof beams, columns, and footings of the heating boiler room structure.

5. Please provide the analysis procedures and detailed calculations (including margins of safety) which support the Licensee submittal findings pertinent to the lower level roof decking, the roof beams, and columns of the primary auxiliary building (PAB).

6. For the fire water tank structure (TK-55), please provide the detailed structural calculations (including margins of safety) as well as the technical bases of the Licensee justification to use the two extreme snow load profiles described in the submittal.

II. Submittal for Design Codes, Design Criteria, Loads, and Ioad Combinations [3]

1. With respect to the Licensee responses to Action No. 1 [3]:

a. For every structural element shown in Enclosure 1, please provide the analysis procedure and detailed calculations used to qualify those safe shutdown structures which meet the corresponding new code criteria.

to

b. For every structural element listed as not applicable (N/A) the safe shutdown structures at YNPS, please provide the technical justifications used to reach this conclusion.

c. Please provide information supported by pertinent mechanical dcayings, which ezglains how the vapor container' structure meets element M8 requirenients (ASIC Code provision NE-3327).

2. Regarding the Licensee responses to Action No. 2 [3]:

a. Please state whether or not the two most severe load combinations identified in Se'etion 10.4 of Reference 4 have been applied to each of the safe shutdown structures at YNPS during the conduct of the following Systematic Evaluation Programs (SEP):

- SEP Topic II-2.A (extreme snow load)

- SEP Topic III-2 (tornado loads)

, s s. ,

2 l

l

s

%' l

• i

- SEP Topic III-5.A (pipe reactions under accident conditions)

- SEP Topic III-5.B (loads due to pipe break)

- SEP Topic III-6 (seismic loads).

b. Please state in detail all load combinations which have been I

applied to each of the safe shutdown structures at YNPS during the conduct of each SEP project listed in request II-2.a above.

~

c ',' Please' provide the new loa'ds and load combinations which have ~ -

been or will be addressed according to the FRC TER [4] for the reactor support structure, the safe shutdown system building, the fire water tank (TK-55), and the main steam /feedwater support structures [31 REFERENCES

1. Letter, USNRC to YAEC (NYR85-107), July 3, 1985

2. Letter, YAEC to USNRC (FYR 86-085), September 8, 1986

3. Letter, YAEC to USNRC (FYR 86-116), December 4, 19'86

4. Franklin Research Center, " Design Codes, Design Criteria, and Loading Combinations (SEP, III-7.B)," Technical Evaluation Report TER-C5257-316, August 30, 1982 O

o Co .2.1 Meeting Notices Internal NRC Participants

/. M ile7 NRC POR ~^' T. Cheng Local PDR E. McKenna ORAS PD I-3 Reading TMurley/JSniezek SVarga JMiraglia BBoger RCapra VNerses JStolz WButler Glainas EAdensam BJYoungblood LRubenstein ACRS-10 OGC, Attorney JPartlow BGrimes Edordan PPAS/TOSB OPA Receptionist (Only if meeting is held in Bethesda)

Project Manager - EMcKenna MRushbrook Region I -

cc: Applicant Servica List s