ML20247D013
| ML20247D013 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 03/22/1989 |
| From: | Gears G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| IEB-79-02, IEB-79-14, IEB-79-2, TAC-00016, TAC-16, NUDOCS 8903300349 | |
| Download: ML20247D013 (37) | |
Text
-
_ _ - =
- % h -e num N'
k UNITED STATES -
.4, j g-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
., s J
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20666
[
March 22,.1989-Docket No. 50-260-1 LICENSEE:
Tennessee Valley Authority FACILITY: Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 2
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING WITH TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY (TVA)
HELD ON JANUARY 5, 1989 TO DISCUSS CIVIL / SEISMIC ISSUES (TAC 00016)
' licensee)y 5,1989, the-NRC staff met with Tennessee' Valley Authority (TVA or On Januar at the NRC offices. in Rockville, Maryland to discuss. civil / seismic -
issues related to the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) Unit 2. The purpose of-this meeting was to provide an overview of the civil / seismic program for BFN,
.with emphasis on the used Amplified Response Spectra (ARS).'and the methodology
- to address IE Bulletins-'79-14 and 79-02. TVA proposed that this meeting serve as a' management introduction for scheduled weekly meetings between the NRC and TVA.
These week'ly sessions.will begin on January 13, 1989 and will focus on all BFN civil / seismic open issues. lists-the meeting participants. contains the slides used in the~ licensee presentation.
TVA presented an overview of the BFN civil / seismic program summarizing the Nuclear Performance Plan Volume 3 and a previous meeting with the staff
'(February.29, 1988). -TVA recapped the events that have, over.the course of the past year, defined the direction of the civil / seismic programs.
~TVA reiterated that changes to the BFN licensing basis and Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) would not'be required by the civil effort. While FSAR revisions might be recommended for clarification, the original licensing basis stated in the FSAR will not be changed for the civil / seismic issues. The entire scope of civil / seismic issues is included in the civil calculation program and the seismic design programs outlined at this meeting.
TVA stated that the scope of the seismic instrument tubing program has increased since the February 29, 1988 meeting because more problems in the instrument tubing area had been identified. The staff asked TVA to describe its seismic instrument tubing program and submit a program description for NRC review. TVA agreed to provide further details on this issue and discuss this as an open item in upcoming working meetings.
This was acceptable'to the staff.
Regarding the Seismic Design Programs Status Chart (Page 7 of Enclosure 2), the staff questioned the definition of the term " complete."
If it.is just " design complete," how does TVA account for the fact that several issues have audit items still open and needing resolution.
TVA agreed to amend this chart to address the noted questions.
8903300349 890322 PDR ADOCK 05000260 P
PDC g
y
'g o
TVA and NRC discussed the use of time history for evaluation of non-piping commodities.
In accordance with agreements reached in the telephone conference of December 22, 1988, TVA will not use the new artificial time history (ATH) as.
a direct input motion for evalaution of non-piping items (structures, components,etc.).
The new ATH will be used only to generate ARS, which will then be used as input for seismic evaluation and analysis of the 79-14/02 scope (pip ng and in-line equipment) and other subsystems (conduit, HVAC components, etc..
TVA reaffirmed that, to date, the only non-piping commodities that have used time history analysis techniques for their Qualification have used El Centro ground motion time history as input. This was acceptable to the staff as evidenced by Safety Evaluation Reports dated June 26, 1972 and December 21, 1972.
A further discussion on the use of response maxima (e.g. moment, shear, member forces, etc). from global seismic analyses was held.
TVA and the staff do not agree on the use of response maxima.
It was agreed that additional discussion of this topic is needed.
The staff asked if TVA could demonstrate acceptability of the primary system with a time history analysis using the vertical and horizontal components of El Centro earthquake record as input, FSAR damping ratios (Appendix J for the reactor pressure vessel only), and the newly developed model accepted by the staff.
This would be acceptable to the staff.
TVA indicated that they do.not believe the reactor pressure vessel analysis is significantly affected by the new models and methodologies and that they agree to review the issue further and advise the NRC.
A discussion followed regarding the use of the new ATH.
TVA and the staff agreed to the following four items relative to the use of new ATH input and ARS for design and qualification:
1.
New artificial time history input will be used only to develop ARS.
2.
TVA will assess where new ARS exceeds the original analysis ARS.
3.
If modifications are required based on these impact evaluations, new ARS will be the design input.
4.
Any time TVA deviates from the agreements listed in 1, 2, and 3 above, TVA will get back to the staff and discuss on a case-by-case basis.
As an open item, TVA was asked, what ARS derived from El Centro or new artificial ground motion time history will be used as design input for new work? TVA agreed to prepare an answer to this question and respond to the NRC in an upcoming weekly meeting.
b
l.
(
(
8 3
3 The staff stated that the design criteria for the IE Bulletin 79-14/02 program scope were applicable to all Class I piping, tubing, and supports (large bore l
l and small bore) outside of the scope of the Long Term Torus Integrity Program.
The staff also agreed that since the Torus Integrity Program had been previously completed by TVA and reviewed by the staff, the staff had no plans to review this item again.
TVA presented an update of the IE Bulletin 79-14/02 program. To date, TVA has performed approximately 100 modifications to support fuel load and using old methodologies.
TVA stated that it anticipated that 900 modifications will be required before restart.
TVA currently projects completion of 35 percent of the 79-14/02 large bore rigorous analyses and support designs by May 31, 1989.
TVA also projects 100 percent walkdown program will be completed April 1,1989, and the horizontal slice evaluation of the remaining 65 percent of the 79-14/02 problems will be completed by June 30, 1989.
The staff restated its position from the March 1988 meeting that TVA should maintain a constant work effort on this program both before and after restart in order to conscientiously move this issue to completion.
Other items discussed at this meeting include:
1.
TVA is to provide the basis for the BFN tornado evaluation being considered a post-restart action. TVA will address this item in an upcoming weekly meeting.
2.
The staff plans to conduct the following audits of BFN issues in the upcoming months:
1/30 - 2/10/89 Civil calculation program at BFN site.
1/23 - 2/3/89 IE Bulletin 79-14/02 audit at SWEC in Cherry Hill, New Jersey.
3/12 - 3/24/89 Audit of civil open items.
- 4/30 - 5/5/89 Civil calculation program conclusion.
1 3.
The definition of zero period acceleration of new ARS was discussed.
This issue was raised as part of the discussion of 79-14/02 methodologies in September 1988.
The staff stated that TVA's justification for cutoff of flexible analyses at 20 Hz required further staff review of the actual ARS curves for frequencies higher than 20 Hz.
The staff would use these curves to access whether TVA's sample evaluations are adequate.
TVA agreed to present and discuss these curves in a subsequent weekly meeting.
s s
4 4
l l
l 4.
The staff will review TVA's basis for snubber allowable loads during the upcoming IE Bulletin 79-14/02 audit. The staff also pointed out to TVA that the Design Basis Earthquake load combination has been defined as an emergency event in the Browns Ferry FSAR and that the allowable limits for piping and supports should conform to this classification.
l l
Original signed by Gerald E. Gears, Project Manager TVA Projects Division Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Enclosures 1.
Attendance Lists 2.
Civil / Seismic Issues Review (Morning) 3.
TVAViewgraphs(Afternoon) cc w/ enclosures:
See next page DISTRIBUTION Docket File NRC PDR Local PDR Those on Attached List 1
I l OFC :NRR:TVA/LA :NRR:TVA/PM
- NRR:TVA/BC TVA/AD/P
- - :.__. 1.;_____:____________:___________:...._____..
y,
- DTerao- /
SBlati NAME :MSimms $__44:GG _
o l
3/
/89
- 3/ @ /89
- 3/.1Y89 DATE : 3/ M /89 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY M
b 1
s.
4
.Mr. Oliver D. Kingsley, Jr.
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant cc:
General Counsel Regional Administrator, Region II Tennessee Valley Authority U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 400 West Summit Hill Drive 101 Marietta Street, N.W.
Eli B33 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Resident Inspector / Browns Ferry NP Mr. R. L. Gridley U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Tennessee Valley Authority Route 12, Box 637 SN 157B Lookout Place Athens, Alabama 35611 Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801 Mr. C. Mason Dr. Henry Myers, Science Advisor Tennessee Valley Authority Committee on Interior Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant and Insular Affairs P.O. Box 2000 U. S. House of Representatives Decatur, Alabama 35602 Washington, D.C.
20515 Tennessee Valley Authority Mr. P. Carier Rockville Office
' Tennessee' Valley Authority 11921 Rockville Pike Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Suite 402 P.O. Box 2000 Rockville, Maryland 20852 Decatur, Alabama 35602 Mr. Oliver D. Kingsley, Jr.
Mr. D. L. Williams Senior Vice President, Nuclear Power Tennessee Valley Authority Tennessee Valley Authority 400 West Summit Hill Drive 6N 38A Lookout Place W10 B85 1101 Market Street Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801 Chairman, Limestone County Commission P.O. Box 188 Athens, Alabama 35611 Claude Earl Fox, M.D.
State Health Officer State Department of Public Health State Office Building Montgomery, Alabama 36130 i
)
..N' i
4
~
l, DISTRIBUTION FOR MEETING SUPNARY DATED: March 22, 1989-Facility: ' Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 2*
Distribution "4 M B "NRC PDR Local PDR Projects Reading
'ADSP Reading D. Crutchfield ~
B. D. Liaw S. Black.-
R. Pierson G. Gears M. Simms
- F. McCoy-J. Rutberg.
D. Terao T. Cheng J. Fair E. Goodwin ACRS (10).
GPA/PA-GPA/CA(M.Callahan)(5)-
S. Varga E. Jordan B. Grimes P. Gwynn J. Scarborough G. Marcus T. Elsasser L.-Norrholm
~C. Ader BFN Rdg. File Ofol
> i
,9' 4
ENCLOSURE 1-ATTENDANCE LIST Name-Affiliation Patrick Carier TVA Roger-Gavankar TVA H. B. Bounds TVA David.Terao NRC Thomas Cheng NRC-Gerry Gears
.NRC Bob Pierson NRC John Fair NRC C. H. Fox
.TVA Jon Rupert
-TVA Thamo. Cruise TVA Alan Chan SWEC John McCall
.TVA
. Karl Seidle TVA W. A. Massie TVA E. F. Goodwin NRC B. D. Liaw NRC
^.
f cGA L
[
- j. -
- BROWNS FERRY UNIT 2 CIVIL / SEISMIC ISSUES REVIEW
'NRC/ WHITE FLINT BLDG.
JANUARY 5,'1989 8:30 a.m. - 12:00 Noon I.
INTRODUCTION...........................
Pat Carier
' MEETING OBJECTIVES Benny Bounds II.
CIVIL / SEISMIC PROGRAMS OVERVIEW............. Roger Gavankar III.
AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA EVALUATION........... Jon Rupert IV.
79-14/02 PROGRAM.............................. T.
C. Cruise V.
SMALL BORE PIPING PROGRAM..................... T. C.
Cruise VI.
CIVIL CALCULATIONS PROGRAM...................... Jon Rupert VII.
AGENDA FOR THE NEXT CIVIL / SEISMIC ISSUES MEETING l
__m.__. _ _ _ _ -. _ _ _ _ _ _ _
g BROWNS FERRY UNIT 2 CIVIL / SEISMIC ISSUES REVIEW MEETING OBJECTIVES-o INITIATE WEEKLY TEGNICAL MEETING o
PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THE. CURRENT STATUS OF CIVIL / SEISMIC PROGRAMS
' o PROVIDE STATUS OF AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA (ARS)' EVALUATIONS o
PROVIDE STATUS OF 79-14/02 PROGRAM AND SMALL BORE PIPE.IN
~ SUPPORT OF THE UPCOMING AUDIT
- o.
. PROVIDE STATUS OF. CIVIL CAL,C PROGRAM IN SUPPORT OF THE
. UPCOMING AUDIT o.
' DISCUSS-AGENDA FOR THE FOLLOWING WEEK'S MEETING l
f L____m_J.u____m__m._. _ _. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _., _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _. _ _ _.. _ _ _ _. _.. _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _
. < =, _
4.
r BROWNS FERRY UNIT 2 OVERALL CIVIL PROGRAM CIVIL / SEISMIC PROGRAMS OVERVIEW' RECAP OF THE FEB. 29 PRESENTATION ON OVERALL CIVIL PROGRAM CHRONOLOGY OF SIGNIFICANT EVENTS SINCE FEB. 29, 1988 BRIEF CURRENT STATUS i
a
H E
T P
I
.il O
El 8
i C
Y V 8
/
9 2
i 1
,ii S
BI
/
C E
2 A
0 l
D R
Si EE I
V EI SH T
E E
I 2 A VE R
R D
E H
N G i - :.
s I
i RT DS R
T UO Y
PN AM U
F; I
E Y. R;
.R M
EA QO P
R A
A E RR E
Y R H AG R
RL M
T C
I E V G
SO T
AD FI M
O F NR S OUE C
N L U
R O O PWN QR S
L S
PW T NE E
EU I
WA LE AGI R
DS V
I A
RE BV C E U ER S
L I
R C D O
L L
N E
AS I
I N
NP AI C MT I
I T
R AK L S A AHO L
I V EOI O
CS CR T
TW l
HYF LHAS HI TSOATC F
TC e
e l
1 l:'
- 1
. !i n i
ll
- ii
02/29/88 5
BROWNS FERRY UNIT 2 OVERALL CIVIL PROGRAM CIVIL
- - SEISMIC-DESIGN--
CALCULATION PROGRAM REVIEWS 1
[
~
SUSPENDED SYSTEMS LARGE BORE PIPING RECIRC PIPING ~
CRD PlPING TORUS PIPING SMALL BORE PIPING
~
INSTRUMENT TUBING CABLE TR AYS ELECTRICAL CONDUlT H V A C _..
STRUCTURES
, DYNAMIC, ANALYSIS DRYWELL PLATFORMS CONCRETE STRUCTURES MISCELLANEOUS STEEL STEEL STRUCTURES TORUS PRIMARY CONTAINMENT MASONRY WALLS EMBEDMENTS EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION TANKS & HEAT EXCHANGERS MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT I
GEOTECHNICAL SEISMIC GROUND MOTIONS SOIL & ROCK ANALYSIS SETTLEMENT & SLOPE STABILITY PILES & FOUNDATIONS BURIED STRUCTURES SPECIAL CIVIL TOPICS PIPE RUPTURE II OVER I
~~
TORNADO EVALUATIONS SECONDARY CONTAINMENT PENET.
HEAVY LOADS EVALUATIONS FLOODING
- ..,_C
.e e
+
e en er
=
,eu
.me se em 4
=m m-4ea f
M+
e.gg ap
.es
BROWNS FERRY SEISMIC ISSUES CHRONOLOGY c) AUGUST 1986 SUBMIH ED NUCLEAR PERFORMANCE PLAN VOLUME 3, REVISION 0 b) MAY 1987 SUBMIHED REQUEST TO USE ARTIFICIAL TIME HISTORY IN LIEU OF EL CENTRO TO GENERATE ARS (AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA).
I c) DECEMBER 1987 DOCKETED 79-14 PROGRAM PLAN IN 12/11/87 BEIMESDA MEETING.
d) JANUARY 1988 NRC ISSUED SER ON USE OF ARTIFICIAL TIME HISTORY IN LIEU OF EL CENTRO TO GENERATE ARS (1/25/88 LETTER).
e) FEBRUARY 1988 PRESENTED OVERALL CIVIL PROGRAM AND " FOCUSED" SEISMIC DESIGN PROGRAMS IN 2/29/88 ROCKVILLE MEETING.
f) MARCH 1988 COMPLETED SUBMITTALS OF ALL SEISMIC DESIGN PROGRAM PLANS.
g) MARCH 1988 NRC CONDITIONALLY APPROVED 79-14 PROGRAM PLAN, WITH:
100% WALKDOWNS BEFORE RESTART, ACCEPTABLE AUDITS, AND EVALUATION OF GENERIC IMPLICATIONS (3/25/88 LETTER).
h) JUNE 1988 DISCUSSED PIPING SEISMIC DESIGN METHODS IN 6/16/88 AND 6/30/88 ROCKVILLE MEETINGS.
i) JULY 1988 NRC ISSUED SERs, WI'IH C0hMENTS, FOR NON-PIPING SEISMIC PROGRAMS (7/26/88 LETTER).
j) AUGUST 1988 INITIAL 35% OF 79-14 COMPLETED USING ORIGINAL CALCULATION MEIHODS.
k) AUGUST 1988 NRC QUESTIONED ORIGINAL SEISMIC MODELS (1 STICK VERSUS MULTI-STICK) USED TO GENERATE ARS DURING KN0XVILLE AUDIT OF CIVIL CALCULATIONS.
- 1) SEPTEMBER 1988 SEISMIC DESIGN bihEODOLOGY RESOLVED, TVA COMMITTED TO REGENERATE ARS AND TO REVISE INITIAL 35% OF 79-14 USING REVISED MEIHODS (9/19/88 AND 9/28/88 LETTERS).
m) OCTOBER 1988 NRC AUDITED NON-PIPING SEISMIC DESIGN PROGRAMS AT BROWNS FERRY SITE.
n) NOVEMBER 1988 USE OF TIME HISTORY AS ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE FOR PIPING DISCUSSED WITH NRC DURING 11/17/88 MEETING AT CHERRY HILL.
o) DECEMBER 1988 NRC CLARIFIED LIMITATION OF TIME HISTORY USAGE AS n->,
ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE IN 12/13/88 MEETING.
p) DECEMBER 1988 NRC ACCEPTED 79-14 PROGRAM USE OF GENERIC IMPLICATION MEIHODS (12/14/88 LETTER).
I q) DECEMBER 1988 NEW ARS AUDITED BY NRC IN KN0XVILLE.
i l
r) JANUARY 1989 INITIATED WEEKLY MEETINGS WITH NRC TO RESOLVE SEISMIC l
ISSUES.
a
j-. _.
7
.s
. g.
BROWNS FERRY UNIT 2 SEISMIC DESIGN PROGRAMS STATUS SEISMIC PROGRAM DESIGN SER CABLE TRAY SUPPORTS COMPL ISSUED CONDUIT SUPPORTS COMPL ISSUED
- HVAC COMPL ISSUED
- DRYWELL STEEL PLATFORMS COMPL ISSUED
- MISCELLANEOUS STEEL COMPL ISSUED
- CLASS II OVER I ONGOING NOT ISSUED SECONDARY CONTAINMENT PENETRATION COMPL ISSUED TORUS COMPL ISSUED 79-14 ONGOING NOT ISSUED CRD PIPING ONGOING NOT ISSUED SMALL BORE ONGOING NOT ISSUED INSTRUMENT TUBING ONGOING NOT ISSUED I
l
- WITH COMMENTS 1
f~
L G_ _ _ _ _ _ _
l 8
IMPACT EVALUATIONS FOR NEW AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA (ARS)
I.
CHRONOLOGY OF ACTIVITIES AT BFN A.
LICENSING BASIS - SMOOTH RESPONSE SPECTRA l
1.
0.lg OBE 2.
0.2g DBE B.
ORIGINAL DESIGN MEE 0D - EL CENTRO 1.
DYNAMIC ANALYSIS MODELS a.
SINGLE STICK (RB) b.
MULTIPLE STICK (RB) 2.
ANALYSIS MEIHODS a.
SINGLE STICK SPECTRA b.
MULTIPLE STICK (RPV 6 INTERNALS) c.
VERTICALLY RIGID C.
CHRONOLOGY 1.
MAY 87 TVA REQUESTED USE OF CLOSE-FIT AE TO GENERATE ARS 2.
JANUARY 88 NRC RESPONSE TO TVA 3.
AUGUST 88 - NRC AUDIT OF ARS DISAGREEMENT OF FSAR/SER INTERPRETATION 4.
SEPTEMBER 88 TVA RESPONSE TO NRC AUDIT 5.
NOVEMBER 88 EE NRC AUDIT ENDING 11/10/88 IDENTIFIED THE COMPARISON OF THE OLD ARS WIE THE NEW ARC AS AN OPEN ITEM.
6.
DECEMBER 88 NRC AUDIT
II.. STA'IUS -
' A.
SPECTRA' DEVELOPMENT
- . RB.'
DG SBGT OFF GAS-INTAKE RHRSW TUNNEL B.
IMPACT EVALUATIO'N-STRUCTbRES STEEL FEATURES CONDUIT
EQUIPMENT PIPING RPV 6 INTERNALS III..
SCHEDULE EVALUATIONS COMPLETE MID-FEBRUARY 1989.
1 l-
i f
+,.
a
/0 l
l BROWNS FERRY UNIT 2 79-14/79-02 SIGNIFICANT EVENTS DECEMBER 1987 DOCKETED 79-14 PROGRAM PLAN IN 12/11/87 BETHESDA MEETING.
FEBRUARY 1988 PRESENTED OVERALL CIVIL PROGRAM AND " FOCUSED" SEISMIC DESIGN PROGRAMS IN 2/29/88 ROCKVILLE MEETING.
MARCH 1988 NRC CONDITIONALLY APPROVED 79-14 PROGRAM PLAN, WITH:
100% WALKDOWNS BEFORE RESTART, ACCEPTABLE AUDITS, AND EVALUATION OF GENERIC DUPLICATIONS (3/25/88 IEITER).
JUNE 1988 DISCUSSED PIPING SEISMIC DESIGN METHODS IN 6/16/88 AND 6/30/88 ROCKVILLE MEETINGS.
AUGUST 1988 INITIAL 35% OF 79-14 ANALYSIS COMPLETED USING ORIGINAL CALCULATION MEIHODS.
SEPTEMBER 1988 SEISMIC DESIGN METHODOLOGY RESOLVED, TVA C0hMITTED TO REGENERATE APS AND TO REVISE INITIAL 35% OF 79-14 USING REVISED METHODS (9/19/88 AND 9/28/88 LEITERS).
NOVEMBER 1988 USE OF TIME HISTORY AS ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE FOR PIPING DISCUSSED WITH NRC DURING 11/17/88 MEETING AT CHERRY HILL.
DECEMBER 1988 NRC CLARIFIED LIMITATION OF TIME HISTORY USAGE AS 79-14 ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE IN 12/13/88 MEETING.
DECEMBER 1988 NRC ACCEITED 79-14 PROGRAM USE OF GENERIC IMPLICATION METHODS (12/14/88 LEITER).
t
I ll) j.
N O
e e
G ESS N
TUI I
EOS N
LRYFI%
POLOA5 MGA M6 OI N E
CRA R
m T2 R
AT TI S4
\\
r EU R
u e
2 T
N I 2 O
N0 I
U-T 9
Y7 W
A R -
E U%
R/
I E
L5 E
V T
A6 F4 R
E V
1 E
L EG S -
V P
G N
N9 O
M N&I W7 O
I N
O C%
RNI R
/5 EWA B
E1 EOM S
NDE I T I KR VX GL e
EE NAF RN EWO
[
r
=
/
ET C
N E
I W
L R
O P
E D
M NS e
K O%
EE L
C0 GT A
/2 U
W E
YB ST FI IS IR 0
VR RT 0
l l
o
~
ll f
llll l
. ;. 7 1
'f.,.
. BROWNS. FERRY UNIT 2 l
-79.14/79-02 l0 SCOPE Lo" NRC BULLETIN 79-14
- o' NRC BULLETIN 79-02 o
APPROXIMATE QUANTITIES o
- 30 SYSTEMS
- o'
. 220 STRESS PROBLEMS
~
o 3500 SUPPORTS SCHEDULE o
- COMPLETION OF 100% WALKDOWN "4/30/89 o-COMPLETION OF 35% ANALYSIS AND SUPPORT DESIGN 5/31/89
.o COMPLETION OF HORIZ0! GAL SLICE 6/30/89 i
-haa-----.A-_-__..______m
L 4 r-1 '. '
t'
. BROWNS FERRY UNIT 2 l'
SMALL BORE.
SCOPE o'
ALL SEISMIC CLASS I PIPING 2 INCHES AND SMALLER REQUIRED FOR SAFE SHIED 0WN EXCEPT THAT WHICH hAS RIGOROUSLY ANALYZED.
o 26,000 FEET OF PIPE-o 4,000 SUPPORTS PROGRAM OVERVIEW o-RESTART o
CONFIGURATION WALKDOWN OF 30 PROBIS S o -
ANALYZE AND EVALUATE SUPPORTS FOR 30 PROBISG o
MAKE MODIFICATIONS TO MEET OPERABILITY CRITERIA FROM THE 30 PROBLEMS ANALYZED, DETERMINE THE R00r CAUSES FOR o
- MODIFICATIONS AND IDENTIFY PHYSICAL ATTRIBlTTES WALKDOWN REMAINING PIPE FOR PHYSICAL ATTRIBlEES o
o
-EVALUATE IDENTIFIED DISCREPANCIES o
MAKE MODS TO MEET OPERABILITY CRITERIA STATUS ANALYSIS AND SUPPORT EVALUATION OF 30 PROBLEMS IS COMPLETE o
o GENERIC ATTRIBtHES ARE IDENTIFIED PLANT WALKDOWN FOR GENERIC ATTRIBUTES COMPLETE o
EVALUATION OF THE 30 PROBIBS FOR ARS AND METHODS CHANGES AND THE o
EFFECT ON THE ATTRIBUTES IS IN PROGRESS SCHEDULE DESIGN COMPLETION FOR RESTART 6/1/89 o
..j
- i. *
~
L CIVIL CALCULATIONS REVIEWS A..
OVERALL STA*IUS - 80% COMPLETE IN MID-JANUARY.
o SCOPE.
TO ASSURE TECHNICAL ADEQUACY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING CALCULATION CATEGORIES-r o
STATUS-ALL CALCULATION CATEGORIES REQUIRING TECHNICAL REVIEWS HAVE BEEN-IDENTIFIED. TECHNICAL REVIEWS IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEP-5.2 HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.
IN SOME CASES, W E TECHNICAL REVIEWS IDENTIFIED DISCREPANCIES WHICH REQUIRE CORRECTIVE ACTION.
SOME OF THE
- . y CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ARE STILL IN PROGRESS.
o FIELD IMPLEMENTATION STATUS NO MODIFICATIONS HAVE YET BEEN IDENTIFIED FROM WE CALCULATION REVIEWS.
B.
~ SCHEDULE o
DYNAMIC ANALYSIS - COMPLETE.
o CONCRETE STRUCTURES - 1/15/89 o
STEEL STRUCTURES - 6/1/89 o
PRIMARY CONTAINMENT - 1/15/89 o
MASONRY WALLS - 1/15/89 o
EMBEDMENTS - COMPLETE o
TANKS 6 HEAT EXCHANGERS - COMPLETE o
SEISMIC GROUND MOTIONS - COMPLETE o
S0IL 6. ROCK ANALYSIS - /15/89 o
SETTLEMENT 6 SLOPE STABILITY - POST RESTART o
PILES 6 FOUNDATIONS - COMPLETE o
BURIED STRUCTURES,. CONDUIT - COMPLETE o
BURIED STRUCTURES, PIPING - 1/31/89 o
PIPE RUlrrURE - COMPLETE o
TORNADO EVALUATIONS - POST RESTART o
HEAVY LOADS EVALUATIONS - POST RESTART o
FLOODING - POST RESTART C.
ACTIONS REQUIRED FROM W E NRC REVIEW AND APPROVE PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
cmw -.
i.
\\
- l. ;..
a.
f~
BROWNS FERRY UNIT 2' CIVIL / SEISMIC ISSUES REVIEW NRC - WHITE FLINT BLDG..
l 1:00 - 4:30 p.m.
OPEN TECHNICAL ITEMS-1.-
ZPA DEFINITION............................................A. Chan 2.-
.ARS IMPACT EVALUATION..................................Jon Rupert
' 3..
. USE OF NF SNUBBERS 6 ALL0WABLES......................T. ' C. Cruise 4.
' UPLIFT ON ROD HANGERS................................T. C. Cruise -
- 5. -
U-BOLT LATERAL L0 ADS..................................Karl'Seidle 6
. PLATFORM 'IHERMAL GR0WIH................................ Jon Rupert
- 7. -
MSSSP-58 DEFINITION...................................Karl Seidle S
1 2
t t-1 TECHNICAL JUSTIFICATION FOR THE USE OF ZPA AND 20 Hz CDTOFF FREQUENCY IN PIPING ANALYSIS
. Concern: The use. of a 20 Hz cutoff frequency in conjunction with' a missing mass correction. using the ZPA may unders;timate the; piping' responses since the ZPA is, lower than the acceleration at 20 Hz.
7
.e Acc6ttMTud AT Mh b
t$
EPA T
I e
l I
2 o fly 1
hMkGdCY 4
daGis y
~ ' - ~ - - _ - - -.. _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, _
g Resolution:
TVA has performed the following study with 3 pipe stress problems.
These three problems cover areas with the greatest differences in the accelerations at 20 Hz and the ZPA.
1.
Pipe stress analysis using 20 Hz cutoff plus the missing mass correction using the ZPA.
2.
Pipe stress analysis using 33HZ cutoff plus the missing mass correction using the ZPA.
3.
Pipe stress analysis using the structural input which considers structural modes beyond 20 Hz and using a 50 Hz piping analysis cutoff frequency plus the missing mass correction using the ZPA.
4.
Pipe support loads from the above three analyses were compared.
==
Conclusion:==
The Browns Ferry approach of using 20 Hz cutoff plus the missing mass correction using the ZPA provides adequate pipe support design.
e
__m_-._____________________m_
1 l
s} _ '
f COMPARISON OF CUT 0FF ACCELERATION YALUES (
ZPA 205 -
i DIRECTION ELETATION ACCEL. AT 20 H2.
y
\\
0.2 0.221 0.421 519.0 N-S 0.362 0.2 0.162 537.0 0.883 0.219 0.664 565.0 1.053 0.301 0.782 593.0 0.453 0.336 0.117 9
621.25 0.404 0.168 0.572 639.0 0.492 0.533 664.0 1.025 0.2 0.221 0.421 519.0 E-W 0.205 0.169 0.374 537.0-0.232 0.678 0.91 f65.0 0.328 0.752 1.08 593.0 0.373 0.096 0.469 621.25
~
0.434' O.195 0.629 639.0 0.519 0.517 1.036 664.0 0.133 0.148 0.281 519.0 YER 0.132 0.104 0.236 537.0 0.15 0.024 0.174,
565.0 0.159 0.089 0.248 l
.593.0 0.165 0.285 0.45 621.25 0.519 0.182 0.337 639.0 0.562 0.203 0.359 664.0 O = ACCEL.-' AT 20 HZ. - IPA 1
e 9.
i.V
~ - -.
... ~
i i
i
.e*
g i
" 88"83 d
' 8g gp w
e
\\
88*8C S
\\
gf 88*8E 4~F/
(
N 4
' 88'81 l'
88*8 aa
)
88*8 88.l.
ca r--
e e.
88*9 e
W
.: c
_ A 2
m s
88.S W
.:~
a 4
' 88*>
o
/
cm A
\\
N 88
- C =
l l
gg zt)
Z W
D O
L.J M
\\
CY.
.Z@
\\
rru 06'8
>ZWW R @
89*8
> < cx c.
L J u o CD SL'8
) Q. 2 Z 0-1 uW~
> cc u m n. 2 gg 8
)<
ZE 3W 41 C 4 1
[
O. o 83*8
> u c.D m e
93=W SP.8 9 Z M Cz; Z g
o o m-3 >. JZMe
> E kg Q >= W.
QC D M C 0 W m e-E E 8C'S
=
ew 4
o 0
CE cs: lllB M 0 mow e P-2 2[
ErJW4 2uW c=
s ce W u a a
-. $.. r. =,,: k.; %
S i, " 8 C4UUW
~-
p 30 cc 4 C W
..._I
,.., e 9
e M - - -- - ~. - - _. -. _ _ _ -. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. - _ _.
mii l
6'
'* - ~ *.
~
3-
. 3 O
t 6
R 8
l 1
3-e.
1 5
8 3
9 2
N g: 3.
F B
P E
C R
l Q
W
- 3. -
y
)
l
\\
I 0
~.-
\\
l r1 1
I
(
. I g
I-D(
I l 1 gI f0 E
. g I
i I I ND el g I I
4f EE 1p DN f
i AE
~
,J
)
N.R UD s
- . 2 1
G Y
- . C N
E 8
8 U
Q 4
E 1
R 9
5 F
0 M0 U0
~
R ET 0 YTT C TNEE - 5
~
I ARP RLCSG OPN N P.
H OEI TRCSPN UA NM AE - OA -
L PD YCGS 5
EUNE 2
~..
LNIRN L
D O1 AYLNI2 VRIOT6
~
RUIO EEBTHN EF A
O S
RRUI SSOE - T EHTLEA s
u.,
e 9
NVCE V
b, l
pd.
i l
t l
b[
N0ACEE 8
i m
g g
'l, 3
t ERECBL 4
(
l 13 1
g TBRAOE 1,n lt j
,f!
!,l l
l
f e,. *i; a.;;
3 i
.; '+
e-12f20 f 2Z -
l RE6dLT!,
ON SAspt:-
5TODY 1oid c-PiPIM# AEpdiEs usWdt cui - o F F-1 coupM:
9 AT ' 2o "I Ao D 50 F REcuenc-(
pipidt SysTEtI's ira 6TdD7 C/CE5 -
g H,qsud. ( Ml-2 23 - E R ),
- 17. ira cd PiPG,163 -593' EL.
(Nl-27 3 -1 R ),
io -I4cH PIPE,- 5 29 SFd st.
Hpcr (IIl-167 - 2 F #.),
J2 IolcP Pips, SGs'- G21 el.
E &o4 o
Fo R.. S Rot 0NS FE rJ.'/ PR o-EcToN 6/
es.
'~
- - - - - - - - _ ~ _ ~ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
l
'L 2
g-
.e5 COMPARISONS OF RESULTS FOR PROBLEM N1-223-5R RHR/SW OUTSIDE DRYWELL METHOD HOUSNER NEW HOUSNER DW TIME HISTORY (0.5 %)
TIME HISTORY (0.5 %)
CUTOFF FREQUENCY 20 HZ CUTOFF FREQUENCY 50 HZ TH CASE NO.
]
6-0 A,B & C l
7-0 A,B & C l
NODE LOAD
- TOTAL RATIO LOAD
- TOTAL RATIO POINT LOAD LOAD S
1 FX 382 1029 1
354 1001 0.9727 647 U
1 FY 1601 2212 1
1635 2246 1.0153 611 P
1 FZ 3001 3076 1
3007 3082 1.0019 75 P
1 MX 20436 23068 1
20686
' 23318 1.0108 2632 0
1 MY 5323 5778 1
5376 5831 1.0091 455 R
1 MZ 7732 12539 1
7842 12649 1.0087 4807 T
4 FY 87 2449 1
88 2450 1.0004 2362 7
FX 2181 2864 1
1989 2672 0.9329 683 L
7 FY 2462 4302 1
2456 4296 0.9986 1840 0
8 FY 1089 2818 1
1206 2935 1.0415 1729 A
12 FY 602 1994 1
657 2049 1.0275 1392 D
15 FY 1088 2665 1
1171 2748 1.0311 1577 16 FX 3758 7746 1
3865 7853 1.0138 3988 52 FX 5487 5713 1
5516 5742 1.0050 226 52 FY 2015 5009 1
2009 5003 0.9988 2994 52 FZ 2813 3791 1
2846 3824 1.0087 978 52 MX 45 115 1
47 117 1.0173 70 52 MY 788 858 1
788 858 1
70 38 FY 1720 4653 1
1713 4646 0.9984 2933 42 FX 2329 2907 1
2317 2895 0.9958 578 45 FY 100 1802 1
101 1803 1.0005 1702 49 FX 790 1486 1
807 1503 1.0114 696 49 FY 2197 3780 1
2254 3837 1.0150 1583 49 FZ 3265 3442 1
3267 3444 1.0005 177 49 MX 25627 27530 1
25707 27610 1.0029 1903 49 MY 10879 12003 1
10884 12008 1.0004 1124 49 MZ 9911 14640 1
10135 14864 1.0153 4729 17E FZ 3318 3534 1
3670 3886 1.0996 216 341 FX 2972 2972 1
2972 2972 1
0 341 FY 3018 8231 1
3174 8387 1.0189 5213 341 FZ 2588 2588 1
2635 2636 1.0185 0
85 1
0 341 MX 85 85 1
85 341 MY 341 341 1
348 348 1.0205 0 j 341 MZ 349 349 1
367 367 1.0515 0
- -- SSE CASE ONLY 4
d g
+
l 4
c,. t..,...
q HPCI OUTSIDE DRYWELL COMPARISONS OF RESULTS FOR PROBLEM N1-273-8R METHOD HOUSNER NEW HOUSNER DW TIME HISTORY (0.5 %)
TIME HISTORY (0.5 %)
CUTOFF FREQUENCY 20 HZ CUTOFF FREQUENCY 50 HZ TH
____-______________________--__-_---_____l 7-0 A,B & C l
l CASE NO.
l 6 0 A,B & C
_____-____~____________________
__________-_____-_-____ ___---__________--___2961 3761 0.9579 800 S
5 FX 3126 3926 1
U S
FY 2545 6213 1
2579 6247 1.0054 3668 P
5 FZ 1581 3375 1
1493 3287 0.9739 1794 P
5 MX 7958 19320 1
7914 19276 0.9977 113'62 0
5 MY 13808 47349 1
13644 47185 0.9965 33541 R
S MZ 41009 47622 1
41051 47664 1.0008 6613 T
VS14 FY 5
354 1
5 354 1
349 25 FY 49 1428 1
49 1428 1
1379 I
L B60 FX 6364 6364 1
6442 6442 1.0122 0
0 81 FY 496 1766 1
497 1767 1.0005 1270 A
85 FY 561 1785 1
561 1785 1
1224 D
100 FY 528 1790 1
529 1791 1.0005 1262 109 FZ 3446 3446 1
3430 3430 0.9953 0
110 FY 597 1694 1
598 1695 1.0005 1097 130 FY 509 1791 1
510 1792 1.0005 1282 145 FY 236 1306 1
236 1306 1
1070 160 FY 54 1646 1
55 1647 1.0006 1592 175 FX 4677 5989 1
4677 5989 1
1312 175 FY 3085 3472 1
3096 3483 1.0031 387 215 FY 896 3628 1
899 3631 1.0008 2732 230 FY 700 2151 1
703 2154 1.0013 1451 245 FY 1259 3701 1
1264 3706 1.0013 2442 260 FZ 7652 8487 1
7660 8495 1.0009 835 270 FY 144 1810 1
145 1811 1.0005 1666 290 FX 3808 4226 1
3762 4180 0.9891 418 305 FY 132 3224 1
134 3226 1.0006 3092 341 FY 0
2800 1
0 2800 1
2800 345 FX 2600 3539 1
2537 3476 0.9821 939 345 FY 2651 3752 1
2690 3791 1.0103 1101 345 FZ 6190 6323 1
G250 6383 1.0094 133 345 MX 7748 20006 1
8037 20295 1.0144 12258 345 MY 23222 28439 1
23354 28571 1.0046 5217 345 MZ 17644 24630 1
17809 24795 1.0066 6986 525 FZ 2332 2332 1
2335 2335 1.0012 0
535 FZ 2981 2981 1
2987 2987 1.0020 0
- -- ESE CASE ONLY
~
...; ~....
^
"r E
lo
- . J.,
f EECW OUTSIDE DRYWEL'L l COMPARISON OF RESULTS FOR PROBLEM N1-167-2RA 1
USNER.
HOUSNER NEW HO TIME HISTORY (0.5%)
TIME HISTORY (0.5%)
METHOD l
~
CUTOFF FREQUENCY 20 HZ CUTOFF FREQUENCY 50 HZ TH
'A,B & C l
& C l
7-O CASE NO.
l 6-0 A,B TAL--_------_--_--_--_----__-----RATIO NODE LOAD
- TO RATIO LOAD
- TOTAL LOAD POINT LOAD I
R14 FX 7616 7637 1
7599 7620 1.00 21 R14 FY 7385 10465 1
7389 10469 1.00 3080 R14 FZ 16343 16366 1
16343 16366 1.00 23 R14 MX 3681 4185 1
3696 4200 1.00 504 R14 MY 164689 164791 1
164704 164806 1.00 102 S
R14 MZ 43804 65916 1
43945 66057 1.00 22112 U
H19 FY 1920 6871 1
1945 6896 1.00 4951 P
H18 FY 4046 7343 1
3994 7291 0.99 3297 P
R13 FX 15446 15479 1
15473 15506 1.00 33 O
R13 FY 4214 7485 1
4103 7374 0.99 3271 R
R13 FZ 5445 5464 1
5439 5458 1.00 19 T
R13 MX 17445 28514 1
17394 28463 1.00 11069 R13 MY 74575 74921 1
74488 74834 1.00 346 R13 MZ 8904 10823 1
8862 10781 1.00 1919 L
H17 FY 1229 4442 1
1223 4436 1.00 3213 O
H16 FY 1650 3858 1
1590 3798 0.98 2208 A
R12 FX 3292 3344 1
2635 2687 0.80 52 j
D R12 FZ 13501 13513 1
13517 13529 1.00 12 j
H15 FY 3483 9327 1
3509 9353 1.00 5844 l
R11 FX 4945 4961 1
4954 4970 1.00 16 I
R11 FY 2480 6645 1
2499 6664 1.00 4165 H14 FY 1558 4763 1
1561 4766 1.00 3205 H13 FY 716 4315 1
659 4258 0.99 3599 l
R10 FX 7213 7243 1
7212 7242 1.00 30 l
R10 Y
231 973 1
347 1089 1.12 742 a
R10 FZ 10536 10541 1
10483 10488 0.99 5
j T
R10 MX 1272 2637 1
1282 2647 1.00 1365
(
R10 MY 151971 152084 1
151745 151858 1.00 113 R10 MZ 789 1500 1
1155 1866 1.24 711
]
S650FY 7377 8789 1
7430 8842 1.01 1412 S665FX 1081 1100 1
1106 1125 1.02 19 i
S665FY 283 765 1
275 757 0.99 482
)
5690FX 1390 1406 1
1388 1404 1.00 16 i
S690FY 285 860 1
285 860 1.00 575 S730FY 414 804 1
410 800 1.00 390 S740FZ 525 558 1
498 531 0.95 33 765 FX 800 849 1
805 854 1.01 49 765 FZ 658 704 1
656 702 1.00 46 S785FY 301 1415 1
275 1389 0.98 1114 ANC6FX 578 603 1
576 601 1.00 25 ANC6FY 86 275 1
82 271 0.99 189 ANC6FZ 270 303 1
274 307 1.01 33 ANC6MX S59 895 1
546 882 0.99 336
~
E 4*g n - -.......
..s It 7
e 4
EECW OUTSIDE DRYWELL COMPARISON ' OF RESULTS FOR PROBLD4 N1-167-2RA
NER----------------------------------------DW NEW HOUSNER METHOD HOUS TIME HISTORY (0.5%)
TIME HISTORY (0.5%)
CUTOFF FREQUENCY 20 HZ CUTOFF FREQUENCY 50 HZ TH CASE NO.
l 6-0 A,B & C
.l 7-0 A,B & C-l
RATIO LOAD
- TOTAL RATIO NODE LOAD
- TOTAL LOAD POINT LOAD
645 1
3604 3651 1.0 47 3598 3
ANC6MY ANC6MZ 724 777 1
725 778 1.00 53 S890FY 299 994 1
289 984 0.99 695 S915FX 1068 1096 1
1079 1107 1.01 28 5915FY 181 615 1
202 636' 1.03 434 S930FX 276 285 1
263 272 0.95 9
S930FY 141 941 1
148 948 1.01 800 935 FX 246 255 1
229 238 0.93 9
t 935 FY 140 420 1
169 449 1.07 280 940 FY 298 805 1
300 807 1.00 507 945 FX 256 303 1
219 266 0.88 47 945 FY 955 1218 1
967 1230 1.01 263 950 FX 1289 1318 1
1267 1296 0.98 29 950 FY 2119 3020 1
2130 3031 1.00 901 970 FX 1251 1330 1
1239 1318 0.99 79 970 FZ 4369 4469 1
4368 4468 1.00 100 1020FY 1064 1368 1
1064 1368 1.00 304 1020FZ 824 935 1
825 936 1.00 111 1035FX 645 737 1
661 753 1.02 92 1035FY 2062 3246 1
2100 3284 1.01 1184 SM25FX 535 586 1
534 585 1.00 51 SM25FY 646 2175 1
609 2138
'O 98 1529 SM25FZ 391 419 1
389 417 1.00 28
- -- SSE CASE ONLY 4
~
1
_________m_____
bl
]
vf
... :. i*
, t
- 5
)r'e.j,
, i
'+ e 0
.0 2
0
, 8 O
t I
T 0
A
, 6 1
R D
0
. 4 A
1 O
L 0
O
, 2 T
I T
1 AR R
R.
b H R5 A
,//
0 O 0 2
O3 7////,//
/
.0 L
2 P2 7///'///y/////
TZ 1
RH O0 P1 P5 N
P UM 0
UH 8
ST E
SL 0
R B
E O
N R
S FP
. 0 U
O
. 6 O
H
. 0 l
f M
. 0
/
A
. 4 l
0 R
G 0
O
, 2 0
T S
I H
0
~
0 8
6 4
2 0
8 6
4 2
0 8
6 4
2 0
3 2
2 2
2 2
1 1
1 1
1
~
i 3O8 o
z f.!;]
sj L' jh"I U h Oi M uQ b T e, # '
.'},..,. 3 )-hI %%
I ge i
r
~
ll l
s 0
' 0 2
' 0
' 8 O
1 I
T 0
A
' 6 R
1 D
' 4 0
A 1
O L
' 0 O
' 2 I
TA 1
T R
R R8 D
A 0
O O3 P2 7/yf///f// /#///,
' / / /,' 0 L
7 i
T 1
R P1 O
N P
UM
' 0 U
P SL i 8 S
E B
' 0 O
R FP
' 0 O
i 6 0
M 0
A i 4 R
- 0 G
O 0
T i 2
- 0 S
I H
i 0 0
5 0
5 0
5 0
5
'0 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
v t05TE ooO L'O dZ
)] '711.
d n CM 11 JfoV r
7-t
.e o.
3. x..
e.,
- a..
3
- l. :<
u l
~l e
2 o,
N l
o-e a
W e
4
_ e.
M c
- T
=
O r~
L-C
'}
1 e,{
g a
t-g5 cd "
b'c N
J" C.
N O$
l\\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\
g
~
C: c 1
b1 c.
Em CL z 55 0
D2 E
=e m
c:
(f) "i w
e 7~.
O U.'
1 c:.
~:
o O 'a
_e C
d
=
T s.
,dC e
(
C O
_No 4
V O
T
_ o I
i i
i i
c c
o o
o o
o
~
to c
w n
N S ee 7V.L O.L ) 3DNIHHnOOO
.:I O
- O N...
...~?.LO I; ) se s
-(
ec
a
( 99==
"A--_-_,-___
.. S',4, N '..
.s 4
,+
.4
~
O O,
. N
~ O8
. O' M
- O
_ m.
g
. *~
.O
-J
[.
O O
- ci H u)
C-Ey W@
E e=
O O =g sxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxx og 0
-N CL a.
a xx n
[-
OO
>U E"
O$
e z
3,3 -
-[
m-(n -
. O g
W O
" O D
to O
I w
N 4
O,
,s
, O O
O
- O~
~
b en O
~
l i
i i
i 4
i i
i i
i O
O O
O O
O
.O O
O O
O o
o to v
M N
O Cn CO N
N w
( Lt t = w1Oi )'30;N3aanOOO JO *ON C m.. t__.. h-m...-
4 ;
4
=_
O
-.m.-__.. _ _ _ _ _. _. _
1 ;(h4sg lb L-orj ;., w.
RE5utT.
hMALYSI C pito f4EM 's All-.lfo7 -Z AA REATi34 :
Fx @Mo0El R lz-gap
- k.
16' y.
DiA = ig '
y' I -'
uu s
,x S o' Y,
A alz.
li' It!
EXAsies C.CR5 60 Tied @ Rit. due t X-EQ.
- b g w,9 9 34 Ex = 4168 37+
%19' 2,344 x
a l.
N b
.g (B) ca.t-oH @ SO tb 4
Fx = 2, no flu +
--, Ri41 D 4
n Scs" 2,3a4 "
i
$*b 9 Hb m es
[.__.______._
.__m_.
_