ML20118A740: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
L. | L. | ||
g Northem States Power Conipany 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 1927 Teleohone (612) 330-5500 September 21, 1992 Generic Letter 87 02 Supplement 1 U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT Docket Nos. 50-2 _ License Nos. DPR-42 50-306 DPR-60 < | g Northem States Power Conipany 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 1927 Teleohone (612) 330-5500 September 21, 1992 Generic Letter 87 02 Supplement 1 U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT Docket Nos. 50-2 _ License Nos. DPR-42 50-306 DPR-60 < | ||
Response to Supplement 1 to Generic Letter 87-02 on SOUG Resolution of UST A-46 On February 19, 1987, the NRC issued Generic Letter 87-02, " Verification of Seismic Adequacy of Mechanical and Electrical Equipment in Operating Reactors, Unresolved Safety Issue (USI) A-46". This Generic Letter encouraged utilities to participate in a generic program to resolve the seismic verification issues associated with USI A-46. As a result, ~ the Seismic Qualification Utility Group (SQUG) developed the " Generic Implementation Procedure (GIP) for Seit.mic Verification of Nuclear Plant Equipment" On May 22, 1992, the NRC Staff issued Generic-Letter 87-02 Supplement 1, which constituted the NRC Staff's review of the GIP and which included Supplemental Safety Evt.luation report Number 2 (SSER-2) on the GIP, Revision 2, corrected on February 14, 1992. The letter to SQUG enclosing SSER-2 requests that SQUG members provide to the NRC, within 120 days, a schedule for implementing the GIP. By letter dated August 21, 1992 to James Partlow, NRC-NRR, SQUG clarified that the 120 days would expire on September 21, 1992. This letter responds to the Staff's request. , | Response to Supplement 1 to Generic Letter 87-02 on SOUG Resolution of UST A-46 On February 19, 1987, the NRC issued Generic Letter 87-02, " Verification of Seismic Adequacy of Mechanical and Electrical Equipment in Operating Reactors, Unresolved Safety Issue (USI) A-46". This Generic Letter encouraged utilities to participate in a generic program to resolve the seismic verification issues associated with USI A-46. As a result, ~ the Seismic Qualification Utility Group (SQUG) developed the " Generic Implementation Procedure (GIP) for Seit.mic Verification of Nuclear Plant Equipment" On May 22, 1992, the NRC Staff issued Generic-Letter 87-02 Supplement 1, which constituted the NRC Staff's review of the GIP and which included Supplemental Safety Evt.luation report Number 2 (SSER-2) on the GIP, Revision 2, corrected on February 14, 1992. The letter to SQUG enclosing SSER-2 requests that SQUG members provide to the NRC, within 120 days, a schedule for implementing the GIP. By {{letter dated|date=August 21, 1992|text=letter dated August 21, 1992}} to James Partlow, NRC-NRR, SQUG clarified that the 120 days would expire on September 21, 1992. This letter responds to the Staff's request. , | ||
Information concerning commitments to the GIP, in-structure respons.e spectra, and schedule are provided in Attachment 1. The procedures and criteria which were used to generate the licensing-basis in-structure response spectra are described in Attachment 2. | Information concerning commitments to the GIP, in-structure respons.e spectra, and schedule are provided in Attachment 1. The procedures and criteria which were used to generate the licensing-basis in-structure response spectra are described in Attachment 2. | ||
I | I | ||
Latest revision as of 23:57, 22 September 2022
| ML20118A740 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Prairie Island  |
| Issue date: | 09/21/1992 |
| From: | Parker T NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20118A741 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-GTECI-A-46, REF-GTECI-SC, TASK-A-46, TASK-OR GL-87-02, GL-87-2, NUDOCS 9209250265 | |
| Download: ML20118A740 (12) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ _ _ _ _ . -__ _-_____--__-_ _ - -. L. g Northem States Power Conipany 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 1927 Teleohone (612) 330-5500 September 21, 1992 Generic Letter 87 02 Supplement 1 U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT Docket Nos. 50-2 _ License Nos. DPR-42 50-306 DPR-60 < Response to Supplement 1 to Generic Letter 87-02 on SOUG Resolution of UST A-46 On February 19, 1987, the NRC issued Generic Letter 87-02, " Verification of Seismic Adequacy of Mechanical and Electrical Equipment in Operating Reactors, Unresolved Safety Issue (USI) A-46". This Generic Letter encouraged utilities to participate in a generic program to resolve the seismic verification issues associated with USI A-46. As a result, ~ the Seismic Qualification Utility Group (SQUG) developed the " Generic Implementation Procedure (GIP) for Seit.mic Verification of Nuclear Plant Equipment" On May 22, 1992, the NRC Staff issued Generic-Letter 87-02 Supplement 1, which constituted the NRC Staff's review of the GIP and which included Supplemental Safety Evt.luation report Number 2 (SSER-2) on the GIP, Revision 2, corrected on February 14, 1992. The letter to SQUG enclosing SSER-2 requests that SQUG members provide to the NRC, within 120 days, a schedule for implementing the GIP. By letter dated August 21, 1992 to James Partlow, NRC-NRR, SQUG clarified that the 120 days would expire on September 21, 1992. This letter responds to the Staff's request. , Information concerning commitments to the GIP, in-structure respons.e spectra, and schedule are provided in Attachment 1. The procedures and criteria which were used to generate the licensing-basis in-structure response spectra are described in Attachment 2. I
/
920925o265 920921 2 i PDR ADOCK 0500 , P
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .1
, USNRC NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY September 21, 1992 Page 2 Please contact us if you require additiona". information, i
/
W f)WJ Thomas M. Parker Manager Nuclear Support Services 3 i cc: Regional Administrator III, NRC NRR Project Manager, NRC Resident Inspector, NRC State of Minnesota, i Attn: Kris Sanda i J Silberg
Attachment:
(1) Response to Supplement 1 to GL 87-02 I (2) Description of Licensing-Ba.vis In-Structure Response Spectra for Use in Resolution of USI A-46 4 (3) Prairio Island Nuclear Generating Plant Earthquake Analysis: Reactor-Auxiliary-Turbine Building, John A, Blume & i Associates Report JAB-PS-02, January 22, 1971 (4) Prairie Island' Nuclear Generating Plant Earthquake Analysis: Reactor-Auxiliary-Turbine Building Response Acceleration Spectra, John A. Blume & Associates Report JAB-PS-04, February 16, 1971 i i l l l l
1 4 UNITED STATFS NUCLEAR REGUIATORY COMMISSION i NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY r PRAIRIE ISLMD NUCLEAR GENERATING PLWT DOCVET NO. 50 282 50-306 i i l RESPONSE TO SUPPLEMENT 1 TO GENERIC LETTER 87-02 ON SQUG RESOLUTION OF USI A-46. i l Northern States, Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, hereby provides the , information requested by Supplement 1 to Generic Letter 87.02, titled
" Supplement No. 1 to Generic Letter (GL) 87-02 that Transmits Supnlemental
,_ Safety Evaluation Report No. 2 (SSER No. 2) on SQUG Generic _Implenentation j Procedure, Revision 2, as corrected on February 14, 1992 (GIP-2)". l This letter contains no restricted or other defense ~information.
- 7
! NORTHERN AT O' R OMPANY l 4 h By / 'T'omas-M h Parker i Managor i Nuclear Support Services t On this k day of b before me a notary public in and
- for said County, perscInally appeared Thomas M Parker, Manager "uclear Support Services, and being first duly sworn acknowledged that he is authorized to
, execute this documen* on behalf of Northern States Power Co.spany, that he knows the contents thereof, .and that to the best of his knowledge, 4 information, and belief the' statements made in it are true an that it-is not f interposed for delay, 1 M! ' L, mQm__
\ '
4 _......-..,-------------v.,--- i jj MARCIA K. LaCORE
- NOTARY PUBUC-MINNESOTA 4
l l HENt4EP!N COUNTY h ' My Commtan Expres Sept 24,103 s:::::::::, ::::::::::,ww::::::::n
- .-~ ~ .. -. -- --- .. . - - - - - .- . . . - -.
4
' Attachment 1 l
Response to Supplement 1 to Generic Letter 87-02 i a I COHMITMENT TO CIP GIP Gommitments: As a member of SQUG, Northern States Power commits to use the SQUG methodology as documented in the GIP, where " GIP" refers to GIP Revision 2, corrected on February 14, 1992, to resolve USI A-46 at Prairie Island. The GIP, as evaluated by the Staff, permits licensees
- to deviate from the SQUG commitments embodied in the commitment
. sections, provided the Staff is notified of substantial deviations prior
- - to implementation. Northern States Power recognizes that the Staff's 4
position in SSER-2 is that if licensees-use other methods that deviate $ from the criteria and procedures as described in SQUG commitments and in i the implementation guidance of the GIP, Revision-2, without prior NRC Staff approval, the method may not be acceptable to the Staff and, l therefore, may result in a deviation from the provisions of Generic Letter 87-02. Specifically, Northern States Power hereby commits to-the SQUG ! commitannts set forth in the GIP in their entirety, including the l clarifications, interpretations, and exceptions identified in SSER 2 as
- clarified by the August 21, 1992, SQUG 1etter responding to SSER-2.
GIP Guidance: Northern States Power generally will be guided by the remaining (non-commitment) sections of the GIP, i.e., GIP implementation guidance, which comprises- suggested methods for implementing the
- applicable commitments. Northern States Power will notify the NRC as j soon as practicable, but no later than tha final USI A-46 summary l report, of-significant or programmatic vfLeions from the guidance i portions of the GIP, if any. Justifications for such. deviations, as i vell as for otner minor deviatiens will be retained on site for NRC
{ review. II IN-STRUCTURE RESPONSE SPECTEA [ For defining seismic demand, Northern States Power will use the options provided in the GIP for median-centered and conservative, design in-l structure response-spectra, as appropriate, depending on the building, 4 the location of equipment in the building, and the equipment ! charact.ristics. The licensing-basis SSE in-structure response spectra may be used as one of the options provided in the GIP for resolution of USI A-46. The licensing-basis spectra, as described in Section 12,2.1.4.3 of the Prairie Island Updated Safety Analysis: Report, are consistent:with l t- standards and guidance applicable to the-plant at the timc of licensing,- and are considered to be Conservative Design. The procedures and criteria which were used to generate-the: licensing-basis in-structure
- response spectra are described in Attachment 2.
Realistic, median-centered in-structure response spectra may be used as an additional option as provided in the G1P for resolution of USI A-46. i 1 , . . . . . _.
Attachment 1 Page 2 September 21, 1992 ! III SCHEDULE , t Given the magnitude of the effort required to achieve resolution of USI A-46, final implementation must be carefully integrated with outage schedules and the seismic IPEEE response, the completion of which may be affected by the A-46 implementation start dato. Considering the workload set forth by the criteria of the GIP, a Seismic Evaluation-
- Report summarizing the results of the A 46 prograa at Prairie Island will be submitted to the NRC by November 20, 1995. This date reflects the fact that Prairie Island is a Category 3 plant, as described in Table A of SSER 2, and assumes that the Staff approves the in-structura response spectra of Attachment 2 within 60 days. However, the A 46 program completion schedule may be affected by coordination with the-seismic IPEEE response, the scope and schedule for completing the necessary SQUG training and by the availability of industry resources which may be unavailable because of'the large number of licensees implementing this program.
Regarding in structure response spectra, it is our understanding, based , on the May 22, 1992 NRC letter transmitting SSER-2, that if the Staff-does not respond by accepting, questioning, or rejecting the- spectra within 60 days of this letter, we may assume the Staff has-accepted our spectra and we may proceed with implementatic We further understand that if a rejection or question is received from the Staff, we will provide additional information to the Staff to resolve the problem and , if the Staff does not respond by accepting, questioning, or rejecting the information within 60 days,_we may interpret this to mean the staff has accepted our resolutioa and proceed with implementation. We endorse the approach described in the-August 21, 1992 SQUG letter responding to SSER-2 (i.e., that rejection of-a licensee's position after 60 days should be considered a changed Staff position requiring 10 CFR 50, Section 50.109 considerations). i
- - . - - - - ~ ~ - - . . -- ~ . - - - - - . -.
i Attachment 2 1 Description of Licensing Basis.In-Structure Response Spectra j For Use In Resolution of USI A ' The procedures and criteria used to generate the licensing basis in structure response spectra which may be used by Northern States Power to resolve USI A-46 at the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant are described below. The 4 licensing basis spectra is described in Prairie Island Updated Safety Analysis i Report Section 12,2,1,4.3 and is further defined in the John A. Blume reports j referenced by the Updated Safety Analysis Report and provided as attachments 3
- and 4 to this. response.
l Input Motion l l 1, the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Dames and Moore Consalt.ng , L gneers in the Applied Earth Sciences developed a report entitled 4.% . of
- Environmental Studies Geology, Hydrology, and Seismology" which is founo
! Appendix E of the Prairie Island Updated Safety Analysis Report, This report developed the ground design response spectra for the Operating. Basis (OBE) and the Design Basis (DBE/SSE) earthquakes. These. spectra are presented in Plates ! 4.5 and 4,6 of Appendix E to the Updated Safety Analysis Report, which are attached to this response as Figures 1 and 2. The horizontal ground j acceleration values for the OBE and the DBE which represent the zero period
- acceleration (ZPA) of the corresponding response spectra were ' established at 6
- _ and 12 percent of gravity respectively after a thorough review'of the
! seismicity of the region, Discussions on the seismology of the region are presented in Section 2 and Appendix-E of_the Updated Safety Analysis Report, i. l- The amplification spectra were developed to indicate the amplification of the h earthquake wave motion between the basement rock and the foundation soils for ! wave motion of varying periods. Further details of the methodslogy used in .
- the development of the response spectra for the Prairie Island site'are j- described in the Dames-and Moore report given in Appendix E of.the-Updated j Safety Analysis Report,
! Dynamic Models The major structures at the. Prairie Island site' inelude the Reactor Building, Auxiliary Building, Turbine Building and Screen House,'_ The dynamic models (mathematical models) developed as part of the design basis seismic analysis - were'used to genetrate OBE in-st eture-_ response. spectra for each floor and roof level. See Figures-3 and 4, attached, The-results-of-the-analyses presented in Attachments 3 and 4 to th's response are for tho'OBE (0,06g) earthquake. Values for the SSE (desigt, , ais)(0,12g) carthquake can be obtained by doubling the presented results. The mathematical model of the Prairie Island structure is a discrete.massL sy_ stem which represents the combined Reactor-Auxiliary-Turbine Building complex. The model has.109 degrees of freedom representing horizontal and rotational degrees of freedom of the~ discrete mass points, Each of the major: , structures.is represented by a stick model, These sticks are connected at ' specific elevations to represent the continuity of the various building: structures-at the~ foundation and certain floor elevations. These connecting links provided continuity, as appropriate.-in the two horizontal translations and the rotation-about the vertical axis only, l l l 1
. . . . .- . .. -u - - - - - - - -. . . - . . - - - - . -.- -
l l - Attachment _2 i Page 2-September 21,1992 { The two reactor buildings along with the steel containment and internal 3 structures are modeled and connected to the overall model at the foundation ! level only. Soil structure interaction effects are accounted for through soil j springs as described in the response to_the next item. - The moments of inertia
- and effective shear areas of the vertical elements between the mass points 4
were determined by cutting a horizontal section and computing the properties of the wall sections thus intersected. .The stiffness of the braced steel structures were computed by considering the axial deformation of the bracing { members. The dynamic seismic analysis along with a detailed description of , the mathematical modeling are described in Attachment 3. ] The mathematical model for vertical response is a single mass system
- representing the entire complex resting on a flexible : soil medium. Soil
] structure interaction in the vertical direction is described in the next item. I Soil Structure Interaction Soil structure interaction analyses have been carried out for the Prairie Island Nuclear Plant facilities. The Reactor _-Auxiliary-Turbine Building-
- structure is founded on densified granular soil, - The soil-structure interaction-under seismic conditions, based geo-physical data collected at the 4
site,.is represented by translational and rotational springs:as shownLin Figure 4, attached. The Reactor Auxiliary-Turbine Building Complex was l- modeled_in_1968 as a multi degree-of-freedom lumped mass system with j foundation springs representating the flexibility of' the' underlying soil 4' layer. The two-horizontal translational and Cie torsional rotational flexibility of the soil-for the entire structure, along with the-two rocking j, flexibilities for each of the two Reactor Buildings, the Auxiliary Building. , and the Turbine Building _ represented the nine soil _ springs used_in the dynamic ,e analysis. The spring constants were obtained by using the equations developed F for the case of a rigid plate.on semi infinite elastic half-space. The. l following soil material properties developed by the-soil consultant.were used F - in the computation of the soil springs: Elastic Modulus 9000 kips /ft 2- { Shear Modulus _3100 kips /ft 2 i 4 Poisson's Ratio 0. 40 .- i
- Thelresulting three-dimensional dynamic model was' analyzed by the normal time -
[ history method using.a ground acceleration; time-history. motion developed from the ground response acceleration spectra specified for the Prairie Island g_ Plant as shown in Figures 1 and 2. t Vertical seismic. analysis of the Reactor-Auxiliary-Turbine Building Complex was also carried out using vertical soil spring to represent the vertical
- . deformation of the undarlying soil.
3 ! The Screen House, which is a separate structure, was modeled'for.the soil-structure interaction analysis in a similar manner. T =- vy- p- - ...ry r , q m ru e e < ime ep% y g.- -e '.ga'4o .u---ap see---,--9-,..q p 11-- =-4y'-"ev-,=.-:
5 1 . 1 J Attachment 2 ,
- 1. Page 3 i September 21, 1992 L 1
( In-Structure Response Spectra i The mathematical model was . subjected to the developed ground acceleration i time history acting in the north-south and in the east west directions, and
- the time history of the horizontal acceleration at-each mass point of the-
! mathematical model was generated. Uring the generated acceleration. time-j histories at selected mass points, the response acceleration spectru for the j l desired damping values were calculated. The response in the vertical [ direction was similarly determined using the developed horizontal ground ! acceleration time-history normalized to 0,04g. 4 j The results of the analyses are described in Attachments 3 and 4. The results j of the analyses. presented are for the OBE (0,06g) carthquake. Values for the SSE (design basis)(0.12g) earthquake can be obtained by doubling the presented
~
j results. Peak Floor Acceleration Values l Attachments 3 and 4 provide complete details on the floor response-spectra for j tha OBE earthquake. ? s 9 4 i N. I 4
'i I
i-
- 1
)
...l
-l i
i I. l s. 4 -
-----n -e,,, - sm., , - , -r-n-, .v~+---,-- e-n,w-,~,w,-nv+,~ , e n se, , es - v , +
Attachment 2 Figure 1
@ s., . < 1, s v rc u s <vx 7'"-' E s si i s;,i i nw 4 x s .
I
'~.?
~ r"" & -~'L 1ans ,r , e b' ._ / , ' r _4 p y y s ,' ~/
. U-(g s F y '~ -
- v. i I x *J *
.it's s ,, s ,' '
'jj ' W V.j %f N b/ 's P S r y'M.' /N N 1r x , f)V)' j ' -v l ss i'i s K ' s s f y yy' y / 'YN\r' . 's. } A 5 6,T' sips \/X1/A/ V ' M's>L. N N / M G V / I M ' O I %j5 o g
*irst/4;y tss@;rW MH Kr\'s>:e;rNrbi hM4 i$'i'I/ $" M NN'i'V ,csy4 N/ 'g
'MO@ N' ^'/'s g[f .
]kT%
g$-e:,A g q-)/ ,i,3//A 3 N ij/ ,'/,/ 'Cj' 9 f QhN e/ rs ., j <N /N
, /
M, [@". Msy , g'"G s s y .. Es s .K A Te / / Rs < v*
- X \ N(s =s
' dRo g$ s
$f'/// / hs ,%
'QyN M
's i,/ Q; ',4 / ,' l'( ;- /
(s{_-N ,' -/- s&/ ' ' '
,$~
yE*</ / s/ ' N, f s-,/ f% A f *isN v /y' / )/ IN , fs/ / [,N ,/ N /II h<hIxJY . '\ m/ d'
, }< >'t.'^s 9 o '"*7 g, s ,,, ,s. . .meP, y N,y s s rs - sd 3 T s ,' a s' /sN
- n 4 $Pa^.?t' X / M
- M M tW= v. '4 s.% 4 y !A sf x is s ,,,q. ~ f - ( A.M N'/ s K.M ,f s4 N v % i N,". 's !=g '
O g q y ,q s\ ;j y f,4Q s>sfy ,;,os sf,,9(y y y s gAyy s, ys\
\g 3 .
. ,g, $ 9 % N,/). '( FVXUK' <'B)QWE f / I M'a >3 \ \M M M s's. % ,
E' S%KN,'9XDM17 V8'biWVP1/M A
;b c o
~
'9m.86'V $r g7 ,$ / ,jF' + -- - -- a . s2W j N yW'N/ 's'klQg .,.o e iY kh'&hW,' Whkf .LY,b('l'?'kh '
o ,, A % f i % % s 's / ,
' 'N's w_ew / w, &k
,v x /=
8.1 I ' a
]K,N.,'N, w' y / Y '
I f E / \[ /
$"p(orJ,4 0<,
o* [e(( / N [qy 3
<.MT"'~< t , ' s E-7 q<s ,' s 4- ,s -s <s s .- - u Q 't bs'i/ V@g7, A'F o 's 5! ,,
N i /'Hp' 141 k s As v s
' '/ ~*de -z 9 CA Z x- N 'w'l' l'),f\zs' M b T P, s LW fl' U '1^ N . \ gg sgo'J / h.MN fA N V N gg .u E r 's ' t' N N y/ r /M F Wp. ' K ' ~ '
EE h's g h \ \f'B,'M 4V i M L M \ 7 'If,PX ,' / MNN i '
/ \ \ 4 $
"7 =A m s
cr .qs s _.hs.
. v N,v
^ a q- f n' s .. [ v m.A ' "**, o w.u...s es y ..
v
% 4 o$.s'b kN
.&v 8 =8
--/ss
^ '
nb' h k . 1' l \ A e [ h,'bQMh
. ls','s 'I Y x N /I',k k
\lf
/
e- t 3 ,v /. /- ,'+.<$s.s
)
a A. . s N 1
.s. I
- h. , @kr/y,.',I ' shk'/
. (.. -- ssk *y < s'+/ Nk ' /'/ ,' / ,x s ,' ,
o k
,m -
,k', { , ,' ,N s N
5.iss sM : \ l
' p/ i/
,,'y'} ',. f
.'yy sk , N s [\s s
'N 9'/%4- '///N.
,[. / -
N si i'y' s
.b: .\(. ' ['Np'A s3'#'lj, ' ',j X; ,,. h/ / ,'X/ s/ ' d
;-* Ed g *: u o
'\ , '\
. w ' g '.. N i
W
' *N / . . . b,'xT' J?9,,ga^ s.',$' 'N'
'\
'( J'6$/M'
' 'N O
Z d 1,i :::: -
*s _N.j . s s nY 4{'. O*M. Q u,.',' '. . ,_
't. w~
.o - v K'*'
'N
-N'
' , * '-8
--' 8 W
A A d 2.N.W.hs ri ? ss
/s N S\s's . s \
; , iX , ;ANi.sb}'.a stsv
_q, , s,'
. ** ,i _' s t/ is/ s M-
"C
%u ,i . w ,. ,. AN.x.4~s .N , h... ', s, ' M.k~ .sh\ 'Jh N s
b l/ (/ h- g'% 'N s i$ f f."',l/ %,. s,>,EW$ m o -
..o .\ 34 *j.'.,'shsh \ Y.
I N / ' /
, e *
- E(. ,/ )QN%.N, '
- J, .Ca,] 's,
,,,,g..,.s.
. .<,j s,.
Y j4..
..f..%s'
\'.
. , ,,.s [-
'7 y ,V] f %---ss..,\,',T,ej$.q 1 c o ga Y \( p s *
- k' l N I ,/..(. \
b ks ,( ' 8' EN ,
' \ ,
[Yh, 5'N1'4 '.44' M'46's \ l \ / f ~ ' ^yEO $
- 3. E .\ .'//..
s 3'A.s, .s>Ols
,,- m s-s .x 9 3 . . , f. . . ;.-. - r . . V ,, .v. .
^M' Kx~\4 ,'y s , @L.o
.--..,- 5 g
i / , /', / , s y o . A A <ffs / ,( .s s, -,s\N m/ / A / e--
/ d..sn.s -{% sA fu G
3 :s ,s./ .s. f. a s / s. , s3 s / s/ e H' . b fl Ydd!'il !!! Lb,j,j[_j,Jb!! ItN!!Y! b!l J IdHft l!l! A t i I' I f Id II9 Yif!$b ' . N91 4!!b't t i l'~ g % gT sas a a n"--- a ONO33S/S3MONI NI All3013A a e::a g g ; a ; a RECOMMENDED RESPONSE SPECTRA DESIGN EARTHQUAKE - 6% ACCELERATION " " * ~ ~ (OBE) Pt ATE M 4.5 ( Rev i)
Attachment 2 Figure 2 J,g 'r*Q F % 1 1 .,' / .f _w - s x <s i V 4A Y <'A x / ' y + ,1 > x [j ., v A v i e,. q , ' ( (syy s, sf Vx
v ~ < N f. 't.st',N t's \ /
- j' , ,. <, / V Vs N/A V 's _s y
yn'ANys ' 's fi 4 / j ' . ' 4W s. N'( \ s r X/V./' A,'gg V % b
's N/, M 'i,N V '.' d'1,\>2( N \/?'f if / W / #3*,
/x ^' wq a E 3~'T NN , Msy w w 80i('S[v\>mram siisk l *
'X4MV'y ' ' @ ;XW
/
y' f 3 , 8$s j'n', N$h'>b~ yl'?bsYdh /$'c${
)r, ,p , O N '
/$
' \ / / /
,s / ',k[h/ / Q f />r v,
/' y ' /' ,
/
i v
.F , #N/,-
,g y
/N/
A - C s /'i >s/
\/ l{/h f.X ., G j \M
',/ W. Ms s/ \/ \ /- 2
_j o'
- 7. <
Z<s 3s, . '"
<s i , MtPj w i r r 's
,5- / /A i f g< -e2 -
3 N' 1.l '4 N.N
, -s <%
< s-
-[ f,,,. 4 4 ' g ? / Q M,srT 'N., <
' ,y, ..
' y, y'~, ,.'
l ff,p,(,%.q /,, y \ y, y g Ny ' 9" s . ,g ' y MN ys 'y/1 ' V . J/e'Cr_ / M'A N_'X 's 'sE *
. t- P e W 's F / '>AjXW -
' XSs),$ \ \4 ,
- w =m % w%I A x //s %< s'vfd?X/Wn n% /1 >s%V 68
- R1': f"@MW,g&'Xf"'qgg4 W 'sf 'gE:'
h / D w
, /, .
rh , ,,, u nw'g' ?: w.u/, :w' m' s:n ws #vw"x< :a '= ey n' a -
-os = m v as- ve p ," , O/
K,, / spa ,(/ xi s v vw/s ,,' s. ,a ss
)iA,y-s , , N ,-qg2 53 g?,m p.i n A ,' n 3 i v 3_.x v ss, . - 's _.n y-x, y es , ,s - - u o D ,, l' t/f D A'N^ R w 's ^ x' '
M/ W o"i K ' s ,' . '/ -g at~ ) 9 E (( rV g A O .'N ' / N
'v s
] -s J 'p[r ,-Ng A \fs ' ,f ' y d'V// f f 'f x\AN /~N 's#Uo' KM/ /. /'Vs T fd_'s A sf N E A%EN A\' [\ \5 eU e
=
((s \ - MeOM / M\)'/Ys ' 3' '
/ NNs
' % [ O \,/5s'N';O5 A 5'Nv't QNXK N- Q X ,i
~
EK - ,' .-
. # s
!'Q@$ W' N/ W M M N.N^3./ s'
[': %ME 8 RE 1,9,M'//gSgS'i 'K'W@M'<s O/ \ A s ys;gs /f ,, s,s . sg M hs' Nh_, s N
@'f ,N'*9 s6g ,
1N y ,', Nf/, / ', S'r s. s N g '$',/ ,Q')'s,'.(N N ,,y/,'V/,^= m 9 O <s
<N
,, i < i'
, i'? X7cA/S
[ eV ^
.V x,Xok'
'N, .-s A
() ','
's- 84
@C Z \ Ai 4
y NJ I, w~ ' /' s N N,' ' i e .. Wg '/x ' ,,17 '/
, De
<' VA('T f s / s IN* rW N' N Ps' \ j\^ IN / \ V # N' s N k r F f s\K i't \ \d[1*/P k'/ijNW Pi\ : M( \ 'V \ N Vi// / hh0M N 't' \ NEg
,Ei
~
t/ j.>MsMLN 'gTJ'J'M f /W'%NN \/}il'/X / ,/W sN' N's 's J g y E( A WW#,MN' X / '%%XWV' XI / N O 'sXMg d alv'l b r' \
,'['f%%4'U v TMMM V '
, ' N'N [
d'/ 'h@s' [$
,< / #s / 'N / s .( # \, AN 4,,'/2f ;'s m >( ,x ;p/'/ A g
/ f s gE sNj's n N'x*[*,[wa,) , k//3'd8y'N ,XV,2,Y/,/ Qf M^A / 'A'>$'p* s g-
-s ,
h a/h A/
)(y / r ,
h* s nab/vjs x f
^#
A / N / N$ f v gS %, y ' A / s/
/
W d bl'l hi'llif! lifil) f I l' l l !)ilit! b!b bil hff!!! !!!!!)I i [ t I b lb<evIf N!!if Ill[l) t I f'~ g sssa a s**"*=* a ~ 93 33 ; 2 3 3 QNO31$/s3M3NI M A113073A l RECOMMENDED RESPONSE SPECTRA l (DBE) MAXIMUM CREDIBLE EARTHQUAKE - 12% ACCELERATION ma=== = ==oa== pt_ ATtt M 4.4 ( Rev.1) l
COO E : T@
@ SilleLD BLDG, o o@
@ CONTAINMENT VESSEL '
@ REACTOR SUPPORT STRUCTURE ,A, '
@ Sl* Gilt Fuel TANK o g6@ o o
@ AUX. 8 LOG. (STESL) '., ' /, / o
@ AUX, SLOG. { CONC.) % @[ 3 o
~
@ TURSING BUILDIAIG 'k 'k '$.' , ,s' o f~
@ TURblME SUPPORT < < <
- / @
o, V DENOTES R/GIO , q ', , /
@ <, c, \
l EL EMENT / '~
" a"m N
Ho SCALE , g' nNof
,4 %
.%=".
~
@ f FOUMDATioM SPRINGS
/ '
p NOT SHOWN /- s' o l o, . ./'
/ ,
< q / o j .
\
,/ @o * ,
% // .o o o
,' , P G ': '
G> ( /~ 1 eh 2e
.. og n
~
JOHN A. BLUMi AND ASSOCIATES, ENC /NEERS PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCWAR Pl. ANT t\4ATHEMA TICAL MODEL SOUTHWEST V!EPV
Attachment 2 Figure 4 i : JOHN A. IlIIME AND ASSOCIATES, ENGINEEIS PrdAllelE IS LAN.O NUCLEAll PLAMT '
)
MATI-!EMA TICA L MODEL c NEST ELE VA T/Oh!
\
O - SEE FIGURE No. 3 POR. Cot 35 NO SCALE j ! b" 898.375' UNIT NG I / /A l
@ 889.375'~
UNIT NO. '2 j,/ i 9,9A (TYPICAL) ,, 872.0' 7,2 A ,, SG3.094' 847.079' 3e 3A 85G.813' ' 'II,Il A 9 St2.15W . ) +, +A I2,12 A
.@ S00.0' I
790.5' b @ 7G ~21 i 37 2i ,, _ , 788.579' yyg,o, @ 5,5A 13,l3A o bu _ er o 38
=:, 28 ,22 tia 755.o' @ 1ss.o' 39 2S ?'2/b 'G,G ' l7 ,17A"14,14A 736 O' 733.7s'
[ BS,3SA ~40 30 -
~g4 l1/c 'y, y, ",g,,g,',5,,5, .i
! 715.o ' -o GoG.75'- o---w. ,,31 wA
,, 26 o
210' ' N 7/I.50 1 S4, S4A 41 g,sA'jg,;qp' Ice,10 A G93.0, G9 7.5' -- % , 703.50' G n o- _ "35,354 pe%N9=em%%%%h5%u&-f I
\ w .
pe p2 po,2os J36,5GA i
.) .
. . _ , _ _ . . . . . _ _ , .}}