ML19253A347
| ML19253A347 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 08/14/1979 |
| From: | Kelly R GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| TAC-11158, NUDOCS 7908210430 | |
| Download: ML19253A347 (17) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:a a Geo g a Power FAmpany 230 Peacetree Street Post O*ce Box 4545 AtMta. Georg a 30302 Teiesnone 404 5223060 R. J. Kelly Wce Pres.dert and GenersWaaager Georgia Power Power Gevrawn , . . < , August 14, 1979 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 NRC DOCKET 50-366 OPERATING LICENSE NPF-5 EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLAST UNIT 2 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - DIFFERENTIAL BUILDING SETTLEMENT Centlemen: In response to your letter of Furch 30, 1979, which requested additional information regarding our December 1, 1978, submittal on differential building settlement, Georgia Power Company hereby submits the following information:
- 1. Attachment 1 contains revised FSAR figure 2A-16A. The revision provides for a correlation betueen benchmark numbers used in the proposed Technical Specifications and the FSAR figure.
- 2. Table 6 of Attachment 2, titled "Su= mary of Ref erence Dates and Elevation Across Structures", provides the surveyed elevation for each benchmark and the reference date used for the beginning of differential settlement calculations. Also contained in Attachment 2 is a " Summary of Differential Settlements Across Siructures" which provides tFe results of the comparison of measured to allowable differential settlement. As can be seen from the table, none of the structures are exhibi*.ing any significant differential settlement.
Attachment 3 provides the calculations used to establish the allowable differential settlement valves between benchmarks 1 & 2 and benchmarks 1 & 3 for the Reactor Building.
- 3. Item 3 of your request for additional information suggests that the proposed Technical Specifications be revised to incorporate a note which specifies when an allowable differential settlement across a structure has been superseded by a more limiting settlement criterion.
It is our view that there is no conflict between the various tables submitted. Table 3. 7. 8. 2-1 establishes limiting valves for differen-tial settlement across a single structure, based on that structure's relationship to adjacent structures. Table 3. 7. 8. 3-1 es tablishes limiting values for differential settlement between a building penetration and the soil, based on stress calculations for the limiting penetration. Table 3.7.8.4-1 establishes limiting values
\'
800 3g 790823093o g
.
- Georgia Power d Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 August 14, 1979 Page Two for penetration differential settlement between structures, based on a stress calculations for the limiting penetration. Each specifica-tion contributes without overlap to the total progrem monitoring differential settlement.
Your March 30, 1979, letter also requested Georgia Power Company to address the staff's position that a shutdown of the unit is required should an allowable differential settlement value be exceeded. We are in general agree-ment with Itum 1 of the discussion in Enclosure 2 of your March 30, 1979, letter. However, it is our view that the maximum settlement limit, beyond which physical inspection would be required, is well beyond the conservative values specified in our submittal. We also agree with discussion Item 2. Should the special report, which would be required 60 days after reaching the 75% level, not provide an acceptable explanation for the continuing dif ferential sett1 ment, we believe ample time would exist due to the slow pace of settlement activity for other measures, one of which might be a unit shutdown. However, we believe a shutdown requirement should not be called out in the Technical Specifications, because the special report called for might suggest alternative solutions which could proceed while the unit was in operation. In our view, such a requirement would unnecessarily rcstrict the op tions available to manage the unit. We believe the existence of a specification which calls for a special report when certain conditions are attained calls sufficient atten-tion by plant management to a potential problem, and that corrective action generally is feasible without requiring a unit shutdown. Very truly yours, R. J. Kelly RDB/nb Attachments xc: Ruble A. Thomas George F. Trowbridge 800 31!B
. . ATTACIDIENT 1
.
800 _
-
3pa
$$ $ $ $ 5 $ $ $ $ $$ $ 8 $$ $ 84 4 4 8 S M s N s s s -s s s s s s s s s s s s s s N g s
>
% -
e u' w ~ m e Q rs - m D 9 6 - 2 a e 9 - a m I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I O 0000 - o
-
-
CO
-
0.050 - y
-
-
WALLS TO\ W. . . _ . .. ._
.m
......
-
, _ _s _ _ _ _ - .
- -
* * * *
. .
-
--
-
,R CF
*.
......,****.**..e..*
- r 0.100 - ell 69'-0* \ - G
[g-{jy
* ..
, * .
- y -
LSTART UNIT 2 -ff-
- u. -
BASE SLAB STRUCTURE Q 63
'
WV g - COMPLETE io s' s '4' _ t- ;2 z - Ei sq
~ PS w 0.150 - L : _. m I _
-
h
-
g _ _ _ - . . _ _ _ _ _ _ h r w _ _
.
_o __o_ .)_
-
.g
" .NE SE t 3 0.200 - xz nrweier *unmrns
-
_
'
@3 l
-
-
N. E. NO. 9 =M Mo. 10 - sr.
,
' D
"
O.250 - N . W. - - - - - - - - No. 11 = W .1 - o- (
'
l ~
~
5.E............. U0- 12 " SU E S#b- -a ! _
- 5. W. - --
b" .-- -- ~~ = -
- '
li" I
-
, 0300 - #t ! l CON T ROL BUlWillG I M1END. 25 7/77 I GEORGIA POWF R COMPANY EOWIN 1. HATCil NUCLE AR PL ANT UNIT 2 FINAL SAFETV ANALYSIS REPORT SE T T LE MEN T CONiitOL DUILDING IIGURE 2,t1GA SilEET 1
.
ID*L- 68 0 as f M 5
, " ,_. . , ,, ,, .. - , . . . . . u, u, , , , .. . . . . . . . . . u. ,,. . . > . .o. ... . . . u, , , , ,, -, . . , w ,e l
_,.,,.,,.,._J __ __ l o
.......
, ,
7 __ __._ ___ _._ _ __ _ _ _ . -. __ - _ ._. - - - . . .-- -. - -- . - - . - - - A-
.
l } }
, , . . . . . ,
y _ _ _ __ __ __ ___ - _.__ __ __ _. . _ - -- _- - _. - --- - -- t
- -
- t .; ,, e
'. '
.
[~ --* hg
._____ ___. _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ - _ _ __ _ _ _ __ -_ _ . _ _ _ . - --- -- - _ -- -- - ---
l ]' eq q ___ __ _ . _ . _ _ __ -- . _ _ ._ __ _ . - _- - -
. _3, ;. 'u - 3, .
.. . ,
o oso - - -- --- --
--
'C0" *****
. I l
.. . ." I
.
_ _ . . _ . __ -. . _ - - _ - ne .
" " " " " ,~
i CD ____
~~r
__ __ _ _ . _ _ _ __ _ - _ _ . _- __ _. - _ _ _ _ _ -
._- - PD. I " ", F. CO
, g
.
, , . f *..
m , es*~ 'e - . _. . - - - - -- - -
-- - - - -
MO. <
" , I,.
-..
.
. %.m e.n c..,...w w..
e eoo *" +%v-** --- --- ~ ~ ~ - - - ' ' '~ ' ' " '
- ~ - '^ ~~ '~ ~' ~ ~ ~ **
l'O.
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
, - le
W. I _~4 ,_,,#' '.h \, % _ _ -- _- . . _ . , - _ . - - -
-- i-- - -- - -- -- -
'
'l < > - -
A _ _ _ _ \ ~ . s.Df
% !1. - V . J Q ,_ . . - __ __ - - - - - - -- -- -- - - - -
. ..{ i *w+ [~ "- * ( ~
-
x
,
, w- .
,
- _ _
' -
_.
, _-- - . . . _<
y ,d> .m u p,,-. - -- -- 2 '*~ y o% _-d ___ g
. _ _ . ._ _ _ _ _ -
- _ . . ,_,
o ,3, e _. ,
, . .
. w _
.
. t
. i t- -
- -1 ; .
_ _ _ _ _ _ . . _
'
I
'
--
.-
I
.
#
'
-
+ '. t
_ ___ ttOfNS
.. ,,
_.-f
- __. . 4 g a., . .. .-. .. ..
l'
- -- -
,
l . e, s , en - - .. ..
,
, , , e s . .s c- ..
o 700 - - - - '-- - * ' " '
,
f [ I
-d _ _ . _ < a
'
I
' *
.
_ _ _ . _ - . -.
* -- ---
gj ___ . _ _ _ 4 + 1 8 - - - - - - -
- s i ,
__ __ _ __ , . _. ._ . _. e o'm --G -
* * " "
,
__._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , l' .
.
__ _ . . . _ _ e __ _._._ om - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - *'* AMEND. 35 7/77 r..e ...<e. z, .a.e..r u.o .,. s en
, m .o.. r .e soo,s nee.< .. s.(e at w...a6n ~ c.* 'a s
- GEORGI A POWER COMPANY T,E T T LE M E N T EDWIN 1. HATCil NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 2 REACTOR DUILDING i i i i a i i a i r *
#
i i i I FINAL SAF ETY ANALYSIS REPORT
,% . . .
' ' FIGURE 2A.16A 5,y J' ('* .i I,et <- ~m. i w .-
g
,_ f, u* :
-4 f)' $^ q
- . -
.- ,
y *P4 ._ 7# a it
- 4.y t : ', s, .
w&_ .4. Y '
)l
b v~* '
;
008
,
;
Sg#'
.
<l o
. ti
.. . w I n
w k W
- w
-
e =
"
> $.w ez; 2 2 o
c d t.. <a e a < l 0 8'a -m e
,ti--
% vEB, 5e 2
-
6e4 4 e cw n o u f lti7v4 l Q m d
"? ? z a2 6 w c
2 s ee<> 05 a
.c_ n ' 's
' lm
-
-
-
s a n e- t w wz ew o e w
"1 w
+-9 d D
E 54 ES" d 3' l W d EbN U l = n2 5
,i
.
O
- i:o "
e' < w LL/2 - - c
.
'
1
; t J. i e
}
-
9L/21_ i C y C _. I ;
'
2 o 9L/ I_ L 7 .,_ T , a
.
l l) W
-
^
d - W 91/0 - . ({ Z ,
'
_sE b I ' o
.
) - I 9L/4_ , , 'm(t I
.
e; I
/
9L / h _ *l 7 4 p, H-E P ,p .U
*. fl 9L /2 - }l
. l k bl /21- *
., 1
- I SL /Di _ 3 g
.
. I SL/9_ . I
*
- -
5 SL/E_ ;f :g 3
.
*
, =
E _
-
F "" * "" m. LL/l *
,
~
, !! li !; 11
. I w hl/21_ J; i E 23EE i =
hl/Cl _ .
- i N n
dddC
-~ ~~
. I r t /9_ ; g
~
- i hL / L - l t
- I hl / l _ .
.
; g..
a ,1 l l . EL/II l l w l
.
*
.
, ew
- EL /8- D" I l
.
.
I sv wa . <
- I ot 1 .
EL/ 5~ *
- I cn ....
, ro
**
W3W3 ggp g l I 2 5 & W~
. /
. i LL/I_ l l l l 2L/21 l 1) [ { jil l l l t i i l l I iiil i IIIIII I I[
o w 8 w 8 8 o a e 8 6 6
~
o
~
d m 133 3-IN3 W371135 ,
-- _ _ _ _ _
,
/ N >=
- w 55 Y
# "
E Zj tW >g
-zw
~
$5" a.10 g L' C 8y tw e
'
!
V ^ g s Cy 4
< M w ,s 5
[ 2r '
; u m-+
i
- o (
[, 6 @SE b '_, y 1 ~Ccc -
- l-+; -
l 3;; e
\ 3 m
v 2 w 62>
<
[t 3 o LL/2 _ w w <2 g
.
9 ' u) z g gt
- <
91/Z1_ Z rs v' -e-
<
o:a lij s 0 ;i zz 9L /oi _ EE
~ 8 9t/ 8 -
3 5p 9L / 9 OC 91/ h _ , 9L / Z _ bl/ fl $L/L_
$L/E_
"
bl / l _ g ht / il_
- c' <f f
'
hl / 6_ o ,
<
c) 3 hl / L _ , ,
'
hL / $ - E ' 3 bl / E __
<
C ' ] qt f g tr. x t < 3 g - N m m n e. EL /l l_ -
=
' ' E *
,.-
W -
= =
LL/ 6- Yo l c: w p-
.
2
- - -
_. g c ' g n a e E4 / L q O'a] n
O O <3
<' @
(L/g- %E m8 3 n n n t y 5: wm3 EL/t z
- c':'<. .
4 EL/ l
- l l l g g g I IIII IIIIIiiliiii i oi l it l l 8 o o e r 9 8 o
O 8 6 6
~
6
"
o @ d 1333- 1N3W311135
ak OOOC S T E W O
&
G E H S i N N I rD A N n NIL 6 t AO 0 1 l 4 o a rU Nl 6
.A 2 wV 1 3i s :c - y$ eB t
f A 2 E nE otf 1 si onn i _A t e5 i n g J l A u t sWD c i 7 t i L_ J9 A t nM e st 5 A a t
- t r.
s t m-n JM a 1 R r-n P f6 e s te A oF R u n cO ON to ew . r M i F e e * . a J O a 2 N T I i 0 NTR U i
$ Y TPO NNE A AR i
A P L e J 7 MPt$ 7
/ O4S i
J 7 C FA Y 3 L i M 1
% REA EL D WC N i
A N OU A E PNY e M M APT, I A G TC r . ASa i F R e J OH t E. G1 a
.
D NN: I e N Wr D i E O i S e A
,
J 7
/ n E
n J 7 9 n N 1
!
N n i M H o O C e C E A e
- W M M
- N n i 3 F t
- f -
N n o c J e D s N Q e i N O e S n A i J i J 6 7
, 9 S,
, e 1 ?
M 1 E e A B t i M a
!
, E 1
1 U SF 3S
! 1
- a f T F
i J K = " = = R
-
D A f 5678
- -
f i
- i N . . .
l C 1. t 0 !
?
4, IOO01 F ;f 1 e 5 F I I i A J 5 7 e J 9 1 i M e A r M i F i _ - ~ : . - J e . e e e e e e , e 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 g 1 9 s _ 8 7 5 4 3 y 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 , 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 , 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 h{ 5 > > w
-
e
- ATTACHMENT 2 l
.
800 3
-
. DIFFERENTIAL RATIO OF BETWEEN SETTLEMENT MEASURED 3 ENC 11 MARK IN FEET TO ALLOWABLE, STRUCTURE NOS. ALLOWABLE MEASURED % Reactor 1 and 2 0.033 0.000 0 Building 3 and 4 0.034 0.006 18 Unit No. 2 1 and 3 0.139 0.006 4 2 and 4 0.134 0.000 0 Radwaste 5 and 6 0.154 0.019 12 Building 7 and 8 0.160 0.017 11 Unit No. 2 5 and 7 0.132 0.00^ 2 6 and 8 0.080 0.00u 0 Control 9 and 10 0.083 0.005 6 Building 11 and 12 0.079 0.012 15 9 and 11 0.251 0.015 6 10 and 12 0.288 0.008 3 Turbine 13 and 14 0.22'4 0.004 i Building 15 and 16 0.205 0.005 2 Unit No. 2 13 and 15 , 0.247 0.005 2 14 and 16 0.281 0.006 2 Diesel 17 and 18 0.424 0.009 2 Generator 19 and 20 0.394 0.022 6 17 and 19 0.206 0.017 8 18 and 20 0.206 0.004 2 Main Steck 21 and 22 . 0.037 0.007 19 21 and 23 0.046 0.002 4 22 and 23 0.042 0.005 12 Intake 24 and 25 0.208 0.001 0 Structure 26 and 27 0.208 0.002 1 24 and 26 0.054 0.000 0 25 and 27 0.104 0.003 3 SDDIARY OF DIFFERENTIAL SETTLEMENTS ACROSS STRUCTURES 2 15'6
.
) () .
IlENCll El.EVATION, Ill.NCl! El.EVATION, S1RUCTURE DATE MARK FEET STRUCTURE DATE MARK FECT Reactor 5-76 1 129.814 Diesel 1-75 17 131.933 nu i ld i ng 5-76 2 129.877 ,)) t,enerator 1-75 18 131.643 buit ..o. 2 5-76 3 129.918 nu i ld i ng 1-75 19 131.017 43) j) 5-76 4 129.864 1-75 20 13!.328
!:a d wa s t e 10-75 5 132.266 Main Stack 10-74 21 119.978 lin i I d i ng 10-15 6 132.240 19-74 22 114.972 Unit No. 2 10-75 7 112.268 10-74 23 119.986 16-75 8 132.309 Intake 10-74 24 note (2)
Control 1-75 9 111.886 Structure 10-74 25 Bu i til i ng 1-75 10 11,1.842 10-74 26 1-75 11 111.923 10-74 27 1-75 12 111.920 Reactor 5-76 28 129.772 3 Turbine 5-76 13 129.926 ;)) llu l ld i ng 5-76 29 129.718 g) Building 5-76 14 12 9 . 'J 50 y) I;.. i t No. 1 5-76 30 129.884 Unit No. 2 5-76 15 129.960 g) 5-76 31 129.744 5-76 lb 129.911 Tu rl> i re 1-75 NE 111.837 Huild lug 1-75 SE I11.842 Unit No. 1 1-75 NW 111.913 1-75 SW 111.922 CD C O IO. t es: (1) Ref erence elevat tens adj usted to account for benchmark elterations (2) Elevations on Intake Structure not recorded a t end of const ruction u TABLE 6:
SUMMARY
OF REFERENCE DATES AND El.EVATIONS ACROSS STRUCTIIRES
'
b i
ATTACHMENT 3
.
800 39
. CON'UTATIONS FOR ALLOWABLE DIFFERENTIAL SETTi.E 'E'.T IN TABLE J . / . o . /- t The computational method used for determining the allowable settlement prottle slope across structures is illustrated in Figures 2 and 3. The Reactor Buildin:; Unit 2 and the Radwaste Building Unit 2 are used for illustration purposes, but the pro-cedure applies to any two adjacent buildings in the. powerblock. Once the allowable slope is determined, the allowable differential settlement may be determined using the known distance between benchmarks inside the building. The benchmark locations for the buildings which cc-prise the powerblock are she'.n in ri2"rc 1. Examole 1 - Reactor Building Unit 2 with Reactor Building Unit 1 as the adjacent
- building.
h = 205.33 ft. (Reactor Building height) 51+S2= 1.44 in. (absolute sum of max. seismic movements LO.B.E./at the top of the buildings) d = 3 - (Si + E2) = 3 - 1.44 = 0.78 in. 2 2 0.78 b"d~ h " 205.33 x 12
= 0.00032 radians L12 = distance between benchmarks 1 and 2 = 104.45 ft.
allowable diffenntial settlement = (6)L12
=
0.00032 (104.45)
= 0.033 ft.
This is the value which appears in Table 3.7.8.2-1 between benchnarks 1 and 2. Examole 2 - Reactor Building Unit 2 with the Control Building as the adjacent building, h = 90.33 ft. (bottom of Reactor Building to highest elevation where the 3" gap remains) _ S1+S2 = 0.18 in. (absolute sum of max. seismic movements [0.B.E./_ at the highest elevation where the 3" gap remains) d= 3 - (Si+S) 2
=
3 - 0.18
= 1.41 in .
d 1.41 O = g = 90.33 x 12 = 0.0013 radians
.-
L13 = distance between benchmarks 1 and 3 = 106.76 ft. 800 3N P
*
- 2-Computations for Allowable Dif ferential Settlement, Cont.
allowable differential settlement = ( 6 ) L13
= 0.0013 (106.76)
= 0.139 ft.
This is the value which appears in Table 3.7.8.2-1 between benchmarks 1 and 3.
.
800 349
r -
.
-_-
en
<
<@a N a
@4 LEGEND FI h
'
SE DENCHMARK
..
..
. . . . . .
. . . . - -
. .
.
.
g g 29 2 PE NE TR ATION -- 28 q GMJ SE SE
< g NE ,_
--
NE B c.n Q s- RE ACTOR "1 REACTOR
- 2 2 0 .-
cn tE I I b 8; R ADWASTE " 2 '[I'A 2
@3 3tg Svg# "
7 [OI Nw _ sw @3Nw _ . .. . . . . . . . . (p NW. $.. $.
$ Ne 9
se 10 Ne 3 14O !; 7y e S' 2 ;$ 4 TURBINE
- l CONTROL T U.R BI N E *2
~ :! -i 9 ii.: .I*
z 11 Z C i h 2 Nw 16 gsw y ao rn nw a ? @sw .
-) ,
a 5 m 7 O OF UNIT POWERBLOCK 'A I f FIGURE 1: LAYOUT N O. 2 O astu j M _ R O SO 100 FT h Y%f_Wk.u < - N _
. . . 3 . 6 tUrtOIM Ft./'<W Cst Vviva r ~nl 4 I na us4an. ocvasvin GENERAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
- - -
.
'
EL.2 8 0*- O " REACTOR BUILDING U N IT 2 _ _- 13' G A P
-
E L.1 e O'- O' l Z - R ADWAST E BUI LDI N G
'
UNIT 2
'
E L 12 9'- O' E L. 9 6'- O'
.
E L. 7 5'- O' FIGUR E 2.: UNIT 2 REACTOR AND R ADWASTE BUILDINGS PARTI AL ELEVATION LOOKING WEST
..
BECHTEL ASSCCIAWS JCG 6511 EDWIN 1. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT No. 2 SCUTHERN 2.IVl3, lNC. l
!
_ 1 800 341 v
.-
_ _ __ GEORGIA POWER COMPANY ATLANTA, GEORGI A GENER AL FNCINFFRONG OEP A prTMrkfT n 3*
-
=
R EAC TOR BUILDI N G UNIT 2 S3 Sp
*
'd g- 93 , _ _
[ l ~~ ~ ~ ']6
\ \
-
\ R ADWASTE BUI L DI N G g U N IT 2
}
\
n 4~e
\
\
- t \
t e 1
~~
,
g _ _ _ _ _ -
/
.
ALLOWABLE SLOPE O= (FO R SMALL A liG LE S ) AND d = 1+ 2} 2 WH ERE: 8 = ALLOWA BL E SLOPE OF THE BUILDI N G d - ALLOWABLE HO RIZ ON TAL CO MPO N E N T OF TILT TOWARDS AN ADJ ACE NT , BUILDING h = H EIGHT OF BUI L DI NG Ug = OBE DE FLE CTION OF BUILDI NG AT TO P S 2= OBE DE.e LECTIO N OF ADJ ACENT BU I LDI N G AT SAM E E LE V AT IO N
'
FIGURE 3: ALI.OWABLE SETTLEMENT PROFILE SLOPE C A LC UL ATION PROCEDURE BECHTEL ASSOC 1ATES JCB 6511 EDWIN 1. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT LNIT No. 2
'
$OUTHERN SERVICES, tNC. g[
800 335}}