ML20154E606

Summary of 880510 Meeting W/Util in Rockville,Md Re Seismic Margin Analysis.Util Indicated That Soil Structure Is Critical Path Item on Schedule.List of Attendees & Viewgraphs Encl

ML20154E606
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	05/13/1988
From:	Hopkins J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
REF-GTECI-A-46, REF-GTECI-SC, TASK-A-46, TASK-OR GL-87-02, GL-87-2, NUDOCS 8805200264
Download: ML20154E606 (103)

Text

_-__ _

I

, May 13 1988 Docket tio.: 50-321 LICEftSEE: Georgia Power Company FACILITIES: Hatch Unit 1

SUBJECT:

SUfTARY OF MEETING HELD MAY 10 1988, TO DISCUSS HATCH 1 SEISMIC MARG!fl AfiALYSIS On May 10, 1988, the ftRC staff net with representatives of the Georgia c Power Company at Rockville, Maryland to discuss the seismic margin analysis \

for Hatch 1. Attendees are listed in Enclosure 1. Enclosure 2 is a copy of the view-graphs used by D. Crowe, GPC and J. Branum, GPC. Enclosure 3 is a copy of the view-graphs used by 1. Idriss, Woodward-Clyde Consultants.

Enclosure 4 is a copy of the view-graphs used by J. Johnson, EQE, Inc.

GPC indicated that soil structure interaction is the critical path item on (

the schedule. The proposed schedule is also subject to change due to the walkdown in containment during the Hatch I refueling outage. The NRC staff stressed that they needed to be kept inforr:ed regarding which sections of the seismic targin analysis would be used to respond to Generic Letter 87-02, "Verification of Seismic Adequancy of f;echanical and Electrical Equipment in Operating Reactors (USI A-46)."

(

S Jon B. Hopkins, Project Manager Project Directorate 11-3 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II

Enclosures:

As stated i

DISTRIBUTION Docket file itRC PDR Local PDR PDII-3 Reading D. Matthews Pt. Rood L. Crocker OGC-WF E. Jordan J. Partlow J. Hopkins D. Guzy G. Bagchi L. Reiter N. Anderson H. Ashar D. Jeng L. Phillips C. Tan J. Philips N. Chokshi A. ifurphy

( -P. Devis 4 -C. Castro P Uhiten - HATCH PLANT FILE y ACRS (10)

,4 DI I -3 f/ JHopkins 05/r3/88 8805000264 000513 DR ADOCK 050 1

k i

d. l' Enclosure 1 ATTENDEES MAY 10, 1988 HATCH I NRC Southern Company Services J. Hopkins D. Moore D. Ifatthews K. Wooten D. Guzy G. Bagchi L. Reiter EPRI N. Anderson H. Ashar R. Kassawara D. Jeng L. Phillips C. Tan Member of Public J. Chen P. Chen A. Wyche - Serch/Bechtel J. Philip N. Chokshi A. Nurphy P. Davis-Consultant, PRD G. Castro-Consultant, GE!

R. Whitman-Consultant, MIT G.fPp D. Crowe J. Branum J. Heidt K. Whitt R. Kennedy-Consultant, Structual Mechanics Consulting I. Idriss-Consultant, Woodward-Clyde J. Johnson-Consultant, EQE

ENCLOSURE 2 ,

s

-O 3:lESEN X DN - O ~~- E NUC_ EAR :lEGU_A- ORY COV V SS ON 3 _AN- - A- C- SE SV C 3 ROG RAv

GEORGIA POWER COMPANY -

i l

1 MAY 10,1988

. s AGENDA PLANT HATCH SEISMIC PROGRAM OVERVIEW f NRC HEADQUARTERS ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND l

MAY 10, 1988 i

i INTRODUC110N DON CROWE

! - INTRODUCE PEOPLE PURPOSE OF MEEllNG INTRODUCTION NRC i PROGRAM OVERVIEW JEFF BRANUM PROJEC1 TEAM SELECT 10N JEFF BRANUM  !

SCHEDULE JEFF BRANUM TECHNICAL ACHIEVEMENIS DON MOORE COMBINING SEISMIC MARGINS AND USI A-Li6 DON MOORE l

AN11CIPATED RESULTS DON CROWE I NRC COMMUNICATIONS DON CROWE NRC COMMENTS NRC

SUMMARY

DON CROWE l

l 0687N I

_ S-~ Or A-~~~E N JE ES :lE 3;lESE N- LN G

! GEOEA 30WE l COV DANY DON CROWE NUCLEAR SAFETY MANAGER, GPC JEFF BRANUM PROJECT MANAGER, GPC JIM HElDT HATCH LICENSING MANAGER, GPC XERMIT WHITT NUCLEAR GENERATION ENG, GPC, DON MOORE TECHNICAL DIRECTOR, SCS KEITH WOOTEN PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR, SCS BOB KENNECP/ STRUCTURAL MECHANICS CONSULTING ED IDRISS WOOCMARD-CLYDE CONSULTING l JIM JOHNSON EGE J

i l -

1, l

1

]

l 1

E

3 _A\~~ - A-~C- SE SV C DIX 3;lAV I

l l

h 3  ; POSE Or V EE- LNG l 1

l s

3 _AN-~ - A- C- SE S V C 3 ROG RAv DURDOSE Or VEE- : NG

• PRESENT AN OVERVIEW OF THE HATCH i SEISMIC PROGRAM  !

• PRESENT GEORGIA POWER's METHODOLOGY FOR COMPLETING THE SEISMIC PROGRAM )

l

• PRESENT PROJECT TEAM AND SCHEDULE e PRESENT THE RESULTS OF ACTIVITIES ACCOMPLISHED TO DATE

• EXPECTED PROGRAM RESULTS

• ESTABLISH NRC INTERFACES i

i l

l 4

~~

3 _A\ - A~~C- SE. Sv C J ROG RAv l

l l

1 l

l OVER\/ EW Or 3;OGRAv '

l 1

5 I

l l

l

_-. D

- A-~C- SE Sv C 3 ROG RA v

~~

3 _A\

\ J S- RY SELSV C SS ES

• USl A-45, SEISMIC QUALIFICATION OF EQUIPMENT (GENERIC LETTER 87-02)

• EASTERN SEISMICITY e EXTERNAL EVENTS SEISMIC e USI A-40 (SEISMIC DESIGN OF TANKS)

• USI A-17 (SEISMIC SWTEMS INTERACTION ONLY)

, OJ- S- AN J \G SELSV C ~~OD'CS

~~

K3 _A\ -K C-4

• USl A-46, VERIFICATION OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT IN OPERATING REACTORS (G. L. 87-02)

I

• FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA-PEAK BROADENING i

e SOIL DYNAMIC PROPERTIES l

i

• CABLE TRAY SUPPORT LOAD ACCOUNTABILITY

• PVRC DAMPlNG t

4

• REACTOR BUILDING ROOF STRUCTURE l

j l

4 I

)

i 1

3 _A\~~ -K C- SE;SV C 3;OG;lAv OBu EC-- VE

• TO IMPLEMENT THE EPRI SEISMIC MARGINS PROGRAM ALONG WITH THE TECHNICAL RESOLUTION TO GENERIC LETTER 87-02 AND USI A-46 e TO RESOLVE OUTSTANDING SEISMIC TOPICS FOR PLANT HATCH BY:

1. DEMONSTRATING A SIGNIFICANT SEISMIC MARGIN AT AN EARTHQUAKE LEVEL HIGHER THAN THE DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE (DBE)

2. IDENTIFYING ANY ' WEAKER LINK' COMPONENTS WHICH REDUCE THE HCLPF VALUE OF THE PLANT e USE RESULTS OF PLANT HATCH SEISMIC PROGRAM TO ADDRESS INDUSTRY ISSUES

1 l

l J

3 _AN-~ -

A- C- S SV C 3 RJG lAV i

i I

l 1

l i

j

--- -. ==s. -

m M MueIIS RERES i

l l

l t

! I l

i l

4 i

l J

i l

1

'I i

DREL EC~~ ~~EAV J

l

• GPC CORPORATE

- HATCH ENGINEERING AND PRCklECTS

- NUCLEAR SAFETY AND LICENSING

• ARCHITECT ENGINEER

- SOUTHERN COMPANY SERVICES, INC

- BECHTEL EASTERN POWER COMPANY e INDUSTRY ORGANIZATIONS

- ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE

! - SEISMIC QUALIFICATION UTILITY GROUP e CONSULTANTS

- DR. BOB KENNECN STRUCTURAL MECHANICS CONSULTING l l GENERAL CONSULTANT)

- DR. JIM JOHNSON EGE, INC j (SOIL-STRUCTURE INTERACTIOb4

- DR. ED IDRISS 4

NRD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS (SOIL EVALUATIONS)

- MR. DAVE BUTTERMER AND DR. DENNIS BLEY  !

PICKARD, LOWE AND GARRICK, INC  !

(SGTEMS CONSULTANTS) 1 i

l

,-Gn->- a >a a --3 - -,w m - a a - w I

I i

l l

i l

1 V

V 3 -

m.i i D-'

l i

l l

I t

4 l

l l

4 Pammuu m m

,- v-- ,

I I

I 1

i 3 _ ANT -ATCH SE SN11C P OGRAN SCHE ULE I i r i

l SELECT SEISMIC MARGIN COM3LETE i EARTHOUAKE -  !

! SELECT SEISMIC FEVIEW TEAM COMPLETE i SOIL EMLUATIONS COMPLETE I

SYSTEMS WOFK BEGIN 2/88 j COM'LETE 10/88 i SOR_-STRUCTURE BEGIN 4/88 i

! NTERACTION COMPLETE 7/88 1  :

) PFE-SCSEENING ACTIVITIES BEGIN 2/88  ;

SEISMIC CARABILnY PALKDCHN 10/88 m i SEISMIC MAFEN ANT BEGIN 11/88 COM'LETE 4/89 m MF FINAL FEPORT TO EPRI 6/89 m i

ISSUE FINAL FEPORT TO E 7/89 m

} SER M Fn BY E 10/89 m i

a SUBJECT TO M_ ANT HATCH OUTAGE SCFEDULE

\ .

4

l l

l 1

l 3 A\~~ -A- C- SEsv C 3ROGRAV l l

1 t

~~ EC- N CA_ AC- EV E V E \ ~~S l

I

..___m -.. , -.,._r,. .,_,. ~,. - - - . . ,- ,-..,. _ _ _ -- . ,

3 _AN-~ - A- C- SE SV C 3RCGRAV

~~ EC- N .:CA_ AC- EVEV EN- S

• SELECTION OF SEISMIC MARGIN EARTHQUAKE i e SELECTION OF SEISMIC REVIEW TEAM

= SOIL PROFILES WITH VARIABILITY

• SEISMIC MARGIN ASSESSMENT OF SOILS

- SOIL LIQUEFACTION

- SLOPE STABILITY

= HAVE BEGUN DEVELOPMENT OF THE LIST OF SAFE SHUTDOWN EQUIPMENT AND RELAYS

• PREPARATIONS ARE COMPLETE TO START THE SSi ANAL'ySIS

• HAVE BEGUN PRE-SCREENING OF CIVIL STRUCTURES, EQUIPMENT, AND SUBSYSTEMS l

• SRT MEMBERS HAVE COMPLETED SQUG TRAINING CLASS .

l

3 _ AN~~ - A- C- SELSV :C 3ROGRAV COv3:\:\G SE SV:C VARG NS AN J GEN ERLC _E-~~~ER 87-02 ~~

rOR 3 A \ - A - C _ \ ;- :.

4

• -,,-gy - - -- p g,, - - . - . , . - - , . , _ - - , - _,_.w...-- ,7 .,, , . , ,, , ,,,. ,,pq~y,. ,., ,qgp,.,, %.y,w.,,,.,,9,p% ,w,,,yp.w3 yom-.-,,,%, ..pg,g-,7.,-..m.

l . ,

3 _AN~~ - A~~C- SELSV C 3;OGRAV l 3 90SE Or G_ 87-02 AN J SVA

• GL 87-02: EVALUATE THE SEISMIC ADEQUACY OF EQUIPMENT NEEDED FOR SAFE SHUTDOWN FOLLCNING A SAFE SHUTDOWN EARTHQUAKE (SSE) e SMA: DETERMINE MARGIN OVEFl THE SSE WHICH WILL ASSURE PLANT SAFETY

. AND DETERMINE ANY ' WEAKER LINKS' l WHICH MIGHT LIMIT THE PLANT SHUTDOWN CARACITY TO SAFELY WITHSTAND A SEISMIC EVENT LARGER THAN THE SSE

MAJOR ACTIVITIES FOR RESOLUTION OF GENERIC LETTER 87-02 PLANT HATCH UNIT i e SELECTION OF SEISMIC REVIEW TEAM e SYSTEMS WORK e SCREENING VERIFICATION AND MLKDOWN

• OUTLIER IDENTIFICATION AND RESOLUTION

• DOCUMENTATION ALL ACTIVITIES TO FOLLOW THE LATEST REVISION OF SQUG GIP's

~~

v Au OR AC-~ V ES =OR SE Sv :C VARG NS ASSESSV EN-~

- A- C - U N L- :

-~

7 _A N

• SELECTION OF SME LEVEL

• SELECTION OF THE SEISMIC REVIEW TEAM *

• SYSTEMS WORK *

• DEVELOPMENT OF NEW FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA

= PRE-WoLKDOWN *

• PRE-SCREENING BEFORE WoLKDOWN *

• SEISMIC CAPABILITY W6LKDOWN *

• SEISMIC MARGINS ASSESSMENT WORK *

• DOCUMENTATION

• REPORT j

ALL ACTIVITIES FOLLOW EPRI METHODOLOGY

• ACTIVITIES COMBINED WITH GL 87-02

i BASIC D FERENCES BETWEEN SEISVC l MAFGIlsS AND G. L. 87-02 l 87-02 N ARGIslS.

ASSUME NO LOCA, SLBA, ASSUME SMALL LOCA l OR HELB l EVALUATE USING SSE SPECTRA EVALUATE USING SMA SPECTRA PERFORM 100% WM KDOWN OF PERFORM SAMPLE WoLKDCAN, . _F RELAYS, CABLE TRAYS, AND RELAYS, CABLE TRAYS, ANC j EQUIPMENT ANCHOREE EQUIPMENT ANCHORAGE DO NOT CONSIDER FLOODING CONSIDER FLOODING

! CONSIDER EQUIPMENT ONLY INCLUDES CIVIL STRUCTURES, i SUBSTRUCTURES, AND SOIL j

i l PLANT HATCH WILL MEET REQUIREMENTS FOR BOTH PROGRAMS 1

i

& s RESO_ ~~'ON Or . NL-~:. G_ 87-02 AS DAR-~ Or ~~-E SV A 3;OG;;Av e COMPLETE SAFE SHUTDOWN EQUIPMENT VERIFICATION e COMPLETE RELAY EVALUATION TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE BASED ON STATUS OF RELAY GERS f

e DEFER CABLE TRAY SUPPORT EVALUATION PENDING RECEPT OF SER ON SQUG PROCEDURE y __ ,.e-.. - ,--, .,y---- -,------,-....w,-c_ ,._.mcym,___.,

e .

l 3 _AN-~ -

A- C- SE SV C 3REGRAV

. N :- 2 l

• RESOLUTION T PLANT HATCH UNIT 2 SEISMIC TOPICS WILL BE BASED ON RESULTS T UNIT i ACTIVITIES l

l 1

3 AN-~ _ - A- C- SE SV: C 3ROGRAv

~~

RES _- S A\ C A- E J l

---

,--,-----_._,,__,,,._m-,..,,,.m., -

-,-,. . - , - - - ---. ..-y... .e-,-.-,rw.--.w.wvw,-y-,-,,---.., , ~ , - - - - - - - - - -w-,---

p AN- A- C- SE Sv'C 3;OG;lAV OVE; A_ _ RESU _- S AN-~ C 3A- E J

• RESOLVE SEISMIC TOPICS AT PLANT HATCH

• RECEIVE SER OR OTHER DOCUMENT INDICATING NRC CONCURRENCE THAT PLANT HATCH SEISMIC !SSUES ARE RESOLVED e SHOW THAT STRUCTURES AND COMPONENTS IN A PREFERRED SHUTDOWN PATH HAVE SEISMIC CAPABILITY MARGINS SUBSTANTIALLY ABOVE THE DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE

• IDENTIFY ' WEAKER LINK' COMPONENTS HAVING LOWEST 'HIGH CONFIDENCE OF LOW PROBABILITY OF FAILURE' 0-ICLPF)

• DETERMINE DESIRABILITY OF MODIFICATIONS TO IMPROVE HCLPF OF ' WEAKER LINKS'

-___-------~---e.., _.. . . .we,%.w4- -.- ,ww-ms, _ +--,,,w-r--+,wwwevym--v.

3 _AN-~ - A- C- SE SV C 3;OG; Av

~~'

lESU _~~S AN C DA-~ E J e SEISMIC TOPICS AT PLANT HATCFt

- GENERIC LETTER 87-02 / USl A-46

- FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA PEAK BROADENING ISSUE

- OfNAMIC SOIL PROPERTIES

- CABLE TRAY SUPPORTS l

- PVRC DAMPlNG

- REACTOR BUILDING ROOF STRUCTURE

, ,,, - ,y, ,_. _ , , , ,,. g, ,,,y9,__

3 _AN-~ - A- C- SE:SV: C3 OG:lAv -~'

lESU _- S A N C DA- E J e INDUSTRY SEISMIC ISSUES:

USI A-40 (SEISMIC DESIGN OF TANKS)

USl A-17 SEISMIC SYSTEMS INTERACTION ONLY EASTERN SEISMICITY EXTERNAL EVENTS - SEISMIC e FUTURE SEISMIC ISSURES 1

,- -,, ., .------.----.w--- - - - , . - _ , , m-- - , ~ .--w-,,. - , . , _ - . , . . . , _ ,-.,,---,,,------,-.--.--m-we,----,--, ye,+,. .-.-

1 3 _A\- -K C- SESV C 3ROGRAV

\ RC COV VL \ICA DNS

N RC CE)V W N:CA~~'DNS WHAT GROUP WITHIN NRC DOES GPC COMMUNICATE WITH?

e FOR GPC SEISMIC PROGRAM e FOR SEISMIC MARGINS PROGRAM PROPOSE MILESTONE MEETINGS FOR USl A-46 AND SMA BE COMBINED NRC OVERVIEW.

• GPC SEISMIC PROGRAM

- TYPE OF OVERVIEW

- ORGANIZATION PERFORMING REVIEW e SEISMIC MARGINS

- TYPE OF OVERVIEW i

! - ORGANIZATION PERFORMING CNERVIEW e SCHEDULE OR PLAN FOR OVERVIEW ACTIVITIES i  !

4 i

I

l l

3 _A\- .A- C- SELSVLC 3ROGRAV Sm VVARY l

l

l S VVARY l

• PLANT HATCH SEISMIC PROGRAM

- RESOLVE SEISMIC TOPICS AT PLANT HATCH

- RESOLVE APPROPRIATE PRESENT AND FUTURE SEISMIC JSSUES

• NRC PARTICIPATION

- WORK WITH GPC IN IMPLEMENTATION OF PROGRAM

- PRJVIDE SER REFLECTING WORK PERFORMEO IN PLANT HATCH SEISMIC PROGRAM l

DRESE\ X O\ - O ~~-E

\UC_EA;l ;;EGU_A- O;Y COV v'SSLO\

3 _AN-~ - A- C- SE SV C 3;OGRAv GEORGIA PCWER COMPANY MAY 10,1988

s AGENDA EPRl/NRC SEISMIC MARGINS MEE11NG NRC HEADQUARTERS ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND MAY 10, 1988 OPENING REMARKS D. M. CROWE BACKGROUND R. P. KASSAWARA PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF MEETING R. P. KASSAWARA PROJECT TASK DESCRIPTIONS D. P. MOORE PROJECT SCHEDULE K. D. WOOTEN DISCUSSION OF PROJECT /NRC INTERFACES R. P. KASSAWARA STATUS OF PROJECT EFFORTS TO DATE:

SELECTION OF SEISMIC MARGIN EARTHQUAKE I. M. IDRISS S0lt LIQUEFACTION 1. M. IDRISS  !

SLOPE STABILITY I. M. IDRISS S0ll PROFILES 1. M. IDRISS S0IL STRUCTURE INTERACTION J. J. JOHNSON GENERATION OF IN-STRUCTURE SPECTRA J. J. JOHNSON DISCUSSION OF ACTION ITEMS.AND NEX1 INTERFACE D. M. CROWE 0687N i

i

E3R:/\ RC l SELSV C VARG:\ ASSESSVEN-~  !

t i

l BACKGRCL \ J l

0

,,c--y--_ _ . - , .- , , . __ _ . ,. , . - _ _ _ , _ .__,,_,,,-,-_,-_._e,m..,_y_____., ,. ., , ,, __ ~ , .., ,_,.,,__,,..._. ..,m_ , - _,s

EPRI-NRC Seismic Margins l Interactions 1 Methods NRC review of methods Review Panel Merging of different approaches Success path vs. fault tree / cut sets CDFM vs. fragility l Basic agreement on success path /CDFM Plant vulnerabilities -- severe accident policy 1

NRC Seismic Design Margins Working Group endorsement of methodology BWR Review Programs merge EPRI does plant evaluation NRC reviews, does substantiating research l Schedule, Methods document to NRC April 87 Review completed June 87 BWR Review Starts Jan.88 NRC Kickoff Meeting May 88 Complete Mid 89

Research Efforts on Seismic Margin NRC SOUG Panel SSRAP A-46 v i Ruggedness Screening & EPRI Guidelines Project v

Methodology Methodology NRC  % Procedures Fault Trees Review Success Path Fragility Panel CDFM n v NRC Maine Yankee Catawba Peer -> Man gin Margin Review Assessment Assessment V

V NRC WG SER Review and ,

Endorsement I of Methods l V

l l

NRC/EPRI Programs Merge NRC Peer Review Plant Hatch Review

OUTLIERS NEEDING UPGRADE OR JUSTIFICATION Maine Yankee Catawba Lead Antimony Several Seismic Interactions Batteries Diesel Generator Day Pipe Support Thermal Failures Tanks i

l

' Station Service Valve / Adjacent Pipe Transformers Supports Block Wall Slack in Armor Cable to Valve Chillers Diesel Room Battery Racks i i

1

. .i

l l

E3R:/\ RC SE SV C VARG \ ASSESSV E\~~

3 m RDOSE A\ J 03c EC-~ VES Or V EE~~ NG i

1 i

Meeting Objectives Convey Project Schedules, time constraints Discussion of Interfaces Summarize Project Efforts to Date Results

- Status

I ED L/\RC SE SV C vA;G:N ASSESSN E\~~

3;CU EC-~ ~~AS< DESC RL 3- DN l 1

I

9 s 1

I v AJOR AC-~ V ~~L ES =CR  !

S-~ Sv' C v ARG N S ASSESSV E N-~

-~ '-

3 _A N - A- C - U N  :.

• SELECTION OF SME LEVEL

• SELECTION OF THE SEISMIC REVIEW TEAM e SYSTEMS WORK

• DEVELOPMENT OF NEW FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA

• PRE-MLKDOWN

• PRE-SCREENING BEFORE WoLKDOWN

• SEISMIC CAPABILITY WoLKDOWN  :

1

• SEISMIC MARGINS ASSESSMENT WORK  ;

• DOCUMENTATION

• REPORT ALL ACTMTIES FOLLOW EPRI METHODOLOGY

I j

SE_EC-~ ON Or Sv r

- _ rvr

• PGA 0.3g

• FOURTH ALTERNATIVE OF THE SMA ,

l METHODOLOGY .

I e

l l

t

.n,, .-..._,,,n .-.,n. . ,.,, .- -.,-~.. --.,

. . . , . , , , - - - - - . - - - - , , , - --..--,----.--,,----._,_._.,-__,_,,,.,..-_,,,.,en

~~ ~ ~

S E _ E C~~ O N O -E

~

S E S V C R EV EW EAV TEAM #1 TEAM #2 DON MOORE PHILLIP GARRETT SRT KEITH WOOTEN E>;;L GOFORTH MEMBERS ,

BOB KENNEDY

• BOB KENNEDY

• SUPPORT SYSTEM ENGINEER SYSTEM ENGINEER >PERSONNEL

, _ PLANT OPERATIONS _

PERSONNEL

• BOB KENNEDY'S RESPONSIBILITIES:

- ASSURE THE SCREENING IS FOLLOWING THE EPRI METHODOLOGY

- ASS!." ON BOTH WALKDOWN TEAMS

SYS- EVS WC):K e IDENTIFY PREFERRED SUCCESS PATH AND ONE ALTERNATE PATH TO BRING THE PLANT TO SAFE SHUTDOWN AND MAINTAIN THAT CONDITION FOR 72 HOURS

• LEAD SWTEMS ENGINEERS:

FLUID-MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL TOM BARR RON BAILEY l

• ROLE OF PICKARD, LOWE AND GARRICK: l

- REVIEW SUCCESS PATH LOGIC DIAGRAMS

- REVIEW COMPONENT LIST FOR REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM

- REVIEW RELAY LIST AND RELAY EVALUATION FOR REPRESENTATIVE SWTEM

- PROVIDE ASSURANCE FOR:

• TECHNICAL ACCURACY e ADHERENCE TO EPRI METHODOLOGY l

• CONS!STENCY WITH CATAWBA SMA l

l 1

JEVE_O3V EN~~ Or N EW

= OOR RES3ONSE SDEC- RA l

1 ORIGINAL UNIT i SEISMIC ANALWIS IS VERY CONSERVATIVE, THEREFORE, SCALING PROCEDURES ARE NOT APPROPRIATE l e NEW FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA WILL BE DEVELOPED REQUIRING NEW SOIL-STRUCTURE INTERACTION ANALWIS BSl;

• SSI ANALWIS WILL INCLUDE:

- ENHANCED BUILDING MODELS

- STRAIN-COMPATIBLE SOIL PROFILES

• SSI ANALWIS TG BE PERFORMED BY EQE, INC.

I i

i l

l 3 RE-WA_.< JONN l 1

l l

l

• PURPOSE IS TO ORGANIZE FOR THE i SEISMIC CAPABILITY MLKDOWN l

• PRE-MLKDOWN INCLUDES:

- LOCATING EQUIPMENT IN THE PLANT l

- IDENTIFYING ANY AUXILARY EQUIPMENT MOUNTED SEPARATELY .

- EVALUATING RADIATION LEVELS, l LOGISTICS, SPECIAL REQUIRMENTS i NEEDED FOR INSPECTIONS, ETC.

1 l

. . , . . _ _ - _ - . , , , , _ , . . _ - , _ .- , ,____ _ ,__,,_,, ..,..__._.__m, ,,, -w.... . -,-m.- v. - - . , - . - -., . -

I i

l 3RE-SCREENLNG 3R:OR ~~O WA_.CCWN

• REVIEW OF PLANT HATCH SEISMIC DESIGN DOCUMENTS

• PREPARE

SUMMARY

REPORT OF PLANT

. HATCH SEISMIC DESIGN BASIS

• OBTAIN DATA NEEDED TO SCREEN OUT CIVIL STUCTURES, SUBSYSTEMS, AND

EQUIPMENT

• PRE-SCREEN CIVIL STRUCTURES,

. SUBSYSTEMS, AND EQUIPMENT USING TABLES 2-3 AND 2-4 OF THE EPRI METHODOLOGY

• ORGANIZE INFORMATION ON EACH ITEM i OF EQUIPMENT FOR THE SEISMIC CAPABILITY WALKDOWN i

I i

i J . - _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . . _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _

S SV C CADA3L_L~~Y WA_COWN

• TWO SRT's FOR APPROXIMATELY TWO WEEKS

• 100% ' WALK-BY' OF ALL ACCESSIBLE EQUIPMENT e INSPECTION OF SUBSYSTEMS ON A SAMPLING BASIS

• ANCHORAGE

= SEISMIC SPATIAL SYSTEM INTERACTION:

- PROXIMITY EFFECTS

- II/I .

- FLEXIBILITY OF ATTACHED LINES I

- FLOODING FROM RUPTURED TANKS OR  !

PIPING i

I

I 1 SELSV C vA3G \ ASSESSVEN~~

l 1

• ALL ITEMS WHICH CAN NOT BE SCREENED OUT DURING THE WALKDOWN WILL BE RESOLVED IN THE SEISMIC MARGIN i ASSESSMENT PORTION OF THE PROJECT ,

• POSSIBLE APPROACHES:

- GENERIC EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION

- CONSERVATIVE DETERMINISTIC FAILURE MARGIN

- IN-SITU TESTING

- SHAKE TABLE TESTING

- EXPAND EARTHQUAKE EXPERIENCE DATA BASE j i

• DR. ROBERT P. KENNEDY WILL~ PARTICIPATE l

l JOC V N~~A- LO N l

l

• SAMPLE OF ITEMS TO BE INCLUDED:

- BASIS FOR SME ,

- LISTING OF EACH ITEM OF THE SUCCESS l PATHS l

- NEW FRS

- LIST OF RELAYS FOR WHICH CHATTER MUST BE PREVENTED

- SRT DOCUMENTATION OF EACH ITEM REVIEWED

- COMPLETED WALKDOWN FORMS

- ALL SMA REVIEWS DOCUMENTED i

l

\ A_ REDOR-~

• SAMPLE OF ITEMS TO BE INCLUDED:

- PLANT DESCRIPTION

- ORIGINAL PLANT SEISMIC DESIGN BASIS

- SELECTION OF SME

- DEVELOPMENT OF FRS

- MLKDOWN RESULTS

- ASSESSMENT OF ELEMENTS NOT SCREENED OUT

- EVALUATION OF RELAYS i

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS i

i

]

E3;L/N;C SE:SV :C VATA N ASSESSV EN-~

DRCL EC-~ SC-EJ _E I

iI i

l i

l

)

9

..__,.,,,__.__,,,,,~,,.,,,,__.,._.,,,.,_n,,,.,._w,.,._,__,,_,,,-_. ann,-n.n.. ,., ,,_,y w -. n. ,,-

~ -

9 Pt ANI HAf CH Sil*,U>C UAR(.IN ASSE LLME NI PROJi CT e Conti Chart Peoject Suas 1967 1988 J,89 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb uor, _ _ Ag.e Moy_, _Jun Jul Aug _ "ep, Oc t _ _ , Now, _ _ D,ec_ Jpt ,._ _ F,eb _ , Mor __ Af _Moy ___Jyn J,uf SILE CT SWE - -- - - -

- - - - - - - - -- .-.~-. _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . ._ __,

28 4 p-1961 31-Dec-1987

<a pp(w g g _ _ ~ . _ _ _ _ ___._.- _ _ _ _ .- __ _ __ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___

21 - Sep- 198 7 S- Oc t - 198 7 tlOutf ACitPN r- - - - - - - - - - - - - - --

S-Oc t - 198 7 18 -Jen- 1968

'ACPE ST Attt e- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

S-Oc t - 19C 7

• 4 - Jan- 1988 SELECT SRI - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - ~

2- Nov - 1981 3 -Dec - 1981 SUCt155 PATH .

l')-f eb- 1988 6-Jun-1968 PNt -SCNt t N ,

1-Mar-1988 4-Auf-1988 ftiLAY ifST -

21 - Mar- 1988 31 - Way-1988 SSI O FRS e ,

11 - u.,- 1984 11 - Aug - 1988 fetLAY EV4L . -

16 - Way- 1988 24-Aug-1988 Pitt - cat k DOWN - ,

2S-Jul- 1988 1 - Aug-1968 w * * = = = s -L. - - n-- a c.__._.s. _n_ __.s_ s _ a_ ,

Pega 1-1 l

o

,9 .

,s, t

{ [ 4 i >

t ,

P 2*  !' j

' i e

\ \

. \

3 2* .

i i

a-ts. &

CC b -

I t

z* .

I -

I I i

i I

n'  ;

4 i

u w

& i i )

C i

i i 1

)

?'

< t

)

2, .n r2  ;

3, r, o , ,

~

' i 2- '

' s.

9b 2 ,s -

i o

a e .-  ;

l i

7 1  ;

O e \, , i j* a 2 ' 1 z i

' l s' > i 2

• e e! l i 1 i B 2* .

t s <

Q i

i.a e..

c CC

- ,S k -

i b

\ .

8 I z*

I

~ l

-Q ,

N-

,. .,. ==

,. ==  ::  ::

-- o,,, .,,

it a I M 5I'i g., 2' 3 *i is'* s s d'? F1

,20 3'A- ~~

,-n 0.-

--a 3a -

! 8 3 5 I

I l l E3R/\RC SE SV C VARG:\ ASSESSVEN-~

3RCL EC-~/N RC \~~ER= ACES  :

I l

l l l

i i

i l

l i

1 l

1

P Discussion of Interfaces Paths of Communication

- Role of the NRC Peer Group Project Interface with the Peer Group Mode of Interaction

- Schedules (times to interface)

Information Requiremerits Plant Outage Schedules and Requirements NRC Studies t

J f

Peer Group Interfaces i

Mode of interface

- Information packages -- by mail

- Peer Group review

- Peer Group consensus

- Peer Group response -- by mail

- Meetings,if resolution required l 1

Milestones

- Soil /SSI May 10,1988 l

- Success path decisions June 6,1988 ,

- Floor response spectra Aug 11,1988 i

- Relay chatter Aug 24,198F ]

(systems screen)

- Walkdown Oct 1 788 1 April i989 1

- Postwalkdown assessment

- Final report June 1989 l

l i

1 l

• g ENCLOSURE 3 I o

SEISV C MARGI\ ASSESSMENT (SM A)

GEORGIA POWER COMPANY'S E. I. HATCH NUCLEAR POWER PLANT APPLING COUNTY, GEORGIA l

Issues Related to Soils and 1 Earthquake Ground Motions l l

l Presentation to NRC i 10 May 1988 Woodward-Clyde Consultants l

General Philosophy of the SMA Methodology

= The Seismic Margin Earthquake (SME) is conservatively specified.

= The response of earth structures (eg, soil profile, slope ...) to the SME is median centered.

= The capacity (eg, shear stress required to cause liquefaction ...) assessment for a given response is seiected conservatively.

i I

WCC - 05\10\88 i

General Philosophy of the SMA Methodology (Cont'd)

= The Trial-SME Level should be set sufficiently high so that some plant components in the success path are found to have HCLPF SME capacity levels less than this trial SME level.

i = Then both the components which control the HCLPF SME capacity level of the plant and the plant's HCLPF SME j capacity level can be established.

1 t

! = On the other hand, the trial SME level should not be j set so high as to result in a substantial increase i in the workload for the SMA.

i WCC - 05\10\88

I l

Selection of Earthquake Ground Motions l for use in a Seismic Margin Assessment In accordance of the methodology developed by EPRI and approved by the US NRC, there are four alternate ways by which these ground motions can be specified.

1. A Selected PGA (or ZPA) multiplied by the 84% non-exceedance probability (NEP) response spectral amplification factors (eg,NUREG 0098, RG 1.60).

I 1

2. A spectrum is selected to have i essentially uniform hazard throughout the frequency range.

, (Cont'd)

WCC - 05\10\88 l l I

i Selection of Earthquake Ground Motions for use in a Seismic Margin Assessment ,

1 l

l (Cont'd) l l

l

3. The hazard is specified in terms of a specific magnitude range and a specified distance from the site. Using a sufficient number of appropriately scaled real (and possibly synthetically derived) time histories, the 84% NEP spectrum is obtained.

4. A standard (non-site specific) trial SME spectrum may be negotiated with the NRC. For example, the median NUREG 0098 spectral shape may be ,

selected and anchored to the desired PGA (or ZPA) .

l WCC - 05\10\88 l

E. I. HATCH NPP --

SMA Earthquake Ground Motions - Plant Area SEISMIC MARGIN EARTHQUAKE (SME) :

. Magnitude of about 6-1/4

. Within Distance of about 25 km of the Site CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SELECTED SME :

. v/a = 100 cm/sec/g (39.4 in/sec/g)

. ad/v2 - 5 WCC - 05\10\88

HATCH NPP -- SM A Spectral Ordinates for Target Ground Motion -- ZPA = 0.3 g Pseudo-Relative Velocity - inch /sec 10 - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - -

l 1

Damping - 0.05

/ Based on NUREG 0098

' ' ' l ' '- ' ' ' ' ' ' ' - ' ' - ' ' ' " ' -

0.1 - 2 --

! 0.01 0.1 1 10 Period - sec WCC - 05\10\88 i

l 4

I 1

l 4=

i l

581 O

CitStL i 4t = l [ t SLCG ji' '

42) .

o

+> l(I l 4to I

..i n l y=it i 0

ji, tytd <h(

C 0404 462 C* ' '

ide n <ttel l 1 vai 's L gge Co=,0{= tait TM 4'I m o h, I ett 4 4 o 162 561 4 ,

d'I 1P 4 4 g l f*

' ~~

sygcinc

~ 4Il 96( 9) '

E C,* E ' 4 6 a M 5' 6d.r W"it 3 st a ttoa ste' 5tl O E

'k' D 68s Q1, / e l18 E l

t 50,, .p .A '4'A 18' +

5,. >. 3

<riy J' ett[I nst 9" (#p i it "

m' v=iq r =et=

YMS JW j tisi ' 544 N$O+00 C I'll

}IaS's"la et 4 sei gse f"f (si (C Qhit I t wa l.Nt Stoa O It?C h I

$ 4h o

NW I

j LEGEND 1 v

0 Pat ce=sts etic =

18%f 80ei=0

! e CO=%f sv Ticie t hg p(;t:0 80' From: HNP-s-F S AR-2 SupplemeM 2 A

$(att

_v l S2_3 Zoo 1

HATCH NP F i' reoie:t BORING LOC ATIONS - PL ANT ARE A 1 )

Fro *:t % 8743076A i w o0De a n; . CL1 CE C f A S . .

• A *. ' '

1 1

1 l

l 1

l 1

)

130 - 0 j Cemented Sand of Fill j i  !

l  !

00 -

40 -

p j v

Silly / Clayey fine Sand i l

60 - ~

so - '

2 3

i 3

- 3 i p to - 61 120 -

l 2

9 '

i j 0 Very conse, fine Sand and hard Clay O

E B 2 2 E 160 -

f I E t a i l

=10 -

200 -

l  !

! I

. i 1

//AWAW I 110 -

240 - **

I

-160 -

280 l

i

o. e :' HA CH NP GENER ALIZED SOIL PROFILE - F 'I I

o r:t N: 8743076A PLANT ARE A 2

HATCH NPP --

SMA Ordinates Based on NUREG 0098 Spectral Shane & Those for Stiff SSC & M 1/4 i

Pseudo-Relative Velocity - inch /sec

• t 10 1

Damping - 0.05 NUREG 0098 Stif f SSC; M 1/4

~'--'-'1' ' '

• I '- ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' - -"- '- ' " I 0.1 0.01 0.1 1 10 Period - sec WCC - 05\10\88

J I l f"

A T

. t i

0 t

'N 4 O C

v 4 f

v E c t

M S ni r

D a w

E n w T oi C <

w _

E u

L y E S

0 b^[ l3 R O

F m

s Y M

A R

G O

R I

h E L

) E C

?

j i

C C l E A j r i 0S C I

2( N E

H f E T N

M I

Y T S

\

i i

I 0 _

i 1 _

?

- r

" i P8 N0 7

H3 C5 I t,, T 4 A7 S

1 1 6

- _ O 4 2 0 2 .

4 .

0 0 O 0 0

- - i v

j f

n& ewoo4 t r ,

e ,.

t ol q <

I l'

. l l L

HATCH NPP --

SMA Spectral Ordinates for Target Ground Motion & for Synthetic Time History Pseudo-Relative Velocity - inch /sec 10 .. .,

'- - - - - - ~ - ---- -- -

1 ,- _

.- Damping - 0.05

- Target Spectrum Synthetic TH

' 'l' ---'-1-*2l' ' '-*'"'l2 0.1 -

0.01 0.1 1 10 Period - sec WCC - 05\10\88

1 0

4 1

r

,i n u

3' l a -

G n 3 l l

o n

/ '

o .

f n n,

\

e .

t e n, s c ~

1\ c .

a a

0 iM c i

T e

i n

\ r i

u

$ v t.

s n

o i

r

) y t

C i c

,]

E o

,0 S t 2( e

)

l v

o

- E c M r

{

I A

\ j l

T t u

l c

k t

_ a r

(

+,

c b 'O j I

I l'

[1 x _

" s _

"7o _

s _

I _

- ^7 _

v -

o 0 0 0 0 0 0 _

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 '/ 3 n

^ o'1 v 'x 2 S >'Z 001_Ig

)

1 n

E2,

lI I l

'm 0 n' 4

• M c

- A R w G n t

O r R ,-

E x.

L n E

^

V C w

o,

~

C a,

\

A ,

e 0 C I

T i 0 E

\ 3 H T

N Y

i/ S R

O i

T T

n N E

Qi ) M C E C

E A a i 0S P L

2( SI l

A' D E D m

c M

I E

T 5

3 \ T A L

1 U

I C L

a N c

, i 0 1

y "A

^v v "oa

'4

- U O

5 0 5 0 S 0 1

5 1

1 1 - .

J O;Ov s SLO <J S 5 l

jl 'll11i l

T.

0 g 3 Q 3 i Q

1 F T.

t 8t L W.

E O l

i C

o f O

S Y L

e t C i

v f

)

f l t t e

l i a 0 A F N 0 W W

2 f O

N I

oW J"

L L

I f

.?i f

F F

O A TE NR EA 0 T r 0 XT N 1 E o

t E IA.

c T 'l a A e M R I X

O 3

R P

A 7

P e

A r

u 0 ig I. F 1

7 H

iga F S F

i n7 nt n wa ol P hs r

e ' ae i

n El c

u br EN _

u nh oca T t i

r' t

el s

m h or it wf l lyl f i

e t f a o mt P ix en ot NA 6 r

p e p

=

H7 0 I- a q C 3 s ne T 4 dd A7 _

nr oa H8 _

peg s

e r

r w n _

r o _

ci t _

a n

om r it cf o

- - e n

- - SI o.

0 0 0 0 J F

5 0 5  :

t t 1 1 c t ji e e

>v1 %e.E.E;2~m o or u r P P

Low Strain Shear Wave Velocity Profiles Plant Area --

HATCH NPP Depth Below Ground Surface - it 0 -- - - -

-f' - - - - - -- - - -

Profile I il Profile 11 50 ,,  : i i

100

, c 150

. 200 -

2- '-- '- ' f1 250 - --- -

O 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

! Shear Wave Velocity - fps j wcc - 05\10\as

o l 1e1 4 ,q <

a. .'

p i 1

l SE I- at

/ V .'

.g i

w 2,) I 1

3 r a5 ,

o s:

g* &

c.

'j ^

E ,

I 1 l

, , , , i i ' -'

M t

]. .

. al 1 11 l

', I I-L v  ;

t ,

?  ! e 1

i...................

1  !  !  !  !

. . . . n o m . ... . . .

i

)

I

i l

I t

0  ; i i i }

i 1 i

O Max Shcar Strees induced ~

10 -

by the postulated SME (ZPA = 0.3 g)

I 30 -

O l

30 m ,

\

i i

. O

. 1 5 Ecuivalent Unif errn "

M 40 -

Shear Stress induced

] by SME i

o '

4 a ,

s y 60 - -

l' 5 o '

t i

4 0 j 60 - -

C  :

l l

70 - Equivaient Uniform Sheer - _

l Stress used for evolusting l liquefaction in Plant Aree 8 0 so . _

! e i I 90 L ' ' ' I l  !

Is 200 400 600 400 1000 120C Sheet Stress

• Def i l

P'e e:S HATCH NP M AX AND EQUIVALENT UNIFORM STRESSES F e*

USED IN LIQUEF ACTION EVALUATION-  !

a

,'o e:, Ne 8743076A PL ANT ARE A 14 v - * - - - -

m - -,.y ._g - - - 9, -;--+-- 4--------,qy-mm y- p-- #-- -

0.6 on e t' ,,e Pement Fines = 35 15 s5 i i i I i-I O.5 -

8 i l

I I g i I e i I l t I g i i  ;

I elo g i o< . ,, l l I I I I I I I I I T1 a:s l l T'o l g lt l r y , _

03 /

eSo+ / /

,/ l e,,

g!? / it, 60' E to '$ */ I t0' e, E$j ,e 2

?,yee '> n "

is x, *o 8(d2 gr 2

22g fn g A'2 .

[ y'r ,

l c er w FINES CONTENT 2 5'4 Mod.fied Chinese Code Propesol(cloy ' content:5%)$

O'l .c oa7 53 Marg.inel No I

i 27e

, Limefection Liovetocton Liovelser.:n  !

3' Pon Americon Octo e c l J:ponese doto o e o Chinese doto a 6 0

O 10 20 30 40 50 (Ni ko Fro . Seed e' a' (199" Proje:1 HATCH NP CYCLIC STRESS R ATIO VERSUS (Ng )60 ' 'I Pro:e:' N: 8743076A M : 7 1/ 2 15

S T

7 CA Fig 1 T_ _

t _

1 u 1 _ S N

t C

_N~-

E D

Y. .

t _

C 0 I D 1

E R A

R w U O S O D

S w E

R 9 ,

dt t

e ce po o

dP A s eh j

i r N I PO GT NA I

NR I

FS NS I _

vt r r OE u

Cf o I CR T _

N 8 ,

e LS g A t

e a r

I TI C

h e v

I L

e A NC I

F Y r -

u C e O n _

S N e I r 7 T O P _

n e

C .

d E .

r F

. u F b

r E e

v O _

l I e S ,

a v _ r it e c t Ni e e f

f M E t t

i F

e s

S ,

~ le ,.

n.

I lo.

e.

o h .

or C

r r f

o.o I

4 ,

er g.

n ,t PA a e l

f < N6 7

H0 e

C3 T4 A7

- I H8 3 ,

o 2

- - N 8 6 4 2 0 0  :

t o o t c

1 0 O e c j j e

,* o or r

P P

o l ca O ge  ! l 3

e d

$ e

i i

• I

- e.

O i O F Z l D

O O O l O O ED ED (ID EIGD O C '

0 b o h 0 30 0 $

g O ~2 0 Cl 0 0 -

H c.

O O Ch O O E U O O E 0 U

g "j.

O [gu 0 c g g ,

o I t 0 - 0 CDC'nn e E D E O (ID 30 O" $ <

i 21 o a a sC6 PB Fc '

i odd,O a % (4 o '

l ps , 53B, O9 , fqf D

1. 4 2.L%c%ref AL ac;O .

- c@og f tiQ "%cgt@6 ~g 3  % a cr m

3 i

sfhI 0

O Ot

@D 0

l l

an -

O Nhgt c B O e o. .

O EC l Z

• O C

of O o$

Z n

I .

o

:  :  :  :  :  :  :  : e

=

0 2

leal . (1gn) uottonel3 UC o o

&L

1 l

1 E. l. HATCH NPP --

SMA l SPT Blowcounts -- Plant Area l 1

Elevation Mean Blowcount Standard Deviation 65 to 80 17.3 5.6 45 to 65 15.3 4.7 40 to 45 20.3 6.2 30 to 40 23.5 7.0 a

20 to 30 23.9 6.4 l l 0 to 20 25.5 6.3 l

l WCC - 05\10\88

I l

o A OW n Wea< ",

r

!!n!

e1 .

V ti gI *1 2 Ba! au

!! 11

• • l a l 15-os l

l 1

? sg .

i I -  !* I

-  ;. t 5,

{$ 8 ,

{ -

• / \

1:- 't: J

). . i

}I.

iis I

'g*tI

.s

• I y g, 22llI O G ,

O h I

I 1

c  ! "

1

l. _

)

I "

g.

9 g .

l I

l

. . , , , , i I y

.....n.,....,i

Calculated Margins Against Liquefaction Plant Area --

Hatch NPP Based on ZPA - 0.28 g Depth Below Ground Surface - f t SPT Bigwcount Used:

20 '

• 70 -

40 v, f e 60 -

o 3_, u _ .

' .i 80 -

Water Table e a Depth - 45 f t t -- J ' ' -

100 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Calculated Margin Against Liquef action j

WCC - 05\10\88

/

i e , e' C 1 it

&. // %Hs '

um s i E$

li:s i

g, 1 ir fl,m s.

A" /

l l

!s iI f li . M T ,

i.d 33 Si! )  ;-

tl 5t 5 i:e= is it '

- J n 1

r i ./ '

i- O (,h

~

• M!l"jVoot ! T g

JiV M *s U.t i ex 1:e p

8 m

y A.

<x, i ,

E$'  ; qa. s a *'

.;, 8 x - v(

j(,

-.,N s Nb

\

i

. a9-- ,

pf

,o + . -4M - yx

.i a.

x C L [

, S ,

4g ,/- - -

. 0 4 A E .\ [ '

A s , v .

s ,, [ .-

9

'f

, +. 5

/ .j/f e 4,\6 ;4 '. is l:

n&t s n [ ct

, .. 7 n, ) . 1 u. I> ~

e I

. h U 1

5 d.

~

g i..m....... .

.g

!  !  !  !  :  :  :  : . I

} ; 's

=

>  ::= :::::::: s .

i

. g ..

I l

s N :.!::::.*:::tD l

l b

i  !

8 l

,cs.::::::::::t:c I l

. I 4

,l i, p I 3lr, . l t*i t 1 5 1

) : M C353 '

. > W . : ! ! D. 12 I,

! :C;5.. 2!:0:3 1 i

! X':'::! . ! * : . " B! *:

. 1 1

I

! c ....:::::::::e

, , , i 4004(it.)9416 9l l

e 1 1

l l

l l

O es  ;

- w?N &

s'

- e g +

e . = 8

% $ 5 i I I I N t < '

y  ? g 5 8 w

t

+

o e E

- _ e c =

< 5. .

N -

E c !,

em 5o am g

_ . _ o_

N t;3 E

o - 2 y<>

o y -

se an, a

o en c ga

, e ~

c a

e = _ e

-mo ==

wm g wa o m e a _ C &W w

C =

t e o

,i -

8 .o e * - N c e 5

= -

> g c 5 e:

i s*

cr e

=

_o_

e p

a W

o .o .-

> a I > 3 o

a w

a ma LL)

E E

o o e o 'o e e Gee  !

i I _

.o. .o. g o

o o

o y

+e

' I i i '

o 3, o o o o @ o o , g O o o o e yq, o

m e

a D w

• j 1sd Js 'y46ueJIS lonp!seg i  ! l 1

r Fj dd8

f l

l l 30 i i i i For Magnitude e 1/3 4

~ l 10 -

l

\

l I t l l i

\ -

~ f 3

l Renos

! l

(

i 2 \

t X

l I

a v -

1 =

3, u r i

5

• l i

i .

l

} o.s -

! \

l i

l l

- l o.1 -

o.o a -

1 ' '

o.01 1 o,e o.s 1.0 o 0.2 c.4 My/Kmes

( Af ter Wakelel and Seed.197 8) l SEISMIC ALLY-INDUCED DISPLACEMENT Fig l Project HATCH NP Project No 8743076A PER CYCLE 24 i l

l l

l

e S

0T N g2 O e

T

. F t u

S N

O C

S E E D -

7 L Y

- - C L C

~ - Y -

C D R

F A W

O D O

R O w

I 8 EB '8 M-B U

NN HIO TT C

I WE 6

H S I

t T -

i s G 4 _

t n

e N

t E O .

o R N f

p)D T od SR nn I 4 e RE y i oa l e AY a C t

D c .

c y EA HL e o8 C c

a l

rA

. f o

SN I f

f o F _

e s r w e O

~

S 2e c b e

e 2. ef I *. s N I

ge o _

i I

S i w M O F s I l

e ee T i

t eH A _

n Ss I e ( R _

t o A .

P V I

2 C 8 ^

I 1 g

P A _

N 6 7 _

H 0

- O C 3

~

- T 4 0 0 O A 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

H 8 _

5 5 0 _

1 1 _

2 _

'e

• e 5 e5 'o EE.j 3E. _

o _

N t f _

c c et et .

- or or _

P P _

e n >=

I n. O V

,Etg i I

... is e n i . i..., s i IG

! II 2

. :t 3I e3

. i*

e =o b @@ @

> N 1

I '

s I ,

1 f, a I i .

i v g l L

n  %  :

d ,,

!v

• s i i i i , , ,1 j ,

i.

l

/

I l I 1. I I t i e

! 8 8 3 1 hl $hEh h % l 4

'(\ ENCLOSURE 4 STRUCTURAL RESPONSE ANALYSIS FOR THE l SEISMIC MARGIN ASSESSMENT OF THE  !

EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNIT 1 Presented to:

US NRC Presented by:

Dr. James J. Johnsorr Mr. Oleg R. Maslenikov i

May 10,1988 i

gn  :

b'$ l l

4 SSI/ STRUCTURAL RESPONSE ANALYSES OF THE HATCH UNIT 1 STRUCTURES WILL BE PERFORMED USING THE l METHODOLOGY DEVELOPED BY EPRI AND APPROVED BY THE NRC e Median - Centered Analysis Procedures and Parameter Values e Uncertainties in System Properties Accounted for by Varying Soil Properties l

• j I

l l

1

THE STRUCTURAL RESPONSE ANALYSIS FOR THE HATCH SMA WILL BE PER. FORMED USING THE SUBSTRUCTURE APPROACH e Free-Field Ground Motion e Control motion defined by ground response spectra e PGA = about 0.3g horizontal direction, about 0.2g vertical direction e Three components of motion e Artificial time histories generated to closely match the ground response spectra

! e Control point on the free surface at finished grade e Spatial variation of motion defined by vertically propagating waves e Provided by WCC j

l i

)

i i THE STRUCTURAL RESPONSE ANALYSIS FOR  ;

THE HATCH SMA WILL BE PERFORMED USING THE SUBSTRUCTURE APPROACH (CONT) e Soil Profile e Strain - dependent equivalent linear soit properties specified for each structure e Uncertainties defined by shifting of soil stiffness e Foundation Input Motion e For embedded and partially embedded structures, kinematic interaction effects are included, e Foundation Impedances ,

e Structural Models e Provided by GPC/SCS

=w

$5?b 5

4 ELEMENTS OF THE SUBSTRUCTURE SSI ANALYSIS f

X .--.

X free.fleid motion Foundation input motion E ZZZ

/

1 Soll profile Impedances ggg i i l

l

}

} M3

Structural model l 1 .

)

.i

'l 4

SSI/ STRUCTURAL RESPONSE ANALYSES OF FOUR IIATCII UNIT 1 STRUCTURES WILL BE PERFORMED e Reactor Building e Control Building e Diesel Generator Building i

e Intake Structure 0

.1 r

l t

l l

1 I

l

.l rg;p?

u= =m

i REACTOR BUILDING o Soil Profile l

! e Combination of Soil Profiles I and II  !

e Soil property variation (0.75,1.5) l l

e Soil / Foundation Model e Sensitivity study for embedment effects

e Foundation, input motion and foundation

! impedances calculated with SUPERALUSII i

] e Possible additional soil property variation 3

! e Structure Model j

i l e N-S, E-W, and vertical models by GPC/SCS l

):

I

)

1 1

i

) '

l ~ l l :h l

i

TYPICAL SUPERALUSH FOUNDATION MODEL OF REACTOR BUILDING Transmitting Boundary -

V . 4r

\N\\\\\\\\\\\'

i \\\N\\\\\\  ;

\\\W\\\\T Rigid Beams = \\\\\\\

l '

\\\\W ,

V xx m

c 0

I w m o vem, 9

l l

l v .m v 1

,_._i

4 o

REACTOR BUILDING SEISMIC MODEL

.L te t ao .

~

L l' o

• dol 88T nit 4[hP(0 S

' A Josm W,oa % g u&Q & Musass t,%u Y. A u, @ ' A145xtss $ min

"' (C )& 3) Cam j, g

= a O =E h Os e E$ CM

"(6). -3

$5 gs

> 25 b

@ s 45 <

a am &

L tc2'c' [ ) b zz No*

9 O @ @

4 ,.

A @A E 8 E i

@ ^u knG*

u @ O 5 r_ m e ,g) qo)Anr a

ureg e

"< c) y g a e gE u*q2) m

"**' a'a-s uao-ga is b b

@)Esg [*Qi) w g, r.we s g r ru.e o e g .

a g ea-A I

4 m

4 ; e_ f _g _

4m-

<.o- u. e-

r. x, .,

aee-  !

., _ d o* [ __

l  ::e $

l t

1

• l CONTROL BUILDING e Soil Profile e Soil Profile II e Soil property variations (0.60,1.5) e Soil / Foundation Model e Embedded, no sidewall contact with soil e Foundation input motion calculated with SUPERFLUSH or SHAKE e Foundation impedances calculated with CLASSI e Structure Model e Three-dimensioral model by GPC/SCS l

1 l

I I

CONTROL BUILDING 3-D SEISMIC MODEL l

xg.O 68 IV N

'<t IS 82

• to

,3 MP4

, n 6 l MP5 7-MP2 4

sFGLestre ku J

3 6

7 er Wuns m MPI v.

a/\ <

-- -- .- ___ . &%y, -*% .%, - --, _.__

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING e Soil Profile e Soil Profile I e Soil property variations (0.8,2.5) e Soil / Foundation Model l; e Surfaced - founded e Foundation input motion equals free-field ground moti e Foundation impedances calculated with CLASSI e Structure Model e N-S, E-W, and vertical models by GPC/SCS l

0 (D , an iso ' \

Q s ay na ix'

Cy N Y

INTAKE STRUCTURE e Soil Profile e Profile accounting for excavation and K -

Krete e Soil property variations (0.75,1.5) e Soil / Foundation Model e Partially embedded '

e Foundation input motion calculated with ,

SUPERFLUSH  !

e Foundation impedances calculated with CLASSI and corrected for partial embedment e Structure Model l e Three-dimensional model by GPC/SCS l

TYPICAL SUPERFLUSH FOUNDATION MODEL OF INTAKE STRUCTURE

- Freefield

- Transmitting Boundary V [

Frecfield--

M Rigid Beams Tra'nsmitting Boundary -

'I y

r I

4 i d

{ $,

4 INTAKE STRUCTURE 3-D SEISMIC MODEL l ee " so IL

@R Mb ag 14 13 (s . "Ch g - rou no ..3 g, 8 sh 4 JOINT NV M 0 t ts GLO 5 Ai ,

i C 00 M 0 tw ATT.

T Y STsvew

= 1 4

I i n (NORT H -30V t H) g e

a f,

RESPONSE WILL BE OBTAINED AT ALL MASS POINTS OF EACH STRUCTURAL MODEL e Response spectra for 3%,5%, and 10% damping l

e Maximum accelerations j e Maximum relative displacements 6

l l

l 3$5

. - _ _ - -- . -