ML20236K384

From kanterella
Revision as of 13:39, 21 February 2021 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Affidavit of Sh Mendes Supporting Supplemental Motion by Scenic Shoreline Preservation Conference,Inc,To Aslab Re PG&E Unit 2
ML20236K384
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon Pacific Gas & Electric icon.png
Issue date: 07/09/1971
From: Mendes S
SCENIC SHORELINE PRESERVATION CONFERENCE, INC.
To:
Shared Package
ML20236J368 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-87-214 NUDOCS 8708070099
Download: ML20236K384 (6)
v • d • e


Text

<

< ,1 t

AFFIDAVIT OF STANLEY H. MENDES STATE OF CALIFORNIA

  • COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA i

STANLEY H. MENDES being duly sworn, deposes and says j

^

This affidavit is in suppor,t of the supplemental motion by Scenic Shoreline Preservation Conference, Inc., to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board in the matter of Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2.

I am a registered Civil and Structural Engineer in the State of California. I received a Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineering from California Institute of Technology in 1947. I 1

All of my twenty-four years of experience has been in the design and supervision of construction for buildings and related structures. Much of the work which I have done has been with buildings of Type I construction. After eight and one-half years as a structural designer for Donald F. Shugart, Structural Engi-neer, the partnership of Shugart and Mendes was formed in 1955 with offices in Santa Barbara. I have had my own offices since 1959. In addition to my consulting engineering office, I supervised the A. F. Janes Testing Laboratories, Inc., of l Santa Barbara, for more than two years, t

ACTIVITIES:

Structural Engineers Association of Southern California - Member American Society of Civil Engineers - Fellow Santa Barbara Engineers Club - Past President National Panel of Arbitrators of the American Arbitration Assn.

Santa Barbara YMCA - Board of Directors (13 years) l 1

f I

l B700070099 870729 PDR FOIA PDR CONNOR 67-214 s

{ '

(

i Rotary Club (15 years) citizens Planning Association ,

i Santa Barbara County Committee for School Dist'rict Organization l Santa Barbara City Water Commission - Former Member ,(14 years)

Lecturer - Calif. Poly College, San Luis Obispo 1967-8 I

My office has furnished consulting structural engineering services for numerous building projects, principally schools,

, i churches, hospitals, offices, etc. We have designed build- I ings for University of California at Santa Barbara, Cal Poly  ;

I f

San Luis Obispo, as well as many public buildings for'the City and County of Santa Barbara. Construction costs for completed projects are in excess of $45,000,000, principally in Santa Barbara County. We have a background of experience which includes almost all of the present day uses of steel, concrete and timber. We have designed foundation systems utilizing steel piles, caissons, mats, etc. Investigations of existing structures, ranging from residential and school buildings to multi-story commercial buildings have been made.

The San Fernando, California, earthquake of February 9, 1971, triggered more than 250 strong-motion accelerographs in Southern California area. Maximum ground accelerations were observed at various sites near the epicenter which were in the range of 0.20 to 0.40 gravity (g) . At Pacoima Dan, five l miles south of the epicenter, the earthquake accelerations were the highest ever recorded. Both the vertical and hori-zontal accelerations were in the.0.50 to 0.75 g range with several high frequency peaks to 1.0 g.

i l

l l

l The accelerograph records indicate ground acceleration two ,

I l

to three times greater than those commonly assumed for  !

! seismic design criteria. It is obvious that a careful reassessment of earthquake-resistant design criterig is j absolutely essential. Of particular concern to me at this l l

time is the Nuclear Unit 2 of the Diablo Canyon Site near I l

l San Luis Obispo, California. I have reviewed ' Appendix D l

Seismic Design

  • section of che Preliminary Safety Analysis j Report as prepared by Pacific Gas and Electric Company.

I Under letter of June 24, 1968, and accompanying report,

! John A. Blume and Associates, Engineers of San Francisco,

]

1 l California ' presents the recommended design earthquake and i corresponding response spectra to be used in the design of 1

l l

components of the plant". On page 3 of the report Earth- 4 quake D, one of the critical design earthquakes, is described and the maximum rock accelerations at the site are estimated to be 0.20 g. It is my opinion that the accelerograph j records and other information obtained from the San Fernando earthquake have shown that actual ground accelerations of two to three times the estimated 0.20 g can very likely occur. The ef f ect of an error by a f actor of 2 or 3 in the fundamental assumption of ground acceleration is extremely important. It could well mean that the structure would fail and cause a nuclear incident or damage vital equipment and thus cause a nuclear incident.

On July 2, 1971, I received a copy of the Report on Olive View Hospital prepared by the Structural Engineers Associa-tion of Southern California. The Olive View Site is about

> ' - - +

'- . .e t W .\ c

..... .t wss w rcat u u Lausa .sa cat u oats as,a un aJpaent t' a > -

chiatric Unit has been widely publicized, especially since t

i

, i

  • l 1

4 these new buildings had been just recently occupied. Follow-  ;

ing are s'everal selected quotations from the Reports i a

J

" CONCLUSIONS: ,

It should be emphasized that the estimated ground' motion, both l I

vertical and horizontal, at this site, greatly exceeded the specified code values and also produced stresses higher than c

the ultimate capacities of many structural members. Minor I deficiencies in design and construction would have had-little  ;

influence on the overall behavior when considering the actual -

force levels involved. Evidently, permanent ground displace-- )

i  !

I ments such as rupturing, sliding and settlementLhad little ,

influence on the behavior of these structures. Most of the

! damage was due to ground accelerations providing stresses considerably in excess of design assumptions." ]

l

" RECOMMENDATIONS:

1 i,

The failures at this facility, even considering the unexpected severity of ground motion, indicate that careful continued ]

review and improvement of lateral force building code provisions i'

must be made. '

i 1

First the codes at best are minimum Standards only, and there is need for special consideration for critical or unusual s tructures. This can be accomplished by code advisory bodica composed of structural engineers experienced in aseismic design.

Second, therb should be careful thought given to increasing the overall safety of structures housing critical functions, such as these hospitals, which should remain in operation after a major disaster, such as an earthquake.

.l

o Third, we as structural engineers, must re-examine our lateral I

force recommendations including the basic philosophy of what

constitutes acceptable damage considering the actual lateral force levels to which structures and equipment may be subjected.

Fourth, every effort should be made to more accurately determine potential major areas of ground rupture and massive earth slippage areas to assist in, evaluating seismic design factors l

as well as determining areas where structures housing highly l sensitive occupancies should not be placed.

l I Fif th, the f ailure pattern in both structures indicates that a much improved understanding of the basic behavior of structures in earthquakes should be the responsibility of the principals who develop the basic planning configuration of the structures.

A much closer coordinated effort is necessary between the archi- <

tects and structural engineers during initial planning phases of projects."

There are many valuable lessons which we engineers are learning as a result of the San Fernando earthquake of February 9,1971.

One of the most important lessons is that earthquake forces of considerably greater magnitude than ever before imagined have been produced by the moderate size (Richter magnitude 6.6) San Fernando earthquake. Thinking engineers cannot help but ask the question - "Do we presently have the necessary know-how to properly design nuclear facilities, especially considering the disasterous consequences if we do not have adequate knowledge?"

Natural disa'sters such as earthquakes are enough for man to contend with -- without having as a side effect a nuclear disaster.

o, .

i f REFERENCES l~

4

,. .i

.1. Preliminary Approximate Maximum Acceleration, San Fernando, California, Earthquak'e of February 9,1971.

. Published by National Ocean Survey NOAA .

Seismological Field Survey 13 March 1971 1

2. The San Fernando, Cplifornia, Earthquake of February 9, i

1971.

A preliminary report published by the U. S. Geological 1 Survey and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric ,

.1 Administration -- Geological Survey L

Professional Paper 733,

3. Report on Olive View Hospital prepared'by l

Structural Engineers Association of Southern California i

y 9._M .NV -

V t- O STANLEY H. MENDES Structural Engineer.

1226-1/2 State Street Santa Barbara, California 4

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

. ) SS COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA )

On July 9th, 1971, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared STANLEY H. MENDES, known to mo to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same.

s

< W. NESS my h n o icial seal

% ** o_n b_..

^^[^ ^^^Afric:AL's'EAL^^^h'*

e '.

, [. STANLEY NOTARY PUBLIC W. ABSOTT CAUFORNIA f

. , SWI \ UMBARA COUNTY

.- My Committen tapues sept 30,1973 [

mf ic 6 .w.ic.i.usi r

_______________ -

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20236K384&oldid=3177392"