ML19336A343
| ML19336A343 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | La Crosse File:Dairyland Power Cooperative icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/14/1980 |
| From: | Linder F DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE |
| To: | Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| LAC-7181, NUDOCS 8010220538 | |
| Download: ML19336A343 (17) | |
Text
- _ _ - _ _
O
.g-z/
JDb4AMrFZs4/b2)
COOPERAT/VE. eo Box air. 2615 EAST AV SOUTH. LA CROSSE. W1SCONSIN 54601 -
(608) 788 4 000 October 14, 1980 In reply, please refer to I AC-7181 DOCKET NO. 50-409 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ATTN:
Mr. Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 Division of Operating Reactors U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555
SUBJECT:
DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE LA CROSSE BOILING WATER REACTOR (LACBWR)
PROVISIONAL OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-45 SEISMIC EVALUATION PROGRAM
Reference:
(1)
NRC Letter, Eisenhut to Linder, dated August 4, 1980.
Gentlemen Your letter, Reference 1, requested that we submit details of our plans for proceeding with a seismic evaluation program and provide justification for continued operation in the interim until the program is complete.
To date, Dairyland Power Cooperative (DPC) has undertaken substan-tial efforts to evaluate the integrity of the plant and systems essential to safety and safe shutdown.
In 1973, Dairyland Power Cooperative required structural evaluations to be prepared for the Full Term Operating License application.
Gulf United Corporation evaluated the adequacy of major LACBWR structures and equipment to withstand the effects of an earthquake event.
The Gulf United report (Technical Reference 1) used a ground response spectra, which was developed by Dames and Moore, based on a maximum horizontal ground acceleration of 0.12G for tho Safe Shut-down Earthquake.
The Gulf United report indicated that high stresses would be generated in soma piping systems and building structures during a seismic event and Gulf United indicated that more detailed analyses would be required.
In 1974, DPC contracted Nuclear Energy Services (NES) to review the Gulf United report, provide the detailed seismic analyses on major primary system piping and design pipe restraints, if required.
The seismic / stress analyses performed by NES are reported in Technical References 2 through 6 and included the recirculation piping, the l
l d o 8 01022053F j0
Mr. Dennic M. Crutchfiold, Chisf LAC-7181 p
Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 October 14, 1980 1
main steam and feedwater piping, end the high pressure core spray suction and discharge piping.
NES also reanalyzed the LACBWR and j
Genoa 3 stacks for. seismic effects.
This work was reported in Technical Reference 7.
1 The NES analytical work confirmed that pipe restraints were 3
necessary and DPC had decided to proceed with the design, fabri-cation and installation of the required pipe restraints.
Shortly thereafter, the design work was stopped because the site specific spectra was questioned by the NRC and the potential for soil lique-faction was being evaluated by NRC.
5 It has recently been determined by NRC that soil liquefaction does not pose a problem at LACBWR and NRC also agreed that the 0.12G value used in previous analyses is acceptable and even conservative.
The latter conclusion is based on a comparison of 0.12G ground i
response spectra developed by Dames and Moore and the LACBWR site specific spectra furnished by the NRC in Technical Reference 8.
The ground response spectra developed by Dames and Moore clearly envelops the site specific spectra of Technical Reference 6.
There-fore, all of the seismic evaluations of LACBWR structures and piping performed since 1974 by NES were based on a more conservative seismic spectra.
It is DPC's intention that all future seismic work required l
for LACBWR will be based on the Technical Reference 8 seismic spectra.
Since 1978, NES has provided seismic / structural analyses work as required by DPC for the Systematic Evaluation Program.
This work is being performed in accordance with the program submitted with this i
letter as Technical Reference 9.
The overall seismic / structural I
evaluation of major structural components of the LACBWR Containment Building using the conservative ground response spectra of Technical Reference 1 has been completed.
These major structural components of j
the Containment Building include the steel containment shell, the reactor pressure vessel, the outer and inner concrete shield walls, the concrete foundation mat and the pile foundation.
The analysis j
i indicated that the overall structural integrity of these major components will be maintained during the safe Shutdown Earthquake.
l Recently DPC has decided to upgrade the shutdown condenser system to an engineerad safety system.
Part of this upgrading effort con-sists of seismic analyses of the shutdown condenser, its support structure, and associated piping and valves.
These analyses are currently being performed by NES.
i As can be seen from the above discussion, DPC had started its own program of seismic / structural evaluations long.before August 4, 1980 (Technical Reference 8) and in some cases even before the Systematic Evaluation Program began.
l #
e t
~
Mr. Dennis M. Crutchfiold, Chiof LAC-7181 Operating Reactors Branch-No. 5 October 14, 1980 i
~
Summarizing this work to dates t
1.
Integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary:
Structural analyses have been completed for the reactor pressure vessel, the main steam piping, the feedwater piping, and the recirculation piping.
2.
Integrity of fluid and electricc1 distribution systems a
related to safe shutdown and engineered safety features:
Structural analyses have been completed for the high pressure core spray suction and discharge piping.
Analysis of the alternate core spray piping and shutdown condenser piping is currently in progress.
Seismic pipe restraints for the high pressure core spray piping are currently being designed and r
fabricated for installation commencing,early in November 1980 l
during the next scheduled refueling outage.
3.
Integrity and functionability of mechanical and electrical equipment and engineered safety feature systems:
Structural analyses of the Containment Building steel shell, outer shield wall, inner shield wall, concrete foundation and pile i
foundation is complete.
Analysis of the LACBWR stack is complete.
Analysis 'of the shutdown cendenser and associated equipment is in progress.
As stated earlier, the prev'ious analytical work performed for i
several major LACBWR piping systems indicated the need for additional 1
pipe restraints. Since this work has been completed ahead of the Systematic Evaluation Program schedule, DPC has committed to a fabri-cation and installation program for the pipe restraints.
DPC prefers to undertake this program now rather than wait for a 1982 outage, as proposed in Technical Reference 8.
DPC has taken this position with the assumption that the ground response spectra shown in Technical Reference 8 is substantially correct and will not be revised in a i
more conservative direction by the NRC.
It is estimated that an add-itional 24 months of analytical and evaluative work remain to satisfy the requests provided in your letter.
This time table appears con-sistent with the progress of the Systematic Evaluation Program and the review of the Full Term Operating License.
Technical Reference 10 states that the NRC has determined that "the return period for an earthquake resulting in a peak acceleration of
.12G would be at least 1,000 years and that the actual return period could be an order of magnitude higher.
The LACBWR site is located in the Central Stable Region where historically the seismic activity is very low.
Using seismicity data developed by the TERA Corporation F
for Lawrance Livermore Laboratory and the NRC, in conjunction with a computer program designed to perform seismic risk analysis, Dames &
l Moore has determined that'the return period for an earthquake of
[
l this size is at least-10,000 years and more likely between 10,000 and 100,000 years." g l
Mr. Dennio M. Crutchfiold, Chicf LAC-7181 Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 October 14, 1980 Since the duration of the structural / seismic portion of the SEP is much shorter than the anticipated remaining life of the plant
/
and since both DPC and NRC have agreed that the general level of seismic hazard is sufficiently low for LACBWR's anticipated remaining life, DPC feels continued operation of LACBWR is justi-fied in the interim until the Systematic Evaluation Program is complete.
If there are any questions concerning this submittal, please contact us.
Very truly yours, DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE A
v Frank Linder, General Manager FL:RES:af Enclosures cc:
J. G. Keppler, Reg. Dir., NRC-DRO III NRC Resident Inspectorb i F
Mr. Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief LAC-7181 Operating Reactors Branch No. 5
. October 14, 1980 Technical
References:
1.
Gulf United Report No. SS-1162, Seismic Evaluation of the La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor, January 1974; DPC Letter, Madgett to Giambusso, LAC-2788, dated October 9, 1974 (Application for FTOL).
- 2.
NES 81A0089, Seismic and Stress Analysis of LACBWR Recircul-ation Piping System.
- 3.
NES 81A0088, Seismic and Stress Analysis of LACEWR Main Steam Piping System.
- 4.
NES 81A0087, Seismic and Stress Analysis of LACBWR Feedwater Piping System.
- 5.
NES 81A0090, Seismic and Stress Analysis of LACBWR High Pressure Core Spray Suction Line Piping System.
- 6.
NES 81A0091, Seismic and Stress Analysis of High Pressure Core Spray Discharge Line Piping System.
7.
NES 81A0092, Seismic and Structural Analysis of LACBWR and Genoa 3 Stacks, June 1976.
8.
NRC Letter, D. G. Eisenhut to F. Linder, SEP Structural /
Seismic Evaluations, August 4, 1980.
9.
NES Lectere 5101-382, 5101-4203 and 5101-481, R. A. Milos to R. E. Shimshak, Systematic Evaluation Program, Seismic and Structural Analysis, dated 9/7/78, 10/24/78 and 3/22/79 respectively (Transmitted with this letter).
10.
Licensee's Answer to Order to Show Cause, dated March 25, 1980.
1
7 !
O L
4.
wc#
ensep 0
ID NUCLEAR ENERGY SERVICES,INC.
NES DMS40N
^
ENYio i
3 pos reassi September 7~,
1978 Reference No. 5101-382 Mr. Richard E. Shimshak Lacrosse Boiling Water Reactor Dairyland Power Cooperative P.O. Box 135 Genoa, WI S4632
Subject:
Systematic Evaluation Program Seismic Analysis Flow Chart
Dear !!r. Shimshak:
Enclosed is the SEP - Seismic Analysis Plow Chart, which we dis-cussed last week at LACBWR.
Confirming our telephone conversation today, Iqbal Husain is preparing a Task Plan covering the SEP -
seismic analyses work and, in accordance with your instructions, he has started to model the Containment Building.
If we can be of further assistance, please call.
I very truly yours, NUCLEAR ENERGY SERVICES, INC.
NES. Division
/
1 Richard A. Milos a
Project Manager RAM /las Enclosure cc W. J. Manion A. H. Yoli I. Husain g
, (j $
- n. g., nt O
w
,t
4 p--
~/
[
NRC/DPC/NES MEETING NRC DEVELOPS DPC/NES.
TO AGREE ON ESSENTIAL LIST OF ESSENTIAL REVIEW OF EQUIPMENT AND LOAD EQUIPMENT NRC LIST COMBINATIONS
=O
=O O
DEVELOP LOAD COMBI. NATIONS MODEL ANALYZE NRC/DPC/NES MEETING CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT BLDG.
TO AGREE ON MAX G's BUILDING FOR MAX G's AND SITE SEISMIC SPECTRA N
LOAD COMB. ON CONTAINMENT BUILDING l
l l
SEP - SEISMIC ANALYSES FLOW CHART b
@ ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENT
@ LOAD COMBINATIONS ANALYZE CONTAINMENT BUILDING
\\)
-w DEVELOP LOADS ON ANALYZE EQUIPMENT INSIDE ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENT CONTAINMENT BLDG.
INSIDE CONT. BLDG.
d MODEL ESSENTIAL EQIJIPMENT INSIDE CONT. BLDG.
i l
. LOAD COMB. ON EQUIP.
INSIDE CONT. BLDG.
DEVELOP LOADS ON ANALYZE EQUIPMENT OUTSIDE ESSENTIAL EQUIP.
CONTAINMENT BLDG.
OUTSIDE CONT. BLDG.
I I f
MODEL ESSENTIAL EQUIP.
i OUTSIDE CONT. BLDG.
j i
LOAD COMB. ON EQUIP.
I OUTSIDE CONT. BLDG.
1
y.
ED NOV -a gg g NUCLEAR ENERGY SERVICES,INC.
NES DMSiON M
~'
SHELTER ROCK ROAD omouw. com oceso pon rease 1-October 24,.1978 Reference No. 5101-420
}
Mr. Richard E. Shimshak Dairyland Power Cooperative La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor P.O. Box 135 Genoa, WI 54632
Subject:
Task Plan for the LACBWR-SEP Seismic and Structural Analysis
Dear Mr. Shimshak:
Enclosed is the Task Plan for the Seismic and Structural Evaluation of Major Building Structures, Equipment, Piping Systems and Components for the LACBWR Systematic Evaluation Program.
Please review the enclosed Task Plan and send us your approval and/or comments.
If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours, NUCLEAR ENERGY SERVICES, INC.
1 NES Division Richard A. Milos Project Manager Z
RAM / jam Enclosure cc:
J.
D.
Parkyn h
W.
J. Manion A.
H. Yoli W. JGLL
- m q.):o e
x- >Te,
\\
-:4,j
%d/
,.//,cl/i24 L
b TASK PLAN FOR SEISMIC AND STRUCTURAL EVALUATION OF MAJOR BUILDING STRUCTURES, EQUIPMENT, PIPING SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS FOR THE LACBWR SYSTEMATIC EVAL"ATION PROGRAM PREPARED UNDER PROJECT 5101
_s FOR DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE NUCLEAR ENERGY SERVICES, INC.
DANBURY, CONNECTICUT 06810 l
I' i
i i
O
i A.
objective
($)
To perform seismic and structural analy' es of essential. building s
structures, equipment, piping systems and compone.nts for the LACBWR Systematic Evaluation Program.
B.
Background
'USNRC has initiated the Systematic Evaluation Program (SEP) for a number of o'ider nuclear power plants..La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor is one of these plants.
In the SEP it is required that essential building structures, equipment, piping systems and components be evaluated to verify their adequacy to withstand the normal loads (e.g. dead, live, pressure and thermal loads) as well as the loads associated with seismic and LOCA events.
In an earlier response to the AEC/DL's request to review the effects of an earthquake event on LACBWR, Dairyland Power Cooperative requested Gulf United Nuclear Fuels Corporation to evaluate the adequacy of the major structures and equipment to withstand seismic loadings.
The Gulf United (GU) Nuclear Fuels Corporation study used the ground response spectra (developed by Dames and Moore) which was based on a maximum horizontal ground acceleration of 0.12 G for the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE).
The Gulf United Study (Reference 1) indicated that high stresses would be generated in some piping systems (e.g. main steam) and building structures (e.g. the LACBWR stack) during a seismic
-j event.
To eliminate the possibility of a seismically induced loss of coolant accident, detailed seismic / stress analyses of the major LACBWR piping systems were subsequently performed and the design of necessary seismic support systems were initiated by NES (References 2 through 6).
In the SEP, however, NRC is asking 'LACBWR to evaluate the pla'nt adequacy for a higher seismic input ground motion (>.12G) and to include the effects of other loads (dead, live, pressure, thermal, etc.) which were not considered in the GU study.
There-fore some of the seismic / structural analysis work will have to be redone or modified.
NES proposes to perform the SEP seismic / structural analy'ses work in accordance with the flow chart shown on Figure 1 and the method of approach described in Section C of this task plan.
C.
Method of Approach As indicated on the seismic / structural analyses flow chart, on receiving the list of essential equipment (which is being I
developed by NRC), NES wil? prepare the applicable loads, load combinations and the corresponding structural acceptance criteria N
(sI i
l l
J for each item of essential equipment.
These loa *ds,. load combina-l
(
tions and the corresponding structural acceptance criteria will be based on the guidelines given in NRC Standard Review; Plan l
Section 3.8.4 (Reference 7), applicable ASME, AISC and ACI codes (References 13 through 15) and current nuclear industry practice.
The list of essential equipment, loads, load combinations and l
acceptance criteria will be reviewed and agreed on by NRC/DPC/NES prior to performing any detail analysis work.
t
'NRC and their. consultant Lawrence Livermore Laboratory OLLL) are' curr'ently reviewing the regional geological, seismological information and the LACBWR site soil data.
NRC has requested the maximum seismic loading that the plant structure cculd with-stand without making major structural modifications.
This information along with the LLL recommendations will be used by i
NRC in developing the maximum ground acceleration and the site seismic spectra.
Since major modifications to the containment building would be very costly and would involve an extended shutdown, NES believes that it is the most important essential structure to analyze with respect to establishing the maximum tolorable seismic loading.
Furthermore, the seismic-response results of the containment building are required in evaluating the structural adequacy of other essential equipment, NES is currently developing the mathematical model for the seismic analysis of the containment j
building.
The multi-degree of freedom lumped mass finite element mathematical model of the containment building is based on current industry practice and includes the soil structure interaction effects as well as that of the pile foundation:
the seismic analysis will be performed using ground acceleration time history input base motion and the modal superposition methods of dynamic analysis.
The characteristics of t.he base motion time history will be such that its spectra will e~nvelope the ground response spectra given in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.60 (Reference 8).
I Appropriate damping values given in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.61
)
(Reference 9) will be used in the analysis.
The effect of each
'l j
of the three orthogonal spatial components (two horizontal and one vertical) of the earthquake will be based on procedure given in NRC regulatory Guide 1.92 (Reference 10).
The containment building structures will also be analyzed for other normal (dead and live loads) and abnormal loading conditions l
(pressure and thermal loads of LOCA) using appropriate finite j
element models and stetic or dynamic methods of structural analysis.
The response results of the seismic normal and abnormal loading i
conditions will be combined and compared with the allowable values l
in accordance with NRC standard review plan 3.8.4.
The mathe-l matical model, load combinations, analytical methodology, etc
([)
will be reviewed with DPC/NRC prior to performing the detail analyses work.
From the above analyses the maximum ground 1'
L
i 4
}
acceleration that the' plant could withstand without making major structural modifications to the containment building will be
()
developed.
Based upon this DPC determined maximum ground' acceleration value, LLL recommendations and NRC experience with other utilities j
participating in the SEP, NRC will' select the maximum ground acceleration and site seismic spectra as indicated in the flow chart.
4 If major plant structural modifications are required to meet the NRC seismic criteria using conventional seismic analysis methods, i
NES will perform non-linear time history seismic analyses to take advantage of the additional material strength (reserve energy) available in the plastic range.
Also wherever feasible pro-balitic combination of various loadings will be considered.
As indicated in the seismic analyses flow chart, mathematical i
i models, load combinations, structural acceptance criteria, etc.
will be similarly developed for essential equipment.
These equipment and essential systems will be evaluated to verify their adequacy to survive and seismic and/or a LOCA event by using appropriate analytical methods, available environmental test results for similar equipment and/or in sites vibration testing.
In the analytical methods, the floor response spectra or floor response time history results from the containment building seismic analysis.will be used as input seismic motion.
Informa-g tion (models,, input data, etc.) available from prior GU study and NES analyses work (Reference 1 through 6) will be utilized to reduce the effort required in the SEP analysis work.
The i
seismic and structural analyses will be performed using STARDYNE, j
ANSYS and PIPESD computer codes (References 16 through 18).
D.
Workscope Since the SEP seismic / structural analysis work is quite extensive, the workscope for the analysis of each individual building structure, equipment, and piping system will be furnished to DPC prior to starting the detail analysis work.
l The workscope for the seismic / structural evaluation of the containment building which is being performed by NES is given below l
1.
Prepara lumped mass mathematical of the containment building including soil structure interaction effects.
2.
Develop member properties, lumped masses and base input I
motion tl 3.
Perform seismic analysis.
ll (s) l l
~
l
- s i
4.
Prepare finite element.models of the contalmeent building to evaluate the effects of other normal and abnormal loadings.
5.
Prepare stiffness properties and input data for ths normal and abnormal loading conditions.
6.
Perform appropriate static / dynamic analysis of the finite -
element models.
7.
Evaluate 'the effects of the combined seismic and' other normal /
abnormal loading conditions on the overall containment building structures and on the local critical. areas such as pile foundation, containment to foundation interface, opening for the personnel lock, overhead tank, crane to support column, reactor vessel to pedestal connection, etc.
8.
Develop the acceptable maximum horizontal ground acceleration values.
9.
Prepare the detail analysis report.
4 1
i ll 8
M
r E.
Task Engineer I. Husain will be Task Engineer for this workscope.
G.
Schedule The workscope items will be completed within five months.
H.
Re fe rences 1.
GUS Report No. SS-1162, Seismic Evaluation of the Lacrosse Boiling Water Reactor 2.
NES 81A0089, Seismic and Stress Analysis of LACBWR Recirculation Piping System.
3.
NES 81A0038, Seismic and Stress Analysis of LACBWR Main Steam Piping System 4.
NES 81A0087, Seismic and Stress Analysis of LACBWR Feedwater Piping System.
5.
NES 81A0090, Seismic and Stress Analysis of LACBWR High Pressure Core Spray Suction Line Piping System.
6.
NES 81A0091, Seismic and Stress Analysis of High Pressure Core Spray Discharge Line Piping System.
7.
USNRC Standard Review Plan, Section 3.8.4.
8.
USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.60 " Design Response Spectra for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants" Rev.1, December 1973.
9.
USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.61, " Damping Values. Tor Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants", October 1973.
d
-L
10.
USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.92, " Combination of Modes and spatial Components in Seismic Response Analysis", Rev. 1, February, 1976.
11.
USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.122 " Development of Floor Design
' Response Spectra for Seismic. Design of Floor-Supported Equipment,or Components", September 1976.
, 12.
USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.57 " Design Limits and Loading
, Combinations for Metal Primary Reactor Containment System Components", June 1973.
13.
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III*, Division 1, 1974 Edition, Nuclear Power Plant Components.
14.
"AISC, Steel Cor.struction Manual", American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc., New York, Seventh Edition,1970.
15.
" Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-71)", American Concrete Institute, March 1973.
16.
MRI/STARDYNE 3 - Static and Dynamic Structural Analysis Systems for Scope 3.4 operating System User's Information -
Manual, Revision A, Control
- Data Corporation, August, 1976.
17.
Swanson Analysis, Inc., "ANSYS - Engineering Analysis System
-)
User Information Manual", Revision D, Control Data Corporation, March, 1976.
18.
URS/ John A. Blume and Associates "PIPESD" - Pipe Static, Dynamic and Thermal Transient Analysis System, Version 5.1, Revision F, Control Data Corporation, December 1977.
O
(-.
O C3 st, - sns,uc amysrs ne rum G;;;;)
EMEJ NbC/DPC/NES MEETING MAC DEVE1APS DPC/NES TO AGREE ON ESSENTIAL LIST OF BSSSETIAL MVIEW OF EQUIPME*1 AND LOAD 50UIPUENT sac LIST Cons! NATIONS g gggggg gg,
@ 14AD CONSINATIONS hh ji W
DEVE1DP 14AD maEIMAtlas b
PIODEL AfBALTIE WRC/DPC/NES MEETING C0erTAlesumert CONTatuMENT SLDC.
TO AGREE ON MAX G's 301131NG FOR MAX C's ABID SITE SEs*MIC SPECTRA ANALY1E CONTAINMENT SUILDING
=0
=0
=- ()
-0 4 l DEVEthP 1AADS CIE AIBALT4E EQVIPMENT INSIDE ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENT N COIS. 05 CONTAINMENT SIDG.
INSIDE CENT. SLOG. _
CDNTAlteSNT
- O SUILDING g
seODEL ESSENTIAL SQUIPMENT IWSIDE CONT. SLDG.
IDAD cons. On EQUIP.
INSIDE CONT. 31DG.
DEVELOP LOADS Cal ARIALTSE EQUIPMENT OUTSIDE ESSENTIAL EQUIP.
CONTAINbtENT BLDC.
OUTSIDE CONT, sLDC.
d peCDEL ESSEN f!AL EQUIP.
OUTSIDE CCNT. BLOG.
14AD Coma. ON EQUIP.
OUTSIDE CONT. BLDG.
G Pague &
//
3-D/EE
/ ".
ED MAR 261979 NUCLEAR ENERGY SERVICES, INC.
NES DIVISON fff 1
c Eb to o
Uon rem 6es I
Mr. Richard E. Shinshak March 22, 1979
(
Lacrosse Boiling Water Reactor Project / Task No.: 5101 g
Dairyland Power Cooperative Reference No.: 5101-481 s
P.O. Box 135 l
Genoa, W1.
54632
Subject:
SEP - Seismic and Structural Analysis k
Re ference:
Telecon between R. E. Shimshak and R. A. Milos, same Subject, on March 20, 1979 Dear Mr. Shimshaka i
Enclosed is the revised SEP - Seismic Analysis Flow Chart which you requested in the referenced telecon. This flow chart was revised to indic. ate completion dates for the containment building-todel, the containment steel shell analysis and the complete con-tainment building analysis to determine the maximum seismic loads which the containment building can survive. The flow chart also indicates the time intervals to complete other specific analyses, which wilI be required after the site specific spectra have been established and agreed to by DPC and NRC.
Enclosed also is a copy of the SEP - seismic and structural analyses Task Plan which was sent to you on October 24, 1978 with letter 5101-420.
If we can be of further assistance, please call.
Very truly yours, NUCLEAR ENERGY SERVICES, INC.
NES Division 2
RAM:ma Richard A. Milos Enc.
Project Manager ces W. J. Manion A. H. Yoli di I. Husain ry f5' Q:wvds /
i e
[p..L...'...:,)k}hl h b.
b i,
o i
, Y...
j
~
b
,i 6
11
~
i g 21 1,
- lg e a
E I
g l1*
n a
s!
c 2
C
![
l i j
l l e!!!
~
si 11 N
ll !
si v 'i l i
i i
n Rau 5.
e.
sg
!I EiE 50
[i "El il
~
g~
I 1i j~
li g
ge 5!
si e
15 5
e ll
- s 2g
!ni NF 3
ee 2
h c --
e G
I E2 Et,0 iji 115 i
isli 15!
r
~
vi vi-1:1 1,1 I " f$
}=
O Ili 0lll')(
11 s
m i k Il lil il li 15
.O i
e m
-