ML20127L067
| ML20127L067 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 01/19/1993 |
| From: | Zeringue O TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| REF-GTECI-046, REF-GTECI-NI, TASK-046, TASK-46, TASK-OR GL-87-02, GL-87-2, GL-88-20, TAC-M69430, TAC-M69431, TAC-M69432, NUDOCS 9301260322 | |
| Download: ML20127L067 (20) | |
Text
_ _
4 i
e-nn Tenressee Va-!!ey Aothonty. Pont Othca B.>x 20(n Decatur. %tama 35009-2000 JAN 191993 O. J "Ike" Zenngue Wce Piesdent. Browns Ferry Naciear P' ant U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.
20555 Gentlement In the Matter Of
)
Docket Nos. 50-259 Tennessee Valley Authority
)
50-260 50-296 BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT (BFN) - GENERIC. LETTER (GL) 87-02, SUPPLEMENT 1, 120-DAY RESPONSE, REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
References:
1.
Letter from NRC to TVA, dated November 19, 1992, Generic Letter 87-02, Supplement 1-Response - Browns Ferry
' Nuclear Plant (TAC Nos. M69430, M69431,-M69432) 2.
Letter from TVA-to NRC, dated-September 21, 1992, Supplement 1 to GL 87-02 and Supplement 4 to GL 88-20
Response
3.
Letter from NRC to TVA, dated May 22,11992, Supplement I s
to GL 87-02 that transmits Supplemental Safety Evaluation No. 2 (SSER No. 2) on SQUG Generic Implementation Procedure, Revision 2, as corrected on February 14, 1992 (GIP-2) 4.
Letter from NRC to TVA, dated January 23, 1991, NUREG-l 1232, Volume 3, Supplement 2, Safety Evaluation Report, TVA's Browns Ferry Nuclear Performance Plan This letter provi6es TVA's_. response to request for additional information-identified by the staff in the SER.(Reference 1) regarding BFN's-120-day response (Reference 2) to Supplement 1-to GL 87-02 (Reference 3),
" Verification of Seis.nic Adequacy of Mechanical and Electrical Equipment in Operating Reactors, Unresolved Safety Issue (USI)-A-46" for BFN,1 Units 1,
2 and 3.
__ to this letter provides a summary'of[NRC requests and the corresponding.TVA response. -TVA considers that-the'information-requested-by NRC has been provided:and: requests the" issuance of a revised SER,
-250030-0h mya q
~g i
?
i 2
U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission JAH 191993 to this letter provides a summary of BFN's GL 87-02, Supplement 1 commitments.
If you have any questions, contact G.
D.
Pierce, Interim Manager of Sito Licensing, at (205) 729-7566.
Sincerely, hIl
,/
O.
J.
Zeringue Enclosures cc (Enclosures):
NRC Resident Inspector Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant toute 12, Box 637 Athens, Alabama 35611 Mr. Thierry M.
Ross, Project Manager U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission one White Flint, North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852 Mr.
B. A.
Wilson, Project Chief U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, NW, Suite 2000 Atlanta, Georgia 30323
ENCLOSURE 1 BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT GENERIC LETTER 87-02, SUPPLEMENT 1 SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT (SER) OPEN ITEMS 1.
NRC Recuest TVA is requested to submit a more explicit commitment to GIP-2 in its entirety, which includes both the seismic Qualification Utility Group (SQUG) commitments and the implementation guidance.
TVA Response The NRC staff identified a concern regardir.g whether TVA will fully implement all provisions of the guidance sections of the GIP and, if not, what will be TVA's process for notifying the staff of deviations. With regard to this concern, TVA's actions will be in accordance with Part I, section 1.3 of the GIP, Revision 2 (corrected February 14, 1992), which was accepted by the staff in Reference 3.
Under Section 1.3 of the GIP, A-46 licensees may substitute clearly equivalent methods for implementation guidance without prior notification of NRC.
However, TVA recognizes that NRC must be notified of significant or programmatic deviations from the GIP guidance.
Notification should be as early as possible, but no later than the final summary report.
2.
NRC Reauest TVA is requested to identify a more precise completion date, consistent with the provisions of Supplement No. 1 to GL 87-02 for resolution of USI A-46 at BFN, Units 2 and 3.
TVA Response Section II.4.2.3, Table A, of SSER No. 2 identifies Units 1 and 2 as Category 3 plants (pre-1976 OL plant) and Unit 3 as a double asterisk Category 1 plant (post-1976 OL plant with Housner-type ground response spectra). The three-year period for plant specific implementation does not begin for plants in these categories until one of the following conditions is mets (1) the receipt of staff approval of the instructure response spectra to be used to resolve the USI A-46 (2) 60 days following the licensee's initial submittal of acceptable procedures and criteria in generating those instructure spectra.
Accordingly, TVA will implement its resolution of USI A-46 and the seismic portion of GL 88-20, Individral Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) for BFN, Units 2 and 3 by March 19, 1996.
The above date assumes staff acceptance of BFN's instructure response spectra by March 19, 1993.
Additionally, for Unit 3, TVA will complete the portion of the USI A-46 program pertaining to conduit and cable trays (including their supports) prior to restart.
(See item 4 below.) The Unit 1 implementation schedule, as accepted by the staff in Reference 1, remains prior to restart.
1 ENCLOSURE 1 Page 2 BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT GENERIC LETTER 87-02, SUPPLEMENT'2 4
SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT (SER) OPEN ITEMS 3.
HRC Recuest a
TVA is requested to specify the criteria and procedures which it intends to use for the interim qualification of flexible conduit at BFN, Units 1 and 3, and for long-term qualification of flexible conduit at BFN, Units 1, 2 and 3 prior to implementation.
t TVA Response seismic qualification of flexible conduit, other than those connected to 1
electrical equipment covered by 10 CFR 50.49 (i.e.,
important to safety, but in a mild environment), will be included as part of the resolution of USI A-46.
Seismic adequacy of flexible conduit installations will be ir. eluded with the cable and conduit review in accordance with Section 8 of j
GIP Revision 2, which includes Appendix D, specifically Section D.4, which addresses the flexibility of attached lines to safety-related equipment.
4 Flexible conduits attached to electrical equipment covered by 10 CFR 50.49 are not considered within the scope of USI A-46.
These flexible conduits will be inspected for Units 1 and 3 prior to unit restart to accommodate i
thermal and seismic movement using the acceptance criteria of TVA's General Engineering Specification G-40.
This inspection methodology was j
utilized for similar 10 CFR 50.49 flexible conduit in Unit 2 prior to restart and accepted by the staff in Section 3.12 of the Safety Evaluation Report on TVA's Browns Ferry Nuclear Performance Plan, NUREG-1232, Volume 3, Supplement 2, (Reference 4).
4.
NRC Recuest 3
TVA is requested to inform the staff how it intends to fulfill restart commitments, regarding interim seismic qualification of conduits and cable trays (including their supports), for Unit 3.
TVA Response As delineated in item 2 above, BFN will complete the conduit and cable tray (including their supports) portion of the USI A-46 program for Unit 3 prior to restart. This will eliminate the need for a costly and time consuming interim program and allow TVA resources to be better utilized in the long-term resolution of USI A-46 and other seismic issues.
5.
NRC Recuest TVA is requested to provide sufficiently detailed information for the staff to determine if the methodology for generating the in-structure response spectra for BFN is conservative or median-centered. This information should include as a minimum a.
Time history (ies) to be. utilized b.
Structural modeling c.
Soil-Structure Interaction Considerations d.
Consideration of three components of earthquake e.
Damping values
j W
j ENCLOSURE 1 Page 3 BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT l
GENERIC LETTER 87-02, SUPPLEMENT 1 SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT (SER) OPEN ITEMS In addition, TVA is requested to clarify its response with regard to usage of the in-structure response spectra as discussed in Section 12.2.2.8 of the FSAR.
TVA Response TVA intends to use the licensing-basis spectra as described in section 12.2 of the BFN FSAR and accepted by NRC in NUREG 1232, Supplement I and is considered by TVA to be conservative design.
An artificial time-history was used for generating amplified response spectra (ARS) to be used for the subsystem evaluations (FSAR 2.5.4).
FSAR Figure 2.5-11 depicts the acceleration, velocity, and displacement time history for this record and is included as Attachment 1 to Enclosure 1.
The artificial time history satisfied the Standard Review Plan (SRP)
Enveloping Guidelines and was accepted by NRC in Section 2.2.1 of NUREG-1232, Volume 3, Supplement 1.
As listed in Section 12 of the FSAR, the seismic class I structures at Browns Ferry include the reactor building,' pumping station structures, diesel generator buildings (DGB), reinforced concrete stack, standby gas treatment building (SGTB), residual heat removal (RHR) service water tunnel, equipment access lock, and off-gas treatment building (OGTB).
Among these structures, the reactor building, stack and pumping station structures are founded on rock. The remaining structures are either supported o.. the surface of the layered soil or are buried in the soil with the exceptions of the OGTB which is supported on rock and buried in soil and the RHR service water tunnel which is supported on piles driven to the bed rock.
When the rock-supported structures were analyzed, the input motion was directly applied at the base of the structural model. As for the soil-supported structures, the input ground motion, as required by the (SAR, was defined.at bedrock.
Because the ground motion needs to be applied directly to the building model which is supported on the surface of the soil stratum or buried in soil, this motior. was amplified through the soil column.
For calculating the amplification factor, as discussed in NRC Inspection Reports 50-260/88-38 and 50-260/88-39, TVA (1) used a soil amplification factor (SAF) of 1.6 which is consistent with the FSAR to the horizontal bedrock motion for the seismic analysis, (2) computed the vertical SAF using the same thacey and method for calculating the ho.-izontal SAFs, and (3) calculated the SAF for the buried structures by an interpolation technique based on the first shear mode of the soil stratum. The final calculated SAFs for different buildings are tabulated
'below:
SAF Buildinc/ Location Horizontal Vertical Diesel generator building 1.6 1.1 Standby gas treatment building 1.6 1.2 RHR service water tunnel--base slab 1.6 1.0 Off-gas treatment building 1.6 1.3
ENCLOSURE 1 Page 4 BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT GENERIC LETTER 87-02, SUPPLEMENT 1 3AFETY EVALUATION REPORT (SER) OPEN ITEMS For the rock supported structures the structural models are given in Attachments 2, 3, and 4 of Enclosure 1 for the Reactor Building, Stack, and Pumping Station respectively.
For calculating the reoponses at locations inside the drywell, a lumped-mass model with four sticks was used.
These four sticks represent the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) and pedestal, the biological shield wall, the drywell steel, and the reactor building.
Five-percent damping was assigned for the reactor building, shield wall, and pedestal; 3.5-percent damping for the control rod drive housings; 7-percent damping for the fuel; 2-percent damping for the star trues, stabilizer, and refueling bellows; and 1-percent damping for the drywell steel, reactor vezael including internals, and vessel supports.
For calculating the responses at locations outside the drywell, a single-stick, lumped-maus model with 5-percent damping for all modes was used.
For soil supported structures the structural models are given in Attachments 5, 6,
7 and 8 of Enclosure 1 for the Diesel Generator Buildings, Standby Gas Treatment Building, RHR Service Water Tunnel, and the Off-Gas Treatment Building, respectively. A damping value of 5 percent was assigned to all modes of analysis including soil modes.
The Square Root of the Sum of the Square method was applied for the modal combination to calculate the total structural response.
Consideration of three components of earthquake was given to the dynamic analysis of structures at BFN.
As stated in the BFN FSAR, section 12.2.2.8.1, separate analyses are performed for the north-south, east-west, and ve-tical directions. Coupling effects between the horizontal and sertical responses are censidered only for soil supported structures.
The seismic analysis of the Class I Structures is described in the FSAR sections as given in the Table below Seismic Class I Structures FSAR REFERENCE Reactor Building 12.2.2.8 Intake Pumping Station 12.2.7.1 Diesel Generator Building - Units 1 & 2 12.2.8.3 Diesel Generator Building - Unit 3 12.2.13.3 Stack 12.2.4 Standby-Gas Treatment Building 12.2.10.2 RHR Service Water Tunnel 12.2.16 Off-Gas Treatment Building 12.2.14 6.
NRC Recuest TVA is requested to inform the staff whether it intends to change its licensing basis via 10 CFR 50.59 to reflect commitments to the USI A-46 methodology prior to receipt of the staff's plant specific SER.
ENCLOSURE I Page 5 BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT GENERIC LETTER 87-02, SUPPLEMENT 1 SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT (SER) OPEN ITEMS TVA Peef>onse TVA interpreted Section I.2.3.1 of SSER No. 2 to require a response from only those iicensees that intended to change their licensing basis prior to receipt of the staff's plant-specific SER.
TVA does not intend to change the licensing basis for DFN, Units 1, 2 and 3 prior to the receipt of the staff's plant-specific SER.
I 1
ENCLOSURE i.
ATTACHMENT 1 t
I
.e i
n 1
t I
r, N
o d'
s
\\
a m
e e
l
,. w w
n ai e.
in 4/.1 m
e e
e a
m
.. =
.=
=
n n.
a e
w c
re.o H
{
m Nx
,a 7*.
Ma e
ga l
U J
l us to~
- vs ta 9!
I o w
u m,
l Y
_ n l
U
~
__ 5 Pd e-m f
E Q
l a
w e
~
_ g 4
A T
4 Pm m
___ s- "~
M c.e-
}
m a
m 8
n.
o e
e n.
i e
i ACCELERATION (g)
VELOCITY (in/sec)=
DISPLACEMENT (in) y 9-
-t u-v4q-m-4
-p g
- y&
4-g-
-tem C
9-----gy++.
---p,y-a y.
imp
-.m+
p.
9g
+wwf w gr
-m y--.g
.J.pw.g g-wg 9
,,-W.yygs-Wgp.
y ey,wg.
g- + - +,,
pg
%,.myug rT et
ENCLOSURE 1 ATTACHMENT 2A I
El 720'-4h'*
i 1
2 2
El 700'-0"
@h N
@@ @r n-
. n z.m a
_n 11910*
/f.t}*
406 !}*
g fjto*
f419*
10%9*
ff p*
1913' j*
b W E) f/td4 0 s
- u. -
3,
.- r 1.
m.
I y
y /~
\\*
~ y'
,y parf (p.
8
' ~-
,4, b
p.
U.
,,n t p.,,,
Cd-g s
.~4 s
re~l it' '*'o
. ] !f
~ ~
4
(
y a
g,,,,,,
K I <or,
,.t k
)
n os> *> ' nessey
(
=,
\\, l '*
-rn e 1
1 cJun c
K ug,rm f
E
)
_,/4 t# //s f
A ness m,
a ce u.s to ev
' 8
k n< s-7 f.t. :.. % _ " _
,,,o.
_, ; E!!!.!1
'~
OH2
, -i p
11
-q.
./..
s,:. *
,1 e
y,- p
.,n ig t
6.
4 T ' 0 mn ri,/,m,,,,
r---------..
,a u, ll))j.kQ unsi-.r y
s.,
~4'!*
19V*
C
!s!*
31% d*
a U.153 0,
g_
' M.. * -
l*,',
{'I.ll0 l
Fl y,, ym,
- n. Rill.
=-
w..,,,,
y, -
7
. a.
l a< sus 0o 6
u glw=W.M e v ~ -. a gg.. }g;w d'F
%z nu2.
.,,. :,,,,,n c- /-
c ">m-a
\\,.
r IJetu
> nsan.=-
s.
- l
~
% R340 E" M' ass"e 'Jt..* f e
p.'
6 s~
t
_1_ sim a-wo -s u.
s r.
. _,,,,77
~.,
,,,a,.,~ :.
ra.,
[_
re.s *< e = ",..-
n
,.,a, ca.,k s. u s
- 2s mg O 2
100
.i us,,o,pJ ~ - _ m,_. '. g._
J. __ _es_y mm
- )t1'r er-pe
.--. w r,
nr wo.
w g.
in.r <r 2
u,,,,....
,,,,. m I
no e l
Figure J-l Reactor Building (Outside Drywell) Hodel
.. _. _. _.. _ _ _ _ _ _.. _. _. ~.. - _ _. _. _.. _ _. _ _ _. - _. _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _.... _. _. _. ~.. _. _ _. _..
ENCLOSURE 1 ATTACHMENT 2B
<r1._Z2n 174' o 2_ 700.000' R/B ENCLOSURE u 3 664.000' BELLOWS 9
652.000' o
lN00ELf
- 64 333' RPV
'4 "=nnn' i
f8._fL40JE5!
I 12 ~ 637.333'
, See
.j25.250.5% 3,7_ 624.667' g y 95,
'g.
j82 65',
" 30 62 TRUSS 1
IEC867'~ ~ ~ 1>5_621.250.'_
0
- ^
o 31 613.917' 17 610.810' lK-3
' STABILIZER o
18._505.786' o
l r
DRYWELL 19 599.648' I
E-
\\b, 20 594.980' 8
595.250' 32 s> 6 593.000' 8
_g( 8, _ q 99,,8 587.333' o h B10 LOGICAL._
SHIELD WALL
- 23. 579.980'-~
t 575.719' 35 579.219' 34 o
o 24 574.390' 573.250' r - --' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 5 o
o 25 569.417' o
570.000' 42
- 26. 564.065' o 7 565.000' 43 o
.M5J17' 27 559.970' PEDESTAL 557.917' Q
28 554.250' o
550.917' 45 29
. DB ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~* ~ ~ ~ ~ ""* ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 g.,. 55,0,J C 39 "L
549.917' 39_5R. 089' qp8 537.000' 40519.000' Wf////W/
l
\\
FICURE f(-l lumped-Hass. Hultiple-Stick Hodel of Reactor Building and Internal Structures l
l
..a
ENCLOSURE 1 ATTACHMENT 2C 7'
E1. 651.263' E1. 646.977'_
76 El. 642.6908 BFFilrl tun N
77 BELLOWS _E1. 64b.06
,g
^RPV SHELL E1. 637.065*
i v79 E1. 630.900'-
00 n 607' TOP OF STEM o
063_E1. 62.
81 SEPARATOR W
OE gg STA0lm o
E1, 625,06S
- STEM SEPARATOR r1. A70.1n7' n3 o 55
-o El. 614.870' SitR000
__ F1. 611.670',,5 o 0 67 u
MIDDIF OF TOP 4~
' 00 '
r GUl0E 8"
[El 0.4 37 o o 68 CT6 F1 603.n00',
o69 o Ao E1. 601,73g' 08' 49, E1. 599.576'-
09 " 070 o
El. 597.420s 90" "71
' 50 91 o 0 7W ;51 El, 595.263' TOP OF GUTOE TUDES
,St J 1 591.905: aho 591.592.102.',
o,
l' 608.940* 34u ",7 0 '
s m ngx 4
4
_o
'55_ E4. San, joy!
u El. 582.815i 9517 103 96<
- *K o SS 3
I b X
. E1. 582.232' U UOUSING El. 582.2328 4
0 Y9 5' E1. 580,237*
-v VESSEL SUPPORT ga Q. 577.982' 104 o RT E1. 576.534 E1. 574.870' J 05_. - o 59
[g'9}
E1. 572.464' j
,lL o 60 f
PEDESTAL El. 570.056' g/
JIDZ-o 61 I
,67 E1. 567:649' I
CRD !!0Usina I
fl UTC K-2 ll0rf gongg3 g4ngCI Of RP Bnd its intCrnals 9
.. ~.
ENCLOSURE 1 t
ATTACHMENT 2D El. 651.253' RPV q
E1. 614.870' 49 E1. 611.670'
-o50 FUEL. -
_ E1. 608.784' O46 511R000 -
ri. 6nn ?ni' y,3 El. 601.132'
-051 CR0GUIDETUBE F1. 595 263' o 47:
___E1. Enn.940'
>52 rl. _ KRadn? '
El 4 K
El. 582.815' 55, 1 M2 El. 582.232' 56
=
J. 577.982'-
, 4g
_ F1. 576.5348
' 5[g, l
- t l
l' SKIRT 8
PEQESTAl.
lI-FIGURE K-3 Vertical'H0 del of RPV and Its Internals
ENCLOSURE 1 ATTACHMENT 3 Flexlble O I 19
- Heober
,- - e R 1 g i d
}
Hember r!
i i
l 310 -
10 f,
- n......
~
l-t; l
1 J
er se j
l I
(
N.
t q
1
~
I
\\
\\
l
(
j 3
3~
s
]
f 'M_.. --
I.
l
, w.,.v....
)
lj-
}
- I,.
1 f"h
{
I'[.
t [
204 W' Exh I
,'...k..,
}
Vent
,,,,) g p
e) q.g!:'!:*/
M Jg,Lt n e -,
7
/\\
l
.grc; Ywa (
tre
- ,,, T -
l
+
r
.T.
/'.".,l'y "b.,
f.l
>.7l;;a.,7 ""!" "',6, i,,
I 2020 E F.:c{Q I
I:
h
- h':,. -
lh }
j.we.,~
Jj:f:.
.-.....h..
H i
y t-i
,, [_ {
.h
.. r-i e ~-
N l_
ICS y
~
~....i** ** 'o~'
,,,,,,o,o o
g l
Shell JCC, tot A
- A Figure C-1 flathetantical Model of Chimney / Stack System
l ENCLOSURE 1 I
j' i
ATTACHMENT 4 i
L I
1
,I j
I
,~
2
.j
]
v y
3
. T{v C
d
.l 1
. l. l 3
k,. J' y *1 t
i a
,1 i.
1 i
4e t
a t
7.,, y-
- i. k c
u
.o.
- i. e, ii 4
3
% 15 u
1 C
j t;.l J
l n g.... %.I [..
2 N M', l!
'., 0 y
w.c J [
L
.u.
- *I k S.
I
. - l. Ay?,
E id.d'
)
4
- ta l
1 a
4.q f y
'[
d l
)
d'
..q
. Z
. plk j'
]
x e
...,_ _ __. g 4
3 g
y _..
f p
_3 j
-1 f
t
.c 1
.s p
i e
s.I. (
[
1 i
a r
y g
j g
a
-~
--i II u
~
e n
4 G
M 3-g o
e
}%
.a.
- o.
n= s n
so at se 3
n.
0 (1
Q O
- J m
a s
4
(
N J
4
% 0 1
k w
gt q-
.e.
s O
c aiC D
P.
i f
h
- T%.
A I
i, e
=
=
q
.a
= = = =,*L--...........*l j
a n y..
1
[
l
.I l
1 4
- g 4-w I
~g.:,.
g.
I.
i A
.i, e,
la sC l
f,1 Q
' JlEl, c
f
}$
c s.
)
f 4 '-
(
i d
a
.}
{
p l l'.
)
r,=
c
'. 4.{. -
}
I
-1 a
4 u; -
s i
e ki i-a.
1, f
... - - _... _..... ~.,., _ _....,.., _,,.. _,. _,. _,,. _, _ _ _ _,, _,., _,,.,..
I ENCLOSURE 1 ATTACllMENT SA I
i Elevallon (ll)
S l l 594.5 nool 502.00 f >
4 First Fbor 3
572.00 gg 4 >
?
S(>S S Top ol Mat l
A nlgtd Link Cente't of Mat E00.08 l_
4
@8f h
FI uro F-1 Lumped-Mass Models for lho Unlis 1 and 2 DGD D
ENCLOSURE 1 ATTACliMENT SB Elevation (II) 6
( )
607.25 f l 594.5 noog 502.00 f l 4
first floot 3
572.06 gp
( )
2 565,5 Top of Mal
-- afgid Link Centerof Mal W 00 h4 FIDuro r-2 !. umped. Mass Model: for !!io Unit 3 DGD
ENCLOSURE 1 ATTACHMENT 6 i
I f
f RN 4x4Mn m ~7%WEr pr,
/VmYtt4T!0V STACK E/ 503.75 2
o i
l srANweY qas 7xcarneNr 4
RMM
{-
4 1
,mCirsvu
- irrmnm, 7
]
3 I
View Looking North i
4 5
4 Figure 1-1 Lumped Mass Model for Standby Cas Treatment Dullding 4
4 i
ENCLOSURE 1 l
ATTACHMENT 7 i
l Table D-2 ODE SEISHIC DISPLACEMENT PROFILES OF PILE CAPS IN SERVICE WATER TUNNEL l
Cround Deflection (in) l l
l l
l l
l E-W Direction l Vertical 1 Axiol l l Support Location i RD 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1
5 l RD l 5 l 5
l l Profile # 1 l0.0 l0.2 l0.175 l0.11 l0.015 l-0.095 10.0 l0.005l 10.115 l l
l l
l l
l l
l l
1 l
l Prof 11e # 2 l0.0 l0.175 l0.20 l0.175 l0.11 l-0.01 l0.0 l0.005l 10.115 l l
l 1
I l
l l
l l
l
_l l Prof 11e # 3 l0.0 l0.11 l0.175 l0.20 l0.175 l 0.00 l0.0 l0.005l 10.115 l l
l 1
I I
I l
l l
l l
JProfile # 4 l0.0 l0.015 l0.11 l0.175 l0.20 l 0.16 l0.0 l0.005l 10.115 l l
l 1
l i
I I
I I
I I
Decause of piles, there is no vertical dlsplacement of pile cops.
Notes:
1.
Per drawing,17W300-17 E6, there are no axlal (N-S direction) restralnts 2.
of plie caps, supports 2, 3, 4, and 5.
The axlal (N-S direction) movement at the plie caps is 0.2, inches.
3.
The displacement profiles are applicabic to the slabs between the 4.
plie caps.
Vert Vert E
E-W
, j[-W
- Vert Reactor /
E-W DidC
/ Vert E-W Vert
/)
RB N
o
,.f
,_ y 1
(
[P 2
/
~'Yir'~ y,
,?
$W~.q' 4
E-W i
214' %
l Axin] (N-S)
Cround Penetration l
of Pipe
ENCLOSURE 1 ATTACIDfENT 8 l
1 w
w N
a
'3 1
m F'4 I
I g
l C1 e
'O a
wa I
g u
f.
1 c.
I Elu i
<d asuH n.e M
8
{
u g
- M f..
O
- 1...
w
(
c.
.. - t
. y. alt c.
u
. g Lo 1.
(,.b.
o
. en.
w 4
i
?
d 4
7.
g c...
=
f g
4 3.,
g 2.*
N E
5 i
t N
,4
.,*y' 0.
e
.W
?
g
(
y k
g'j d
. s g
=
s, 4
a e *.
s Q
q 4
4 w
.e s
... s-1
.a a
o U
k D e.
o n
M
.ta g.'
e
=4 1
N c
It pe w
.s g
[
g
- \\.(. %
\\,
.wO
,.r.
b o
. ',k, s.2 Q{
. =
- 7......
r
, W'. : -l:..
A g
A c
~
1 l
1 e
4 ENCLOSURE 2 BROWHS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT GENERIC LETTER 87-02, SUPPLEMENT 1 LIST OF COMMITMENTS 1.
TVA commits to use the SQUG nethodology as documented in the GIP, when GIP refers to Revision 2, corrected February 14, 1992 to reso3.ve USI A-46 at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant.
2.
BFN's program to implement GL 87-U2, Supplement 1, fer Units 1, 2 and 3 will incorporate the long-term qualification of conduits and supports, flexible conduits, cable trays and supports, and seismic interactions (class II features over Class I features).
3.
DFN will conduct the seismic portion of the IPEEE using the seismic Margins Methodology developed by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).
4.
BFN will implement GL 87-02, Supplement 1 for the long-term qualification of conduits and supports and cable trays and supports for Unit 3 prior to restart.
5.
A Seismic Evaluation Report summarizing the results of the A-46 and seismic IPEEE programs for BFN Units 2 and 3 will be submitted to NRC by March 19, 1996.
6.
A Seismic Evaluation Report summarizing the results of the A-46 and seismic IPEEE programs for DFN Unit 1 will be submitted to NRC prior to restart.
I
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __-__________-_________ _ - ___