ML13123A159: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 17: Line 17:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:(~ DUKE                                                                     seon L BATSON Vice President ENERG't                                                                   Oconee Nuclear Station Duke Energy ON01VP /7800 Rochester Hwy Seneca, SC 29672 10 CFR 50.90 864-873-3274 864-873-4208 fax April 5. 2013                                                           Scott.Batson@duke-energy.com Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington. DC 20555-0001
{{#Wiki_filter:(~ DUKE ENERG't April 5. 2013 Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington. DC 20555-0001  


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
Duke Energy Carolinas. LLC Oconee Nuclear Station. Units 1. 2. and 3 Docket Numbers 50-269. 50-270. and 50-287.
Duke Energy Carolinas. LLC 10 CFR 50.90 Oconee Nuclear Station. Units 1. 2. and 3 Docket Numbers 50-269. 50-270. and 50-287.
Renewed Operating Licenses DPR-38. DPR-47. and DPR-55 Licensing Basis for the Protected Service Water System - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4
Renewed Operating Licenses DPR-38. DPR-47. and DPR-55 seon L BATSON Vice President Oconee Nuclear Station Duke Energy ON01VP /7800 Rochester Hwy Seneca, SC 29672 864-873-3274 864-873-4208 fax Scott.Batson@duke-energy.com Licensing Basis for the Protected Service Water System - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4  


==References:==
==References:==
Line 31: Line 31:
: 5. Letter from T. Preston Gillespie. Vice President. Oconee Nuclear Station. Duke Energy Carolinas. LLC. to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Licensing Basis for the Protected Service Water System - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 3." dated November 2.2012.
: 5. Letter from T. Preston Gillespie. Vice President. Oconee Nuclear Station. Duke Energy Carolinas. LLC. to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Licensing Basis for the Protected Service Water System - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 3." dated November 2.2012.
: 6. Emails from John Boska. U.S. NRC. to Stephen C. Newman and Timothy D.
: 6. Emails from John Boska. U.S. NRC. to Stephen C. Newman and Timothy D.
Brown. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC. dated November 2 and 9.2012.
Brown. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC. dated November 2 and 9.2012.  


U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April 5, 2013 Page 2 By letter dated June 11, 2012, Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy) formally received a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Request for Additional Information (RAI) (Reference 1) associated with the design and licensing bases for the proposed Protected Service Water (PSW) system. Duke Energy responded to the RAI items by letters dated July 11, July 20, August 31, and November 2, 2012, (References 2, 3, 4, and 5).
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April 5, 2013 Page 2 By {{letter dated|date=June 11, 2012|text=letter dated June 11, 2012}}, Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy) formally received a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Request for Additional Information (RAI) (Reference 1) associated with the design and licensing bases for the proposed Protected Service Water (PSW) system. Duke Energy responded to the RAI items by letters dated July 11, July 20, August 31, and November 2, 2012, (References 2, 3, 4, and 5).
In November and December 2012, there were interactions between Duke Energy and the Staff regarding seismic qualification of PSW building and the associated structures, systems and components. As a result, Duke Energy indicated that revised responses to RAI items 139(e), 141, 160161, and 162, would be provided and the Staff issued new RAI items 168 and 169 via email (Reference 6).
In November and December 2012, there were interactions between Duke Energy and the Staff regarding seismic qualification of PSW building and the associated structures, systems and components. As a result, Duke Energy indicated that revised responses to RAI items 139(e), 141, 160161, and 162, would be provided and the Staff issued new RAI items 168 and 169 via email (Reference 6).
This submittal contains Duke Energy's responses to:
This submittal contains Duke Energy's responses to:
Line 41: Line 41:
If you have any questions in regard to this letter, please contact Stephen C. Newman, Regulatory Affairs Senior Engineer, Oconee Nuclear Station, at (864) 873-4388.
If you have any questions in regard to this letter, please contact Stephen C. Newman, Regulatory Affairs Senior Engineer, Oconee Nuclear Station, at (864) 873-4388.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on April 5, 2013.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on April 5, 2013.
Sincerely, Scott L. Batson Vice President Oconee Nuclear Station Enclosure
Sincerely, Scott L. Batson Vice President Oconee Nuclear Station Enclosure  


U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April 5, 2013 Page 3 cc: (w/enclosure)
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April 5, 2013 Page 3 cc: (w/enclosure)
Mr. John P. Boska, Senior Project Manager (by electronic mail only)
Mr. John P. Boska, Senior Project Manager (by electronic mail only)
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Mr. Victor M. McCree, Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE, Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30303-1257 Mr. Ed Crowe NRC Senior Resident Inspector Oconee Nuclear Station Ms. Susan E. Jenkins, Manager Radioactive & Infectious Waste Management SC Dept. of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull St.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Mr. Victor M. McCree, Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE, Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30303-1257 Mr. Ed Crowe NRC Senior Resident Inspector Oconee Nuclear Station Ms. Susan E. Jenkins, Manager Radioactive & Infectious Waste Management SC Dept. of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull St.
Columbia, SC 29201
Columbia, SC 29201  


Enclosure Responses to Request for Additional Information Supplement 4
Enclosure Responses to Request for Additional Information Supplement 4  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013                                                                                 Page 2 RAI #139(e)
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 RAI #139(e)
Add statements that indicate that the PSW piping has been evaluated for potential interactions with nonseismically qualified systems, structures, and components (II over I).
Page 2 Add statements that indicate that the PSW piping has been evaluated for potential interactions with nonseismically qualified systems, structures, and components (II over I).
Duke Energy Response:
Duke Energy Response:
Duke Energy's July 20,2012, response to RAI item 139(e) is revised as:
Duke Energy's July 20,2012, response to RAI item 139(e) is revised as:
e) Pipe support loads generated by the Oconee Pipe Stress Group calculations OSC-9206, OSC-9S12, and OSC-9241 are transmitted to the Support Design Group for further evaluation. The interaction between the piping systems and surrounding supporting structures are assessed in the applicable support calculations. Deflections from the piping stress models are checked for interactions and all clearances less than two inches are evaluated and noted on the pipe support sketches.
e) Pipe support loads generated by the Oconee Pipe Stress Group calculations OSC-9206, OSC-9S12, and OSC-9241 are transmitted to the Support Design Group for further evaluation. The interaction between the piping systems and surrounding supporting structures are assessed in the applicable support calculations. Deflections from the piping stress models are checked for interactions and all clearances less than two inches are evaluated and noted on the pipe support sketches.
Within the PSW Building are two piping systems that are at opposite ends of the building and do not interact with each other. The Eyewash and Firehose piping is designed to withstand seismic loads and their associated pipe supports are designed as safety related supports such that there are no II over I issues. Within the Auxiliary Building is the PSW Pipe Header. This pipe and its associated supports are deSignated as safety related and are designed to withstand seismic loads. Interaction of these piping systems with non-seismic systems has been identified by Seismic 1111 walkdowns in accordance with Duke Piping Design Criteria PDC-120 Non-Seismic Interactions. Where non-seismic systems, structures and components (SSC's) were identified as potentially interacting with the safety related piping, the safety related piping was re-routed to avoid this interference. When it was not possible to re-route the safety related piping, the interfering SSC has been relocated.
Within the PSW Building are two piping systems that are at opposite ends of the building and do not interact with each other. The Eyewash and Firehose piping is designed to withstand seismic loads and their associated pipe supports are designed as safety related supports such that there are no II over I issues. Within the Auxiliary Building is the PSW Pipe Header. This pipe and its associated supports are deSignated as safety related and are designed to withstand seismic loads. Interaction of these piping systems with non-seismic systems has been identified by Seismic 1111 walkdowns in accordance with Duke Piping Design Criteria PDC-120 Non-Seismic Interactions. Where non-seismic systems, structures and components (SSC's) were identified as potentially interacting with the safety related piping, the safety related piping was re-routed to avoid this interference. When it was not possible to re-route the safety related piping, the interfering SSC has been relocated.  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                 Page 3 RAI #141 According to the licensee's letter dated March 16,2012, the ONS UFSAR mark-up included Section 9.7.1.2.5.1 which states the following:
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 RAI #141 Page 3 According to the licensee's {{letter dated|date=March 16, 2012|text=letter dated March 16,2012}}, the ONS UFSAR mark-up included Section 9.7.1.2.5.1 which states the following:  
"The design response spectra for the new structures correspond to the expected maximum bedrock acceleration of 0.1g (MHE). The design response spectra were developed in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.122 (Reference 15). The dynamic analysis is made using the STAAD-PRO computer program. The structure is built on structural fi ll. A ground motion time history was developed based on the soil properties and amplified response spectra generated at elevations of significant nodal mass."
"The design response spectra for the new structures correspond to the expected maximum bedrock acceleration of 0.1g (MHE). The design response spectra were developed in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.122 (Reference 15). The dynamic analysis is made using the ST AAD-PRO computer program. The structure is built on structural fill. A ground motion time history was developed based on the soil properties and amplified response spectra generated at elevations of significant nodal mass."
Provide the following:
Provide the following:
a) Considering that the PSW building is described as founded on the structural fill, provide a detailed description of rock motion, anchoring point for the input motion, and material properties of soil profile(s) overlaying bedrock (thickness, shear wave velocity, and other relevant material properties. Also, discuss the response amplification calculation process that was used to determine the free-field horizontal and vertical ground motion at the PSW building.
a) Considering that the PSW building is described as founded on the structural fill, provide a detailed description of rock motion, anchoring point for the input motion, and material properties of soil profile(s) overlaying bedrock (thickness, shear wave velocity, and other relevant material properties. Also, discuss the response amplification calculation process that was used to determine the free-field horizontal and vertical ground motion at the PSW building.
b) Provide a detailed description of the procedures used for the seismic analysis of the PSW building and to develop the in-structure response spectra (floor design response spectra).
b) Provide a detailed description of the procedures used for the seismic analysis of the PSW building and to develop the in-structure response spectra (floor design response spectra).
If different from the methods and acceptance criteria outlined in the NRC standard review plan (SRP) 3.7.1 and 3.7.2, identify those differences and provide justification that the PSW building is adequately designed, using these alternative methods, to withstand the effects of earthquake loads.
If different from the methods and acceptance criteria outlined in the NRC standard review plan (SRP) 3.7.1 and 3.7.2, identify those differences and provide justification that the PSW building is adequately designed, using these alternative methods, to withstand the effects of earthquake loads.
c) Confirm and provide further information that STAAD-PRO and all features of this software related to the dynamic response analysis and static analysis have been verified and validated by its provider in compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix 8 and 10 CFR Part 21 . Also, provide documentation, which demonstrates that the software provider has been audited and approved as an Appendix 8 supplier d) Describe the method of combination of modal responses and spatial components used in the PSW building seismic response analysis. If different from the methods outlined in the NRC Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.92, identify those differences and discuss how these alternative methods provide assurance that the PSW building is adequately designed to withstand the effects of earthquake loads.
c) Confirm and provide further information that STAAD-PRO and all features of this software related to the dynamic response analysis and static analysis have been verified and validated by its provider in compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix 8 and 10 CFR Part 21. Also, provide documentation, which demonstrates that the software provider has been audited and approved as an Appendix 8 supplier d) Describe the method of combination of modal responses and spatial components used in the PSW building seismic response analysis. If different from the methods outlined in the NRC Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.92, identify those differences and discuss how these alternative methods provide assurance that the PSW building is adequately designed to withstand the effects of earthquake loads.
Duke Energy Response:
Duke Energy Response:
This revised response supersedes in its entirety the response to NRC Request for Additional Information (RAI) 141 [EMCB6] submitted via Duke Energy Letters dated July 20,2012 and November 02, 2012.
This revised response supersedes in its entirety the response to NRC Request for Additional Information (RAI) 141 [EMCB6] submitted via Duke Energy Letters dated July 20,2012 and November 02, 2012.
Seismic analyses supporting this RAI response comply with guidance provided in SRP 3.7.1, Rev. 3 and SRP 3.7.2, Rev. 3 except as noted in Tables 141-5 and 141-6. Tables 141-5 and 141-6 also provide the justification for non-compliance with the SRP guidance, where applicable.
Seismic analyses supporting this RAI response comply with guidance provided in SRP 3.7.1, Rev. 3 and SRP 3.7.2, Rev. 3 except as noted in Tables 141-5 and 141-6. Tables 141-5 and 141-6 also provide the justification for non-compliance with the SRP guidance, where applicable.  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                   Page 4 a) Input Design Response Spectra and Time Histories Protected Service Water (PSW) building is founded on subgrade. For the PSW building design, the Maximum Hypothetical Earthquake (MHE) response spectra presented in Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Figure 2-55, "Recommended Response Spectra" was used, consistent with Oconee Nuclear Station (ONS) licensing basis (UFSAR Section 3.7.1.1 "Design Response Spectra"). For the PSW building MHE In-structure response spectra (ISRS) generation, the time history record of the North-South (N-S), May 1940 EI Centro earthquake normalized to a peak acceleration of 0.15g was used as the input ground motion for both the vertical and horizontal excitation consistent with the ONS licensing basis (UFSAR Section 3.7.1.2 "Design Time History"). The 5%
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 a) Input Design Response Spectra and Time Histories Page 4 Protected Service Water (PSW) building is founded on subgrade. For the PSW building design, the Maximum Hypothetical Earthquake (MHE) response spectra presented in Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Figure 2-55, "Recommended Response Spectra" was used, consistent with Oconee Nuclear Station (ONS) licensing basis (UFSAR Section 3.7.1.1 "Design Response Spectra"). For the PSW building MHE In-structure response spectra (ISRS) generation, the time history record of the North-South (N-S), May 1940 EI Centro earthquake normalized to a peak acceleration of 0.15g was used as the input ground motion for both the vertical and horizontal excitation consistent with the ONS licensing basis (UFSAR Section 3.7.1.2 "Design Time History"). The 5%
damped response spectra of the North-South (N-S), May 1940 EI Centro earthquake normalized to a peak acceleration of 0.15g essentially envelopes the design response spectra of UFSAR Figures 2-55 as shown in Figure 141-1 considering that the lowest fundamental frequency of the PSW building models is 6.23 Hz. (Tables 141-7 to 141-10).
damped response spectra of the North-South (N-S), May 1940 EI Centro earthquake normalized to a peak acceleration of 0.15g essentially envelopes the design response spectra of UFSAR Figures 2-55 as shown in Figure 141-1 considering that the lowest fundamental frequency of the PSW building models is 6.23 Hz. (Tables 141-7 to 141-10).
The Design Basis Earthquake (DBE) ground response spectra and ground motion time history peak ground acceleration (PGA) are 50% of the MHE response spectra and ground motion time history PGA. ONS MHE is equivalent to the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) and ONS DBE is equivalent to the Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) in today's terminology.
The Design Basis Earthquake (DBE) ground response spectra and ground motion time history peak ground acceleration (PGA) are 50% of the MHE response spectra and ground motion time history PGA. ONS MHE is equivalent to the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) and ONS DBE is equivalent to the Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) in today's terminology.
The use of 0.15g PGA response spectra presented in the UFSAR Figure 2-55 for the PSW building is consistent with that used for design of CT4 Block House, the only other Class 1 ONS structure founded on subgrade.
The use of 0.15g PGA response spectra presented in the UFSAR Figure 2-55 for the PSW building is consistent with that used for design of CT 4 Block House, the only other Class 1 ONS structure founded on subgrade.
The subsurface materials underlying the PSW building location, as well as adjacent areas of the ONS site, have been investigated and are well understood. Direct soil borings and geophysical testing were performed in 2007 in support of the PSW building site evaluation.
The subsurface materials underlying the PSW building location, as well as adjacent areas of the ONS site, have been investigated and are well understood. Direct soil borings and geophysical testing were performed in 2007 in support of the PSW building site evaluation.
Subsurface conditions encountered in the geotechnical investigations of the PSW building site were consistent with those for the Radwaste building and are compatible with information in the UFSAR from the original ONS geotechnical investigations. Thus, the geotechnical investigations for the PSW building site satisfies the purpose and goals of Regulatory Guide 1.132 and the PSW building site is considered to be "well investigated."
Subsurface conditions encountered in the geotechnical investigations of the PSW building site were consistent with those for the Radwaste building and are compatible with information in the UFSAR from the original ONS geotechnical investigations. Thus, the geotechnical investigations for the PSW building site satisfies the purpose and goals of Regulatory Guide 1.132 and the PSW building site is considered to be "well investigated."
Under the PSW building, structural fill constitutes the upper 23 feet of the soil profile.
Under the PSW building, structural fill constitutes the upper 23 feet of the soil profile.
Beneath the fill, the soil profile gradually transitions into rock. Bedrock was established at a depth of 80 feet below the existing ground surface. Shear wave velocity (Vs) values for the subsurface materials underlying the PSW building were calculated from Seismic Cone Penetrometer Testing (SCPT) and Refraction Microtremor (ReMi) testing, together with the information provided from direct soil boring performed for the PSW building design. This information was supplemented by data obtained from the Cross-Hole Velocity (CHV) testing and soil borings performed in 1981 for the adjacent Radwaste building. The soil properties and the soil/rock profile used in the 1-dimensional (1-D) site response analysis are shown in Table 141-1. The Table presents the soil unit weights, the best estimate (BE) low strain (10-4 percent) shear modulus (G), the Poisson's ratio, and the low strain BE, the lower bound (LB), and the upper bound (UB) shear wave velocities (Vs) for the soil profile under the PSW building. The ReMi data was used to characterize the PSW building subsurface soil profile to rock. The Vs measured in the ReMi survey were taken to be the BE shear wave velocities because the ReMi survey yields shear wave velocities averaged
Beneath the fill, the soil profile gradually transitions into rock. Bedrock was established at a depth of 80 feet below the existing ground surface. Shear wave velocity (Vs) values for the subsurface materials underlying the PSW building were calculated from Seismic Cone Penetrometer Testing (SCPT) and Refraction Microtremor (ReMi) testing, together with the information provided from direct soil boring performed for the PSW building design. This information was supplemented by data obtained from the Cross-Hole Velocity (CHV) testing and soil borings performed in 1981 for the adjacent Radwaste building. The soil properties and the soil/rock profile used in the 1-dimensional (1-D) site response analysis are shown in Table 141-1. The Table presents the soil unit weights, the best estimate (BE) low strain (10-4 percent) shear modulus (G), the Poisson's ratio, and the low strain BE, the lower bound (LB), and the upper bound (UB) shear wave velocities (Vs) for the soil profile under the PSW building. The ReMi data was used to characterize the PSW building subsurface soil profile to rock. The Vs measured in the ReMi survey were taken to be the BE shear wave velocities because the ReMi survey yields shear wave velocities averaged  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                               Page 5 over the length of the survey line and the ReMi survey line encompassed the length of the PSW building. The BE shear modulus values were calculated from the corresponding BE shear wave velocities. The LB and the UB shear modulus values obtained using an assigned coefficient of variation (COV) of 0.5 were used to calculate the low strain LB and UB shear wave velocities, respectively. Figure 141-17 presents the values of shear wave velocities versus depth for the PSW building site. As shown in Figure 141-17, the shear wave velocities values obtained from independent geophysical tests are consistent, and the LB and UB values of shear wave velocities reasonably bracket the values of shear wave velocities calculated from the various measurements (ReMi, SCPT, and CHV). For this reason, the use of a COV value of 0.5 for shear modulus is justified.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 5 over the length of the survey line and the ReMi survey line encompassed the length of the PSW building. The BE shear modulus values were calculated from the corresponding BE shear wave velocities. The LB and the UB shear modulus values obtained using an assigned coefficient of variation (COV) of 0.5 were used to calculate the low strain LB and UB shear wave velocities, respectively. Figure 141-17 presents the values of shear wave velocities versus depth for the PSW building site. As shown in Figure 141-17, the shear wave velocities values obtained from independent geophysical tests are consistent, and the LB and UB values of shear wave velocities reasonably bracket the values of shear wave velocities calculated from the various measurements (ReMi, SCPT, and CHV). For this reason, the use of a COV value of 0.5 for shear modulus is justified.
One-dimensional site response analyses were performed using SHAKE2000, "A Computer Program for 1D Analysis of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Problems," (Sargent &
One-dimensional site response analyses were performed using SHAKE2000, "A Computer Program for 1 D Analysis of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Problems," (Sargent &
Lundy Program 03.7.402-3.50) to obtain strain compatible soil properties for the 0.15g MHE ground motion using low strain soil properties in Table 141-1 and strain dependent modulus reduction and damping coefficients from Idriss (1990). Water Table at elevation 752 feet was used in the site response analyses. These strain compatible soil properties obtained from the SHAKE2000 V3.5 site response analyses are shown in Tables 141-2, 141-3, and 141-4 for the LB, BE, and UB soil properties, respectively.
Lundy Program 03.7.402-3.50) to obtain strain compatible soil properties for the 0.15g MHE ground motion using low strain soil properties in Table 141-1 and strain dependent modulus reduction and damping coefficients from Idriss (1990). Water Table at elevation 752 feet was used in the site response analyses. These strain compatible soil properties obtained from the SHAKE2000 V3.5 site response analyses are shown in Tables 141-2, 141-3, and 141-4 for the LB, BE, and UB soil properties, respectively.
The PSW seismic design inputs are as specified in the ONS UFSAR Sections 2.5.2 and 3.7.1. Table 141-5 presents the compliance of the seismic design inputs used for the PSW building seismic evaluations with guidance provided in SRP Section 3.7.1 Revision 3. The PSW building seismic design inputs are compliant with the ONS UFSAR and, in general, different from those in the current SRP guidance.
The PSW seismic design inputs are as specified in the ONS UFSAR Sections 2.5.2 and 3.7.1. Table 141-5 presents the compliance of the seismic design inputs used for the PSW building seismic evaluations with guidance provided in SRP Section 3.7.1 Revision 3. The PSW building seismic design inputs are compliant with the ONS UFSAR and, in general, different from those in the current SRP guidance.
The use of the 0.15g MHE ground motions in ONS UFSAR for the PSW building response analysis is at variance with that described in the July 20,2012 RAI 141 response. The July 20,2012 response to RAI 141 described the development of the MHE surface horizontal response spectra through a 1-D site response analysis. The vertical surface response spectrum was scaled from the horizontal surface response spectra. For the 1-D site response analysis, the recorded N-S, May 1940 EI Centro earthquake time history normalized to 0.1 g was used as rock outcrop motion 80 ft. below ground surface. This method for developing the MHE surface response spectra shape is not appropriate for the PSW site because the N-S, May 1940 EI Centro earthquake motion is a surface motion recorded at a firm soil site (United States Geological Survey (USGS) Site Classification C 180-360 meters/second [590-1180 feet/second] Shear wave velocity). Top of rock under the PSW building is 80 ft. below the ground surface. Use of the N-S, May 1940 EI Centro earthquake time history as the rock outcrop motion to develop MHE surface motion is not appropriate because it has effectively amplified the soil motions twice - once in the original EI Centro recorded time history and second in the 1-D site response analysis performed to develop the PSW building horizontal and vertical MHE ground design response spectra.
The use of the 0.15g MHE ground motions in ONS UFSAR for the PSW building response analysis is at variance with that described in the July 20,2012 RAI 141 response. The July 20,2012 response to RAI 141 described the development of the MHE surface horizontal response spectra through a 1-D site response analysis. The vertical surface response spectrum was scaled from the horizontal surface response spectra. For the 1-D site response analysis, the recorded N-S, May 1940 EI Centro earthquake time history normalized to 0.1 g was used as rock outcrop motion 80 ft. below ground surface. This method for developing the MHE surface response spectra shape is not appropriate for the PSW site because the N-S, May 1940 EI Centro earthquake motion is a surface motion recorded at a firm soil site (United States Geological Survey (USGS) Site Classification C 180-360 meters/second [590-1180 feet/second] Shear wave velocity). Top of rock under the PSW building is 80 ft. below the ground surface. Use of the N-S, May 1940 EI Centro earthquake time history as the rock outcrop motion to develop MHE surface motion is not appropriate because it has effectively amplified the soil motions twice - once in the original EI Centro recorded time history and second in the 1-D site response analysis performed to develop the PSW building horizontal and vertical MHE ground design response spectra.
b) Seismic Design Procedures for PSW Building Design and ISRS Generation The PSW building design has been reevaluated for this revised response to NRC RAI 141
b) Seismic Design Procedures for PSW Building Design and ISRS Generation The PSW building design has been reevaluated for this revised response to NRC RAI 141
[EMCB6]. For this reevaluation, reanalysis of the PSW building has been performed using the "as built" configuration. For the reanalysis, the response spectra method of analysis was used to determine maximum design forces of various structural components of the PSW building and maximum foundation soil bearing pressures. The response spectra specified in ONS UFSAR Figure 2-55 for structures on subgrade was used as the MHE
[EMCB6]. For this reevaluation, reanalysis of the PSW building has been performed using the "as built" configuration. For the reanalysis, the response spectra method of analysis was used to determine maximum design forces of various structural components of the PSW building and maximum foundation soil bearing pressures. The response spectra specified in ONS UFSAR Figure 2-55 for structures on subgrade was used as the MHE  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                   Page 6 foundation input spectra in the seismic analysis for PSW building design as noted in paragraph a) above.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 6 foundation input spectra in the seismic analysis for PSW building design as noted in paragraph a) above.
For PSW building ISRS generation, the time history method of analysis was used to develop absolute acceleration time histories at the various nodes where equipment is located. The ground motion input (EI Centro N-S 1940 time history normalized to 0.15g) for the time history response analysis is described in paragraph a) above.
For PSW building ISRS generation, the time history method of analysis was used to develop absolute acceleration time histories at the various nodes where equipment is located. The ground motion input (EI Centro N-S 1940 time history normalized to 0.15g) for the time history response analysis is described in paragraph a) above.
For both the building design and ISRS generation, the PSW building model and analysis parameters were as follows:
For both the building design and ISRS generation, the PSW building model and analysis parameters were as follows:
i)   The PSW building is a reinforced concrete structure approximately 124 feet long by 33 feet wide. The total building height is about 30 feet (7.75 feet is below grade).
i)
The PSW building is a reinforced concrete structure approximately 124 feet long by 33 feet wide. The total building height is about 30 feet (7.75 feet is below grade).
The building consists of concrete and steel grating floors, a concrete roof, concrete shear walls, and interconnected multiple concrete spread footings. The roof is supported by the exterior walls. The concrete slabs are supported by concrete walls and beams around their perimeters. The steel grating is supported on steel floor framing members spanning between exterior and interior walls with the main steel girders supported at their mid spans by steel columns. All walls and steel columns are supported directly on reinforced concrete spread footings. The battery room foundation on the South end of the building is a slab on grade. The center wall is supported directly on a spread footing approximately 2 feet below grade. All exterior walls are supported on spread footings at elevation 789'-3" (7.75 feet below grade). All spread footings are 24 inches thick and were cast monolithically or with intentionally roughened joints and continuous reinforcement. The east exterior wall footing is supported on concrete fill that extends below the adjacent CCW pipes. The spread footing of the remaining walls and the battery room foundation slab are founded on compacted structural fill. Drawings 0-398-A2-101 Rev. 0, 0-398-A2-102 Rev. N, 0-398-A3-401 Rev. C, and 0-398-A3-403 Rev. 0 show the details of the PSW building and its foundation. These drawings are accessible through the Duke Energy's Share Point system.
The building consists of concrete and steel grating floors, a concrete roof, concrete shear walls, and interconnected multiple concrete spread footings. The roof is supported by the exterior walls. The concrete slabs are supported by concrete walls and beams around their perimeters. The steel grating is supported on steel floor framing members spanning between exterior and interior walls with the main steel girders supported at their mid spans by steel columns. All walls and steel columns are supported directly on reinforced concrete spread footings. The battery room foundation on the South end of the building is a slab on grade. The center wall is supported directly on a spread footing approximately 2 feet below grade. All exterior walls are supported on spread footings at elevation 789'-3" (7.75 feet below grade). All spread footings are 24 inches thick and were cast monolithically or with intentionally roughened joints and continuous reinforcement. The east exterior wall footing is supported on concrete fill that extends below the adjacent CCW pipes. The spread footing of the remaining walls and the battery room foundation slab are founded on compacted structural fill. Drawings 0-398-A2-101 Rev. 0, 0-398-A2-102 Rev. N, 0-398-A3-401 Rev. C, and 0-398-A3-403 Rev. 0 show the details of the PSW building and its foundation. These drawings are accessible through the Duke Energy's Share Point system.
ii) The structure was analyzed using a three dimensional (3-D) Finite Element (FE) model representing the superstructure and the foundations. The concrete elements were modeled using 4-noded thin plate (shell) elements with 6 degrees of freedom (DOF)/node. The steel elements were modeled using 2-node beam elements with 6 DOF/node. Figure 141-2 shows the FEM model used for the seismic analysis of the PSW building. In this figure, the building shell elements are shown in blue. The black circles are member end moment releases at the end of beam elements. The shell elements for the two entry ways and the Battery Room wall foundation are shown in red.
ii) The structure was analyzed using a three dimensional (3-D) Finite Element (FE) model representing the superstructure and the foundations. The concrete elements were modeled using 4-noded thin plate (shell) elements with 6 degrees of freedom (DOF)/node. The steel elements were modeled using 2-node beam elements with 6 DOF/node. Figure 141-2 shows the FEM model used for the seismic analysis of the PSW building. In this figure, the building shell elements are shown in blue. The black circles are member end moment releases at the end of beam elements. The shell elements for the two entry ways and the Battery Room wall foundation are shown in red.
iii) Nodal mass included contributing mass from static loads on the structure. For the mass calculations, 100% of the dead (permanent) loads (e.g., weight of structure and equipment), 50 psf for minor equipmenUpiping/raceways, 25% of the floor live (short term) loads (e.g., general live load), and 75% of the roof snow load were considered. The equipment mass was lumped at the location of the equipment.
iii) Nodal mass included contributing mass from static loads on the structure. For the mass calculations, 100% of the dead (permanent) loads (e.g., weight of structure and equipment), 50 psf for minor equipmenUpiping/raceways, 25% of the floor live (short term) loads (e.g., general live load), and 75% of the roof snow load were considered. The equipment mass was lumped at the location of the equipment.
The mass of cable tray, HVAC ducts, and piping and their supports were modeled as distributed mass on floors and walls.
The mass of cable tray, HVAC ducts, and piping and their supports were modeled as distributed mass on floors and walls.  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                     Page 7 iv) The PSW building model described above was used for the seismic response analysis with two sets of boundary conditions to model the PSW building foundation. The first was a fixed base model where the foundation nodes were fixed consistent with the current seismic design basis (COB) of other ONS Class I structures. The second was a confirmatory model that used Lumped Soil Springs (LSS) to model soil structure interaction (SSI) effects.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 7 iv) The PSW building model described above was used for the seismic response analysis with two sets of boundary conditions to model the PSW building foundation. The first was a fixed base model where the foundation nodes were fixed consistent with the current seismic design basis (COB) of other ONS Class I structures. The second was a confirmatory model that used Lumped Soil Springs (LSS) to model soil structure interaction (SSI) effects.
For the COB model, all the foundation nodes at elevation 789'-3" are fixed in all six degrees of freedom. For the entry ways and Battery Room wall foundation at elevation 797' (shown in red in Figure 141-2), springs to approximately model the elastic restraint provided to these small foundations by the soil under the foundations at elevation 797' were used. Vertical and horizontal soil spring constants were calculated using the ASCE 4-98 Section 3.3.4.2.2 formulation.
For the COB model, all the foundation nodes at elevation 789'-3" are fixed in all six degrees of freedom. For the entry ways and Battery Room wall foundation at elevation 797' (shown in red in Figure 141-2), springs to approximately model the elastic restraint provided to these small foundations by the soil under the foundations at elevation 797' were used. Vertical and horizontal soil spring constants were calculated using the ASCE 4-98 Section 3.3.4.2.2 formulation.
Fixed boundary condition for the battery room wall and entry way foundation was not used because if the entry way and Battery Room wall foundation nodes at elevation 797' are fixed, the response for the operating floor at elevation 797',
Fixed boundary condition for the battery room wall and entry way foundation was not used because if the entry way and Battery Room wall foundation nodes at elevation 797' are fixed, the response for the operating floor at elevation 797',
where most of the equipment is located, will be nonconservative (same as the input ground motion). In addition, the fixed boundary condition will force the majority of lateral load from the operating floor to be resisted by the fixed nodes of the small entry way foundation (approximately 9'x11'). This would not be representative of the "designed" load path where the majority of the operating floor inertia (seismic) loads will be transferred to the building foundation at elevation 789'-3" through supporting shear walls during a seismic event. Free boundary condition at the entry way and Battery Room wall foundation nodes at elevation 797' would result in the entry way structure and Battery Room wall inertia loads transferred to the PSW walls or the Battery Room roof respectively. This also is not representative of the "designed" load path where the inertia loads from the entry way and the Battery Room wall will be partially transferred to the respective foundations at elevation 797'. The modal frequencies and participation factors for the COB model are presented in Table 141-7. The COB model mode shape for mode 1 (predominant Z-direction mode), mode 2 (predominant V-direction mode), mode 72 (first dominant X-direction mode) are presented in Figures 141-3, 141-4, and 141-5, respectively.
where most of the equipment is located, will be nonconservative (same as the input ground motion). In addition, the fixed boundary condition will force the majority of lateral load from the operating floor to be resisted by the fixed nodes of the small entry way foundation (approximately 9'x11'). This would not be representative of the "designed" load path where the majority of the operating floor inertia (seismic) loads will be transferred to the building foundation at elevation 789'-3" through supporting shear walls during a seismic event. Free boundary condition at the entry way and Battery Room wall foundation nodes at elevation 797' would result in the entry way structure and Battery Room wall inertia loads transferred to the PSW walls or the Battery Room roof respectively. This also is not representative of the "designed" load path where the inertia loads from the entry way and the Battery Room wall will be partially transferred to the respective foundations at elevation 797'. The modal frequencies and participation factors for the COB model are presented in Table 141-7. The COB model mode shape for mode 1 (predominant Z-direction mode), mode 2 (predominant V-direction mode), mode 72 (first dominant X-direction mode) are presented in Figures 141-3, 141-4, and 141-5, respectively.
For the LSS models, Tables 141-2, 141-3, and 141-4 soil profile and strain compatible soil properties were used to calculate the LB, BE, and UB LSS parameters for the PSW building response analysis. The methodology detailed in Christiano (1974) was followed to compute the equivalent shear modulus for the layered soil profile under the PSW foundation. In this procedure, average shear modulus value is developed whereby each layer is weighted in accordance with the strain energy in that layer. This method quantifies the diminishing effect of the soil layers on the overall impedance of the foundation soil with increasing depths from the bottom of the foundation. The soil spring parameters (spring constant and damping) were computed based on the formulation in ASCE 4-98 Section 3.3.4.2.2 using the equivalent shear modulus for the layered soil profile. The PSW building foundation consists of interconnected multiple strip footings. The box shaped monolithic N-S and E-W shear walls supported on these strip footings provide the rigidity to the foundation for all the horizontal, vertical, rocking, and torsional degrees of freedom. The LSS vertical and horizontal springs and dampings were computed for the various strips of PSW building foundations. In the 3-D FEM
For the LSS models, Tables 141-2, 141-3, and 141-4 soil profile and strain compatible soil properties were used to calculate the LB, BE, and UB LSS parameters for the PSW building response analysis. The methodology detailed in Christiano (1974) was followed to compute the equivalent shear modulus for the layered soil profile under the PSW foundation. In this procedure, average shear modulus value is developed whereby each layer is weighted in accordance with the strain energy in that layer. This method quantifies the diminishing effect of the soil layers on the overall impedance of the foundation soil with increasing depths from the bottom of the foundation. The soil spring parameters (spring constant and damping) were computed based on the formulation in ASCE 4-98 Section 3.3.4.2.2 using the equivalent shear modulus for the layered soil profile. The PSW building foundation consists of interconnected multiple strip footings. The box shaped monolithic N-S and E-W shear walls supported on these strip footings provide the rigidity to the foundation for all the horizontal, vertical, rocking, and torsional degrees of freedom. The LSS vertical and horizontal springs and dampings were computed for the various strips of PSW building foundations. In the 3-D FEM  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                   Page 8 model, these vertical and horizontal springs also provide the equivalent rocking and torsional lumped soil spring parameters consistent with the spatial distribution of the foundation strips. The modal frequencies and participation factors for the LSS BE, LB, and UB models are presented in Tables 141-8, 141-9, and 141-10, respectively. The LSS BE model mode shapes for mode 1 (predominant z-direction mode), mode 2 (predominant V-direction mode), mode 19 (predominant X-direction mode) are presented in Figures 141-6, 141-7, and 141-8, respectively.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 8 model, these vertical and horizontal springs also provide the equivalent rocking and torsional lumped soil spring parameters consistent with the spatial distribution of the foundation strips. The modal frequencies and participation factors for the LSS BE, LB, and UB models are presented in Tables 141-8, 141-9, and 141-10, respectively. The LSS BE model mode shapes for mode 1 (predominant z-direction mode), mode 2 (predominant V-direction mode), mode 19 (predominant X-direction mode) are presented in Figures 141-6, 141-7, and 141-8, respectively.
v) Consistent with ONS UFSAR Section 3.7.1.3, 2% damping for steel elements and 5% damping for reinforced concrete elements were used for MHE. The 2% steel and 5% concrete MHE damping values are lower (conservative) when compared to the 4% steel and 7% concrete SSE dam pings specified in Regulatory Guide 1.61.
v) Consistent with ONS UFSAR Section 3.7.1.3, 2% damping for steel elements and 5% damping for reinforced concrete elements were used for MHE. The 2% steel and 5% concrete MHE damping values are lower (conservative) when compared to the 4% steel and 7% concrete SSE dam pings specified in Regulatory Guide 1.61.
Composite modal damping (stiffness proportional) was used for both the COB (steel and concrete) and LSS (steel, concrete, and soil) response analyses.
Composite modal damping (stiffness proportional) was used for both the COB (steel and concrete) and LSS (steel, concrete, and soil) response analyses.
Line 106: Line 107:
Except for the 5% damping for concrete elements for DBE, all other damping values either comply or are conservative when compared to the SRP 3.7.2 guidance. For ONS, the DBE corresponds to the present day OBE.
Except for the 5% damping for concrete elements for DBE, all other damping values either comply or are conservative when compared to the SRP 3.7.2 guidance. For ONS, the DBE corresponds to the present day OBE.
vi) Consistent with COB seismic analysis of all ONS safety related structures, un-cracked concrete properties were used for the seismic analysis of the PSW building for the COB and LSS models. Cracked concrete properties were not used.
vi) Consistent with COB seismic analysis of all ONS safety related structures, un-cracked concrete properties were used for the seismic analysis of the PSW building for the COB and LSS models. Cracked concrete properties were not used.
vii) For the COB time history response analysis for ISRS development, 100 modes (up to 42 Hz.) were considered. The modal frequencies, participation factors, and the total participating mass in the X-, Y-, and Z-directions for the COB model are presented in Table 141-7. For the COB response spectra analysis, for shear force calculation, 59 modes (up to 24 Hz.) together with the effect of the missing mass was considered to account for 100% of the total system mass in the three orthogonal directions [X (N-S), Y (Vertical), and Z (E-W)]. The 24 Hz frequency corresponds to the rigid frequency of the input ground response spectra (UFSAR Figure 2-55). For the COB response spectra analysis, for moment calculations, a large number of modes (771 modes) accounting for 96% of the X-directional mass, 90% of the Y-directional mass, and 96% of the Z-directional mass were considered because for moment calculations STAAD-PRO 2007 V8i software does not have the capability to account for the missing mass.
vii) For the COB time history response analysis for ISRS development, 100 modes (up to 42 Hz.) were considered. The modal frequencies, participation factors, and the total participating mass in the X-, Y-, and Z-directions for the COB model are presented in Table 141-7. For the COB response spectra analysis, for shear force calculation, 59 modes (up to 24 Hz.) together with the effect of the missing mass was considered to account for 100% of the total system mass in the three orthogonal directions [X (N-S), Y (Vertical), and Z (E-W)]. The 24 Hz frequency corresponds to the rigid frequency of the input ground response spectra (UFSAR Figure 2-55). For the COB response spectra analysis, for moment calculations, a large number of modes (771 modes) accounting for 96% of the X-directional mass, 90% of the Y-directional mass, and 96% of the Z-directional mass were considered because for moment calculations ST AAD-PRO 2007 V8i software does not have the capability to account for the missing mass.
For the LSS response analysis (both response spectra and time history), sufficient number of modes were considered (61 modes for LB, 76 modes for BE, and 107 modes for UB) to account for at least 95% of the total system mass in each of the three orthogonal directions [X (N-S), Y (Vertical), and Z (E-W)]. The modal frequencies, participation factors, and the total participating mass in the X-, Y-, and Z- directions for the LSS BE, LB, and UB model are presented in Tables 141-8, 141-9, and 141-10, respectively.
For the LSS response analysis (both response spectra and time history), sufficient number of modes were considered (61 modes for LB, 76 modes for BE, and 107 modes for UB) to account for at least 95% of the total system mass in each of the three orthogonal directions [X (N-S), Y (Vertical), and Z (E-W)]. The modal frequencies, participation factors, and the total participating mass in the X-, Y-, and Z-directions for the LSS BE, LB, and UB model are presented in Tables 141-8, 141-9, and 141-10, respectively.
The PSW building seismic forces and moments from the COB and the LSS response spectra analyses were used to evaluate the adequacy of the PSW
The PSW building seismic forces and moments from the COB and the LSS response spectra analyses were used to evaluate the adequacy of the PSW  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                   Page 9 building seismic design (shear walls, slabs, steel framing, column, etc.). Accidental torsion (an eccentricity of +/-5% of the maximum building dimension per SRP 3.7.2) was considered in the PSW building design. The PSW finite element model used for COB and LSS response analysis accurately models the inherent eccentricity of the PSW structure layout. In addition, all significant equipment masses were modeled at their physical locations within the building.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 9 building seismic design (shear walls, slabs, steel framing, column, etc.). Accidental torsion (an eccentricity of +/-5% of the maximum building dimension per SRP 3.7.2) was considered in the PSW building design. The PSW finite element model used for COB and LSS response analysis accurately models the inherent eccentricity of the PSW structure layout. In addition, all significant equipment masses were modeled at their physical locations within the building.
viii} The COB and the LSS models seismic foundation bearing pressures meet the minimum factor of safety (FOS) of 3.0 for static loading and FOS of 2.25 for static plus MHE seismic loading. There is no foundation uplift due to the MHE seismic loading.
viii} The COB and the LSS models seismic foundation bearing pressures meet the minimum factor of safety (FOS) of 3.0 for static loading and FOS of 2.25 for static plus MHE seismic loading. There is no foundation uplift due to the MHE seismic loading.
ix} The PSW building FOS against sliding and overturning meet the minimum required FOS of 1.1 for MHE or Tornado loading. The PSW building MHE base forces and moments are shown in Table 141-11.
ix} The PSW building FOS against sliding and overturning meet the minimum required FOS of 1.1 for MHE or Tornado loading. The PSW building MHE base forces and moments are shown in Table 141-11.
x} The ISRS generation complies with RG 1.122 guidance relative to the frequency intervals for ISRS generation and ISRS peak widening. For developing the PSW building ISRS, the nodal accelerations time histories were developed for the X-, Y-,
x} The ISRS generation complies with RG 1.122 guidance relative to the frequency intervals for ISRS generation and ISRS peak widening. For developing the PSW building ISRS, the nodal accelerations time histories were developed for the X-, Y-,
and Z-excitations individually for 19 selected locations in the PSW building. The selected locations included the location of major equipment, centers and corners of operating floor and roof slabs, and centers of exterior walls panel. At each of the 19 selected locations, each of the X-, Y-, and Z- direction excitation yields three (X-,
and Z-excitations individually for 19 selected locations in the PSW building. The selected locations included the location of major equipment, centers and corners of operating floor and roof slabs, and centers of exterior walls panel. At each of the 19 selected locations, each of the X-, Y-, and Z-direction excitation yields three (X-,
Y-, and Z- directions) response time histories. Unwidened response spectra were developed for these 9 time histories at each of the 19 selected nodes and combined to generate the X-, Y-, and Z-directional ISRS at each node using the combination method described in paragraph d} below. The X-, Y-, and Z-directional ISRS at each of the 19 nodes were then widened +/-15% on the frequency scale. The frequencies for ISRS generation included structural modal frequencies in addition to the frequencies based on Table 1 of RG 1.122. However, periods (1/frequency) closer than 0.0007 seconds were eliminated from the combined RG 1.122 and structural frequencies list. This elimination of extremely close periods has practically no effect on the widened (+/-15%) ISRS used for equipment qualification. ISRS were developed for all applicable damping values for equipment and support qualifications as specified in UFSAR Section 3.7.1.3.
Y-, and Z-directions) response time histories. Unwidened response spectra were developed for these 9 time histories at each of the 19 selected nodes and combined to generate the X-, Y -, and Z-directional ISRS at each node using the combination method described in paragraph d} below. The X-, Y-, and Z-directional ISRS at each of the 19 nodes were then widened +/-15% on the frequency scale. The frequencies for ISRS generation included structural modal frequencies in addition to the frequencies based on Table 1 of RG 1.122. However, periods (1/frequency) closer than 0.0007 seconds were eliminated from the combined RG 1.122 and structural frequencies list. This elimination of extremely close periods has practically no effect on the widened (+/-15%) ISRS used for equipment qualification. ISRS were developed for all applicable damping values for equipment and support qualifications as specified in UFSAR Section 3.7.1.3.
The ISRS were developed for both the COB and LSS analyses at the 19 selected nodes as describe above. In addition, the ISRS for all nodes on the operating floor, battery room roof, PSW building roof, and exterior walls were enveloped to develop enveloped ISRS for the operating floor, the battery room floor, the PSW roof, and the exterior walls, respectively. Finally, the enveloped ISRS for the operating floor, the battery room roof, the PSW building roof, and the exterior walls from the COB and the LSS analyses were enveloped. These enveloped COB and LSS horizontal and vertical ISRS for the operating floor, the battery room roof, the PSW roof, and the exterior walls are shown in Figures 141-9 through 141-16, respectively. The horizontal ISRS in these figures are the envelope of the X- and Z- direction ISRS.
The ISRS were developed for both the COB and LSS analyses at the 19 selected nodes as describe above. In addition, the ISRS for all nodes on the operating floor, battery room roof, PSW building roof, and exterior walls were enveloped to develop enveloped ISRS for the operating floor, the battery room floor, the PSW roof, and the exterior walls, respectively. Finally, the enveloped ISRS for the operating floor, the battery room roof, the PSW building roof, and the exterior walls from the COB and the LSS analyses were enveloped. These enveloped COB and LSS horizontal and vertical ISRS for the operating floor, the battery room roof, the PSW roof, and the exterior walls are shown in Figures 141-9 through 141-16, respectively. The horizontal ISRS in these figures are the envelope of the X-and Z-direction ISRS.
The DBE ISRS are one-half (1/2) of the corresponding MHE ISRS. This is justified because the percent of critical damping for steel and concrete structural elements are the same for MHE and DBE (UFSAR section 3.7.1.3) and the design ground
The DBE ISRS are one-half (1/2) of the corresponding MHE ISRS. This is justified because the percent of critical damping for steel and concrete structural elements are the same for MHE and DBE (UFSAR section 3.7.1.3) and the design ground  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                             Page 10 motion for DBE is one-half of the MHE ground motion (UFSAR sections 3.7.1.1 and 3.7.1 .2).
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 10 motion for DBE is one-half of the MHE ground motion (UFSAR sections 3.7.1.1 and 3.7.1.2).
xi) The seismic 1111 interaction between the PSW building and adjacent structures was addressed in RAI 148. No additional information was developed in response to this RAJ.
xi) The seismic 1111 interaction between the PSW building and adjacent structures was addressed in RAI 148. No additional information was developed in response to this RAJ.
c) Duke Energy contracted Sargent & Lundy (S&L) to perform the PSW building seismic response analysis and ISRS development as a safety related scope to be performed under the S&L QA Program. S&L QA program complies with 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B and 10 CFR Part 21 requirements and has been approved by the NRC (Accession No. ML090750737, ML090750638, and ML12142A195). S&L QA program is audited by NUPIC as a matter of course. Duke Energy subscribes to NUPIC audits. The S&L QA Program and Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)-204 implementation has also been audited by the NRC on past S&L projects (example: South Texas Project, Units 3 and 4 Combined Operating License Application, Docket Number 52-12 and 52-13).
c) Duke Energy contracted Sargent & Lundy (S&L) to perform the PSW building seismic response analysis and ISRS development as a safety related scope to be performed under the S&L QA Program. S&L QA program complies with 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B and 10 CFR Part 21 requirements and has been approved by the NRC (Accession No. ML090750737, ML090750638, and ML12142A195). S&L QA program is audited by NUPIC as a matter of course. Duke Energy subscribes to NUPIC audits. The S&L QA Program and Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)-204 implementation has also been audited by the NRC on past S&L projects (example: South Texas Project, Units 3 and 4 Combined Operating License Application, Docket Number 52-12 and 52-13).
For the PSW building seismic analysis and ISRS development STAAD-PRO 2007 V8i (S&L Program No. 03.7.745-7.4) and RSG V2.0, "Response Spectra Generator" (S&L Program No. 03.7.414-2.0) software were used (OSC-9230). For the 1-0 site response analysis SHAKE2000 V3.5, "A Computer Program for 10 Analysis of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Problems" (S&L Program 03.7.402-3.50) was used. STAAD-PRO 2007 V8i, RSG V2.0, and SHAKE2000 V3.5 software have been validated in accordance with Sargent & Lundy SOP-0204. SOP-0204 governs all software validation and verification (V&V) at S&L and is the implementing procedure for the S&L NQA-1 1994 compliant Nuclear QA Program. S&L has validated STAAD-PRO 2007 V8i for development of the ISRS using the time history method of analysis. S&L has also validated the STAAD-PRO 2007 V8i response spectra method of analysis to calculate element forces and base forces when modal response combinations are performed using the complete quadratic combination (CaC) method.
For the PSW building seismic analysis and ISRS development ST AAD-PRO 2007 V8i (S&L Program No. 03.7.745-7.4) and RSG V2.0, "Response Spectra Generator" (S&L Program No. 03.7.414-2.0) software were used (OSC-9230). For the 1-0 site response analysis SHAKE2000 V3.5, "A Computer Program for 10 Analysis of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Problems" (S&L Program 03.7.402-3.50) was used. STAAD-PRO 2007 V8i, RSG V2.0, and SHAKE2000 V3.5 software have been validated in accordance with Sargent & Lundy SOP-0204. SOP-0204 governs all software validation and verification (V&V) at S&L and is the implementing procedure for the S&L NQA-1 1994 compliant Nuclear QA Program. S&L has validated STAAD-PRO 2007 V8i for development of the ISRS using the time history method of analysis. S&L has also validated the ST AAD-PRO 2007 V8i response spectra method of analysis to calculate element forces and base forces when modal response combinations are performed using the complete quadratic combination (CaC) method.
STAAD-PRO 2007 V8i software was used for the PSW building finite element modeling and seismic analyses. The PSW ISRS were developed using the time history method of analysis. The PSW building element design forces were developed using the response spectra method of analysis. The CQC method was used to combine modal responses when the response spectra method was used.
ST AAD-PRO 2007 V8i software was used for the PSW building finite element modeling and seismic analyses. The PSW ISRS were developed using the time history method of analysis. The PSW building element design forces were developed using the response spectra method of analysis. The CQC method was used to combine modal responses when the response spectra method was used.
The RSG V2.0 software was used for ISRS generation from time history responses at selected nodes of the PSW building model. RSG V2.0 software has been validated for response spectra generation from acceleration time histories and to combine the ISRS using the absolute sum or the SRSS method.
The RSG V2.0 software was used for ISRS generation from time history responses at selected nodes of the PSW building model. RSG V2.0 software has been validated for response spectra generation from acceleration time histories and to combine the ISRS using the absolute sum or the SRSS method.
SHAKE2000 V3.5 software was used for 1-0 site response analysis to compute strain compatible soil properties for the 0.15g MHE ground motions.
SHAKE2000 V3.5 software was used for 1-0 site response analysis to compute strain compatible soil properties for the 0.15g MHE ground motions.
d) For the response spectra method of analysis (used for the PSW building design), the responses were calculated for the X-, Y-, and Z- excitations individually. The modal responses for these individual analyses were combined using the complete quadratic combination (CQC) method in accordance with Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.92, Section C.1.1.
d) For the response spectra method of analysis (used for the PSW building design), the responses were calculated for the X-, Y-, and Z-excitations individually. The modal responses for these individual analyses were combined using the complete quadratic combination (CQC) method in accordance with Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.92, Section C.1.1.  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                               Page 11 For the time history analysis (used for developing the PSW building ISRS), the response was calculated for the X-, Y-, and Z- excitations individually. The modal responses for these individual time history analyses were combined algebraically at each time step.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 11 For the time history analysis (used for developing the PSW building ISRS), the response was calculated for the X-, Y-, and Z-excitations individually. The modal responses for these individual time history analyses were combined algebraically at each time step.
The co-directional responses (maximum element forces and ISRS at selected nodes) from the individual X-, Y-, and Z- direction excitation analysis (using the response spectra method or the time history method) were summed using absolute sum rule to obtain the summed X-component, V-component, and Z- component of the design responses (maximum element forces and ISRS at selected nodes) as follows:
The co-directional responses (maximum element forces and ISRS at selected nodes) from the individual X-, Y-, and Z-direction excitation analysis (using the response spectra method or the time history method) were summed using absolute sum rule to obtain the summed X-component, V-component, and Z-component of the design responses (maximum element forces and ISRS at selected nodes) as follows:
                =
Rx = (Rxx + Rxy + Rxz)
Rx (Rxx + Rxy + Rxz)
Ry = (Ryx + Ryy + Ryz)
Ry = (Ryx + Ryy + Ryz)
                =
Rz = (Rzx + Rzy + Rzz)
Rz (Rzx + Rzy + Rzz)
Where:
Where:
Rx = summed X-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node)
Rx = summed X-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node)
Ry = summed Y-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node)
Ry = summed Y -component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node)
Rz = summed Z-component the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node)
Rz = summed Z-component the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node)
Rxx = X-component of design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to X-excitation Rxy = X-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to V-excitation Rxz =   X-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to Z-excitation Ryx =   V-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to X-excitation Ryy = Y-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to Y-excitation Ryz =   Y-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to Z-excitation Rzx =   Z-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to X-excitation Rzy = Z-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to V-excitation Rzz =   Z-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to Z-excitation ONS is a two-directional earthquake motion plant according to ONS UFSAR, Section 3.7.2.5. All ONS structures, systems, and components (SSCs) were designed for the two-directional earthquake with the exception of the SSCs for the Standby Shutdown Facility (SSF) where the three spatial components of the earthquakes were combined using the square root of the sum of the squares (SRSS) rule. Therefore, the PSW SSCs are designed/qualified for the two-directional earthquake using the absolute sum combination, i.e., maximum of the absolute sum of (Rx plus Ry) or (Rzplus Ry) .
Rxx = X-component of design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to X-excitation Rxy = X-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to V-excitation Rxz = X-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to Z-excitation Ryx = V-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to X-excitation Ryy = Y -component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to Y-excitation Ryz = Y -component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to Z-excitation Rzx = Z-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to X-excitation Rzy = Z-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to V-excitation Rzz = Z-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to Z-excitation ONS is a two-directional earthquake motion plant according to ONS UFSAR, Section 3.7.2.5. All ONS structures, systems, and components (SSCs) were designed for the two-directional earthquake with the exception of the SSCs for the Standby Shutdown Facility (SSF) where the three spatial components of the earthquakes were combined using the square root of the sum of the squares (SRSS) rule. Therefore, the PSW SSCs are designed/qualified for the two-directional earthquake using the absolute sum combination, i.e., maximum of the absolute sum of (Rx plus Ry) or (Rzplus Ry).  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                               Page 12 Table 141-1: PSW Soil Profile and Low Strain (10'" percent) Soil Properties Layer Name     Depth     Elevation     Unit Weight   BEVs    Poisson's      BEG    LBVs  UBVs (ft)       (ft)          (pct)       (fps)     Ratio       (ksf) (fps) (fps)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 12 Table 141-1: PSW Soil Profile and Low Strain (10'" percent) Soil Properties Layer Name Fill Residual Soil Partially Weathered Rock Weathered Rock Transitional Rock Rock Legend:
Fill                Surface -
BE = Best Estimate LB = Lower Bound UB = Upper Bound Depth (ft) 0-16 16 - 23 23-43 43 - 51 51 - 65 65-75 75-80 80+
0-16                        121          897      0.30       3024     732  1099 779 16 - 23    779 -772          122          897      0.30       3049     732  1099 Residual    23-43      772 - 752        125        1042      0.40       4215     851  1276 Soil      43 - 51    752 - 744        127        1042      0.40       4282     851  1276 Partially Weathered    51 - 65    744 -730          135        1674      0.40       11749   1367  2050  I I
Elevation Unit Weight (ft)
I Rock Weathered 65-75      730 -720          160        2559      0.40       32539   2089  3134 Rock Transitional 75- 80    720 -715          170        4659      0.40       114598   3804  5706 Rock Rock        80+        <715            170        6942      0.40       254426   5668  8502 Legend:
(pct)
BE = Best Estimate            ft =feet                                =
Surface -
ksf kips per square foot LB = Lower Bound              pef = pounds per cubic foot            =
121 779 779 -772 122 772 - 752 125 752 - 744 127 744 -730 135 730 -720 160 720 -715 170
Vs Shear Wave Velocity
<715 170 ft = feet pef = pounds per cubic foot fps = feet per second BEVs (fps) 897 897 1042 1042 1674 2559 4659 6942 Poisson's BEG Ratio (ksf) 0.30 3024 0.30 3049 0.40 4215 0.40 4282 0.40 11749 0.40 32539 0.40 114598 0.40 254426 ksf = kips per square foot Vs = Shear Wave Velocity G = Shear Modulus LBVs (fps) 732 732 851 851 1367 2089 3804 5668 UBVs (fps) 1099 1099 1276 1276 2050 I
        =
I I
UB Upper Bound                     =
3134 5706 8502
fps feet per second                    =
 
G Shear Modulus
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 13 Table 141-2: Lower Bound Strain Compatible Soil Properties for Input Motion at Ground Layer Name Layer Thickness (ft)
Fill 5.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 Residual 6.0 Soil 6.0 8.0 8.0 Partially 7.0 Weathered Rock 7.0 Weathered Rock 10.0 Transitional Rock


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                              Page 13 Table 141-2: Lower Bound Strain Compatible Soil Properties for Input Motion at Ground Surface with ZPA 0.15 9 Layer Name      Layer      Depth    Elevation   Unit   Poisson's Shear   Shear   Damping Thickness      (ft)       (ft)    Weight   Ratio   Modulus Wave     Ratio (ft)                            (pcf)             (ksf) Velocity (fps)
==5.0 Legend==
Fill                            Surface -
ft = feet pcf = pounds per cubic foot fps = feet per second ksf = kips per square foot Depth (ft) 0-5 5 - 10 10 -16 16 - 23 23-29 29 - 35 35-43 43 - 51 51 - 58 58-65 65-75 75-80 Surface with ZPA 0.15 9 Elevation Unit Poisson's Shear Shear Damping (ft)
5.0        0-5        790       121     0.30     1971   724     0.01 5.0        5 - 10  790 -785     121     0.30     1847   701     0.018 6.0      10 -16  785 -779     121     0.30     1739   680     0.026 7.0      16 - 23  779 -772     122     0.30     1604   651     0.033 Residual        6.0      23- 29    772 -766     125     0.40     2259     763     0.032 Soil          6.0      29 - 35  766 -760     125     0.40     2123     740     0.037 8.0      35-43    760 -752     125     0.40     1990   716     0.041 8.0      43 - 51    752 - 744   127     0.40     1909   696     0.047 Partially      7.0      51 - 58  744 -737     135     0.40     6830   1276     0.025 Weathered Rock          7.0      58- 65    737 -730     135     0.40     6742   1268     0.026 Weathered Rock        10.0      65-75      730 -720     160     0.40     20646   2038     0.015 Transitional Rock          5.0      75- 80    720 - 715   170     0.40     75648   3785     0.008 Legend:
Weight Ratio Modulus Wave Ratio (pcf)
ft =feet pcf = pounds per cubic foot
(ksf)
                  =
Velocity (fps)
fps feet per second
Surface -
                  =
790 121 0.30 1971 724 0.01 790 -785 121 0.30 1847 701 0.018 785 -779 121 0.30 1739 680 0.026 779 -772 122 0.30 1604 651 0.033 772 -766 125 0.40 2259 763 0.032 766 -760 125 0.40 2123 740 0.037 760 -752 125 0.40 1990 716 0.041 752 - 744 127 0.40 1909 696 0.047 744 -737 135 0.40 6830 1276 0.025 737 -730 135 0.40 6742 1268 0.026 730 -720 160 0.40 20646 2038 0.015 720 - 715 170 0.40 75648 3785 0.008  
ksf kips per square foot


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                               Page 14 Table 141-3: Best Estimate Strain Compatible Soil Properties for Input Motion at Ground Surface with ZPA 0.15 9 Layer Name        Layer      Depth  Elevation     Unit     Poisson's Shear   Shear   Damping Thickness      (ft)     (ft)      Weight     Ratio   Modulus Wave     Ratio (ft)                            (pcf)               (ksf) Velocity (fps)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 14 Table 141-3: Best Estimate Strain Compatible Soil Properties for Input Motion at Ground Layer Name Fill Residual Soil Partially Weathered Rock Weathered Rock Transitional Rock Legend:
Fill                              Surface -
ft = feet Layer Thickness (ft) 5.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 10.0 5.0 pcf = pounds per cubic foot fps = feet per second ksf = kips per square foot Depth (ft) 0-5 5 - 10 10 -16 16 - 23 23-29 29 - 35 35-43 43 - 51 51 - 58 58 - 65 65 -75 75 - 80 Surface with ZPA 0.15 9 Elevation Unit Poisson's Shear Shear Damping (ft)
5.0          0-5      790         121       0.30     2994   893     0.008 5.0        5 - 10 790 - 785     121       0.30     2897     878     0.014 6.0        10 -16  785 - 779     121       0.30     2733     853     0.019 7.0        16 - 23 779 -772       122       0.30     2639     835     0.025 Residual Soil      6.0        23- 29  772 -766       125       0.40     3670     972     0.025 6.0        29 - 35 766 -760       125       0.40     3585   961     0.028 8.0        35-43  760 -752       125       0.40     3395   935     0.032 8.0        43 - 51 752 -744       127       0.40     3280   912     0.036 Partially        7.0        51 - 58 744 -737       135       0.40     10630   1592     0.019 Weathered Rock          7.0        58 - 65 737 -730       135       0.40     10496   1582     0.021 Weathered Rock          10.0      65 -75  730 - 720     160       0.40     31462   2516     0.012 Transitional Rock          5.0        75 - 80 720-715       170       0.40   113798   4643     0.007 Legend:
Weight Ratio Modulus Wave Ratio (pcf)
ft = feet pcf = pounds per cubic foot
(ksf)
                    =
Velocity (fps)
fps feet per second ksf =kips per square foot
Surface -
790 121 0.30 2994 893 0.008 790 - 785 121 0.30 2897 878 0.014 785 - 779 121 0.30 2733 853 0.019 779 -772 122 0.30 2639 835 0.025 772 -766 125 0.40 3670 972 0.025 766 -760 125 0.40 3585 961 0.028 760 -752 125 0.40 3395 935 0.032 752 -744 127 0.40 3280 912 0.036 744 -737 135 0.40 10630 1592 0.019 737 -730 135 0.40 10496 1582 0.021 730 - 720 160 0.40 31462 2516 0.012 720-715 170 0.40 113798 4643 0.007  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013                                                                                                 Page 15 Table 141-4: Upper Bound Strain Compatible Soil Properties for Input Motion at Ground Surface with ZPA 0.15 9 Layer Name        Layer      Depth    Elevation     Unit   Poisson's   Shear   Shear   Damping Thickness        (ft)     (ft)      Weight     Ratio     Modulus Wave     Ratio (ft)                              (pcf)                 (ksf) Velocity (fps)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013 Page 15 Table 141-4: Upper Bound Strain Compatible Soil Properties for Input Motion at Ground Surface Layer Name Layer Depth Thickness (ft)
Fill                                Surface -
(ft)
5.0        0-5        790         121     0.30       4510   1096     0.006 5.0        5 - 10  790 - 785       121     0.30       4406   1083     0.011 6.0        10 -16  785-779         121     0.30       4287   1068     0.015 7.0        16 - 23  779 - 772       122     0.30       4146   1046     0.019 Residual Soil        6.0        23- 29  772 - 766       125     0.40       5760   1218     0.018 6.0        29- 35  766 -760       125     0.40       5627   1204     0.022 8.0        35-43    760 - 752       125     0.40       5505   1191     0.025 8.0        43 - 51  752 - 744       127     0.40       5489   1180     0.027 Partially          7.0      51 - 58  744 -737       135     0.40       16625   1991     0.015 Weathered Rock              7.0      58 - 65  737 -730       135     0.40       16412   1979     0.016 Weathered Rock            10.0      65-75    730 -720       160     0.40       47676   3098     0.01 Transitional Rock            5.0        75- 80  720 -715       170     0.40   ,--171192 5694     0.005 !
Fill 5.0 0-5 5.0 5 - 10 6.0 10 -16 7.0 16 - 23 Residual Soil 6.0 23-29 6.0 29-35 8.0 35-43 8.0 43 - 51 Partially 7.0 51 - 58 Weathered Rock 7.0 58 - 65 Weathered Rock 10.0 65-75 Transitional Rock 5.0 75-80 Legend:
Legend:
ft = feet pcf = pounds per cubic foot fps = feet per second ksf = kips per square foot with ZPA 0.15 9 Elevation Unit Poisson's Shear Shear Damping (ft)
ft = feet
Weight Ratio Modulus Wave Ratio (pcf)
                    =
(ksf)
pcf pounds per cubic foot fps =feet per second ksf = kips per square foot
Velocity (fps)
Surface -
790 121 0.30 4510 1096 0.006 790 - 785 121 0.30 4406 1083 0.011 785-779 121 0.30 4287 1068 0.015 779 - 772 122 0.30 4146 1046 0.019 772 - 766 125 0.40 5760 1218 0.018 766 -760 125 0.40 5627 1204 0.022 760 - 752 125 0.40 5505 1191 0.025 752 - 744 127 0.40 5489 1180 0.027 744 -737 135 0.40 16625 1991 0.015 737 -730 135 0.40 16412 1979 0.016 730 -720 160 0.40 47676 3098 0.01 720 -715 170 0.40  
,--171192 5694 0.005  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013                                                                                                                                   Page 16 Table 141-5: SRP 3.7.1 COMPLIANCE MATRIX Section Title           Section       SRP Acceptance                     SRP Requirements                     Comply with Justification for the Exception Number             Criteria                                                               SRP Requirements Design Ground Motion   1.1         11.1                 The design ground motion for OBE and SSE           N/A           Seismic design ground motions should be consistent with the description of the                 are specified in Oconee UFSAR, free field ground motion at the site as provided in               Section 3.7. ONS licensing SRP Section 2.5.2.                                               predates NRC SRP.
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013 Page 16 Table 141-5: SRP 3.7.1 COMPLIANCE MATRIX Section Title Section SRP Acceptance SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Criteria SRP Requirements Design Ground Motion 1.1 11.1 The design ground motion for OBE and SSE N/A Seismic design ground motions should be consistent with the description of the are specified in Oconee UFSAR, free field ground motion at the site as provided in Section 3.7. ONS licensing SRP Section 2.5.2.
Design Response         1.1.A       1I.1.A               GMRS are determined in the free field on the       N/A           Seismic design Response Spectra                                                   ground surface.                                                   Spectra used are as specified in Oconee UFSAR (Section 3.7.1.1 and Figure 2-55).
predates NRC SRP.
For soil sites excavated to expose competent       N/A material (1000 fps shear wave velocity). GMRS is specified on an outcrop or a hypothetical outcrop after excavation.
Design Response 1.1.A 1I.1.A GMRS are determined in the free field on the N/A Seismic design Response Spectra ground surface.
Motions at the hypothetical outcrop should be       N/A developed as free surface motions.
Spectra used are as specified in Oconee UFSAR (Section 3.7.1.1 and Figure 2-55).
For soil sites excavated to expose competent N/A material (1000 fps shear wave velocity). GMRS is specified on an outcrop or a hypothetical outcrop after excavation.
Motions at the hypothetical outcrop should be N/A developed as free surface motions.
Minimum required response spectra specified as N/A an outcrop at the free field with PGA for horizontal component of 0.1g or higher.
Minimum required response spectra specified as N/A an outcrop at the free field with PGA for horizontal component of 0.1g or higher.
Design Time Histories   1.1.B       1I.1.B               Real time Histories or artificial time histories. Yes N/A =Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.
Design Time Histories 1.1.B 1I.1.B Real time Histories or artificial time histories.
Yes N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                               Page 17 Table 141*5: SRP 3,7,1 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 17 Table 141*5: SRP 3,7,1 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Section Title         Section     SRP Acceptance                     SRP Requirements                   Comply with Justification for the Exception Number             Criteria                                                           SRP Requirements Design Time Histories 1.1.B       1I.1.B             Three mutually orthogonal directions shown to     Yes be statistically independent (correlation between a pair does not exceed 0.16).
Section Title Section SRP Acceptance SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Criteria SRP Requirements Design Time Histories 1.1.B 1I.1.B Three mutually orthogonal directions shown to Yes be statistically independent (correlation between a pair does not exceed 0.16).
I For linear structural analyses, the duration of   Yes I                                                       artificial time histories should be long enough to include Fourrier components at low frequency (SRP Section 2.5.2).
I For linear structural analyses, the duration of Yes I
For single time history analyses, the response     Yes spectra generated from the artificial time history at the free field envelop the free field design response spectra.
artificial time histories should be long enough to include Fourrier components at low frequency (SRP Section 2.5.2).
N/A =Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.
For single time history analyses, the response Yes spectra generated from the artificial time history at the free field envelop the free field design response spectra.
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS,2013                                                                                                                             Page 18 Table 141-5: SRP 3.7.1 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS,2013 Page 18 Table 141-5: SRP 3.7.1 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
*Section Title             Section       SRP Acceptance                 SRP Requirements                   Comply with Justification for the Exception Number           Criteria                                                         SRP Requirements Percentage of Critical   1.2         11,2             Consistent with RG 1.61.                       No           Except for the 5% damping for Damping Values                                                                                                       concrete elements for DBE, all other damping values either comply or are conservative when I compared to the SRP 3.7.2 guidance. The damping used are consistent with ONS UFSAR Section 3.7.1.3.
* Section Title Section SRP Acceptance SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Criteria SRP Requirements Percentage of Critical 1.2 11,2 Consistent with RG 1.61.
Maximum soil damping value is 15 percent.       Yes Supporting Media for     1.3         11.3             Adequate description of soil media, foundation, Yes Seismic Category I                                     structure and soil properties.
No Except for the 5% damping for Damping Values concrete elements for DBE, all other damping values either comply or are conservative when I
Structures Review Considerations   1.4         11.4                                                             N/A for DC and COL Applications Inspections, Tests,     1.5         11.5                                                             N/A Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC)
compared to the SRP 3.7.2 guidance. The damping used are consistent with ONS UFSAR Section 3.7.1.3.
I COL Action Items and     1.6         11.6                                                             N/A Certification Requirements and Restrictions N/A =Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.
Maximum soil damping value is 15 percent.
Yes Supporting Media for 1.3 11.3 Adequate description of soil media, foundation, Yes Seismic Category I structure and soil properties.
Structures Review Considerations 1.4 11.4 N/A for DC and COL Applications Inspections, Tests, 1.5 11.5 N/A Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC)
I COL Action Items and 1.6 11.6 N/A Certification Requirements and Restrictions N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                                     Page 19 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX Section Title   Section       SRP                       SRP Requirements                         Comply with   Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance                                                                     SRP Criteria                                                             Requirements Seismic         1.1     11.1         Use suitable dynamic analyses that account for the         Yes iAnalyses                             effects of SSI and considers the torsional, rocking, and Methods                               translational responses of the structures.
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 19 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Seismic 1.1 11.1 Use suitable dynamic analyses that account for the Yes iAnalyses effects of SSI and considers the torsional, rocking, and Methods translational responses of the structures.
Seismic analyses should be performed for three             Yes orthogonal directions of earthquake with all modes with frequencies less than ZPA represented in the dynamic solution.
Seismic analyses should be performed for three Yes orthogonal directions of earthquake with all modes with frequencies less than ZPA represented in the dynamic solution.
High frequency modes should be included in the             Yes dynamic solution in accordance with RG 1.92 Revision 2.
High frequency modes should be included in the Yes dynamic solution in accordance with RG 1.92 Revision
Dynamic analyses should consider relative                 N/A           No significant displacements displacements between adjacent supports of seismic                       between adjacent supports of category I SSCs.                                                         seismic category I structures.
: 2.
Dynamic analyses should include significant effects       N/A           No significant effects of piping such as piping interactions, externally applied structural               interactions, externally applied restraints, hydrodynamic loads, and non-linear                           structural restraints, hydrodynamic responses.                                                               loads, and non-linear response.
Dynamic analyses should consider relative N/A No significant displacements displacements between adjacent supports of seismic between adjacent supports of category I SSCs.
Natural         1.2     11.2         Dynamic analyses should provide a summary of modal         Yes Frequencies                           masses, effective masses, natural frequencies, mode
seismic category I structures.
~nd Responses                         shapes, modal and total responses.
Dynamic analyses should include significant effects N/A No significant effects of piping such as piping interactions, externally applied structural interactions, externally applied restraints, hydrodynamic loads, and non-linear structural restraints, hydrodynamic responses.
Dynamic analyses should include the calculated time       Yes histories or response spectra used in design, at the major plant equipment elevations and point of support.
loads, and non-linear response.
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.
Natural 1.2 11.2 Dynamic analyses should provide a summary of modal Yes Frequencies masses, effective masses, natural frequencies, mode  
~nd Responses shapes, modal and total responses.
Dynamic analyses should include the calculated time Yes histories or response spectra used in design, at the major plant equipment elevations and point of support.
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                                 Page 20 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 20 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Section Title   Section       SRP                         SRP Requirements                     Comply with   Justification for the Exception Number   Acceptance                                                                 SRP Criteria                                                           Requirements Procedures     1.3     11.3         The analytical models should represent the adequate     Yes Used for                               stiffness, mass, and damping characteristics of the
Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Procedures 1.3 11.3 The analytical models should represent the adequate Yes Used for stiffness, mass, and damping characteristics of the  
!Analytical                           structural systems. Three dimensional finite element Modeling                               models should be used in general and should consider local regions of the structure such as walls and slabs.
!Analytical structural systems. Three dimensional finite element Modeling models should be used in general and should consider local regions of the structure such as walls and slabs.
Mesh size should be selected on the basis that further   No           Refined mesh size used is 2' x 2' refinement has only negligible effect on the solution                 and meets or exceeds ASCE 4-09 results.                                                               requirements (Commentary Section C3.1.3.2).
Mesh size should be selected on the basis that further No Refined mesh size used is 2' x 2' refinement has only negligible effect on the solution and meets or exceeds ASCE 4-09 results.
requirements (Commentary Section C3.1.3.2).
The analytical models should adequately represent the Yes seismic systems and sub-systems and use the de-coupling criteria in accordance with SRP Section 11.3.B.
The analytical models should adequately represent the Yes seismic systems and sub-systems and use the de-coupling criteria in accordance with SRP Section 11.3.B.
In addition to structural mass and equipment, 50 psf for Yes minor equipment/piping/raceways, 25% of floor design live load, and 75% of roof design snow load if applicable should be included in the analytical models.
In addition to structural mass and equipment, 50 psf for Yes minor equipment/piping/raceways, 25% of floor design live load, and 75% of roof design snow load if applicable should be included in the analytical models.
A methodology is needed to transfer the seismic         Yes response loads from the dynamic models to the structural models that will be used for detailed design.
A methodology is needed to transfer the seismic Yes response loads from the dynamic models to the structural models that will be used for detailed design.
i I
i I
I I
I I
Soil-Structure 1.4     11.4         For SSI analyses should consider:
Soil-Structure 1.4 11.4 For SSI analyses should consider:
Interaction 1- Effect of embedment of structure                     No           PSW building has a shallow foundation. Embedment less than 8 feet. Emb. SSI effects are small.
Interaction 1-Effect of embedment of structure No PSW building has a shallow foundation. Embedment less than 8 feet. Emb. SSI effects are small.
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                             Page 21 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 21 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)  
  ~ection Title Section       SRP                         SRP Requirements                 Comply with   Justification for the Exception Number   Acceptance                                                             SRP Criteria                                                       Requirements Soll-Structure 1.4     11.4         2- Ground water effects                               No           Variation of water table was not Interaction                                                                                               considered in the site response analyses (water table at EL. 752' used in site response analysis).
~ection Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Soll-Structure 1.4 11.4 2-Ground water effects No Variation of water table was not Interaction considered in the site response analyses (water table at EL. 752' used in site response analysis).
Since the analyses cover fixed base, LB, BE, and UB soil profiles, the effect of the water table are implicitly included in the analyses from the wide range of soil profiles considered.
Since the analyses cover fixed base, LB, BE, and UB soil profiles, the effect of the water table are implicitly included in the analyses from the wide range of soil profiles considered.
3- Layering effects of soil media                     Yes Soil spring and the compliance function methods are   Yes acceptable provided that frequency variations and layering effects are incorporated.
3-Layering effects of soil media Yes Soil spring and the compliance function methods are Yes acceptable provided that frequency variations and layering effects are incorporated.
The mesh size should be adequate for representing the N/A           Soil spring method was used.
The mesh size should be adequate for representing the N/A Soil spring method was used.
static stress distribution under the foundation and transmitting the frequency content of interest.
static stress distribution under the foundation and transmitting the frequency content of interest.
i I
i I
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013                                                                                                                                   Page 22 Table 141-6: SRP 3,7,2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Page 22 Table 141-6: SRP 3,7,2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Section Title   Section     SRP                         SRP Requirements                         Comply with     Justification for the Exception Number   Acceptance                                                                   SRP Criteria                                                             Requirements Soil-Structure 1.4     11.4         For deep soil sites, model depth should be at least         N/A           Oconee is not a deep soil site (80 Interaction                         twice the base dimension below the foundation level.                     feet deep soil to bedrock and The frequency of the soil should be well below the                       approximately 8 feet building structural frequencies of interest. All structural modes of               embedment).
Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Soil-Structure 1.4 11.4 For deep soil sites, model depth should be at least N/A Oconee is not a deep soil site (80 Interaction twice the base dimension below the foundation level.
feet deep soil to bedrock and The frequency of the soil should be well below the approximately 8 feet building structural frequencies of interest. All structural modes of embedment).
interest should be included.
interest should be included.
The soil properties used should be consistent with soil     Yes strains developed in free field site response analyses.
The soil properties used should be consistent with soil Yes strains developed in free field site response analyses.
Fixed based analyses are acceptable for structures         N/A           PSW building is founded on soil founded on material with minimum shear wave velocity                     subgrade. Calculation includes both of 8000 fps.                                                             fixed base and Lumped Soil Spring (LSS) analyses. Fixed base analysis is the UFSAR licensing basis.
Fixed based analyses are acceptable for structures N/A PSW building is founded on soil founded on material with minimum shear wave velocity subgrade. Calculation includes both of 8000 fps.
At least 3 soil/rock profiles should be used: BE, LB, UB Yes LB shear modulus should not be less than value that         Yes yields foundation settlement under static loads exceeding design allowables.
fixed base and Lumped Soil Spring (LSS) analyses. Fixed base analysis is the UFSAR licensing basis.
UB shear modulus should not be less than the BE value Yes defined at low strain and as determined from the geophysical testing program .
At least 3 soil/rock profiles should be used: BE, LB, UB Yes LB shear modulus should not be less than value that Yes yields foundation settlement under static loads exceeding design allowables.
N/A =Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.
UB shear modulus should not be less than the BE value Yes defined at low strain and as determined from the geophysical testing program.
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                                 Page 23 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 23 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Section Title   Section       SRP                       SRP Requirements                       Comply with   Justification for the Exception Number   Acceptance                                                               SRP Criteria                                                         Requirements Soil-Structure 1.4       11.4         For well investigated sites (RG 1.132 and RG 1.138),     No           Shear wave velocity (Vs) values for Interaction                           COY for soil profiles should not be less than 0.5. For               the subsurface materials underlying sites that are not well investigated sites, COY shall be             the PSW building were calculated at least 1.                                                           from Seismic Cone Penetrometer Testing (SCPT) and Refraction Microtremor (ReMi) testing, together with the information provided from direct soil boring performed for the PSW building design. This information was supplemented by data obtained from the Cross-Hole Velocity (CHV) testing and soil borings performed in 1981 for the adjacent Radwaste building. The geotechnical investigations for the PSW building site satisfies the purpose and goals of Regulatory Guide 1.132 and the PSW building site is considered to be *well investigated".
Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Soil-Structure 1.4 11.4 For well investigated sites (RG 1.132 and RG 1.138),
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.
No Shear wave velocity (Vs) values for Interaction COY for soil profiles should not be less than 0.5. For the subsurface materials underlying sites that are not well investigated sites, COY shall be the PSW building were calculated at least 1.
from Seismic Cone Penetrometer Testing (SCPT) and Refraction Microtremor (ReMi) testing, together with the information provided from direct soil boring performed for the PSW building design. This information was supplemented by data obtained from the Cross-Hole Velocity (CHV) testing and soil borings performed in 1981 for the adjacent Radwaste building. The geotechnical investigations for the PSW building site satisfies the purpose and goals of Regulatory Guide 1.132 and the PSW building site is considered to be *well investigated".
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                                   Page 24 i                                                                                                                                                   ,
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 24 i
;                                        Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Section Title   Section     SRP                       SRP Requirements                       Comply with   Justification for the Exception Number   Acceptance                                                               SRP Criteria                                                         Requirements Soil-Structu re 1.4     11.4         For well investigated sites (RG 1.132 and RG 1.138),     No           The shear wave velocities (Vs)
Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Soil-Structu re 1.4 11.4 For well investigated sites (RG 1.132 and RG 1.138),
Interaction                         COV for soil profiles should not be less than 0.5. For               measured in the ReMi survey were sites that are not well investigated sites, COV shall be             taken to be the BE shear wave at least 1.                                                           velocities because the ReMi survey yields shear wave velocities averaged over the length of the survey line and the ReMi survey I
No The shear wave velocities (Vs)
Interaction COV for soil profiles should not be less than 0.5. For measured in the ReMi survey were sites that are not well investigated sites, COV shall be taken to be the BE shear wave at least 1.
velocities because the ReMi survey yields shear wave velocities averaged over the length of the survey line and the ReMi survey I
line encompassed the length of the PSW building. The BE shear modulus values were calculated from the corresponding BE shear wave velocities values. The LB and the UB shear modulus values obtained from the BE shear modulus using an assigned coefficient of variation (COV) of 0.5.
line encompassed the length of the PSW building. The BE shear modulus values were calculated from the corresponding BE shear wave velocities values. The LB and the UB shear modulus values obtained from the BE shear modulus using an assigned coefficient of variation (COV) of 0.5.
Figure 141-17 presents the values of shear wave velocities versus depth for the PSW building site. As shown in Figure 141-17, the shear wave velocities values obtained from independent geophysical tests are consistent, and the LB and UB values of shear wave velocities, calculated from the LB and UB shear modulus, reasonably bracket the values of shear wave velocities
Figure 141-17 presents the values of shear wave velocities versus depth for the PSW building site. As shown in Figure 141-17, the shear wave velocities values obtained from independent geophysical tests are consistent, and the LB and UB values of shear wave velocities, calculated from the LB and UB shear modulus, reasonably bracket the values of shear wave velocities calculated from the various measurements (ReMi, SCPT, and CHV).
,                                                                                                            calculated from the various measurements (ReMi, SCPT, and CHV).
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                                             Page 25 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 25 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Section Title   Section       SRP                       SRP Requirements                       Comply with     Justification for the Exception Number   Acceptance                                                                 SRP Criteria                                                           Requirements Soil-Structu re 1.4     11.4         For well investigated sites (RG 1.132 and RG 1.138),     No           For this reason, the use of a COY Interaction                           COY for soil profiles should not be less than 0.5. For                 value of 0.5 for LB and UB shear sites that are not well investigated sites, COY shall be               modulus is justified.
Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Soil-Structu re 1.4 11.4 For well investigated sites (RG 1.132 and RG 1.138),
No For this reason, the use of a COY Interaction COY for soil profiles should not be less than 0.5. For value of 0.5 for LB and UB shear sites that are not well investigated sites, COY shall be modulus is justified.
at least 1.
at least 1.
Soil damping should not exceed 15%.                     Yes Control Motion should be in accordance with SRP 3.7.1 See SRP 3.7.1 Matrix Development of 1.5       11.5         RG 1.122 should be used augmented by SRP Section         Yes In-Structure                         guidance in Section 11.5
Soil damping should not exceed 15%.
Yes Control Motion should be in accordance with SRP 3.7.1 See SRP 3.7.1 Matrix Development of 1.5 11.5 RG 1.122 should be used augmented by SRP Section Yes In-Structure guidance in Section 11.5  


===Response===
===Response===
Spectra
Spectra
[Three         1.6     11.6         Responses from three earthquake directions should be No               ONS is a two directional plant Components of                         combined in accordance with RG 1.92.                                   according to UFSAR, Section Earthquake                                                                                                   3.7.2.5.The two-directional Motion                                                                                                       earthquake with the absolute sum rule yields design responses that are comparable to those obtained using the SRSS rule. For example, if a design response has the same response magnitude (say 1.0) from each of the three spatial excitations (X, Y, and Z), the absolute sum rule will yield a combined design response of 2.0 compared to 1.73 for the combined design responses using the SRSS rule.
[Three 1.6 11.6 Responses from three earthquake directions should be No ONS is a two directional plant Components of combined in accordance with RG 1.92.
N/A =Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.
according to UFSAR, Section Earthquake 3.7.2.5.The two-directional Motion earthquake with the absolute sum rule yields design responses that are comparable to those obtained using the SRSS rule. For example, if a design response has the same response magnitude (say 1.0) from each of the three spatial excitations (X, Y, and Z), the absolute sum rule will yield a combined design response of 2.0 compared to 1.73 for the combined design responses using the SRSS rule.
N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                                   Page 26
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 26  
                                                                                      -----        - -        ~-
~-
Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Section Title   Section       SRP                         SRP Requirements                       Comply with   Justification for the Exception Number   Acceptance                                                                   SRP Criteria                                                             Requirements Combination of 1.7     11.7         For modal superposition time history analyses, modal       Yes Modal                                 responses should be combined algebraically at each Responses                             output time step. Modes with frequencies less than ZPA should be included in the modal superposition. Higher modes responses should be calculated using the missing mass approach. This contribution is treated as one additional modal response, scaled to the input time history normalized to ZPA, and combined algebraically with the modal superposition solution at each time step.
Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Combination of 1.7 11.7 For modal superposition time history analyses, modal Yes Modal responses should be combined algebraically at each Responses output time step. Modes with frequencies less than ZPA should be included in the modal superposition. Higher modes responses should be calculated using the missing mass approach. This contribution is treated as one additional modal response, scaled to the input time history normalized to ZPA, and combined algebraically with the modal superposition solution at each time step.
Interaction of 1.8     11.8         Provide technical basis and formally document non-         Yes Non-Category I                       collapse of the non-Category I structure or that the Structures with                       collapse of the non-Category I structure will not impair Category I SSCs                       the integrity of Category I SSCs, nor results in incapacitating injury to control room occupants.
Interaction of 1.8 11.8 Provide technical basis and formally document non-Yes Non-Category I collapse of the non-Category I structure or that the Structures with collapse of the non-Category I structure will not impair Category I SSCs the integrity of Category I SSCs, nor results in incapacitating injury to control room occupants.
Effects of     1.9     11.9         Analyses should consider effects of expected variation No               Comply with all SRP requirements Parameter                             in structural properties, damping values, soil properties,               except for concrete cracking.
Effects of 1.9 11.9 Analyses should consider effects of expected variation No Comply with all SRP requirements Parameter in structural properties, damping values, soil properties, except for concrete cracking.
Variation on                         and SSI on response spectra. For concrete structures,                   Concrete cracking was not Floor Response                       the effect of potential concrete cracking on the                         considered for any of the existing Spectra                               structural stiffness should be addressed.                               Category I structures at ONS.
Variation on and SSI on response spectra. For concrete structures, Concrete cracking was not Floor Response the effect of potential concrete cracking on the considered for any of the existing Spectra structural stiffness should be addressed.
I I Use of         1.10   11.10                                                                   N/A           Dynamic analyses were performed.
Category I structures at ONS.
Equivalent
I I Use of 1.10 11.10 N/A Dynamic analyses were performed.
. Vertical Static Factors N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.
Equivalent  
. Vertical Static Factors N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                           Page 27 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 27 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Section Title   Section       SRP                       SRP Requirements                   Comply with   Justification for the Exception Number   Acceptance                                                             SRP Criteria                                                         Requirements Methods Used   1.11   11.11       Dynamic analyses should include the effects of         Yes to Account For                       accidental torsion by including torsional degrees of Torsional                           freedom in the analytical models. An additional Effects                             eccentricity of +/- 5% of the maximum building dimensions should be assumed for both horizontal directions. The eccentricities should be determined separately for each building floor.
Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Methods Used 1.11 11.11 Dynamic analyses should include the effects of Yes to Account For accidental torsion by including torsional degrees of Torsional freedom in the analytical models. An additional Effects eccentricity of +/- 5% of the maximum building dimensions should be assumed for both horizontal directions. The eccentricities should be determined separately for each building floor.
Comparison of   1.12   11.12       The peak responses obtained from time history and     N/A           For buiding design, the response Responses                           response spectrum methods should be compared to                     spectra method was used. The time demonstrate approximate equivalency between the two                 history method is only used for methods.                                                             generation of In-Structure Response Spectra (ISRS).
Comparison of 1.12 11.12 The peak responses obtained from time history and N/A For buiding design, the response Responses response spectrum methods should be compared to spectra method was used. The time demonstrate approximate equivalency between the two history method is only used for methods.
Analysis       1.13   11.13       CompOSite modal damping is limited to 20%.             Yes Procedure for                       Acceptable techniques for the calculation of composite Damping                             modal damming should be in accordance with SRP Section 11.13.
generation of In-Structure Response Spectra (ISRS).
, Determination   1.14   11.14       Should incorporate three components of input motion   Yes of Seismic                           and conservative consideration of the simultaneous Overturning                           action of vertical and horizontal seismic forces. Load Moments and                         combination in accordance with SRP 3.8.5.
Analysis 1.13 11.13 CompOSite modal damping is limited to 20%.
Sliding Forces
Yes Procedure for Acceptable techniques for the calculation of composite Damping modal damming should be in accordance with SRP Section 11.13.  
'or Seismic
, Determination 1.14 11.14 Should incorporate three components of input motion Yes of Seismic and conservative consideration of the simultaneous Overturning action of vertical and horizontal seismic forces. Load Moments and combination in accordance with SRP 3.8.5.
!category I Structures N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.
Sliding Forces  
'or Seismic  
!category I Structures N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013                                                                                                                 Page 28 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013 Page 28 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)
Section Title   Section       SRP                   SRP Requirements                 Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance                                                       SRP Criteria                                                 Requirements Inspections,     1.15   11.15                                                       N/A
Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Inspections, 1.15 11.15 N/A  
~ests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC)
~ests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC)
COL Action       1.16   11.16                                                       N/A Items and Certification Requirements and Restrictions N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.
COL Action 1.16 11.16 N/A Items and Certification Requirements and Restrictions N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013                                                                 Page 29 Table 141-7: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW COS Model Frequency     Period Participation Participation Participation Mode Hz       seconds       X%             Y%             Z%
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013 Table 141-7: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW COS Model Mode Frequency Period Participation Participation Participation Hz seconds X%
1         10.182       0.098       0.01           0.136         48.58 2         10.927       0.092         0           11.969         0.563 3         11.872       0.084         0           0.013         0.039 4           12.02       0.083         0           0.006         0.008 5         12.033       0.083         0           0.008         0.186 6         12.045       0.083         0             0               0 7         12.126       0.082         0             0           0.005 8         12.232       0.082         0           0.014         0.068 9         12.361       0.081         0             0           0.002 10         12.397       0.081         0           0.001         0.024 11         12.545       0.08     0.004           0.042         0.006 12         12.761       0.078         0           0.001         0.055 13         12.766       0.078         0             0           0.003 14         12.935       0.077         0           0.001         0.068 15           13.16       0.076         0             0           0.016 16         13.286       0.075         0             0           0.034 17         13.582       0.074         0           0.001         0.091 18         13.656       0.073         0             0               0 19         13.759       0.073         0           0.003         0.047 20         13.961       0.072         0             0           0.023 21         14.101       0.071         0             0           0.033 22         14.468       0.069         0             0             0.11 23         14.476       0.069         0           0.001         0.015 24         14.741       0.068     0.006           2.957         0.068 25           14.96       0.067         0           0.004         0.027 26         15.008       0.067         0             0           0.011 27         15.031       0.067         0             0               0 28         15.424       0.065         0             0           0.059 29         15.518       0.064         0             0               0 30         15.688       0.064       0.28             0               0 31         15.787       0.063     0.001             0               0 32         15.875       0.063         0             0           0.026 33         15.927       0.063         0             0           0.027 34         15.932       0.063         0             0           0.006 35         16.015       0.062     0.131             0               0 36         16.028       0.062         0             0               0 37         16.379       0.061         0             0           0.106 38         16.461       0.061         0             0           0.003 39         16.541       0.06         0             0           0.006 40         16.713       0.06         0             0           0.034 41         16.793       0.06         0             0               0 42         16.876       0.059     0.517             0               0 43         17.093       0.059     0.037             0               0 44         17.112       0.058     0.027             0               0 45         17.192       0.058     0.002             0               0 46         17.247       0.058         0             0           0.021 47         17.316       0.058     0.019             0             0
Y%
Z%
1 10.182 0.098 0.01 0.136 48.58 2
10.927 0.092 0
11.969 0.563 3
11.872 0.084 0
0.013 0.039 4
12.02 0.083 0
0.006 0.008 5
12.033 0.083 0
0.008 0.186 6
12.045 0.083 0
0 0
7 12.126 0.082 0
0 0.005 8
12.232 0.082 0
0.014 0.068 9
12.361 0.081 0
0 0.002 10 12.397 0.081 0
0.001 0.024 11 12.545 0.08 0.004 0.042 0.006 12 12.761 0.078 0
0.001 0.055 13 12.766 0.078 0
0 0.003 14 12.935 0.077 0
0.001 0.068 15 13.16 0.076 0
0 0.016 16 13.286 0.075 0
0 0.034 17 13.582 0.074 0
0.001 0.091 18 13.656 0.073 0
0 0
19 13.759 0.073 0
0.003 0.047 20 13.961 0.072 0
0 0.023 21 14.101 0.071 0
0 0.033 22 14.468 0.069 0
0 0.11 23 14.476 0.069 0
0.001 0.015 24 14.741 0.068 0.006 2.957 0.068 25 14.96 0.067 0
0.004 0.027 26 15.008 0.067 0
0 0.011 27 15.031 0.067 0
0 0
28 15.424 0.065 0
0 0.059 29 15.518 0.064 0
0 0
30 15.688 0.064 0.28 0
0 31 15.787 0.063 0.001 0
0 32 15.875 0.063 0
0 0.026 33 15.927 0.063 0
0 0.027 34 15.932 0.063 0
0 0.006 35 16.015 0.062 0.131 0
0 36 16.028 0.062 0
0 0
37 16.379 0.061 0
0 0.106 38 16.461 0.061 0
0 0.003 39 16.541 0.06 0
0 0.006 40 16.713 0.06 0
0 0.034 41 16.793 0.06 0
0 0
42 16.876 0.059 0.517 0
0 43 17.093 0.059 0.037 0
0 44 17.112 0.058 0.027 0
0 45 17.192 0.058 0.002 0
0 46 17.247 0.058 0
0 0.021 47 17.316 0.058 0.019 0
0 Page 29


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013                                                                 Page 30 Table 141-7: Modal Frequencies and Mass PartiCipation Factors for the PSW COB Model (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Table 141-7: Modal Frequencies and Mass PartiCipation Factors for the PSW COB Model (Continued)
Frequency     Period Participation Participation Participation Mode Hz     seconds       X%             Y%             Z%
Mode Frequency Period Participation Participation Participation Hz seconds X%
48         17.362       0.058       0.032             0             0 49         17.545       0.057       0.001             0           0.023 50         17.582       0.057       0.028         0.021         0.007 51         17.763       0.056         0               0           0.062 52         17.775       0.056         0               0           0.014 53         18.296       0.055         0               0           0.028 54           20.04       0.05         0               0           0.024 55         20.457       0.049       0.095           0.01         0.643 56           20.84       0.048       0.006         0.002         0.134 57         21.438       0.047       0.002         0.003         0.041 58         21.584       0.046       0.007         0.806         0.031 59         24.129       0.041       0.113         0.228         0.058 60         25.372       0.039       0.043         0.006         0.351 61           25.61       0.039       0.334         0.389         3.386 62           26.26       0.038       0.793           0.03         0.107 63         26.577       0.038         0           0.022         0.938 64         26.724       0.037       0.015         0.883         1.741 65           26.96       0.037       0.032         0.012         0.541 66           28.14       0.036       0.279           2.18         0.314 67         28.391       0.035       0.593         0.687         1.622 68         28.714       0.035       0.002         0.006         0.059 69         29.909       0.033       0.143         0.079         0.035 70         30.241       0.033       0.611         0.068         2.207 71         30.338       0.033       0.004           0.07         1.157 72         30.552       0.033     21 .759         0.011         0.525 73         31.155       0.032       3.43         0.002         5.982 74         31.811       0.031     11 .783         4.358         0.026 75         31.953       0.031       0.078         0.685         0.107 76         32.144       0.031       0.985         2.055         1.779 77         32.441       0.031     25.098         0.972         0.739 78         32.657       0.031       0.02         0.626             0 79         33.235       0.03       0.327         0.388         0.007 80         34.129       0.029       0.035         0.029         0.166 81         34.277       0.029       0.331         0.016         2.857 82         34.441       0.029       0.001         0.001         0.142 83         34.682       0.029       0.046         0.017         0.001 84         35.433       0.028       3.757         0.167         0.006 85         35.706       0.028       0.04         0.018         0.001 86         35.821       0.028         0           0.15           0 87           36.04       0.028       3.201         0.081         0.691 88         36.777       0.027       0.099         0.033         1.314 89         37.585       0.027       0.034         0.001           0.27 90         37.593       0.027       0.052         0.037         0.448 91         38.198       0.026       0.106         0.688         0.847 92         38.621       0.026         0           0.633         0.028 93           38.73       0.026         0           0.101         0.014 94         39.473       0.025       0.095         0.001         0.514
Y%
Z%
48 17.362 0.058 0.032 0
0 49 17.545 0.057 0.001 0
0.023 50 17.582 0.057 0.028 0.021 0.007 51 17.763 0.056 0
0 0.062 52 17.775 0.056 0
0 0.014 53 18.296 0.055 0
0 0.028 54 20.04 0.05 0
0 0.024 55 20.457 0.049 0.095 0.01 0.643 56 20.84 0.048 0.006 0.002 0.134 57 21.438 0.047 0.002 0.003 0.041 58 21.584 0.046 0.007 0.806 0.031 59 24.129 0.041 0.113 0.228 0.058 60 25.372 0.039 0.043 0.006 0.351 61 25.61 0.039 0.334 0.389 3.386 62 26.26 0.038 0.793 0.03 0.107 63 26.577 0.038 0
0.022 0.938 64 26.724 0.037 0.015 0.883 1.741 65 26.96 0.037 0.032 0.012 0.541 66 28.14 0.036 0.279 2.18 0.314 67 28.391 0.035 0.593 0.687 1.622 68 28.714 0.035 0.002 0.006 0.059 69 29.909 0.033 0.143 0.079 0.035 70 30.241 0.033 0.611 0.068 2.207 71 30.338 0.033 0.004 0.07 1.157 72 30.552 0.033 21.759 0.011 0.525 73 31.155 0.032 3.43 0.002 5.982 74 31.811 0.031 11.783 4.358 0.026 75 31.953 0.031 0.078 0.685 0.107 76 32.144 0.031 0.985 2.055 1.779 77 32.441 0.031 25.098 0.972 0.739 78 32.657 0.031 0.02 0.626 0
79 33.235 0.03 0.327 0.388 0.007 80 34.129 0.029 0.035 0.029 0.166 81 34.277 0.029 0.331 0.016 2.857 82 34.441 0.029 0.001 0.001 0.142 83 34.682 0.029 0.046 0.017 0.001 84 35.433 0.028 3.757 0.167 0.006 85 35.706 0.028 0.04 0.018 0.001 86 35.821 0.028 0
0.15 0
87 36.04 0.028 3.201 0.081 0.691 88 36.777 0.027 0.099 0.033 1.314 89 37.585 0.027 0.034 0.001 0.27 90 37.593 0.027 0.052 0.037 0.448 91 38.198 0.026 0.106 0.688 0.847 92 38.621 0.026 0
0.633 0.028 93 38.73 0.026 0
0.101 0.014 94 39.473 0.025 0.095 0.001 0.514 Page 30


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April S. 2013                                                                   Page 31 Table 141-7: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW COS Model (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April S. 2013 Table 141-7: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW COS Mode 95 96 97 98 99 100 Total Participating Mass (%)
Frequency  Period   Participation Participation  Participation Mode Hz    seconds       X%            Y%              Z%
Frequency Hz 39.746 39.951 40.515 41.351 41.761 42.422 Model (Continued)
95          39.746    0.025       0.247         0.805          0.194 96          39.951    0.025     0.147          0.995          1.892 97          40.515    0.025      0.083          1.405            0.01 98          41.351    0.024     0.002          0.181              0 99          41.761    0.024      0.118            0.01           0.169 100          42.422    0.024      0.034          0.087           0.007 Total Participating                          76.075        35.212         82.629 Mass (%)
Period Participation seconds X%
0.025 0.247 0.025 0.147 0.025 0.083 0.024 0.002 0.024 0.118 0.024 0.034 76.075 Participation Participation Y%
Z%
0.805 0.194 0.995 1.892 1.405 0.01 0.181 0
0.01 0.169 0.087 0.007 35.212 82.629 Page 31


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013                                                                 Page 32 Table 141-8: Modal Frequencies and Mass participation Factors for the PSW LSS BE Model Frequency   Period   Participation Participation Participation Mode Hz     seconds         X%             Y%             Z%
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013 Table 141-8: Modal Frequencies and Mass participation Factors for the PSW LSS BE Model Mode Frequency Period Participation Participation Participation Hz seconds X%
1           7.089     0.141       0.035           0           59.766 2           10.52     0.095           0         18.211         0.036 3         11 .688     0.086       0.203         0.007         0.914 4           11 .796     0.085       0.015         0.09           0.218 5         11 .931     0.084       0.061           0           0.316 6         12.042     0.083       0.001           0           0.002 7         12.072     0.083       0.043         0.001         0.047 8           12.12     0.083       0.139           0           0.009 9         12.143     0.082         0.53         0.005         0.026 10           12.25     0.082         3.57         0.319         0.043 11         12.349     0.081       0.055         0.013         0.134 12         12.364     0.081       0.002         0.001         0.031 13         12.564       0.08       0.083         0.007         0.544 14         12.753     0.078       0.074         0.001         0.015 15         12.806     0.078       0.005         0.005         0.012 16         13.125     0.076       0.044         0.002         0.055 17         13.226     0.076       0.001         0.001         0.052 18         13.463     0.074       20.666         0.051         0.039 19         13.479     0.074       58.084         0.059         0.192 20         13.627     0.073       1.451         0.009           0 21         13.714     0.073       0.216         0.025         0.039 22         13.944     0.072       0.057         0.003         0.071 23         14.062     0.071       0.026         0.014         0.061 24         14.377       0.07       0.053         0.434         0.354 25         14.432     0.069       0.074         0.022         0.001 26         14.463     0.069       0.091         6.541           0 27         14.837     0.067       0.001         0.001         0.095 28         14.996     0.067       0.002         0.001         0.006 29         15.028     0.067       0.001           0             0 30         15.283     0.065       0.001         0.003         0.171 31         15.517     0.064           0             0             0 32         15.708     0.064         0.29         0.013         0.001 33         15.779     0.063       0.001         0.008         0.215 34         15.787     0.063           0             0           0.014 35         15.894     0.063       0.008           0           0.134 36         15.921     0.063       0.001         0.001         0.007 37         16.023     0.062       0.071         0.008         0.002 38         16.027     0.062       0.016         0.001           0 39         16.191     0.062         0.01         0.019         0.462 40         16.452     0.061           0           0.009         0.002 41         16.468     0.061       0.001         0.008           0 42         16.602       0.06       0.001         0.016         0.056 43         16.777       0.06           0           0.005         0.003 44         16.886     0.059       0.002         0.135         0.021 45           17.08     0.059       0.085         0.084         0.083 46         17.108     0.058       0.027         0.023         0.024 47         17.141     0.058       0.028         0.072         0.537 48         17.192     0.058       0.028         0.007           0
Y%
Z%
1 7.089 0.141 0.035 0
59.766 2
10.52 0.095 0
18.211 0.036 3
11.688 0.086 0.203 0.007 0.914 4
11.796 0.085 0.015 0.09 0.218 5
11.931 0.084 0.061 0
0.316 6
12.042 0.083 0.001 0
0.002 7
12.072 0.083 0.043 0.001 0.047 8
12.12 0.083 0.139 0
0.009 9
12.143 0.082 0.53 0.005 0.026 10 12.25 0.082 3.57 0.319 0.043 11 12.349 0.081 0.055 0.013 0.134 12 12.364 0.081 0.002 0.001 0.031 13 12.564 0.08 0.083 0.007 0.544 14 12.753 0.078 0.074 0.001 0.015 15 12.806 0.078 0.005 0.005 0.012 16 13.125 0.076 0.044 0.002 0.055 17 13.226 0.076 0.001 0.001 0.052 18 13.463 0.074 20.666 0.051 0.039 19 13.479 0.074 58.084 0.059 0.192 20 13.627 0.073 1.451 0.009 0
21 13.714 0.073 0.216 0.025 0.039 22 13.944 0.072 0.057 0.003 0.071 23 14.062 0.071 0.026 0.014 0.061 24 14.377 0.07 0.053 0.434 0.354 25 14.432 0.069 0.074 0.022 0.001 26 14.463 0.069 0.091 6.541 0
27 14.837 0.067 0.001 0.001 0.095 28 14.996 0.067 0.002 0.001 0.006 29 15.028 0.067 0.001 0
0 30 15.283 0.065 0.001 0.003 0.171 31 15.517 0.064 0
0 0
32 15.708 0.064 0.29 0.013 0.001 33 15.779 0.063 0.001 0.008 0.215 34 15.787 0.063 0
0 0.014 35 15.894 0.063 0.008 0
0.134 36 15.921 0.063 0.001 0.001 0.007 37 16.023 0.062 0.071 0.008 0.002 38 16.027 0.062 0.016 0.001 0
39 16.191 0.062 0.01 0.019 0.462 40 16.452 0.061 0
0.009 0.002 41 16.468 0.061 0.001 0.008 0
42 16.602 0.06 0.001 0.016 0.056 43 16.777 0.06 0
0.005 0.003 44 16.886 0.059 0.002 0.135 0.021 45 17.08 0.059 0.085 0.084 0.083 46 17.108 0.058 0.027 0.023 0.024 47 17.141 0.058 0.028 0.072 0.537 48 17.192 0.058 0.028 0.007 0
Page 32


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013                                                                   Page 33 Table 141-8: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS BE Model (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013 Table 141-8: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS BE Mode 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 Total Participating Mass (%)
Frequency    Period     Participation Participation Participation Mode Hz      seconds         X%            Y%            Z%
Frequency Hz 17.236 17.32 17.363 17.423 17.502 17.704 18.05 18.164 18.309 18.994 20.082 20.324 20.928 21.457 21.72 22.127 22.741 23.493 24.925 25.145 25.514 25.893 26.124 26.756 26.855 27.034 27.266 28.211 Model (Continued)
49          17.236      0.058         1.393         0.282          0.085 50          17.32      0.058         0.045         0.007          0.028 51          17.363      0.058         0.002         0.001          0.121 52          17.423      0.057         1.956         0.03          0.934 53          17.502      0.057         0.295         0.069          0.349 54          17.704      0.056         0.056         0.044          0.686 55            18.05      0.055         0.079         0.244          3.73 56          18.164      0.055         0.12           0.1          3.786 57          18.309      0.055         0.007         0.072          7.827 58          18.994      0.053         0.355         1.166          0.294 59          20.082      0.05         1.13       35.136          1.481 60          20.324      0.049         0.106         4.152          0.056 61          20.928      0.048        0.098        0.053          5.073 62          21.457      0.047        0.034        0.343          0.057 63            21 .72    0.046        1.963        1.608          2.011 64          22.127      0.045        2.456        8.119          1.128 65          22.741      0.044        0.264        0.368          0.688 66          23.493      0.043        0.292        15.31          0.566 67          24.925      0.04        0.009        0.011          0.034 68          25.145      0.04        0.258          0.58          0.629 69          25.514      0.039        0.083        0.363          0.006 70          25.893      0.039        0.178        0.031          0.318 71          26.124      0.038          0.02        0.221          0.117 72          26.756      0.037          0.12        0.557          0.047 73          26.855      0.037        0.006         0.666          0.044 74          27.034      0.037        0.05          0.39          0.031 75          27.266      0.037        0.01          0.186         0.027 76          28.211      0.035        0.007        0.018         0.069 Total Participating                              97.545        96.362         95.032 Mass (%)
Period Participation seconds X%
0.058 1.393 0.058 0.045 0.058 0.002 0.057 1.956 0.057 0.295 0.056 0.056 0.055 0.079 0.055 0.12 0.055 0.007 0.053 0.355 0.05 1.13 0.049 0.106 0.048 0.098 0.047 0.034 0.046 1.963 0.045 2.456 0.044 0.264 0.043 0.292 0.04 0.009 0.04 0.258 0.039 0.083 0.039 0.178 0.038 0.02 0.037 0.12 0.037 0.006 0.037 0.05 0.037 0.01 0.035 0.007 97.545 Participation Participation Y%
Z%
0.282 0.085 0.007 0.028 0.001 0.121 0.03 0.934 0.069 0.349 0.044 0.686 0.244 3.73 0.1 3.786 0.072 7.827 1.166 0.294 35.136 1.481 4.152 0.056 0.053 5.073 0.343 0.057 1.608 2.011 8.119 1.128 0.368 0.688 15.31 0.566 0.011 0.034 0.58 0.629 0.363 0.006 0.031 0.318 0.221 0.117 0.557 0.047 0.666 0.044 0.39 0.031 0.186 0.027 0.018 0.069 96.362 95.032 Page 33


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013                                                                     Page 34 Table 141-9: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS LB Model Frequency                 Participation Participation Participation Mode                  Period seconds Hz                         X%           Y%           Z%
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013 Table 141-9: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS LB Model Mode Frequency Period seconds Participation Participation Participation Hz X%
1         6.234         0.16           0.032         0.001       63.989 2           9.975         0.1           0.395         0.061         0.122 3         10.279       0.097           0.025       26.611         0.058 4         10.855       0.092         75.796         0.255         0.172 5         11.554       0.087           1.027         0.048         2.207 6           11.87       0.084           0.005         0.069         0.059 7         11.944       0.084           0.117         0.021         0.133 8         12.041       0.083           0.037           0         0.003 9         12.119       0.083           0.194         0.001         0.013 10         12.139       0.082           0.561           0           0.02 11         12.214       0.082         11 .339         0.39         0.054 12         12.315       0.081           0.022         0.001         0.185 13         12.362       0.081           0.003         0.001         0.003 14         12.482         0.08           0.036           0           0.345 15         12.747       0.078           0.041         0.002         0.021 16           12.8       0.078           0.001         0.006         0.001 17         13.116       0.076           0.003         0.003         0.077 18         13.216       0.076             0         0.002         0.059 19         13.448       0.074           0.002         0.018         0.209 20         13.599       0.074           0.013         0.024         0.003 21           13.7       0.073             0         0.096         0.071 22           13.93       0.072           0.007         0.05         0.154 23         14.042       0.071           0.009         0.897         0.143 24         14.123       0.071           0.392       14.708         0.014 25         14.341         0.07             0         0.162         0.63 26         14.398       0.069           0.014         0.023         0.026 27         14.805       0.068             0         0.001         0.161 28         14.993       0.067           0.002         0.002         0.012 29         15.025       0.067             0           0             0 30         15.241       0.066             0         0.004         0.504 31         15.517       0.064             0           0           0.001 32         15.575       0.064           0.007           0           2.007 33         15.673       0.064           0.095         0.147         0.039 34         15.786       0.063             0         0.002         0.181 35           15.79       0.063           0.019         0.001         3.057 36         15.912       0.063             0         0.003         0.261 37         15.991       0.063           0.412         0.372         0.423 38         16.026       0.062             0           0           0.03 39         16.046       0.062           0.038         0.024         3.649 40         16.084       0.062           0.303         0.495         3.273 41         16.268       0.061           3.014         2.826         3.197 42           16.31       0.061           1.323         1.785         0.828 43         16.459       0.061           0.004         0.013           0 44         16.558         0.06           0.05         0.369         0.133 45         16.652         0.06           0.058         0.544         0.001 46         16.802         0.06           0.017         0.219         0.039 47         16.939       0.059           0.394         0.545         0.002 48         17.095       0.058           0.031         0.044         0.005
Y%
Z%
1 6.234 0.16 0.032 0.001 63.989 2
9.975 0.1 0.395 0.061 0.122 3
10.279 0.097 0.025 26.611 0.058 4
10.855 0.092 75.796 0.255 0.172 5
11.554 0.087 1.027 0.048 2.207 6
11.87 0.084 0.005 0.069 0.059 7
11.944 0.084 0.117 0.021 0.133 8
12.041 0.083 0.037 0
0.003 9
12.119 0.083 0.194 0.001 0.013 10 12.139 0.082 0.561 0
0.02 11 12.214 0.082 11.339 0.39 0.054 12 12.315 0.081 0.022 0.001 0.185 13 12.362 0.081 0.003 0.001 0.003 14 12.482 0.08 0.036 0
0.345 15 12.747 0.078 0.041 0.002 0.021 16 12.8 0.078 0.001 0.006 0.001 17 13.116 0.076 0.003 0.003 0.077 18 13.216 0.076 0
0.002 0.059 19 13.448 0.074 0.002 0.018 0.209 20 13.599 0.074 0.013 0.024 0.003 21 13.7 0.073 0
0.096 0.071 22 13.93 0.072 0.007 0.05 0.154 23 14.042 0.071 0.009 0.897 0.143 24 14.123 0.071 0.392 14.708 0.014 25 14.341 0.07 0
0.162 0.63 26 14.398 0.069 0.014 0.023 0.026 27 14.805 0.068 0
0.001 0.161 28 14.993 0.067 0.002 0.002 0.012 29 15.025 0.067 0
0 0
30 15.241 0.066 0
0.004 0.504 31 15.517 0.064 0
0 0.001 32 15.575 0.064 0.007 0
2.007 33 15.673 0.064 0.095 0.147 0.039 34 15.786 0.063 0
0.002 0.181 35 15.79 0.063 0.019 0.001 3.057 36 15.912 0.063 0
0.003 0.261 37 15.991 0.063 0.412 0.372 0.423 38 16.026 0.062 0
0 0.03 39 16.046 0.062 0.038 0.024 3.649 40 16.084 0.062 0.303 0.495 3.273 41 16.268 0.061 3.014 2.826 3.197 42 16.31 0.061 1.323 1.785 0.828 43 16.459 0.061 0.004 0.013 0
44 16.558 0.06 0.05 0.369 0.133 45 16.652 0.06 0.058 0.544 0.001 46 16.802 0.06 0.017 0.219 0.039 47 16.939 0.059 0.394 0.545 0.002 48 17.095 0.058 0.031 0.044 0.005 Page 34


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013                                                                     Page 3S Table 141-9: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS LB Model (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013 Table 141-9: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS LB Mode 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 Total Participating Mass (%)
Frequency                  Participation Participation Participation Mode                  Period seconds Hz                          X%            Y%            Z%
Frequency Hz 17.116 17.138 17.193 17.313 17.318 17.364 17.481 17.646 17.784 17.885 18.145 18.515 19.001 Model (Continued)
49        17.116        0.058         0.044         0.119        0.003 50        17.138        0.058         0.001          0.167            0 51        17.193        0.058         0.002          0.003            0 52        17.313        0.058          0.127        10.813          5.98 53        17.318        0.058          0.033          0.275        0.282 54        17.364        0.058          0.025          0.006        0.023 55        17.481        0.057          0.002          2.676        0.024 56        17.646        0.057          0.005          0.518        0.267 57        17.784        0.056          0.016        17.479         0.885 58        17.885        0.056          0.015          3.471         1.605 59        18.145        0.055            0            1.958         0.074 60        18.515        0.054            0            0.26         0.197 61        19.001        0.053          2.379          7.061           0 Total Participating                              98.487        95.652       95.914 Mass (%)
Period seconds Participation X%
0.058 0.044 0.058 0.001 0.058 0.002 0.058 0.127 0.058 0.033 0.058 0.025 0.057 0.002 0.057 0.005 0.056 0.016 0.056 0.015 0.055 0
0.054 0
0.053 2.379 98.487 Participation Participation Y%
Z%
0.119 0.003 0.167 0
0.003 0
10.813 5.98 0.275 0.282 0.006 0.023 2.676 0.024 0.518 0.267 17.479 0.885 3.471 1.605 1.958 0.074 0.26 0.197 7.061 0
95.652 95.914 Page 3S


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                   Page 36 Table 141-10: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS UB Model Frequency     Period   Participation Participation Participation Mode Hz       seconds         X%             Y%           Z%
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Table 141-10: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS UB Model Mode Frequency Period Participation Participation Participation Hz seconds X%
1           7.86       0.127         0.034         0.002         55.52 2         10.657       0.094           0           14.624         0.047 3         11 .773     0.085         0.018         0.032         0.562 4         11 .926     0.084           0           0.019         0.078 5         11 .965     0.084         0.009         0.017         0.177 6         12.042       0.083           0             0           0.001 7         12.123       0.082         0.001         0.001         0.006 8         12.159       0.082         0.015         0.006         0.039 9         12.351       0.081         0.012         0.001         0.04 10         12.365       0.081           0             0           0.019 11         12.387       0.081         0.196         0.118         0.013 12         12.587       0.079           0             0           0.234 13         12.756       0.078         0.002           0           0.003 14         12.811       0.078         0           0.002         0.005 15         13.128       0.076           0             0           0.019 16         13.232       0.076           0             0           0.023 17         13.473       0.074           0             0           0.045 18         13.632       0.073         0.004         0.003         0.009 19         13.721       0.073         0.004         0.011         0.04 20         13.929       0.072           0           0.045         0.043 21         14.021       0.071       0.004         0.278         0.574 22         14.074       0.071       0.003         0.038         0.158 23         14.413       0.069         0           0.198         0.367 24         14.445       0.069         0.022         0.051         0.013 25         14.613       0.068         0.016         3.967         0.008 26         14.873       0.067         0.001         0.015         0.121 27         14.998       0.067         0.004         0.001         0.008 28         15.029       0.067       0.002         0.001           0 29         15.314       0.065       0.005         0.001         0.155 30         15.517       0.064       0.103           0             0 31         15.524       0.064       27.844         0.037         0.011 32         15.786       0.063       0.032           0           0.001 33         15.814       0.063         0           0.003         0.117 34         15.896       0.063       11 .015         0.03         0.009 35         15.913       0.063         5.6           0.011         0.072 36         15.925       0.063       1.109         0.004           0 37         16.027       0.062       0.003           0             0 38         16.143       0.062       22.135         0.087         0.005 39         16.248       0.062       1.348         0.001         0.355 40         16.458       0.061         0           0.001         0.001 41         16.492       0.061       0.017         0.004         0.001 42         16.622         0.06         0           0.005         0.029 43         16.784         0.06       0.005             0           0 44         16.982       0.059       3.058         0.056           0 45         17.098       0.058         0.18         0.008           0 46           17.12       0.058       0.394         0.018           0 47         17.179       0.058       0.001         0.012         0.112
Y%
Z%
1 7.86 0.127 0.034 0.002 55.52 2
10.657 0.094 0
14.624 0.047 3
11.773 0.085 0.018 0.032 0.562 4
11.926 0.084 0
0.019 0.078 5
11.965 0.084 0.009 0.017 0.177 6
12.042 0.083 0
0 0.001 7
12.123 0.082 0.001 0.001 0.006 8
12.159 0.082 0.015 0.006 0.039 9
12.351 0.081 0.012 0.001 0.04 10 12.365 0.081 0
0 0.019 11 12.387 0.081 0.196 0.118 0.013 12 12.587 0.079 0
0 0.234 13 12.756 0.078 0.002 0
0.003 14 12.811 0.078 0
0.002 0.005 15 13.128 0.076 0
0 0.019 16 13.232 0.076 0
0 0.023 17 13.473 0.074 0
0 0.045 18 13.632 0.073 0.004 0.003 0.009 19 13.721 0.073 0.004 0.011 0.04 20 13.929 0.072 0
0.045 0.043 21 14.021 0.071 0.004 0.278 0.574 22 14.074 0.071 0.003 0.038 0.158 23 14.413 0.069 0
0.198 0.367 24 14.445 0.069 0.022 0.051 0.013 25 14.613 0.068 0.016 3.967 0.008 26 14.873 0.067 0.001 0.015 0.121 27 14.998 0.067 0.004 0.001 0.008 28 15.029 0.067 0.002 0.001 0
29 15.314 0.065 0.005 0.001 0.155 30 15.517 0.064 0.103 0
0 31 15.524 0.064 27.844 0.037 0.011 32 15.786 0.063 0.032 0
0.001 33 15.814 0.063 0
0.003 0.117 34 15.896 0.063 11.015 0.03 0.009 35 15.913 0.063 5.6 0.011 0.072 36 15.925 0.063 1.109 0.004 0
37 16.027 0.062 0.003 0
0 38 16.143 0.062 22.135 0.087 0.005 39 16.248 0.062 1.348 0.001 0.355 40 16.458 0.061 0
0.001 0.001 41 16.492 0.061 0.017 0.004 0.001 42 16.622 0.06 0
0.005 0.029 43 16.784 0.06 0.005 0
0 44 16.982 0.059 3.058 0.056 0
45 17.098 0.058 0.18 0.008 0
46 17.12 0.058 0.394 0.018 0
47 17.179 0.058 0.001 0.012 0.112 Page 36


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013                                                                   Page 37 Table 141-10: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS US Model (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013 Table 141-10: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS US Model (Continued)
Frequency     Period   Participation Participation Participation Mode Hz       seconds         X%             Y%             Z%
Mode Frequency Period Participation Participation Participation Hz seconds X%
48         17.193       0.058         0.009         0.001           0 49         17.317       0.058           0           0.006           0 50           17.36       0.058         0.013         0.011         0.001 51         17.518       0.057         0.03         0.019         0.237 52         17.536       0.057         3.382         0.057         0.122 53         17.659       0.057         8.643         0.002         0.061 54         17.748       0.056         0.842         0.003         0.066 55         18.223       0.055           0           0.051           0.3 56           18.44       0.054         0.291         0.162         0.254 57         19.853       0.05         0.48         0.011         0.17 58         20.273       0.049         0.055         0.481         16.784 59         20.538       0.049         0.177             0         3.288 60         21.262       0.047         0.123         5.313         0.001 61         21.476       0.047         0.026           0.05         0.008 62         23.101       0.043         0.305         20.263         1.902 63           23.8       0.042         0.004         0.219         0.053 64         24.924       0.04         4.21         7.737         0.455 65         25.322       0.039         0.249         0.287         1.42 66         25.396       0.039         0.663         0.058         3.148 67         25.684       0.039         0.13         7.992         0.635 68         26.243       0.038         0.01         3.235         0.15 69         26.418       0.038         0.005         5.141         0.251 70           26.77       0.037         0.028         0.431         0.891 71         27.044       0.037         0.138         0.008         0.002 72         27.194       0.037         0.032         0.095         1.471 73         27.887       0.036         0.047         1.915         0.053 74         28.509       0.035         0.993         8.642         0.004 75         28.619       0.035         0.097         3.862         0.304 76         29.383       0.034         0.67         2.362         0.28 77         29.647       0.034         0.002         0.393         0.426 78         29.845       0.034         0.027         0.322         0.154 79         29.989       0.033         0.045           0.08         0.63 80         30.702       0.033           0.1         0.218         0.185 81         30.827       0.032         0.025           0.96         0.449 82         31 .241     0.032         0.036         0.248         0.11 83         31.419       0.032         0.08         1.951         0.118 84         32.128       0.031         0.211         0.526         0.068 85         32.955       0.03         0.005         0.024         0.002 86         33.438       0.03         0.103           0.02         0.002 87         33.647       0.03         0.034         0.136         0.012 88         33.861       0.03         0.861         0.173         0.011 89         34.167       0.029         0.065         0.007         0.048 90           34.3       0.029         0.202         0.023           0 91         34.588       0.029         0.359         0.024         0.061 92           34.72       0.029           0           0.12         0.43 93         35.075       0.029         0.018         0.039         0.004 94         35.424       0.028         0.166         1.563         0.023
Y%
Z%
48 17.193 0.058 0.009 0.001 0
49 17.317 0.058 0
0.006 0
50 17.36 0.058 0.013 0.011 0.001 51 17.518 0.057 0.03 0.019 0.237 52 17.536 0.057 3.382 0.057 0.122 53 17.659 0.057 8.643 0.002 0.061 54 17.748 0.056 0.842 0.003 0.066 55 18.223 0.055 0
0.051 0.3 56 18.44 0.054 0.291 0.162 0.254 57 19.853 0.05 0.48 0.011 0.17 58 20.273 0.049 0.055 0.481 16.784 59 20.538 0.049 0.177 0
3.288 60 21.262 0.047 0.123 5.313 0.001 61 21.476 0.047 0.026 0.05 0.008 62 23.101 0.043 0.305 20.263 1.902 63 23.8 0.042 0.004 0.219 0.053 64 24.924 0.04 4.21 7.737 0.455 65 25.322 0.039 0.249 0.287 1.42 66 25.396 0.039 0.663 0.058 3.148 67 25.684 0.039 0.13 7.992 0.635 68 26.243 0.038 0.01 3.235 0.15 69 26.418 0.038 0.005 5.141 0.251 70 26.77 0.037 0.028 0.431 0.891 71 27.044 0.037 0.138 0.008 0.002 72 27.194 0.037 0.032 0.095 1.471 73 27.887 0.036 0.047 1.915 0.053 74 28.509 0.035 0.993 8.642 0.004 75 28.619 0.035 0.097 3.862 0.304 76 29.383 0.034 0.67 2.362 0.28 77 29.647 0.034 0.002 0.393 0.426 78 29.845 0.034 0.027 0.322 0.154 79 29.989 0.033 0.045 0.08 0.63 80 30.702 0.033 0.1 0.218 0.185 81 30.827 0.032 0.025 0.96 0.449 82 31.241 0.032 0.036 0.248 0.11 83 31.419 0.032 0.08 1.951 0.118 84 32.128 0.031 0.211 0.526 0.068 85 32.955 0.03 0.005 0.024 0.002 86 33.438 0.03 0.103 0.02 0.002 87 33.647 0.03 0.034 0.136 0.012 88 33.861 0.03 0.861 0.173 0.011 89 34.167 0.029 0.065 0.007 0.048 90 34.3 0.029 0.202 0.023 0
91 34.588 0.029 0.359 0.024 0.061 92 34.72 0.029 0
0.12 0.43 93 35.075 0.029 0.018 0.039 0.004 94 35.424 0.028 0.166 1.563 0.023 Page 37


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013                                                                       Page 38 Table 141-10: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS UB Model (Continued)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Table 141-10: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS UB Mode 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 Total Participating Mass l%l Frequency Hz 35.641 36.042 36.53 36.815 37.388 37.467 38.155 38.649 38.971 39.177 39.458 40.22 40.588 Model (Continued)
Frequency      Period   Participation  Participation   Participation Mode Hz        seconds         X%            Y%              Z%
Period Participation seconds X%
95        35.641      0.028         0.003         0.249            0 96          36.042      0.028         0.002           0.11          0.154 97          36.53      0.027         0.121          0.005          0.057 98        36.815      0.027         0.003             0           0.102 99        37.388      0.027            0          0.059          0.012 100        37.467      0.027        0.003          0.001          0.003 101        38.155      0.026          0.01          0.321          0.268 102        38.649      0.026        0.006          0.004          0.002 103        38.971      0.026        0.003          0.163            0 104        39.177      0.026        0.121          0.025          0.036 105        39.458      0.025          0.12          0.004            0 106        40.22        0.025         0.22          0.071          0.139 107        40.588      0.025        0.011            0           0.547 Total Participating                              97.81        95.961         95.404 Mass l%l
0.028 0.003 0.028 0.002 0.027 0.121 0.027 0.003 0.027 0
0.027 0.003 0.026 0.01 0.026 0.006 0.026 0.003 0.026 0.121 0.025 0.12 0.025 0.22 0.025 0.011 97.81 Participation Participation Y%
Z%
0.249 0
0.11 0.154 0.005 0.057 0
0.102 0.059 0.012 0.001 0.003 0.321 0.268 0.004 0.002 0.163 0
0.025 0.036 0.004 0
0.071 0.139 0
0.547 95.961 95.404 Page 38


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                         Page 39 Table 141-11: Maximum Base Forces and Base Moments(1)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 39 Table 141-11: Maximum Base Forces and Base Moments(1)
Base Forces Jkips)                                 Base Moments (ft-kips)
Base Forces Jkips)
VX                   765                     MX                     21799 CQC VZ                   589                     MZ                     24838 Note (1): Maximum from Fixed Base and Lumped Soil Spring Models for all the soil cases: LB, BE, and UB.
Base Moments (ft-kips)
VX 765 MX 21799 CQC VZ 589 MZ 24838 Note (1): Maximum from Fixed Base and Lumped Soil Spring Models for all the soil cases: LB, BE, and UB.
Legend:
Legend:
CQC =Complete Quadratic modal combination for Response Spectrum Analyses.
CQC = Complete Quadratic modal combination for Response Spectrum Analyses.  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013                                                                                             Page 40 FIGURE 141-1: Comparison of ONS UFSAR Figure 2-55 and EI Centro Time History 5 %
C) -
Damped Response Spectra 0.4 0.35 1940 Elcentro N-S scaled to 0.159 RS (5%)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Page 40 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 FIGURE 141-1: Comparison of ONS UFSAR Figure 2-55 and EI Centro Time History 5 %
0.3 C) c 0.25 o
Damped Response Spectra 1940 Elcentro N-S scaled to 0.159 RS (5%)
~
c o  
~   0.2
~  
~
~ 0.2  
~
~  
u 0.15 Oconee UFSAR Horizontal and Vertical RS (5%) FIG 2-55 0.1 0.05 o
~
0.1                                          1                                10                               100 Frequency (HZ)
u <<
0.15 0.1 0.05 o
0.1 1
Frequency (HZ)
Oconee UFSAR Horizontal and Vertical RS (5%) FIG 2-55 10 100  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013                                                                           Page 41 FIGURE 141-2: PSW BUILDING FEM MODEL PSW BUILDING ELEVATION Entry Way                                                 Entry Way
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013 FIGURE 141-2: PSW BUILDING FEM MODEL PSW BUILDING ELEVATION Entry Way Entry Way  
          ~
~ -
                                                                    ~
~
I'l' 1'1'   'I' IA   II    1 II I
I'l' 1'1'  
Battery Room Foundation NEE r                         PSW BUILDING PLAN
'I' IA I I 1
Page 41 I I I
Battery Room Foundation NEE r
PSW BUILDING PLAN  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013                                                             Page 42 FIGURE 141-3: PSW Building eDB Model Mode Shape for Mode 1 (Z-Direction Predominant Mode)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013  
        ~ J(
~
z
J(
z FIGURE 141-3: PSW Building eDB Model Mode Shape for Mode 1 (Z-Direction Predominant Mode)
Page 42


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                         Page 43 FIGURE 141-4: PSW Building CDB Model Mode Shape for Mode 2 (Y-Direction Predominant Mode) y x
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 y
z                                                         L.Rd, Mode Shape 2 Whole Srruerlle
FIGURE 141-4: PSW Building CDB Model Mode Shape for Mode 2 (Y-Direction Predominant Mode)
Page 43 x
z L.Rd, Mode Shape 2 Whole Srruerlle  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013                                                               Page 44 FIGURE 141-5: PSW Building CDB Model Mode Shape for Mode 72 (X-Direction Predominant Mode) v X
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 v
l Whor S/nIcble
l X
FIGURE 141-5: PSW Building CDB Model Mode Shape for Mode 72 (X-Direction Predominant Mode)
Whor S/nIcble Page 44


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013                                                                     Page4S FIGURE 141-6: PSW Building LSS BE Model Mode Shape for Mode 1 (Z-Direction Predominant Mode)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013 T
T
FIGURE 141-6: PSW Building LSS BE Model Mode Shape for Mode 1 (Z-Direction Predominant Mode)
Page4S


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013                                                                 Page 46 FIGURE 141-7: PSW Building LSS BE Model Mode Shape for Mode 2 (Y-Direction Predominant Mode)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 IIIDde 2 FIGURE 141-7: PSW Building LSS BE Model Mode Shape for Mode 2 (Y -Direction Predominant Mode)
IIIDde 2
Page 46


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April S. 2013                                                                     Page 47 FIGURE 141-8: PSW Building LSS BE Model Mode Shape for Mode 19 (X-Direction Predominant Mode)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April S. 2013 T
T*
* 1 FIGURE 141-8: PSW Building LSS BE Model Mode Shape for Mode 19 (X-Direction Predominant Mode)
1                                                          LMIIIt _a_,.
LMIIIt _a_,.
Page 47


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                                                                               Page 48 FIGURE 141-9: ISRS for PSW Building Operating Floor (El 797'-0") - MHE Horizontal Direction, ClB-lSS Envelop
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 48  
: 3. 0 .---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
&sect; c o FIGURE 141-9: ISRS for PSW Building Operating Floor (El 797'-0") - MHE Horizontal Direction, ClB-lSS Envelop 3. 0.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~  
                - -- Widened ISRS 1% Damping
--- Widened ISRS 1% Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping  
                - - - Widened ISRS 2% Damping
....*. Widened ISRS 4% Damping 2.5 ~ 1- -- -Widened ISRS 5% Damping Widened ISRS 7% Damping 2.0  
                ....*. Widened ISRS 4% Damping 2.5 ~   1- -- - Widened ISRS 5% Damping
~
                - -. - Widened ISRS 7% Damping 2.0
GJ 1.5 -
  &sect; c
'3 u <<
o
1.0 0.5 0.0 I 0.10 r -
  ~GJ 1.5 -
I  
  '3u                                                                                                                                          r - -
\\
I     \
I  
                                                                                                                                              ,I       ~
~
1.0                                                                                                                                  ,.
I,..... \\  
I ..... \
.,,1 1- - \\-,. -', ' - ',' \\
                                                                                                                                                        . ,,1 1- - \-,. -' , ' - ' ,' \
J
_ -'                    J         "
,. __. \\ 1
                                                                                                          , __ ,            ""              , . __ . \ 1
_ r _ -
_ r_            - w     I       "        ,_ . "': ,,' . . 1-         ,; 0 "
w I  
Ir-,:':::.: ""'"               .,._',              .'" II 0.5
,_. "':,,'.. 1-
                                                            ,'" ,' _ /.,J~' .: : .__..:....:. ......
,; 0 "
                                                                                                ..                      ..Ir
Ir-,:':::.: ""'"  
                                                                                                    , '/.. .. _ ..*r- . -,  - - - ** - - '
.'" II
                                                                                                                                                          ' .\,. ,.\r- I - - \ ,
.... _.. r...Ir --- ** --'
                                                                                                                                                          , I
I
                                                                                                                                                                      .~'- -...';J,
, ' _,J~ :::: __...:....., '/  
                                                                                                                                                                '~. . . . -
' \\,. \\ I -
_.\.',
/. '
                                            ~ _.:,p""_.'
_.\\.',  
f ,_. - ;,'                              ,",.
.,. r-
0.0 I          .....-  - -
\\
0.10                                              1.00                                                                 10.00                                           100.00 Frequency (Hz)
f,_. - ;,'
'~.... -
.~' -.',  
~ _.:,p  
-.. ;J 1.00 10.00 100.00 Frequency (Hz)  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013                                                                                                                                                           Page 49 FIGURE 141-10: ISRS for PSW Building Operating Floor (EL 797'-0") - MHE Vertical Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 2.0 T I ~,==================~--------------------------------------1
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013 Page 49 S
                  - - - Widened ISRS 1% Damping
c FIGURE 141-10: ISRS for PSW Building Operating Floor (EL 797'-0") - MHE Vertical Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 2.0 T I ~
                  - - - Widened ISRS 2% Damping Widened ISRS 4% Damping
,==================~--------------------------------------1 1.5
                  - * - - Widened ISRS 5% Damping
--- Widened ISRS 1 % Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping Widened ISRS 4% Damping  
                  - - * - Widened ISRS 7% Damping 1.5 S
- Widened ISRS 5% Damping Widened ISRS 7% Damping l,
                                                                                                                          ,    l ,
I I  
c                                                                                                                    I
' r--
                                                                                                          ,    .,        I          '   r--
~
  ~III 1.0                                                                                         ,  ,      l_""               , ,
III 1.0 l_""  
  ~
~
u
u :i 0.5
:i                                                                                               ,_'. ' "
...* * :j  
                                                                                                    ,          ...* *:j
\\..:
                                                                                                                                \. .:
I' r _ _  
r_ _,      .,'._' -.."*r - - . - - - I''                ,
-.*r --. -- -
                                                                        - - -~,-', .-'" .'-.****-,.---'
I I
I I  '            *
J
                                                                                      \ .;.- . -~ . .'
\\ _.  
                                                                                                                  \ _.          " \               \
" \\
                                                                                                        .                                            \
\\
                                                                -*_~...-..-.'~..,'...
~
                                                                                                                \.
. \\
J                                                              ';'.
\\.  
                                                                                  ~.'                                                  .. ,. . .
\\.;. -. -~..'  
                                                                                                                                    \                 \
\\  
0.5                                                  -                                                                                  .      \
\\  
                                                        ./ '                          . II
- -~.-.'~,....,.. -.'
                                                                                                                                                .. ,,..' \
.. \\  
                                                                                                                                            . \ \ .' ' \
*.. -.. ~... I I
                                    ,-,~. ~--'
. \\ ' \\  
                                                                                                                                                            \'
/  
                                                          / ' /, '                 ./
\\  
                                                            ,/
. \\'  
___      9 / '
. /' /, '  
                                                '/
./  
O. O +,----~~----------------~------------------------._----------------------~
',',/  
Q10                                         1.00                                                 10.00                                           100.00 Frequency (Hz)
., ' \\
~-- '
9 / '  
,-,~..
' /
O. O +
, ----~~----------------~------------------------._----------------------~
Q10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Frequency (Hz)  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013                                                                                                                                                           Page 50 FIGURE 141-11 : ISRS for Battery Room Roof EL. 807' - 0" - MHE Horizontal Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 3.0 , ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Page 50  
                - - - Widened ISRS 1% Damping
&sect; c
                - - - Widened ISRS 2% Damping
0 ;;
                - - - - - -Widened ISRS 4% Damping
FIGURE 141-11: ISRS for Battery Room Roof EL. 807' - 0" - MHE Horizontal Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 3.0,------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,  
: 2. 5 1 1- -- - Widened ISRS 5% Damping
---Widened ISRS 1% Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping  
                - - - - Widened ISRS 7% Damping 2.0
- - - - - -Widened ISRS 4% Damping 2.5 1 1- -- - Widened ISRS 5% Damping Widened ISRS 7% Damping 2.0 I!!
  &sect; c
0
  ;;
I!!
CII 1.5 Gi u
CII 1.5 Gi u
u c(
u c(
1.0 0.5 i                                                         l'               . _- __ ,... - - ,... - - -    - .
1.0 0.5 i l'
0,0 I                 ~._n           -
0,0 I  
0.10                                             1.00                                                   10.00                                         100.00 Frequency (Hz)
~._n -
0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Frequency (Hz)  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                                                   Page 51 FIGURE 141-12: ISRS for Battery Room Roof EL. 807' - 0" - MHE Vertical Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 4.0 ~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 51 FIGURE 141-12: ISRS for Battery Room Roof EL. 807' - 0" - MHE Vertical Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 4.0 ~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------~  
                  - - - Widened ISRS 1% Dampin!
---Widened ISRS 1% Dampin!
                  - - - Widened ISRS 2% Dampin 3.5 ~ !.       Widened ISRS 4% Dampin!
Widened ISRS 2% Dampin 3.5 ~ !.
                  - - -
Widened ISRS 4% Dampin!
* Widened ISRS 5% Dampin!
* Widened ISRS 5% Dampin!
                  - *. - Widened ISRS 7% Dampin!
Widened ISRS 7% Dampin!
3.0
3.0  
  ....... 2.5 S
....... 2.5 S
                                                                                                                                            , '\
c
  ~
\\  
c l!
~
  .!! 2.0
l!  
                                                                                                                                            ,,  \
.!! 2.0  
1 CD u
\\
I I
1 I
  ~                                                                                                                                              1 1.5                                                                                                                                      1 I       ..,          '. :    .1 1--
I 1
I            - \ ..... I: __ .-,''. 11 l_     I                       ....J       . \'
1 CD u  
                                                                                                              -    , __ ._            I'         "
~
1.0 -.                                                                      ,... ...J I.....          "                    1           \   \'
I  
_                .I"      ,....., ..... _ . '. ' .'' , r' * - . ". 1 I                                          ~.~,~
. 1 I
_.r _ - v       1   _"            '    _. " - . J -            -. J .
I 1--
                                                                                                                                                      ~
\\..... : __.-,'. 1 1
                                                  .~. -,.-"~-' ,~
I l_ I  
                                                                      \r                                                            I
....J  
* __                    ;::":'Y'-:-""'-'
. \\'
                                                                          ...J        * * * *            .      . '
I'  
* 0.5 00                                                                  ** - . , -                                                             ..
,......J 1  
            .                                    "  _. - 7         - ~--   '
\\ \\'  
0.10               ..-.=- <",/-" - . '                   '
,..... _ '. ' r'  
1.00                                               10.00                                            100.00 Frequency (Hz)
. I"
* -. " 1
_.r _ - v 1
_. " -. J  
-. J.
I
\\r...J I
~
* __ ~.~,~  
;::":'Y'-:-""'-'
00
. ~.  
-,.-"~ - '  
, ~ ** -.,-
7  
- ~ - -
0.10  
..-.=- <",/-" -. '
1.5 1.0 -.
0.5 1.00 10.00 Frequency (Hz) 100.00


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                           Page 52 FIGURE 141-13: ISRS for PSW Building Roof EL. 818' - 0" - MHE Horizontal Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 5.0 ~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 52 FIGURE 141-13: ISRS for PSW Building Roof EL. 818' - 0" - MHE Horizontal Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 5.0 ~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,
                - - - Widened ISRS 1% Damping
4.5 4.0.
                - - - Widened ISRS 2% Damping 4.5
3.5
                ...*.. Widened ISRS 4% Damping
---Widened ISRS 1% Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping  
                - * -
...*.. Widened ISRS 4% Damping
* Widened ISRS 5% Damping 4.0 .  - ** - Widened ISRS 7% Damping 3.5 S3.0 c
* Widened ISRS 5% Damping Widened ISRS 7% Damping S3.0 c o  
o                                                                                                                 I
+l I
  +l                                                                                                                 I l!
I l!
ell 2.5                                                                                                             I
ell 2.5 I
  'iii                                                                                                                 II u
II
u                                                                                                                   I c:(
'iii u
2.0                                                                                                             I I
u c:(
                                                                                                              .,.... - ', 1
2.0 1.5 1.0 I
                                                                                                ...J         "        ' ,V---
I I  
1.5                                                                              ,          . . .1             \.   .,
',1  
                                                                                                    .~ . -'I"OI'-'l oJ I
...J  
J             ;.        "          *
',V---
                                                                                ",        *    .." * * ...J 1.0                                                                          1, - -
oJ..
                                                              -- ., r .. ..... '":? - :
.1  
J 'r ' ':''
\\.
0.5o                                      ~ --..<- .~ * ...
I
                                                      ~' ,_ ..-~ .'-:~'
.~. -'I"OI'-'l J  
        . 0.10                   - ""- - ""o-'.'=-..
.." **...J 1, --
O    I                      --------=--;:;;;;--- - -
I J 'r ' ':'' :? - :
1.00                                                           10.00            100.00 Frequency (Hz)
O r....... '"
o
~ --..<-.~ *...
. 0.10  
- ""--""o-'.'=-.. ~',_.. -~
.'-:~'
--------=--;:;;;;-----
0.5 1.00 10.00 Frequency (Hz) 100.00


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013                                                                                                                                                         Page 53 FIGURE 141-14: ISRS for PSW Building Roof EL, 818' - 0" - MHE Vertical Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 5 . 0 .-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Page 53 FIGURE 141-14: ISRS for PSW Building Roof EL, 818' - 0" - MHE Vertical Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 5. 0.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
                - - - Widened      ISRS 1% Damping
4.5 4.0 3.5
                - - - Widened      ISRS 2% Damping 4.5
:&sect; 3.0 c o  
                - - - - - -Widened ISRS 4% Damping
~
                - - - - Widened    ISRS 5% Damping 4.0       - - - - Widened    ISRS 7% Damping 3.5
:&sect; 3.0
  ~
c o
                                                                                                                ' --I ,  "\
I!
I!
GI 2.5
GI 2.5 Gi u u <<
                                                                                                                            \
2.0 1.5 1.0  
                                                                                                                            "\
---Widened ISRS 1% Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping
Gi u
- - - - - -Widened ISRS 4% Damping
u                                                                                                                                     ,,
- - - Widened ISRS 5% Damping Widened ISRS 7% Damping
2.0
'--I,
                                                                                                            ,;- - - '-.
"\\
l'
\\
                                                                                                                              \. - - , , ,
"\\
1.5                                                                                              -( ,~ .----..                 ~ ' ~ '\
l'  
r /'                     _ ...... ,',\
\\. - -,,,
I   "                            ,, _ ,
(  
                                                                                                    '/   j'
~ '
                                                                                                                                          \ -"-'i..'
~
                                                                                                                                              . -,,-\.
,~.----..  
1.0
'\\
                                                                                                    "  "                                          '\.""'"\'
r /'
I                                                                       ,---,_":I;.,-- :
_...... \\
                                                      ~ -.1' -, .... ' ..J. ~, ~. -' " /
I  
_          .             r _ '    __    r -
'/
0.5                                          .... _._- _ .,  _
j '  
* _ _ .....      - -
\\ -"-'i..'  
* I' 0.0 '
. -,,-\\.  
0.10                      __ __ ,,:G""-.~                     .. c: '
'\\.  
1.00                                                       10.00                                      100.00 Frequency (Hz)
\\'
I r
__ r 0.0 '
~ - -.1'-,.... '  
, ~. -'" /  
..J. ~ -
-
* I' 0.10
__ __,,:G""-.~  
.. c: '
0.5
_":I - :
1.00 10.00 Frequency (Hz) 100.00


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                                               Page 54 FIGURE 141-15: ISRS for Perimeter Wall EL. 811' - 0" - MHE Horizontal Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 5.0 ~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 54 FIGURE 141-15: ISRS for Perimeter Wall EL. 811' - 0" - MHE Horizontal Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 5.0 ~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
              - - - - Widened ISRS 1% Damping
4.5 4.0 3.5
              - - - Widened ISRS 2% Damping 4.5
----Widened ISRS 1% Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping  
              .... " . Widened ISRS 4% Damping
.... ". Widened ISRS 4% Damping  
              - * -
* -
* Widened ISRS 5% Damping 4.0    - ** - Widened ISRS 7% Damping 3.5 1
* Widened ISRS 5% Damping Widened ISRS 7% Damping  
  &sect;   3.0 -                                                                                         1 c                                                                                                 I o
&sect; 3.0 -
  ;;                                                                                                  1                     'r -     \
1 1
I!                                                                                                I
I c o I!
  .!!  2.5                                                                                             I                             1\
1  
B u                                                                                         I         I                                 "\
'r -
  ~                                                                                        1:**** lr--                                     I' 2.0                                                                            ,'_J:,_._:
\\
1      ,,
2.5 I
                                                                                                      ,'4 1.~ ,1" * * * -
I 1 \\
                                                                                            -        I'                     "
B u  
J J ,, " JI** _. ' "I' , .. ". I ," 'r          - ,'
~
r.":~,
2.0 1.5 I
1.5 I'l    :' .
I 1:**** lr--
                                                                                                      \ : - . - "I       ,i \."
1 I'
                                                                                                                    "' \1 *r**-            1',1
"\\
                                                                              .    'I                   ...... - \    ",           '. , *
I'  
                                                                                *_ ,                                ,I    '                \  I' 1.0
,'_J:,_._:,'4
                                                ~---  " ,,.,-~
: 1. ~
1 J
'l J
, " J ** _. "
I  
'r.
I  
' I,.. ".
I
I
* __ - " J,"; ::"'-:!'-'                                   ,s;i                     \
:'. ~,
                                          ~~..~"~ ..
\\ : -
_                      /"J                                            .. "
. - "I,i
0.5-0.0                                        .. ,        -  - y '
\\."
                      -      =----                                                                                                                 ..
r.":
          .10                       ----.
"' \\1 *r**-
* O                                      1,00                                           10.00                                                100.00 Frequency (Hz)
1',1
' I
...... - \\
, I
\\ I' I
* __ -"J,"; ::"'-:!'-'  
,s;i  
\\  
/"J 0.0
~---",,.,-~..... '
y O
=----
~ ~.. ~" ~
.10 1.0 0.5 -
1,00 10.00 Frequency (Hz) 100.00


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                                                                                                 Page 55 FIGURE 141-16: ISRS for Perimeter Wall EL, 811' - 0" - MHE Vertical Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 2.0 r---------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 55  
              - - - Widened ISRS 1% Damping
&sect; c o FIGURE 141-16: ISRS for Perimeter Wall EL, 811' - 0" - MHE Vertical Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 2.0 r---------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
              - - - Widened ISRS 2% Damping Widened ISRS 4% Damping
1.5
              - . -
---Widened ISRS 1% Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping Widened ISRS 4% Damping  
* Widened ISRS 5% Damping
-. -
              - .. - Widened ISRS 7% Damping 1.5
* Widened ISRS 5% Damping  
  &sect; c
-.. - Widened ISRS 7% Damping I!
  ;
G) 1.0  
o I!
\\
G) 1.0
I I  
                                                                                                                                  \
"8 u
I       I "8u ct r---' _, .,
ct 0.5 r--
                                                                                                        ,, r - -_ J -I
I
                                                                                                                        ;r ' - . ',
_J-
                                                                                                                                    \
\\
                                                                                                                                      \
\\
l \
r---' _,.,  
                                                                      '{ _ { - - rll      I1-   -v' ,,- : * - "',-'
;r ' -. ', l \\  
                                                                                                                  ," ..J'      \', \
'{ _ { -
                                                          ~. ' f ' ' - '-,"- ~'"' -.<", / ,/'~,-",-'r--,!
- ll 1- -v' :  
                                                            / __ ~'-"
\\', \\
_              "- """,, .l                  'J " - , , - , , ' : '      '-
r I
0.5
',-' J
                                                                                                                                  '. -:,           \
"-""",,.l
                                                                                              , - ,, - :                             '-::': ' , '\-
'J "-,,-,, ' : '  
                                                      ~ ,-,/
/ __ ~'-"
                                                      . ,J   ' /.                 /                                                         -, "
,~,-",-'r--,!
                      ~~
\\
                            ~-
~
                                -  ---- ....-- ~:::.
f ' ' -, -~ -, //', -,, - :  
                                      .... -......,;-
'-::': ', \\
., J
' /.  
/  
~,-,/
~-
---.... -- ~:::.  
~~
0.0 ~
0.0 ~
          , -----=------------------~------------------------~----------------------~
, -----=------------------~------------------------~----------------------~
Q10                                               1.00                                               10.00                                 100.00 Frequency (Hz)
Q10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Frequency (Hz)  


Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                           Page 56 Figure 141-17: Shear-Wave Velocity Data at PSW Building Locality o           1000         2000         3000     4000     5000       6000   7000       8000             9000 o                                                     I I      I ReMi (Best Estimate)
Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 56 Figure 141-17: Shear-Wave Velocity Data at PSW Building Locality o
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 o,
I I
I I
-10            I I
I I I ReMi (Best Estimate)
I.I                                                          I - 'SCPT Velocity
                                                                                  - -  - Cross-hole velocity    t--
I-
I-
                                                                                  -   - Lower Range I      J                                                          -  -  Upper Range I     I
'SCPT Velocity I I.
-20
Cross-hole velocity t--
                .., L I
I I
                      ,I I
I-I J Lower Range Upper Range I
-30                  '.
I I L
I I~ :                       I I   ,   I I
..,, I I  
-40                                                     ,
-10
I   I   I                   I I   I I
-20 I
I~ :
I I,
I I
I I I I
I I I I
I
--1 I I I
-30
-40  
-100 II I I
I I I I
I I
I I I I
I I -
-I II I
I II I
I
~
- -I
"- - - - 1-: l I
I I
I I  
- -.1. -
I I
I I
        - -1          I II I
I t-
I  -I            I                                                              -
-I I
-60 I
I  I    I            I I                    --                -              -
I I   I
-70
                      . I I
                                      -I I
                                              -III      I I      II        I
                                    ~
                                        "- - - - 1- : l    - -I
-80 I            I            I I
I            . - - . - - . 1. - --. -
I
-90 t-             --              -      - --        I
                                                                        -I   -                      - -I- --
I I
I I
-100                                                                      I                                I Shear-Wave Velocity,ftls
I
-60
-70
-80
-90 Shear-Wave Velocity,ftls  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                               Page 57 RAI #160 In response to RAI-62, the licensee included, in its letter dated January 20,2012, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) 344-1975 as one of the industry standards that is being used for the PSW system design. Discuss the seismic qualification method(s) used for electrical and mechanical equipment credited for the PSW system. Provide a summary of the seismic qualification results to demonstrate that all equipment credited for the PSW system including their subcomponents (relays, contacts, breakers etc.) are capable to perform their intended design function in the event of a safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) after a number of postulated occurrences of the operating basis earthquake (OBE). The response to this RAI, as a minimum, should include the test response spectra (if applicable), the required response spectra, the method of mounting of equipment to the shake table, and the equipment mounting configuration in service condition. Also, discuss the methodology, the industry codes and standards, the level of earthquake, and the acceptance criteria used for the structural design of the PSWequipment mounting.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 RAI #160 Page 57 In response to RAI-62, the licensee included, in its {{letter dated|date=January 20, 2012|text=letter dated January 20,2012}}, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) 344-1975 as one of the industry standards that is being used for the PSW system design. Discuss the seismic qualification method(s) used for electrical and mechanical equipment credited for the PSW system. Provide a summary of the seismic qualification results to demonstrate that all equipment credited for the PSW system including their subcomponents (relays, contacts, breakers etc.) are capable to perform their intended design function in the event of a safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) after a number of postulated occurrences of the operating basis earthquake (OBE). The response to this RAI, as a minimum, should include the test response spectra (if applicable), the required response spectra, the method of mounting of equipment to the shake table, and the equipment mounting configuration in service condition. Also, discuss the methodology, the industry codes and standards, the level of earthquake, and the acceptance criteria used for the structural design of the PSWequipment mounting.
Duke Energv Response:
Duke Energv Response:
The Duke Energy response to this request for information has three parts: I) Seismic qualification of electrical equipment, II) seismic qualification of mechanical equipment and III) anchorage as discussed below.
The Duke Energy response to this request for information has three parts: I) Seismic qualification of electrical equipment, II) seismic qualification of mechanical equipment and III) anchorage as discussed below.
Line 654: Line 968:
: 3) Section 6.6.2.5 - For sine sweep testing, the TRS was again allowed to fall below the RRS by reference to Section 6.6.2.1. Sine sweep testing was deemed not suitable for equipment qualification unless justification was provided.
: 3) Section 6.6.2.5 - For sine sweep testing, the TRS was again allowed to fall below the RRS by reference to Section 6.6.2.1. Sine sweep testing was deemed not suitable for equipment qualification unless justification was provided.
: 4) Section 8 - Documentation. Supplemental documentation is required related to equipment malfunction data.
: 4) Section 8 - Documentation. Supplemental documentation is required related to equipment malfunction data.
For QA-1 electrical equipment, procurement documents were generated in accordance with Duke Energy's directive EDM-140 "Procurement Specifications for Equipment." Seismic demand at the equipment mounting location was included in those procurement
For QA-1 electrical equipment, procurement documents were generated in accordance with Duke Energy's directive EDM-140 "Procurement Specifications for Equipment." Seismic demand at the equipment mounting location was included in those procurement  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5,2013                                                                                 Page 58 documents. For new floor- and wall-mounted electrical enclosures, the applicable in-structure response spectra demand was used for the equipment mounting location. For components added to existing safety-related electrical enclosures, such as the electrical components added to the Oconee Main Control Boards, in-cabinet response spectra demand for the electrical component mounting locations was specified.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5,2013 Page 58 documents. For new floor-and wall-mounted electrical enclosures, the applicable in-structure response spectra demand was used for the equipment mounting location. For components added to existing safety-related electrical enclosures, such as the electrical components added to the Oconee Main Control Boards, in-cabinet response spectra demand for the electrical component mounting locations was specified.
Procurement documents were used by the selected vendors to perform the qualification.
Procurement documents were used by the selected vendors to perform the qualification.
Whether testing, analysis or a combination of testing and analysis was used; the vendors assured the resulting seismic capacity of the equipment enveloped the specified seismic demand. For testing, the 10% margin specified in IEEE 323 was included. Pre- and post-seismic functional testing was performed. All shake table testing consisted of five OBE earthquakes followed by SSE testing taking into account the electrical safety function of the equipment (Le. contactors were evaluated in energized and de-energized states and for transition between those states and chatter was monitored in excess of 2 msec). In addition, random multi-frequency input was used for the testing as opposed to single-frequency and sine-sweep testing noted in the RG 1.100 exceptions #2 and #3 above. Any anomalies found through testing were documented in the qualification reports and given a disposition. Therefore, RG 1.100, Revision 1 Exceptions #2, #3 and #4 were addressed.
Whether testing, analysis or a combination of testing and analysis was used; the vendors assured the resulting seismic capacity of the equipment enveloped the specified seismic demand. For testing, the 10% margin specified in IEEE 323 was included. Pre-and post-seismic functional testing was performed. All shake table testing consisted of five OBE earthquakes followed by SSE testing taking into account the electrical safety function of the equipment (Le. contactors were evaluated in energized and de-energized states and for transition between those states and chatter was monitored in excess of 2 msec). In addition, random multi-frequency input was used for the testing as opposed to single-frequency and sine-sweep testing noted in the RG 1.100 exceptions #2 and #3 above. Any anomalies found through testing were documented in the qualification reports and given a disposition. Therefore, RG 1.100, Revision 1 Exceptions #2, #3 and #4 were addressed.
Qualification by analysis was used for some of the equipment following the methods given in IEEE 344-1975. The 1.5 multimode factor was used as appropriate and justified.
Qualification by analysis was used for some of the equipment following the methods given in IEEE 344-1975. The 1.5 multimode factor was used as appropriate and justified.
Therefore, RG 1.100, Revision 1 Exception #1 has been addressed.
Therefore, RG 1.100, Revision 1 Exception #1 has been addressed.
As part of the procurement, Duke Energy required an owner review and approval of the qualification plans prior to the qualification to insure the vendor's qualification method would meet the owner's requirements. Vendor qualifications were documented in vendor qualification reports that were again owner reviewed. Final qualification reports were entered into Oconee Document Control and Records Management to maintain a record of the qualification. Qualification reports met the documentation requirements of IEEE 344-1975 and included seismic capacity versus demand comparisons. Because of the extensive list of electrical equipment, there is a corresponding extensive list of qualification documents.
As part of the procurement, Duke Energy required an owner review and approval of the qualification plans prior to the qualification to insure the vendor's qualification method would meet the owner's requirements. Vendor qualifications were documented in vendor qualification reports that were again owner reviewed. Final qualification reports were entered into Oconee Document Control and Records Management to maintain a record of the qualification. Qualification reports met the documentation requirements of IEEE 344-1975 and included seismic capacity versus demand comparisons. Because of the extensive list of electrical equipment, there is a corresponding extensive list of qualification documents.
The procurement documents also required the vendor to determine anchorage requirements. The qualifications documented the adequacy of that anchorage design and each vendor developed drawings to transmit the anchorage design. The drawings were used to anchor the equipment to the structures during implementation of the engineering changes. If problems arose with the vendor-defined anchorage, then site civil was contacted and they worked with the vendor to determine the acceptability of any changes .
The procurement documents also required the vendor to determine anchorage requirements. The qualifications documented the adequacy of that anchorage design and each vendor developed drawings to transmit the anchorage design. The drawings were used to anchor the equipment to the structures during implementation of the engineering changes. If problems arose with the vendor-defined anchorage, then site civil was contacted and they worked with the vendor to determine the acceptability of any changes.
Appendix AW of ONS calculation OSC-9506, "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 0, includes a figure on P. AW2 identified as PAW1 "Seismic Horizontal and Vertical FDS (5% Damping) and EPS, Elevation 818'."
Appendix AW of ONS calculation OSC-9506, "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 0, includes a figure on P. AW2 identified as PAW1 "Seismic Horizontal and Vertical FDS (5% Damping) and EPS, Elevation 818'."
The purpose of that figure is to compare the final horizontal and vertical envelopes of the in-structure response spectra calculated for the center of the roof of the PSW Building against the conservative estimate of worst-case in-structure spectra referred to as "Equipment Procurement Spectra" (EPS). It should be noted that the EPS was determined, and used for procurement purposes for equipment with long lead-times, as the PSW Building response spectra analyses were being performed. When the final enveloped results were created for the operating floor, mezzanine, mid-height of the walls and the roof of the PSW Building, they were compared to the EPS in Appendices AT through AW. As shown in those plots,
The purpose of that figure is to compare the final horizontal and vertical envelopes of the in-structure response spectra calculated for the center of the roof of the PSW Building against the conservative estimate of worst-case in-structure spectra referred to as "Equipment Procurement Spectra" (EPS). It should be noted that the EPS was determined, and used for procurement purposes for equipment with long lead-times, as the PSW Building response spectra analyses were being performed. When the final enveloped results were created for the operating floor, mezzanine, mid-height of the walls and the roof of the PSW Building, they were compared to the EPS in Appendices AT through AW. As shown in those plots,  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                             Page 59 the EPS did indeed bound all of the PSW Building locations except for the vertical response at the center of the PSW Building roof.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 59 the EPS did indeed bound all of the PSW Building locations except for the vertical response at the center of the PSW Building roof.
Wherever the EPS was used for the procurement of electrical equipment, the procurement specifications included hold points to validate the seismic input(s). The hold points were removed by either revising the procurement specification to add the corresponding final envelopes from OSC-9506 or in some cases deviations to the procurement specifications were issued with the corresponding final envelopes from OSC-9506. In either case, the equipment that was initially procured using the EPS was qualified using the appropriate seismic in-structure spectra.
Wherever the EPS was used for the procurement of electrical equipment, the procurement specifications included hold points to validate the seismic input(s). The hold points were removed by either revising the procurement specification to add the corresponding final envelopes from OSC-9506 or in some cases deviations to the procurement specifications were issued with the corresponding final envelopes from OSC-9506. In either case, the equipment that was initially procured using the EPS was qualified using the appropriate seismic in-structure spectra.
In the Duke Energy Response to RAI-141 dated July 20,2012, it was determined that the PSW Building in-structure response spectra, that was originally included with the procurement specifications, required revision. Therefore, the PSW Building was reanalyzed and the results documented in Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1.
In the Duke Energy Response to RAI-141 dated July 20,2012, it was determined that the PSW Building in-structure response spectra, that was originally included with the procurement specifications, required revision. Therefore, the PSW Building was reanalyzed and the results documented in Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1.
As a result of the PSW building reanalysis a reevaluation of the electrical equipment was required. A comprehensive seismic capacity versus demand evaluation was completed via Oconee Calculation OSC-10824 "Evaluation of New In-Structure Response Spectra for the PSW Building on Electrical Equipment Qualification," Revision 0 to verify the seismic capacity of electrical equipment located in the PSW Building bounded the new seismic demand listed in OSC-10764 Revision 1. In cases where the capacity did not completely envelope the new in-structure demand response spectra, either an appropriate engineering justification was made, or the equipment was requalified using the new in-structure response spectra.
As a result of the PSW building reanalysis a reevaluation of the electrical equipment was required. A comprehensive seismic capacity versus demand evaluation was completed via Oconee Calculation OSC-10824 "Evaluation of New In-Structure Response Spectra for the PSW Building on Electrical Equipment Qualification," Revision 0 to verify the seismic capacity of electrical equipment located in the PSW Building bounded the new seismic demand listed in OSC-10764 Revision 1. In cases where the capacity did not completely envelope the new in-structure demand response spectra, either an appropriate engineering justification was made, or the equipment was requalified using the new in-structure response spectra.
Seismic Qualification of Electrical Equipment Specific Example - Motor Control Centers in the PSW and Auxiliary Buildings Motor Control Centers (MCC) were included with the scope of PSW electrical equipment and are located in the Auxiliary and PSW Buildings. The requirements for procurement of the MCCs were documented in OSS-0308.00-00-0007, "Procurement Specification for the Design, Fabrication and testing of the QA-1, 600 VAC Motor Control Centers (MCCs) for the Protected Service Water (PSW) System," Revision 2. Nuclear LogistiCS Incorporated (NLI) was selected as the supplier and their qualification plan was documented in QP-29412392-1, "Qualification Plan for Motor Control Centers," Revision 3. Duke Energy approved that qualification plan and NLI performed the qualification. Seismic qualification of the equipment was documented in NLI Qualification Report QR-29412392-1 , "Qualification Report for Motor Control Centers," Revision 4 which was filed as an Oconee vendor manual and placed in Oconee Document Control and Records Management. The vendor manual number is OM 308.--531.001, "PSW - Seismic Qualification Report for Motor Control Centers XPSW, 1XPSW, 2XPSWA, 2XPSWB and 3XPSW," Revision 4.
Seismic Qualification of Electrical Equipment Specific Example - Motor Control Centers in the PSW and Auxiliary Buildings Motor Control Centers (MCC) were included with the scope of PSW electrical equipment and are located in the Auxiliary and PSW Buildings. The requirements for procurement of the MCCs were documented in OSS-0308.00-00-0007, "Procurement Specification for the Design, Fabrication and testing of the QA-1, 600 VAC Motor Control Centers (MCCs) for the Protected Service Water (PSW) System," Revision 2. Nuclear LogistiCS Incorporated (NLI) was selected as the supplier and their qualification plan was documented in QP-29412392-1, "Qualification Plan for Motor Control Centers," Revision 3. Duke Energy approved that qualification plan and NLI performed the qualification. Seismic qualification of the equipment was documented in NLI Qualification Report QR-29412392-1, "Qualification Report for Motor Control Centers," Revision 4 which was filed as an Oconee vendor manual and placed in Oconee Document Control and Records Management. The vendor manual number is OM 308.--531.001, "PSW - Seismic Qualification Report for Motor Control Centers XPSW, 1XPSW, 2XPSWA, 2XPSWB and 3XPSW," Revision 4.
The MCCs were qualified by a combination of shake table testing and analysis in accordance with IEEE 344-1975. Shake table testing was used to qualify the enclosures and equipment and analysiS was used to qualify additional changes made after the completion of the shake table testing. For example, analysis was used to address vertical barriers added to the enclosures for personnel safety.
The MCCs were qualified by a combination of shake table testing and analysis in accordance with IEEE 344-1975. Shake table testing was used to qualify the enclosures and equipment and analysiS was used to qualify additional changes made after the completion of the shake table testing. For example, analysis was used to address vertical barriers added to the enclosures for personnel safety.  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013                                                                               Page 60 The MCCs consist of two different types based on physical location: 1) NEMA 3R MCCs for the Auxiliary Building and 2) NEMA 1 MCCs for the PSW Building. All of the MCCs were Freedom 2100 Series with a 600A main bus and were joined in sets connected on their sides. The largest sets have five sections bolted together and the smallest set has two sections bolted together.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Page 60 The MCCs consist of two different types based on physical location: 1) NEMA 3R MCCs for the Auxiliary Building and 2) NEMA 1 MCCs for the PSW Building. All of the MCCs were Freedom 2100 Series with a 600A main bus and were joined in sets connected on their sides. The largest sets have five sections bolted together and the smallest set has two sections bolted together.
One representative NEMA 1 enclosure was bolted to one representative NEMA 3R enclosure using the standard inter-cabinet bolting used for these enclosures. The bolted enclosure set was welded to a base plate to simulate the installed configuration in the final design drawings. The as-tested layout is shown on NLI Drawing 29412392-LDTS-1, "MCC Test Specimen Outline," Revision 3 that is given in Appendix D of the NLI Qualification Report. The base plate containing the set of two enclosures was fastened to the shake table using four 3/8" diameter bolts. The report states that four bolts used to anchor the set of two enclosures bounds the proposed field installation where four bolts were specified for each individual section (Le. a set of two sections has a total of eight anchors in the field).
One representative NEMA 1 enclosure was bolted to one representative NEMA 3R enclosure using the standard inter-cabinet bolting used for these enclosures. The bolted enclosure set was welded to a base plate to simulate the installed configuration in the final design drawings. The as-tested layout is shown on NLI Drawing 29412392-LDTS-1, "MCC Test Specimen Outline," Revision 3 that is given in Appendix D of the NLI Qualification Report. The base plate containing the set of two enclosures was fastened to the shake table using four 3/8" diameter bolts. The report states that four bolts used to anchor the set of two enclosures bounds the proposed field installation where four bolts were specified for each individual section (Le. a set of two sections has a total of eight anchors in the field).
Each enclosure specimen included a representative set of electrical equipment. The equipment was selected by considering all of the equipment in all of the MCC enclosures and the relative mounting locations of that equipment within the enclosure. Traceability between the test specimens and the production units was given in Section 2.2 of the qualification report.
Each enclosure specimen included a representative set of electrical equipment. The equipment was selected by considering all of the equipment in all of the MCC enclosures and the relative mounting locations of that equipment within the enclosure. Traceability between the test specimens and the production units was given in Section 2.2 of the qualification report.
In-structure response spectra for the Auxiliary and PSW Buildings were included in the procurement specification. NLI created a composite envelope of those spectra and used it as the Required Response Spectra (RRS) input for the shake table testing. The Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) at Oconee is one-half the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) so the RRS was factored by 0.5 for the OBE and taken as the full value for the SSE.
In-structure response spectra for the Auxiliary and PSW Buildings were included in the procurement specification. NLI created a composite envelope of those spectra and used it as the Required Response Spectra (RRS) input for the shake table testing. The Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) at Oconee is one-half the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) so the RRS was factored by 0.5 for the OBE and taken as the full value for the SSE.
A comparison of the Test Response Spectrum (TRS) , obtained from the control accelerometers, to the RRS for the SSE is shown in Figures 160.1 and 160.2 for the horizontal and vertical excitation directions respectively (Note: Figures 160.1 and 160.2 are provided in the RAI #160 supplemental information section of the Attachment to the July 20, 2012, RAI response letter).
A comparison of the Test Response Spectrum (TRS), obtained from the control accelerometers, to the RRS for the SSE is shown in Figures 160.1 and 160.2 for the horizontal and vertical excitation directions respectively (Note: Figures 160.1 and 160.2 are provided in the RAI #160 supplemental information section of the Attachment to the July 20, 2012, RAI response letter).
An anomaly documented the fact that the TRS did not fully envelope the RRS below approximately 2 Hz for both excitation directions. Before the OBE and SSE testing, however, the vendor performed low-level sine-sweeps to determine the resonant frequencies of the enclosure set. Because the enclosure set did not have resonant frequencies in that range, the exceedance was deemed acceptable.
An anomaly documented the fact that the TRS did not fully envelope the RRS below approximately 2 Hz for both excitation directions. Before the OBE and SSE testing, however, the vendor performed low-level sine-sweeps to determine the resonant frequencies of the enclosure set. Because the enclosure set did not have resonant frequencies in that range, the exceedance was deemed acceptable.
The testing consisted of five OBE tests followed by three SSE tests that covered the energized, de-energized and transition states of the electrical equipment. Two of the SSE tests were substituted for two of the OBE tests. The test series was conducted in four different specimen orientations at 0, 90, 180 and 270 degrees to capture the in-phase and out-of-phase response due to the dependent biaxial shake table.
The testing consisted of five OBE tests followed by three SSE tests that covered the energized, de-energized and transition states of the electrical equipment. Two of the SSE tests were substituted for two of the OBE tests. The test series was conducted in four different specimen orientations at 0, 90, 180 and 270 degrees to capture the in-phase and out-of-phase response due to the dependent biaxial shake table.
QA-1 electrical equipment was subjected to pre- and post-seismic functional testing and was monitored for contact chatter in excess of two milliseconds during the shake table testing.
QA-1 electrical equipment was subjected to pre-and post-seismic functional testing and was monitored for contact chatter in excess of two milliseconds during the shake table testing.
The list of equipment, functional state, type of monitoring and acceptance criteria was given in Section 4.2.6 of the report for the three SSE tests. Equipment with no moving contacts (Le. terminal blocks and fuse blocks) was monitored for continuity and non-safety equipment
The list of equipment, functional state, type of monitoring and acceptance criteria was given in Section 4.2.6 of the report for the three SSE tests. Equipment with no moving contacts (Le. terminal blocks and fuse blocks) was monitored for continuity and non-safety equipment  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                             Page 61 was evaluated for structural integrity (mounting) only. All of the equipment met the acceptance criteria except that the door on the NEMA 3R enclosure popped open during some of the testing. NLI resolved this issue by adding a small padlock to the door and then later qualified a hitch pin proposed by Duke Energy. The requirement to include the hitch pin to maintain seismic qualification was included on the final design drawings.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 61 was evaluated for structural integrity (mounting) only. All of the equipment met the acceptance criteria except that the door on the NEMA 3R enclosure popped open during some of the testing. NLI resolved this issue by adding a small padlock to the door and then later qualified a hitch pin proposed by Duke Energy. The requirement to include the hitch pin to maintain seismic qualification was included on the final design drawings.
Anomalies were identified and addressed in an appendix to the test report.
Anomalies were identified and addressed in an appendix to the test report.
Additional analysis was used to quantify anchorage loads to be used by Duke Energy. The qualification report references a separate NLI anchorage qualification report. The anchorage qualification report is QR-29411642-4, Revision 3 and was filed as an Oconee Vendor Manual OM 302.A-0072.004, "Mounting Base Design and Anchorage Loads for NLI Supplied Equipment," Revision 3.
Additional analysis was used to quantify anchorage loads to be used by Duke Energy. The qualification report references a separate NLI anchorage qualification report. The anchorage qualification report is QR-29411642-4, Revision 3 and was filed as an Oconee Vendor Manual OM 302.A-0072.004, "Mounting Base Design and Anchorage Loads for NLI Supplied Equipment," Revision 3.
An additional capacity versus demand comparison was performed in OSC-10824, Revision O. This verified that the new in-structure response spectra (ISRS) from OSC-10764, Revision 1, Appendix AX and A Y did not negatively impact the seismic qualification of the 600V MCC that is located in the PSW Building. The qualification of the 600V MCC located in the Auxiliary Building is not impacted by the new ISRS for the PSW Building.
An additional capacity versus demand comparison was performed in OSC-10824, Revision O. This verified that the new in-structure response spectra (ISRS) from OSC-10764, Revision 1, Appendix AX and A Y did not negatively impact the seismic qualification of the 600V MCC that is located in the PSW Building. The qualification of the 600V MCC located in the Auxiliary Building is not impacted by the new ISRS for the PSW Building.
Specific Example - Batteries and Battery Racks in the PSW Building See Duke Energy's response to RAI-161 (submitted to the NRC on July 11 , 2012) for the details of the qualification of the PSW batteries and racks.
Specific Example - Batteries and Battery Racks in the PSW Building See Duke Energy's response to RAI-161 (submitted to the NRC on July 11, 2012) for the details of the qualification of the PSW batteries and racks.
II. Seismic Qualification of Mechanical Equipment Specification ECV-0601.00-00-0005, Rev.1 "Specification for the Seismic Qualification of Equipment" by Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Oconee Nuclear Station Units 1, 2 and 3 describes acceptable methods for seismic qualification of electromechanical equipment.
II. Seismic Qualification of Mechanical Equipment Specification ECV-0601.00-00-0005, Rev.1 "Specification for the Seismic Qualification of Equipment" by Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Oconee Nuclear Station Units 1, 2 and 3 describes acceptable methods for seismic qualification of electromechanical equipment.
The following governing design criteria documents and references are used, among others, as a basis for the seismic qualification:
The following governing design criteria documents and references are used, among others, as a basis for the seismic qualification:
* UFSAR:
UFSAR:
Section 3.7 "Seismic Design", Section 3.9 "Mechanical Systems and Components",
Section 3.7 "Seismic Design", Section 3.9 "Mechanical Systems and Components",
Section 3.10 "Seismic Qualification of Category I Instrumentation and Electrical Equipment" .
Section 3.10 "Seismic Qualification of Category I Instrumentation and Electrical Equipment".
* Codes and Standards:
Codes and Standards:
IEEE Standard 344-1975.
IEEE Standard 344-1975.
IEEE Standard 323-1974.
IEEE Standard 323-1974.
IEEE Standard 627-1980,
IEEE Standard 627-1980, Specifications:
* Specifications:
OSS -254.00-00-4010 "Design Basis Specification for Seismic Design," Rev. 4.
OSS -254.00-00-4010 "Design Basis Specification for Seismic Design," Rev. 4.
OSS-0235.00-00-0013, "Procurement Specification for the QA-I Heating and Ventilation System of the Protected Service Water Building". Revision 2.
OSS-0235.00-00-0013, "Procurement Specification for the QA-I Heating and Ventilation System of the Protected Service Water Building". Revision 2.
* Regulatory Document:
Regulatory Document:
USNRC R.G. 1.100, Rev 1.
USNRC R.G. 1.100, Rev 1.  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                             Page 62 As QA Condition 1 (QA-1), the PSW mechanical equipment (ME) seismic qualification is governed by the QA program requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix B, and applicable Oconee's procurement, design, fabrication, and installation specifications supplemented by industry codes, standards, and US NRC regulatory guides. Procurement specifications cover the design, fabrication, testing, delivery, and quality assurance documentation of the equipment. Seismic qualification of Class 1E equipment is governed by detailed requirements stipulated in IEEE Standards 344-1975 and IEEE Standards 323-1974. Class 1-E equipment are identified as essential to emergency reactor shutdown, containment isolation, reactor core cooling, containment and reactor heat removal, and preventing significant release of radioactive material to the environment.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 62 As QA Condition 1 (QA-1), the PSW mechanical equipment (ME) seismic qualification is governed by the QA program requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix B, and applicable Oconee's procurement, design, fabrication, and installation specifications supplemented by industry codes, standards, and US NRC regulatory guides. Procurement specifications cover the design, fabrication, testing, delivery, and quality assurance documentation of the equipment. Seismic qualification of Class 1 E equipment is governed by detailed requirements stipulated in IEEE Standards 344-1975 and IEEE Standards 323-1974. Class 1-E equipment are identified as essential to emergency reactor shutdown, containment isolation, reactor core cooling, containment and reactor heat removal, and preventing significant release of radioactive material to the environment.
IEEE Standards 344-1975 provide procedures which verify that Class 1-E equipment can meet its performance requirements during and following one SSE preceded by a number of OBE specified seismic events. Section 4 of IEEE 344 details acceptable methods used for seismic qualification as follows:
IEEE Standards 344-1975 provide procedures which verify that Class 1-E equipment can meet its performance requirements during and following one SSE preceded by a number of OBE specified seismic events. Section 4 of IEEE 344 details acceptable methods used for seismic qualification as follows:
: 1. Analysis that would predict equipment performance (safety margins against code allowable for various operating and accident loading conditions).
: 1. Analysis that would predict equipment performance (safety margins against code allowable for various operating and accident loading conditions).
Line 712: Line 1,025:
For the Duke Energy PSW Project, Mechanical Equipment procurement specifications were issued to Duke Energy approved vendors. These speCifications provided detailed seismic qualification requirements for the vendors to use. It should be noted that the EPS was determined, and used for procurement purposes for mechanical equipment with long lead-times, as the PSW Building response spectra analyses were being performed. When the final enveloped results were created for the operating floor, mezzanine, mid-height of the walls and the roof of the PSW Building, they were compared to the EPS in Appendices AT through AW of OSC-9506, Rev. O. As shown in those plots, the EPS did indeed bound all of the PSW Building locations except for the vertical response at the center of the PSW Building roof.
For the Duke Energy PSW Project, Mechanical Equipment procurement specifications were issued to Duke Energy approved vendors. These speCifications provided detailed seismic qualification requirements for the vendors to use. It should be noted that the EPS was determined, and used for procurement purposes for mechanical equipment with long lead-times, as the PSW Building response spectra analyses were being performed. When the final enveloped results were created for the operating floor, mezzanine, mid-height of the walls and the roof of the PSW Building, they were compared to the EPS in Appendices AT through AW of OSC-9506, Rev. O. As shown in those plots, the EPS did indeed bound all of the PSW Building locations except for the vertical response at the center of the PSW Building roof.
Wherever the EPS was used for the procurement of mechanical equipment, the procurement specifications included hold points to validate the seismic input(s}. The hold points were removed by either revising the procurement speCification to add the corresponding final envelopes from OSC-9506, Rev. 0 or in some cases deviations to the procurement speCifications were issued with the corresponding final envelopes from OSC-9506, Rev. O. In either case, the equipment that was initially procured using the EPS was qualified using the appropriate seismic in-structure spectra.
Wherever the EPS was used for the procurement of mechanical equipment, the procurement specifications included hold points to validate the seismic input(s}. The hold points were removed by either revising the procurement speCification to add the corresponding final envelopes from OSC-9506, Rev. 0 or in some cases deviations to the procurement speCifications were issued with the corresponding final envelopes from OSC-9506, Rev. O. In either case, the equipment that was initially procured using the EPS was qualified using the appropriate seismic in-structure spectra.
In the Duke Energy Response to RAI-141 dated July 20,2012, it was determined that the PSW Building in-structure response spectra, that was Originally included with the
In the Duke Energy Response to RAI-141 dated July 20,2012, it was determined that the PSW Building in-structure response spectra, that was Originally included with the  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                           Page 63 procurement specifications, required revision. Therefore, the PSW Building was reanalyzed and the results documented in Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 63 procurement specifications, required revision. Therefore, the PSW Building was reanalyzed and the results documented in Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1.
As a result of the PSW building reanalysis a reevaluation of the safety related mechanical equipment in the PSW Building was required. An additional seismic capacity versus demand evaluation was performed to verify the seismic capacity of the safety related mechanical equipment located in the PSW Building bounded the new seismic demand listed in OSC-10764 Revision 1. All mechanical equipment was requalified for the appropriate in-structure response spectra in OSC-10764 Revision 1. In cases where the capacity did not completely envelope the new in-structure demand response spectra, either an appropriate engineering justification was made, or the equipment was requalified using the new in-structure response spectra. The final qualification reports for the safety related mechanical equipment, OM 235-0624.001, OM-235-0687.002, and OM-235-0633.002 were revised to include the new seismic evaluation.
As a result of the PSW building reanalysis a reevaluation of the safety related mechanical equipment in the PSW Building was required. An additional seismic capacity versus demand evaluation was performed to verify the seismic capacity of the safety related mechanical equipment located in the PSW Building bounded the new seismic demand listed in OSC-10764 Revision 1. All mechanical equipment was requalified for the appropriate in-structure response spectra in OSC-10764 Revision 1. In cases where the capacity did not completely envelope the new in-structure demand response spectra, either an appropriate engineering justification was made, or the equipment was requalified using the new in-structure response spectra. The final qualification reports for the safety related mechanical equipment, OM 235-0624.001, OM-235-0687.002, and OM-235-0633.002 were revised to include the new seismic evaluation.
The following are examples of qualification by analysis and testing.
The following are examples of qualification by analysis and testing.
Line 720: Line 1,033:
The seismic qualification analysis of the PSW system Booster Pump was performed using general purpose finite element code ANSYS. A three-dimensional (3-D) Finite Element Model (FEM) detailing mass, stiffness, and bolted connections of various components of the pump, motor and mounting steel frame was developed. The model included contact elements to simulate bolted connections preload conditions and potential separation between contacted surfaces.
The seismic qualification analysis of the PSW system Booster Pump was performed using general purpose finite element code ANSYS. A three-dimensional (3-D) Finite Element Model (FEM) detailing mass, stiffness, and bolted connections of various components of the pump, motor and mounting steel frame was developed. The model included contact elements to simulate bolted connections preload conditions and potential separation between contacted surfaces.
A natural frequency analysis was performed on the FEM and the results indicated that all calculated natural frequencies were above the Zero Point Acceleration (ZPA) frequency of 20 Hz. Accordingly, the pump assembly was, therefore, considered rigid and equivalent static analysis method was used to determine effects of OBE and SSE seismic loading conditions. The method includes the use of applicable ZPA accelerations, a static coefficient of 1.5, and the SRSS method to combine seismic responses in the three orthogonal directions (2 horizontal and 1 vertical).
A natural frequency analysis was performed on the FEM and the results indicated that all calculated natural frequencies were above the Zero Point Acceleration (ZPA) frequency of 20 Hz. Accordingly, the pump assembly was, therefore, considered rigid and equivalent static analysis method was used to determine effects of OBE and SSE seismic loading conditions. The method includes the use of applicable ZPA accelerations, a static coefficient of 1.5, and the SRSS method to combine seismic responses in the three orthogonal directions (2 horizontal and 1 vertical).
The dead weight, thermal, internal pressure, nozzle loading and Seismic OBE and SSE loads are considered in the qualification of the pump assembly. The detailed calculations have been performed to determine Load/Capacity, (UC) ratios (Le., Calculated/ Allowable) for various pump assembly components (i.e., Casing, Cover, Bearing Housing, Bolting, Base Plate, Rotor Evaluation, Pipe Work and Flange).
The dead weight, thermal, internal pressure, nozzle loading and Seismic OBE and SSE loads are considered in the qualification of the pump assembly. The detailed calculations have been performed to determine Load/Capacity, (UC) ratios (Le., Calculated/ Allowable) for various pump assembly components (i.e., Casing, Cover, Bearing Housing, Bolting, Base Plate, Rotor Evaluation, Pipe Work and Flange).  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                             Page 64 Based on documented results, it is concluded that the capacity, C, of the evaluated components (as specified by the pertinent allowable values) far exceeds the seismic demand (Le., the calculated load, L, values). Therefore, ample margins of safety exist against specified operating and seismic load combinations.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 64 Based on documented results, it is concluded that the capacity, C, of the evaluated components (as specified by the pertinent allowable values) far exceeds the seismic demand (Le., the calculated load, L, values). Therefore, ample margins of safety exist against specified operating and seismic load combinations.
Section 3.1 of Sulzer's seismic analysis report lists applicable OBE seismic response spectra (RS) (where the Booster Pump will be mounted) for the Auxiliary Building, Floor EI.
Section 3.1 of Sulzer's seismic analysis report lists applicable OBE seismic response spectra (RS) (where the Booster Pump will be mounted) for the Auxiliary Building, Floor EI.
771', N-S, E-W, and vertical directions. The applicable RS are provided in procurement specification OSS-0208.00-00-0015, Rev. 2 of the PSW Booster Pump.
771', N-S, E-W, and vertical directions. The applicable RS are provided in procurement specification OSS-0208.00-00-0015, Rev. 2 of the PSW Booster Pump.
Line 735: Line 1,048:
* Resonance search testing
* Resonance search testing
* Full-Level Qualification Tests
* Full-Level Qualification Tests
* Post-Seismic Operational/Functional Check
* Post-Seismic Operational/Functional Check  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                               Page 65 The fan assemblies were tested operational (with nominal 575 VAC applied during the performance of all seismic tests.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 65 The fan assemblies were tested operational (with nominal 575 VAC applied during the performance of all seismic tests.
No structural deteriorations (such as loose or detached mounting hardware, dislodged motor attachment, cracked welds, loose or detached sub-assemblies or components thereof, loose electrical interface connections etc.) were detected. Additionally, no physical interference between the fan blades and the fan housing occurred during any of the performed tests and no drift or change in blade pitch occurred as a result of the imposed seismic test environment. The motor assemblies maintained their electrical integrity (fan/motor RPM (s) remained consistent and no deterioration of the Insulation Resistance (IR) occurred.
No structural deteriorations (such as loose or detached mounting hardware, dislodged motor attachment, cracked welds, loose or detached sub-assemblies or components thereof, loose electrical interface connections etc.) were detected. Additionally, no physical interference between the fan blades and the fan housing occurred during any of the performed tests and no drift or change in blade pitch occurred as a result of the imposed seismic test environment. The motor assemblies maintained their electrical integrity (fan/motor RPM (s) remained consistent and no deterioration of the Insulation Resistance (IR) occurred.
Therefore, the tested fan/motor assemblies possessed sufficient structural, electrical, and operational integrity, to successfully withstand the imposed OBE-Ievel and full SSE-level simulated seismic environments within the specified acceptance criteria.
Therefore, the tested fan/motor assemblies possessed sufficient structural, electrical, and operational integrity, to successfully withstand the imposed OBE-Ievel and full SSE-level simulated seismic environments within the specified acceptance criteria.
The following minimum acceptance criteria apply. There shall not be any loss of:
The following minimum acceptance criteria apply. There shall not be any loss of:
* Structural integrity resulting in mounting detachment of the fan assemblies and/or subcomponents thereof.
Structural integrity resulting in mounting detachment of the fan assemblies and/or subcomponents thereof.
* Electrical integrity (short or open circuits).
Electrical integrity (short or open circuits).
* Operational integrity caused by either structural, electrical, or mechanical defects Test setup details, data sheets containing results for the performed pre- and post-seismic operational checks, seismic test summary including data plots and photographs are documented in the Appendix I of this report.
Operational integrity caused by either structural, electrical, or mechanical defects Test setup details, data sheets containing results for the performed pre-and post-seismic operational checks, seismic test summary including data plots and photographs are documented in the Appendix I of this report.
Based on the seismic test results documented in this test report, the successful qualification of the tested representative sacrificial fan/motor assemblies is extended to include all the PSW production fan/motor assemblies which will be delivered for use at the PSW Building.
Based on the seismic test results documented in this test report, the successful qualification of the tested representative sacrificial fan/motor assemblies is extended to include all the PSW production fan/motor assemblies which will be delivered for use at the PSW Building.
An additional study was performed in Appendix V of this report to address qualification of fan/motor assemblies for the applicable In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra from OSC-10764, Rev.1. This study verified that the applicable new in-structure response spectra from OSC-10764, Revision 1, are bounded by the previous test spectra; therefore, new in-structure response spectra did not negatively impact the seismic qualification of the fan/motor assemblies of HV system in the PSW Building.
An additional study was performed in Appendix V of this report to address qualification of fan/motor assemblies for the applicable In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra from OSC-10764, Rev.1. This study verified that the applicable new in-structure response spectra from OSC-10764, Revision 1, are bounded by the previous test spectra; therefore, new in-structure response spectra did not negatively impact the seismic qualification of the fan/motor assemblies of HV system in the PSW Building.
III. Seismic Qualification of Equipment Mounting Load combinations and structural design criteria for anchorage of components in the PSW, Auxiliary, and SSF Buildings are given in Duke Energy specification OSS-0292.00-00-0001, Specification for Design and Implementation Support of the Protected Service Water System, for SSE and OBE earthquakes.
III. Seismic Qualification of Equipment Mounting Load combinations and structural design criteria for anchorage of components in the PSW, Auxiliary, and SSF Buildings are given in Duke Energy specification OSS-0292.00-00-0001, Specification for Design and Implementation Support of the Protected Service Water System, for SSE and OBE earthquakes.
Methodology:
Methodology:
All Buildings
All Buildings Attachments are Nuclear Safety Related Seismic analysis of the attachment of electrical equipment uses a static coefficient factor of 1.5 for new designs.  
    -    Attachments are Nuclear Safety Related
    -    Seismic analysis of the attachment of electrical equipment uses a static coefficient factor of 1.5 for new designs.


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                               Page 66
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 66 The design of concrete expansion anchors used to attach new and/or existing equipment are in accordance with specifications OSS-0020.00-00-0004, Specification for the Design, Installation and Inspection of Concrete Expansion Anchors, and OSS-0020.00-00-0006, Specification for the Design, Installation, and Inspection of Hilti Concrete Expansion Anchors.
  -    The design of concrete expansion anchors used to attach new and/or existing equipment are in accordance with specifications OSS-0020.00-00-0004, Specification for the Design, Installation and Inspection of Concrete Expansion Anchors, and OSS-0020.00-00-0006, Specification for the Design, Installation, and Inspection of Hilti Concrete Expansion Anchors.
PSW Building and Auxiliary Building Attachment of equipment is evaluated for worst-case resultant seismic loads by summing forces/moments produced by the vertical seismic acceleration and the controlling horizontal (east/west or north/south) seismic acceleration based on acceleration magnitude and attachment geometry. (See Section 3.7.2.5 of the Oconee UFSAR)
PSW Building and Auxiliary Building
Critical damping values (used for the seismic analysis of the attachment of new and/or eXisting equipment) are as specified in Section 3.7.1.3 of the Oconee UFSAR.
    -    Attachment of equipment is evaluated for worst-case resultant seismic loads by summing forces/moments produced by the vertical seismic acceleration and the controlling horizontal (east/west or north/south) seismic acceleration based on acceleration magnitude and attachment geometry. (See Section 3.7.2.5 of the Oconee UFSAR)
For PSW building seismic equipment mounting qualification, the in-structure response spectra documented in OSC-9506, Rev. 0 was utilized. Following the Duke Energy Response to RAI-141 dated July 20,2012, it was determined that the PSW Building in-structure response spectra, that was originally used in the PSW building equipment mounting calculations, required revision. Therefore, the PSW Building was reanalyzed and the results documented in Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1. As a result of the PSW building reanalysis a re-evaluation of the PSW building equipment mounting was required. All pertinent equipment mounting calculations (See Table I) were revised to verify the original seismic design load (Le., peak acceleration of appropriate in-structure response spectra) of existing equipment anchorage located in the PSW Building bounded the new seismic load listed in OSC-10764 Revision 1. In cases where the original design load did not completely envelope the new seismic load in OSC-10764, Rev. 1, the equipment mounting was re-qualified using the peak acceleration of the new in-structure response spectra.
    -    Critical damping values (used for the seismic analysis of the attachment of new and/or eXisting equipment) are as specified in Section 3.7.1.3 of the Oconee UFSAR.
SSF Building The seismic analysis of the attachment of equipment is performed in accordance with Section 6.3.8 of specification OSS-0176.00-00-0002, Design Specification for Standby Shutdown Facility and shall be evaluated for worst-case resultant seismic loads obtained by the square-root-of-the-sum-of-the-square (SRSS) of forces/moments produced by all three components of earthquake motion: vertical acceleration and both horizontal (east/west and north/south) accelerations. (Regulatory Guide 1.92, Revision 1 and Sections 9.6.3.1 and 9.6.4.3 of the Oconee UFSAR).
    -    For PSW building seismic equipment mounting qualification, the in-structure response spectra documented in OSC-9506, Rev. 0 was utilized. Following the Duke Energy Response to RAI-141 dated July 20,2012, it was determined that the PSW Building in-structure response spectra, that was originally used in the PSW building equipment mounting calculations, required revision. Therefore, the PSW Building was reanalyzed and the results documented in Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1. As a result of the PSW building reanalysis a re-evaluation of the PSW building equipment mounting was required. All pertinent equipment mounting calculations (See Table I) were revised to verify the original seismic design load (Le., peak acceleration of appropriate in-structure response spectra) of existing equipment anchorage located in the PSW Building bounded the new seismic load listed in OSC-10764 Revision 1. In cases where the original design load did not completely envelope the new seismic load in OSC-10764, Rev. 1, the equipment mounting was re-qualified using the peak acceleration of the new in-structure response spectra.
SSF Building
    -    The seismic analysis of the attachment of equipment is performed in accordance with Section 6.3.8 of specification OSS-0176.00-00-0002, Design Specification for Standby Shutdown Facility and shall be evaluated for worst-case resultant seismic loads obtained by the square-root-of-the-sum- of-the-square (SRSS) of forces/moments produced by all three components of earthquake motion: vertical acceleration and both horizontal (east/west and north/south) accelerations. (Regulatory Guide 1.92, Revision 1 and Sections 9.6.3.1 and 9.6.4.3 of the Oconee UFSAR).
Structural Acceptance Criteria:
Structural Acceptance Criteria:
PSW Building
PSW Building Subsection 11.5 of SRP Section 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2 Aux. Building Section 20.2.3 of OSS-0254.00-00-3007, Design Basis Specification for the Auxiliary Building  
    -    Subsection 11.5 of SRP Section 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2 Aux. Building
    -    Section 20.2.3 of OSS-0254.00-00-3007, Design Basis Specification for the Auxiliary Building


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 Apri15, 2013                                                                             Page 67 SSF Building
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 Apri15, 2013 SSF Building Page 67 Section 4.2.1 of OSS-0176.00-00-0002, Design Specification for Standby Shutdown Facility Loads and Load Combinations:
    -  Section 4.2.1 of OSS-0176.00-00-0002, Design Specification for Standby Shutdown Facility Loads and Load Combinations:
PSW Building Dead loads consist of the weight of the structure plus all equipment and materials permanently fastened to, and supported by, the structure/component.
PSW Building
Live loads are the loads produced by the use and occupancy of the building or structure.
    -  Dead loads consist of the weight of the structure plus all equipment and materials permanently fastened to, and supported by, the structure/component.
    -  Live loads are the loads produced by the use and occupancy of the building or structure.
They include the weight of all movable loads, including personnel, tools, miscellaneous equipment, movable partitions, cranes, hoists, parts of dismantled equipment, and stored material.
They include the weight of all movable loads, including personnel, tools, miscellaneous equipment, movable partitions, cranes, hoists, parts of dismantled equipment, and stored material.
    -  Seismic in-structure response spectra as specified in OSC-10764, Revision 1. Critical damping values as specified in Section 3.7.1.3 of the Oconee UFSAR. Components of earthquake motion applied as specified in Section 3.7.2.5 of the Oconee UFSAR.
Seismic in-structure response spectra as specified in OSC-10764, Revision 1. Critical damping values as specified in Section 3.7.1.3 of the Oconee UFSAR. Components of earthquake motion applied as specified in Section 3.7.2.5 of the Oconee UFSAR.
    -  Load Combinations are as specified in NUREG-800, SRP 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2.
Load Combinations are as specified in NUREG-800, SRP 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2.
Aux. Building
Aux. Building Sections 20.2.1 and 20.2.2of OSS-0254.00-00-3007, Design Basis Specification for the Auxiliary Building SSF Building Section 6.2.1 of OSS-0176.00-00-0002, Design Specification for Standby Shutdown Facility Codes and Standards:
    -  Sections 20.2.1 and 20.2.2of OSS-0254.00-00-3007, Design Basis Specification for the Auxiliary Building SSF Building
PSW Building Structural steel and plates: Subsection 11.2 of Standard Review Plan (SRP) Section 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2 (Le., ANSI/AISC N690-1984 as supplemented by Appendix F of SRP Section 3.8.4)
    -  Section 6.2.1 of OSS-0176.00-00-0002, Design Specification for Standby Shutdown Facility Codes and Standards:
Anchoring components and structural supports in concrete: Subsection C of Regulatory Guide 1.199 (i.e., Appendix B (February 2001) to ACI 349-01 as supplemented by Regulatory Guide 1.199)
PSW Building
Aux. Building Section 20.2.4 of OSS-0254.00-00-3007, Design Basis Specification for the Auxiliary Building SSF Building Section 4.3.1 of OSS-0176.00-00-0002, Design Specification for Standby Shutdown Facility  
    -  Structural steel and plates: Subsection 11.2 of Standard Review Plan (SRP) Section 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2 (Le., ANSI/AISC N690-1984 as supplemented by Appendix F of SRP Section 3.8.4)
    -  Anchoring components and structural supports in concrete: Subsection C of Regulatory Guide 1.199 (i.e., Appendix B (February 2001) to ACI 349-01 as supplemented by Regulatory Guide 1.199)
Aux. Building
    -  Section 20.2.4 of OSS-0254.00-00-3007, Design Basis Specification for the Auxiliary Building SSF Building
    -  Section 4.3.1 of OSS-0176.00-00-0002, Design Specification for Standby Shutdown Facility


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5,2013                                                                               Page 68 Examples:
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5,2013 Examples:
PSW Building
PSW Building Page 68 OSC-9818, "PSW Battery and Battery Racks 0 PSW BC CPSW001 and 0 PSW CPSW002 Seismic Mounting Qualification," Revision 1.
        -  OSC-9818, "PSW Battery and Battery Racks 0 PSW BC CPSW001 and 0 PSW CPSW002 Seismic Mounting Qualification," Revision 1.
Auxiliary Building OSC-9357, "Terminal Cabinet 1 PSWCA0001 Seismic Mounting Qualification,"
Auxiliary Building
        -  OSC-9357, "Terminal Cabinet 1PSWCA0001 Seismic Mounting Qualification,"
Revision O.
Revision O.
SSF Building
SSF Building OSC-1371, "Seismic Mounting of Electrical Equipment for the Standby Shutdown Facility," Revision 33.
        -  OSC-1371, "Seismic Mounting of Electrical Equipment for the Standby Shutdown Facility," Revision 33.
RAJ #161 Discuss the method of seismic qualification of DC batteries associated with the PSW system and the supporting battery rack structure(s). Describe the procedures used to account for possible amplification of vibratory motion through the battery rack structure.
RAJ #161 Discuss the method of seismic qualification of DC batteries associated with the PSW system and the supporting battery rack structure(s). Describe the procedures used to account for possible amplification of vibratory motion through the battery rack structure.
Duke Energy Response:
Duke Energy Response:
Line 798: Line 1,094:
Qualification was by similarity to previous shake table testing in accordance with IEEE 344-1975.
Qualification was by similarity to previous shake table testing in accordance with IEEE 344-1975.
The previous shake table test, performed by Wyle Laboratories and documented in Report 43450-1, "Seismic Simulation Test Program on a Battery Rack and Batteries", dated December 7, 1976, is contained in Attachment 2 of QR-2312237. This test used a similar 2-Step Battery Rack and was fully loaded with naturally aged, artificially aged and un-aged batteries of various ratings. Any test anomalies were documented and justified within the body of the 43450-1 report. Any differences between the previously tested batteries and battery racks and PSW production Batteries and Battery Racks were justified fully within the QR-2312237 report.
The previous shake table test, performed by Wyle Laboratories and documented in Report 43450-1, "Seismic Simulation Test Program on a Battery Rack and Batteries", dated December 7, 1976, is contained in Attachment 2 of QR-2312237. This test used a similar 2-Step Battery Rack and was fully loaded with naturally aged, artificially aged and un-aged batteries of various ratings. Any test anomalies were documented and justified within the body of the 43450-1 report. Any differences between the previously tested batteries and battery racks and PSW production Batteries and Battery Racks were justified fully within the QR-2312237 report.
The in-structure response spectra for the PSW Battery Room were specified in Deviation 1 of OSS-0320.00-00-0023 Rev 1. C&D performed a comparison of the Test Response Spectrum (TRS) from the previous test in 43450-1 against this Required Response Spectrum (RRS), after adjusting for both the 10% margin required by IEEE 323-1974, and to account for a weight difference between the tested and supplied Batteries and Battery Racks. The TRS vs. RRS for the Safety Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) is shown in Figure 161.1 and Figure 161.2 (Note: Figures 161 .1 and 161.2 provided in the RAI #161 supplemental information section of the attachment to
The in-structure response spectra for the PSW Battery Room were specified in Deviation 1 of OSS-0320.00-00-0023 Rev 1. C&D performed a comparison of the Test Response Spectrum (TRS) from the previous test in 43450-1 against this Required Response Spectrum (RRS), after adjusting for both the 10% margin required by IEEE 323-1974, and to account for a weight difference between the tested and supplied Batteries and Battery Racks. The TRS vs. RRS for the Safety Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) is shown in Figure 161.1 and Figure 161.2 (Note: Figures 161.1 and 161.2 provided in the RAI #161 supplemental information section of the attachment to  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                               Page 69 the July 20,2012 RAI response letter). The small excursion in Figure 161.2 where the TRS did not fully envelope the RRS is justified within QR-2312237 as being acceptable as the batteries and battery racks are not dynamically responsive at low frequency.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 69 the July 20,2012 RAI response letter). The small excursion in Figure 161.2 where the TRS did not fully envelope the RRS is justified within QR-2312237 as being acceptable as the batteries and battery racks are not dynamically responsive at low frequency.
The testing consisted of five Operational Basis Earthquake (OBE) tests followed by an SSE test.
The testing consisted of five Operational Basis Earthquake (OBE) tests followed by an SSE test.
The battery cells were connected in series to a resistive load and monitored during all phases of the test program. The battery output voltage and current were recorded on an oscillograph recorder to determine electrical continuity, current and voltage levels, and to detect any spurious operation during seismic testing. There are no moving contacts in the batteries or battery racks that would necessitate chatter monitoring. The test program was conducted in two separate specimen orientations at 0 and 90 degrees due the bi-axial independent motion seismic table with phase in-coherent vertical and horizontal inputs.
The battery cells were connected in series to a resistive load and monitored during all phases of the test program. The battery output voltage and current were recorded on an oscillograph recorder to determine electrical continuity, current and voltage levels, and to detect any spurious operation during seismic testing. There are no moving contacts in the batteries or battery racks that would necessitate chatter monitoring. The test program was conducted in two separate specimen orientations at 0 and 90 degrees due the bi-axial independent motion seismic table with phase in-coherent vertical and horizontal inputs.
The batteries and battery racks were subjected to pre- and post-seismic functional testing as well as monitoring during the shake table testing . A summary of the results is listed in Section 5.7 of QR-2312237.
The batteries and battery racks were subjected to pre-and post-seismic functional testing as well as monitoring during the shake table testing. A summary of the results is listed in Section 5.7 of QR-2312237.
An additional capacity versus demand comparison was performed in Oconee Calculation OSC-10824, "Evaluation of New In-Structure Response Spectra for the PSW Building on Electrical Equipment Qualification," Revision O. This verified that the new in-structure response spectrum (ISRS) from Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building ," Revision 1, Appendix AX and A Y did not negatively impact the seismic qualification of the DC Batteries and Battery Racks located in the PSW Building.
An additional capacity versus demand comparison was performed in Oconee Calculation OSC-10824, "Evaluation of New In-Structure Response Spectra for the PSW Building on Electrical Equipment Qualification," Revision O. This verified that the new in-structure response spectrum (ISRS) from Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1, Appendix AX and A Y did not negatively impact the seismic qualification of the DC Batteries and Battery Racks located in the PSW Building.
RAI #162 Discuss the methodology, the industry codes and standards, the level of earthquake, and the acceptance criteria used for the structural design of the battery rack structure and its anchorages.
RAI #162 Discuss the methodology, the industry codes and standards, the level of earthquake, and the acceptance criteria used for the structural design of the battery rack structure and its anchorages.
Duke Energy Response:
Duke Energy Response:
: 1. Seismic Qualification of Electrical Equipment The battery racks were seismically qualified by seismic shake table testing and dynamic similarity in accordance with IEEE 344-1975 as discussed in the Duke Energy response to RAI-161. Because analysis was not used for this equipment qualification, the development methodology or industry codes and standards used by C & D Technologies, Inc (C&D) are not required as part of this qualification. This is acceptable because the structural design of the battery racks was successfully challenged via proof testing in accordance with IEEE 344-1975. The level of earthquake and acceptance criteria are discussed in the Duke Energy Response to RAI-161 (from the RAI response letter dated July 11, 2012).
: 1. Seismic Qualification of Electrical Equipment The battery racks were seismically qualified by seismic shake table testing and dynamic similarity in accordance with IEEE 344-1975 as discussed in the Duke Energy response to RAI-161. Because analysis was not used for this equipment qualification, the development methodology or industry codes and standards used by C & D Technologies, Inc (C&D) are not required as part of this qualification. This is acceptable because the structural design of the battery racks was successfully challenged via proof testing in accordance with IEEE 344-1975. The level of earthquake and acceptance criteria are discussed in the Duke Energy Response to RAI-161 (from the RAI response {{letter dated|date=July 11, 2012|text=letter dated July 11, 2012}}).
: 2. Anchorage Load combinations and structural design criteria for anchorage of the Battery Racks in the PSW Building are given in ONS speCification OSS-0292.00-00-0001 , "Specification for Design and Implementation Support of the Protected Service Water System, for SSE and OBE earthquakes."
: 2. Anchorage Load combinations and structural design criteria for anchorage of the Battery Racks in the PSW Building are given in ONS speCification OSS-0292.00-00-0001, "Specification for Design and Implementation Support of the Protected Service Water System, for SSE and OBE earthquakes."
Methodology:
Methodology:
Buildings
Buildings  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                               Page 70
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Attachments are QA-1.
* Attachments are QA-1 .
Page 70 Seismic analysis of the attachment of electrical equipment uses a static coefficient factor of 1.5 for new designs.
* Seismic analysis of the attachment of electrical equipment uses a static coefficient factor of 1.5 for new designs.
The design of concrete expansion anchors used to attach new and/or existing equipment are in accordance with existing Oconee anchor design specifications.
* The design of concrete expansion anchors used to attach new and/or existing equipment are in accordance with existing Oconee anchor design specifications.
Attachment of equipment is evaluated for worst-case resultant seismic loads by summing forces/moments produced by the vertical seismic acceleration and the controlling horizontal (east/west or north/south) seismic acceleration based on acceleration magnitude and attachment geometry (See Section 3.7.2.5 of the Oconee UFSAR).
* Attachment of equipment is evaluated for worst-case resultant seismic loads by summing forces/moments produced by the vertical seismic acceleration and the controlling horizontal (east/west or north/south) seismic acceleration based on acceleration magnitude and attachment geometry (See Section 3.7.2.5 of the Oconee UFSAR).
Critical damping values (used for the seismic analysis of the attachment of new and/or existing equipment) are as specified in Section 3.7.1.3 of the Oconee UFSAR.
* Critical damping values (used for the seismic analysis of the attachment of new and/or existing equipment) are as specified in Section 3.7.1.3 of the Oconee UFSAR.
Welds to embedded plates were specified by the vendor and confirmed within calculation OSC-9818, "PSW Battery and Battery Racks 0 PSW BC CPSW001 and 0 PSW CPSW002 Seismic Mounting Qualification," to be conservative.
* Welds to embedded plates were specified by the vendor and confirmed within calculation OSC-9818, "PSW Battery and Battery Racks 0 PSW BC CPSW001 and 0 PSW CPSW002 Seismic Mounting Qualification," to be conservative.
Structural Acceptance Criteria:
Structural Acceptance Criteria:
* Subsection 11.5 of SRP Section 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2.
Subsection 11.5 of SRP Section 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2.
Loads and Load Combinations:
Loads and Load Combinations:
* Dead loads consist of the weight of the structure plus all equipment and materials permanently fastened to, and supported by, the structure/component.
Dead loads consist of the weight of the structure plus all equipment and materials permanently fastened to, and supported by, the structure/component.
* Seismic design response spectra as specified in OSC-9506, "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building."
Seismic design response spectra as specified in OSC-9506, "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building."
Note: Following the Duke Energy Response to RAI-141 dated July 20,2012, it was determined that the PSW Building in-structure response spectra, that was originally used in the PSW building equipment mounting calculations,OSC-9506 required revision.
Note: Following the Duke Energy Response to RAI-141 dated July 20,2012, it was determined that the PSW Building in-structure response spectra, that was originally used in the PSW building equipment mounting calculations,OSC-9506 required revision.
Therefore, the PSW Building was reanalyzed and the results documented in Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1. As a result of this reanalysis a re-evaluation of the PSW Building equipment mounting was completed. All pertinent equipment mounting calculations were reviewed and/or revised to verify the original seismic design load (Le.,
Therefore, the PSW Building was reanalyzed and the results documented in Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1. As a result of this reanalysis a re-evaluation of the PSW Building equipment mounting was completed. All pertinent equipment mounting calculations were reviewed and/or revised to verify the original seismic design load (Le.,
peak acceleration of appropriate in-structure response spectra) of existing equipment anchorage located in the PSW Building bounded the new seismic load listed in OSC-10764 Revision 1. This re-evaluation included OSC-9818, "PSW Battery and Battery Racks 0 PSW BC CPSW001 and 0 PSW CPSW002 Seismic Mounting Qualification." In the re-evaluation of OSC-9818 it was determined that the accelerations documented in OSC-10764, revision 1, when increased by the static coefficient factor of 1.5 were bounded by the original acceleration values used in OSC-9818, revision 0, where a static coefficient factor of 1.0 was used.
peak acceleration of appropriate in-structure response spectra) of existing equipment anchorage located in the PSW Building bounded the new seismic load listed in OSC-10764 Revision 1. This re-evaluation included OSC-9818, "PSW Battery and Battery Racks 0 PSW BC CPSW001 and 0 PSW CPSW002 Seismic Mounting Qualification." In the re-evaluation of OSC-9818 it was determined that the accelerations documented in OSC-10764, revision 1, when increased by the static coefficient factor of 1.5 were bounded by the original acceleration values used in OSC-9818, revision 0, where a static coefficient factor of 1.0 was used.
* Load Combinations are as specified in NUREG-800, SRP 3.8.4, [DRAFT] Revision 2.
Load Combinations are as specified in NUREG-800, SRP 3.8.4, [DRAFT] Revision 2.
Codes and Standards:
Codes and Standards:
* Structural steel and plates: Subsection 11.2 of Standard Review Plan (SRP) Section 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2 (Le., ANSI/AISC N690-1984 as supplemented by Appendix F of SRP Section 3.8.4).
Structural steel and plates: Subsection 11.2 of Standard Review Plan (SRP) Section 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2 (Le., ANSI/AISC N690-1984 as supplemented by Appendix F of SRP Section 3.8.4).  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April5, 2013                                                                               Page 71
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April5, 2013 Page 71 Anchoring components and structural supports in concrete: Subsection C of Regulatory Guide 1.199 (Le., Appendix B (February 2001) to ACI 349-01 as supplemented by Regulatory Guide 1.199).
* Anchoring components and structural supports in concrete: Subsection C of Regulatory Guide 1.199 (Le., Appendix B (February 2001) to ACI 349-01 as supplemented by Regulatory Guide 1.199).
RAI #168:
RAI #168:
RAI-139 requested design inputs (01) (including loads and load combinations) for HVAC system components and component supports, ductwork and duct supports. The response to RAI-139(b),
RAI-139 requested design inputs (01) (including loads and load combinations) for HVAC system components and component supports, ductwork and duct supports. The response to RAI-139(b),
Line 842: Line 1,136:
OW Upset:
OW Upset:
DW+/- OBE Faulted:
DW+/- OBE Faulted:
DW+/- SSE Where:
Where:
                    =
OW Deadweight of ductwork, fans , mountings, insulation, miscellaneous, and attachments.
                    =
OBE Operating Base Earthquake loading determined by multiplying the appropriate OBE acceleration by the participating mass.
                    =
SSE Safe Shutdown Earthquake loading determined by multiplying the appropriate SSE acceleration by the participating mass.
RAI #169:
RAI #169:
DW+/- SSE OW = Deadweight of ductwork, fans, mountings, insulation, miscellaneous, and attachments.
OBE = Operating Base Earthquake loading determined by multiplying the appropriate OBE acceleration by the participating mass.
SSE = Safe Shutdown Earthquake loading determined by multiplying the appropriate SSE acceleration by the participating mass.
RAI-138 requested the following: "Identify the codes and code edition utilized for the structural design of the HVAC system components and component supports, ducts and duct supports and whether these codes are in the ONS CLB or current design basis (COB). If these codes are not in the ONS CLB or COB, please provide the basis for justifying use of these codes."
RAI-138 requested the following: "Identify the codes and code edition utilized for the structural design of the HVAC system components and component supports, ducts and duct supports and whether these codes are in the ONS CLB or current design basis (COB). If these codes are not in the ONS CLB or COB, please provide the basis for justifying use of these codes."
The response to RAI-138 provides the requested information for HVAC duct supports, but not for HVAC system components or ducts.
The response to RAI-138 provides the requested information for HVAC duct supports, but not for HVAC system components or ducts.  


Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013                                                                             Page 72 The response to RAI-138 states that "For details on the codes and editions used for the qualification of HVAC equipment, see the response to RAJ 160." Review of the response to RAI-160 shows that it does not include HVAC.
Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 72 The response to RAI-138 states that "For details on the codes and editions used for the qualification of HVAC equipment, see the response to RAJ 160." Review of the response to RAI-160 shows that it does not include HVAC.
The response to RAI-62 designated standard ASME AG-1, 2003 as the Code for HVAC system design. The response to RAI-138, for the design of HVAC ducts, makes reference to the SMACNA HVAC Duct Construction Standards - Metal and Flexible, 2005. Please provide clarification and verify which HVAC codes have been utilized for the PSW system credited HVAC system ductwork and components (such as AHUs, Fans, AC refrigeration units etc) and component supports. If these codes are not in the ONS CL8 or CD8, please provide the basis for justifying use of these codes.
The response to RAI-62 designated standard ASME AG-1, 2003 as the Code for HVAC system design. The response to RAI-138, for the design of HVAC ducts, makes reference to the SMACNA HVAC Duct Construction Standards - Metal and Flexible, 2005. Please provide clarification and verify which HVAC codes have been utilized for the PSW system credited HVAC system ductwork and components (such as AHUs, Fans, AC refrigeration units etc) and component supports. If these codes are not in the ONS CL8 or CD8, please provide the basis for justifying use of these codes.
Duke Energy Response:
Duke Energy Response:
Line 862: Line 1,153:
In Section CA Conditioning Equipment, ASTM A90 and ASTM A653 standards for zinc coated materials were added. Also reference to ASTM A525 was superseded by ASTM A653 and editorial change to replace reference from ASME NQA-1 to ASME NQA-2.
In Section CA Conditioning Equipment, ASTM A90 and ASTM A653 standards for zinc coated materials were added. Also reference to ASTM A525 was superseded by ASTM A653 and editorial change to replace reference from ASME NQA-1 to ASME NQA-2.
The remaining differences identified were editorial in nature and have no technical impact on the PSW ductwork design. Examples of these differences are: change in spacing, replacing words with their mathematical symbol, changing phraSing to better convey meaning, renumbering paragraphs, tables and figures, adding publisher names and addresses, and author's names to references.
The remaining differences identified were editorial in nature and have no technical impact on the PSW ductwork design. Examples of these differences are: change in spacing, replacing words with their mathematical symbol, changing phraSing to better convey meaning, renumbering paragraphs, tables and figures, adding publisher names and addresses, and author's names to references.
The sections of ASME AG-1, 1997 applicable to the design of the PSW HVAC systems were not changed by the 2003 revision . Therefore, use of ASME AG-1, 2003 in lieu of ASME AG-1 , 1997 is acceptable.}}
The sections of ASME AG-1, 1997 applicable to the design of the PSW HVAC systems were not changed by the 2003 revision. Therefore, use of ASME AG-1, 2003 in lieu of ASME AG-1, 1997 is acceptable.}}

Latest revision as of 09:05, 11 January 2025

Response to Request for Additional Information to Licensing Basis for the Protected Service Water System - Supplement 4
ML13123A159
Person / Time
Site: Oconee  Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 04/05/2013
From: Batson S
Duke Energy Carolinas
To:
Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Boska J
References
Download: ML13123A159 (75)
v • d • e


Text

(~ DUKE ENERG't April 5. 2013 Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington. DC 20555-0001

Subject:

Duke Energy Carolinas. LLC 10 CFR 50.90 Oconee Nuclear Station. Units 1. 2. and 3 Docket Numbers 50-269. 50-270. and 50-287.

Renewed Operating Licenses DPR-38. DPR-47. and DPR-55 seon L BATSON Vice President Oconee Nuclear Station Duke Energy ON01VP /7800 Rochester Hwy Seneca, SC 29672 864-873-3274 864-873-4208 fax Scott.Batson@duke-energy.com Licensing Basis for the Protected Service Water System - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4

References:

1. Letter from John Boska. Senior Project Manager. Division of Operating Reactor Licensing. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. to T. Preston Gillespie. Vice President. Oconee Nuclear Station.

Duke Energy Carolinas. LLC. "Request for Additional Information (RAI) Regarding the License Amendment Requests (LARs) for the Licensing Basis for the Protected Service Water System." June 11. 2012.

2. Letter from T. Preston Gillespie. Vice President. Oconee Nuclear Station. Duke Energy Carolinas. LLC. to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Licensing Basis for the Protected Service Water System - Responses to Request for Additional Information." dated July 11.2012.
3. Letter from T. Preston Gillespie. Vice President. Oconee Nuclear Station. Duke Energy Carolinas. LLC. to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Licensing Basis for the Protected Service Water System - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 1." dated July 20.2012.
4. Letter from T. Preston Gillespie. Vice President. Oconee Nuclear Station. Duke Energy Carolinas. LLC. to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Licensing Basis for the Protected Service Water System - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 2." dated August 31. 2012.
5. Letter from T. Preston Gillespie. Vice President. Oconee Nuclear Station. Duke Energy Carolinas. LLC. to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Licensing Basis for the Protected Service Water System - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 3." dated November 2.2012.
6. Emails from John Boska. U.S. NRC. to Stephen C. Newman and Timothy D.

Brown. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC. dated November 2 and 9.2012.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April 5, 2013 Page 2 By letter dated June 11, 2012, Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy) formally received a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Request for Additional Information (RAI) (Reference 1) associated with the design and licensing bases for the proposed Protected Service Water (PSW) system. Duke Energy responded to the RAI items by letters dated July 11, July 20, August 31, and November 2, 2012, (References 2, 3, 4, and 5).

In November and December 2012, there were interactions between Duke Energy and the Staff regarding seismic qualification of PSW building and the associated structures, systems and components. As a result, Duke Energy indicated that revised responses to RAI items 139(e), 141, 160161, and 162, would be provided and the Staff issued new RAI items 168 and 169 via email (Reference 6).

This submittal contains Duke Energy's responses to:

1. RAI items 139(e), 160, 161, and 162 (revision bars indicate changes to the previous responses),
2. A complete rewrite of the response to RAI item 141. The revision supersedes previous responses to this RAI, and
3. Responses to RAI items 168 and 169.

If you have any questions in regard to this letter, please contact Stephen C. Newman, Regulatory Affairs Senior Engineer, Oconee Nuclear Station, at (864) 873-4388.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on April 5, 2013.

Sincerely, Scott L. Batson Vice President Oconee Nuclear Station Enclosure

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April 5, 2013 Page 3 cc: (w/enclosure)

Mr. John P. Boska, Senior Project Manager (by electronic mail only)

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Mr. Victor M. McCree, Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE, Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30303-1257 Mr. Ed Crowe NRC Senior Resident Inspector Oconee Nuclear Station Ms. Susan E. Jenkins, Manager Radioactive & Infectious Waste Management SC Dept. of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull St.

Columbia, SC 29201

Enclosure Responses to Request for Additional Information Supplement 4

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 RAI #139(e)

Page 2 Add statements that indicate that the PSW piping has been evaluated for potential interactions with nonseismically qualified systems, structures, and components (II over I).

Duke Energy Response:

Duke Energy's July 20,2012, response to RAI item 139(e) is revised as:

e) Pipe support loads generated by the Oconee Pipe Stress Group calculations OSC-9206, OSC-9S12, and OSC-9241 are transmitted to the Support Design Group for further evaluation. The interaction between the piping systems and surrounding supporting structures are assessed in the applicable support calculations. Deflections from the piping stress models are checked for interactions and all clearances less than two inches are evaluated and noted on the pipe support sketches.

Within the PSW Building are two piping systems that are at opposite ends of the building and do not interact with each other. The Eyewash and Firehose piping is designed to withstand seismic loads and their associated pipe supports are designed as safety related supports such that there are no II over I issues. Within the Auxiliary Building is the PSW Pipe Header. This pipe and its associated supports are deSignated as safety related and are designed to withstand seismic loads. Interaction of these piping systems with non-seismic systems has been identified by Seismic 1111 walkdowns in accordance with Duke Piping Design Criteria PDC-120 Non-Seismic Interactions. Where non-seismic systems, structures and components (SSC's) were identified as potentially interacting with the safety related piping, the safety related piping was re-routed to avoid this interference. When it was not possible to re-route the safety related piping, the interfering SSC has been relocated.

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 RAI #141 Page 3 According to the licensee's letter dated March 16,2012, the ONS UFSAR mark-up included Section 9.7.1.2.5.1 which states the following:

"The design response spectra for the new structures correspond to the expected maximum bedrock acceleration of 0.1g (MHE). The design response spectra were developed in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.122 (Reference 15). The dynamic analysis is made using the ST AAD-PRO computer program. The structure is built on structural fill. A ground motion time history was developed based on the soil properties and amplified response spectra generated at elevations of significant nodal mass."

Provide the following:

a) Considering that the PSW building is described as founded on the structural fill, provide a detailed description of rock motion, anchoring point for the input motion, and material properties of soil profile(s) overlaying bedrock (thickness, shear wave velocity, and other relevant material properties. Also, discuss the response amplification calculation process that was used to determine the free-field horizontal and vertical ground motion at the PSW building.

b) Provide a detailed description of the procedures used for the seismic analysis of the PSW building and to develop the in-structure response spectra (floor design response spectra).

If different from the methods and acceptance criteria outlined in the NRC standard review plan (SRP) 3.7.1 and 3.7.2, identify those differences and provide justification that the PSW building is adequately designed, using these alternative methods, to withstand the effects of earthquake loads.

c) Confirm and provide further information that STAAD-PRO and all features of this software related to the dynamic response analysis and static analysis have been verified and validated by its provider in compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix 8 and 10 CFR Part 21. Also, provide documentation, which demonstrates that the software provider has been audited and approved as an Appendix 8 supplier d) Describe the method of combination of modal responses and spatial components used in the PSW building seismic response analysis. If different from the methods outlined in the NRC Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.92, identify those differences and discuss how these alternative methods provide assurance that the PSW building is adequately designed to withstand the effects of earthquake loads.

Duke Energy Response:

This revised response supersedes in its entirety the response to NRC Request for Additional Information (RAI) 141 [EMCB6] submitted via Duke Energy Letters dated July 20,2012 and November 02, 2012.

Seismic analyses supporting this RAI response comply with guidance provided in SRP 3.7.1, Rev. 3 and SRP 3.7.2, Rev. 3 except as noted in Tables 141-5 and 141-6. Tables 141-5 and 141-6 also provide the justification for non-compliance with the SRP guidance, where applicable.

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 a) Input Design Response Spectra and Time Histories Page 4 Protected Service Water (PSW) building is founded on subgrade. For the PSW building design, the Maximum Hypothetical Earthquake (MHE) response spectra presented in Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Figure 2-55, "Recommended Response Spectra" was used, consistent with Oconee Nuclear Station (ONS) licensing basis (UFSAR Section 3.7.1.1 "Design Response Spectra"). For the PSW building MHE In-structure response spectra (ISRS) generation, the time history record of the North-South (N-S), May 1940 EI Centro earthquake normalized to a peak acceleration of 0.15g was used as the input ground motion for both the vertical and horizontal excitation consistent with the ONS licensing basis (UFSAR Section 3.7.1.2 "Design Time History"). The 5%

damped response spectra of the North-South (N-S), May 1940 EI Centro earthquake normalized to a peak acceleration of 0.15g essentially envelopes the design response spectra of UFSAR Figures 2-55 as shown in Figure 141-1 considering that the lowest fundamental frequency of the PSW building models is 6.23 Hz. (Tables 141-7 to 141-10).

The Design Basis Earthquake (DBE) ground response spectra and ground motion time history peak ground acceleration (PGA) are 50% of the MHE response spectra and ground motion time history PGA. ONS MHE is equivalent to the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) and ONS DBE is equivalent to the Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) in today's terminology.

The use of 0.15g PGA response spectra presented in the UFSAR Figure 2-55 for the PSW building is consistent with that used for design of CT 4 Block House, the only other Class 1 ONS structure founded on subgrade.

The subsurface materials underlying the PSW building location, as well as adjacent areas of the ONS site, have been investigated and are well understood. Direct soil borings and geophysical testing were performed in 2007 in support of the PSW building site evaluation.

Subsurface conditions encountered in the geotechnical investigations of the PSW building site were consistent with those for the Radwaste building and are compatible with information in the UFSAR from the original ONS geotechnical investigations. Thus, the geotechnical investigations for the PSW building site satisfies the purpose and goals of Regulatory Guide 1.132 and the PSW building site is considered to be "well investigated."

Under the PSW building, structural fill constitutes the upper 23 feet of the soil profile.

Beneath the fill, the soil profile gradually transitions into rock. Bedrock was established at a depth of 80 feet below the existing ground surface. Shear wave velocity (Vs) values for the subsurface materials underlying the PSW building were calculated from Seismic Cone Penetrometer Testing (SCPT) and Refraction Microtremor (ReMi) testing, together with the information provided from direct soil boring performed for the PSW building design. This information was supplemented by data obtained from the Cross-Hole Velocity (CHV) testing and soil borings performed in 1981 for the adjacent Radwaste building. The soil properties and the soil/rock profile used in the 1-dimensional (1-D) site response analysis are shown in Table 141-1. The Table presents the soil unit weights, the best estimate (BE) low strain (10-4 percent) shear modulus (G), the Poisson's ratio, and the low strain BE, the lower bound (LB), and the upper bound (UB) shear wave velocities (Vs) for the soil profile under the PSW building. The ReMi data was used to characterize the PSW building subsurface soil profile to rock. The Vs measured in the ReMi survey were taken to be the BE shear wave velocities because the ReMi survey yields shear wave velocities averaged

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 5 over the length of the survey line and the ReMi survey line encompassed the length of the PSW building. The BE shear modulus values were calculated from the corresponding BE shear wave velocities. The LB and the UB shear modulus values obtained using an assigned coefficient of variation (COV) of 0.5 were used to calculate the low strain LB and UB shear wave velocities, respectively. Figure 141-17 presents the values of shear wave velocities versus depth for the PSW building site. As shown in Figure 141-17, the shear wave velocities values obtained from independent geophysical tests are consistent, and the LB and UB values of shear wave velocities reasonably bracket the values of shear wave velocities calculated from the various measurements (ReMi, SCPT, and CHV). For this reason, the use of a COV value of 0.5 for shear modulus is justified.

One-dimensional site response analyses were performed using SHAKE2000, "A Computer Program for 1 D Analysis of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Problems," (Sargent &

Lundy Program 03.7.402-3.50) to obtain strain compatible soil properties for the 0.15g MHE ground motion using low strain soil properties in Table 141-1 and strain dependent modulus reduction and damping coefficients from Idriss (1990). Water Table at elevation 752 feet was used in the site response analyses. These strain compatible soil properties obtained from the SHAKE2000 V3.5 site response analyses are shown in Tables 141-2, 141-3, and 141-4 for the LB, BE, and UB soil properties, respectively.

The PSW seismic design inputs are as specified in the ONS UFSAR Sections 2.5.2 and 3.7.1. Table 141-5 presents the compliance of the seismic design inputs used for the PSW building seismic evaluations with guidance provided in SRP Section 3.7.1 Revision 3. The PSW building seismic design inputs are compliant with the ONS UFSAR and, in general, different from those in the current SRP guidance.

The use of the 0.15g MHE ground motions in ONS UFSAR for the PSW building response analysis is at variance with that described in the July 20,2012 RAI 141 response. The July 20,2012 response to RAI 141 described the development of the MHE surface horizontal response spectra through a 1-D site response analysis. The vertical surface response spectrum was scaled from the horizontal surface response spectra. For the 1-D site response analysis, the recorded N-S, May 1940 EI Centro earthquake time history normalized to 0.1 g was used as rock outcrop motion 80 ft. below ground surface. This method for developing the MHE surface response spectra shape is not appropriate for the PSW site because the N-S, May 1940 EI Centro earthquake motion is a surface motion recorded at a firm soil site (United States Geological Survey (USGS) Site Classification C 180-360 meters/second [590-1180 feet/second] Shear wave velocity). Top of rock under the PSW building is 80 ft. below the ground surface. Use of the N-S, May 1940 EI Centro earthquake time history as the rock outcrop motion to develop MHE surface motion is not appropriate because it has effectively amplified the soil motions twice - once in the original EI Centro recorded time history and second in the 1-D site response analysis performed to develop the PSW building horizontal and vertical MHE ground design response spectra.

b) Seismic Design Procedures for PSW Building Design and ISRS Generation The PSW building design has been reevaluated for this revised response to NRC RAI 141

[EMCB6]. For this reevaluation, reanalysis of the PSW building has been performed using the "as built" configuration. For the reanalysis, the response spectra method of analysis was used to determine maximum design forces of various structural components of the PSW building and maximum foundation soil bearing pressures. The response spectra specified in ONS UFSAR Figure 2-55 for structures on subgrade was used as the MHE

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 6 foundation input spectra in the seismic analysis for PSW building design as noted in paragraph a) above.

For PSW building ISRS generation, the time history method of analysis was used to develop absolute acceleration time histories at the various nodes where equipment is located. The ground motion input (EI Centro N-S 1940 time history normalized to 0.15g) for the time history response analysis is described in paragraph a) above.

For both the building design and ISRS generation, the PSW building model and analysis parameters were as follows:

i)

The PSW building is a reinforced concrete structure approximately 124 feet long by 33 feet wide. The total building height is about 30 feet (7.75 feet is below grade).

The building consists of concrete and steel grating floors, a concrete roof, concrete shear walls, and interconnected multiple concrete spread footings. The roof is supported by the exterior walls. The concrete slabs are supported by concrete walls and beams around their perimeters. The steel grating is supported on steel floor framing members spanning between exterior and interior walls with the main steel girders supported at their mid spans by steel columns. All walls and steel columns are supported directly on reinforced concrete spread footings. The battery room foundation on the South end of the building is a slab on grade. The center wall is supported directly on a spread footing approximately 2 feet below grade. All exterior walls are supported on spread footings at elevation 789'-3" (7.75 feet below grade). All spread footings are 24 inches thick and were cast monolithically or with intentionally roughened joints and continuous reinforcement. The east exterior wall footing is supported on concrete fill that extends below the adjacent CCW pipes. The spread footing of the remaining walls and the battery room foundation slab are founded on compacted structural fill. Drawings 0-398-A2-101 Rev. 0, 0-398-A2-102 Rev. N, 0-398-A3-401 Rev. C, and 0-398-A3-403 Rev. 0 show the details of the PSW building and its foundation. These drawings are accessible through the Duke Energy's Share Point system.

ii) The structure was analyzed using a three dimensional (3-D) Finite Element (FE) model representing the superstructure and the foundations. The concrete elements were modeled using 4-noded thin plate (shell) elements with 6 degrees of freedom (DOF)/node. The steel elements were modeled using 2-node beam elements with 6 DOF/node. Figure 141-2 shows the FEM model used for the seismic analysis of the PSW building. In this figure, the building shell elements are shown in blue. The black circles are member end moment releases at the end of beam elements. The shell elements for the two entry ways and the Battery Room wall foundation are shown in red.

iii) Nodal mass included contributing mass from static loads on the structure. For the mass calculations, 100% of the dead (permanent) loads (e.g., weight of structure and equipment), 50 psf for minor equipmenUpiping/raceways, 25% of the floor live (short term) loads (e.g., general live load), and 75% of the roof snow load were considered. The equipment mass was lumped at the location of the equipment.

The mass of cable tray, HVAC ducts, and piping and their supports were modeled as distributed mass on floors and walls.

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 7 iv) The PSW building model described above was used for the seismic response analysis with two sets of boundary conditions to model the PSW building foundation. The first was a fixed base model where the foundation nodes were fixed consistent with the current seismic design basis (COB) of other ONS Class I structures. The second was a confirmatory model that used Lumped Soil Springs (LSS) to model soil structure interaction (SSI) effects.

For the COB model, all the foundation nodes at elevation 789'-3" are fixed in all six degrees of freedom. For the entry ways and Battery Room wall foundation at elevation 797' (shown in red in Figure 141-2), springs to approximately model the elastic restraint provided to these small foundations by the soil under the foundations at elevation 797' were used. Vertical and horizontal soil spring constants were calculated using the ASCE 4-98 Section 3.3.4.2.2 formulation.

Fixed boundary condition for the battery room wall and entry way foundation was not used because if the entry way and Battery Room wall foundation nodes at elevation 797' are fixed, the response for the operating floor at elevation 797',

where most of the equipment is located, will be nonconservative (same as the input ground motion). In addition, the fixed boundary condition will force the majority of lateral load from the operating floor to be resisted by the fixed nodes of the small entry way foundation (approximately 9'x11'). This would not be representative of the "designed" load path where the majority of the operating floor inertia (seismic) loads will be transferred to the building foundation at elevation 789'-3" through supporting shear walls during a seismic event. Free boundary condition at the entry way and Battery Room wall foundation nodes at elevation 797' would result in the entry way structure and Battery Room wall inertia loads transferred to the PSW walls or the Battery Room roof respectively. This also is not representative of the "designed" load path where the inertia loads from the entry way and the Battery Room wall will be partially transferred to the respective foundations at elevation 797'. The modal frequencies and participation factors for the COB model are presented in Table 141-7. The COB model mode shape for mode 1 (predominant Z-direction mode), mode 2 (predominant V-direction mode), mode 72 (first dominant X-direction mode) are presented in Figures 141-3, 141-4, and 141-5, respectively.

For the LSS models, Tables 141-2, 141-3, and 141-4 soil profile and strain compatible soil properties were used to calculate the LB, BE, and UB LSS parameters for the PSW building response analysis. The methodology detailed in Christiano (1974) was followed to compute the equivalent shear modulus for the layered soil profile under the PSW foundation. In this procedure, average shear modulus value is developed whereby each layer is weighted in accordance with the strain energy in that layer. This method quantifies the diminishing effect of the soil layers on the overall impedance of the foundation soil with increasing depths from the bottom of the foundation. The soil spring parameters (spring constant and damping) were computed based on the formulation in ASCE 4-98 Section 3.3.4.2.2 using the equivalent shear modulus for the layered soil profile. The PSW building foundation consists of interconnected multiple strip footings. The box shaped monolithic N-S and E-W shear walls supported on these strip footings provide the rigidity to the foundation for all the horizontal, vertical, rocking, and torsional degrees of freedom. The LSS vertical and horizontal springs and dampings were computed for the various strips of PSW building foundations. In the 3-D FEM

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 8 model, these vertical and horizontal springs also provide the equivalent rocking and torsional lumped soil spring parameters consistent with the spatial distribution of the foundation strips. The modal frequencies and participation factors for the LSS BE, LB, and UB models are presented in Tables 141-8, 141-9, and 141-10, respectively. The LSS BE model mode shapes for mode 1 (predominant z-direction mode), mode 2 (predominant V-direction mode), mode 19 (predominant X-direction mode) are presented in Figures 141-6, 141-7, and 141-8, respectively.

v) Consistent with ONS UFSAR Section 3.7.1.3, 2% damping for steel elements and 5% damping for reinforced concrete elements were used for MHE. The 2% steel and 5% concrete MHE damping values are lower (conservative) when compared to the 4% steel and 7% concrete SSE dam pings specified in Regulatory Guide 1.61.

Composite modal damping (stiffness proportional) was used for both the COB (steel and concrete) and LSS (steel, concrete, and soil) response analyses.

However, for the LSS response analysis, if the calculated composite modal damping exceeded 20% for any mode, the LSS soil spring damping was reduced so that composite modal dam pings for all modes were less than or equal to 20% as required by the SRP. No material damping for soil was considered. Table 141-6 notes the compliance of damping values used for the PSW building analysis.

Except for the 5% damping for concrete elements for DBE, all other damping values either comply or are conservative when compared to the SRP 3.7.2 guidance. For ONS, the DBE corresponds to the present day OBE.

vi) Consistent with COB seismic analysis of all ONS safety related structures, un-cracked concrete properties were used for the seismic analysis of the PSW building for the COB and LSS models. Cracked concrete properties were not used.

vii) For the COB time history response analysis for ISRS development, 100 modes (up to 42 Hz.) were considered. The modal frequencies, participation factors, and the total participating mass in the X-, Y-, and Z-directions for the COB model are presented in Table 141-7. For the COB response spectra analysis, for shear force calculation, 59 modes (up to 24 Hz.) together with the effect of the missing mass was considered to account for 100% of the total system mass in the three orthogonal directions [X (N-S), Y (Vertical), and Z (E-W)]. The 24 Hz frequency corresponds to the rigid frequency of the input ground response spectra (UFSAR Figure 2-55). For the COB response spectra analysis, for moment calculations, a large number of modes (771 modes) accounting for 96% of the X-directional mass, 90% of the Y-directional mass, and 96% of the Z-directional mass were considered because for moment calculations ST AAD-PRO 2007 V8i software does not have the capability to account for the missing mass.

For the LSS response analysis (both response spectra and time history), sufficient number of modes were considered (61 modes for LB, 76 modes for BE, and 107 modes for UB) to account for at least 95% of the total system mass in each of the three orthogonal directions [X (N-S), Y (Vertical), and Z (E-W)]. The modal frequencies, participation factors, and the total participating mass in the X-, Y-, and Z-directions for the LSS BE, LB, and UB model are presented in Tables 141-8, 141-9, and 141-10, respectively.

The PSW building seismic forces and moments from the COB and the LSS response spectra analyses were used to evaluate the adequacy of the PSW

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 9 building seismic design (shear walls, slabs, steel framing, column, etc.). Accidental torsion (an eccentricity of +/-5% of the maximum building dimension per SRP 3.7.2) was considered in the PSW building design. The PSW finite element model used for COB and LSS response analysis accurately models the inherent eccentricity of the PSW structure layout. In addition, all significant equipment masses were modeled at their physical locations within the building.

viii} The COB and the LSS models seismic foundation bearing pressures meet the minimum factor of safety (FOS) of 3.0 for static loading and FOS of 2.25 for static plus MHE seismic loading. There is no foundation uplift due to the MHE seismic loading.

ix} The PSW building FOS against sliding and overturning meet the minimum required FOS of 1.1 for MHE or Tornado loading. The PSW building MHE base forces and moments are shown in Table 141-11.

x} The ISRS generation complies with RG 1.122 guidance relative to the frequency intervals for ISRS generation and ISRS peak widening. For developing the PSW building ISRS, the nodal accelerations time histories were developed for the X-, Y-,

and Z-excitations individually for 19 selected locations in the PSW building. The selected locations included the location of major equipment, centers and corners of operating floor and roof slabs, and centers of exterior walls panel. At each of the 19 selected locations, each of the X-, Y-, and Z-direction excitation yields three (X-,

Y-, and Z-directions) response time histories. Unwidened response spectra were developed for these 9 time histories at each of the 19 selected nodes and combined to generate the X-, Y -, and Z-directional ISRS at each node using the combination method described in paragraph d} below. The X-, Y-, and Z-directional ISRS at each of the 19 nodes were then widened +/-15% on the frequency scale. The frequencies for ISRS generation included structural modal frequencies in addition to the frequencies based on Table 1 of RG 1.122. However, periods (1/frequency) closer than 0.0007 seconds were eliminated from the combined RG 1.122 and structural frequencies list. This elimination of extremely close periods has practically no effect on the widened (+/-15%) ISRS used for equipment qualification. ISRS were developed for all applicable damping values for equipment and support qualifications as specified in UFSAR Section 3.7.1.3.

The ISRS were developed for both the COB and LSS analyses at the 19 selected nodes as describe above. In addition, the ISRS for all nodes on the operating floor, battery room roof, PSW building roof, and exterior walls were enveloped to develop enveloped ISRS for the operating floor, the battery room floor, the PSW roof, and the exterior walls, respectively. Finally, the enveloped ISRS for the operating floor, the battery room roof, the PSW building roof, and the exterior walls from the COB and the LSS analyses were enveloped. These enveloped COB and LSS horizontal and vertical ISRS for the operating floor, the battery room roof, the PSW roof, and the exterior walls are shown in Figures 141-9 through 141-16, respectively. The horizontal ISRS in these figures are the envelope of the X-and Z-direction ISRS.

The DBE ISRS are one-half (1/2) of the corresponding MHE ISRS. This is justified because the percent of critical damping for steel and concrete structural elements are the same for MHE and DBE (UFSAR section 3.7.1.3) and the design ground

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 10 motion for DBE is one-half of the MHE ground motion (UFSAR sections 3.7.1.1 and 3.7.1.2).

xi) The seismic 1111 interaction between the PSW building and adjacent structures was addressed in RAI 148. No additional information was developed in response to this RAJ.

c) Duke Energy contracted Sargent & Lundy (S&L) to perform the PSW building seismic response analysis and ISRS development as a safety related scope to be performed under the S&L QA Program. S&L QA program complies with 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B and 10 CFR Part 21 requirements and has been approved by the NRC (Accession No. ML090750737, ML090750638, and ML12142A195). S&L QA program is audited by NUPIC as a matter of course. Duke Energy subscribes to NUPIC audits. The S&L QA Program and Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)-204 implementation has also been audited by the NRC on past S&L projects (example: South Texas Project, Units 3 and 4 Combined Operating License Application, Docket Number 52-12 and 52-13).

For the PSW building seismic analysis and ISRS development ST AAD-PRO 2007 V8i (S&L Program No. 03.7.745-7.4) and RSG V2.0, "Response Spectra Generator" (S&L Program No. 03.7.414-2.0) software were used (OSC-9230). For the 1-0 site response analysis SHAKE2000 V3.5, "A Computer Program for 10 Analysis of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Problems" (S&L Program 03.7.402-3.50) was used. STAAD-PRO 2007 V8i, RSG V2.0, and SHAKE2000 V3.5 software have been validated in accordance with Sargent & Lundy SOP-0204. SOP-0204 governs all software validation and verification (V&V) at S&L and is the implementing procedure for the S&L NQA-1 1994 compliant Nuclear QA Program. S&L has validated STAAD-PRO 2007 V8i for development of the ISRS using the time history method of analysis. S&L has also validated the ST AAD-PRO 2007 V8i response spectra method of analysis to calculate element forces and base forces when modal response combinations are performed using the complete quadratic combination (CaC) method.

ST AAD-PRO 2007 V8i software was used for the PSW building finite element modeling and seismic analyses. The PSW ISRS were developed using the time history method of analysis. The PSW building element design forces were developed using the response spectra method of analysis. The CQC method was used to combine modal responses when the response spectra method was used.

The RSG V2.0 software was used for ISRS generation from time history responses at selected nodes of the PSW building model. RSG V2.0 software has been validated for response spectra generation from acceleration time histories and to combine the ISRS using the absolute sum or the SRSS method.

SHAKE2000 V3.5 software was used for 1-0 site response analysis to compute strain compatible soil properties for the 0.15g MHE ground motions.

d) For the response spectra method of analysis (used for the PSW building design), the responses were calculated for the X-, Y-, and Z-excitations individually. The modal responses for these individual analyses were combined using the complete quadratic combination (CQC) method in accordance with Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.92, Section C.1.1.

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 11 For the time history analysis (used for developing the PSW building ISRS), the response was calculated for the X-, Y-, and Z-excitations individually. The modal responses for these individual time history analyses were combined algebraically at each time step.

The co-directional responses (maximum element forces and ISRS at selected nodes) from the individual X-, Y-, and Z-direction excitation analysis (using the response spectra method or the time history method) were summed using absolute sum rule to obtain the summed X-component, V-component, and Z-component of the design responses (maximum element forces and ISRS at selected nodes) as follows:

Rx = (Rxx + Rxy + Rxz)

Ry = (Ryx + Ryy + Ryz)

Rz = (Rzx + Rzy + Rzz)

Where:

Rx = summed X-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node)

Ry = summed Y -component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node)

Rz = summed Z-component the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node)

Rxx = X-component of design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to X-excitation Rxy = X-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to V-excitation Rxz = X-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to Z-excitation Ryx = V-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to X-excitation Ryy = Y -component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to Y-excitation Ryz = Y -component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to Z-excitation Rzx = Z-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to X-excitation Rzy = Z-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to V-excitation Rzz = Z-component of the design response (maximum element force or unwidened ISRS at the selected node) due to Z-excitation ONS is a two-directional earthquake motion plant according to ONS UFSAR, Section 3.7.2.5. All ONS structures, systems, and components (SSCs) were designed for the two-directional earthquake with the exception of the SSCs for the Standby Shutdown Facility (SSF) where the three spatial components of the earthquakes were combined using the square root of the sum of the squares (SRSS) rule. Therefore, the PSW SSCs are designed/qualified for the two-directional earthquake using the absolute sum combination, i.e., maximum of the absolute sum of (Rx plus Ry) or (Rzplus Ry).

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 12 Table 141-1: PSW Soil Profile and Low Strain (10'" percent) Soil Properties Layer Name Fill Residual Soil Partially Weathered Rock Weathered Rock Transitional Rock Rock Legend:

BE = Best Estimate LB = Lower Bound UB = Upper Bound Depth (ft) 0-16 16 - 23 23-43 43 - 51 51 - 65 65-75 75-80 80+

Elevation Unit Weight (ft)

(pct)

Surface -

121 779 779 -772 122 772 - 752 125 752 - 744 127 744 -730 135 730 -720 160 720 -715 170

<715 170 ft = feet pef = pounds per cubic foot fps = feet per second BEVs (fps) 897 897 1042 1042 1674 2559 4659 6942 Poisson's BEG Ratio (ksf) 0.30 3024 0.30 3049 0.40 4215 0.40 4282 0.40 11749 0.40 32539 0.40 114598 0.40 254426 ksf = kips per square foot Vs = Shear Wave Velocity G = Shear Modulus LBVs (fps) 732 732 851 851 1367 2089 3804 5668 UBVs (fps) 1099 1099 1276 1276 2050 I

I I

3134 5706 8502

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 13 Table 141-2: Lower Bound Strain Compatible Soil Properties for Input Motion at Ground Layer Name Layer Thickness (ft)

Fill 5.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 Residual 6.0 Soil 6.0 8.0 8.0 Partially 7.0 Weathered Rock 7.0 Weathered Rock 10.0 Transitional Rock

5.0 Legend

ft = feet pcf = pounds per cubic foot fps = feet per second ksf = kips per square foot Depth (ft) 0-5 5 - 10 10 -16 16 - 23 23-29 29 - 35 35-43 43 - 51 51 - 58 58-65 65-75 75-80 Surface with ZPA 0.15 9 Elevation Unit Poisson's Shear Shear Damping (ft)

Weight Ratio Modulus Wave Ratio (pcf)

(ksf)

Velocity (fps)

Surface -

790 121 0.30 1971 724 0.01 790 -785 121 0.30 1847 701 0.018 785 -779 121 0.30 1739 680 0.026 779 -772 122 0.30 1604 651 0.033 772 -766 125 0.40 2259 763 0.032 766 -760 125 0.40 2123 740 0.037 760 -752 125 0.40 1990 716 0.041 752 - 744 127 0.40 1909 696 0.047 744 -737 135 0.40 6830 1276 0.025 737 -730 135 0.40 6742 1268 0.026 730 -720 160 0.40 20646 2038 0.015 720 - 715 170 0.40 75648 3785 0.008

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 14 Table 141-3: Best Estimate Strain Compatible Soil Properties for Input Motion at Ground Layer Name Fill Residual Soil Partially Weathered Rock Weathered Rock Transitional Rock Legend:

ft = feet Layer Thickness (ft) 5.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 10.0 5.0 pcf = pounds per cubic foot fps = feet per second ksf = kips per square foot Depth (ft) 0-5 5 - 10 10 -16 16 - 23 23-29 29 - 35 35-43 43 - 51 51 - 58 58 - 65 65 -75 75 - 80 Surface with ZPA 0.15 9 Elevation Unit Poisson's Shear Shear Damping (ft)

Weight Ratio Modulus Wave Ratio (pcf)

(ksf)

Velocity (fps)

Surface -

790 121 0.30 2994 893 0.008 790 - 785 121 0.30 2897 878 0.014 785 - 779 121 0.30 2733 853 0.019 779 -772 122 0.30 2639 835 0.025 772 -766 125 0.40 3670 972 0.025 766 -760 125 0.40 3585 961 0.028 760 -752 125 0.40 3395 935 0.032 752 -744 127 0.40 3280 912 0.036 744 -737 135 0.40 10630 1592 0.019 737 -730 135 0.40 10496 1582 0.021 730 - 720 160 0.40 31462 2516 0.012 720-715 170 0.40 113798 4643 0.007

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013 Page 15 Table 141-4: Upper Bound Strain Compatible Soil Properties for Input Motion at Ground Surface Layer Name Layer Depth Thickness (ft)

(ft)

Fill 5.0 0-5 5.0 5 - 10 6.0 10 -16 7.0 16 - 23 Residual Soil 6.0 23-29 6.0 29-35 8.0 35-43 8.0 43 - 51 Partially 7.0 51 - 58 Weathered Rock 7.0 58 - 65 Weathered Rock 10.0 65-75 Transitional Rock 5.0 75-80 Legend:

ft = feet pcf = pounds per cubic foot fps = feet per second ksf = kips per square foot with ZPA 0.15 9 Elevation Unit Poisson's Shear Shear Damping (ft)

Weight Ratio Modulus Wave Ratio (pcf)

(ksf)

Velocity (fps)

Surface -

790 121 0.30 4510 1096 0.006 790 - 785 121 0.30 4406 1083 0.011 785-779 121 0.30 4287 1068 0.015 779 - 772 122 0.30 4146 1046 0.019 772 - 766 125 0.40 5760 1218 0.018 766 -760 125 0.40 5627 1204 0.022 760 - 752 125 0.40 5505 1191 0.025 752 - 744 127 0.40 5489 1180 0.027 744 -737 135 0.40 16625 1991 0.015 737 -730 135 0.40 16412 1979 0.016 730 -720 160 0.40 47676 3098 0.01 720 -715 170 0.40

,--171192 5694 0.005

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013 Page 16 Table 141-5: SRP 3.7.1 COMPLIANCE MATRIX Section Title Section SRP Acceptance SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Criteria SRP Requirements Design Ground Motion 1.1 11.1 The design ground motion for OBE and SSE N/A Seismic design ground motions should be consistent with the description of the are specified in Oconee UFSAR, free field ground motion at the site as provided in Section 3.7. ONS licensing SRP Section 2.5.2.

predates NRC SRP.

Design Response 1.1.A 1I.1.A GMRS are determined in the free field on the N/A Seismic design Response Spectra ground surface.

Spectra used are as specified in Oconee UFSAR (Section 3.7.1.1 and Figure 2-55).

For soil sites excavated to expose competent N/A material (1000 fps shear wave velocity). GMRS is specified on an outcrop or a hypothetical outcrop after excavation.

Motions at the hypothetical outcrop should be N/A developed as free surface motions.

Minimum required response spectra specified as N/A an outcrop at the free field with PGA for horizontal component of 0.1g or higher.

Design Time Histories 1.1.B 1I.1.B Real time Histories or artificial time histories.

Yes N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 17 Table 141*5: SRP 3,7,1 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)

Section Title Section SRP Acceptance SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Criteria SRP Requirements Design Time Histories 1.1.B 1I.1.B Three mutually orthogonal directions shown to Yes be statistically independent (correlation between a pair does not exceed 0.16).

I For linear structural analyses, the duration of Yes I

artificial time histories should be long enough to include Fourrier components at low frequency (SRP Section 2.5.2).

For single time history analyses, the response Yes spectra generated from the artificial time history at the free field envelop the free field design response spectra.

N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS,2013 Page 18 Table 141-5: SRP 3.7.1 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)

  • Section Title Section SRP Acceptance SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Criteria SRP Requirements Percentage of Critical 1.2 11,2 Consistent with RG 1.61.

No Except for the 5% damping for Damping Values concrete elements for DBE, all other damping values either comply or are conservative when I

compared to the SRP 3.7.2 guidance. The damping used are consistent with ONS UFSAR Section 3.7.1.3.

Maximum soil damping value is 15 percent.

Yes Supporting Media for 1.3 11.3 Adequate description of soil media, foundation, Yes Seismic Category I structure and soil properties.

Structures Review Considerations 1.4 11.4 N/A for DC and COL Applications Inspections, Tests, 1.5 11.5 N/A Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC)

I COL Action Items and 1.6 11.6 N/A Certification Requirements and Restrictions N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 19 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Seismic 1.1 11.1 Use suitable dynamic analyses that account for the Yes iAnalyses effects of SSI and considers the torsional, rocking, and Methods translational responses of the structures.

Seismic analyses should be performed for three Yes orthogonal directions of earthquake with all modes with frequencies less than ZPA represented in the dynamic solution.

High frequency modes should be included in the Yes dynamic solution in accordance with RG 1.92 Revision

2.

Dynamic analyses should consider relative N/A No significant displacements displacements between adjacent supports of seismic between adjacent supports of category I SSCs.

seismic category I structures.

Dynamic analyses should include significant effects N/A No significant effects of piping such as piping interactions, externally applied structural interactions, externally applied restraints, hydrodynamic loads, and non-linear structural restraints, hydrodynamic responses.

loads, and non-linear response.

Natural 1.2 11.2 Dynamic analyses should provide a summary of modal Yes Frequencies masses, effective masses, natural frequencies, mode

~nd Responses shapes, modal and total responses.

Dynamic analyses should include the calculated time Yes histories or response spectra used in design, at the major plant equipment elevations and point of support.

N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 20 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)

Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Procedures 1.3 11.3 The analytical models should represent the adequate Yes Used for stiffness, mass, and damping characteristics of the

!Analytical structural systems. Three dimensional finite element Modeling models should be used in general and should consider local regions of the structure such as walls and slabs.

Mesh size should be selected on the basis that further No Refined mesh size used is 2' x 2' refinement has only negligible effect on the solution and meets or exceeds ASCE 4-09 results.

requirements (Commentary Section C3.1.3.2).

The analytical models should adequately represent the Yes seismic systems and sub-systems and use the de-coupling criteria in accordance with SRP Section 11.3.B.

In addition to structural mass and equipment, 50 psf for Yes minor equipment/piping/raceways, 25% of floor design live load, and 75% of roof design snow load if applicable should be included in the analytical models.

A methodology is needed to transfer the seismic Yes response loads from the dynamic models to the structural models that will be used for detailed design.

i I

I I

Soil-Structure 1.4 11.4 For SSI analyses should consider:

Interaction 1-Effect of embedment of structure No PSW building has a shallow foundation. Embedment less than 8 feet. Emb. SSI effects are small.

N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 21 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)

~ection Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Soll-Structure 1.4 11.4 2-Ground water effects No Variation of water table was not Interaction considered in the site response analyses (water table at EL. 752' used in site response analysis).

Since the analyses cover fixed base, LB, BE, and UB soil profiles, the effect of the water table are implicitly included in the analyses from the wide range of soil profiles considered.

3-Layering effects of soil media Yes Soil spring and the compliance function methods are Yes acceptable provided that frequency variations and layering effects are incorporated.

The mesh size should be adequate for representing the N/A Soil spring method was used.

static stress distribution under the foundation and transmitting the frequency content of interest.

i I

N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Page 22 Table 141-6: SRP 3,7,2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)

Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Soil-Structure 1.4 11.4 For deep soil sites, model depth should be at least N/A Oconee is not a deep soil site (80 Interaction twice the base dimension below the foundation level.

feet deep soil to bedrock and The frequency of the soil should be well below the approximately 8 feet building structural frequencies of interest. All structural modes of embedment).

interest should be included.

The soil properties used should be consistent with soil Yes strains developed in free field site response analyses.

Fixed based analyses are acceptable for structures N/A PSW building is founded on soil founded on material with minimum shear wave velocity subgrade. Calculation includes both of 8000 fps.

fixed base and Lumped Soil Spring (LSS) analyses. Fixed base analysis is the UFSAR licensing basis.

At least 3 soil/rock profiles should be used: BE, LB, UB Yes LB shear modulus should not be less than value that Yes yields foundation settlement under static loads exceeding design allowables.

UB shear modulus should not be less than the BE value Yes defined at low strain and as determined from the geophysical testing program.

N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 23 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)

Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Soil-Structure 1.4 11.4 For well investigated sites (RG 1.132 and RG 1.138),

No Shear wave velocity (Vs) values for Interaction COY for soil profiles should not be less than 0.5. For the subsurface materials underlying sites that are not well investigated sites, COY shall be the PSW building were calculated at least 1.

from Seismic Cone Penetrometer Testing (SCPT) and Refraction Microtremor (ReMi) testing, together with the information provided from direct soil boring performed for the PSW building design. This information was supplemented by data obtained from the Cross-Hole Velocity (CHV) testing and soil borings performed in 1981 for the adjacent Radwaste building. The geotechnical investigations for the PSW building site satisfies the purpose and goals of Regulatory Guide 1.132 and the PSW building site is considered to be *well investigated".

N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 24 i

Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)

Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Soil-Structu re 1.4 11.4 For well investigated sites (RG 1.132 and RG 1.138),

No The shear wave velocities (Vs)

Interaction COV for soil profiles should not be less than 0.5. For measured in the ReMi survey were sites that are not well investigated sites, COV shall be taken to be the BE shear wave at least 1.

velocities because the ReMi survey yields shear wave velocities averaged over the length of the survey line and the ReMi survey I

line encompassed the length of the PSW building. The BE shear modulus values were calculated from the corresponding BE shear wave velocities values. The LB and the UB shear modulus values obtained from the BE shear modulus using an assigned coefficient of variation (COV) of 0.5.

Figure 141-17 presents the values of shear wave velocities versus depth for the PSW building site. As shown in Figure 141-17, the shear wave velocities values obtained from independent geophysical tests are consistent, and the LB and UB values of shear wave velocities, calculated from the LB and UB shear modulus, reasonably bracket the values of shear wave velocities calculated from the various measurements (ReMi, SCPT, and CHV).

N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 25 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)

Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Soil-Structu re 1.4 11.4 For well investigated sites (RG 1.132 and RG 1.138),

No For this reason, the use of a COY Interaction COY for soil profiles should not be less than 0.5. For value of 0.5 for LB and UB shear sites that are not well investigated sites, COY shall be modulus is justified.

at least 1.

Soil damping should not exceed 15%.

Yes Control Motion should be in accordance with SRP 3.7.1 See SRP 3.7.1 Matrix Development of 1.5 11.5 RG 1.122 should be used augmented by SRP Section Yes In-Structure guidance in Section 11.5

Response

Spectra

[Three 1.6 11.6 Responses from three earthquake directions should be No ONS is a two directional plant Components of combined in accordance with RG 1.92.

according to UFSAR, Section Earthquake 3.7.2.5.The two-directional Motion earthquake with the absolute sum rule yields design responses that are comparable to those obtained using the SRSS rule. For example, if a design response has the same response magnitude (say 1.0) from each of the three spatial excitations (X, Y, and Z), the absolute sum rule will yield a combined design response of 2.0 compared to 1.73 for the combined design responses using the SRSS rule.

N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 26

~-

Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)

Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Combination of 1.7 11.7 For modal superposition time history analyses, modal Yes Modal responses should be combined algebraically at each Responses output time step. Modes with frequencies less than ZPA should be included in the modal superposition. Higher modes responses should be calculated using the missing mass approach. This contribution is treated as one additional modal response, scaled to the input time history normalized to ZPA, and combined algebraically with the modal superposition solution at each time step.

Interaction of 1.8 11.8 Provide technical basis and formally document non-Yes Non-Category I collapse of the non-Category I structure or that the Structures with collapse of the non-Category I structure will not impair Category I SSCs the integrity of Category I SSCs, nor results in incapacitating injury to control room occupants.

Effects of 1.9 11.9 Analyses should consider effects of expected variation No Comply with all SRP requirements Parameter in structural properties, damping values, soil properties, except for concrete cracking.

Variation on and SSI on response spectra. For concrete structures, Concrete cracking was not Floor Response the effect of potential concrete cracking on the considered for any of the existing Spectra structural stiffness should be addressed.

Category I structures at ONS.

I I Use of 1.10 11.10 N/A Dynamic analyses were performed.

Equivalent

. Vertical Static Factors N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 27 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)

Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Methods Used 1.11 11.11 Dynamic analyses should include the effects of Yes to Account For accidental torsion by including torsional degrees of Torsional freedom in the analytical models. An additional Effects eccentricity of +/- 5% of the maximum building dimensions should be assumed for both horizontal directions. The eccentricities should be determined separately for each building floor.

Comparison of 1.12 11.12 The peak responses obtained from time history and N/A For buiding design, the response Responses response spectrum methods should be compared to spectra method was used. The time demonstrate approximate equivalency between the two history method is only used for methods.

generation of In-Structure Response Spectra (ISRS).

Analysis 1.13 11.13 CompOSite modal damping is limited to 20%.

Yes Procedure for Acceptable techniques for the calculation of composite Damping modal damming should be in accordance with SRP Section 11.13.

, Determination 1.14 11.14 Should incorporate three components of input motion Yes of Seismic and conservative consideration of the simultaneous Overturning action of vertical and horizontal seismic forces. Load Moments and combination in accordance with SRP 3.8.5.

Sliding Forces

'or Seismic

!category I Structures N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013 Page 28 Table 141-6: SRP 3.7.2 COMPLIANCE MATRIX (Continued)

Section Title Section SRP SRP Requirements Comply with Justification for the Exception Number Acceptance SRP Criteria Requirements Inspections, 1.15 11.15 N/A

~ests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC)

COL Action 1.16 11.16 N/A Items and Certification Requirements and Restrictions N/A = Not Applicable to PSW Building Seismic Analyses.

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013 Table 141-7: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW COS Model Mode Frequency Period Participation Participation Participation Hz seconds X%

Y%

Z%

1 10.182 0.098 0.01 0.136 48.58 2

10.927 0.092 0

11.969 0.563 3

11.872 0.084 0

0.013 0.039 4

12.02 0.083 0

0.006 0.008 5

12.033 0.083 0

0.008 0.186 6

12.045 0.083 0

0 0

7 12.126 0.082 0

0 0.005 8

12.232 0.082 0

0.014 0.068 9

12.361 0.081 0

0 0.002 10 12.397 0.081 0

0.001 0.024 11 12.545 0.08 0.004 0.042 0.006 12 12.761 0.078 0

0.001 0.055 13 12.766 0.078 0

0 0.003 14 12.935 0.077 0

0.001 0.068 15 13.16 0.076 0

0 0.016 16 13.286 0.075 0

0 0.034 17 13.582 0.074 0

0.001 0.091 18 13.656 0.073 0

0 0

19 13.759 0.073 0

0.003 0.047 20 13.961 0.072 0

0 0.023 21 14.101 0.071 0

0 0.033 22 14.468 0.069 0

0 0.11 23 14.476 0.069 0

0.001 0.015 24 14.741 0.068 0.006 2.957 0.068 25 14.96 0.067 0

0.004 0.027 26 15.008 0.067 0

0 0.011 27 15.031 0.067 0

0 0

28 15.424 0.065 0

0 0.059 29 15.518 0.064 0

0 0

30 15.688 0.064 0.28 0

0 31 15.787 0.063 0.001 0

0 32 15.875 0.063 0

0 0.026 33 15.927 0.063 0

0 0.027 34 15.932 0.063 0

0 0.006 35 16.015 0.062 0.131 0

0 36 16.028 0.062 0

0 0

37 16.379 0.061 0

0 0.106 38 16.461 0.061 0

0 0.003 39 16.541 0.06 0

0 0.006 40 16.713 0.06 0

0 0.034 41 16.793 0.06 0

0 0

42 16.876 0.059 0.517 0

0 43 17.093 0.059 0.037 0

0 44 17.112 0.058 0.027 0

0 45 17.192 0.058 0.002 0

0 46 17.247 0.058 0

0 0.021 47 17.316 0.058 0.019 0

0 Page 29

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Table 141-7: Modal Frequencies and Mass PartiCipation Factors for the PSW COB Model (Continued)

Mode Frequency Period Participation Participation Participation Hz seconds X%

Y%

Z%

48 17.362 0.058 0.032 0

0 49 17.545 0.057 0.001 0

0.023 50 17.582 0.057 0.028 0.021 0.007 51 17.763 0.056 0

0 0.062 52 17.775 0.056 0

0 0.014 53 18.296 0.055 0

0 0.028 54 20.04 0.05 0

0 0.024 55 20.457 0.049 0.095 0.01 0.643 56 20.84 0.048 0.006 0.002 0.134 57 21.438 0.047 0.002 0.003 0.041 58 21.584 0.046 0.007 0.806 0.031 59 24.129 0.041 0.113 0.228 0.058 60 25.372 0.039 0.043 0.006 0.351 61 25.61 0.039 0.334 0.389 3.386 62 26.26 0.038 0.793 0.03 0.107 63 26.577 0.038 0

0.022 0.938 64 26.724 0.037 0.015 0.883 1.741 65 26.96 0.037 0.032 0.012 0.541 66 28.14 0.036 0.279 2.18 0.314 67 28.391 0.035 0.593 0.687 1.622 68 28.714 0.035 0.002 0.006 0.059 69 29.909 0.033 0.143 0.079 0.035 70 30.241 0.033 0.611 0.068 2.207 71 30.338 0.033 0.004 0.07 1.157 72 30.552 0.033 21.759 0.011 0.525 73 31.155 0.032 3.43 0.002 5.982 74 31.811 0.031 11.783 4.358 0.026 75 31.953 0.031 0.078 0.685 0.107 76 32.144 0.031 0.985 2.055 1.779 77 32.441 0.031 25.098 0.972 0.739 78 32.657 0.031 0.02 0.626 0

79 33.235 0.03 0.327 0.388 0.007 80 34.129 0.029 0.035 0.029 0.166 81 34.277 0.029 0.331 0.016 2.857 82 34.441 0.029 0.001 0.001 0.142 83 34.682 0.029 0.046 0.017 0.001 84 35.433 0.028 3.757 0.167 0.006 85 35.706 0.028 0.04 0.018 0.001 86 35.821 0.028 0

0.15 0

87 36.04 0.028 3.201 0.081 0.691 88 36.777 0.027 0.099 0.033 1.314 89 37.585 0.027 0.034 0.001 0.27 90 37.593 0.027 0.052 0.037 0.448 91 38.198 0.026 0.106 0.688 0.847 92 38.621 0.026 0

0.633 0.028 93 38.73 0.026 0

0.101 0.014 94 39.473 0.025 0.095 0.001 0.514 Page 30

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April S. 2013 Table 141-7: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW COS Mode 95 96 97 98 99 100 Total Participating Mass (%)

Frequency Hz 39.746 39.951 40.515 41.351 41.761 42.422 Model (Continued)

Period Participation seconds X%

0.025 0.247 0.025 0.147 0.025 0.083 0.024 0.002 0.024 0.118 0.024 0.034 76.075 Participation Participation Y%

Z%

0.805 0.194 0.995 1.892 1.405 0.01 0.181 0

0.01 0.169 0.087 0.007 35.212 82.629 Page 31

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013 Table 141-8: Modal Frequencies and Mass participation Factors for the PSW LSS BE Model Mode Frequency Period Participation Participation Participation Hz seconds X%

Y%

Z%

1 7.089 0.141 0.035 0

59.766 2

10.52 0.095 0

18.211 0.036 3

11.688 0.086 0.203 0.007 0.914 4

11.796 0.085 0.015 0.09 0.218 5

11.931 0.084 0.061 0

0.316 6

12.042 0.083 0.001 0

0.002 7

12.072 0.083 0.043 0.001 0.047 8

12.12 0.083 0.139 0

0.009 9

12.143 0.082 0.53 0.005 0.026 10 12.25 0.082 3.57 0.319 0.043 11 12.349 0.081 0.055 0.013 0.134 12 12.364 0.081 0.002 0.001 0.031 13 12.564 0.08 0.083 0.007 0.544 14 12.753 0.078 0.074 0.001 0.015 15 12.806 0.078 0.005 0.005 0.012 16 13.125 0.076 0.044 0.002 0.055 17 13.226 0.076 0.001 0.001 0.052 18 13.463 0.074 20.666 0.051 0.039 19 13.479 0.074 58.084 0.059 0.192 20 13.627 0.073 1.451 0.009 0

21 13.714 0.073 0.216 0.025 0.039 22 13.944 0.072 0.057 0.003 0.071 23 14.062 0.071 0.026 0.014 0.061 24 14.377 0.07 0.053 0.434 0.354 25 14.432 0.069 0.074 0.022 0.001 26 14.463 0.069 0.091 6.541 0

27 14.837 0.067 0.001 0.001 0.095 28 14.996 0.067 0.002 0.001 0.006 29 15.028 0.067 0.001 0

0 30 15.283 0.065 0.001 0.003 0.171 31 15.517 0.064 0

0 0

32 15.708 0.064 0.29 0.013 0.001 33 15.779 0.063 0.001 0.008 0.215 34 15.787 0.063 0

0 0.014 35 15.894 0.063 0.008 0

0.134 36 15.921 0.063 0.001 0.001 0.007 37 16.023 0.062 0.071 0.008 0.002 38 16.027 0.062 0.016 0.001 0

39 16.191 0.062 0.01 0.019 0.462 40 16.452 0.061 0

0.009 0.002 41 16.468 0.061 0.001 0.008 0

42 16.602 0.06 0.001 0.016 0.056 43 16.777 0.06 0

0.005 0.003 44 16.886 0.059 0.002 0.135 0.021 45 17.08 0.059 0.085 0.084 0.083 46 17.108 0.058 0.027 0.023 0.024 47 17.141 0.058 0.028 0.072 0.537 48 17.192 0.058 0.028 0.007 0

Page 32

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013 Table 141-8: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS BE Mode 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 Total Participating Mass (%)

Frequency Hz 17.236 17.32 17.363 17.423 17.502 17.704 18.05 18.164 18.309 18.994 20.082 20.324 20.928 21.457 21.72 22.127 22.741 23.493 24.925 25.145 25.514 25.893 26.124 26.756 26.855 27.034 27.266 28.211 Model (Continued)

Period Participation seconds X%

0.058 1.393 0.058 0.045 0.058 0.002 0.057 1.956 0.057 0.295 0.056 0.056 0.055 0.079 0.055 0.12 0.055 0.007 0.053 0.355 0.05 1.13 0.049 0.106 0.048 0.098 0.047 0.034 0.046 1.963 0.045 2.456 0.044 0.264 0.043 0.292 0.04 0.009 0.04 0.258 0.039 0.083 0.039 0.178 0.038 0.02 0.037 0.12 0.037 0.006 0.037 0.05 0.037 0.01 0.035 0.007 97.545 Participation Participation Y%

Z%

0.282 0.085 0.007 0.028 0.001 0.121 0.03 0.934 0.069 0.349 0.044 0.686 0.244 3.73 0.1 3.786 0.072 7.827 1.166 0.294 35.136 1.481 4.152 0.056 0.053 5.073 0.343 0.057 1.608 2.011 8.119 1.128 0.368 0.688 15.31 0.566 0.011 0.034 0.58 0.629 0.363 0.006 0.031 0.318 0.221 0.117 0.557 0.047 0.666 0.044 0.39 0.031 0.186 0.027 0.018 0.069 96.362 95.032 Page 33

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013 Table 141-9: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS LB Model Mode Frequency Period seconds Participation Participation Participation Hz X%

Y%

Z%

1 6.234 0.16 0.032 0.001 63.989 2

9.975 0.1 0.395 0.061 0.122 3

10.279 0.097 0.025 26.611 0.058 4

10.855 0.092 75.796 0.255 0.172 5

11.554 0.087 1.027 0.048 2.207 6

11.87 0.084 0.005 0.069 0.059 7

11.944 0.084 0.117 0.021 0.133 8

12.041 0.083 0.037 0

0.003 9

12.119 0.083 0.194 0.001 0.013 10 12.139 0.082 0.561 0

0.02 11 12.214 0.082 11.339 0.39 0.054 12 12.315 0.081 0.022 0.001 0.185 13 12.362 0.081 0.003 0.001 0.003 14 12.482 0.08 0.036 0

0.345 15 12.747 0.078 0.041 0.002 0.021 16 12.8 0.078 0.001 0.006 0.001 17 13.116 0.076 0.003 0.003 0.077 18 13.216 0.076 0

0.002 0.059 19 13.448 0.074 0.002 0.018 0.209 20 13.599 0.074 0.013 0.024 0.003 21 13.7 0.073 0

0.096 0.071 22 13.93 0.072 0.007 0.05 0.154 23 14.042 0.071 0.009 0.897 0.143 24 14.123 0.071 0.392 14.708 0.014 25 14.341 0.07 0

0.162 0.63 26 14.398 0.069 0.014 0.023 0.026 27 14.805 0.068 0

0.001 0.161 28 14.993 0.067 0.002 0.002 0.012 29 15.025 0.067 0

0 0

30 15.241 0.066 0

0.004 0.504 31 15.517 0.064 0

0 0.001 32 15.575 0.064 0.007 0

2.007 33 15.673 0.064 0.095 0.147 0.039 34 15.786 0.063 0

0.002 0.181 35 15.79 0.063 0.019 0.001 3.057 36 15.912 0.063 0

0.003 0.261 37 15.991 0.063 0.412 0.372 0.423 38 16.026 0.062 0

0 0.03 39 16.046 0.062 0.038 0.024 3.649 40 16.084 0.062 0.303 0.495 3.273 41 16.268 0.061 3.014 2.826 3.197 42 16.31 0.061 1.323 1.785 0.828 43 16.459 0.061 0.004 0.013 0

44 16.558 0.06 0.05 0.369 0.133 45 16.652 0.06 0.058 0.544 0.001 46 16.802 0.06 0.017 0.219 0.039 47 16.939 0.059 0.394 0.545 0.002 48 17.095 0.058 0.031 0.044 0.005 Page 34

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013 Table 141-9: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS LB Mode 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 Total Participating Mass (%)

Frequency Hz 17.116 17.138 17.193 17.313 17.318 17.364 17.481 17.646 17.784 17.885 18.145 18.515 19.001 Model (Continued)

Period seconds Participation X%

0.058 0.044 0.058 0.001 0.058 0.002 0.058 0.127 0.058 0.033 0.058 0.025 0.057 0.002 0.057 0.005 0.056 0.016 0.056 0.015 0.055 0

0.054 0

0.053 2.379 98.487 Participation Participation Y%

Z%

0.119 0.003 0.167 0

0.003 0

10.813 5.98 0.275 0.282 0.006 0.023 2.676 0.024 0.518 0.267 17.479 0.885 3.471 1.605 1.958 0.074 0.26 0.197 7.061 0

95.652 95.914 Page 3S

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Table 141-10: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS UB Model Mode Frequency Period Participation Participation Participation Hz seconds X%

Y%

Z%

1 7.86 0.127 0.034 0.002 55.52 2

10.657 0.094 0

14.624 0.047 3

11.773 0.085 0.018 0.032 0.562 4

11.926 0.084 0

0.019 0.078 5

11.965 0.084 0.009 0.017 0.177 6

12.042 0.083 0

0 0.001 7

12.123 0.082 0.001 0.001 0.006 8

12.159 0.082 0.015 0.006 0.039 9

12.351 0.081 0.012 0.001 0.04 10 12.365 0.081 0

0 0.019 11 12.387 0.081 0.196 0.118 0.013 12 12.587 0.079 0

0 0.234 13 12.756 0.078 0.002 0

0.003 14 12.811 0.078 0

0.002 0.005 15 13.128 0.076 0

0 0.019 16 13.232 0.076 0

0 0.023 17 13.473 0.074 0

0 0.045 18 13.632 0.073 0.004 0.003 0.009 19 13.721 0.073 0.004 0.011 0.04 20 13.929 0.072 0

0.045 0.043 21 14.021 0.071 0.004 0.278 0.574 22 14.074 0.071 0.003 0.038 0.158 23 14.413 0.069 0

0.198 0.367 24 14.445 0.069 0.022 0.051 0.013 25 14.613 0.068 0.016 3.967 0.008 26 14.873 0.067 0.001 0.015 0.121 27 14.998 0.067 0.004 0.001 0.008 28 15.029 0.067 0.002 0.001 0

29 15.314 0.065 0.005 0.001 0.155 30 15.517 0.064 0.103 0

0 31 15.524 0.064 27.844 0.037 0.011 32 15.786 0.063 0.032 0

0.001 33 15.814 0.063 0

0.003 0.117 34 15.896 0.063 11.015 0.03 0.009 35 15.913 0.063 5.6 0.011 0.072 36 15.925 0.063 1.109 0.004 0

37 16.027 0.062 0.003 0

0 38 16.143 0.062 22.135 0.087 0.005 39 16.248 0.062 1.348 0.001 0.355 40 16.458 0.061 0

0.001 0.001 41 16.492 0.061 0.017 0.004 0.001 42 16.622 0.06 0

0.005 0.029 43 16.784 0.06 0.005 0

0 44 16.982 0.059 3.058 0.056 0

45 17.098 0.058 0.18 0.008 0

46 17.12 0.058 0.394 0.018 0

47 17.179 0.058 0.001 0.012 0.112 Page 36

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5. 2013 Table 141-10: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS US Model (Continued)

Mode Frequency Period Participation Participation Participation Hz seconds X%

Y%

Z%

48 17.193 0.058 0.009 0.001 0

49 17.317 0.058 0

0.006 0

50 17.36 0.058 0.013 0.011 0.001 51 17.518 0.057 0.03 0.019 0.237 52 17.536 0.057 3.382 0.057 0.122 53 17.659 0.057 8.643 0.002 0.061 54 17.748 0.056 0.842 0.003 0.066 55 18.223 0.055 0

0.051 0.3 56 18.44 0.054 0.291 0.162 0.254 57 19.853 0.05 0.48 0.011 0.17 58 20.273 0.049 0.055 0.481 16.784 59 20.538 0.049 0.177 0

3.288 60 21.262 0.047 0.123 5.313 0.001 61 21.476 0.047 0.026 0.05 0.008 62 23.101 0.043 0.305 20.263 1.902 63 23.8 0.042 0.004 0.219 0.053 64 24.924 0.04 4.21 7.737 0.455 65 25.322 0.039 0.249 0.287 1.42 66 25.396 0.039 0.663 0.058 3.148 67 25.684 0.039 0.13 7.992 0.635 68 26.243 0.038 0.01 3.235 0.15 69 26.418 0.038 0.005 5.141 0.251 70 26.77 0.037 0.028 0.431 0.891 71 27.044 0.037 0.138 0.008 0.002 72 27.194 0.037 0.032 0.095 1.471 73 27.887 0.036 0.047 1.915 0.053 74 28.509 0.035 0.993 8.642 0.004 75 28.619 0.035 0.097 3.862 0.304 76 29.383 0.034 0.67 2.362 0.28 77 29.647 0.034 0.002 0.393 0.426 78 29.845 0.034 0.027 0.322 0.154 79 29.989 0.033 0.045 0.08 0.63 80 30.702 0.033 0.1 0.218 0.185 81 30.827 0.032 0.025 0.96 0.449 82 31.241 0.032 0.036 0.248 0.11 83 31.419 0.032 0.08 1.951 0.118 84 32.128 0.031 0.211 0.526 0.068 85 32.955 0.03 0.005 0.024 0.002 86 33.438 0.03 0.103 0.02 0.002 87 33.647 0.03 0.034 0.136 0.012 88 33.861 0.03 0.861 0.173 0.011 89 34.167 0.029 0.065 0.007 0.048 90 34.3 0.029 0.202 0.023 0

91 34.588 0.029 0.359 0.024 0.061 92 34.72 0.029 0

0.12 0.43 93 35.075 0.029 0.018 0.039 0.004 94 35.424 0.028 0.166 1.563 0.023 Page 37

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Table 141-10: Modal Frequencies and Mass Participation Factors for the PSW LSS UB Mode 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 Total Participating Mass l%l Frequency Hz 35.641 36.042 36.53 36.815 37.388 37.467 38.155 38.649 38.971 39.177 39.458 40.22 40.588 Model (Continued)

Period Participation seconds X%

0.028 0.003 0.028 0.002 0.027 0.121 0.027 0.003 0.027 0

0.027 0.003 0.026 0.01 0.026 0.006 0.026 0.003 0.026 0.121 0.025 0.12 0.025 0.22 0.025 0.011 97.81 Participation Participation Y%

Z%

0.249 0

0.11 0.154 0.005 0.057 0

0.102 0.059 0.012 0.001 0.003 0.321 0.268 0.004 0.002 0.163 0

0.025 0.036 0.004 0

0.071 0.139 0

0.547 95.961 95.404 Page 38

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 39 Table 141-11: Maximum Base Forces and Base Moments(1)

Base Forces Jkips)

Base Moments (ft-kips)

VX 765 MX 21799 CQC VZ 589 MZ 24838 Note (1): Maximum from Fixed Base and Lumped Soil Spring Models for all the soil cases: LB, BE, and UB.

Legend:

CQC = Complete Quadratic modal combination for Response Spectrum Analyses.

C) -

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Page 40 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 FIGURE 141-1: Comparison of ONS UFSAR Figure 2-55 and EI Centro Time History 5 %

Damped Response Spectra 1940 Elcentro N-S scaled to 0.159 RS (5%)

c o

~

~ 0.2

~

~

u <<

0.15 0.1 0.05 o

0.1 1

Frequency (HZ)

Oconee UFSAR Horizontal and Vertical RS (5%) FIG 2-55 10 100

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013 FIGURE 141-2: PSW BUILDING FEM MODEL PSW BUILDING ELEVATION Entry Way Entry Way

~ -

~

I'l' 1'1'

'I' IA I I 1

Page 41 I I I

Battery Room Foundation NEE r

PSW BUILDING PLAN

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013

~

J(

z FIGURE 141-3: PSW Building eDB Model Mode Shape for Mode 1 (Z-Direction Predominant Mode)

Page 42

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 y

FIGURE 141-4: PSW Building CDB Model Mode Shape for Mode 2 (Y-Direction Predominant Mode)

Page 43 x

z L.Rd, Mode Shape 2 Whole Srruerlle

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 v

l X

FIGURE 141-5: PSW Building CDB Model Mode Shape for Mode 72 (X-Direction Predominant Mode)

Whor S/nIcble Page 44

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013 T

FIGURE 141-6: PSW Building LSS BE Model Mode Shape for Mode 1 (Z-Direction Predominant Mode)

Page4S

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 IIIDde 2 FIGURE 141-7: PSW Building LSS BE Model Mode Shape for Mode 2 (Y -Direction Predominant Mode)

Page 46

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April S. 2013 T

  • 1 FIGURE 141-8: PSW Building LSS BE Model Mode Shape for Mode 19 (X-Direction Predominant Mode)

LMIIIt _a_,.

Page 47

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 48

§ c o FIGURE 141-9: ISRS for PSW Building Operating Floor (El 797'-0") - MHE Horizontal Direction, ClB-lSS Envelop 3. 0.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~

--- Widened ISRS 1% Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping

....*. Widened ISRS 4% Damping 2.5 ~ 1- -- -Widened ISRS 5% Damping Widened ISRS 7% Damping 2.0

~

GJ 1.5 -

'3 u <<

1.0 0.5 0.0 I 0.10 r -

I

\\

I

~

I,..... \\

.,,1 1- - \\-,. -', ' - ',' \\

J

,. __. \\ 1

_ r _ -

w I

,_. "':,,'.. 1-

,; 0 "

Ir-,:':::.: ""'"

.'" II

.... _.. r...Ir --- ** --'

I

, ' _,J~ :::: __...:....., '/

' \\,. \\ I -

/. '

_.\\.',

.,. r-

\\

f,_. - ;,'

'~.... -

.~' -.',

~ _.:,p

-.. ;J 1.00 10.00 100.00 Frequency (Hz)

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS. 2013 Page 49 S

c FIGURE 141-10: ISRS for PSW Building Operating Floor (EL 797'-0") - MHE Vertical Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 2.0 T I ~

,==================~--------------------------------------1 1.5

--- Widened ISRS 1 % Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping Widened ISRS 4% Damping

- Widened ISRS 5% Damping Widened ISRS 7% Damping l,

I I

' r--

~

III 1.0 l_""

~

u :i 0.5

...* * :j

\\..:

I' r _ _

-.*r --. -- -

I I

J

\\ _.

" \\

\\

~

. \\

\\.

\\.;. -. -~..'

\\

\\

- -~.-.'~,....,.. -.'

.. \\

  • .. -.. ~... I I

. \\ ' \\

/

\\

. \\'

. /' /, '

./

',',/

., ' \\

~-- '

9 / '

,-,~..

' /

O. O +

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

Q10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Frequency (Hz)

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Page 50

§ c

0 ;;

FIGURE 141-11: ISRS for Battery Room Roof EL. 807' - 0" - MHE Horizontal Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 3.0,------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,

---Widened ISRS 1% Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping

- - - - - -Widened ISRS 4% Damping 2.5 1 1- -- - Widened ISRS 5% Damping Widened ISRS 7% Damping 2.0 I!!

CII 1.5 Gi u

u c(

1.0 0.5 i l'

0,0 I

~._n -

0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Frequency (Hz)

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 51 FIGURE 141-12: ISRS for Battery Room Roof EL. 807' - 0" - MHE Vertical Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 4.0 ~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------~

---Widened ISRS 1% Dampin!

Widened ISRS 2% Dampin 3.5 ~ !.

Widened ISRS 4% Dampin!

  • Widened ISRS 5% Dampin!

Widened ISRS 7% Dampin!

3.0

....... 2.5 S

c

\\

~

l!

.!! 2.0

\\

1 I

I 1

1 CD u

~

I

. 1 I

I 1--

\\..... : __.-,'. 1 1

I l_ I

....J

. \\'

I'

,......J 1

\\ \\'

,..... _ '. ' r'

. I"

  • -. " 1

_.r _ - v 1

_. " -. J

-. J.

I

\\r...J I

~

  • __ ~.~,~
"
'Y'-:-""'-'

00

. ~.

-,.-"~ - '

, ~ ** -.,-

7

- ~ - -

0.10

..-.=- <",/-" -. '

1.5 1.0 -.

0.5 1.00 10.00 Frequency (Hz) 100.00

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 52 FIGURE 141-13: ISRS for PSW Building Roof EL. 818' - 0" - MHE Horizontal Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 5.0 ~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,

4.5 4.0.

3.5

---Widened ISRS 1% Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping

...*.. Widened ISRS 4% Damping

  • Widened ISRS 5% Damping Widened ISRS 7% Damping S3.0 c o

+l I

I l!

ell 2.5 I

II

'iii u

u c:(

2.0 1.5 1.0 I

I I

',1

...J

',V---

oJ..

.1

\\.

I

.~. -'I"OI'-'l J

.." **...J 1, --

I J 'r ' ': :? - :

O r....... '"

o

~ --..<-.~ *...

. 0.10

- ""--""o-'.'=-.. ~',_.. -~

.'-:~'

=--;:;;;;-----

0.5 1.00 10.00 Frequency (Hz) 100.00

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Page 53 FIGURE 141-14: ISRS for PSW Building Roof EL, 818' - 0" - MHE Vertical Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 5. 0.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~

4.5 4.0 3.5

§ 3.0 c o

~

I!

GI 2.5 Gi u u <<

2.0 1.5 1.0

---Widened ISRS 1% Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping

- - - - - -Widened ISRS 4% Damping

- - - Widened ISRS 5% Damping Widened ISRS 7% Damping

'--I,

"\\

\\

"\\

l'

\\. - -,,,

(

~ '

~

,~.----..

'\\

r /'

_...... \\

I

'/

j '

\\ -"-'i..'

. -,,-\\.

'\\.

\\'

I r

__ r 0.0 '

~ - -.1'-,.... '

, ~. -'" /

..J. ~ -

-

  • I' 0.10

__ __,,:G""-.~

.. c: '

0.5

_":I - :

1.00 10.00 Frequency (Hz) 100.00

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 54 FIGURE 141-15: ISRS for Perimeter Wall EL. 811' - 0" - MHE Horizontal Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 5.0 ~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~

4.5 4.0 3.5

Widened ISRS 1% Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping

.... ". Widened ISRS 4% Damping

  • -
  • Widened ISRS 5% Damping Widened ISRS 7% Damping

§ 3.0 -

1 1

I c o I!

1

'r -

\\

2.5 I

I 1 \\

B u

~

2.0 1.5 I

I 1:**** lr--

1 I'

"\\

I'

,'_J:,_._:,'4

1. ~

1 J

'l J

, " J ** _. "

I

'r.

I

' I,.. ".

I

'. ~,

\\ : -

. - "I,i

\\."

r.":

"' \\1 *r**-

1',1

' I

...... - \\

, I

\\ I' I

  • __ -"J,"; ::"'-:!'-'

,s;i

\\

/"J 0.0

~---",,.,-~..... '

y O

=----

~ ~.. ~" ~

.10 1.0 0.5 -

1,00 10.00 Frequency (Hz) 100.00

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 55

§ c o FIGURE 141-16: ISRS for Perimeter Wall EL, 811' - 0" - MHE Vertical Direction, CLB-LSS Envelop 2.0 r---------------------------------------------------------------------------------~

1.5

---Widened ISRS 1% Damping Widened ISRS 2% Damping Widened ISRS 4% Damping

-. -

  • Widened ISRS 5% Damping

-.. - Widened ISRS 7% Damping I!

G) 1.0

\\

I I

"8 u

ct 0.5 r--

I

_J-

\\

\\

r---' _,.,

r ' -. ', l \\

'{ _ { -

- ll 1- -v' :

\\', \\

r I

',-' J

"-""",,.l

'J "-,,-,, ' : '

/ __ ~'-"

,~,-",-'r--,!

\\

~

f ' ' -, -~ -, //', -,, - :

'-::': ', \\

., J

' /.

/

~,-,/

~-

---.... -- ~:::.

~~

0.0 ~

, -----=------------------~------------------------~----------------------~

Q10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Frequency (Hz)

Enclosure - Response to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 56 Figure 141-17: Shear-Wave Velocity Data at PSW Building Locality o

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 o,

I I

I I I ReMi (Best Estimate)

I-

'SCPT Velocity I I.

Cross-hole velocity t--

I I

I-I J Lower Range Upper Range I

I I L

..,, I I

-10

-20 I

I~ :

I I,

I I

I I I I

I I I I

I

--1 I I I

-30

-40

-100 II I I

I I I I

I I

I I I I

I I -

-I II I

I II I

I

~

- -I

"- - - - 1-: l I

I I

I I

- -.1. -

I I

I t-

-I I

I I

I

-60

-70

-80

-90 Shear-Wave Velocity,ftls

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 RAI #160 Page 57 In response to RAI-62, the licensee included, in its letter dated January 20,2012, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) 344-1975 as one of the industry standards that is being used for the PSW system design. Discuss the seismic qualification method(s) used for electrical and mechanical equipment credited for the PSW system. Provide a summary of the seismic qualification results to demonstrate that all equipment credited for the PSW system including their subcomponents (relays, contacts, breakers etc.) are capable to perform their intended design function in the event of a safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) after a number of postulated occurrences of the operating basis earthquake (OBE). The response to this RAI, as a minimum, should include the test response spectra (if applicable), the required response spectra, the method of mounting of equipment to the shake table, and the equipment mounting configuration in service condition. Also, discuss the methodology, the industry codes and standards, the level of earthquake, and the acceptance criteria used for the structural design of the PSWequipment mounting.

Duke Energv Response:

The Duke Energy response to this request for information has three parts: I) Seismic qualification of electrical equipment, II) seismic qualification of mechanical equipment and III) anchorage as discussed below.

I. Seismic Qualification of Electrical Equipment Seismic qualification of electrical equipment is outlined in Section 3.10 of the Oconee Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). For the PSW project, QA-1 electrical equipment was seismically qualified in accordance with IEEE 344-1975, which meets or exceeds the Oconee UFSAR requirements for qualification by testing or analysis.

Qualification is performed for all electrical equipment using shake table testing, analysis or a combination of testing and analysis.

The NRC endorsed IEEE 344-1975, with exceptions, in Regulatory Guide 1.100, Revision 1.

The exceptions were:

1) Section 5.3 - Use of the 1.5 static coefficient was found acceptable but a requirement was imposed for justifying its use.
2) Section 6.6.2.1 - This concerns single-frequency test input motion and that the resultant Test Response Spectrum (TRS) at the test frequencies must equal 1.5 times the acceleration of the required response spectrum (RRS). This section also allowed the TRS to not envelope the RRS, if the 1.5 factor was used. Justification is therefore required to use single frequency testing and for the TRS to not envelope the RRS.
3) Section 6.6.2.5 - For sine sweep testing, the TRS was again allowed to fall below the RRS by reference to Section 6.6.2.1. Sine sweep testing was deemed not suitable for equipment qualification unless justification was provided.
4) Section 8 - Documentation. Supplemental documentation is required related to equipment malfunction data.

For QA-1 electrical equipment, procurement documents were generated in accordance with Duke Energy's directive EDM-140 "Procurement Specifications for Equipment." Seismic demand at the equipment mounting location was included in those procurement

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5,2013 Page 58 documents. For new floor-and wall-mounted electrical enclosures, the applicable in-structure response spectra demand was used for the equipment mounting location. For components added to existing safety-related electrical enclosures, such as the electrical components added to the Oconee Main Control Boards, in-cabinet response spectra demand for the electrical component mounting locations was specified.

Procurement documents were used by the selected vendors to perform the qualification.

Whether testing, analysis or a combination of testing and analysis was used; the vendors assured the resulting seismic capacity of the equipment enveloped the specified seismic demand. For testing, the 10% margin specified in IEEE 323 was included. Pre-and post-seismic functional testing was performed. All shake table testing consisted of five OBE earthquakes followed by SSE testing taking into account the electrical safety function of the equipment (Le. contactors were evaluated in energized and de-energized states and for transition between those states and chatter was monitored in excess of 2 msec). In addition, random multi-frequency input was used for the testing as opposed to single-frequency and sine-sweep testing noted in the RG 1.100 exceptions #2 and #3 above. Any anomalies found through testing were documented in the qualification reports and given a disposition. Therefore, RG 1.100, Revision 1 Exceptions #2, #3 and #4 were addressed.

Qualification by analysis was used for some of the equipment following the methods given in IEEE 344-1975. The 1.5 multimode factor was used as appropriate and justified.

Therefore, RG 1.100, Revision 1 Exception #1 has been addressed.

As part of the procurement, Duke Energy required an owner review and approval of the qualification plans prior to the qualification to insure the vendor's qualification method would meet the owner's requirements. Vendor qualifications were documented in vendor qualification reports that were again owner reviewed. Final qualification reports were entered into Oconee Document Control and Records Management to maintain a record of the qualification. Qualification reports met the documentation requirements of IEEE 344-1975 and included seismic capacity versus demand comparisons. Because of the extensive list of electrical equipment, there is a corresponding extensive list of qualification documents.

The procurement documents also required the vendor to determine anchorage requirements. The qualifications documented the adequacy of that anchorage design and each vendor developed drawings to transmit the anchorage design. The drawings were used to anchor the equipment to the structures during implementation of the engineering changes. If problems arose with the vendor-defined anchorage, then site civil was contacted and they worked with the vendor to determine the acceptability of any changes.

Appendix AW of ONS calculation OSC-9506, "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 0, includes a figure on P. AW2 identified as PAW1 "Seismic Horizontal and Vertical FDS (5% Damping) and EPS, Elevation 818'."

The purpose of that figure is to compare the final horizontal and vertical envelopes of the in-structure response spectra calculated for the center of the roof of the PSW Building against the conservative estimate of worst-case in-structure spectra referred to as "Equipment Procurement Spectra" (EPS). It should be noted that the EPS was determined, and used for procurement purposes for equipment with long lead-times, as the PSW Building response spectra analyses were being performed. When the final enveloped results were created for the operating floor, mezzanine, mid-height of the walls and the roof of the PSW Building, they were compared to the EPS in Appendices AT through AW. As shown in those plots,

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 59 the EPS did indeed bound all of the PSW Building locations except for the vertical response at the center of the PSW Building roof.

Wherever the EPS was used for the procurement of electrical equipment, the procurement specifications included hold points to validate the seismic input(s). The hold points were removed by either revising the procurement specification to add the corresponding final envelopes from OSC-9506 or in some cases deviations to the procurement specifications were issued with the corresponding final envelopes from OSC-9506. In either case, the equipment that was initially procured using the EPS was qualified using the appropriate seismic in-structure spectra.

In the Duke Energy Response to RAI-141 dated July 20,2012, it was determined that the PSW Building in-structure response spectra, that was originally included with the procurement specifications, required revision. Therefore, the PSW Building was reanalyzed and the results documented in Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1.

As a result of the PSW building reanalysis a reevaluation of the electrical equipment was required. A comprehensive seismic capacity versus demand evaluation was completed via Oconee Calculation OSC-10824 "Evaluation of New In-Structure Response Spectra for the PSW Building on Electrical Equipment Qualification," Revision 0 to verify the seismic capacity of electrical equipment located in the PSW Building bounded the new seismic demand listed in OSC-10764 Revision 1. In cases where the capacity did not completely envelope the new in-structure demand response spectra, either an appropriate engineering justification was made, or the equipment was requalified using the new in-structure response spectra.

Seismic Qualification of Electrical Equipment Specific Example - Motor Control Centers in the PSW and Auxiliary Buildings Motor Control Centers (MCC) were included with the scope of PSW electrical equipment and are located in the Auxiliary and PSW Buildings. The requirements for procurement of the MCCs were documented in OSS-0308.00-00-0007, "Procurement Specification for the Design, Fabrication and testing of the QA-1, 600 VAC Motor Control Centers (MCCs) for the Protected Service Water (PSW) System," Revision 2. Nuclear LogistiCS Incorporated (NLI) was selected as the supplier and their qualification plan was documented in QP-29412392-1, "Qualification Plan for Motor Control Centers," Revision 3. Duke Energy approved that qualification plan and NLI performed the qualification. Seismic qualification of the equipment was documented in NLI Qualification Report QR-29412392-1, "Qualification Report for Motor Control Centers," Revision 4 which was filed as an Oconee vendor manual and placed in Oconee Document Control and Records Management. The vendor manual number is OM 308.--531.001, "PSW - Seismic Qualification Report for Motor Control Centers XPSW, 1XPSW, 2XPSWA, 2XPSWB and 3XPSW," Revision 4.

The MCCs were qualified by a combination of shake table testing and analysis in accordance with IEEE 344-1975. Shake table testing was used to qualify the enclosures and equipment and analysiS was used to qualify additional changes made after the completion of the shake table testing. For example, analysis was used to address vertical barriers added to the enclosures for personnel safety.

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 AprilS, 2013 Page 60 The MCCs consist of two different types based on physical location: 1) NEMA 3R MCCs for the Auxiliary Building and 2) NEMA 1 MCCs for the PSW Building. All of the MCCs were Freedom 2100 Series with a 600A main bus and were joined in sets connected on their sides. The largest sets have five sections bolted together and the smallest set has two sections bolted together.

One representative NEMA 1 enclosure was bolted to one representative NEMA 3R enclosure using the standard inter-cabinet bolting used for these enclosures. The bolted enclosure set was welded to a base plate to simulate the installed configuration in the final design drawings. The as-tested layout is shown on NLI Drawing 29412392-LDTS-1, "MCC Test Specimen Outline," Revision 3 that is given in Appendix D of the NLI Qualification Report. The base plate containing the set of two enclosures was fastened to the shake table using four 3/8" diameter bolts. The report states that four bolts used to anchor the set of two enclosures bounds the proposed field installation where four bolts were specified for each individual section (Le. a set of two sections has a total of eight anchors in the field).

Each enclosure specimen included a representative set of electrical equipment. The equipment was selected by considering all of the equipment in all of the MCC enclosures and the relative mounting locations of that equipment within the enclosure. Traceability between the test specimens and the production units was given in Section 2.2 of the qualification report.

In-structure response spectra for the Auxiliary and PSW Buildings were included in the procurement specification. NLI created a composite envelope of those spectra and used it as the Required Response Spectra (RRS) input for the shake table testing. The Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) at Oconee is one-half the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) so the RRS was factored by 0.5 for the OBE and taken as the full value for the SSE.

A comparison of the Test Response Spectrum (TRS), obtained from the control accelerometers, to the RRS for the SSE is shown in Figures 160.1 and 160.2 for the horizontal and vertical excitation directions respectively (Note: Figures 160.1 and 160.2 are provided in the RAI #160 supplemental information section of the Attachment to the July 20, 2012, RAI response letter).

An anomaly documented the fact that the TRS did not fully envelope the RRS below approximately 2 Hz for both excitation directions. Before the OBE and SSE testing, however, the vendor performed low-level sine-sweeps to determine the resonant frequencies of the enclosure set. Because the enclosure set did not have resonant frequencies in that range, the exceedance was deemed acceptable.

The testing consisted of five OBE tests followed by three SSE tests that covered the energized, de-energized and transition states of the electrical equipment. Two of the SSE tests were substituted for two of the OBE tests. The test series was conducted in four different specimen orientations at 0, 90, 180 and 270 degrees to capture the in-phase and out-of-phase response due to the dependent biaxial shake table.

QA-1 electrical equipment was subjected to pre-and post-seismic functional testing and was monitored for contact chatter in excess of two milliseconds during the shake table testing.

The list of equipment, functional state, type of monitoring and acceptance criteria was given in Section 4.2.6 of the report for the three SSE tests. Equipment with no moving contacts (Le. terminal blocks and fuse blocks) was monitored for continuity and non-safety equipment

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 61 was evaluated for structural integrity (mounting) only. All of the equipment met the acceptance criteria except that the door on the NEMA 3R enclosure popped open during some of the testing. NLI resolved this issue by adding a small padlock to the door and then later qualified a hitch pin proposed by Duke Energy. The requirement to include the hitch pin to maintain seismic qualification was included on the final design drawings.

Anomalies were identified and addressed in an appendix to the test report.

Additional analysis was used to quantify anchorage loads to be used by Duke Energy. The qualification report references a separate NLI anchorage qualification report. The anchorage qualification report is QR-29411642-4, Revision 3 and was filed as an Oconee Vendor Manual OM 302.A-0072.004, "Mounting Base Design and Anchorage Loads for NLI Supplied Equipment," Revision 3.

An additional capacity versus demand comparison was performed in OSC-10824, Revision O. This verified that the new in-structure response spectra (ISRS) from OSC-10764, Revision 1, Appendix AX and A Y did not negatively impact the seismic qualification of the 600V MCC that is located in the PSW Building. The qualification of the 600V MCC located in the Auxiliary Building is not impacted by the new ISRS for the PSW Building.

Specific Example - Batteries and Battery Racks in the PSW Building See Duke Energy's response to RAI-161 (submitted to the NRC on July 11, 2012) for the details of the qualification of the PSW batteries and racks.

II. Seismic Qualification of Mechanical Equipment Specification ECV-0601.00-00-0005, Rev.1 "Specification for the Seismic Qualification of Equipment" by Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Oconee Nuclear Station Units 1, 2 and 3 describes acceptable methods for seismic qualification of electromechanical equipment.

The following governing design criteria documents and references are used, among others, as a basis for the seismic qualification:

UFSAR:

Section 3.7 "Seismic Design", Section 3.9 "Mechanical Systems and Components",

Section 3.10 "Seismic Qualification of Category I Instrumentation and Electrical Equipment".

Codes and Standards:

IEEE Standard 344-1975.

IEEE Standard 323-1974.

IEEE Standard 627-1980, Specifications:

OSS -254.00-00-4010 "Design Basis Specification for Seismic Design," Rev. 4.

OSS-0235.00-00-0013, "Procurement Specification for the QA-I Heating and Ventilation System of the Protected Service Water Building". Revision 2.

Regulatory Document:

USNRC R.G. 1.100, Rev 1.

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 62 As QA Condition 1 (QA-1), the PSW mechanical equipment (ME) seismic qualification is governed by the QA program requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix B, and applicable Oconee's procurement, design, fabrication, and installation specifications supplemented by industry codes, standards, and US NRC regulatory guides. Procurement specifications cover the design, fabrication, testing, delivery, and quality assurance documentation of the equipment. Seismic qualification of Class 1 E equipment is governed by detailed requirements stipulated in IEEE Standards 344-1975 and IEEE Standards 323-1974. Class 1-E equipment are identified as essential to emergency reactor shutdown, containment isolation, reactor core cooling, containment and reactor heat removal, and preventing significant release of radioactive material to the environment.

IEEE Standards 344-1975 provide procedures which verify that Class 1-E equipment can meet its performance requirements during and following one SSE preceded by a number of OBE specified seismic events. Section 4 of IEEE 344 details acceptable methods used for seismic qualification as follows:

1. Analysis that would predict equipment performance (safety margins against code allowable for various operating and accident loading conditions).
2. Testing under simulated seismic conditions (for operability, and overall structural integrity determination).
3. Qualification by combined test and analysis.

Choice of qualification method is based on the type, size, shape, and complexity of the equipment and the desired reliability of the conclusion.

IEEE Standard 323-1974, Section 4, lists operating experience as a method of limited use as a sole means of seismic qualification but of great use for supplementation of testing. In addition, Section 6.3.1.5 lists margins (suggested factors) to be applied to service conditions (e.g., temperatures +15°F, pressure +10% ~10 psi, etc.).

For the Duke Energy PSW Project, Mechanical Equipment procurement specifications were issued to Duke Energy approved vendors. These speCifications provided detailed seismic qualification requirements for the vendors to use. It should be noted that the EPS was determined, and used for procurement purposes for mechanical equipment with long lead-times, as the PSW Building response spectra analyses were being performed. When the final enveloped results were created for the operating floor, mezzanine, mid-height of the walls and the roof of the PSW Building, they were compared to the EPS in Appendices AT through AW of OSC-9506, Rev. O. As shown in those plots, the EPS did indeed bound all of the PSW Building locations except for the vertical response at the center of the PSW Building roof.

Wherever the EPS was used for the procurement of mechanical equipment, the procurement specifications included hold points to validate the seismic input(s}. The hold points were removed by either revising the procurement speCification to add the corresponding final envelopes from OSC-9506, Rev. 0 or in some cases deviations to the procurement speCifications were issued with the corresponding final envelopes from OSC-9506, Rev. O. In either case, the equipment that was initially procured using the EPS was qualified using the appropriate seismic in-structure spectra.

In the Duke Energy Response to RAI-141 dated July 20,2012, it was determined that the PSW Building in-structure response spectra, that was Originally included with the

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 63 procurement specifications, required revision. Therefore, the PSW Building was reanalyzed and the results documented in Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1.

As a result of the PSW building reanalysis a reevaluation of the safety related mechanical equipment in the PSW Building was required. An additional seismic capacity versus demand evaluation was performed to verify the seismic capacity of the safety related mechanical equipment located in the PSW Building bounded the new seismic demand listed in OSC-10764 Revision 1. All mechanical equipment was requalified for the appropriate in-structure response spectra in OSC-10764 Revision 1. In cases where the capacity did not completely envelope the new in-structure demand response spectra, either an appropriate engineering justification was made, or the equipment was requalified using the new in-structure response spectra. The final qualification reports for the safety related mechanical equipment, OM 235-0624.001, OM-235-0687.002, and OM-235-0633.002 were revised to include the new seismic evaluation.

The following are examples of qualification by analysis and testing.

Seismic Qualification of Mechanical Equipment Specific Example 1 - Booster Pump in the Auxiliary Building Booster Pump seismic qualification is documented in Report No. PVA 1000294590010-01, Rev. 3. Details seismic testing requirements for any PSW mechanical equipment are provided in pertinent procurement specification. Specification OSS-0208.00-00-0015, "Protected Service Water Booster Pump", Rev. 2 addresses seismic requirements, quality assurance requirements, supplier's documents, test, inspection and conformance with specification.

The seismic qualification analysis of the PSW system Booster Pump was performed using general purpose finite element code ANSYS. A three-dimensional (3-D) Finite Element Model (FEM) detailing mass, stiffness, and bolted connections of various components of the pump, motor and mounting steel frame was developed. The model included contact elements to simulate bolted connections preload conditions and potential separation between contacted surfaces.

A natural frequency analysis was performed on the FEM and the results indicated that all calculated natural frequencies were above the Zero Point Acceleration (ZPA) frequency of 20 Hz. Accordingly, the pump assembly was, therefore, considered rigid and equivalent static analysis method was used to determine effects of OBE and SSE seismic loading conditions. The method includes the use of applicable ZPA accelerations, a static coefficient of 1.5, and the SRSS method to combine seismic responses in the three orthogonal directions (2 horizontal and 1 vertical).

The dead weight, thermal, internal pressure, nozzle loading and Seismic OBE and SSE loads are considered in the qualification of the pump assembly. The detailed calculations have been performed to determine Load/Capacity, (UC) ratios (Le., Calculated/ Allowable) for various pump assembly components (i.e., Casing, Cover, Bearing Housing, Bolting, Base Plate, Rotor Evaluation, Pipe Work and Flange).

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 64 Based on documented results, it is concluded that the capacity, C, of the evaluated components (as specified by the pertinent allowable values) far exceeds the seismic demand (Le., the calculated load, L, values). Therefore, ample margins of safety exist against specified operating and seismic load combinations.

Section 3.1 of Sulzer's seismic analysis report lists applicable OBE seismic response spectra (RS) (where the Booster Pump will be mounted) for the Auxiliary Building, Floor EI.

771', N-S, E-W, and vertical directions. The applicable RS are provided in procurement specification OSS-0208.00-00-0015, Rev. 2 of the PSW Booster Pump.

Specific Example 2 - Greenheck Fan Motor Assemblies in the PSW Building Equipment Tested:

Fan Model No: VAD-24FI7-32-AIO, 1,770 RPM, 24.38" diameter Axial Flow Fan, Direct Drive Baldor Motor, 10 HP TEAO, 575/60/3 Fan Model No. AX41-190-0409-M3, 3,500 RPM, 16.25" diameter Axial Flow Fan, Direct Drive Baldor Motor, 3 HP TEAO, 575/60/3 Applicable Specifications:

Duke Energy Specification No. OSS-0235.00-00-0013, Revision 2, dated September 15, 2010, "Procurement Specification for the QA-I Heating and Ventilation System of the Protected Service Water Building".

Duke OM 235-0687.002, Rev. DC, test report (Vendor report No. EGS-TR-23050-0611-05) documents methodology, procedures and results for environmental and seismic qualification of Commercial Grade (CG) Heating and Ventilation (HV) equipment for nuclear safety-related (QA-I) in use at the PSW Building per the applicable requirements outlined in the IEEE 344-1975 and 323-1974; and Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.100, Revision 1. Specifically, this report documents the seismic/environmental results pertaining to the qualification of the commercial grade Greenheck fan/motor assemblies. The fan/motor assemblies are part of the PSW Building HV system and are designated as Oconee QA Condition, which specifies structures; systems or components (SSC) subject to the quality assurance requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix B.

The two sacrificial fan/motor assemblies were subjected to the seismic qualification testing and pre-and post-seismic operational verification testing per the procedures and requirements outlined in the seismic test procedure of fan/motor assemblies.

The testing was performed at QualTech NP's Cincinnati, Ohio test facility and was witnessed by Bahnson and Flour QA personnel. The test fan/motor assemblies were mounted per test procedure utilizing appropriately sized ASTM-A307 mounting bolts, washers, lock washers and nuts. All bolts were torqued snug-tight.

The fan motors were electrically powered and accelerometers were mounted. Subsequently, the test units were subjected to the following tests:

  • Pre-Seismic Operational/Functional Check
  • Resonance search testing
  • Full-Level Qualification Tests
  • Post-Seismic Operational/Functional Check

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 65 The fan assemblies were tested operational (with nominal 575 VAC applied during the performance of all seismic tests.

No structural deteriorations (such as loose or detached mounting hardware, dislodged motor attachment, cracked welds, loose or detached sub-assemblies or components thereof, loose electrical interface connections etc.) were detected. Additionally, no physical interference between the fan blades and the fan housing occurred during any of the performed tests and no drift or change in blade pitch occurred as a result of the imposed seismic test environment. The motor assemblies maintained their electrical integrity (fan/motor RPM (s) remained consistent and no deterioration of the Insulation Resistance (IR) occurred.

Therefore, the tested fan/motor assemblies possessed sufficient structural, electrical, and operational integrity, to successfully withstand the imposed OBE-Ievel and full SSE-level simulated seismic environments within the specified acceptance criteria.

The following minimum acceptance criteria apply. There shall not be any loss of:

Structural integrity resulting in mounting detachment of the fan assemblies and/or subcomponents thereof.

Electrical integrity (short or open circuits).

Operational integrity caused by either structural, electrical, or mechanical defects Test setup details, data sheets containing results for the performed pre-and post-seismic operational checks, seismic test summary including data plots and photographs are documented in the Appendix I of this report.

Based on the seismic test results documented in this test report, the successful qualification of the tested representative sacrificial fan/motor assemblies is extended to include all the PSW production fan/motor assemblies which will be delivered for use at the PSW Building.

An additional study was performed in Appendix V of this report to address qualification of fan/motor assemblies for the applicable In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra from OSC-10764, Rev.1. This study verified that the applicable new in-structure response spectra from OSC-10764, Revision 1, are bounded by the previous test spectra; therefore, new in-structure response spectra did not negatively impact the seismic qualification of the fan/motor assemblies of HV system in the PSW Building.

III. Seismic Qualification of Equipment Mounting Load combinations and structural design criteria for anchorage of components in the PSW, Auxiliary, and SSF Buildings are given in Duke Energy specification OSS-0292.00-00-0001, Specification for Design and Implementation Support of the Protected Service Water System, for SSE and OBE earthquakes.

Methodology:

All Buildings Attachments are Nuclear Safety Related Seismic analysis of the attachment of electrical equipment uses a static coefficient factor of 1.5 for new designs.

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 66 The design of concrete expansion anchors used to attach new and/or existing equipment are in accordance with specifications OSS-0020.00-00-0004, Specification for the Design, Installation and Inspection of Concrete Expansion Anchors, and OSS-0020.00-00-0006, Specification for the Design, Installation, and Inspection of Hilti Concrete Expansion Anchors.

PSW Building and Auxiliary Building Attachment of equipment is evaluated for worst-case resultant seismic loads by summing forces/moments produced by the vertical seismic acceleration and the controlling horizontal (east/west or north/south) seismic acceleration based on acceleration magnitude and attachment geometry. (See Section 3.7.2.5 of the Oconee UFSAR)

Critical damping values (used for the seismic analysis of the attachment of new and/or eXisting equipment) are as specified in Section 3.7.1.3 of the Oconee UFSAR.

For PSW building seismic equipment mounting qualification, the in-structure response spectra documented in OSC-9506, Rev. 0 was utilized. Following the Duke Energy Response to RAI-141 dated July 20,2012, it was determined that the PSW Building in-structure response spectra, that was originally used in the PSW building equipment mounting calculations, required revision. Therefore, the PSW Building was reanalyzed and the results documented in Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1. As a result of the PSW building reanalysis a re-evaluation of the PSW building equipment mounting was required. All pertinent equipment mounting calculations (See Table I) were revised to verify the original seismic design load (Le., peak acceleration of appropriate in-structure response spectra) of existing equipment anchorage located in the PSW Building bounded the new seismic load listed in OSC-10764 Revision 1. In cases where the original design load did not completely envelope the new seismic load in OSC-10764, Rev. 1, the equipment mounting was re-qualified using the peak acceleration of the new in-structure response spectra.

SSF Building The seismic analysis of the attachment of equipment is performed in accordance with Section 6.3.8 of specification OSS-0176.00-00-0002, Design Specification for Standby Shutdown Facility and shall be evaluated for worst-case resultant seismic loads obtained by the square-root-of-the-sum-of-the-square (SRSS) of forces/moments produced by all three components of earthquake motion: vertical acceleration and both horizontal (east/west and north/south) accelerations. (Regulatory Guide 1.92, Revision 1 and Sections 9.6.3.1 and 9.6.4.3 of the Oconee UFSAR).

Structural Acceptance Criteria:

PSW Building Subsection 11.5 of SRP Section 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2 Aux. Building Section 20.2.3 of OSS-0254.00-00-3007, Design Basis Specification for the Auxiliary Building

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 Apri15, 2013 SSF Building Page 67 Section 4.2.1 of OSS-0176.00-00-0002, Design Specification for Standby Shutdown Facility Loads and Load Combinations:

PSW Building Dead loads consist of the weight of the structure plus all equipment and materials permanently fastened to, and supported by, the structure/component.

Live loads are the loads produced by the use and occupancy of the building or structure.

They include the weight of all movable loads, including personnel, tools, miscellaneous equipment, movable partitions, cranes, hoists, parts of dismantled equipment, and stored material.

Seismic in-structure response spectra as specified in OSC-10764, Revision 1. Critical damping values as specified in Section 3.7.1.3 of the Oconee UFSAR. Components of earthquake motion applied as specified in Section 3.7.2.5 of the Oconee UFSAR.

Load Combinations are as specified in NUREG-800, SRP 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2.

Aux. Building Sections 20.2.1 and 20.2.2of OSS-0254.00-00-3007, Design Basis Specification for the Auxiliary Building SSF Building Section 6.2.1 of OSS-0176.00-00-0002, Design Specification for Standby Shutdown Facility Codes and Standards:

PSW Building Structural steel and plates: Subsection 11.2 of Standard Review Plan (SRP) Section 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2 (Le., ANSI/AISC N690-1984 as supplemented by Appendix F of SRP Section 3.8.4)

Anchoring components and structural supports in concrete: Subsection C of Regulatory Guide 1.199 (i.e., Appendix B (February 2001) to ACI 349-01 as supplemented by Regulatory Guide 1.199)

Aux. Building Section 20.2.4 of OSS-0254.00-00-3007, Design Basis Specification for the Auxiliary Building SSF Building Section 4.3.1 of OSS-0176.00-00-0002, Design Specification for Standby Shutdown Facility

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5,2013 Examples:

PSW Building Page 68 OSC-9818, "PSW Battery and Battery Racks 0 PSW BC CPSW001 and 0 PSW CPSW002 Seismic Mounting Qualification," Revision 1.

Auxiliary Building OSC-9357, "Terminal Cabinet 1 PSWCA0001 Seismic Mounting Qualification,"

Revision O.

SSF Building OSC-1371, "Seismic Mounting of Electrical Equipment for the Standby Shutdown Facility," Revision 33.

RAJ #161 Discuss the method of seismic qualification of DC batteries associated with the PSW system and the supporting battery rack structure(s). Describe the procedures used to account for possible amplification of vibratory motion through the battery rack structure.

Duke Energy Response:

DC Batteries and Battery Racks for the PSW system are located in two adjacent Battery Rooms in the PSW building. The method of Seismic Qualification of electrical equipment is discussed generically within the Duke Energy Response to RAI-160. The requirements for procurement of the Batteries and Battery Racks were documented in OSS-0320.00-00-0023 "Specification for the Design, Fabrication and Testing of the QA-1, 125 VDC Batteries for the Protected Service Water (PSW) System", Rev 1 with Deviations 1 and 2. The equipment vendor C&D Technologies (C&D),

performed the seismic qualification and supplied both a Test Plan and Final Report per Deviation 2 in C&D Report QR-2312237 "Seismic & Environmental Qualification Report of 125 Volt DC LCY-39 Batteries & 2-Step Battery Racks", Rev 4 which was filed as an Oconee vendor manual.

The vendor manual number is OM 320.-0239.001 "PSW - Seismic & Environmental Qualification Report of 125VDC LCY-39 Batteries & 2-Step Battery Racks", Rev 4.

Qualification was by similarity to previous shake table testing in accordance with IEEE 344-1975.

The previous shake table test, performed by Wyle Laboratories and documented in Report 43450-1, "Seismic Simulation Test Program on a Battery Rack and Batteries", dated December 7, 1976, is contained in Attachment 2 of QR-2312237. This test used a similar 2-Step Battery Rack and was fully loaded with naturally aged, artificially aged and un-aged batteries of various ratings. Any test anomalies were documented and justified within the body of the 43450-1 report. Any differences between the previously tested batteries and battery racks and PSW production Batteries and Battery Racks were justified fully within the QR-2312237 report.

The in-structure response spectra for the PSW Battery Room were specified in Deviation 1 of OSS-0320.00-00-0023 Rev 1. C&D performed a comparison of the Test Response Spectrum (TRS) from the previous test in 43450-1 against this Required Response Spectrum (RRS), after adjusting for both the 10% margin required by IEEE 323-1974, and to account for a weight difference between the tested and supplied Batteries and Battery Racks. The TRS vs. RRS for the Safety Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) is shown in Figure 161.1 and Figure 161.2 (Note: Figures 161.1 and 161.2 provided in the RAI #161 supplemental information section of the attachment to

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 69 the July 20,2012 RAI response letter). The small excursion in Figure 161.2 where the TRS did not fully envelope the RRS is justified within QR-2312237 as being acceptable as the batteries and battery racks are not dynamically responsive at low frequency.

The testing consisted of five Operational Basis Earthquake (OBE) tests followed by an SSE test.

The battery cells were connected in series to a resistive load and monitored during all phases of the test program. The battery output voltage and current were recorded on an oscillograph recorder to determine electrical continuity, current and voltage levels, and to detect any spurious operation during seismic testing. There are no moving contacts in the batteries or battery racks that would necessitate chatter monitoring. The test program was conducted in two separate specimen orientations at 0 and 90 degrees due the bi-axial independent motion seismic table with phase in-coherent vertical and horizontal inputs.

The batteries and battery racks were subjected to pre-and post-seismic functional testing as well as monitoring during the shake table testing. A summary of the results is listed in Section 5.7 of QR-2312237.

An additional capacity versus demand comparison was performed in Oconee Calculation OSC-10824, "Evaluation of New In-Structure Response Spectra for the PSW Building on Electrical Equipment Qualification," Revision O. This verified that the new in-structure response spectrum (ISRS) from Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1, Appendix AX and A Y did not negatively impact the seismic qualification of the DC Batteries and Battery Racks located in the PSW Building.

RAI #162 Discuss the methodology, the industry codes and standards, the level of earthquake, and the acceptance criteria used for the structural design of the battery rack structure and its anchorages.

Duke Energy Response:

1. Seismic Qualification of Electrical Equipment The battery racks were seismically qualified by seismic shake table testing and dynamic similarity in accordance with IEEE 344-1975 as discussed in the Duke Energy response to RAI-161. Because analysis was not used for this equipment qualification, the development methodology or industry codes and standards used by C & D Technologies, Inc (C&D) are not required as part of this qualification. This is acceptable because the structural design of the battery racks was successfully challenged via proof testing in accordance with IEEE 344-1975. The level of earthquake and acceptance criteria are discussed in the Duke Energy Response to RAI-161 (from the RAI response letter dated July 11, 2012).
2. Anchorage Load combinations and structural design criteria for anchorage of the Battery Racks in the PSW Building are given in ONS speCification OSS-0292.00-00-0001, "Specification for Design and Implementation Support of the Protected Service Water System, for SSE and OBE earthquakes."

Methodology:

Buildings

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Attachments are QA-1.

Page 70 Seismic analysis of the attachment of electrical equipment uses a static coefficient factor of 1.5 for new designs.

The design of concrete expansion anchors used to attach new and/or existing equipment are in accordance with existing Oconee anchor design specifications.

Attachment of equipment is evaluated for worst-case resultant seismic loads by summing forces/moments produced by the vertical seismic acceleration and the controlling horizontal (east/west or north/south) seismic acceleration based on acceleration magnitude and attachment geometry (See Section 3.7.2.5 of the Oconee UFSAR).

Critical damping values (used for the seismic analysis of the attachment of new and/or existing equipment) are as specified in Section 3.7.1.3 of the Oconee UFSAR.

Welds to embedded plates were specified by the vendor and confirmed within calculation OSC-9818, "PSW Battery and Battery Racks 0 PSW BC CPSW001 and 0 PSW CPSW002 Seismic Mounting Qualification," to be conservative.

Structural Acceptance Criteria:

Subsection 11.5 of SRP Section 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2.

Loads and Load Combinations:

Dead loads consist of the weight of the structure plus all equipment and materials permanently fastened to, and supported by, the structure/component.

Seismic design response spectra as specified in OSC-9506, "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building."

Note: Following the Duke Energy Response to RAI-141 dated July 20,2012, it was determined that the PSW Building in-structure response spectra, that was originally used in the PSW building equipment mounting calculations,OSC-9506 required revision.

Therefore, the PSW Building was reanalyzed and the results documented in Oconee Calculation OSC-10764 "Generation of SSE In-Structure Seismic Response Spectra for the PSW Building," Revision 1. As a result of this reanalysis a re-evaluation of the PSW Building equipment mounting was completed. All pertinent equipment mounting calculations were reviewed and/or revised to verify the original seismic design load (Le.,

peak acceleration of appropriate in-structure response spectra) of existing equipment anchorage located in the PSW Building bounded the new seismic load listed in OSC-10764 Revision 1. This re-evaluation included OSC-9818, "PSW Battery and Battery Racks 0 PSW BC CPSW001 and 0 PSW CPSW002 Seismic Mounting Qualification." In the re-evaluation of OSC-9818 it was determined that the accelerations documented in OSC-10764, revision 1, when increased by the static coefficient factor of 1.5 were bounded by the original acceleration values used in OSC-9818, revision 0, where a static coefficient factor of 1.0 was used.

Load Combinations are as specified in NUREG-800, SRP 3.8.4, [DRAFT] Revision 2.

Codes and Standards:

Structural steel and plates: Subsection 11.2 of Standard Review Plan (SRP) Section 3.8.4, DRAFT Revision 2 (Le., ANSI/AISC N690-1984 as supplemented by Appendix F of SRP Section 3.8.4).

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April5, 2013 Page 71 Anchoring components and structural supports in concrete: Subsection C of Regulatory Guide 1.199 (Le., Appendix B (February 2001) to ACI 349-01 as supplemented by Regulatory Guide 1.199).

RAI #168:

RAI-139 requested design inputs (01) (including loads and load combinations) for HVAC system components and component supports, ductwork and duct supports. The response to RAI-139(b),

in reference to HVAC, shows loads and load combinations considered for HVAC supports only.

Please provide requested design inputs for PSW System credited HVAC system ductwork and components (such as AHUs, Fans, AC refrigeration units etc) and component supports.

Duke Energy Response:

Similar to the response for RAI-139(b) the Structural Design Input Loads and Load Combinations for the HVAC System (Refer to Specification OSS-0235.00-00-0013, "Procurement Specification for the QA-1 Heating and Ventilation System of the Protected Service Water Building", Rev 2.)

Normal:

OW Upset:

DW+/- OBE Faulted:

Where:

RAI #169:

DW+/- SSE OW = Deadweight of ductwork, fans, mountings, insulation, miscellaneous, and attachments.

OBE = Operating Base Earthquake loading determined by multiplying the appropriate OBE acceleration by the participating mass.

SSE = Safe Shutdown Earthquake loading determined by multiplying the appropriate SSE acceleration by the participating mass.

RAI-138 requested the following: "Identify the codes and code edition utilized for the structural design of the HVAC system components and component supports, ducts and duct supports and whether these codes are in the ONS CLB or current design basis (COB). If these codes are not in the ONS CLB or COB, please provide the basis for justifying use of these codes."

The response to RAI-138 provides the requested information for HVAC duct supports, but not for HVAC system components or ducts.

Enclosure - Responses to Request for Additional Information - Supplement 4 April 5, 2013 Page 72 The response to RAI-138 states that "For details on the codes and editions used for the qualification of HVAC equipment, see the response to RAJ 160." Review of the response to RAI-160 shows that it does not include HVAC.

The response to RAI-62 designated standard ASME AG-1, 2003 as the Code for HVAC system design. The response to RAI-138, for the design of HVAC ducts, makes reference to the SMACNA HVAC Duct Construction Standards - Metal and Flexible, 2005. Please provide clarification and verify which HVAC codes have been utilized for the PSW system credited HVAC system ductwork and components (such as AHUs, Fans, AC refrigeration units etc) and component supports. If these codes are not in the ONS CL8 or CD8, please provide the basis for justifying use of these codes.

Duke Energy Response:

The PSW System utilizes ASME AG-1, 2003 for the HVAC System Ductwork and ductwork components such as AHUs and fans. AC refrigeration is Non-QA and no HVAC codes are utilized. Ductwork supports utilize American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) 6th Edition with material properties from other editions.

The Code and Code Edition used for the design of the safety related HVAC system is ASME AG-1, 2003, Code on Nuclear Air and Gas Treatment. Use of this ASME code revision is justified by comparison of it with ASME AG-1, 1997. ASME AG-1, 1997 was endorsed by the NRC in Regulatory Guide 1.52 revision 3 and Regulatory Guide 1.140 revision 2. It is also included in the Westinghouse AP1 000 application that has been accepted by the NRC.

Comparison of ASME AG-1, 2003 to ASME AG-1, 1997 was made by a line by line review of the sections that are applicable to the design of the PSW building HVAC system, ductwork and ductwork components.

Two reference documents listed in ASME AG-1, 2003 are shown as later revisions than what is listed in ASME AG-1, 1997. These documents are ASME 831.1 Power Piping, 1988 and ASME NQA-1 Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facilities, 2000. Even though later versions of these documents are referenced, the content in both AG-1 1997 and 2003 was reviewed entirely for purposes of the aforementioned line by line comparison. Therefore, direct reference(s) to content in either ASME 831.1 Power Piping or ASME NQA-1 Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facilities was evaluated as part of the comparison.

In Section CA Conditioning Equipment, ASTM A90 and ASTM A653 standards for zinc coated materials were added. Also reference to ASTM A525 was superseded by ASTM A653 and editorial change to replace reference from ASME NQA-1 to ASME NQA-2.

The remaining differences identified were editorial in nature and have no technical impact on the PSW ductwork design. Examples of these differences are: change in spacing, replacing words with their mathematical symbol, changing phraSing to better convey meaning, renumbering paragraphs, tables and figures, adding publisher names and addresses, and author's names to references.

The sections of ASME AG-1, 1997 applicable to the design of the PSW HVAC systems were not changed by the 2003 revision. Therefore, use of ASME AG-1, 2003 in lieu of ASME AG-1, 1997 is acceptable.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML13123A159&oldid=5238109"