ML17309A393
| ML17309A393 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 12/12/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17309A392 | List: |
| References | |
| IEB-80-11, NUDOCS 8701060372 | |
| Download: ML17309A393 (9) | |
Text
SG006882 I
Current as of 1998/05/06 Page 1 of 2
g% WE P
~4 0
4
~
~
I n
4
+
0 4*py4 UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON,D. C. 20S55 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE'F NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO YiASONRY MALL DESIGN IE BULLETIN 80-11 FOR FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-18 ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORA: ION R.
E.
GINNA NUCLEAR POMER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-244
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The findings reported in this Safety Evaluation (SE) are based on the attached Technical Evaluation Report (TER), Attachment 1,
prepared by Franklin Research Center (FRC) as a contractor to NRC.
This TER contains the details of construction techniques, technical information reviewed, acceptance criteria, and technical findings with respect to masonry wall construction at the Ginna plant.
The staff has reviewed this TER and concurs with its technical findings.
2.0 DISCUSSION The following is our suIInIary of the major technical findings:
1.
The licensee has identified 37 (subdivided into 56 wall panels) safety-related walls at the Ginna plant.
Thirty-one wall panels have been qualified (after some modifications) on the basis of the linear elastic working stress cri'teria which comply with.the intent of the staff acceptance criteria (Appendix A of the TER).
As discussed in item 2 below, ten wall panels have been qualified using a nonlinear analysis technique.
One wall panel is no longer considered safety related as its failure has no safety implications.
The remaining fourteen panels are scheduled for modifications as discussed in item 3.
The seismic loading used in the reevaluation is based on the seismic analysis conducted in the Systematic Evaluation Program.
2.
Ten wall panels in the control building have been analyzed using a
nonlinear approach.
This approach is similar to the one used in the San Onofre 1 masonry wall evaluation and reviewed by the staff earlier (Ref.
11 of the TER).
Additional correlation studies were performed by the licensee to demonstrate better correlation between the results from the nonlinear analysis approach and the test results
- RG006882*
QG006882 Current as of 1998/05/06 I
Page 2 of 2
obtained from the San Onofre l test program.
As discussed in Appendix C of the TER, based on the correlation study, it is concluded that the nonlinear analysis approach is acceptable for the Ginna wall evaluation.
The results of the nonlinear analysis indicate that the ductility demand for the Ginna walls is quite low and steel and masonry strains are well below the acceptance limits.
Therefore, it is concluded that ten wall panels in the control building qualified by the nonlinear analysis approach are adequate to withstand the out-of-plane effects of the seismic loading.
3.
The licensee has committed to modify 14,wall panels which currently do not meet the acceptance criteria.
The licensee's approach to modification consists of protecting the safety-related equipment from Falling blocks.
3 ~ 0 CONC! USION Based on the above findings and the licensee's commitment, the staff concludes that items 2(b) and 3 of IE Bulletin 80-ll have been fully implemented at Ginna plant and that there is a reasonable assurance that the safety-related masonry walls at Ginna will withstand the specified design load conditions without impairment of (a) wall integrity or (b) the performance of the required safety functions.
4' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Principal Contributors:
N ~ Chokshi N ~
Romney OEC1a 888
yl
ATTACHIVIENT FOR QUESTION 4 7
fNI,S I fNCNN
$)1Ntlfa StNfg gttt
>j',SN I N f
/IISamyhhl gt Sl(%$ 16hmm Snttttbtg eh St,bmk KlllefhmIIIrttitthgCtturlt, gt,lhSt,yhmhe 14-18, MB NeilP.
SQUG Chairman old A Freed, MPR Associates SQUG Training Coordinator Robert P. Kassawara, EPRI SQUG Program Manager
AAb AA6 AAb AO Ab AA6 AA6 AA6 AAd AAO AAb AA6 AAd
, ~~+
~Cc
~~+
c~~
~pc c~
+
'~Cc
~Zc David A Freed, MPR Assocht SQUG Training Coordinata
...,,.EI RI Research Institute
~
fN 8 8 I,'NIIij,l EIIIs ts fa StfttfytIIttf 4~NN r Ni IItts Satttttishit tiis Sstsltt:3$ KAitit-aNSrttININtiIIIaNrst gsltt Nfttrdi3-4, 1RB Robert P. Kassawara, EPRl SQUG Program Manager 0
~~+
0
$>~
+
~~+
&3~
sp~
+
r o V<o V<o V<<, V<o V< o V>o V<o V<o V<e V<o V< <,V> e V< ex
ATTACHMENT FOR QUESTION 4 8