CSCFFF Seismic Imppgrovement Program

Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3 © 2013 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC. All Rights Reserved.

C SCFFF Seismic Improvement Programp g

January 8 2013January 8, 2013

1


Agendag

• Problem and solution statements • Objectives• Objectives• Scope of work• Milestone scheduleMilestone schedule• Structural Analysis• Summaryy

2


Problem and Solution Statements

• Problem Statement– Compliance with license performance requirements from seismic initiated– Compliance with license performance requirements from seismic initiated

events is not clearly documented given the code of record for the forty year old facility (URI’s).

• Solution StatementSolution Statement– CFFF will analyze the current condition. A team of seismic experts will

perform a detailed engineering study using NUREG 1520 recommended methodology. The seismic improvement plan will be created based on that analysis. Results will also be incorporated into CFFF Integrated Safety Analysis. A report will be prepared and available for NRC review:– Which CFFF building and equipment upgrades are necessary.– Which CFFF buildings and equipment will follow a mitigation strategy.

– It is expected that upgrades will be implemented over multiple years.

3


Objectivesj

1. Create the CFFF Seismic Improvement Plan to address regulatory requirements:q– Determine assessment methodology– Complete investigation on codes of record for the facility– Apply methodology to assess buildings and equipmentApply methodology to assess buildings and equipment

– Identify buildings and equipment for upgrades– Update the investment plan (capital, expense and manufacturing development) and

resource plan to support upgrades and the off site equipment initiative. – Develop a mitigation strategy. Where upgrades are not feasible potentially request a

license exemption.

– Address Unresolved Issues (URI’s) from NRC inspection– Current License Condition S-7; The licensee shall complete additional

enhancements to the structural and seismic response analysis and related criticality safety evaluations by January 31, 2014.

4


Objectivesj

2. Update documentationIntegrated Safety Analysis (ISA)– Integrated Safety Analysis (ISA)

– Plant Procedures– FSS-014–Seismic Engineering Design Criteria

RA 133 EH&S M j H d R i d S f t B i St t f P j t– RA-133–EH&S Major Hazards Review and Safety Basis Strategy for Projects– Emergency Response Procedures

3. Review revised safety basis with the NRC3. Review revised safety basis with the NRC4. Perform any required upgrades

– Request funding and supplemental resources I l t d ( t ti l lti l )– Implement upgrades (potential multiple years )

5


Program ResourcesCFFF S i i I t U d TCFFF Seismic Improvement Upgrade Team

• CFFF seismic improvement team has the right expertise to complete the CFFF program with excellenceCFFF program with excellence– Experienced, certified Program Manager with extensive experience in

managing large complex programs for CFFFFour seismic team members from Nuclear Safety Associates are experts in– Four seismic team members from Nuclear Safety Associates are experts in developing seismic plans

– Applicable NRC Regulations and DOE Standards– Seismic failure probability of critical equipment using equipment fragilities basedSeismic failure probability of critical equipment using equipment fragilities based

on experience from past earthquakes– Seismic, structural, and dynamic impact analyses– Seismic analysis of facilities & components

– CFFF engineers are experienced designing and building equipment– Experienced safety analysis staff

6


Scope of WorkA l i O i DiAnalysis Overview Diagram

7


Scope of WorkMil t S h d lMilestone Schedule

Item Description Due Date1 Determine seismic category (PC) Aug 20121 Determine seismic category (PC) Aug 20122 Building code evaluation and comparison Sep 20123 Identify emergency preparedness upgrades Nov 20124 Complete structural analysis of building Dec 20126 Complete evaluation of equipment Feb 20137 Draft seismic program plan Mar 20138 Decision point – upgrade, mitigate or request exemption Apr 20139 Submit resource and funding request Finalize seismic Apr 20139 Submit resource and funding request. Finalize seismic

improvement plan.Apr 2013

10 Update plant safety basis Feb–Dec 2013

11 Finalize revised safety basis to NRC (exemption requests possible) Jan 2014

12 NRC approval CY 2014

8


Structural Analysisy

• Follow NUREG-1520 approachDOE STD 1020 2002 d fi PC 1 t PC 4 l i i t• DOE-STD-1020-2002 defines PC-1 to PC-4 analysis requirements– PC-1 & 2 are code design/analysis

– Code uses Importance Factor (I)– PC-1 typical bldg I = 1.0– PC-2 essential facility I > 1.0

• ISA Methodology & DOE-STD- GUIDANCE used to determine PC gy• Determine & document bldg PC (=> PC-2)

– All CFFF Buildings with SNM are PC-2

9



Building Code Edition Used in Design of Seismic Base Shear, V

Standard Building Code (SBC)

1965 Original Main Plant (1968) -

1976 1978 Expansion 0.05W1986 1986 Addition 0.0675W1986 1986 Addition 0.0675W

International Building Code (IBC)

2000/03 0.174W2006/09 0.176W

2012 0.144W

• Kl/r Discussion Adopt “direct analysis” approach Presented in AISC 13th and 14th Editions, code acceptedI t d “ li l i ” th d• Introduces “nonlinear analysis” method– Considers geometric nonlinearity, not material nonlinearity– Will introduce some analysis complications but all are tolerable

10



• Evaluate original code seismic requirements & compare to current regulatory seismic requirementsregulatory seismic requirements– Codes use pseudo-static approach– Current requirements (IBC 2012)

E th k d b bilit 2% i 50 0 0004 l 2500– Earthquake exceedance probability, 2% in 50 yrs => 0.0004 annual, 2500 yr return period (for PC-1)

– Added IBC 2012 because SC in process of adopting

• Comparison of SBC (the design code) and IBC (the evaluation code)• Comparison of SBC (the design code) and IBC (the evaluation code)– Base shear (V) = coefficients*W = % bldg weight (W)– Base shear (V) = ZKCW or ZIKCSW (SBC)– Base shear (V) = Cs W where Cs = SDS/(R/I) (IBC)

11


Structural Analysisy● Main Bldg

– Actually 2 buildings – split at column line 9 & 9x y g p– 2-D Models – Modeled 4 column lines– 3-D Models – Modeled North & South buildings

● 1978 Expansion● 1978 Expansion– Actually 5 buildings – identified as 1 to 5

– 3-D Models – Modeled all 5 buildings

● 1986 Addition● 1986 Addition– 2 buildings – identified as SW & SE

– 3-D Models – Modeled SW & SE, both models are integrated with South main bldg modelmain bldg model

● Evaluated individual structural members– Roof equipment weights – additions to roof will be limited in the future.

12


Summary and Conclusiony

• CFFF Seismic Improvement Program status summary– All plant areas containing nuclear material are PC-2All plant areas containing nuclear material are PC 2– Building structure analysis complete.

– All CFFF buildings will survive the earthquake criteria defined in the IBC 2012 Standard for essential facilities.

– Plant Documentation will be upgraded – Relevant Plant Procedures– Engineering Seismic Design Criteriag g g

– Critical equipment analysis underway– CFFF Seismic Program on schedule– Seismic Upgrades will be implemented on a priority basis over theSeismic Upgrades will be implemented on a priority basis over the

next few years– No additional actions are required for NPH other than seismic.

13


NCSIP-II Status Updatep

• NRC Inspection – Westinghouse geometry control methodology unacceptablep

• Westinghouse discussions with NRC led to understanding• Westinghouse developed new methodology to demonstrate sub-

criticality by geometry (Sept 2012)criticality by geometry (Sept 2012)• Westinghouse revised CSE procedure and NCS manual to incorporate

new methodology (Sept 2012)All 120 CSE i d 52 i l ti ith th d l• All 120 CSEs reviewed - 52 require re-evaluation with new methodology

• Revision incorporated into ongoing NCSIP2 program• Revised schedule (December 2014)

14

© 2013 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC. All Rights Reserved.Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3

NCSIP II Schedule StatusNCSIP-II Schedule Status

15

© 2013 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC. All Rights Reserved.Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3

Natural Phenomenon HazardsNatural Phenomenon Hazards Backup Details

16


Code Comparison – The Detailsp

17


Main Bldg – Column Scheduleg

18


Main Bldg: 3-D Model North Bldgg g

N

19


Kl/r Discussion – AISC 6th Code

20


Project Resourcesj

• CFFF Seismic Plan Upgrade Program requires specialized seismic expertise:expertise:– NUREG-1520 approach in using DOE-STD-1020– In structural analysis and seismic evaluation of existing buildings

• The NSA Team has all of the required expertise– Dr. Frank Hand, PE–NSA PM and DOE-STD-1020 and natural

phenomena hazards (NPH) subject matter expert– Sam Swan, PE–Seismic failure probability of critical equipment using

equipment fragilities based on experience from past earthquakes– Tony Chung, PE–Seismic, structural, and dynamic impact analyses– Dr. Robert Stephenson, PHD, PE–Seismic analysis of facilities &

components

21


Scope of Work (Cont.) D t i E th k FDetermine Earthquake Frequency

• Correlate original code design value to a return periodto a return period

• Scale return period based on base shear (V)

U i ti d l th– Use existing or develop the appropriate curve for CFFF

22


Key NUREG-1520 Phrasesy• Page 3-D-2

– The staff believes that many existing facilities can be shown to be in compliance with, or at least near compliance with, the performance requirements of the regulation by accounting for conservatisms in the seismic, flooding, and wind design of the facility. In addition, relatively minor engineered improvements and administrative measures may furtherengineered improvements and administrative measures may further enhance safety, at least with respect to the public and other offsite receptors.

• Page 3-D-7Page 3 D 7– For existing facilities, due credit should be given to analysis assumptions

and administrative controls, emergency procedures, and active engineered controls that do not change the design bases of the facility structures to natural phenomena. If the ISA and ISA Summary demonstrate that the existing facility is near compliance (within an order of magnitude of a likelihood threshold or within 50 percent of meeting a consequence threshold but not both) an exemption to the regulation may be considered

23

threshold, but not both), an exemption to the regulation may be considered.

CSCFFF Seismic Imppgrovement Program

Documents