L-2013-265, Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident - 1.5 Year Response for CEUS Sites

Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident - 1.5 Year Response for CEUS Sites

ML13267A162
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	09/09/2013
From:	Kiley M Florida Power & Light Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L-2013-265
Download: ML13267A162 (11)

Text

September 9, 2013 PL L-2013-265 FPL.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn.: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Re: Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251 Florida Power & Light Company's, Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident - 1.5 Year Response for CEUS Sites

References:

1. NRC Letter, Request for Information Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendations 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3, of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident, dated March 12, 2012, ML12053A340

2. NRC Letter, Endorsement of Electric Power Research Institute Final Draft Report 1025287, "Seismic Evaluation Guidance," dated February 15, 2013, ML12319A074

3. EPRI Report 1025287, Seismic Evaluation Guidance: Screening, Prioritization and Implementation Details (SPID) for the Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic, November 2012, ML12333A170

4. NEI Letter to NRC, Proposed Path Forward for NTTF Recommendation 2.1: Seismic Reevaluations, dated April 9, 2013, ML13101A254

5. NRC Letter, EPRI Final Draft Report XXXXXX, "Seismic Evaluation Guidance:

Augmented Approach for the Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic," as an Acceptable Alternative to the March 12, 2012, Information Request for Seismic Reevaluations, dated May 7, 2013, ML13106A331 On March 12, 2012, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Reference 1 to all power reactor licensees and holders of construction permits in active or deferred status. Enclosure 1 of Reference 1 requested each addressee in the Central and Eastern United States (CEUS) to submit a written response consistent with the requested seismic hazard evaluation information (items 1 through 7) by September 12, 2013.

,40o) p... . .

r9lor76 9760 S.W.ower 344MS Se Hometad, FL 33035 StireetHoetdF305

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 L-2013-265 Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251 Page 2 of 2 On February 15, 2013, NRC issued Reference 2, endorsing the Reference 3 industry guidance for responding to the request outlined in Reference 1. Section 4 of Reference 3 identifies the detailed information to be included in the seismic hazard evaluation submittals.

On April 9, 2013, NEI submitted Reference 4 to NRC, requesting NRC agreement to delay submittal of some of the CEUS seismic hazard evaluation information so that an update to the EPRI (2004, 2006) ground motion attenuation model could be completed and used to develop that information. NEI proposed that descriptions of subsurface materials and properties and base case velocity profiles (items 3a and 3b in Section 4 of Reference 3) be submitted to NRC by September 12, 2013, with the remaining seismic hazard and screening information submitted to NRC by March 31, 2014. In Reference 5, NRC agreed with this recommendation.

The enclosure to this letter contains the requested descriptions of subsurface materials and properties and base case velocity profiles for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4. The information provided in the enclosure is considered an interim product of the seismic hazard development efforts being performed for the industry by EPRI. The complete and final seismic hazard reports for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 will be provided to the NRC in the Turkey Point seismic hazard submittal by March 31, 2014 in accordance with Reference 5.

This letter contains no new regulatory commitments.

Should you have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact Mr. Robert J. Tomonto, Turkey Point Licensing Manager, at (305) 246-7327.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on September _, 2013 Sincerely, Michael Kiley Site Vice President Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Enclosure cc: USNRC Regional Administrator, Region II USNRC Project Manager, Turkey Point Nuclear Plant USNRC Senior Resident Inspector, Turkey Point Nuclear Plant

L-2013-265 Enclosure Florida Power & Light Company's Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f)

Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident - 1.5 Year Response for CEUS Sites Page 1 of 9

L-2013-265 Enclosure The information presented in this document provides the necessary information described in items 3.a. "Description of Subsurface Materials and Properties," and 3.b. "Development of Base Case Profiles and Nonlinear Material Properties" of Section 4 of Reference 6 listed below. The basic information used to create the site geological profile at the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station is shown in Table 1. This profile was developed using information documented in Reference 1 below, which is a combination of data from the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Updated Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), the FSAR for the COL Application for Units 6 and 7, and other related design information. The following near-surface material characteristics were used in developing the geological profiles:

The subsurface soils at the site consist of a limerock fill, sand and silt fill layer, underlain by limerock.

Description Elevation ft MLW Very dense limerock, sand, and silt fill +18 to - 5 Limestone, sand and silt fill - 5 to -10 Fossiliferous limerock (Miami Oolite) -10 to -35 The geophysical survey indicated the following two basic units for the subsurface conditions:

Description Elevation ft MLW Limerock fill +18 to -10 Miami Oolite -10 to -35 The Turkey Point SSE Control Point is defined at elevation +18 ft, so the profile was modeled to include the above description of near-surface materials. Table 2 shows the thicknesses, depths, and shear-wave velocities (Vs) for the layers, which were derived from this information.

Specifically:

" The highest geologic unit in the profile is the Limerock fill (described above), which is 28 ft in thickness (from depth 0 ft to 28 ft) and is modeled with a best-estimate Vs of 1400 fps.

" The next lower geologic unit is Miami Oolite (described above), which is 25 ft thick (from depth 28 ft to 53 ft) and is modeled with a best-estimate Vs of 2300 fps. The bottom of this unit is at elevation -35 ft (see above description).

Page 2 of 9

L-2013-265 Enclosure

" The next lower geologic unit is the Key Largo formation of Table 1, which extends from elevation -35 ft (the bottom of the Miami Oolite above) to -49.4 ft (which is the elevation of the top of Stratum 4 in Table 1). This 14 ft thick unit is modeled in Table 2 with Vs of 5800 fps (following Table 1).

" Stratum 4 in Table 1, the Ft. Thompson formation, extends from elevation -49.4 ft to -

115.1 ft, a thickness of 65.7 ft, and this is modeled in Table 2 with a best-estimate Vs of 4250 fps (following Table 1).

" Stratum 5 in Table 1, the Upper Tamiami unit, extends from elevation -115.1 ft to -159 ft, a thickness of 43.9 ft, and this is modeled in Table 2 with a best-estimate Vs of 1400 fps (following Table 1).

• Stratum 6 in Table 1, the Lower Tamiami unit, extends from elevation -159 ft to -215.2 ft, a thickness of 56.2 ft, and this is modeled in Table 2 with a best-estimate Vs of 1600 fps (following Table 1).

" Stratum 7 in Table 1, the Peace River unit, extends from elevation -215.2 ft to -452.1 ft, a thickness of 236.9 ft, and this is modeled in Table 2 with a best-estimate Vs of 1650 fps (following Table 1).

• Stratum 8 in Table 1, the Arcadia unit, begins at elevation -452.1 ft and is modeled with a thickness of 244.7 ft, down to a depth of 714.3 ft. This unit is modeled in Table 2 with a best-estimate Vs of 3600 fps (following Table 1).

" For deeper units (below 714 ft depth), the profile is modeled with layers that have monotonically increasing Vs values, down to a depth of about 4000 ft, where the profile is estimated to have Vs of 9285 fps. This interpretation of the deep Vs properties follows general estimates of Vs in Southern Florida as shown in Turkey Point Units 6 and 7 COL Application Figure 2.5.4-211 in Reference 5.

For dynamic properties of rock layers, modulus and damping curves were represented with two models. The first model used non-linear rock curves taken from Reference 2 and the second model assumed linear behavior. These dynamic property models were weighted equally.

For dynamic properties of fill and compacted sand layers, modulus and damping curves were also represented with two models. The first model used soil curves taken from Reference 2, the second model used soil curves taken from References 3 and 4.

These dynamic property models were weighted equally. To model the profile, rock modulus and damping curves from Reference 2 were paired with soil modulus and damping curves from Reference 2, and linear rock modulus and damping curves were paired with soil modulus and damping curves from References 3 and 4.

Page 3 of 9

L-2013-265 Enclosure The 3 base-case shear-wave velocity profiles used to model amplification at the site are shown in Figure 1. Profiles 1, 2, and 3 are weighted 0.4, 0.3, and 0.3, respectively. Thicknesses, depths, and shear-wave velocities (Vs) corresponding to each profile are shown in Table 2.

References

1. EC 279883, Engineering Evaluation PTN-ENG-SECS-13-025, Rev 0, Submittal of Subsurface Materials and Properties, in Response to the 50.54(F) Information Request Regarding NTTF 2.1: Seismic Reevaluation for PTN U3 & U4, Attachment 3, Turkey Point Nuclear Units 3 & 4 Site Geologic Conditions.

2. EPRI (1993). Guidelines for Determining Design Basis Ground Motions, Elec. Power Res.

Inst., Palo Alto, CA, Rept. TR-102293, Vol. 1-5.

3. Silva, W.J., N. A. Abrahamson, G.R. Toro, and C. Costantino (1996). Description and Validation of the Stochastic Ground Motion Model, Rept. submitted to Brookhaven Natl.

Lab., Assoc. Universities Inc., Upton NY 11973, Contract No. 770573.

4. Walling, M.A., W.J., Silva and N.A. Abrahamson (2008). "Nonlinear Site Amplification Factors for Constraining the NGA Models," Earthquake Spectra, 24 (1) 243-255.

5. Turkey Point FSAR Units 6 and 7 COL Application FSAR, Rev. 4, Section 2.5.4.

ML13008A438

6. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Final Report No. 1025287, February 2013, entitled, "Seismic Evaluation Guidance Screening, Prioritization and Implementation Details (SPID) for the Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic" Page 4 of 9

L-2013-265 Enclosure Table 1 Summary of Recommended Geotechnical Engineering Parameters (COL Application Part 2-FSAR Rev. 3 Table 2.5.4-209)

StratumdI) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Fill Key Ft. Upper Lower Peace Description Muck Miami Largo Thompson Tamiami Tamiami River Arcadia Elevation of top of layer (ft) -1.2 -4.5 -26.7 -49.4 -115.1 -159.0 -215.2 -452.1 -

ML, GM, Limestone Limestone SM, SP- ML SM Limestone -

MH GP- SM GM, SM, SW-SM, SW, USCS symbol SP-SM Total unit weight, y (pc') 80 125 136 139 120 120 120 130 130 Natural water content, w, (%) >80 -- - - 30 - - 33 Fines content (%) >60 18 - - 28 62 16 - 15 Atterberg limits Liquid limit, LL - - - 24 - - -

Plastic limit, PL . .... 20 - - -

Plasticity index,PI . .... 4 - - -

SPT N6o-value (blows/ft) -0 20 - - 40 32 75 - 30 Undrained properties Undrained shear strength, su (ksf) . ... 4 -- -- -

Internal friction angle, ýp,(deg) ....

Drained properties Effective cohesion, c' (ksf) - -. 0 1.7 0 - -

Effective friction angle, (p,(deg) - - 35 20 40 - 33 Average Rock core recovery (%) - - 83 to 96 41 to 98 - - - 63 to 100 -

Average RQD (%) - - 54 to 81 16 to 91 - - - 32 to 90 -

Unconfined compressive strength, U (psi) - 200 1,500 2,000 -- - - 100 -

2,700 1,100 Elastic modulus (high strain), EH - 630 ksi 2,600 ksi 1,500 ksi 1,500 ksf 2,500 ksf ksf 980 ksi ksf 19,700 25,750 27,400 9,100 Elastic modulus (low strain), EL - 950 ksi 2,600 ksi 1,500 ksi ksf ksf ksf 980 ksi ksf 1,000 420 Shear modulus (high strain), GH - 230 ksi 1,000 ksi 550 ksi 550 ksf 900 ksf ksf 360 ksi ksf 10,150 3,500 Shear modulus (low strain), GL - 350 ksi 1,000 ksi 550 ksi 7,300 ksf 9,500 ksf ksf 360 ksi ksf Shear wave velocity, V,, (ft/sec) - 3,600 5,800 4,250 1,400 1,600 1,650 3,600 860 Compression wave velocity, Vc, (ft/sec) - 8,000 11,000 8,700 2,900 3,300 3,450 7,850 1,600 Coefficient of sliding - 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.3 - - 0.5 Poisson's ratio, g - 0.37 0.31 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.3 Static earth pressure coefficients Active, K. - 0.3 - - 0.27 0.5 - - 0.3 At-rest, K. - 0.5 - - 0.5 0.66 -- 0.5 (a) Properties of Stratum I (muck) are not provided as this stratum was removed prior to construction Page 5 of 9

L-2013-265 Enclosure Figure 1 Shear Wave Velocity (Vs) profiles for Turkey Point site Vs profiles for Turkey Point Site vs (ft/56c) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0

500 T IT _[

1000 -'-

1500,- Profile 1 9,2000 ___,,,,,-Profile 2

- Profile 3 a 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 __ __

Page 6 of 9

L-20 13-265 Enclosure Table 2 Layer thicknesses, depths, and Shear Wave Velocity (Vs) for 3 profiles, Turkey Point Site Profile 1 ___ Profile 2 ___ Profile 3 ___

thickness depth Vs thickness depth Vs thickness depth Vs (f)(ft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (ft/s)

_______ 0 1400 ______ 0 896 0 2198 7.0 7.0 1400 7.0 7.0 896 7.0 7.0 2198 7.0 14.0 1400 7.0 14.0 896 7.0 14.0 2198 7.0 21.0 1400 7.0 21.0 896 7.0 21.0 2198 7.0 28.0 1400 7.0 28.0 896 7.0 28.0 2198 8.3 36.3 2300 8.3 36.3 1472 8.3 36.3 3611 8.3 44.6 2300 8.3 44.6 1472 8.3 44.6 3611 5.4 50.0 2300 5.4 50.0 1472 5.4 50.0 3611 3.0 53.0 2300 3.0 53.0 1472 3.0 53.0 3611 7.0 60.0 5800 7.0 60.0 3712 7.0 60.0 9106 7.0 67.0 5800 7.0 67.0 3712 7.0 67.0 9106 6.6 73.6 4250 6.6 73.6 2720 6.6 73.6 6672 6.6 80.1 4250 6.6 80.1 2720 6.6 80.1 6672 6.6 86.7 4250 6.6 86.7 2720 6.6 86.7 6672 6.6 93.2 4250 6.6 93.2 2720 6.6 93.2 6672 6.6 99.8 4250 6.6 99.8 2720 6.6 99.8 6672 6.6 106.4 4250 6.6 106.4 2720 6.6 106.4 6672 6.6 112.9 4250 6.6 112.9 2720 6.6 112.9 6672 6.6 119.5 4250 6.6 119.5 2720 6.6 119.5 6672 6.6 126.0 4250 6.6 126.0 2720 6.6 126.0 6672 6.6 132.6 4250 6.6 132.6 2720 6.6 132.6 6672 8.8 141.4 1400 8.8 141.4 896 8.8 141.4 2198 8.8 150.2 1400 8.8 150.2 896 8.8 150.2 2198 8.8 159.0 1400 8.8 159.0 896 8.8 159.0 2198 8.8 167.8 1400 8.8 167.8 896 8.8 167.8 2198 8.8 176.6 1400 8.8 176.6 896 8.8 176.6 2198 14.0 190.6 1600 14.0 190.6 1024 14.0 190.6 2512 14.0 204.7 1600 14.0 204.7 1024 14.0 204.7 2512 14.0 218.7 1600 14.0 218.7 1024 14.0 218.7 2512 14.0 232.7 1600 14.0 232.7 1024 14.0 232.7 2512 17.3 250.0 1650 17.3 250.0 1056 17.3 250.0 2590 30.1 280.1 1650 30.1 280.1 1056 30.1 280.1 2590 23.7 303.8 1650 23.7 303.8 1056 23.7 303.8 2590 23.7 327.5 11650 23.7 327.5 1056 23.7 327.5 2590 Page 7 of 9

L-2013-265 Enclosure Table 2 Layer thicknesses, depths, and Shear Wave Velocity (Vs) for 3 profiles, Turkey Point Site Profile 1 Profile 2 Profile 3 thickness depth Vs thickness depth Vs thickness depth Vs (f0) (ft) (ft/s) (ft) (1) (ft/s) (f0) (0) (ft/s) 23.7 351.2 1650 23.7 351.2 1056 23.7 351.2 2590 23.7 374.9 1650 23.7 374.9 1056 23.7 374.9 2590 23.7 398.6 1650 23.7 398.6 1056 23.7 398.6 2590 23.7 422.2 1650 23.7 422.2 1056 23.7 422.2 2590 23.7 445.9 1650 23.7 445.9 1056 23.7 445.9 2590 23.7 469.6 1650 23.7 469.6 1056 23.7 469.6 2590 25.0 494.6 3600 25.0 494.6 2304 25.0 494.6 5652 5.3 500.0 3600 5.3 500.0 2304 5.3 500.0 5652 39.3 539.3 3600 39.3 539.3 2304 39.3 539.3 5652 25.0 564.3 3600 25.0 564.3 2304 25.0 564.3 5652 25.0 589.3 3600 25.0 589.3 2304 25.0 589.3 5652 25.0 614.3 3600 25.0 614.3 2304 25.0 614.3 5652 25.0 639.3 3600 25.0 639.3 2304 25.0 639.3 5652 25.0 664.3 3600 25.0 664.3 2304 25.0 664.3 5652 25.0 689.3 3600 25.0 689.3 2304 25.0 689.3 5652 25.0 714.3 3600 25.0 714.3 2304 25.0 714.3 5652 25.0 739.3 4000 25.0 739.3 2560 25.0 739.3 6279 25.0 764.3 4000 25.0 764.3 2560 25.0 764.3 6279 25.0 789.3 4000 25.0 789.3 2560 25.0 789.3 6279 25.0 814.3 4000 25.0 814.3 2560 25.0 814.3 6279 25.0 839.3 4000 25.0 839.3 2560 25.0 839.3 6279 25.0 864.3 4000 25.0 864.3 2560 25.0 864.3 6279 25.0 889.3 4000 25.0 889.3 2560 25.0 889.3 6279 25.0 914.3 4000 25.0 914.3 2560 25.0 914.3 6279 25.0 939.3 4000 25.0 939.3 2560 25.0 939.3 6279 25.0 964.3 4000 25.0 964.3 2560 25.0 964.3 6279 100.0 1064.3 4500 100.0 1064.3 2880 100.0 1064.3 7064 100.0 1164.3 4500 100.0 1164.3 2880 100.0 1164.3 7064 100.0 1264.3 4500 100.0 1264.3 2880 100.0 1264.3 7064 100.0 1364.3 4500 100.0 1364.3 2880 100.0 1364.3 7064 100.0 1464.3 4500 100.0 1464.3 2880 100.0 1464.3 7064 100.0 1564.3 5500 100.0 1564.3 3520 100.0 1564.3 8634 100.0 1664.3 5500 100.0 1664.3 3520 100.0 1664.3 8634 100.0 1764.3 5500 100.0 1764.3 3520 100.0 1764.3 8634 100.0 1864.3 5500 100.0 1864.3 3520 100.0 1864.3 8634 Page 8 of 9

L-2013-265 Enclosure Table 2 Layer thicknesses, depths, and Shear Wave Velocity (Vs) for 3 profiles, Turkey Point Site Profile 1 Profile 2 Profile 3 thickness depth Vs thickness depth Vs thickness depth Vs (1t00 ) (ft/s) 10.

(50) (1/s) (100 ) (1. /s) 100.0 1964.3 5500 100.0 1964.3 3520 100.0 1964.3 8634 100.0 2064.3 5500 100.0 2064.3 3520 100.0 2064.3 8634 100.0 2164.3 5500 100.0 2164.3 3520 100.0 2164.3 8634 100.0 2264.3 5500 100.0 2264.3 3520 100.0 2264.3 8634 100.0 2364.3 5500 100.0 2364.3 3520 100.0 2364.3 8634 100.0 2464.3 5500 100.0 2464.3 3520 100.0 2464.3 8634 200.0 2664.3 8000 200.0 2664.3 5120 200.0 2664.3 9285 200.0 2864.3 8000 200.0 2864.3 5120 200.0 2864.3 9285 200.0 3064.3 8000 200.0 3064.3 5120 200.0 3064.3 9285 200.0 3264.3 8000 200.0 3264.3 5120 200.0 3264.3 9285 200.0 3464.3 8000 200.0 3464.3 5120 200.0 3464.3 9285 500.0 3964.2 8000 500.0 3964.2 5120 500.0 3964.2 9285 3280.8 7251 9285 3280.8 7245.1 9285 3280.8 7245.1 9285 Page 9 of 9