ML16204A060

Spent Fuel Pool Evaluation Supplemental Report, Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant, Regarding Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident

ML16204A060
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	07/20/2016
From:	Henderson K Duke Energy Carolinas
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML16204A060 (9)

Text

Kelvin Henderson

~~DUKE Vice President

~ ENERGY: Catawba Nuclear Station Duke Energy CN01VP 14800 Concord Road York, SC 29745 o: 803. 701.4251 f: 803.701.3221 10 CFR 50.4

.. 10 CFR 50.54(f)

CNS-16-055 July 20, 2016 Attention: Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear RegJlatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555-001 Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy)

Catawba Nuclear Station (CNS), Units 1 and 2 Docket Numbers 50-413 and 50-414 Renewed License Nos. NPF-35 and NPF-52

Subject:

Spent Fuel Pool Evaluation Supplemental Report, Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai~ichi Accident

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, ADAMS Accession No. ML12053A340

. 2. NRC Letter, Final Determination of Licensee Seismic Probabilistic Risk Assessments Under the Request for Information Pursuant to Title 1O of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendation 2.1 "Seismic" of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident, dated October 27, 2015, ADAMS Accession Number ML15194A015

3. NEI Letter, transmits EPRI 3002007148 for NRC endorsement, dated February 23, 2016, ADAMS Accession Number ML16055A017

4. EPRI 3002007148, Seismic Evaluation Guidance Spent Fuel Pool Integrity Evaluation, February 2016

5. NRC Letter, provides endorsement of EPRI 3002007148, dated March 17, 2016, ADAMS Accession Number ML15350A158

6. Catawba Nuclear Station Letter, Seismic Hazard and Screening Report (CEUS Sites),

Response to NRC 10 CFR 50.54(f) Request for Additional Information Pursuant to Title 1O 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 31, 2014 (ADAMS Accession Number ML14099A184)

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2 July 20, 2016

7. NRG Letter, Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 - Staff Assessment of Information Provided Pursuant to Title 10 of The Code of Federal Regulations Part 50, Section 50.54(F), Seismic Hazard Reevaluations Relating to Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident (TAC Nos.

MF3965 and MF3966), dated April 27, 2015 (ADAMS Accession Number ML15096A513)

8. EPRI 1025287, Seismic Evaluation Guidance, Screening, Prioritization and Implementation Details [SPID] for the Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic, February 2013 Ladies and Gentlemen:

I I On March 12, 2012, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued a Request for Information per 10 CFR 50.54(f) (Reference 1) to all power reactor licensees. Enclosure 1, Item (9) of the 50.54(f) letter requested addressees to prqvide limited scope Spent Fuel Pool (SFP) evaluations. By letter dated October 27, 2015 (Reference 2), the NRC transmitted final seismic information request tables which identified that Catawba Nuclear Station is to conduct a limited scope SFP Evaluation. By Reference 3, Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) submitted an Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) report entitled, Seismic Evaluation Guidance Spent Fuel Pool Integrity Evaluation (EPRI 3002007148) (Reference 4) for NRC review and endorsement. NRC endorsement was provided by Reference 5.

EPRI 3002007148 provides criteria for evaluating the seismic adequacy of a SFP to the reevaluated ground motion response spectrum (GMRS) hazard levels. This report supplements the guidance in the Seismic Evaluation Guidance, Screening, Prioritization, and Implementation Details (SPID) (Reference 8), for plants where the GMRS peak spectral acceleration is less than or equal to 0.8g. Section 3.3 of EPRI 3002007148 lists the parameters to be verified to confirm that the results of the report are applicable to Catawba Nuclear Station and that the Catawba Nuclear Station SFP is seismically adequate in accordance with the Near-Term Task Force (NTTF) 2.1 Seismic evaluation criteria.

The attachment to this letter provides the data for Catawba Nuclear Station that confirms applicability of the EPRI 3002007148 criteria, confirms that the SFP.is seismically adequate, and provides the requested information in response to Item (9} of the 50.54 (f) letter associated with NTTF Recommendation 2.1 Seismic evaluation criteria.

This letter contains no new Regulatory Commitments and no revision to existing Regulatory Commitments.

Should you have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact Sherry Andrews at 803-701-3424.

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 3 July 20, 2016 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on July 20, 2016.

Sincerely, Kelvin Henderson, Vice President, Catawba Nuclear Station

Attachment:

Site-Specific Spent Fuel Pool Criteria for Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 arid 2

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 4 July 20, 2016 xc:

C. Haney, Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Avenue NE, Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30303-1257 W. M. Dean, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North, Mailstop 13 Hl6M 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Michael D. Orenak, Project Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North, Mailstop 0-8G9A 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 P.J. Bamford, Senior Project Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North, Mailstop 13 F15 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 J.D. Austin U.S. NRC Senior Resident Catawba Nuclear Station Justin Folkwein American Nuclear Insurers 95 Glastonbury Blvd., Suite 300 Glastonbury, CT 06033-4453

ATTACHMENT Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy)

Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 I

Docket Numbers 50-413 and 50-414 Renewed License Numbers NPF-35 and NPF-52 Site-Specific Spent Fuel Pool Criteria for Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2

The 50.54(f) letter requested that, in conjunction with the response to Near-Term Task Force (NTTF) Recommendation 2.1, a seismic evaluation be made of the Spent Fuel Pool (SFP).

More specifically, plants were asked to consider "all seismically induced failures that can lead to draining of the SFP." Such an evaluation would be needed for any plant in which the ground motion response spectrum (GMRS) exceeds the safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) in the 1 to 10 Hz frequency range. The staff confirmed through References 2 and 7 that the GMRS exceeds the SSE and concluded that a SFP evaluation is merited for the Catawba Nuclear Station. By letter dated March 17, 2016 (Reference 5), the staff determined that the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) 3002007148 was an acceptable approach for performing SFP evaluations for plants where the peak spectral acceleration is less than or equal to 0.8g.

The table below lists the criteria from Section 3.3 of EPRI 3002007148 along with data for Catawba Nuclear Station that confirms applicability of the EPRI 3002007148 criteria and confirms that the SFP is seismically adequate and can retain adequate water inventory for 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> in accordarce with NTTF 2.1 Seismic evaluation criteria. 1 Site Parameters

1. The site-specific GMRS peak The GMRS peak spectral acceleration in Catawba

.spectral acceleration at any Nuclear Station Letter, Seismic Hazard and frequency should be less than or Screening Report (CEUS Sites), Response to NRC equal to 0.8g. 10 CFR 50.54(f) Request for Additional 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 31, 2014 (ADAMS Accession Number ML14099A184) as accepted by the NRC in NRC Letter, Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 - Staff Assessment of Information Provided Pursuant to Title 10 of The Code of Federal Regulations Part 50, Section 50.54(F),

Seismic Hazard Reevaluations Relating to Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident (TAC Nos. MF3965 and MF3966), dated April 27, 2015 (ADAMS Accession Number ML15096A513) is 0.748g, which is s 0.8g.

Therefore, this criterion is met for Catawba Nuclear Station.

Page 2 of 5

SFP cfiterla from *EPR1'30020011*~a Structural Parameters

2. The structure housing the SFP The SFP is housed in the Spent Fuel Pool should be designed using an SSE Handling Building portion of the Auxiliary Building with a peak ground acceleration both of which are designed as Category I (PGA) of at least 0.1 g. structures (Ref. CNS-1570.KF-00-0001 Rev. 21 ).

Category I structures are seismically designed to the site SSE with a PGA of 0.15g (Ref. CNS UFSAR Sections 3.1, 3.2.1, 3.7.2, 3.8.4, and 9.1.2). The Catawba Nuclear Station PGA is greater than 0.1 g. Therefore, this criterion is met for Catawba Nuclear Station.

3. The structural load path to the SFP For both the Unit 1 and Unit 2 SFP, the Structural should consist of som~ combination load path from the foundation to the SFP consists of reinforced concrete shear wall of a cast in place reinforced concrete structure elements, reinforced concrete frame founded on rock or fill concrete. The four foot thick elements, post-tensioned concrete concrete walls are rigidly connected to the 4 foot elements and/or structural steel thick floor slab (Ref. CNS UFSAR Section 3.8.4.1 frame elements. b). The location of the SFPs are shown on UFSAR Figures 1.4 through 1. 7. Therefore, this criteria is met for Catawba Nuclear Station.

4. The SFP structure should be The Spent Fuel Pool structures are monitored included in the Civil Inspection under EDM-410 Rev. 17 (Inspection Program for Program performed in accordance Civil Engineering Structures and Components) with Maintenance Rule. such that there is reasonable assurance that these SSCs are capable of fulfilling their intended functions. It is noted that EDM-410 is being replaced by a site specific procedure at each Duke Nuclear Station "AD-EG-CNS-1214" (Condition Monitoring of Structures). Both EDM-410 and AD-EG-CNS-1214 satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 50.65. Therefore, this criterion is met for Catawba Nuclear Station.

Non-Structural Parameters

5. To confirm applicability of the piping Cooling and make up piping attached to the SFP is evaluation in Section 3.2 of EPRI designed to ASME Nuclear Safety Class 3 (Duke 3002007148, piping attached to the Class C) and seismic Category I standards (Ref.

SFP up to the first valve should have CNS-1570.KF-00-0001 Rev. 21 ). Therefore, this been evaluated for the SSE. criterion is met for Catawba Nuclear Station.

Page 3 of 5

6. Anti-siphoning devices should be Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 and Unit 2, each installed on any piping that could have passive features providing vacuum/anti-lead to siphoning water from the siphon protection at every Spent Fuel Cooling (KF)

SFP. In addition, for any cases system piping interface with the Spent Fuel Pool.

where active anti-siphoning devices Neither of the two Spent Fuel Pools has an active are attached to 2-inch or smaller device providing a vacuum breaker/anti-siphon piping and have extremely large function. The passive vacuum breaker/anti-siphon extended operators, the valves features at each interface with the Spent Fuel Pool should be walked down to confirm are:

adequate lateral support. 1) The Spent Fuel Pool Cooling loop suction piping penetrates the pool wall and terminates within 2 to 4 feet below normal pool level (Ref. CN-1570-01.00 Rev. 26 and CN-2570-01.00 Rev. 17).

I

2) The Spent Fuel Pool Cooling loop discharge piping has a 0.5 inch diameter hole in the pipe wall located approximately 2 feet below normal pool level on both of the discharge return piping branches (Ref. CN-1570-01.00 Rev. 26 and CN-2570-01.00 Rev. 17).

3) The Spent Fuel Pool makeup header piping terminates 2 feet below normal pool level (Ref. CN-1570-01.00 Rev. 26 and CN-2570-01.00 Rev. 17).

4) The Spent Fuel Pool Skimmer loop suction piping penetrates the pool wall and terminates within 2 to 4 feet below normal pool level (Ref. CN-1570-01.00 Rev. 26 and CN-2570-01.00 Rev. 17).

5) The Spent Fuel Pool Skimmer discharge piping terminates 2 feet below normal pool level (Ref. CN-1570-01.00 Rev. 26 and CN-2570-01.00 Rev. 17).

6) The Standby Makeup Pump (RCP Alternate Seal Injection) suction supply is via piping connected to the fuel-transfer tube (Ref. CN-1570-01.00 Rev. 26 and CN-2570-01.00 Rev. 17). This is isolated procedurally via a manual isolation valve in the event of loss of spent 'fuel pool level (Ref.

AP/1/A/5500/041Rev.11 and AP/2/A/5500/041 Rev. 13).

As described, anti-siphoning devices are installed on all SFP piping that could lead to siphoning.

Therefore, this criterion is met for Catawba Nuclear Station.

As documented above there are no anti-siphoning devices attached to 2"-inch or smaller piping with extremely large extended operators. Therefore, this criterion is met for Catawba Nuclear Station.

Page 4 of 5

Sf;,P*S~if~ri~}r9rli.~PQ' a:9o~g~714~. . ". ~-~!e . .~p~~~ifi~.. D~!e1\ .? * ,~ ** * ,:*. ** :; *:

7. To confirm applicability of the The SFP has a length of approximately 120 feet, a sloshing evaluation in Section 3.2 of width of approximately 21.5 feet, and a depth of EPRI 3002007148, the maximum approximately 40 feet based on UFSAR Section SFP horizontal dimension (length or 3.8.4.1. Therefore, this criterion is met for width) should be less than 125 ft, the Catawba Nuclear Station.

SFP depth should be greater than 36 The Catawba Nuclear Station GMRS maximum ft, and the GMRS peak Sa should be spectral acceleration in the frequency range less

<0.1g at frequencies equal to or less than 0.3 Hz is 0.0344g from Catawba Nuclear than 0.3 Hz. Station Letter, Seismic Hazard and Screening Report (CEUS Sites), Response to NRC 10 CFR 50.54(f) Request for Additional Information Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f) regarding Recommendatiors 2.1, 2.3 and 9.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident, Dated March 31, 2014 (ADAMS Accession Number ML14099A184) which is less than 0.1 g. Therefore, this criterion is met for Catawba Nuclear Station.

8. To confirm applicability of the The surface area of the Catawba Nuclear Station evaporation loss e*valuation in SFP *is 2176 ft2 ,excluding the fuel transfer canal Section 3.2 of EPRI 3002007148, area (Ref. CNC-1201.3,0-00-0010 Rev. 0), which is the SFP surface area should be greater than 500 ft 2 ; and lic~nsed reactor thermal greater than 500 ft2 and. the licensed* power for Catawba Nuclear Station is 3469 MWt

. reactor core thermal power should for Unit 1 and 3411 MWt for Unit 2 which is less be less than 4,000 MWt per unit. than 4,000 MWt per unit (Ref. latest issue of the Catawba Facility Operating License). Therefore, these criteria are met for Catawba Nuclear Station.

Page 5 of 5