View source for NL-16-2494, Units 1 and 2 - 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 ...

{{Adams
| number = ML16350A350
| issue date = 12/15/2016
| title = Units 1 and 2 - 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 ...
| author name = Pierce C
| author affiliation = Southern Nuclear Operating Co, Inc
| addressee name = 
| addressee affiliation = NRC/Document Control Desk, NRC/NRR
| docket = 05000321, 05000366
| license number = 
| contact person = 
| case reference number = NL-16-2494
| document type = Letter type:NL, Response to Request for Additional Information (RAI)
| page count = 8
| project = 
| stage = Supplement
}}

=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:~ Southern Nuclear                                 Charles R. Pierce           40 Inverness Center Parkway Regulatory Affairs Director Post Office Box 1295 Birmingham, AL 35242 205 992 7872 tel 205 992 7601 fax crpierce@ southernco.com December 15, 2016 Docket Nos.: 50-321                                                             NL-16-2494 50-366 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATIN: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555-0001 Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant- Units 1 and 2 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 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendations 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3 of the NTTF Review of Insights from the Fukushima Daiichi Accident, dated March 12, 2012. ML12053A340.
: 2. NRC Letter, Final Determination of Licensee Seismic Probabilistic Risk Assessments Under the Request for Information Pursuant to Title 10 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. ML15194A015.
: 3. NEI Letter, transmits EPRI3002007148 for NRC endorsement, dated February 23,2016.
ML16055A017.
: 4. EPRI 3002007148, Seismic Evaluation Guidance Spent Fuel Pool Integrity Evaluation, February 2016.
: 5. NRC Letter, provides endorsement of EPRI3002007148, dated March 17,2016.
ML15350A158.
: 6. Letter to NRC, Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2- Seismic Hazard and Screening Report for CEUS Sites, dated March 31,2014 (NL-14-0343). ML14092A017.
: 7. NRC Letter, Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, 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 for Recommendation 2. 1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident, dated April 27, 2015. ML15097A424.
: 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:
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 provide 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 Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant - Units 1 and 2, is to conduct a

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NL-16-2494 Page 2 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 30020071481ists the parameters to be verified to confirm that the results of the report are applicable to Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant - Units 1 and 2, and that the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant- Units 1 and 2, SFPs are seismically adequate in accordance with the Near Term Task Force (NTTF) 2.1 Seismic evaluation criteria.
The enclosure to this letter provides the data for Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant- Units 1 and 2 that confirms applicability of the EPRI 3002007148 criteria, confirms that the SFPs are 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 NRC Commitments. If you have any questions, please contact John Giddens at 205.992.7924.
Mr. C. R. Pierce states he is the Regulatory Affairs Director for Southern Nuclear Operating Company, is authorized to execute this oath on behalf of Southern Nuclear Operating Company and, to the best of his knowledge and belief, the facts set forth in this letter are true.
Rtf"~
l
                                                                                                                     ~            ,l.
                                                                                                                                       ~
                                                                                                  ;           )    t
                                                                                           *\          ''t ..    )
C. R. Pierce                                                                               '*        I
                                                                                                                *(         '        ,.
                                                                                              ',~      I'               l'     't      '
Regulatory Affairs Director                                                                                                  t jl CRP/JMG/GLS Sworn to and subscribed before me this                                          '2016.
C1!L!3'~
Notary PUbiiC My commission expires:     1- 2-Z.ofg

==Enclosure:==
Site-Specific Spent Fuel Pool Criteria for Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant - Units 1 and 2

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NL-16-2494 Page 3 cc:   Southern Nuclear Operating Company Mr. S. E. Kuczynski, Chairman, President & CEO Mr. D. G. Bost, Executive Vice President & Chief Nuclear Officer Mr. D. R. Vineyard, Vice President- Hatch Mr. M. D. Meier, Vice President- Regulatory Affairs Mr. D. R. Madison, Vice President- Fleet Operations Mr. B. J. Adams, Vice President - Engineering Mr. G. L. Johnson, Regulatory Affairs Manager- Hatch RType: CHA02.004 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ms. C. Haney, Regional Administrator Mr. M. D. Orenak, NRR Project Manager- Hatch Mr. D. H. Hardage, Senior Resident Inspector- Hatch State of Georgia Mr. R.E. Dunn, Director- Environmental Protection Division

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant- Units 1 and 2 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 Enclosure Site-Specific Spent Fuel Pool Criteria for Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant - Units 1 and 2

Enclosure to NL-16-2494 Site-Specific Spent Fuel Pool Criteria for Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant- Units 1 and 2 Introduction The 10 CFR 50.54(f) letter requested that, in conjunction with the response to NTTF Recommendation 2.1, a seismic evaluation be made of the 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 Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant - Units 1 and 2 (Hatch). By letter dated March 17, 2015 (Reference 5) the staff determined that 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 Hatch that confirms applicability of the EPRI 3002007148 criteria and confirms that the SFPs are seismically adequate and can retain adequate water inventory for 72 hours in accordance with NTTF 2.1 Seismic evaluation criteria.
SFP Criteria from EPRI3002007148             Site-Specific Data Site Parameters
: 1. The site-specific GMRS peak               The GMRS peak spectral acceleration in the Hatch spectral acceleration at any             site-specific GMRS submittal (Reference 6 frequency should be less than or          ML14092A017) as accepted by the NRC in NRC equal to 0.8g.                            Letter (Reference 7 ML15097A424) is 0.32g, which is< 0.8g, therefore, this criterion is met.
Structural Parameters
: 2. The structure housing the SFP             The SFPs are housed in the Reactor Buildings, should be designed using an SSE           which are seismically designed to the site with a peak ground acceleration           SSEs/DBEs with a PGA of 0.15g (Reference 6).
(PGA) of at least 0.1g.                   The Hatch PGAs are greater than 0.1 g, therefore, this criterion is met.
: 3. The structural load path to the SFP       The structural load path from the foundation to the should consist of some combination        SFP consists of two concrete columns on one side of reinforced concrete shear wall         and the drywall shield on the other side. In elements, reinforced concrete frame       addition, there is a structural steel support system elements, post-tensioned concrete        that includes 36" wide flange beams that directly elements and/or structural steel          support the Spent Fuel Pool slab.
frame elements.
Drawings showing structural details for the Hatch Unit 1 SFP include the following : H-15303, H-15304, H-15336.
Drawings showing structural details for the Hatch Unit 2 SFP include the following: H-25428, H-25429, H-26105, H-25606.
Therefore, this criterion is met for Hatch.
E-1

Enclosure to NL-16-2494 Site-Specific Spent Fuel Pool Criteria for Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant- Units 1 and 2 SFP Criteria from EPRI 3002007148           Site-Specific Data
: 4. The SFP structure should be              The SFP structures are included in the Hatch Civil included in the Civil Inspection         Inspection Program in accordance with 10 CFR Program performed in accordance          50.65, which monitors the performance or with Maintenance Rule.                   condition of structures, systems, or components (SSCs) in a manner sufficient to provide reasonable assurance that these SSCs are capable of fulfilling their intended functions. The applicable procedure is NMP-ES-021 Version 9.0 Structural Monitoring Program for the Maintenance Rule.
Therefore, this criterion is met for Hatch.
Non-Structural Parameters
: 5. To confirm applicability of the piping  Piping attached to the SFP is evaluated to the SSE evaluation in Section 3.2 of EPRI       in accordance with Seismic Category I 3002007148, piping attached to the      requirements as documented in Unit 2 FSAR SFP up to the first valve should have   section 9.1.3.2.1. This section of the Unit 2 FSAR been evaluated for the SSE.             is applicable to both units, as the Unit 1 FSAR section 10.4 directs the reader to the Unit 2 FSAR.
Therefore, this criterion is met for Hatch.
E-2

Enclosure to NL-16-2494 Site-Specific Spent Fuel Pool Criteria for Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant- Units 1 and 2 SFP Criteria from EPRI3002007148            Site-Specific Data
: 6. Anti-siphoning devices should be         Plant Hatch Units 1 and 2 Spent Fuel Pools are installed on any piping that could      shared across the units when the SFP gates are lead to siphoning water from the        removed. The Fuel Pool Cooling system (G41)
SFP. In addition, for any cases         does not have passive anti-siphon devices per where active anti-siphoning devices     design. The Plant Hatch Fuel Pool Cooling system are attached to 2-inch or smaller       (G41) has two water-return diffusers and one make piping and have extremely large         up water diffuser for each unit. The make-up water extended operators, the valves          diffuser has an anti-siphon check valve, while each should be walked down to confirm        water-return diffuser has two check valves located adequate lateral support.               in series in the piping, adding up to a total of five (5) anti-siphon devices per unit. These are Active devices. The Decay Heat Removal System (G71) does have passive devices (anti-siphon holes) on the discharge and suction piping going in to the spent fuel pool. Normal pool level is set at elevation 226'-5" and all of the devices are submerged under water, located at elevation 225'-7".
As described, anti-siphoning devices are installed on all SFP piping that could lead to siphoning; therefore, this criterion is met for Hatch.
No anti-siphoning devices are attached to 2-inch or smaller piping with extremely large extended operators; therefore, this criterion is met for Hatch.
: 7. To confirm applicability of the         The Hatch Unit 1 SFP has a length of 33.75 ft, a sloshing evaluation in Section 3.2 of   width of 40ft and a depth of 39ft based on Hatch EPRI 3002007148, the maximum            Drawings H-15337, H-15437, H-16033; therefore.
SFP horizontal dimension (length or     this criterion is met.
width) should be less than 125 ft, the SFP depth should be greater than        The Hatch Unit 2 SFP has a length of 28.5 ft, a 36 ft, and the GMRS peak Sa should      width of 40 ft and a depth of 39 ft based on Hatch be <0.1 g at frequencies equal to or    Drawings H-25568, H-25571, H-25578, H-261 05; less than 0.3 Hz.                       therefore. this criterion is met.
The Hatch GMRS maximum spectral acceleration in the frequency range less than 0.3 Hz is 0.058g from Hatch GMRS submittal (Reference 6) which is less than 0.1g, therefore. this criterion is met.
E-3

Enclosure to NL-16-2494 Site-Specific Spent Fuel Pool Criteria for Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant- Units 1 and 2 SFP Criteria from EPRI3002007148           Site-Specific Data
: 8. To confirm applicability of the         For Hatch Unit 1, the surface area of the Hatch evaporation loss evaluation in          SFP is 1,350 fe, which is greater than 500 fe; and Section 3.2 of EPRI 3002007148,         licensed reactor thermal power for Hatch Unit 1 is the SFP surface area should be          2,804 MWt which is less than 4,000 MWt per unit, greater than 500 te and the licensed    therefore, these criteria are met.
reactor core thermal power should be less than 4,000 MWt per unit.
For Hatch Unit 2, the surface area of the Hatch SFP is 1,140 te, which is greater than 500 te; and licensed reactor thermal power for Hatch Unit 2 is 2,804 MWt which is less than 4,000 MWt per unit, therefore, these criteria are met.
E-4}}