ML15020A434

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, Issuance of Amendment Regarding Minimum Critical Power Ratio (TAC No. MF4588)

ML15020A434
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	02/18/2015
From:	Martin R E Plant Licensing Branch II
To:	Pierce C R Southern Nuclear Operating Co
Martin R E
References
TAC MF4588
Download: ML15020A434 (15)

Text

. J UNITED STATES* NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 Mr. C. R. Pierce Regulatory Affairs Director February 18, 2015 Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. Post Office Box 1295, Bin -038 Birmingham, AL 35201-1295

SUBJECT:

EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NO. 2, ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT REGARDING MINIMUM CRITICAL POWER RATIO (TAC NO. MF4588)

Dear Mr. Pierce:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No; 218 to Renewed Facility Operating License NPF-5 for the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant; Unit Noo 2, in response to the license amendment application dated August 8, 2014, as supplernented by letters dated September 8, and October 24, 2014.-The amendment revises the Technical Specification value of the Safety Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio to support operation in the next fuel cycle. A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed.

A Notice of Issuance will be included .

in the Commission's biweekly Federal Register notice. Docket No. 50-366 Encl.osures:

1. Amendment No. 218 to NPF-5 2. Safety Evaluation

• cc w/encls: Distribution via Listserv Sincerely, (J ,1 fi--/YI Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 11-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensihg Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555--0001 SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY, INC. GEORGIA POWER COMPANY OGLETHORPE POWER, CORPORATION MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC AUTHORITY OF GEORGIA CITY OF DAL TON. GEORGIA DOCKET NO. 50-366 EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT. UNIT NO. 2 AMENDMENT TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 218 Renewed License No. NPF-5 1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that: A. The application for amendment to the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2 (the facility)

Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-5 filed by Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (the licensee), acting for itself, Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, and City of Dalton, Georgia (the owners), dated August 8, 2014, as supplemented by letters dated September 8, and October 24, 2014, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations as set forth in -10 CFR Chapter I; -B. The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C. There is reasonable assurance (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; D. The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; E. The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.

Enclosure 1

. 2. Accordingly, the license is hereby*amended by page changes to the Technical Specifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment, and paragraph 2.C.(2) of Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-5 is hereby amended to read as follows: (2) Technical Specifications

• The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B, as revised through Amendment No. 218 are hereby incorporated in the license. Southern Nuclear shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan. 3. This license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance and shall be implemented prior to reactor startup following the Unit 2 spring 2015 refueling outage.

Attachment:

Changes to Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-5 and the Technical Specifications FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Robert J .. Pascarelli, Chief Plant Licensing Branch 11-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Date of Issuance:

February 18, 2015 ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 218 RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-5 DOCKET NO. 50-366 Replace the following pages of the License and the Appendix A Technical Specifications (TSs) with the attached revised pages. The revised pages are identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the areas of change. Remove Pages License NPF-5, Page 4 TSs 2.0-1 Insert Pages License NPF-5, Page 4 TSs 2.0-1 I .) (6) Southern Nuclear; pursuant to the Act ahd 1 O .CFR Parts 30 and 70, to possess, but not separate, suth byproduct and special nuclear materials as may be produced by the operation of the facility.

C.

• This renewed license shall be deemed to contain, and is subject to, the conditions

• specified in the following Commission regulations in 10 CFR. Chapter I: Part 20, Section 30.34 of Part 30, Section 40.41 of Part 40, Section 50.54 of Part 50, and Section 70.32 of Part 70; all appiicable provisions of the Act and the rules, regulations, and orders of the Commission now or hereafter in effect; and the additional conditions 2 specified or incorporated below: (1-) *Maximum Power Level . ' Southern Nudear is authorized to operate the fc!cilitv at steady state reactor core power levels not.in excess of 2,604 megawatts thermal, in accordance with the conditions specified herein. (2) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications (Appendix A) and the E1:wironmental

.. Protection B); as revised.through Amendment No:*:218.

are hereby incorporated in the renewed license. Southern Nuclear snarl operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protec.tion Plan. (3) Additional Conditions The matters specified In the following conditions shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Commission within the stated time periods following the issuance of the renewed license or within the operational restrictions

• Indicated.

The of these conditions shall be made by an

• amendment to the license supported by a favorable evaluation by the Commission. (a)

• Fire Protection . southern Nuclear shall implement and maintain in effectall prov!sions of the fire protection program, which is referenced in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report for the facility, as contained 2 The original licensee authorized to possess, use, and operate the facility was Geprgia. Power Company (GPC). Consequently, certain historical references to GPC remain in certain license conditions.

• Renewe<;l Licens.e ,No. NPF*5 Amendment No.' 218 2.0 SAFETY LIMITS (Sls) 2.1 SLs 2.1.1 Reactor Core SLs 2.1.1.1 With the reactor steam dome pressure < 785 psig or core flow < 10% rated core flow: THERMAL POWER shall bes 24% RTP. 2.1.1.2 With the reactor steam dome pressure <:: 785 psig and core flow <:: 10% rated core flow: Sls 2.0 MCPR shall be ::: 1.09 for two recirculation loop operation or <:: 1.12 for single recirculation loop operation.

2.1.1.3 Reactor vessel water level shall be greater than the top of active irradiated fuel. 2.1.2 Reactor Coolant System (RCS) Pressure SL Reactor steam dome pressure shall bes 1325 psig. 2.2 SL Violations With any SL violation, the following actions shall be completed within 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />s: 2.2.1 Restore compliance with all Sls; and 2.2.2 Insert all insertable control rods. HATCH UNIT 2 2.0-1 Amendment UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C.

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 218 TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-5 SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY, INC. 1.0. INTRODUCTION EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 2 DOCKET NO. 50-366 By license amendment request (LAR) dated August 8, 2014 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), Accession Nos. ML 14223A793 and ML 14223A794), as supplemented on September 8 and October 24, 2014, ADAMS Accession Nos. ML 14251A579 and ML 14302A159), Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (SNC, the licensee), requested an amendment to the technical specifications (TS) for the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 2 (HNP). The proposed amendment revises TS 2.0, "Safety Limits (SLs)," by changing the safety limit minimum critical power ratio (SLMCPR) for both single and dual recirculation loop operation.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) staff's evaluation of the licensee's proposed changes is provided below. 2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50 (10 CFR 50), Appendix A, general design crjteria 10 states, in part, that the reactor core and associated coolant, control, and protection systems shall be designed to assure that specified acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded during any condition of normal operation, including the effects of anticipated operational occurrences.

Fuel design limits can be exceeded if the core exceeds critical power, a term used for the power at which the fuel departs from nucleate boiling and enters a transition to film boiling. For boiling-water reactors (BWRs), the critical power is predicted using a correlation known as the GE (General Electric) critical quality boiling length correlation, or better known as the GEXL correlation.

Due to core wide and operational variations, the margin t6 boiling transition is most easily described in terms of a critical power ratio (CPR), which is defined as the rod critical power as calculated by GEXL divided by the actual rod power. More margin is gained as the CPR value exceeds 1.0. Enclosure 2 The SLMCPR is calculated using a statistical process that takes into account operating parameters and uncertainties.

The operating limit MCPR (OLMCPR) is equal to the SLMCPR plus a CPR margin for transients.

At the OLMCPR, at least 99.9 percent (NUREG-0800, The Standard Review Plan, Section 4.4, "Thermal Hydraulic Design") of the rods avoid boiling transition during steady state operation and transients caused by a single operator error or equipment malfunction.

Safety limits are required to be included in the TS by 10 CFR 50.36. The SLMCPR is calculated on a cycle-specific basis because it is necessary to account for the core configuration-specific neutronic and thermal-hydraulic response.

3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION 3.1 HNP Unit 2 Cycle 24 Core HNP, Unit 2, is a BWR/4 which has two recirculation loops. The licensee proposed to change the SLMCPR value in TS 2.1.1.2 from 1.08 to 1.09 for two-recirculation-loop operation, and from 1.10 to 1.12 for single-recirculation-loop operation with the reactor vessel steam dome . pressure greater than or equal to 785 psig and core flow greater than or equal to 10 percent of rated core flow. HNP, Unit 2, Cycle 24, core loading consists of 224 fresh fuel bundles by Global Nuclear Americas, LLC (GNF), 224 once-burnt GE14 fuel bundles, 104 twice-burnt GE14 fuel bundles, 4 twice-burnt GNF2, and 4 thrice-burnt GE14 fuel bundles. 3.2 Methodology GNF developed the HNP, Unit 2, Cycle 24, SLMCPR values using the following NRC approved methodologies and uncertainties:

NEDC-32601 P "Methodology and Uncertainties for Safety Limit MCPR Evaluations;" Non-Power Distribution Uncertainty (Reference

4)

• NEDC-32694P "Power distribution Uncertainties for Safety Limit MCPR Evaluations;" Power Distribution Methodology and Uncertainty (Reference

6)

• NEDE-24011-P-A "General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel;" (Reference

3) NEDC-32505P-A "R-Factor Calculation Method for GE 11, GE 12 and GE 13 Fuel;" R-Factor Calculation Methodology (Reference

5) Plant-specific use of these methodologies must adhere to certain restrictions.

3.2.1 Methodology Restrictions . Based on the review (Reference

6) of Topical Reports NEDC-32601 P, NEDC-32694P, and Amendment 25 to NEDE-24011-P-A (GESTAR II), the NRC staff identified the following restrictions for the use of these Topical Reports: 1. The TGBLA (lattice physics code) fuel rod power calculational uncertainty should be verified when applied to fuel designs not included in the benchmark comparisons of Table 3.1 of NEDC-32601 P; since changes in fuel design can have a significant effect on calculation accuracy.

2. The effect of the correlation of rod power calculation uncertainties should be reevaluated to insure the accuracy of R-Factor uncertainty when the methodology is applied to a new fuel lattice. 3. In view of the importance of the MIP (MCPR Importance Parameter) criterion and its potential sensitivity to changes in fuel bundle designs, core loading and operating strategies, the MIP criterion should be reviewed periodically as part of the procedural review process to insure that the specific value recommended in NEDC-32601-P is applicable to future designs and operating strategies.

3.2.1.1 Restrictions (1) and (2) In addressing restrictions (1) and (2) in a letter dated September 24, 2001, from GNF to the NRC "Confirmation of 1Ox10 Fuel Design Applicability to Improved SLMCPR, Power Distribution and R-Factor Methodologies" (Reference 9), GNF states that the rod power calculational uncertainties are dominated by geometrical considerations in which GE14 is identical to GE12. The NRC staff determined that GNF2 (Reference

8) is designed for mechanical, nuclear, and thermal-hydraulic compatibility with the other 10X10 GNF fuel designs. The design has features of the currently operating GE 10, GE 11 /13 and GE 12/14 fuel including pellet-cladding interaction resistant barrier cladding, high performance spacers, part length rods, interactive thick corner/thin wall channel, and axial enrichment loading. The GNF2 design is a 1Ox10 array with 92 fuel rods and two large central water rods, and fourteen part length fuel rods. The part length rod configuration improves efficiency and reactivity margins. Table 3.1 of NEDC-32601 P provides GE12 1Ox10 lattices.

The values given in Table 3.1 for GE12 are representative of the values being calculated for GE14 and GNF2. The NRC staff asked the licensee (RAl-1) to explain the differences in design and geometrical considerations between GNF2 and GE14 fuel. In response to the staff's question, the licensee stated in Reference 2 that GNF2 is an evolutionary fuel product based on GE 14 and that it is not considered a new fuel design as it maintains the previously established 1 OX1 O array. Based on the above discussion, the NRC staff concludes that the rod power calculational uncertainties used by GNF to develop the HNP, Unit 2, Cycle 24, SLMCPR values are valid for.GNF2 fuel and that the response to RAl-1 in Reference 2 addresses the staff's concern and is acceptable.

3.2.1.2 Restriction (3) For HNP, Unit 2, Cycle 24, the minimum core flow SLMCPR calculation performed at 92.9 percent core flow and rated core power condition was limiting as compared to the rated core flow and rated core power condition.

The analysis indicates that, at low core flows, the limiting rod pattern and the nominal rod pattern are essentially the same. In its application, GNF determined that the rod pattern used to calculate the SLMCPR at 100 percent rated power and 92.9 percent rated flow reasonably assures that at least 99.*9 percent of fuel rods in the core would not be expected to experience boiling transition during normal operation or anticipated operational occurrences during the operation of HNP Unit 2 Cycle 24. The NRC staff determined that the rod patterns used to calculate the SLMCPR at 92.9 percent of rated core flow and 100 percent of rated core power produce a limiting MCPR distribution that reasonably bounds the MCPR distributions that would be expected during the operation of the HNP, Unit 2, core throughout Cycle 24. Therefore, the staff concludes that the licensee's submittal demonstrates the validity of the criterion in restriction (3) (MIP criterion) for*GNF2 fuel and the minimum core flow condition.

In summary, the NRC staff concludes that the licensee has adequately addressed the restrictions of Topical Reports NEDC-32601 P-A, NEDC-32694P-A, Amendment 25 to NEDE-24011-P-A (GESTAR II), and NEDC-32505P-A and that the use of these reports to evaluate the HNP, Unit 2, Cycle 24, SLMCPR is acceptable.

3.3 Departures from NRG-Approved Methodology No departures from NRG-approved methodologies were identified in the HNP, Unit 2, Cycle 24, SLMCPR calculations.

3.4 Deviations from the NRG-Approved Calculational Uncertainties 3.4.1 R-Factor The R-factor is an input into the GEXL correlation used to describe the local pin-by-pin power . distribution and the fuel assembly and channel geometry on the fuel assembly critical power. The R-factor uncertainty analysis includes an allowance for power peaking modeling uncertainty, manufacturing uncertainty and channel bow uncertainty.

GNF has increased this uncertainty for all SLMCPR calculations to account for the potential impact of control blade shadow corrosion induced bow. GNF has generically increased the GEXL R-Factor uncertainty (Reference

5) to account for an increase in channel bow due to the emerging unforeseen phenomenon called control blade shadow corrosion-induced channel bow, which is not accounted for in the channel bow uncertainty component of the approved R-Factor uncertainty.

The HNP, Unit 2, Cycle 24, analysis shows an expected channel bow which is bounded by a GEXL R-Factor uncertainty that accounts for channel bow uncertainty (Reference 5). Thus, the NRC staff finds that the use of a GEXL R-Factor uncertainty (Reference

5) adequately accounts for the expected control blade shadow corrosion-induced channel bow for HNP, Unit 2, Cycle 24. 3.4.2 Core Flow Rate and Random Effective TIP Reading GNF has committed (Reference

7) to the expansion of the state points used in the determination of the SLMCPR. Consistent with the Reference 7 commitments, GNF performs analyses at the rated core power and minimum licensed core flow point in addition to analyses at the rated core power and rated core flow point. The NRG-approved SLMCPR methodology is applied at each statepoint that is analyzed.

The core flow and random traverse in-core probe (TIP) reading uncertainties used in single-loop operation (SLO) minimum core flow SLMCPR analysis remain the same as in the rated core flow SLO SLMCPR analysis because these uncertainties (which are substantially larger than used in two-loop operation (TLO) analysis) already account for the effects of operating at reduced core flow. For TLO calculations performed at 92.9 percent core flow, the NRC-approved uncertainty values for the core flow rate (2.5 percent) and the random effective TIP reading (1.2 percent) are adjusted by dividing them by 92.9/100.

The treatment of the core flow and random effective TIP reading uncertainties is based on the assumption that the signal to noise ratio deteriorates as core flow is reduced. GNF states that this increase is conservative based on the expectation that the variability in the absolute flow will decrease as flow decreases.

The NRC staff finds that this increase in the uncertainty should bound the original non-flow dependent uncertainties and, therefore, the staff finds it acceptable for HNP, Unit 2, Cycle 24. 3.5 Core Monitoring System For HNP, Unit 2, Cycle 24, the GNF 30 MONICORE System (Reference

8) will be used as the core monitoring system. The 30 MONICORE system is in widespread use throughout the GNF fueled fleet of BWRs, including BWR/4 plants like HNP, Unit 2, and BWR/6 plants. Use of a current version of 30 MONICORE provides the plant capability to perform the reactivity anomaly surveillance.

Use of 30 MONICORE has been previously evaluated and accepted by the NRC (Reference 8). Therefore, the NRC staff finds the use of the GNF 30 MONICORE system for HNP, Unit 2, Cycle 24, to be acceptable.

3.6 Summary The NRC staff finds the licensee's proposeq Cycle 24 SLMCPR values of 1.09 for two-recirculation-loop ope*ration and 1.12 for single-recirculation-loop operation acceptable for HNP, Unit 2, Cycle 24, because they were developed through the appropriate use of NRC-approved methodologies in accordance with NRC staff guidelines.

The staff further finds that the licensee used methods consistent with the regulatory requirements and guidance identified in Section 2.0 above. 4.0 FINAL NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards considerations, and there has been no public comment on the finding (80 FR 536, January 6, 2015). The Commission may issue a license amendment before the expiration of the 60-day notice period provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration (NSHC). This amendment is being issued prior to the expiration of the 60-day notice period. Therefore, a final finding of NSHC follows. The Commission has made a final determination that the amendment request involves NSHC. Under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment does not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91 (a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration which is presented below. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.92, SNC has reviewed the proposed change and concludes that the change does not involve a significant hazards consideration since the proposed change satisfies the criteria in 10 CFR 50.92(c).

The discussion below addresses each of these criteria and demonstrates that the proposed amendment does not constitute a significant hazard. The proposed change does not involve a significant hazards consideration because: 1. The operation of HNP Unit 2 in accordance with the proposed amendment will not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

The Safety Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio (SLMCPR) ensures that, 99.9% of the fuel rods in the core will not be susceptible to boiling transition during normal operation or the most limiting postulated design-basis transient event. The new SLMCPR values preserve the existing margin to the onset of transition boiling; therefore, the probability of fuel damage is not increased as a result of this proposed change. The determination of the revised HNP Unit 2 SLMCPRs has been performed using NRC-approved methods of evaluation.

These plant-specific calculations are performed each operating cycle and may require changes for future cycles. The revised SLMCPR values do not change the method of operating the plant; therefore, they have no effect on the probability of an accident initiating event or transient.

Based on the above, SNC has concluded that the proposed change will not result in a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

2. The operation of HNP Unit 2 in accordance with the proposed amendment will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

The proposed changes result only from a specific analysis for the HNP Unit 2 core reload design. These changes do not involve any new or different methods for operating the facility.

No new initiating events or transients result from these changes. Based on the above, SNC has concluded that the proposed change will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from those previously evaluated.

3. The operation of HNP Unit 2 in accordance with the proposed amendment will not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety. The new SLMCPRs have been calculated using NRG-approved methods of evaluation with plant and cycle-specific input values for the fuel and core design for the upcoming cycle of operation.

The SLMCPR values ensure that 99.9% of the fuel rods in the core will not be susceptible to boiling transition during normal operation or the most limiting postulated design-basis transient event. The operating MCPR limit is set appropriately above the safety limit value to ensure adequate margin when the cycle-specific transients are evaluated.

Accordingly, the margin of safety is maintained with the revised values. As a result, SNC has determined that the proposed change will not result in a significant reduction in the margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and based on this review, determined that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied.

Therefore, the staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration.

5.0 STATE CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Georgia State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.

The State official had no comments.

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts and no significant change in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.

The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards considerations, and there has been no public comment on the finding (80 FR 536, January 6, 2015). Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.

7.0 CONCLUSION

The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) there is reasonable assurance that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

8.0 REFERENCES

1. Letter from C. R Pierce (Southern Nuclear Operating Company) to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Proposed Change to the Hatch Unit 2 Nuclear Plant's Technical Specification Concerning the Safety Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio," August 8, 2014. 2. Letter from C. R Pierce (Southern Nuclear Operating Company) to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Response to Request for Additional Information (RAI) Regarding Proposed 3. Safety Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio License Amendment (SLMCPR)," September 8, 2014. 4. Global Nuclear Fuels Licensing Topical Report NEDE-24011-P-A-20, "General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel," December 2013. 5. General Electric Nuclear Energy Licensing Topical Report NEDC-32601 P-A, "Methodology and Uncertainties for Safety Limit MCPR Evaluations," August 1999. 6. General Electric Nuclear Energy Licensing Topical Report NEDC-32505P-A, Revision 1, "R-Factor Calculation Method for GE11, GE12, and GE13 Fuel," July 1999.

• 7. MFN-003-99, Letter, Frank Akstulewicz (NRC) to Glen A. Watford (GE), "Acceptance for Referencing of Licensing Topical Reports NEDC-32601 P, Methodology and Uncertainties for Safety Limit MCPR Evaluations, NEDC-32694P, Power Distribution Uncertainties for Safety Limit MCPR Evaluation; and Amendment 25 to NEDE-24011-P-A on Cycle Specific Safety Limit MCPR," March 11, 1999. 8. MFN 04-081, Letter from J.S. Post (GE) to NRC, "Part 21 Reportable Condition and 60-Day Interim Report; Notification:

Non-Conservative SLMCPR," August 24, 2004. 9. NED0-31152 Revision 9, "Global Nuclear Fuels Fuel Bundle Designs", dated May 2007. 10. Confirmation of 1Ox10 Fuel Design Applicability to Improved SLMCPR, Power Distribution and R-Factor Methodologies, dated September 24, 2001.

• Principal Contributor:

Fred Forsaty, NRR/DSS/SRXB Date: February 18, 2015 Mr. C. R. Pierce Regulatory Affairs Director February 18, 2015 Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. Post Office Box 1295, Bin -038 Birmingham, AL 35201-1295

SUBJECT:

EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NO. 2, ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT REGARDING MINIMUM CRITICAL POWER RATIO (TAC NO. MF4588)

Dear Mr. Pierce:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 218 to Renewed Facility Operating License NPF-5 for the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, in response to the license amendment application dated August 8, 2014, as supplemented by letters dated September 8, and October 24, 2014. The amendment revises the Technical Specification value of the Safety Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio to support operation in the next fuel cycle. A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed.

A Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's biweekly Federal Register notice. . Docket No. 50-366

Enclosures:

Sincerely, /RA/ Robert E. Martin, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 11-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

1. Amendment No. 218 to NPF-5 2. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: Distribution via Listserv DISTRIBUTION:

PUBLIC LPL2-1 R/F RidsAcnw_MailCTR Resource RidsNrrDorlDpr Resource RidsNrrDorllpl2-1 Resource RidsNrrDssStsb Resource RidsNrrPMHatch Resource RidsRgn2MailCenter Resource FForsaty ADAMS A ccess1on N ML 15020A434

o. *SE t *u db d t d ransm1 e 1y memo a e OFFICE NRR/LPL2-1

/PM NRR/LPL2-1

/LA DSS/SRXB/BC NRR/DSS/STSB/BC NAME RMartin SFigueroa CJackson RElliott DATE 02/18/15 02/03/15 02/02/15

• 02/03/15 OFFICE OGC NRR/LPL2-1

/BC NRR/LPL2-1/PM NAME DRoth RPascarelli RMartin DATE 01/28/15 02/18/15 02/18/15 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY