ML070510629

License Amendment, Issuance of Amendment Regarding TSTF -449 Steam Generator Tube Integrity TAC No. MD0696

ML070510629
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	03/28/2007
From:	Geoffrey Miller NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLI-2
To:	Peschel J, St.Pierre G North Atlantic Energy Service Corp
Miller G, NRR/DORL, 415-2481
Shared Package
ML070510645	List: ML070510629 ML070880286
References
TAC MD0696
Download: ML070510629 (12)

Text

March 28, 2007 Mr. Gene F. St. Pierre, Site Vice President c/o James M. Peschel Seabrook Station PO Box 300 Seabrook, NH 03874

SUBJECT:

SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT RE:

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION TASK FORCE (TSTF)-449, STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INTEGRITY, (TAC NO. MD0696)

Dear Mr. St. Pierre:

The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 115 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-86 for the Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 (Seabrook), in response to your application dated March 23, 2006, as supplemented by letters dated August 16 and November 28, 2006.

The amendment revises the Seabrook Technical Specifications (TSs) consistent with TSTF Standard Technical Specification Change Traveler, TSTF-449, Steam Generator Tube Integrity, Revision 4. TSTF-449 is part of the consolidated line item improvement process.

A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's biweekly Federal Register notice.

Sincerely,

/ra/

G. Edward Miller, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-443

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 115 to NPF-86

2. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: See next page

March 28, 2007 Mr. Gene F. St. Pierre, Site Vice President c/o James M. Peschel Seabrook Station PO Box 300 Seabrook, NH 03874

SUBJECT:

SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT RE:

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION TASK FORCE (TSTF)-449, STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INTEGRITY, (TAC NO. MD0696)

Dear Mr. St. Pierre:

The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 115 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-86 for the Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 (Seabrook), in response to your application dated March 23, 2006, as supplemented by letters dated August 16 and November 28, 2006.

The amendment revises the Seabrook Technical Specifications (TSs) consistent with TSTF Standard Technical Specification Change Traveler, TSTF-449, Steam Generator Tube Integrity, Revision 4. TSTF-449 is part of the consolidated line item improvement process.

A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's biweekly Federal Register notice.

Sincerely,

/ra/

G. Edward Miller, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-443

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 115 to NPF-86

2. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: See next page DISTRIBUTION RidsNRRLpl1-2 RidsOgcMailCenter RidsRgn1MailCenter AHiser PUBLIC RidsNrrRMGMiller RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter KKarowski LPL1-2R/F RidsNrrLAMOBrien TKobetz MYoder RidsNrrDorl GHill (2) TWertz Package Accession Number: ML070510645 Amendment Accession Number: ML070510629 Tech Specs. Accession Number: ML070880286 OFFICE LPL1-2/PM LPL1-2/LA DCI/CSGB/BC DIRS/ITSB/BC OGC LPL1-2/BC NAME GEMiller MOBrien AHiser TKobetz STurk Hchernoff w/comments DATE 3/19/07 3/19/07 1/18/07 1/19/07 3/19/07 3/27/07 Official Record Copy

Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 cc:

Mr. J. A. Stall Ms. Cristine McComb, Director Senior Vice President, Nuclear and ATTN: John Giarrusso Chief Nuclear Officer Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency Florida Power & Light Company 400 Worcester Road P.O. Box 14000 Framingham, MA 01702-5399 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420 Ms. Kelly Ayotte, Attorney General Mr. Peter Brann Mr. Orvil Fitch, Deputy Attorney General Assistant Attorney General 33 Capitol Street State House, Station #6 Concord, NH 03301 Augusta, ME 04333 Mr. Christopher M. Pope, Director Resident Inspector Homeland Security & Emergency Mgmt.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission New Hampshire Department of Safety Seabrook Nuclear Power Station Bureau of Emergency Management P.O. Box 1149 33 Hazen Drive Seabrook, NH 03874 Concord, NH 03301 Town of Exeter Mr. M. S. Ross, Managing Attorney 10 Front Street Florida Power & Light Company Exeter, NH 03823 P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Rajiv S. Kundalkar 475 Allendale Road Vice President - Nuclear Engineering King of Prussia, PA 19406 Florida Power & Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Office of the Attorney General Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420 One Ashburton Place, 20th Floor Boston, MA 02108 James M. Peschel Regulatory Programs Manager Board of Selectmen FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC Town of Amesbury PO Box 300 Town Hall Seabrook, NH 03874 Amesbury, MA 01913 Mr. Mark E. Warner Mr. Robert Poole Vice President, Nuclear Operations Support Federal Emergency Management Agency Florida Power & Light Company Region I P.O. Box 14000 99 High Street, 6th Floor Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420 Boston, MA 02110 Ms. Marjan Mashhadi Mr. Tom Crimmins Senior Attorney Polestar Applied Technology Florida Power & Light Company One First Street, Suite 4 801 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Suite 220 Los Altos, CA 94019 Washington, DC 20004

FPL ENERGY SEABROOK, LLC, ET AL.*

DOCKET NO. 50-443 SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 115 License No. NPF-86

1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:

A. The application for amendment filed by FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC, et al. (the licensee), dated March 23, 2006, as supplemented by letters dated August 16 and November 28, 2006, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations 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; 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; and 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.

• FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (FPLE Seabrook) is authorized to act as agent for the: Hudson Light & Power Department, Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Company, and Taunton Municipal Light Plant and has exclusive responsibility and control over the physical construction, operation and maintenance of the facility.

2. Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Technical Specifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment, and paragraph 2.C.(2) of Facility Operating License No. NPF-86 is hereby amended to read as follows:

(2) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. , are hereby incorporated in the license. The licensee 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 within 90 days of issuance.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

/ra/

Harold K. Chernoff, Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Changes to the License and Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: March 28, 2007

ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 115 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-86 DOCKET NO. 50-443 Replace the following page of Facility Operating License No. NPF-86 with the attached revised page. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains a marginal line indicating the area of change.

Remove Insert 3 3 Replace the following pages of the Appendix A, Technical Specifications, with the attached revised pages as indicated. The revised pages are identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the area of change.

Remove Insert v v x x xiv xiv 1-4 1-4 1-5 1-5 3/4 4-13 3/4 4-13 3/4 4-14 3/4 4-14 3/4 4-15 3/4 4-15 3/4 4-16 3/4 4-16 3/4 4-16a --

3/4 4-17 3/4 4-17 3/4 4-18 3/4 4-18 3/4 4-19 3/4 4-19 3/4 4-20 3/4 4-20 3/4 4-21 3/4 4-21 3/4 4-22 3/4 4-22 3/4 4-23 3/4 4-23 3/4 4-24 3/4 4-24 3/4 4-25 3/4 4-25 3/4 4-26 3/4 4-26 3/4 4-27 3/4 4-27 3/4 4-28 3/4 4-28 3/4 4-29 3/4 4-29 3/4 4-30 3/4 4-30 3/4 4-31 3/4 4-31 3/4 4-32 3/4 4-32 3/4 4-33 --

(Continued) The revised pages are identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the area of change.

Remove Insert 3/4 4-34 --

3/4 4-34a --

3/4 4-35 --

3/4 4-36 --

3/4 4-37 --

3/4 4-38 --

3/4 4-39 --

6-11 6-11 6-12 6-12 6-13 6-13 6-14 6-14 6-15 6-15 6-16 6-16 6-17 6-17 6-18 6-18 6-19 6-19 6-20 6-20 6-21 6-21 6-22 6-22 6-23 6-23

-- 6-24

-- 6-25

-- 6-26

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 115 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-86 FPL ENERGY SEABROOK, LLC SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-443

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letters dated March 23, 2006 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)) Accession No. ML060870133), as supplemented by letters dated August 16 and November 28, 2006 (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML062340145 and ML063350055, respectively),

FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (FPLE or the licensee) submitted License Amendment Request (LAR) No. 06-02, requesting changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) for Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 (Seabrook). The supplements provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register on April 25, 2006 (71 FR 23955).

The proposed changes would revise the existing steam generator (SG) tube surveillance program. The changes are modeled after TS Task Force (TSTF) traveler TSTF-449, Steam Generator Tube Integrity, Revision 4. The model safety evaluation (SE) prepared by the NRC was originally published in the Federal Register on March 25, 2005 (70 FR 10298). The scope of the application includes changes to the definition of leakage, changes to the primary-to-secondary leakage requirements, changes to the SG tube surveillance program (SG tube integrity), changes to the SG reporting requirements, and associated changes to the TS Bases.

2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION

The background, description, and applicability of the proposed changes associated with the SG tube integrity issue and the applicable regulatory requirements were included in the NRC staffs model SE published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2005 (70 FR 10298). The Notice of Availability of Model Application Concerning Technical Specification Improvement to Modify Requirements Regarding Steam Generator Tube Integrity Using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process was published in the Federal Register on May 6, 2005 (70 FR 24126),

which provided the model SE for licensees to reference.

3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

In its application, FPLE proposed changes to the TSs that are modeled after TSTF-449. The amendment revises the Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 Technical Specifications (TSs) Definitions, TS 3.4.5, "Steam Generator (SG) Tube Integrity," and TS 3.4.6.2, "Reactor Coolant System Operational Leakage" consistent with Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical Specification Traveler TSTF-449, "Steam Generator Tube Integrity," Revision 4.

Additionally the amendment creates TS 6.7.6.k. "Steam Generator (SG) Program" and TS 6.8.1.7, "Steam Generator Tube Inspection Report," consistent with TSTF-449, Revision 4.

There were minor differences between TSTF-449 and FPLEs application, which included differences in the Seabrook licensing basis and TS section numbering. These are discussed below.

With respect to the differences in the facility licensing basis, the differences did not invalidate the application of TSTF-449, rather they resulted in the licensee deviating slightly from some of the changes discussed in TSTF-449. The following are differences that the NRC staff considers to be administrative in nature and/or consistent with the overall intent of TSTF-449:

• TSTF-449 references two notes associated with Reactor Coolant System Operational Leakage. In the case of Seabrook, the notes were footnotes and the numbering was reversed. This is considered an administrative difference.

• FPLEs proposed to enter cold shutdown within the next 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br /> after achieving hot standby (with hot standby being entered within 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />) when tube integrity is not maintained (or not verified within the required periodicity when a tube is inadvertently not plugged). This is slightly different than TSTF-449, which requires that cold shutdown be entered within 36 hours4.166667e-4 days <br />0.01 hours <br />5.952381e-5 weeks <br />1.3698e-5 months <br />, however, both requirements have the plant reaching the desired Modes within the same time-frame.

Since these differences were either administrative in nature or consistent with the Seabrook licensing basis (and in either case, conservative), the NRC staff determined that they were acceptable.

In addition to the changes above, FPLE proposed changes not included in TSTF-449, Revision 4. First, FPLE, proposed, in part, to limit the calculated accident induced leakage to 1 gallon per minute (gpm) total or 500 gallons per day through any one SG. Since this proposal was more restrictive than that required by TSTF-449 (which solely limits the calculated accident induced leakage to 1 gpm total leakage), the NRC staff finds this acceptable.

It should be noted that the revised TS pages are slightly different than the proposed markups due to previously approved alternate repair criteria. The structure of TSTF-449 allows licensees to incorporate alternate repair criteria into the TSTF-449 format. By incorporating the previously approved repair criteria into the TSTF-449 format, there were several minor changes to the requirements. These changes were made as a result of the format, content, and performance based approach of TSTF-449. Since these changes to the requirements were minor in nature, consistent with the NRC staffs original approval, and consistent with the format and structure of TSTF-449, the NRC staff determined these changes to be acceptable.

The proposed TS changes establish a programmatic, largely performance-based regulatory framework for ensuring that SG tube integrity is maintained. The NRC staff finds that the proposed TSs implement key improvements over the current framework by ensuring that SG programs are focused on accomplishing the overall objective of maintaining SG tube integrity.

The TS changes incorporate performance criteria for evaluating tube integrity that the NRC staff finds consistent with the structural margins and the degree of leak tightness assumed in the current plant licensing basis. Further, the NRC staff finds that maintaining these performance criteria provides reasonable assurance that the SGs can be operated safely without increased risk.

The proposed TSs contain limited specific details concerning how the SG Program is to achieve the required objective of maintaining tube integrity, allowing the licensee flexibility to determine the specific strategy for meeting this objective. The NRC staff finds that included in this flexibility, there are sufficient regulatory constraints on the establishment and implementation of the SG program to provide for adequate oversight and inspection.

Failure to meet the performance criteria will be reportable pursuant to the requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73. The NRC reactor oversight process provides a process by which the NRC staff can verify that the licensee has identified any SG Program deficiencies that may have contributed to such an occurrence and the appropriate corrective actions have been implemented.

In conclusion, the NRC staff finds that the TS changes proposed by FPLE will continue to conform to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.36 by establishing a framework that will assure the necessary quality of the SGs, that their operation will be within safety limits, and that the limiting conditions for operation will be met.

FPLE included revised TS Bases to be implemented with the TS change. The NRC staff notes that the Seabrook TS Bases Control Program is the appropriate process for updating the TS Bases.

4.0 STATE CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New Hampshire and Massachusetts State officials were notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State officials had no comments.

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

The amendment changes a requirement with respect to 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 amendment involves 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 consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (71 FR 23955). The amendment also relates to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) and (c)(10). Pursuant to 10

CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.

5.0 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) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Principal Contributor: Trent L. Wertz Date: March 28, 2007