ML19350B775

Forwards Evaluation of SEP Topic V-5 Re RCPB Leakage Detection.Two Addl Leakage Detection Methods & Increase in Sensitivity Are Necessary

ML19350B775
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	03/18/1981
From:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Counsil W NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO.
References
TASK-05-05, TASK-5-5, TASK-RR LSO5-81-03-032, LSO5-81-3-32, NUDOCS 8103230676
Download: ML19350B775 (5)

Text

~

s 2

W g

s Dock et No. 50-245 EARCH 18 TAI LS05-81-03-032 Mr. W. G. Counsil, Vice President Nuclear Engineering and Operations Northeast Nuclear Energy Cogary P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101

Dear Mr. Ccunsil:

RE: SEP TCPIC V-5, REACTOR CCOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY LEAKAGE DETECTION MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Enclosed is a copy of cur evaluaton of SEP Topic V-5 for the Millstone Nuclear Pcuer Station. This assessnent co@ ares ycur facility, as described in Docket Nc. 50-245, with the criteria currently used by the regulatory staff for licensing new facilities. Please infor:a us within 30 days if your as-built facility differs from the licensing basis assumed in cur assessment or this topic will be assumed co@lete.

This evaluation will be a basic input to the integrated safety assessment for your facility unless ycu identify changes needed to reflect the as-built conditions at ycur facility. This assess.nent may be revised in the future if your facility-design is changed or if HRC criteria relating to this subject are modified before the integrated assesscent is completed.

In future correspondence regarding this topic, please refer to the tcpic number in ycur cover letter.

Sincerely, g ist M 'cr tC te#S u Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 Division of Licensing

Enclosure:

SEP Topic V-5 cc w/ enclosure:

See next page r\\

, g.-SEP : L SEPB:DL:SL SEPSOLgV ; ORB 15:DL;FM ;0R

DL:C q

., g

..omey R

dk i RENi ann " i "h sei '

13Shia' iDC ld :"

G""'

J....

..l.

Ar* M.

+..]/8 J/$/81

',3g [gf I 3/

mei 3 1

3/7781

-3/f/81

")

2

8103230 @ h '

'O

~'

>$ Kf 4g o

UNITED STATES

.pg.(f'.'k

!h -

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p/. ;

WASmNGTON, D C. 20555

&oRY $

March 18, 1981 Docket No. 50-245 LS05-81-03-032 Mr. W. G. Counsil, Vice President Nuclear Engineering and Operations Northeast Nuclear Energy Ccmpany P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101

Dear Mr. Counsil:

RE: SEP TOPIC V-5, REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY LEAKAGE DETECTION MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Enclosed is a copy of our evaluaton of SEP Topic V-5 for the Millstone Nuclear Power Station. This assessment compares your facility, as described in Docket No. 50-245, with the criteria currently used by the regulatory staff for licensing new facilities. Please inform us within 30 days if your as-built facility differs from the licensing basis assumed in our assessment or this topic will be assumed complete.

This evaluation will be a basic input to the integrated safety assessment for your facility unless you identify changes needed to reflect the a -

built conditions at your facility. This assessment may be revised in the future if your facility design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to this subject are modified before the integrated assessment is completed.

In future correspondence regarding this topic, please refer to the topic number in your cover letter.

g Sincerely.

h.

Dennis M. Crutchfield, ief Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 Division of Licensing

Enclosure:

SEP Topic V-5 cc w/ enclosure:

See next page

~

Mr. W. G. Counsil MILESTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-245 cc w/ enclosure:

William H. Cuddy, Esquire Connecticut Energy Agency Day, Berry & Howard ATTN: Assistant Director One Constitution Plaza

~

Research and Policy Counselors at' Law Development Hartford, Connecticut 06103 Department of Planning and Energy Policy Natural Resources Defense Council 20 Grand Street 917 15th Street, N. W.

Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Washington, D. C.

20005 s Director, Technical Assessment Division Northeast Nuclear Energy Company Office of Radiation Programs ATTN: Superintendent (AW-459)

Millstone Plant U. S. Environmental Protection P. O. Box 128 Agency Waterford, Connecticut 06385 Crystal Mall #2 Arlington, Virginia 20460 Mr. James R. Himmelwright Northeast Utilities Service Co.epany U. S. Environmental Protection P. O. Box 270 Agency Hartford, Connecticut 06101 Region 1 Office ATTN: EIS COORDINATOR Resident Inspector JFK Federal Building c/o U. S. NRC Boston, Massachusetts 02203 P. O. Box Drawer KK Niantic, Connecticut 06357 Waterford Public Library Rope Ferry Road, Route 156 Waterford, Connecticut 06385 g

First Selectman of the Town of Waterford Hall of Rtcords 200 Boston Post Road Waterford, Connecticut 06385 John F. Opeka Systems ' Superintendent Northeast Utilities Service Company P. O. Box 270 e

Hartford, Connecticut 06101 s

SO 8f

1 I

MILLSTONE 1 l

SYSTEMATIC EVALVATION FROGRAM TOPIC V-S REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY (RCPB) LEAKAGE DETECTION Introduction The safety objective of Topic V-5 is to determine the reliability and sensitivity of the leak detection systems which monitor the reactor coolant pressure boundary to identify primary system leaks at an early stage before failures occur.

g L

II. Review Criteria i"

The ' acceptance criteria for the detecticn of leakage from the reactor coolant pressure boundary is stated in the General Design Criteria of A;;pendix A,10 CFR Part 50.

Criterion 30, " Quality of Reacter Coolant Pressure Boundary", requires that means shall be previced for detecting and, to the extent practical, identi-fying the location of the source of Icakage in the reactor coolant pressure tcundary. Criterien 32, " Ins;:ecticn of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary",

recuires that componer.ts which are part of the reactor coolant pressure tcundary shall be designed to permit periodic inspection and testing to assess their structur4 Land leak tight integrity.

III. Review Guidelines The acceptance criteria are implemented by the Nuclear Regulatory Comission in Section 5,2.5, " Reactor Coolant Pressure Soundary Leakage Detection", and Section 5.2.4, " Reactor Ccolant Pressure Scuncary Inservice Inspection and The areas of the Safety Analysis Report Testing", of the Standard Review Plan.

and Technical Specifications are reviewed to establish that information submitted is in compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.45, " Reactor Coolant by the licensee Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection Systems", and that the inservice inspection programs are based on the requirements of Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, " Rules for the Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Although not a part of this review, the consequences of break and Ccmponents".

crack location in component f ailures is analyzed and evaluated in Section 3.6.1,

" Plant Design for Protection Against Postulated Piping Failures in Fluid Systems Outside Containment", and Section 3.6.2, " Determination of Sreak t.ocations and Dynamic. Effects Associated with Postulated Rupture of Piping", of the Standard Review Plan.

il i

i g

O

-2 i

IV.

Evaluation Safety Tepic V-5 was evaluated in this review for compliance of the information submitted by the licensee with Regulatory Guide 1.45, " Reactor Coolant Pressure Scundary Leakage Cetection Systems". The information in the Safety Analysis Report and Technical Specifications was substantiated by telephone conversation.

with the licensee. Regulatory Guide 1.45 requires that at least three separate detection systems be installed in a nuclear power plant to detect an unidentified L

leakage from the reactor coolant pressure boundary of cne gallon per minute within one hour. Leakage from identified sources must be isolated so that the flow rates may be monitored separately from unidentified leakage. The detection systems should be capable of performing their functions follcwing seismic events and capable of being checked in the control rcem. Of the three separate leak detection methods required, two of the methods should be (1) sump level and flow monitoring and (2) airborne particulate radioactivity monitoring. The third method may be either monitoring of condensate flew rate frem air coolers or monitoring of airborne gasecus radioactisity. Other detection methods, such as l

humidity, temperature and pressure, shculd be considered to be alarms or indirect indication of leakaca to the centainment.

The recuirements of Reg. Guide 1.45 and Standard Review Plan 5.2b and plant incorporated systems that meet those requirements are tabulated in Table 1.

V.

Conclusion Our review indicates that this facility is not in compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.45.

At least two additional leakage detection methods and an increase in sensitivity from 2.5 to 1 gpm are riecessary to satisfy the Regulatory Guide requirements. The necessity for such modifications (installation of gaseous and particulate monitors) will be considered during the integrated safety assessment.

J l

l 6

f k

l Table 1 - Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakace Detection System

~

Plant S.R.P. 5.2.5 or Incorporated Reg Guide 1.45 System System Recuirement i

5 I 4gn" X

1) Sump Level Monitoring (Inventory)

I Sump Pump Actuations Yes,1 or 2

2) Monitoring (Time Meters)

X Mandatory Yes

3) Airborne Particulate j

Radioactivity Monitoring Mandatory I

Yes, 4 or 5

4) M m e Gaseous Radioactivity Monitoring Mandatory Yes, 4 or 5

5) Condensated Flow Rate from Air Coolers Mandet.ucy Yes

6) Containment A:nosphere Pressure Monitoring Optional I

Containment Atroschere Yes

7) Humidity Monitoring Optional i

Containment Atmosphere Yes

8) Temperature Monitoring Optional

9) CVCS Makeup Flowrate tional Yes

10) Portable Ultrasonic Detectors X

Optional

))) Air Conditioner Coolant No Temperature Rise X

i

(

12) 13)

L h

t II~