ML20004D898

Forwards Draft Evaluation of SEP Topic V-5, Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection. Requests Response within 30 Days Indicating Whether as-built Facility Differs from Licensing Basis Assumed in Assessment

ML20004D898
Person / Time
Site:	Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png
Issue date:	06/03/1981
From:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Counsil W CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER CO.
References
TASK-05-05, TASK-5-5, TASK-RR LSO5-81-06-006, LSO5-81-6-6, NUDOCS 8106100281
Download: ML20004D898 (8)

Text

U

-T.

June 3, 1981 A

Occket No. 50-213 LS05-81-06-006 Y

L 0 9 iss g Mr. W. G. Counsil, Vice President itj "'%gp N;/

Nuclear Engineering and Operations Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company 4

f P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101

(,,

SUBJECT:

SEP TOPIC V-5, REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY LEAKAGE DETECTION HADDAM NECK NUCLEAR POWER STATION Enclosed is a copy of our revised draft evaluation of SEP Topic V-5 for the Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Station. This assessment compares your facility, as described in Docket No. 50-213, with the criteria currently used by the regulatory staff for licensing new facilities. This revised draft evaluation factors in the information contained in your "A01584, Responds to SEP Topic V-5, Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection. [[Regulatory Guide" contains a listed "[" character as part of the property label and has therefore been classified as invalid. Requires Seismic Qualification of Only Airborne Particulate Monitoring Sys & Not Leakage Detection Sys|April 30, 1981 letter]] on tnis subject, and pertinent information contained in SEP Tcpic V-10.A and available 10 CFR 50, Appendix I submittals for Haddam Neck. Please inform us within 30 days whe+.her or not your as-built facility differs from the licensing basis assuned n our assessment.

This evaluation will be a basic input to the integrated safety assessnent for your facility unless you identify changes needed to reflect the as-built conditions at your f acility. This assessment may be revised in the future if your faciity design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to this subject are modified before the integrated assessment is conpleted.

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

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

Enclosure:

SEP Topic.V-5 8106100 M p

cc w/ enclosure:

See next page f

.s

.SEPB.:0L ['k SEPB:DL Q ! SEPB.:, g,,,l,ORBf,5,:gt:PMI OR y g :DC i

C L

c' cr>

7 5 [ 51'

/k/81'

{:[Bi'"^C//8l

/ ]/ 2/85 ld[.Gh,1 n= = ry KHerring:'dk RHermann i

WR'uYs'el l

' WPa'ulson as~'

/T)81

rt>

c<:~24 -: : u :. : :...

C. iC!,a L ?i E C O ?. C: C C ?'/

j.(

'y UNITED STATES g

s-,

g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'y )

E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

/p

,j/

June 3,1981 vs Docket No. 50-213 LS05 06-006 Mr. W. G. Counsil, Vice President Nuclear Engineering and Operations Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company P. O. Box 270 Hartferd, Connecticut 06101

SUBJECT:

SEP TOPIC V-5, REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY LEAKAGE DETECTION HADDAM MECK NUCLEAR POWER STATION Enclosed is a copy of our revised draft evaluation of SEP Topic V-5 for the Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Station. This assessment compares your facility, as described in Docket No. 50-213, with the criteria currently used by the regulatory staff for licensing new facilities. This revised draft evaluation factors in the information contained in your "A01584, Responds to SEP Topic V-5, Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection. [[Regulatory Guide" contains a listed "[" character as part of the property label and has therefore been classified as invalid. Requires Seismic Qualification of Only Airborne Particulate Monitoring Sys & Not Leakage Detection Sys|April 30, 1981 letter]] on this subject, and pertinent information contained in SEP Topic V-10.A and available 10 CFR 50, Appendix I submittals for Haddam Neck. Please inform us within 30 days whether or not your as-built f acility differs from the licensing basis assumed in our assessment.

This evaluation will be a basic input to the integrated safety assessment for your facility unless you identify changes needad to reflect the as-built conditions at your f acility. This assessment may be revised in the future if your faciity design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to this subject are modified before the integrated assessment is completed, s

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

Sincerely, H

Dennis M. Crutchfle d, h' f Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 Division of Licensing l

Enclosure:

SEP Topic V-5 cc w/ enclosure:

See next page

Mr. W. G. Counsil cc Day, Berry & Howard U. S. Environmental Protectim Counselors at Law Agency One Constitution Plaza Region I Office Hartford, Connecticut 06103 ATTN: EIS COORDINATOR JFK Federal Building Superintendent Boston, Massachusetts 02203 Haddam Neck Plant RFD #1 Resident inspector Post Office Box 127E Haddam Neck Nuclear. Power Sution East Hampton, Connecticut 06424 c/o U. S. NRC East Haddam Post Office Mr. James R. Himmelwright East Haddam, Connecticut 0923 Northeast Utilities Service Conpany P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101 Russell Library 119 Broad Street Middletown, Connecticut 06457 Board of Selectmen Town Hall Haddam, Connecticut 06103 Connecticut Energy Agency ATTN: Assistant Director Research and Policy Development Department of Planning and Energy Policy 20 Grand Street Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Director, Criteria and Standards Division Office of Radiation Prograns (ANR-460)

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D. C.

20460

..7.-

9

HA}DAMNECK SYSTEMATIC EVALUA110N PROGRAM TOPIC V-5 REACTOR COOL \\NT PRESSURE BOUNUAKY (KLeo) LLAKAut utitCTION I.

. 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.

II.

Review Criteria The acceptance criteria for the detection of leakage from the reactor coolant pressure boundary is stated in the General Design Criteria of Appendix A,10 CFR Part 50. Criterion 30, " Quality of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary,"

requires that means shall be provided for detecting and, to the extent practi-cal, identifying the location of the source of leakage in the reactor coolant pressure boundary.

III. Review Guidelines The acceptance criteria are described in the Nuclear Regulatory Connission Standard Review Plan Section 5.2.5, " Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage -

Detection." -The areas of the Safety Analysis Report and Technical Specifications are reviewed to establish that information submitted by the licensee is in compli-ance with Regulatory Guide 1.45, " Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection Systers."

IV.

Evaluation Safety Topic V-5 was evaluated in this review for conpliance of the informa-tion submitted by the licensee with Regulatory Guide 1.45, " Reactor Coolant-Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection Systems." The information in the Safety Analysis Report and Technical Specifications, the April 12, 1979 letter from CY to the NRC regarding SEP Topic V-10.A. the April 30, 1931 letter from NU to the NRC regarding SEP Topic V-5, and the available 10 CFR 50, Appendix I review information for Haddam Neck was reviewed. Regulatory Guide 1.45 requires that at least three separate detection systems be installed in a nuclear power plant to detect an unidentified leakage from the reactor coolant pressure boundary to the primary containment of one 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 following certain seismic events and capable of being checked in the control room. Of the three separate i

e b

4 e

e-.

w w.

=-

3

-wv y

.-ve

-e--

-m,,m,->

4e-

=

+ - - - -

,--,e

1. ++--w 1

3

--wy

+.- -.+ - - w a' - -., < * -

v-

. 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 flow rate from air coolers or monitoring of airborne gaseous radioactivity.

Oth'er detection methods, such as humidity, temperature and pressure, should be considered to be alarms of indirect indication of leakage to the containment.

In addition, provisions should be made to monitor systems interfacing with the reactor coolant pressure boundary for signs of intersystem leakage through methods such as radioactivity and water level or flow monitors. Plant incorporated systems and their corresponding features are tabulated in Enclosure 1.

Detailed guidance for the leakage detection system is contained in Regulatory Guide 1.45.

Based upon our review of the referenced documents and the summaries presented in Enclosure 1, we have determined:

1) The systems employed for detection of leakage from the reactor coolant pressure boundary to the primary containment meet the Regulatory Guide 1.45 requirement for the types of leakage detection systems to be employed. However, the airborne particulate radioactivity monitoring system does not have the required sensitivity for the detection of leaks of I gpm within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />. Furthermore, this system is not seismically qualified to function following the occurrence _ of earthquakes up to and including the SSE, and the sump level and airborne gascus radio-activity monitoring' systems are not seismically qualified to function following the occurrence of earthquales up to and including the OBE, as required by Regulatory Guide 1.45.

The additional Regulatory Guide 1.45 criteria are met.

(See Table 1 of Enclosure 1.)

2) The Haddam Neck Technical Specifications do not impose require-ments concerning the operability of the leakage detection systems to monitor leakage to the primary ':ontainment, as required by Regulatory Guide 1.45.

'3) Provisions are made to monitor raactor coolant in-leakage to those systems listed in Table 2 of Enclosure 1.

However, from the review of the referenced information it is not clear that this table includes all systems which interface with the reactor coolant pressure boundary.

In addition, information concerning the leak detection methods, similar to that given for the detection systems in Table 1 of Enclosure 1, is inconplete for those in Table 2. -

4) -Information concerning the use of reactor coolant inventory balances, as indicated in Table 3 of Enclosure 1, for a determination of its usefulness for reactor coolant pressure boundary leak detection is-incomplete.

m y

y e-a-y..

e

3-V.

Conclusions

1) The review of Table 1 of Enclosure 1 indicates that the systems incorporated for measurement of leakage from the reactor coolant pressure boundary to the containment do not conform with Regulatory Guide 1.45 criteria regarding sensitivity and seismic qualification.

The necessity for mocifications will be considered during the inte-grated safety assessment.

2)

Standard Technical Specification 3/4.4.6 and the corresponding surveillance requirements concerning the operability of the reactor coolant pressure boundary to the coateinment-leakage detection systems (excluding the sump flow monitor) should be added to the Haddam Neck Technical Specifications. Also, the current Haddam Neck Technical Specification ~3.14 should be revised to state that the sensitivities of the reactor coolant pressure boundary to containment leakage detection system is 1 gpm within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> for Items 1, 4 and 7 in Table 1 of Enclosure 1.

3)

Information concerning the leakage detection systems for the detection of intersystem reactor coolant pressure boundary leakage and the '

reactor coolant inventory balance is incomplete. Therefore, we cannot-determine the extent to which Regulatory Guide 1.45 is met. The necessity for any modifications in this area will be considered during the integrated safety assessment.

e o

(

~

y w,y,-y 9

y w

y s

,c, w-y,.

l l

1 f(ll\\

"Dm gM;'r!

4 fi t!

4 I

m m

m m

m m

m m

m u

m s

us n

o i

rt ia eMr l

e b gp anO s

s se ti e

e Y

srl Y

Y eua t

TDm r

un

)

U i

h

.f O

u m

f t e N

t N

n nR mr 1

1 r

e e 18r 8r 8

mnc

/ e a

uon

/e

/e

/

cie 0t 0t 0

ut t

ot r 3t 3t 3

Jt t

Dae

/e

/ e

/

/e a

4l 4l 4

Tl m

a s

r n

o i

t h

a t

rc i

oi w

mfd o

n d

onI s

Ro s

s e

e i&

e e

t Y

l t Y

Y c

SM e

oas t

E rcm e

T ti S

d nda Y

onl e

S CIA b

N n

O d

rn d

d a

I oo e

e ie c

TC if i

i p

fi if m

f E

s t

Tt ecd t

l k ne l

l g

E n a

D em aur a

a E

e uF u u

u u

I q

s q

q 9

q t

E iu o

o r

hhs t

t cA t

t a

o h

V k

ri N

A q

E e

c ahs N

N t

L R

e EWi s

N e

Y5 t

m fH

'q e v r.

i a

R4 a

y c

A d

det D1 d

vi r

d a

b t

e l

eii h

n 0

d l

Rht r

i I

B i

ci o

4 I

u eAs o

1 E,G t

m n

P f

n ioe P

t y

a 3

TtS S

r l

S o

P n

E t

o R

a i

y P

l t

t u

a m

ei T

g t v m

p ic A

R ai p

r N

e g

f Rt g

oo i

L is 1

1 O

P c

k e

O an p

C ee S

LS RO l

a T

c C

d A

e n

i E

t R

h a

c r

e o

s p

s s

T r

e e

e Y

o Y

Y cn I

)

yro t,

r evn I

)

q g

e n

n r

i e

e eg p

(

s ir r

e r

r rn a

n st eo o

t e

e ei T

g e

i ne tt t

a h g hq hr s

ai i

R p n_

pn po e

e o M_

i am cM r

mo mo mn ic v

r l n n

si sj st o

t te uo e-or or oi i

i t

n i

n ui i

i 1 e t t tt t o tn o

tT ty Fl Ai Ai AM i

s 1

a M

c(

rt t

o n

n m

n m

A ai do to to t e E

e eC nM nM nr S

E n

l g

Pv i

t e

e eu c

R e

my mt i

e i

e pn i

s a

v mi et ar m,r O

nt na t

r o

t~

e ur n:

si t

o~

L Po ra nA l u ii i r s

u n

t oo e

as ad ae u

ts t

C p

pi bi d m t s ti t p o

t nm c

m mn rd d

no ne nm N

or or ou

'oe c

o E

1 o

m u

uo ia e

e S

SM AR Cf CP CH CT A

M t

t b

P y

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

l B

s T

R-S 1

2 3

5 6

7 8

9 0

1 2

a C

1 1

1 1

1

g q "W gM y

" F $

p" # (g o

- i rt oa eNr l

e bgp anO ti srl eua Dm

, c rI c r-I r

e it

<it ro o

nmI nmI i

oo oo f

t it Ct

.Ct t e C

c A o~

Ao.

nR e

e 9

C9 C

e e b S

1 e 7e mnc

/ er/er uon R

R 2k e2 k e nw1 nw

m. i e A4 A4 YYP3YP ao/ao t r h

S t7 F7 Dac s

ro t

~

a rc oi mfd o

n onI R oi&

S loas e

e e

e t

s s

s s

H rcm Y

Y Y

Y t

i ti r S

nda Y

onl S

CIA NO I

rn T

oo C

E s,

i f

t T

t ecd E

n D

e k ne aur m

uF u E e q

s G r hhs Ai K u

't cA ri A q ahs E e

[WI L R_

kc Ys e

R4 N

y A

det D1 m

vi

'q e v I

a Rt c d

eii 0a 1

l d

Rht 1

a ci u

l eAs l

E c_

m n

R l

y_

l oe t5 r t

I tS 5 o n

E t

a R

a l

P y

P lu t

ei T

g t v N

e ai A

R Rt L

i O

k s O

an C

ee R

tS O

f TC 5.

r r

t A

B ad E

o R

P r a r

o ft oCe eR o

t k

tRgn t ei n

d ra te. n cgn a

n a

sek wrero T

io mdt el f

aojaM a wit h. ge oue c

hsL rsd r v d

t a-e o n'I i i

l n

ai e a

ieent flfISBf4FDRSl R

m

.m B

e e

P t

t C

s s

R y

y S

S

/

w r

r e

e e

t t

c a

a a

m m

W W

f e

e e ~~ r t

t g

g g

e a

y y

i i

s s

n n

t n

S S

l l

k I

a o

o e

y y

o o

h L

r r

C C

c a

a m

d d

d d

i h

e n

n e

e t

W o

o s

s o

o 2:

s

's c

c l

l e

e y

m S

S C

C s

e e

r t

_ a 6

l e

)

)

)

)

)

b t

s n

e 9

0 1

2

)

a n

y

)

)

)

)

S 1

2 3

4 1

1 1

T I

i i;'1 l 3 3 3 !ti1t! '

. i : II9 l1 i )fl

!T 4a' ' j t'

t h

J

{

i L :-

.1 t

Rt

COOLANT PRESSURE B0t!NDARY LEAKAGE DETECTION SYSTEMS Regulatory Guide 1.45 Requirements e

Table 3:

Plant:,,,_113ddagjeck t

RCS Inventory Balance ~

t, t

Leak Rate Sensitivity

.2 gpm Corresponding Tirne Required to

• 24 hrs.

Achieve Stnsitivity s

• Normal Imentory Check M

{

Instrumentation Required with Corresponding Location:

Earthquake for Which Instrumentation Hardware Functioning Is Assured:

Testable During Normal Operation:

Doctmentation

Reference:

FSAR Section 1.2.2.3 eM c3 c2f.

c:3 C3 CL.

g 7.

v-e s

e e

• • $*-eh%.

'mp==

A

.w

,,,-m._s.

_