Text

Proposed Tech Specs Re Containment Leakage Testing Modifying Implementing Performance Based Program at Seabrook Station IAW 10CFR50,App J,Option B & Reg Guide 1.163 Requirements
	ML20117K311
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	06/04/1996
From:	; NORTH ATLANTIC ENERGY SERVICE CORP. (NAESCO)
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20117K296	List: ML20117K293; ML20117K305; ML20117K311;
References
	RTR-REGGD-01.163, RTR-REGGD-1.163 NUDOCS 9606110090
	Download: ML20117K311 (35)
	v • d • e

,

DEFINITIONS CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY

^

1.7 CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY shall exist when:

All penetrations required to be closed during accident conditions a.

are either:

1)

Capable of being closed by an OPERABLE containment automatic isolation valve system, or 2)

Closed by manual valves, blind flanges, or deactivated automatic valves secured in their closed positions.

)

b.

All equipment hatch'es are closed.and sealed,

~

Each air lock is in compliance with the requirements o{d"." "Y c.

gag"%1, Specification 3.6.1.3, g

d.

ontainmeng ates ar =ithi, the lirits c.

.,,,,,...s.....

The sealing mechanism associated with 'each penetration (e.g.,

e.

. welds, bellows, or.0-rings) is OPERABLE.

CONTROLLED LEAKAGE 1.8 CONTROLLED LEAKAGE shall be that seal' water flow supplied to the reactor coolant pump seals.

CORE ALTERATION 1.9 CORE ALTERATION shall be the movement or manipulation of any component within the reactor pressure vessel with the vessel head removed and fuel in the vessel.

Suspension of CORE ALTERATION shall not preclude completion of movement of a component to.a safe conservative position.

CORE OPERATING LIMITS REPORT 1.10 The CORE OPERATING LIMITS REPORT (COLR) provides core operating limits for the current operating reload cycle. The cycle specific core operating limits shall be determined for each reload cycle in accordance with Specification 6.8.1.6.

Plant operation within these operating limits is addressed in individual specifications.

DIGITAL CHANNEL OPERATIONAL TEST 1.11 A DIGITAL CHANNEL OPERATIONAL TEST shall consist of exercising the digital computer hardware using data base manipulation and/or injecting simulated process data to verify OPERABILITY of alarm and/or trip functions.

The Digital Channel Operational Test definition is only applicable to the Radiation Monitoring Equipment.

9606110090 960604 PDR ADOCK 05000443 P

PDR SEABROOK - UNIT 1 1-2 Amendment No.-9}-

L6TE

3/4.6 CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS 3/4.6.1 PRIMARY CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION

3. 6.1.1 Primary CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY shall be maintained.

APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1, 2, 3, and 4.

ACTION:

Without primary CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY, restore CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY within I hour or be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months .

SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.6.1.1 Primary CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY shall be demonstrated:

At least once per 31 days by verifying that all penetrations

not a.

capable of being closed by OPERABLE containment automatic isolation valves and required to be closed during accident conditions are closed by valves, blind flanges, or deactivated automatic valves secured in their positions except for valves that are open under administrative control as permitted by Specification 3.6.3; u d A

b.

By verifying that each containment air lock in complianc with the requirements of S ecification 3 After each closing of each penetration subject to Type B testing, c.

except the containment air locks, if opened following a Type A or B test, by leak rate testing the seal with gas at a pressure not less than P,, 49.6 psig, and verifying that when the measured leakage rate for these seals is added to the leakage rates detemined pursuant to Specification 4.6.1.2d. for all other Type B and C penetrations, the combined leakage rate is less than 0.60 L,.

Except valves, blind flanges, and deactivated automatic valves which are located inside the containment and are locked, sealed, or otherwise secured in the closed position.

These penetrations shall be verified closed during each COLD SHUTDOWN except that such verification need not be performed more often than once per 92 days.

SEA 8 ROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-1 Amendment No.

CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS PRIMARY CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION

3. 6.1. 2 Containment leakage rates shall be limited to: fio ~cecrAwu. sW k coa

W mi LeJ ge AAc

%s hg Prymm.

a.

An overall integrated leakage rate of:

Less than or equal to L,, 0.15% by weight of the containment air per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months at P,, 49.6 psig; b.

A combined leakage rate of less than 0.60 L, for all penetrations and valves subject to Type B and C tests, when pressurized to P,.

No individual penetration will be allowed to exceed 5% of the total allowed (0.05 L,); and A combined leakage rate of less than or equal to 0.60 L, for all c.

penetrations that are secondary containment bypass leakage paths l

when pressurized to P.

APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1, 2, 3, and 4.

ACTION:

_e r

4 With (a) the measured overall integrated containment leakage rate exceeding 0.75 L,, or (b) the measured combined leakage rate for all penetrations and valves subject to Types B and'C tests exceeding 0.60 L,, or (c) the combined

~

bypass leakage rate exceeding 0.60 L,, restore the overall integrated leakage rate to less than or equal to 0.75 L, the combined leakage rate for all penetrations and valves subject to Type 8 and C tests to less than 0.60 L,,

and the combined bypass leakage rate to less than 0.60 L, prior to increasing the Reactor Coolant System temperature above 200'F.

A.

A OR 4e wered\\ ipkegrdel le<~hp rde ewc.ee chwg \\ 0 L cy C 9 TAvJ m e N T' 1 tuTEGr(2. \\ T Y M M

{ hoor or he is hst ) hot STAN D 6Y sb he iuo4 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months uA u d

Coto sauroca ww- % Atw,9 30 woors.

L SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-2 Amendment No.14

CONTAlletENT SYSTEMS PRIMARY CONTAIMENT CONTAlledNT. LEAKAGE SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.61.2 _The contajn!nentleikage.ptes__shall be demonstyted(at the following te V

ule and shall be determined in' conformWaith the criteria specified in

~

, Appendix J of 10 CFR Part 50:

Type A tests (Overall Integrated Containment Leakage Rate) shall be a.

conducted at intervals specified in 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, as I

modified by approved exemptions, during shutdown at a pressure not less than P,, 49.6 psig, b.

If any periodic Type A test fails to meet 0.75 L, the test schedule for subsequent Type A tests shall be reviewed,and approved by the Commission. If two consecutive Type A tests fail to meet 0.75 L, a Type A test shall be performed at least every 18 months until.two consecutive Type A tests meet 0.75 L, at which time the above test schedule may be resumed; The accuracy of each Type A test shall be verified by a supplemental c.

test which:

1)

Confirms the accuracy of the test by verifying that the supple-mental test result, L, is in accordance with the following eqaation:

l L, - ( L. + L.) l s 0. 25 L, where L is the measured Type A test leakage and L, is the superimposed leak; 2)

Has a duration sufficient to establish accurately the change in leakage rate between the Type A test and the supplemental test; and 3)

Requires that the rate at which gas is injected into the containment or bled from the containment during the supplemental test is between 0.75 L, and 1.25 L,.

ia cuc.cccNcc rah %. YwMA Leap (Lk Tesug Wopm.

i i

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-3 Amendment No. 7--

LATER

CONTAINMENT

~

PRIMARY CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT !7AKAGE v-SURVEILLANCE REOUIREMENTS

=-

4.6.1.2 (Continued) d.

Type B and C tests shall be conducted with gas at a pressure not less than P 49.6 psig, at intervals no greater than 24 months

-i except for.l,ests involving:

1)

Air locks, and 2)

Purge supply and exhaust isolation valves with resilient material seals, e.

The combined bypass leakage rate shall be determined to be less than or equal to 0.60 L, by applicable Type B and C tests at least once I

per 24 months.

f.

Purge supply and exhaust isolation valves with resilient material seals shall be tested and demonstrated OPERABLE by the requirements of Specification 4.6.1.7.1.

l,,

g.

Air lescks shall be tested and demonstrated OPERABLE by the requirements of Specification 4.6.1.3; and

~

h.

The provisions of Specifications 4.0.2 are not applicable.

/

k A

A SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-4 Amendment No. 49-.

LMEL

... ~

l

.. 3.j ; r r. ;ga.

m.,

........=.w, CONTAINMENT.' SYSTEMS

~

t PRIMARY CONTAINMENT

'~

CONTAINMENT AIR LOCKS LIMITING CONDITION FOR 0 ERATION 3.6.1.3 Each containment air. lock shall be OPERABLE l

Both doors closed except w en the air lock is being used for normal a.

transit entry and exit through the containment, then at least one air lock door shall be closed, and b.

An overall air lock leakage rate of less than or equal to 0.05 L" at P, 49.6 psig.

APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1, 2, 3, and 4.

Q

("

} 'f Propm.

ACTION:

s With one containment air lock door inoperable:

a.

1.

Maintain at least the OPERABLE air lock door closed

and either l

restore the inoperable air lock door to OPERABLE status within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months or lock the OPERABLE air lock door closed, 2.

Operation may then continue until performance of the next re-quired overall air lock leakage test provided that the OPERABLE air lock door is verific.d to be locked closed at least once per 31 days, j

l 3.

Otherwise, be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months , and 4.

The provisions of Specification 3.0.4 are not applicable.

b.

With the containment air lock inoperable, except as the result of an inoperable air lock door, maintain at least one air lock door closed; restore the inoperable air lock to OPERABLE status within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months or be in at least HOT STANOBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months .

1 4

i

Except during entry to repair an inoperable inner door 'for a cumulative time not to exceed 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months per year.

4 6

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-7 g{/

Q d

c..

e -

CONTAINMENT ' SYSTEMS PRIMARY CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT AIR LOCKS SURVEILLANCE REQ'JIREMENTS l

4. 6. '. 3 Each containment air lock shall be demonstrated OPERABLE:

pr W

\\

[

a.

Within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days 0.02 hours 1.190476e-4 weeks 2.7396e-5 months following each closing, except,when the air lock is being used for multiple entries, then at least once per 72 hours8.333333e-4 days 0.02 hours 1.190476e-4 weeks 2.7396e-5 months , by J

I verifying that the seal leakage is less than 0.01 L, as determined by precision flow measurements when measured for at least 30 seconds

.within the volume between the seal at a constant pressure of 49.6 psig; i

b.

By conducting overall air lock leakage tests at not less than P,,

49.6 psig, and verifying the overall air lock leakage rate is within its limit.

l i

i 1)

At least once per 6 months,* and j

2)

Prior to establishing CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY when maintenance has been performed on the air lock that could affect the air lock sealing capability.**

b,

[.

At least once pe rifyin only one door in each air lock can be opened at a time.

V Q.

hIb Oe, lec

e. Ydt i,0 a.C.c.orcIum ct v>M Oe OudA>med Ledge Sde Te.s&g ho{ta m.

The provisions of Specification 4.0.2 are not applicable.

- This represents an exemption to Appendix J, paragraph III.0.2.(b)(ii),

of 10 CFR Part 50.

A-4' g'

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-8

.g

' CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS

-PRIMARY CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT VESSEL STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION

3. 6.1. 6 The structural integrity of the containment vessel shall be maintained at a level consistent with the acceptance criteria in Specification 4.6.1.6.

l APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1, 2, 3, and 4.

ACTION:

With the structural integrity of the containment vessel not conforming to the above requirements, restore the structural integrity to within the limits prior to increasing the Reactor Coolant System temperature above 200 F.

SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS

b....,3, c..,7,..q 7. b...N.y.

b.. b..

3......., _-

)

7,eci euiei,.v.a.c) by a visual on x

d accessib W te r

a

,extqtior a so he_ vessel This inspection shall be performed prior to the Type A con ainment eakage rate test to verify no a arent changes in appearance p he _surfac e r other_ abnormal degradation.

ny abno degrada-on o the containment vess Dele ected during the abore required inspections shall be reported to the Commission in a Special Report pursuant to Specifi-cation 6.8.2 witfiin 15 days.

[r3 o CCordctcJce wh J heb-r Coa W,avn i Lah p

%s%g v=.

hbf SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-13 j'

gv.>

/:

~

CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS PRIMARV CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT VENTILATION SYSTEM

~

i LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION l

1 3.6.1.7 Each 8-inch containment purge supply and exhaust isolation valve shall be OPERABLE and sealed closed except when open for purge system operation for i

pressure control; for ALARA, respirable, and air quality considerations to facilitate personnel entry; and for surveillance tests that require the j

valve (s) to be open.

APPLICABILITY: MODES 1, 2, 3, and 4.

['

ACTION:

i a.

With one or more of the 8-inch containment purge supply or exhaust i

isolation valves open for reasons other than given in Specification 3.6.1.7 above, close the open 8-inch valve (s) or isolate the penetration (s) within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months , otherwise be in at least HOT STANDBY I

1 within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months , and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following-j N

30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months .

1 i

b.

With one or more containment purge supply or exhaust isolation d leakage rate in excess of the limits of 5;;::..... 10: 4.. '.7.11 restore the inoperable valve (s) to OPERABLE l

a

'fected penetration (

t he leakage rate does not exceed the limits of-: ::ifi:: tic: ?.0.1.7.1 j

within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months and close the purge supply he a ec penetration is the exhaust penetration, otherwise be in at least HOT 1

1 I

STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months , and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the f

following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months .

P

-h Coa 4dwm%4 leak e & Test:og rogemyvs SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-12 Amendment No. tir LAM j

CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS

.PRJfjARY CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT VENTILATION SYSTEM l

SURVEILLANCE RE0VIREMENTS 4.6.1.7.1 A' k :t cr-- - r 02 d:

Aach8-inchcontainmentpurgesupplyand exhaust iso a Fres lent material seals sha demons t

h,,..

.".".rif g ga p o(e me y

c:: 5.:r Or eg:1 to

.....,.. ~_..___ __...

a a Each8-inchcontainmentpurge"EuilplfMITdxhaustisolationvalve 4.6.1.7.2 shall be verified to be sealed closed or open in accordance with Specification l

3.6.1.7 at least once per 31 days.

i l

[

l l

l I

i l

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-13 Amendment No. 99--

l t_ATER

, CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING STRUCTURAL INTL. ?.RITY LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION l

3.6.5.3 The structural integrity of the containment enclosure idin shall a

ve onsistent with th ;;;;ptanc; c,iteri in i

Sp::ific:ti;n,......,.

APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1, 2, 3, and 4.

D C Mcc%t Loge-Re>0cm Tes b3 ACTION:

v With the structural integrity of the containment enclosure building not con-forming to the above requirements, restore the structural integrity to within the limits within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months or be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months .

SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.6.5.3 The tructur i

ri o the con

' ment e los e

1dino s_ hall be determined during the shut own for each ype containment leakage rate test (reference Specification 4.6.1.2) by a visual inspection of the exposed acces-sible interior and exterior surfaces of the containment enclosure building and verifying no apparent chan s in ap aranc_e of the concrete surfaces or other abnorma1 _d_egr n

ny a norm gradation t e con inment enc ure building detecte during the above required inspections shall be reported to the Commission in a Special Report pursuant to Specification 6.8.2 within 15 days.

be. cdohe.tM.veck l4 ACC.,otd@CC-LO b O

MNE-LeJcge. RcAe. ~ t eshg f) cogram. OE f

b h

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-25 e

. ~.. -. -

~.

ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS 6.15 Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program I

A program shall be established to implement the leakage rate testing of the containment as required by 10 CFR 50.54(o) and 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, Option B, as modified by approved exemptions. This program shall be in accordance with the guidelines contained in Regulatory Guide 1.163, "Perfonnance-Based Containment Leak Test Program, dated September 1995," as modified by approved exceptions.

The peak calculated containment internal pressure for the design basis loss of coolant accident, P., is 49.6 psig..

L The maximum allowable containment leakage rate, L., at P., shall be 0.15% of primary containment air weight per day.

The provisions of SR 4.0.2 do not apply to the test frequencies specified in the l

Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program.

l l

The provisions of SR 4.0.3 are applicable to the Containment Leakage Rate Testing l-Program.

Containment leakage rate acceptance criterion is s 1.0 L,. During the first unit startup following testing in accordance with this program, the leakage rate acceptance criteria are s 0.60 L, for the Type B and Type C tests and s 0.75 L, for Type A tests.

L Overall air lock leakage rate acceptance criterion is s 0.05 L, when tested at 2 P.,

l Each containment 8-inch purge supply and exhaust isolation valve leakage rate.

acceptance criterion is 5 0.01 L, when tested at P.

I L

l i

e

I 3/4.6 CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS j

BASES l

3/4.6.1 PRIMARY CONTAINMENT 3/4.6.1.1 CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY Primary CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY ensures that the release of radioactive l

materials from the containment atmosphere will be restricted to those leakage paths and associated leak rates assumed in the safety analyses.

This i

restriction, in conjunction with the leakage rate limitation, will limit the SITE BOUNDARY radiation doses to w

'n the do h e nf 10 CFR Part inn during accident conditions.

f'r6u 2.4=

OPERABW G Ma@a'

(;4b (eh

+o d 1.0 La, e+c y t pnce 4o A Erb 3/4.6.1.2 CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE eb or i

A r c.:~e "om \\ "'

1 l

The limitations on containmen

a[e e, r.ne weai Ned.

e l

containment leakage volume will not exceed the value assumed in the safety analyses at the peak accident pressure, P.

As an added conservatism, the 3

measured overall integrated leakage rate is further limited to less than or i

equal to 0.75 L during performance of the periodic tests to account for pos-

]

3 sible degradation of the containment leakage barriers between leakage tests.

l T

surveilla et tin or surina leakage rates is =si; tat.ith the req & O:Or... ef Append J e 10 C.

Pdt $0?

i CA,g,ud Leg Rde daace w R &c.T b n.cc 3/4.6.1.3 CONTAINMENT AIR LOCKS t

The limitations on closure and leak rate for the containment air locks are required to meet the restrictions on CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY and containment leak rate.

Surveillance testing of the air lock seals provides assurance that the overall air lock leakage will not become excessive due to seal damage during the intervals between air lock leakage tests.

3/4.6.1.4 INTERNAL PRESSURE l

The limitations on containment internal pressure ensure that:

(1) the containment structure is prevented from e weeding its design negative pressure differential with respect to the annulus atmosphere of 3.5 psi and (2) the containment peak pressure does not exceed the design pressure of 52 psig during LOCA conditions.

The maximum peak pressure expected to be obtained from a LOCA event is 49.6 psig.

The limit of 16.2 psia for initial positive containment pressure l

will limit the total pressure to 49.6 psia which is less than the design pres-l sure and is consistent with the safety analyses.

l l

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 B 3/4 6-1

CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS

\\

BASES 3/4.6.1 PRIMARY CONTAINMENT (Continued) j l

3/4.6.1.5 AIR TEMPERATURE The limitation in containment average air temperature ensures that the containment average air temperature does not. exceed the initial temperature condition assumed in the overall safety analysis for a steam line break acci-dent. Measurements shall be made at all listed locations, whether by fixed or portable instruments, prior to determining the average air temperature.

]

3/4.6.1.6 CONTAINMENT VESSEL STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY This limitation ensures that the structural integrity of the containment steel vessel will be maintained comparable to the original design rtandards for i

the life of the facility. Structural integrity is required to ensure that the vessel will withstand the 2

of a L_0 A visual inspection in : Hue:ti;n g4; n

.... s

.-- :ip t ~ t: :: :,.#icient te g'

]

demonstrat this capabil ty.

ce&c er,p

,, e 3 /4. 6.1. 7 CONTAINMENT VENTILATION SYSTEM I

The 36-inch containment purge supply and exhaust isolation valves are required to be sealed closed during plant operation since these valves have not been demonstrated capable of closing during a LOCA or steam line break e

accident. Maintaining these valves closed during plant operations ensures that l

excessive quantities of radioactive materials will not be released via the j

Containment Purge System. To provide assurance that these containment valves

}

cannot be inadvertently opened, the 36-inch containment shutdown purge supply and. exhaust isolation valves are not utilized during operation on MODES 1-4, j

and a blind flange is installed establishing a Type "B" penetration. The i

penetration is surveilled i.cre;ilhnte P. M u,ryaiQ Q :fisc-gplicable ec a

w rement 4.6.

1 DES

, 3, and 4.

e q ui m.; ;t b. 1. m to th.s naa= M tica.

f

~

The use of the containment purge lines is restricted to the 8-inch purge l

supply and exhaust isolation valves since, unlike the 36-inch valves, the j

8-inch valves are capable of closing during a LOCA or steam line break accident. Therefore, the SITE BOUNDARY dose guideline values of 10 CFR Part i

100 would not be exceeded in the event of an accident during containment PURGING cperation. The total time the containment purge (vent) system isolation valves may be open durimg MODES 1, 2, 3, and 4 in a calendar year is i

determined by the actual need for opening the valves for safety-related reasons; e.g., containment pressure control or the reduction of airborne radioactivity t rsonnel access for surve activitie

'Thc.@uw pm s

e.ht i+ch dves ca e. W'ecA

+edeA m a.ccoracMe. d

& CoAum M t Tesk ec%.

Leakage n egr e s witn a maximum age ra

-~

containment purge supply and exhaust supply valves will provide early indication of resilient material seal degradation and wil r

t i

r r before a

f ree ould devel The 0.6 L eakage limi of Specification

.6.1.2b. shal not e exceeded hentheleakagerates determined by the leakage integrity tests of these valves are added to the previously determined total for all valves and penetrations subject to Type B and C tests.

l SEABROOK - UNIT 1 B 3/4 6-2 Amendment No. E9-LATER.

i 1

l CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS l

BASES 1

3/4.6.4 COMBUSTIBLE GAS CONTROL

}

The OPERABILITY of the equipment and systems required for the detection j

and control of hydrogen gas ensures that this equipment will be available to 7

maintain the hydrogen concentration within containment below its flammable limit during post-LOCA conditions.

Either recombiner unit is capable of con-4 trolling the expected hydrogen generation associated with:

(1) zirconium-water reactions, (2) radiolytic decomposition of water, and (3) corrosion of metals within containment.

These hydrogen control systems are consistent with the recommendations of Regulatory Guide 1.7, " Control of Combustible Gas Concentra-F tions in Containment Following a LOCA," March 1,971.

l The Hydrogen Mixing Systems are provided to ensure adequate mixing of the i

containment atmosphere following a LOCA.

This mixing action will prevent localized accumulations of hydrogen from exceeding the flammable limit.

3/4.6.5 CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING 3/4.6.5.1 CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE EMERGENCY AIR CLEANUP SYSTEM The. ERABILITY of the Containment Enclosure Emergency Air Cleanup System ensures that during LOCA conditions containment vessel leakage into the annulus, and radioactive materials leaking from engineered safety features equipment, from the electrical penetration areas, and from the mechanical penetration tunnel, will be filtered through the HEPA filters and charcoal adsorber trains i

prior to discharge to the atmosphere.

3/4.6.5.2 CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING INTEGRITY CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING INTEGRITY ensures that the release of radio-active materials from the primary containment atmosphere will be restricted to those leakage paths and associated leak rates assumed in the safety analyses.

This restriction, in conjunction with operation of the Containment Enclosure Emergency Air Cleanup System, will limit the SITE BOUNDARY radiation doses to within the dose guideline values of 10 CFR Part 100 during accident conditions.

3/4.6.5.3 CONTAIWtENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY This limitation ensures that the structural integrity of the containment enclosure building will be maintained comparable to the original design standards for the life of the facility.

Structural integrity is required to provide:

(1) protection for the steel vessel from external missiles, (2) radiation shielding in the event of a LOCA, and (3) an annulus surrounding the primary containment that can be maintained at a negative pressure during accident con-ditions.

A visual inspection is sufficient to demonstrate this capability.

v-r (p ctcM ce. (dik k bMoh+ lea ge M e Tes G Wo ra.m

'W

/

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 8 3/4 6-4 AmendmentNo.g

III. Ratvoe of Proposed chancras See attached retype of proposed changes to Technical Specifications.

The attached retype reflects the currently issued version of Technical Specifications.

Pending Technical Specification changes or Technical Specification changes _ issued subsequent to this submittal are not reflected - in the enclosed retype.

The enclosed retype should be checked for continuity with Technical Specifications prior to j

issuance.

Revision bars are provided in the right hand. margin to designate a change in the text.

i e

i i

I 8

-. - - ~

DEFINITIONS CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY 1.7. CONTAINMENT-INTEGRITY shall' exist when; a.

All penetrations required to be closed during accident conditions are either:

1)

Capable of being closed by an OPERABLE containment automatic 1 solation valve system, or 2)

Closed by manual valves.-blind _f1anges, or deactivated automatic valves secured in their closed positions.

b.

All equipment hatches are closed and sealed, c.

Each air lock is in compliance with the requirements _of Specification 3.6.1.3.

d.

The containment leakage rates are in accordance with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program, and e.

The sealing mechanism associated with each penetration (e.g.,

welds, bellows, or 0-rings) is OPERABLE.

i CONTROLLED LEAKAGE 1.8 CONTROLLED LEAKAGE shall be that seal water flow supplied to the reactor coolant pump seals.

CORE ALTERATION i

1.9 CORE ALTERATION'shall be the movement or manipulation of any component within the reactor pressure vessel with the vessel head removed and fuel in the vessel.

Suspension of CORE ALTERATION shall not preclude completion of movement of a component to a safe conservative position.

CORE OPERATING LIMITS REPORT 1.10 The CORE OPERATING LIMITS REPORT (COLR) provides core operating limits t

for the current operating reload cycle. The cycle specific core o)erating limits shall be determined for each reload cycle in accordance wit 1 Specification 6.8.1.6.

Plant operation within these operating limits is addressed in individual specifications.

DIGITAL CHANNEL OPERATIONAL TEST 1.11 A DIGITAL CHANNEL OPERATIONAL TEST shall consist of exercising the digital computer hardware using data base manipulation and/or injecting simulated process data to verify OPERABILITY of alarm and/or trip functions.

The Digital Channel Operational Test definition is only applicable to the-

'Radiaticn Monitoring Equipment.

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 1-2 Amendment No. -9. 33

.~

3/4.6 CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS 3/4.6.1 PRIMARY CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY l

LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION 3.6.1.1 Primary CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY.shall be maintained.

APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1, 2, 3, and 4.

ACTION:

Without primary CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY. restore CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months or be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months .

SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS i

4.6.1.1 Primary CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY shall be demonstrated:

a.

At least once per 31 days by verifying that all penetrations

not capable of being closed by OPERABLE containment automatic isolation valves' and required to be closed during accident conditions are closed by valves, blind flanges, or deactivated automatic valves secured in their positions except for valves that are open under -

administrative control as permitted by Specification 3.6.3: and b.

By verifying that each containment air lock is in compliance with the requirements of. Specification 3.6.1.3.

I l

Except valves, blind flanges, and deactivated automatic valves which are located inside the containment and are locked, sealed, or otherwise secured in the closed )osition. These penetrations shall be verified closed during each COLD SHUT)0WN except that such verification need not be performed more often than once per 92 days.

l 4

1 SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-1 Amendment No.

CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS PRIMARY CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE L]MITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION 3.6.1.2 Containment leakage rates shall be limited in accordance with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program.

APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1. 2, 3 and 4.

ACTION:

With the overall integrated leakage rate exceeding 1.0 La, restore CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months or be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months .

SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.6.1.2 The containment leakage rates shall be demonstrated in accordance with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program.

l I

i I

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-2 Amendment No. 14 l

f i

l t

r P

PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK l

I l

l i

I t

l I

l a

l l

1 SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-3 Amendment No. 37

PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK i

l l

l SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-4 Amendment No. 39 l

i CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS PRIMARY' CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT AIR LOCKS i

LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION 3.6.1.3 Each containment air lock shall be OPERABLE in accordance with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program.

APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1, 2, 3 and 4.

ACTION:

a.

With one containment air lock door inoperable:

1.

Maintain at least the OPERABLE air lock door closed

and either restore the inoperable air lock door to OPERABLE status within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months or lock the OPERABLE air lock door closed.

2.

Operation may then continue until performance of the next required overall air lock leakage test provided that-the OPERABLE air lock door is verified to be locked closed at least once per 31 days.

3.

Otherwise, be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months , and 4.

The provisions of Specification 3.0.4 are not applicable.

b.

With the containment air lock inoperable, except as the result of an inoperable air lock door, maintain at least one air lock door closed: restore the inoperable air lock to OPERABLE status within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months or be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months .

l

Except during entry to repair an inoperable inner door, for a cumulative time l

not to exceed 1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months per year.

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-7 Amendment No.

CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS PRIMARY CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT AIR LOCKS SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.6.1.3 Each containment air lock shall be demonstrated OPERABLE:

a.

With the leakage rate in accordance with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program, b.

At least once per 6 months by verifying that only one door in each air lock can be opened at a time.

l SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-8 Amendment No.

l CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS PRIMARY CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT VESSEL STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY i

LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION l

3.6.1.6 The structural integrity of the containment vessel shal1 be maintained at a level consistent with the acceptance criteria in Specification 4.6.1.6.

j APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1. 2. 3. and 4.

l l

ACTION:

With the structural integrity of the containment vessel not conforming to the above requirements, restore the structural integrity to within the limits prior to increasing the Reactor Coolant System temperature above 200 F.

i SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS l

4. 6.1. 6, The structural integrity of the t cainment vessel shall be determined by a visual inspection of the exposed accessible interior and exterior surfaces of the vessel in accordance with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program.

Any abnormal degradation of the containment vessel detected during the above required inspections shall be reported to the Commission in a Special Report pursuant to Specification 6.8.2 within 15 days.

l i

l l

f a

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-11 Amendment No.

t I

l."

CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS PRIMARY CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT VENTILATION SYSTEM LIMITING CCNDITION FOR OPERATION t

L 3.6.1.7 Each 8-inch containment purge supply and exhaust isolation valve shall be OPERABLE and sealed closed except when open for purge system operation for pressure control: for ALARA, respirable, and air quality considerations to facilitate personnel entry: and for surveillance tests that require the valve (s) to be open.

APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1, 2.-3, and 4.

ACTION:

a.

With one or more of the 8-inch containment purge supply or exhaust isolation valves open for reasons other than given in Specification 1

3.6.1.7 above, close the open 8-inch valve (s) or isolate the penetration (s) within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months , otherwise be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months , and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months , l

b.

With one or more containment purge supply or exhaust isolation valves having a measured leakage rate in excess of the limits of the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program, restore the l

inoperable valve (s) to OPERABLE status or isolate the affected penetration (s)'so that the measured leakage rate does not exceed the limits of the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program, within l

24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months and close the purge supply if the affected penetration is the exhaust penetration, otherwise be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months , and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months .

i SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-12 Amendment No. 39

CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS PRIMARY CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT VENTILATION SYSTEM SURVEILLANCE REOUIREMENTS 4.6.1.7.1 Each 8-inch containment purge supply and exhaust isolation valve with resilient material seals shall be demonstrated OPERABLE by verifying that the measured leakage rate is in accordance with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program.

4.6.1.7.2 Each 8-inch containment purge supply and exhaust isolation valve shall be verified to be sealed closed or open in accordance with Specification 3.6.1.7 at least once per 31 days.

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-13 Amendment No. 29

CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION 3.6.5.3 The structural integrity of the containment enclosure building shall be maintained at a level consistent with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program.

APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1. 2. 3. and 4.

ACTION:

With the structural integrity of the containment enclosure building not con-forming to the above requirements, restore the structural integrity to within the limits within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months or be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months .

SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS j

4.6.5 3 The structural integrity of the containment enclosure building shall be determined in accordance with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program.

Any abnormal degradation of the containment enclosure building detected during the above required inspections shall be re)orted to the Commission in a Special Report pursuant to Specification 6.8.2 witlin 15 days.

I l

l l

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-25 Amendment No.

i

1

[

6.0 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS 6.15 CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE RATE TESTING PROGRAM A program shall be established to im)lement the leakage rate testing of the containment as required by 10 CFR 50.54(o) and 10 CFR 50. Appendix J.

Option B. as modified by approved exemptions. This program shall be in accordance with the guidelines contained in Regulatory Guide 1.163,

" Performance-Based Containment Leak Test Program, dated September 1995,"

as modified by approved exceptions.

The peak calculated containment internal pressure for the design basis loss of coolant accident, P., is 49.6 psig.

1 l

The maximum allowable containment leakage rate. L, at P, shall be 0.15%

of primary containment air weight per day.

I The 3rovisions of SR 4.0.2 do not apply to the test frequencies specified j

in t1e Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program.

The provisions of SR 4.0.3 are applicable to the Containment Leakage Rate.

l Testing Program.

Containment leakage rate accpetance criterion is s 1.0 L, During the first unit startup following testing in accordance with lhis program, the

+

leakage rate acce)tance criteria are 5 0.60 L, for the Type B and Type C l

tests and s 0.75 _,.for Type A tests.

Overall air.-lock leakage rate acceptance criterion is s 0.05 L, when tested at 2: P,.

Each containment 8-inch purge supply and exhaust isolation valve leakage j

rate acceptance criterion is s 0.01 L, when tested at P,,

i l

l l

l i

l SEABROOK - UNIT 1 6-24 Amendment No.

i

l 3/4.6 CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS BASES l

3/4.6.1 PRIMARY CONTAINMENT j

3/4.6.1.1 CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY Primary CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY ensures that the release of radioactive i

materials from the containment atmosphere will be restricted to those leakage paths and associated leak rates assumed in the safety analyses. This restriction, in conjunction with the leakage rate limitation. will limit the i

SITE 80!)NDARY radiation doses to within the dose guidelines of 10 CFR Part 100 l

during accident conditions.

l 3/4.6.1.2 CONTAINMENT LL'AKAGE Primary containment OPERABILITY is maintained by limiting leakage to s 1.0 L,. except prior to the first startup after performing a required Primary i

Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program leakage test. At this time, applicable leakage limits must be met. The limitations on containment leakage rates ensure that the total containment leakage volume will not exceed the value assumed in the safety analyses at the peak accident pressure. P.

As an added conservatism, the measured overall integrated leakage rate is further limited to less than or equal to 0.75 L, during performance of the periodic l

tests to account for possible degradation of the containment leakage barriers between leakage tests.

l The surveillance testing for measuring leakage rates is in accordance with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program.

3/4.6.1.3 CONTAINMENT AIR LOCKS l

The limitations on closure and leak rate for the containment air locks are required to meet the restrictions on CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY and containment i

leak rate.

Surveillance testing of the air lock seals provides assurance that the overall air lock leakage will not become excessive due to seal damage during the intervals between air lock leakage tests.

j 3/4.6.1.4 INTERNAL PRESSURE The limitations on containment internal pressure ensure that:

(1) the l

containment structure is prevented from exceeding its design negative pressure differential with respect to the annulus atmosphere of 3.5 psi and (2) t1e containment peak pressure does not exceed the design pressure of 52 psig during LOCA conditions.

l The maximum peak pressure expected to be obtained from a LOCA event is I

49.6 psig.

The limit of 16.2 psia for initial aositive containment pressure will limit the total pressure to 49.6 psia whic1 is less than the design pres-sure and is consistent with the safety analyses.

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 B 3/4 6-1 Amendment No.

l CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS BASES 1

3/4.6.1 PRIMARY CONTAINMENT (Continued) 3/4.6.1.5 AIR TEMPERATURE The limitation in containment average air temperature ensures that the containment average air temperature does not exceed the initial temperature condition assumed in the overall safety analysis for a steam line break acci-dent.

Measurements shall be made at all listed locations, whether by fixed or portable instruments, prior to determining the average air temperature.

3/4.6.1.6 CONTAINMENT VESSEL STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY This limitation ensures that the structural integrity of the containment i

steel vessel will be maintained comparable to the original design standards for the life of the facility. Structural integrity is required to ensure that the vessel will withstand the maximum pressure of 52 psig in the event of a LOCA.

A visual inspection in accordance with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program demonstrates this capability.

3/4.6.1.7 CONTAINMENT VENTILATION SYSTEM The 36-inch containment purge supply and exhaust isolation valves are required to be sealed closed during plant operation since these valves have not been demonstrated capable of closing during a LOCA or steam line break i

accident.

Maintaining these valves closed during plant operations ensures that excessive quantities of radioactive materials will not be released via the Containment Purge System. To provide assurance that these containment valves cannot be inadvertently opened, the 36-inch containment shutdown purge supply and exhaust isolation valves are not utilized during operation on MODES 1-4, and a blind flange is installed establishing a Type "B" penetration. The penetration is surveilled in accordance with Surveillance Requirement 4.6.1.la in MODES 1, 2, 3, and 4.

The use of the containment purge lines is restricted to the 8-inch purge supply and exhaust isolation valves since, unlike the 36-inch valves, th.e 8-inch valves are capable of closing during a LOCA or steam line break accident. Therefore, the SITE BOUNDARY dose guideline values of 10 CFR Part 100 would not be exceeded in the event of an accident during containment PURGING operation.

The total time the containment purge (vent) system isolation valves may be open,during MODES 1, 2, 3, and 4 in a calendar year is determined by the actual need for opening the valves for safety-related reasons: e.g., containment pressure control or the reduction of airborne radioactivity to facilitate personnel access for surveillance and maintenance activities.

Leakage integrity tests with a maximum allowable leakage rate for containment purge supply and exhaust supply valves will provide early indication of resilient materibl seal degradation and will allow opportunity for repair before gross leakage failures could develop. The containment purge supply and exhaust isolation valves are leakage rate tested in accordance with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program.

SEABROOK - UNIT 1 B 3/4 6-2 Amendment No. 39

\\

CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS-BASES 3/4.6.4 COMBUSTIBLE GAS CONTROL The OPERABILITY of the equipment and systems required for the detection and control of hydrogen gas ensures that this equipment will be available to.

maintain the hydrogen concentration within containment below its flammable limit during post-LOCA conditions.

Either recombiner unit is capable of con-trolling the expected hydrogen generation associated with:

(1) zirconium-water reactions, (2) radiolytic decomposition of water, and-(3) corrosion of metals within containment.

These hydrogen control systems are consistent with the recommendations of Regulatory Guide 1.7, " Control of Combustible Gas Concentra-tions in Containment Following a LOCA." March 1971.

The Hydrogen Mixing Systems are provided to ensure adequate mixing of the containment atmosphere following a LOCA.

This mixing action will prevent localized accumulations of hydrogen from exceeding the flammable limit.

3/4.6.5 CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING 3/4.6.5.1 CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE EMERGENCY AIR CLEANeP SYSTEM The OPERABILITY of the Containment Enclosure Emergency Air Cleanup System ensures that during LOCA conditions containment vessel leakage into the annulus, and radioactive materials leaking from engineered safety features equipment from the electrical penetration areas, and from the mechanical penetration tunnel, will be filtered through the HEPA filters and charcoal adsorber trains prior to discharge to the atmosphere.

3/4.6.5.2 CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING INTEGRITY CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING INTEGRITY ensures that the release of 1

radioactive materials from the 3rimary containment atmosphere will be restricted to those leakage patas and asscciated leak rates assumed in the safety analyses.

This restriction in conjunction with operation of the Containment Enclosure Emergency Air Cleanup System, will limit the SITE BOUNDARY radiation doses to within the dose guideline values of 10 CFR Part 100 during accident conditions.

3/4.6.5.3 CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY This limitation ensures that the structural integrity of the containment enclosure building will be maintained comparable to the original design standards for the life of the facility.

Structural integrity is required to provide:

(1) protection for the steel vessel from external missiles. (2) radiation shielding in the event of a LOCA, and (3) an annulus surrounding the primary containment that can be maintained at a negative pressure during accident conditions. A visual inspection in accordance with the Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program, is sufficient to demonstrate this capability.

l SEABROOK - UNIT 1 B 3/4 6-4 Amendment No. 44 p.,:

IV.

Determination of Significant Hazards for Proposed changes In accordance with 10CFR50.92, North Atlantic has reviewed the

)

attached proposed changes and has concluded that they do not involve a significant hazards consideration (SHC).

The basis for this conclusion is that the three criteria of 10CFR50.92(c) are not compromised.

The proposed changes do not involve a SHC because the changes would not:

1.

Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences 1

of an accident previously evaluated.

l The changes involved in this license amendment request revise the testing criteria for the containment penetrations.

The revised criteria will be based on the guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.163, l

" Performance-Based Containment Leak-Test Program."

This guidance allows for the use of relaxed testing frequencies for containment penetrations that have performed satisfactorily on a historical basis.

l The Containment Leakage Rate. '3esting Program considers the type of service, the design of the ' penetration, and the safety impacc of the penetration in determining the testing interval of each penetration.

The NRC Staff has reviewed the potential impact of performance based testing frequencies for containment penetrations during the l

development of the Option B regulation.

The NRC ' Staf f review is documented in NUREG-1493 " Performance Based Containment Leakage Test l

Program."

The review concluded that reducing the frequency of Type A l

tests (Integrated Leak Rate Tests) from three per ten years to one per ten years leads to an imperceptible increase in risk.

For Type B and C testing (Local Leak Rate Tests), the change in testing frequency will not have significant impact since this leakage contributes less than 0.1 percent of the overall risk based on the existing regulations.

EPRI Research Project Report TR-104285,

" Risk Impact l

Assessment of Revised Containment Leak Rate Testing rntervals," also concluded that a relaxation of the test intervals foe Type B and C penetrations results in a negligible increase in total plant risk.

The use of Option B will allow the extension of testing intervals with a minimal impact on the radiological release rates since most penetration leakage is continually well below the specified limits.

In the accident risk evaluation, the NRC Staff noted that the accident risk is relatively insensitive to the containment leakage rate because the accident risk is dominated by accident sequences that result in l

failure of or bypass of the containment.

The use of a performance-l based testing program will continue to provide assurance that the j

accident analysis assumptions remain bounding.

l Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously analyzed, i

l l

9

I v

Changes to the Administrative section describe the containment testing program only and cannot increase the probability or consequencee of an accident previously analyzed.

2 Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident frxn any previously analyzed.

The proposed license amendment does not change the operation of the pla.it.

The change in the test frequency is dependent on the establishment of a Containment Leakage Rate Test Program.

This test program will ensure the performance history of each penetration is satisf actory prior to the changing of any test frequency.

Since the performance history of the penetration will be known, there is no possibility of the implementation of the program creating a new or different kind of accident than previously analyzed.

Since there is no change to the equipment or the operation of the plant, there is no possibility of creating a new or different kind of accident than previously analyzed.

Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously analyzed.

Changes to the Administrative section describe the containment testing program only and cannot create a

different accident from any previously analyzed.

3 Involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

l During the development of 10CFR50, Appendix J, Option B, the NRC Staff determined the reduction in safety associated with the implementation l

of the performance-based testing program.

The results of this review are documented in NUPEG-1493.

The review concluded that reducing the frequency of Type A tests (Integrated Leak Rate Tests) from three per ten years to one per ten years leads to an imperceptible increase in risk.

For Type B and C testing (Local Leak Rate Tests), the change in i

testing frequency will not have significant impact since this leakage contributes less than 0.1 percent of the overall risk-based on the existing regulations.

The use of Option B will allow the extension of testing intervals with a minimal impact on the radiological release rates since most penetration leakage is continually well below the specified limits.

In the accident risk evaluation, the NRC Staff I

noted that the accident risk is relatively inaensitive to the containment leakage rate because the accident risk is dominated by accident sequences that result in failure of or bypass of the containment.

The use of a performance based testing program will continue to provide assurance that the accident analysis assumptions remain bounding.

Therefore, this change does not involve a

significant reduction in the margin of safety.

Changes to the Administrative section describe the containment testing program only and cannot reduce the margin of safety.

10 l

i V.

Proposed Schedule for Licanae 1==nd==nt Imanance and Effectiveness North Atlantic requests issuance of the license amendment by September i

1, 1996, with the amendment effective as of the date of issuance, to l

be implemented within 6 months of the date of issuance.

1 1

i i

f.

l J

l i.

t l

l l-11 l

t VI.

Enviro===ntal T=pmet Ammem===nt North Atlantic has reviewed the proposed license amendment against the criteria of 10CFR51.22 for environmental considerations.

The proposed changes do not increase the types and amounts of effluents that-may be released offsite, nor significantly increase individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposures.

Based on the foregoing,

-North Atlantic concludes that the proposed changes meet the criteria delineated in 10CFR51.22 (c) (9) for a categorical exclusion from the requirements for an environmental impact statement.

l l

l i

l 1

A.

12 l

l

,'

ML20117K311

Text

Navigation menu

Search