ML20212L123
| ML20212L123 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 10/01/1999 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212L111 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9910070163 | |
| Download: ML20212L123 (3) | |
Text
e j
c,#
- 4e y*
4 UNITED STATES g'
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20566 4 001
.....,d SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. r,1 TO FAC!LITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-86 NORTH ATLANTIC ENERGY SERVICE CORPORATION SEABROOK STATION. UNIT NO.1 DOCKET NO. 50-443
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated December 16,1998, the North Atlantic Energy Service Corporation (North Atlantic) submitted License Amendment Request (LAR) 98-15 which requests changes to the Seabrook Station Technical Specifications (TSs). The proposed amendment relocates Technical Specification (TS) 3/4.7.10 " Area Temperature Monitoring," and the associated TS Table 3.7-3, to the Seabrook Station Technical Requirements Manual (SSTR), which is referenced in the Seabrook Station Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) and is the implementing manual for the TS improvement program referenced in Section 6.7 of the TSs.
The licensee stated that the requirements for area temperature monitoring do not need to be controlled by TS because (1) their inclusion in the TSs is not required by 10 CFR 50.36 or other j
regulations, (2) the requirements are not required to avert an immediate threat to the public health and safety, (3) area temperature monitoring was not identified as a significant risk i
contributor, based upon the Probabilistic Risk Assessment Summary report for the MERITS l
Program contained in Section 4 of WCAP-11618, and (4) changes to these requirements will be adequately controlled by the provisions pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 to determine if an unreviewed safety question (USO) exists which if a USO exists, will require NRC staff approval prior to implementation.
2.0 BACKGROUND
Section 182a of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) requires applicants for
. nuclear power plant operating licenses to include the TSs as part of the license. The Commission's regulatory requirements related to the content of the TSs are set forth in id CFR 60.36. That regulation requires that the TS include items in eight specific categories.
The categories are (1) safety limits, limiting safety system settings, and limiting control settings; (2) limiting conditions for operation; (3) surveillance requirements; (4) design features; (5) administrative controls; (6) decommissioning; (7) initial notification; and (8) written reports.
However, the regulation does not specify the particular requirements to be included in a plant's TSs.
9910070163 991001 PDR ADOCK 05000443 P
i f
~
2-The Commission amended 10 CFR 50.36 (60 FR 36593, July 19,1995), and codified four i
criteria to be used in determining whether a particular matter is required to be included as a limiting condition for operation (LCO), as follows: (1) Installed instrumentation that is used to I
detect, and indicate in the control room, a significant abnormal degradation of the reactor coolant pressure boundary; (2) a process variable, design feature, or operating restriction that is an initial condition of a design-basis accident or transient analysis that either assumes the failure of, or presents a challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier; (3) a structure, system, or component that is part of the primary success path and which functions or actuates to mitigate a design-basis accident or transient that either assumes the failure of, or presents a challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier; or (4) a structure, system, or component which operating experience or probabilistic safety assessment has shown to be significant to public health and safety. LCOs and related requirements that fall within or satisfy any of the criteria in the regulation must be retained in the TSs, while those requirements that do not fall within or satisfy these criteria may be relocated to licensee-controlled documents. While the criteria specifically apply to LCOr, in adopting the revision to the Rule the Commission noted that the staff had used the intent of these criteria to identify the optimum set of administrative controls in the TS (60 FR 36957).
3.0 EVALUATION The area temperature limits for the Seabrook Station have been established to ensure that environmentally qualified equipment will not be exposed to temperatures beyond that to which they were originally qualified. The limits and the corresponding plant locations are contained in
)
the current TS 3/4.7.10. The consequences of exceeding the area temperature limits are that extended exposure to elevated temperatures could contribute to equipment degradation and cause the degradation to exceed the rate assumed by the facility environmental qualification (EO) program.
The North Atlantic EQ program is described in the Seabrook Station Equipment Qualification Manual and UFSAR Sections 3.11 and 7.5. The EO program is based,in part, on the requirements and guidelines of 10 CFR 50.49,"Environrnental Qualification of Electric Equipment important to Safety for Nuclear Power Plants," 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, General Design Criterion 4," Environmental and Missile Design Bases," and NUREG-0588, Revision 1," Interim Staff Position on Environmental Qualification of Safety-Related Electrical Equipment."
The staff reviewed information provided by North Atlantic and agrees that the requirements related to area temperature monitoring do not satisfy any of the criteria which would necessitate that they be included in the TSs. This instrumentation (1) is not used to detect a significant abnormal degradation of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, (2)is not a process variable that is an initial condition of a design basis accident (DBA) or transient analysis that assumes either the failure of, or presents a challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier, (3) is not a structure, system, or component that is part of the primary success path which functions or actuates to mitigate a DBA or transient that either assumes the f ailure of, or presents a challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier, and (4) is not a structure, system, or component which operating experience or probabilistic safety assessment has shown to be significant to public health and safety, in addition, relocating TS 3/4.7.10 " Area Temperature
w 3-Monitoring," and the associated TS Table 3.7-3, to the SSTR, which is referenced in the Seabrook Station UFSAR and will be controlled according to 10 CFR 50.59, ensures that changes to these requirements will be controlled in a manner that is acceptable to the staff, in summary, the staff has reviewed the proposed TS changes and considers them to be acceptable since 10 CFR 50.36 does not require these items to be controlled by the TSs and control of changes by the provisions of 10 CFR 50,59 is adequate. The NRC staff also notes that the proposed change would make the Seabrook Station TSs consistent with the guidance provided in the NRC's Standard Technical Specifications, Westinghouse Plants (NUREG-1431), in that the NRC's Standard Technical Specifications do not include TSs requiring the operability of the plant area temperature monitoring system.
The staff has no objection to.the deletion of the Bases associated with these TSs.
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 and changes surveillance requirements. 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 (64 FR 6700). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment,
6.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health ar.J safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Cornmission'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: Richard Croteau Date: October 1, 1999