ML20215G562
| ML20215G562 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 10/16/1986 |
| From: | George Thomas PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE |
| To: | Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| SBN-1216, NUDOCS 8610210005 | |
| Download: ML20215G562 (9) | |
Text
d George S. Thomas Vice President-Nuclear Production Pub 5C Service of New Hampshire New Hampshire Yankee Division October 16, 1986 SBN-1216 T.F. B7.1.2 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washingten, DC 20555 Attention:
Mr. Thomas M. Novak, Acting Director Division of PWR Licensing-A
References:
(a) Construction Permits CPPR-135 and CPPR-136, Docket Nos. 50-443 and 50-444 (b) PSNH Letter dated July 26, 1035, " Technical Specifications _for Seabrook Station," G. S. Thomas to G. W. Knighton (c) USNRC Letter dated May 20, 1986, "Seabrook Station Technical Specification Improvement Program,"
T. M. Novak to R. J. Harrison (d) USNRC Letter dated June 18, 1986, "Pinal Draft Technical Specifications for Seabrook Power Station, Unit 1,"
T. M. Novak to R. J. Harrison (e) PSNH Letter dated June 20, 1986, "Seabrook Station Technical Specifications," G. S. Thomas to T. M. Novak 1
(f) PSNH Letter dated June 23, 1986, "Seabrook Station m
Technical Specification Improvement Program,"
G.
- 5. Thomas to T. M. Novak i
(g) USNRC Letter dated June 26, 1986, " Changes to Seabrook Station Draft Technical Specifications," T. M. Novak to R. J. Harrison (h) PSNH Letter (SBN-Il57) dated July 15, 1986, " Additional Comments on Seabrook Station Technical Specifications,"
G. S. Thomas to T. M. Novak 8610210005 861016 PDR ADOCK-05000443 A
PDR p/
8fl P.O. Box 300. Seabrook, NH 03874. Telephone (603) 474-9574
i I
l 4
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission October 16, 1986 Mr. Thomas M. Novak Page 2 4
References:
(i) PSNH Letter (SBN-1192) dated September 12, 1986, (continued)
" Additional Comments on Seabrook Station Technical
' Specifications," J. DeVincentis to T. M. Novak (j) USNRC Letter dated October 10, 1986, " Changes to Seabrook i
I Station Final Draf t. Technical Specifications," T. M. Novak to R. J. Harrison (k) USNRC Letter dated October 15, 1986, " Changes to Seabrook Station Final Draf t Technical Specifications," T. M. Novak 4
to R. J. Harrison 4
{
Subject:
Certification of'Seabrook Station Unit 1 Technical j
Specifications
Dear Sir:
Reference (d) forwarded the Final Draf t Technical Specifications for Seabrook Station Unit I and requested that New Hampshire Yankee (NHY)~ review i
those technical specifications and provide any final comments. This -review of the Final Draf t Technical Specifications identified several necessary changes to reflect plant-specific design and/or analysis. Those comments were forwarded to you by Reference (e).
1 4
To resolve comments provided by Reference (e), meetings between the Staff and NHY were held. As a result of these meetings, Reference (g) forwarded 1
additional changes to the Seabrook Station Technical Specifications. NHY reviewed these changes and provided additional comments by References (h) and i
(1). Additional meetings were held with the Staf f and References (j) and (k) provided the final _ changes to the Seabrook Station Technical Specifications.
As a final check, we have reviewed all of the above referenced 3
correspondence and have identified five (5) corrections that must be made to the Seabrook Station Technical Specifications. These corrections are attached in the form of marked up pages.
J Reference (b) proposed several technical specification improvements for i
the Seabrook Station Technical Specifications. Reference (c) allowed some of the requested improvements and required that those improvements be incorpo-rated into the Seabrook Station FSAR. Reference (f) responded to your request and provided a proposed new section to the FSAR (Section 16.3) which has been i
incorporated into the FSAR.
[
a k
i 1
i j
3
. - - - - - - =, = -,, - - -, - - -, - - - - - -. -... -,. = -,,. - - -. - -,,. - -,, -... - -. -, -
l r
4 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission October 16, 1986 Mr. Thomas M. Novak Page 3 l
New Hampshire Yankee has performed a process to certify the Final Draf t Technical Specifications and applicable changes based on a review of the Seabrook Station FSAR through Amendment 60, the NRC Staff's Safety Evaluation Report through Supplement 5, and the plant's as-built condition. In addition to reviews by the NHY staff and Yankee Atomic Electric Company personnel, independent reviews of the Seabrook Station Technical Specifications have been conducted by representatives of Westinghouse Electric Corporation (the NSSS Vendor) and United Engineers and Constructors (the Architect / Engineer).
During the course of our certification process, necessary changes to the Seabrook FSAR have been identified to ensure compatibility between the FSAR and the technical specifications. These changes will be incorporated into the FSAR in a future amendment.
j To the best of my knowledge ar.d belief, and based upon the foregoing, I certify that the Final Draft Technical Specifications as forwarded by References (d), (g), (j), and (k), with the inclusion of attached changes, are compatible with the as-built plant configuration, the Seabrook Station FSAR through Amendment 60, the NRC Staf f's Safety Evaluation Report-through Supplement 5, and other docketed correspondence with the Nuclear Regulatory i
Commission Staff.
1 I
Very truly yours,
+
t M
George S. Thomas Enclosures cc: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Service List L
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Rockingham, ss.
October 16, 1986 j
Then personally appeared before me, the above-named George S. Thomas who, being. duly sworn, did state that he is Vice President - Nuclear Product' ion of I'
Public Service Company of New Hampshire, that he is duly authorized to execute and file the foregoing information in the name and on the behalf of Public i
Service Company of New Hampshire, and that the statements therein are true to the best lof his knowledge and belief.
I a
&W h.J Beverly E. M 110way, Notar d ublic d
My Commission Expires: March 6, 1990
O ENCLOSURE TO SBN-1216 i
J j
i i
I l
i
n--
,-r-,,..-_,,,_
"'-~-"-a&**
--w
FINAL DiMFT
~
~
l[
CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS.
CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE BUILDING CONTAINMENT ENCLOSURE EMERGENCY AIR CLEANUP SYSTEM SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.6.5.lb.2 (Continued) of Regulatory Position C.6.a of Regulatory Guide 1.52. Revi-sion 2, March 1978, by showing a' methyl ation of less than 2.14% when tested at a tem ur'e of 30 C a at a relative humidity of 95% in accorda e with ASTM-03803;
/0 3)
Verifying a system flow rate of 2 00 cfm i )(% during syste operation when tested in accordan e with ANSI N510-1980.
c.
Af ter every 720 hours0.00833 days <br />0.2 hours <br />0.00119 weeks <br />2.7396e-4 months <br /> of charcoal adsorber operauon, by~ verifying, within 31 days after removal that a laboratory analysis-of a repre-sentative carbon sample obtained in accordance with Regulatory Position C.6.b of Regulatory Guide 1.52, Revision 2, March 1978, meets the laboratory testing criteria of Regulatory Position C.6.a of Regulatory Guide 1.52, Revision 2, March 1978, by showing a methyl iodide penetration of less than 2.14% when tested at a tem-perature of 30 C and at a relative humidity of 95% in accordance with ASTM-D3803.
d.
At least once per 18 months by:
1)
Verifying that the pressure drop across the combined HEPA filters and charcoal adsorber banks is less than 6 inches Water Gauge while operating the system at a flow rate of 2100 cfn i 10%,
2)
Verifying that the system starts on a Safety Injection test
- signal, 3)
Verifying that the filter cross connect valves can be manually
- opened, 4)
Verifying that each system produces a negative pressure of greater than or equal to 0.25 inch Water Gauge in the annulus within 4 minutes af ter a start signal, and After each complete or partial replacement of a high efficiency e.
particulate air (HEPA) filter bank, by verifying that the cleanup system satisfies the in place penetration leakage testing acceptance criteria of less than 0.05% in accordance with ANSI N510-1980 for a dioctyl phthalate (00P) test aerosol while operating the system at a flow rate of 2100 cfm i 10%; and SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 6-22
PLANT SYSTEMS 3/4.7.5 ULTIMATE HEAT SINK LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION 3.7.5 The ultimate heat sink (UHC) h=11 ha nPERABLE with:
[JP-0"MeanSeaLevel,USGSd_atumhandA service water pump g.g g
__,m hemmTeal draft cooling tower comprised of one cooling tow cell with one OPERABLE fan and a second cell with two OPERABLE fa s, and a contained basin water level of equal to or greater than
- feet at a bulk average water temperature of less than or equal to 67.3'F, and A portable tower makeup pump system stored to be OPERABLE for 30 days c.
following a Safe Shutdown Earthquake, j
APPLICABILITY: MODES 1, 2, 3, and 4.
ACTION:
a.
With the service water pumphouse inoperable, restori the service water pumphouse to OPERABLE status within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />, or be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />.
b.
With the mechanical draft cooling tower inoperable, restore the cooling tower to OPERABLE status within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />, or be in at least i
HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the l
following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />.
With the portable tower makeup pump system inoperable, continue c.
operation and notify.the NRC within I hour in accordance with the procedure of 10 CFR 50.72 of actions or contingencies to ensure an l
adequate supply of makeup water to the mechanical draft cooling tower for a minimum of 30 days.
l l
e l
1
- With the cooling tower in operation with valves aligned for tunnel heat treat-ment, the tower basin level shall be maintained at greater than or equal to feet.
4s.55 SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 7-14
l PLANT SYSTEMS ULTIMATE HEAT SINK
SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.7.5 The ultimate heat sink shall be determined OPERABLE:
a.
At least once per 24 ho ; ty-
~'
_ _ _ _ 1)
Verifying the wa er level in the service water pumph be at or above 5'-
(ainusDC'-0"MeanSeaLevel and S
""=
2)
Verifying the wate n
ew.uk.Mt cooling tower basin to be greater than or equal to a level of 3frct feet.
+2 /5 b.
At least once per week by verifying that the water in the mechanicql draft cooling tower basin to be at a bulk average temperature of M /%
j fv 67.3*F.
c.
At least once per 31 days by:
1)
Starting from the control room each UHS cooling tower fan that is required to be OPERABLE and operating each of those fans for at least 15 minutes, and 2)
Verifying that the portable tower makeup pump system is stored in its design operational readiness state.
d.
At least once per 18 months by verifying automatic actuation of each cooling tower fan on a Tower Actuation test signal.
9
+m-SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 7-15 L.
M 4 R*v ELECTRICAL POWER SYSTEMS kg [
3 L
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT. PROTECTIVE DEVICES
[
C0NTAINMENT PENETRATION CONDUCTOR OVERCURRENT PROTECTIVE DEVICES ANO /h 7e c ri s G ewfs _ Folt GAsa E F S w c' ll.(e.sn.rE3 & tt sv6E T ED T~O NM = UE 4 Tc croru rr
'I.IMIT]NG CONDITION FOR OPERATION 3.8.4.2 Each containment penetration conduct'or overcurrent protec ive device3 shall be OPERABLE.
%5 d e4 8,. ; /, c /., c Q MODES 1,2,3,andh f,
APPLICABILITY:
IE gm s s.m
.s a
,", g
{
g-ACTION:
g7-cv, With one or more of the coM[=,=qt pgt ;t'y g-l"ger eprpm;3-protective de / ice (s) inoperable:
0 p.
Restore the protective device (s) to OPERABLE status or deenergize the circuit (s) by tripping the associated circuit breaker or racking out or removing the inoperable protective device within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />, declare the affected system or component inoperable, and verify the circuit breaker to be tripped or the inoperable proi.ective device to be racked out or removed at least once per 7 days thereafter; the provisions of Specification 3.0.4 are not applicable to overcurrent devices in circuits which have their circuit breakers tripped, or m
their inoperable protective devices racked out, or removed; or p.
Be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in COLD i
SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />.
l
}y;5 k k.
f,.
l'L - -k-&.
^
w y -
=-
SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.8.4.2 E ac h -- - 2 ' = ----- ninn rnna _ m - = -:-s protective device shall be demonstrated OPERABLE:
a.
At least once per 18 months:
g ge 13.G-kV b it break
\\
s i
1)
By verifying that the medium vol I
are OPERABLE by selecting, on a r ating basis, at least e of the circuit breakers, and performing
. followino:__
a)
A CHANNEL CA'.IBRATION of the associated protective relays (because of the large currents involved, it is impractical to inject primary side signals to current transformers; l
therefore, the channel calibration will be performed by injecting a signal on the secondary side of those trans-formers at their test plug),
Sa LIG"p+Sw grabsSL-s' M 4
enjy SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 8-21
REFUELING OPERATIONS FUEL STORAGE BUILDING EMERGENCY AIR CLEANING SYSTEM SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.9.12b (Continued) 1)
Verifying that the cleanup system satisfies the.in place penetration and bypass leakage testing acceptance criteria of less than 0.05% and uses the test procedure guidance in Regulatory Positions C.S.a C.5.c, and C.5.d of Regulatory Guide 1.52, Revision 2, March 1978,* and the system flow rate
~~
is ;L2rC00 cfm i 10%;-
/k+50 2)
Verifying, w.ithin 31 days after removal, that a laboratory analysis of a representative carbon sample obtained in accor-dance with Regulatory Position C.6.b of Regulatory Guide 1.52, l
Revision 2, March 1978,* meets the laboratory testing criteria of Regulatory Position C.6.a of Regulatory Guide 1.52, Revision 2, March 1978, by showing a methyl iodide penet of less than 1.0% when tested at a temperature of 30 C d at a
've hu-midity of 95% in accordance with ASTM-D-3 3; and M ffe 3)
Verifying a system flow rate of 44000 c m during sys m l
operation when tested in accordance witt; ANSI N510-1980.
l c.
After every 720 hours0.00833 days <br />0.2 hours <br />0.00119 weeks <br />2.7396e-4 months <br /> of charcoal adsorber op< ation by verifyi within 31 days after removal, that a laboratory sis representative carbon sample obtained in accordance wi Regulatory Position C.6.b of Regulatory Guide 1.52, Revision 2, March 1978,*
meets the laboratory testing criteria of Regulatory Position C.G.a i
of Regulatory Guide 1.52, Revision 2, March 1978,* by showing a methyl iodide penetration of less than 1.0% when tested at a tem-perature of 30 C and at a relative humidity of 95% in accordance with ASTM-D-3803.
d.
At least once per 18 months by:
1)
Verifying that the pressure drop across the combined HEPA l
filters and charcoal adsorber banks is less than 6 inches i
Water Gauge while operating the system at a flow rate of
-17,000- cfm i 10%,
/Q 410 2)
Verifying that the system maintains the spent fuel storage pool area at a negative pressure of greater than or equal to 1/4 inch Water Gauge relative to the outside atmosphere during system operation,
- ANSI N510-1980 shall be used in place of ANSI N510-1975 as referenced in Regulatory Guide 1.52, Rev. 2, March 1978.
1 1
SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 9-14