|
|
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) |
| Line 18: |
Line 18: |
|
| |
|
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:April 21, 2006MEMORANDUM TO:Darrell J. Roberts, ChiefPlant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationFROM:Timothy J. Kobetz, Chief/RA/Technical Specifications Branch Division of Inspections and Regional Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation | | {{#Wiki_filter:April 21, 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Darrell J. Roberts, Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Timothy J. Kobetz, Chief /RA/ |
| | Technical Specifications Branch Division of Inspections and Regional Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
|
| |
|
| ==SUBJECT:== | | ==SUBJECT:== |
| SEABROOK STATION- STAFF'S REVIEW OF CLIIPAMENDMENT TO DELETE SECTION 2.G OF FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE (TAC NO. MD0697)By letter dated March 23, 2006 (ML060870115), FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee)submitted a license amendment request (LAR) regarding the Seabrook Station FacilityOperating License. The proposed amendment would delete Section 2.G of Facility OperatingLicense No. NPF-86, which requires reporting of violations of the requirements of Section 2.C of the license. This operating license improvement was made available by the U.S. NuclearRegulatory Commission on November 4, 2005, as part of the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP). The staff of the Technical Specifications Branch (ITSB) of the Division of Inspections andRegional Support (DIRS) has completed its review of the LAR. The staff's review is enclosed. Docket No.: 50-443 | | SEABROOK STATION- STAFFS REVIEW OF CLIIP AMENDMENT TO DELETE SECTION 2.G OF FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE (TAC NO. MD0697) |
| | By letter dated March 23, 2006 (ML060870115), FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee) submitted a license amendment request (LAR) regarding the Seabrook Station Facility Operating License. The proposed amendment would delete Section 2.G of Facility Operating License No. NPF-86, which requires reporting of violations of the requirements of Section 2.C of the license. This operating license improvement was made available by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on November 4, 2005, as part of the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP). |
| | The staff of the Technical Specifications Branch (ITSB) of the Division of Inspections and Regional Support (DIRS) has completed its review of the LAR. The staffs review is enclosed. |
| | Docket No.: 50-443 |
|
| |
|
| ==Enclosure:== | | ==Enclosure:== |
| As statedCONTACT: Eric M. Thomas, ITSB/DIRS 301-415-6772
| |
|
| |
|
| ML061080141 OFFICEITSB:DIRSBC:ITSB:DIRSNAMEEMThomas TJKobetzDATE4/17/200604/21/2006 STAFF SAFETY EVALUATIONSEABROOK STATION AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSEDELETION OF SECTION 2.GTAC NO. MD0697DOCKET NO. 50-44
| | As stated CONTACT: Eric M. Thomas, ITSB/DIRS 301-415-6772 |
|
| |
|
| ==31.0 INTRODUCTION==
| | ML061080141 OFFICE ITSB:DIRS BC:ITSB:DIRS NAME EMThomas TJKobetz DATE 4/17/2006 04/21/2006 STAFF SAFETY EVALUATION SEABROOK STATION AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DELETION OF SECTION 2.G TAC NO. MD0697 DOCKET NO. 50-443 |
| By letter dated March 23, 2006, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee), proposed a licenseamendment to changethe Facility Operating License for Seabrook Station (ADAMS AccessionNo. ML060870115). The proposed amendment would delete Section 2.G of the FacilityOperating License, which requires reporting of violations of the requirements in Section 2.C ofthe Facility Operating License. A notice announcing the availability of this proposed changeusing the consolidated line item improvement process was published in the Federal Register onNovember 4, 2005 (70 FR 67202).
| |
|
| |
|
| ==2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION== | | ==1.0 INTRODUCTION== |
| A section or condition was included in the facility operating licenses issued to somenuclear power plants requiring the licensee to make reports to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regarding violations of other sections of the operating license (typicallySection 2.C). In the case of Seabrook Station, Section 2.G of the Facility Operating Licensereads as follows:Except as otherwise provided in the Technical Specifications of EnvironmentalProtection Plan, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC, shall report any violations of the requirements contained in Sections 2.C.(1) and 2.C.(2) of this license in the following manner: Initial notification shall be made within 24 hours to the NRC Operations Centervia the Emergency Notification System, with written followup within 30 days in accordance with the procedures described in 10 CFR Part 50.73(b), (c) and (e).In addition to the information provided to support licensing decisions, the NRC obtainsinformation about plant operation, licensee programs, and other matters using a combination of inspections and reporting requirements. Routine or scheduled reports that are required to be submitted to the NRC are defined in the related regulations, specific license condition, technicalspecification, or an NRC-approved program document. The reporting of emergencies,unplanned events or conditions, and other special cases may also be addressed within such documents by the inclusion of reporting thresholds and are also the focus of the reporting requirements in 10 CFR 50.72, "Immediate notification requirements for operating nuclearpower reactors," and 10 CFR 50.73, "Licensee event report system." Changes to the reportingregulations in 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73 became effective in January 2001 (see Federal Registernotice on October 25, 2000 (65 FR 63769) and included extending the allowable reporting times for licensee event reports (LERs) from 30 days to 60 days.The Administrative Section of the Technical Specifications (TS) for Seabrook Station alsoincludes TS 6.5, "Reportable Event Action," which has a duplicative reporting requirement pursuant to 10 CFR 50.73, but which does not reflect subsequent changes in the regulationsuch as requiring LERs within 60 days instead of 30 days
| |
| .
| |
|
| |
|
| ==3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION==
| | By letter dated March 23, 2006, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee), proposed a license amendment to changethe Facility Operating License for Seabrook Station (ADAMS Accession No. ML060870115). The proposed amendment would delete Section 2.G of the Facility Operating License, which requires reporting of violations of the requirements in Section 2.C of the Facility Operating License. A notice announcing the availability of this proposed change using the consolidated line item improvement process was published in the Federal Register on November 4, 2005 (70 FR 67202). |
| Section 2.G of the Seabrook Station Facility Operating License requires the licensee to reportany violations of the requirements of Sections 2.C(1) and 2.C(2) of the Facility OperatingLicense and defines the method and allowable time periods for such reports. The reporting threshold (i.e., a violation) for the conditions included in Sections 2.C(1) and 2.C(2) of the Facility Operating License duplicate those defined in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73.However, the requirements in the Facility Operating License have different deadlines than thosedefined in the regulations following a rule change in 2001. This difference in reporting requirements has led to variations in reporting since many facility operating licenses do notcontain the subject condition. For those licensees with a 30-day reporting requirement in the Facility Operating License, the condition has decreased the benefits of the rulemaking. Forthose cases where the current Facility Operating License requirement to report violations is alsoreportable in accordance with the regulations defined in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73, theNRC staff finds that the regulations adequately address this issue and the elimination of theduplicative requirement in the Facility Operating License is acceptable.Some of the conditions addressed in Section 2.[C] of a Facility Operating License mayaddress the maintenance of particular programs, administrative requirements, or other matters where a violation of the requirement would not result in a report to the NRC in accordance with10 CFR 50.72 or 10 CFR 50.73. In most cases, there are requirements for reports to the NRC related to these conditions in other regulations, the specific license condition or technical specification, or an NRC-approved program document. In other cases, there are reports toother agencies or news releases that would prompt a report to the NRC (in accordance with10 CFR 50.72(b)(2)(xi)). The NRC staff also assessed violations of administrative requirementsthat could be reportable under the current License Condition but that may not have a duplicativerequirement in a regulation or other regulatory requirement. The NRC staff finds that therequirements to report such problems within 24 hours with written reports to follow using the LER process is not needed. The NRC staff is confident that the information related to suchviolations that is actually important to the NRC's regulatory functions would come to light in atime frame comparable to the 60-day LER requirements. The information would become available to the appropriate NRC staff through the inspection program, updates to programdocuments, resultant licensing actions, public announcements, or some other reliable mechanism.The NRC staff finds that the elimination of Section 2.G in the Seabrook Station FacilityOperating License will not result in a loss of information to the NRC that would adversely affect either its goal to protect public health and safety or its ability to carry out its various otherregulatory responsibilities. Therefore, the elimination of Section 2.G of the Facility OperatingLicense is acceptable.TS 6.5, "Reportable Event Action," for Seabrook Station requires that the NRC be notifiedpursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.73 for any "REPORTABLE EVENTS," but does not reflect subsequent changes in the regulation such as requiring LERs within 60 days instead of 30 days. The NRC staff finds the elimination of TS 6.5 acceptable since the required report isdefined in an established NRC regulation that is also applicable to this licensee.
| |
|
| |
|
| ==4.0 STATE CONSULTATION== | | ==2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION== |
| In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New Hampshire State official was notifiedof the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
| |
|
| |
|
| ==5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION==
| | A section or condition was included in the facility operating licenses issued to some nuclear power plants requiring the licensee to make reports to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regarding violations of other sections of the operating license (typically Section 2.C). In the case of Seabrook Station, Section 2.G of the Facility Operating License reads as follows: |
| The amendment changes recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures orrequirements. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusionset forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10). 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.
| | Except as otherwise provided in the Technical Specifications of Environmental Protection Plan, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC, shall report any violations of the requirements contained in Sections 2.C.(1) and 2.C.(2) of this license in the following manner: Initial notification shall be made within 24 hours to the NRC Operations Center via the Emergency Notification System, with written followup within 30 days in accordance with the procedures described in 10 CFR Part 50.73(b), (c) and (e). |
| | In addition to the information provided to support licensing decisions, the NRC obtains information about plant operation, licensee programs, and other matters using a combination of inspections and reporting requirements. Routine or scheduled reports that are required to be submitted to the NRC are defined in the related regulations, specific license condition, technical specification, or an NRC-approved program document. The reporting of emergencies, unplanned events or conditions, and other special cases may also be addressed within such documents by the inclusion of reporting thresholds and are also the focus of the reporting requirements in 10 CFR 50.72, Immediate notification requirements for operating nuclear power reactors, and 10 CFR 50.73, Licensee event report system. Changes to the reporting regulations in 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73 became effective in January 2001 (see Federal Register notice on October 25, 2000 (65 FR 63769) and included extending the allowable reporting times for licensee event reports (LERs) from 30 days to 60 days. |
| | The Administrative Section of the Technical Specifications (TS) for Seabrook Station also includes TS 6.5, Reportable Event Action, which has a duplicative reporting requirement pursuant to 10 CFR 50.73, but which does not reflect subsequent changes in the regulation such as requiring LERs within 60 days instead of 30 days. |
|
| |
|
| ==6.0 CONCLUSION== | | ==3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION== |
| The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that (1) there isreasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered byoperation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with theCommission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to thecommon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. 7.0 REFERENCE1. NRC's model SE published in the Federal Register on August 29, 2005 (70 FR 51098).Principal Contributor: E. ThomasDate: April 17, 2006Enclosure}} | | |
| | Section 2.G of the Seabrook Station Facility Operating License requires the licensee to report any violations of the requirements of Sections 2.C(1) and 2.C(2) of the Facility Operating License and defines the method and allowable time periods for such reports. The reporting threshold (i.e., a violation) for the conditions included in Sections 2.C(1) and 2.C(2) of the Facility Operating License duplicate those defined in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. |
| | However, the requirements in the Facility Operating License have different deadlines than those defined in the regulations following a rule change in 2001. This difference in reporting requirements has led to variations in reporting since many facility operating licenses do not contain the subject condition. For those licensees with a 30-day reporting requirement in the Facility Operating License, the condition has decreased the benefits of the rulemaking. For those cases where the current Facility Operating License requirement to report violations is also reportable in accordance with the regulations defined in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73, the NRC staff finds that the regulations adequately address this issue and the elimination of the duplicative requirement in the Facility Operating License is acceptable. |
| | Some of the conditions addressed in Section 2.[C] of a Facility Operating License may address the maintenance of particular programs, administrative requirements, or other matters where a violation of the requirement would not result in a report to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.72 or 10 CFR 50.73. In most cases, there are requirements for reports to the NRC related to these conditions in other regulations, the specific license condition or technical specification, or an NRC-approved program document. In other cases, there are reports to other agencies or news releases that would prompt a report to the NRC (in accordance with 10 CFR 50.72(b)(2)(xi)). The NRC staff also assessed violations of administrative requirements that could be reportable under the current License Condition but that may not have a duplicative requirement in a regulation or other regulatory requirement. The NRC staff finds that the requirements to report such problems within 24 hours with written reports to follow using the LER process is not needed. The NRC staff is confident that the information related to such violations that is actually important to the NRCs regulatory functions would come to light in a time frame comparable to the 60-day LER requirements. The information would become available to the appropriate NRC staff through the inspection program, updates to program documents, resultant licensing actions, public announcements, or some other reliable mechanism. |
| | The NRC staff finds that the elimination of Section 2.G in the Seabrook Station Facility Operating License will not result in a loss of information to the NRC that would adversely affect either its goal to protect public health and safety or its ability to carry out its various other regulatory responsibilities. Therefore, the elimination of Section 2.G of the Facility Operating License is acceptable. |
| | TS 6.5, Reportable Event Action, for Seabrook Station requires that the NRC be notified pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.73 for any REPORTABLE EVENTS, but does not reflect subsequent changes in the regulation such as requiring LERs within 60 days instead of 30 days. The NRC staff finds the elimination of TS 6.5 acceptable since the required report is defined in an established NRC regulation that is also applicable to this licensee. |
| | |
| | ==4.0 STATE CONSULTATION== |
| | |
| | In accordance with the Commissions regulations, the New Hampshire State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments. |
| | |
| | ==5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION== |
| | |
| | The amendment changes recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10). 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 and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commissions 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. |
| | 7.0 REFERENCE |
| | : 1. NRCs model SE published in the Federal Register on August 29, 2005 (70 FR 51098). |
| | Principal Contributor: E. Thomas Date: April 17, 2006 Enclosure}} |
|
|---|
Category:Memoranda
MONTHYEARML23053A0502023-02-22022 February 2023
Cover Memo and Response to C-10 Questions Regarding 3Q2022 Inspection Report
ML22306A0202022-11-0202 November 2022
Cover Memo and Response to C-10 Questions Regarding 2Q2022 Inspection Report
ML24285A2012022-06-29029 June 2022
Memo Response - LTR-24-0212 - Response from Thomas Szabo - C-10 Board Member - David Lochbaum
ML21242A2242021-08-26026 August 2021
C-10 Research & Education Foundation Memo Dated 8/26/21 Re Questions Regarding the 2021 Second Quarter Integrated Inspection Report (05000443/2021002)
ML21062A1462021-04-21021 April 2021
Memo to File: Final Ea/Fonsi of 2012 and 2015 Decommissioning Funding Plans for Seabrook Station Unit 1 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (2012 and 2015)
ML19057A3832019-03-0404 March 2019
Renewal of Full-Power Operating License for Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1
ML19058A2162019-03-0404 March 2019
Update to Proposed Issuance of a Final No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination and License Amendment Regarding Which a Hearing Has Been Requested (CAC No. MF8260; EPID L-2016-LLA-0007)
ML18226A2052018-09-28028 September 2018
Redacted, Submission of Alkali-Silica Reaction License Amendment Request Draft Safety Evaluation to Support Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Review of Seabrook License Renewal (CAC No. MF8260; EPID L-2016-LLA-0007)
ML18243A4522018-08-31031 August 2018
License Renewal Application Memorandum
ML17278A1662017-10-0505 October 2017
Teleconference Meeting Summary Dated August 28, 2017 with Massachusetts Attorney General'S Office and Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency
ML17254A7522017-09-0606 September 2017
Alkali-Silica Reaction Issue Technical Team Charter Revision 2
ML16088A2042016-03-28028 March 2016
Memo T Bowers from s Ruffin, Technical Assistance Requests - Review 2015 Tri-Annual Decommissioning Funding Plans for Multiple Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations W/ Encl 2 (Template)
ML16088A2052016-03-28028 March 2016
Enclosure 1 - (72.30 DFP Reviews to Be Completed 2015) - Memo T Bowers from s Ruffin, Technial Assistance Requests - Review 2015 Tri-Annual Decommissioning Funding Plans for Multiple Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations
ML16056A3342016-03-0101 March 2016
Memorandum to File Regarding Transcript for 10 CFR 2.206 Petition from C-10 Research & Education Foundation Regarding Seabrook Station, Unit 1
ML15096A1682015-07-27027 July 2015
Memorandum to File from John Lamb, DORL, NRR No Significant Hazards Consideration Analysis and Categorical Exclusion Related to Proposed Exemption
ML14014A3782014-02-19019 February 2014
Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) Issue Technical Team Charter, Revision 1
ML13193A0742013-07-16016 July 2013
Request for Additional Information - Seabrook Station Regarding Overall Integrated Plan for Reliable Spent Fuel Pool Instrumentation (Order Number EA-12-051) (Tac No. MF0837)
ML13128A5212013-06-10010 June 2013
Memo Position Paper -Assessment of Aci 318-71 as Design Basis for Category I Concrete Structures Affected by Alkalisilica Reaction at Seabrook Station.
ML13154A5052013-06-0404 June 2013
Rai'S Following Ifib Analysis of NextEra Energy'S 2013 Decommissioning Funding Status Reports for Seabrook
ML13099A2152013-04-18018 April 2013
Forthcoming Meeting with Nextera Energy Seabrook, LLC (Nextera) Regarding a Pre-Submittal for a Fixed Incore Detector License Amendment Request
ML13066A4882013-03-21021 March 2013
Summary of Meeting Held on February 21, 2013, Between the NRC and NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLS Regarding License Renewal Application, Seabrook Station
ML12242A3702012-09-0505 September 2012
Request for Deviation from the Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix to Provide Increased Oversight of the Alkali-Silica Reaction Issue at Seabrook
ML12236A3852012-08-23023 August 2012
Memo Summary of NextEra Energy Seabrook Drop in Visit and Slides, August 22, 2012
ML12222A0392012-08-0909 August 2012
8/16/2012 Cancellation Notice of Forthcoming Conference Call with NextEra Energy and Florida Power and Light Concerning Generic Letter 2004-02 and Request for NRC Staff Review of Draft Proposed Guideline for Strainer Fiber Bypass Test Proto
ML12213A0612012-08-0101 August 2012
8/16/12 Forthcoming Conference Call with NextEra Energy and Florida Power & Light Concerning Generic Letter 2004-02 and Request for NRC Staff Review of Draft Proposed Guideline for Strainer Fiber Bypass Test Protocol
ML12164A9012012-06-22022 June 2012
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on 5/24/12, Between the NRC and NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC Concerning the Drai Pertaining to the Seabrook Station LRA
ML13196A2202012-06-0606 June 2012
Memo from B. Balsam, NRR and D. Logan, NRR to J. Susco, NRR on Summary of Section 7 Consultation Activities Related to the National Marine Fisheries Service'S Final Rule to List the Atlantic Sturgeon
ML12173A4622012-06-0404 June 2012
Draft Letter from D. Roberts, Region I to J. Jolicoeur, NRR; Subject: Request for Technical Assistance, Seabrook Station Alkali-Silica Reaction
ML12173A4632012-06-0404 June 2012
Draft Letter from D. Roberts, Region I to R. Nelson, NRR; Subject: Request for Technical Assistance, Seabrook Station Alkali-Silica Reaction
ML12174A0122012-06-0404 June 2012
Draft Letter from J. Clifford, Region I to R. Nelson, NRR; Subject: Request for Technical Assistance, Seabrook Station Alkali-Silica Reaction
ML12174A0172012-06-0404 June 2012
Draft Letter from J. Clifford, Region I to R. Nelson, NRR; Subject: Request for Technical Assistance, Seabrook Station Alkali-Silica Reaction
ML12174A0152012-06-0404 June 2012
Draft Letter from J. Clifford, Region I to R. Nelson, NRR; Subject: Request for Technical Assistance, Seabrook Station Alkali-Silica Reaction
ML1208600492012-03-23023 March 2012
Corrected Notice of Forthcoming Meeting with NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC (NextEra) Regarding Seabrook Station Concrete Degradation
ML12054A7292012-02-16016 February 2012
DRAFT- from James Clifford to Robert Nelson Request for Technical Assistance Seabrook Station ALKALI-SILICA Reaction, Draft 5
ML12054A7132012-02-16016 February 2012
DRAFT- from James Clifford to Robert Nelson Request for Technical Assistance Seabrook Station ALKALI-SILICA Reaction, Draft 8 2010817
ML12054A7312012-02-16016 February 2012
DRAFT- from James Clifford to Robert Nelson Request for Technical Assistance Seabrook Station ALKALI-SILICA Reaction, Draft 3
ML12054A7042012-02-16016 February 2012
DRAFT- from Darrell Roberts to John Jolicoeur Request for Technical Assistance Seabrook Station ALKALI-SILICA Reaction, Draft 2
ML12054A7282012-02-16016 February 2012
DRAFT- from James Clifford to Robert Nelson Request for Technical Assistance Seabrook Station ALKALI-SILICA Reaction, Draft 5
ML12054A7272012-02-16016 February 2012
DRAFT- from James Clifford to Robert Nelson Request for Technical Assistance Seabrook Station ALKALI-SILICA Reaction, Draft 4
ML12054A7112012-02-16016 February 2012
DRAFT- from James Clifford to Robert Nelson Request for Technical Assistance Seabrook Station ALKALI-SILICA Reaction, Draft 6
ML12054A7122012-02-16016 February 2012
DRAFT- from James Clifford to Robert Nelson Request for Technical Assistance Seabrook Station ALKALI-SILICA Reaction, Draft 7 (2)
ML12054A7142012-02-16016 February 2012
DRAFT- from James Clifford to Robert Nelson Request for Technical Assistance Seabrook Station ALKALI-SILICA Reaction, Draft 8 Comment
ML12054A7302012-02-16016 February 2012
DRAFT- from James Clifford to Robert Nelson Request for Technical Assistance Seabrook Station ALKALI-SILICA Reaction, Draft 3. Resolved
ML11354A1182011-12-22022 December 2011
12/8/2011 Summary of Meeting Between NRC Staff and the Nuclear Energy Institute to Discuss Current License Renewal Topics
ML11343A4482011-12-0909 December 2011
NextEra Drop in Meeting Summary and Slides from 11-14-2011 Meeting with Region-I
ML11327A0722011-11-30030 November 2011
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on November 22, 2011, Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC, Concerning the Response to the Request for Additional Information Pertaining to the Seabrook St
ML11304A1662011-11-0404 November 2011
Summary of Tele Conf Call Held on 3/3/11, Between the USNRC and NextEra Energy Seabrook, Llc. Concerning Clarification of Information Pertaining to the Seabrook Station Request for Additional Information Responses
ML11304A1512011-11-0404 November 2011
Summary of Tele Conf Call Held on 4/8/11 Between USNRC and NextEra Energy Seabrook, Llc. Concerning Clarification of Information Pertaining to the Seabrook Station Request for Additional Information Responses
ML11304A1092011-11-0404 November 2011
Summary of Tele Conf Call Held on 5/31/11, Between the USNRC and Nextera Energy Seabrook, Llc., Concerning Clarification of Information Pertaining to the Seabrook LRA
ML11277A0462011-10-26026 October 2011
Summary of Public Meetings Conducted to Discuss the Dseis Related to the Review of the Seabrook Station License Renewal Application
2023-02-22
[Table view]
Category:Safety Evaluation
MONTHYEARML24254A2552024-09-25025 September 2024
Alternative Request No. 4A-01 for the Fourth 10-Year Inservice Inspection Interval
ML24239A5382024-09-20020 September 2024
Issuance of Amendment No. 175 One-Time Allowable Outage Time Extension to the Technical Specification 3.8.1.1, A.C. Sources – Operating, Limiting Condition for Operation
ML24149A2862024-06-12012 June 2024
NextEra Fleet - Proposed Alternative Frr 23-01 to Use ASME Code Case N-752-1, Risk-Informed Categorization and Treatment for Repair/Replacement Activities in Class 2 and 3 Systems Section X1, Division 1 (EPID L-2023-LLR-0009) - Letter
ML24046A0512024-05-0707 May 2024
Issuance of Amendment No. 174 to Update the Period of Applicability (Poa) for the Pressure-Temperature Limits (PTL) and Low Temperature Overpressure Protection (LTOP) Curves
ML24067A2622024-03-0808 March 2024
Issuance of Amendment No. 173 Revise Technical Specification 3/4.8.1 to Allow Replacement of Reserve Auxiliary Transformer (Emergency Circumstances)
ML23312A1822023-12-22022 December 2023
Issuance of Amendment No. 172 Revision to Cooling Tower Service Water Loop or Cell Requirements
ML23073A1562023-03-23023 March 2023
Relief Request 4RA-22-01, Relief from the Requirements of the ASME Code
ML22287A1572022-12-0505 December 2022
Issuance of Amendment No. 171 Revision to Technical Specifications to Adopt TSTF-577, Revised Frequencies for Steam Generator Tube Inspections
ML22262A3142022-10-0404 October 2022
Relief Requests 3IR-18 and 3IR-19, Relief from the Requirements of the ASME Code
ML22230C9242022-09-30030 September 2022
Issuance of Amendment No. 170 Revision of 120-Volt AC Vital Instrument Panel Requirements
ML21008A0142021-02-25025 February 2021
Issuance of Amendment No. 168 Revise Technical Specification Table 3.3.4 to Change Time Delay Setpoints for Degraded Voltage Relays
ML20293A1572020-12-28028 December 2020
Issuance of Amendment No. 167 Reactor Trip System Instrumentation Technical Specification Changes to Implement WCAP-14333 and WCAP-15376
ML20298A2532020-11-24024 November 2020
Issuance of Amendment No. 166 Revise Technical Specification 3/4.8.1, A.C. Sources Operating
ML20070Q0712020-03-27027 March 2020
Issuance of Amendment No. 165 Emergency Core Cooling System Accumulator Technical Specification Changes
ML20073E4342020-03-17017 March 2020
Relief from the Requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
ML20076D2812020-03-17017 March 2020
Relief from the Requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
ML19357A1952020-02-10010 February 2020
Unit No.1; & Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 & 4 - Issuance of Amendments Nos. 265, 268, 164, 290, and 284 Revise Technical Specifications to Adopt TSTF-563
ML20015A1232020-02-0606 February 2020
Proposed Alternative to Use Encoded Phased Array Ultrasonic Examination Techniques
ML19340A1282019-12-13013 December 2019
Relief from the Requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
ML19326C4802019-12-0505 December 2019
Issuance of Amendment No. 163 One-Time Change to the Onsite Power Distribution Requirements
ML19224A5632019-11-18018 November 2019
Issuance of Amendment No. 162 Revisions to Technical Specifications Associated with Movable Control Rods
ML19249B1012019-09-30030 September 2019
Relief from the Requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code; Relief Request RA-19-001
ML19148A7442019-07-31031 July 2019
Issuance of Amendment Nos. 161, 249, 200, 287, and 281 to Add Technical Specification Limiting Condition for Operation 3.0.6
ML19065A2152019-03-29029 March 2019
Issuance of Amendment No. 160 Measurement and Assessment Frequency for Technical Specification 6.7.6.l, Control Room Envelope Habitability Program
ML18204A2912019-03-11011 March 2019
Issuance of Amendment No. 159 Methodology for Analysis of Seismic Category I Structures with Concrete Affected by Alkali-Silica Reaction
ML18247A5382018-11-27027 November 2018
Issuance of Amendment No. 158 Removing Requirement to Perform Certain Surveillance Requirements During Shutdown and Changes to Administrative Technical Specifications
ML18199A6092018-08-0707 August 2018
Issuance of Amendment No. 157 Changes to the Technical Specifications Requirements for DC Batteries (CAC No. MG0046; EPID L-2017-LLA-0289)
ML18106B1212018-04-25025 April 2018
Proposed Alternative to Use Encoded Phased Array Ultrasonic Examination Techniques
ML17102A8892017-04-13013 April 2017
Issuance of Amendment Licensing Basis Change for Service Water Cooling Tower
ML17027A0782017-04-0707 April 2017
Issuance of Amendments Regarding Technical Specifications for Inservice Testing Programs (CAC Nos. MF8202 Through MF8209)
ML17080A0382017-03-27027 March 2017
Relief from the Requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
ML17046A4432017-03-15015 March 2017
Issuance of Amendment Extension of Containment Leakage Rate Test Frequency
ML16330A1182016-12-15015 December 2016
NextEra Fleet - Safety Evaluation for Proposed Alternative to the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Operation and Maintenance Code by Adoption of Approved Code Case OMN-20, Inservice Test Frequency (CAC Nos. MF8195 Through MF8201)
ML16321A4182016-12-0101 December 2016
Safety Evaluation Regarding Implementation of Mitigating Strategies and Reliable Spent Fuel Pool Instrumentation Related to Orders EA-12-049 and EA-12-051 (CAC Nos. MF0836 and MF0837)
ML15096A2552015-11-0202 November 2015
Issuance of Amendment Regarding License Amendment Request 14-04, Revised Reactor Coolant System Pressure-Temperature Limits Applicable for 44 Effective Full Power Years
ML15231A1442015-10-0606 October 2015
Issuance of Amendment No. 150 Regarding Note for Reactor Coolant System Surveillance Requirements
ML15205A3332015-07-28028 July 2015
Safety Evaluation by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Related to Request for Exemption from Table 1 of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC Seabrook Station, Unit 1 Docket No. 50-443
ML15096A1432015-07-28028 July 2015
Exemption from Specific Requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, and 10 CFR 50.60
ML15096A1312015-07-17017 July 2015
Issuance of Amendment Regarding Changes to Technical Specification 3.3.3.1, Radiation Monitoring for Plant Operations
ML15118A6322015-05-18018 May 2015
Issuance of Amendment Regarding License Amendment Request Regarding New Fuel Valut
ML15082A2332015-04-24024 April 2015
Issuance of Amendment Regarding Increase Voltage Limit for Diesel Generator Load Rejection Surveillance Requirement
ML15058A7062015-04-22022 April 2015
Issuance of Amendment No. 146 Regarding the Cyber Security Plan Implementation Schedule
ML15002A2512015-03-31031 March 2015
Unit No.1 - Issuance of Amendment Regarding License Amendment Request 14-06, Application Regarding the Removal of the Cold Leg Injection Permissive from Technical Specifications
ML14345A2882015-02-0606 February 2015
Issuance of Amendment Regarding Technical Specifications Task Force Traveler-523, Generic Letter 2008-01, Managing Gas Accumulation Using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process
ML14363A2752015-02-0404 February 2015
Non-Proprietary SE for Issuance of Amendment Regarding License Amendment Request Regarding Fixed Incore Detector System Analysis
ML14184A7952014-09-0303 September 2014
Issuance of Amendment Regarding License Amendment Request Regarding Fuel Storage Changes
ML13212A0692014-07-24024 July 2014
Issuance of Amendment Regarding the Risk-Informed Justifications for the Relocation of Specific Surveillance Frequency Requirements to a Licensee Controlled Program
ML14071A4102014-04-10010 April 2014
Request for Relief RA-14-001 from American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI Requirements Regarding the Reactor Vessel Head Flange Seal Leak Detection Piping (TAC No. Mfxxxx)
ML14029A4452014-03-0606 March 2014
Issuance of Amendment Regarding License Amendment Request 12-04, Application Regarding Cold Leg Injection Permissive
ML13213A1432014-03-0505 March 2014
Issuance of Amendment Regarding the Use of Optimized Zirlo Fuel Rod Cladding Material
2024-09-25
[Table view] |
Text
April 21, 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Darrell J. Roberts, Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Timothy J. Kobetz, Chief /RA/
Technical Specifications Branch Division of Inspections and Regional Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
SEABROOK STATION- STAFFS REVIEW OF CLIIP AMENDMENT TO DELETE SECTION 2.G OF FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE (TAC NO. MD0697)
By letter dated March 23, 2006 (ML060870115), FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee) submitted a license amendment request (LAR) regarding the Seabrook Station Facility Operating License. The proposed amendment would delete Section 2.G of Facility Operating License No. NPF-86, which requires reporting of violations of the requirements of Section 2.C of the license. This operating license improvement was made available by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on November 4, 2005, as part of the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP).
The staff of the Technical Specifications Branch (ITSB) of the Division of Inspections and Regional Support (DIRS) has completed its review of the LAR. The staffs review is enclosed.
Docket No.: 50-443
Enclosure:
As stated CONTACT: Eric M. Thomas, ITSB/DIRS 301-415-6772
ML061080141 OFFICE ITSB:DIRS BC:ITSB:DIRS NAME EMThomas TJKobetz DATE 4/17/2006 04/21/2006 STAFF SAFETY EVALUATION SEABROOK STATION AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DELETION OF SECTION 2.G TAC NO. MD0697 DOCKET NO. 50-443
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated March 23, 2006, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee), proposed a license amendment to changethe Facility Operating License for Seabrook Station (ADAMS Accession No. ML060870115). The proposed amendment would delete Section 2.G of the Facility Operating License, which requires reporting of violations of the requirements in Section 2.C of the Facility Operating License. A notice announcing the availability of this proposed change using the consolidated line item improvement process was published in the Federal Register on November 4, 2005 (70 FR 67202).
2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION
A section or condition was included in the facility operating licenses issued to some nuclear power plants requiring the licensee to make reports to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regarding violations of other sections of the operating license (typically Section 2.C). In the case of Seabrook Station, Section 2.G of the Facility Operating License reads as follows:
Except as otherwise provided in the Technical Specifications of Environmental Protection Plan, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC, shall report any violations of the requirements contained in Sections 2.C.(1) and 2.C.(2) of this license in the following manner: Initial notification shall be made within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> to the NRC Operations Center via the Emergency Notification System, with written followup within 30 days in accordance with the procedures described in 10 CFR Part 50.73(b), (c) and (e).
In addition to the information provided to support licensing decisions, the NRC obtains information about plant operation, licensee programs, and other matters using a combination of inspections and reporting requirements. Routine or scheduled reports that are required to be submitted to the NRC are defined in the related regulations, specific license condition, technical specification, or an NRC-approved program document. The reporting of emergencies, unplanned events or conditions, and other special cases may also be addressed within such documents by the inclusion of reporting thresholds and are also the focus of the reporting requirements in 10 CFR 50.72, Immediate notification requirements for operating nuclear power reactors, and 10 CFR 50.73, Licensee event report system. Changes to the reporting regulations in 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73 became effective in January 2001 (see Federal Register notice on October 25, 2000 (65 FR 63769) and included extending the allowable reporting times for licensee event reports (LERs) from 30 days to 60 days.
The Administrative Section of the Technical Specifications (TS) for Seabrook Station also includes TS 6.5, Reportable Event Action, which has a duplicative reporting requirement pursuant to 10 CFR 50.73, but which does not reflect subsequent changes in the regulation such as requiring LERs within 60 days instead of 30 days.
3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION
Section 2.G of the Seabrook Station Facility Operating License requires the licensee to report any violations of the requirements of Sections 2.C(1) and 2.C(2) of the Facility Operating License and defines the method and allowable time periods for such reports. The reporting threshold (i.e., a violation) for the conditions included in Sections 2.C(1) and 2.C(2) of the Facility Operating License duplicate those defined in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73.
However, the requirements in the Facility Operating License have different deadlines than those defined in the regulations following a rule change in 2001. This difference in reporting requirements has led to variations in reporting since many facility operating licenses do not contain the subject condition. For those licensees with a 30-day reporting requirement in the Facility Operating License, the condition has decreased the benefits of the rulemaking. For those cases where the current Facility Operating License requirement to report violations is also reportable in accordance with the regulations defined in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73, the NRC staff finds that the regulations adequately address this issue and the elimination of the duplicative requirement in the Facility Operating License is acceptable.
Some of the conditions addressed in Section 2.[C] of a Facility Operating License may address the maintenance of particular programs, administrative requirements, or other matters where a violation of the requirement would not result in a report to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.72 or 10 CFR 50.73. In most cases, there are requirements for reports to the NRC related to these conditions in other regulations, the specific license condition or technical specification, or an NRC-approved program document. In other cases, there are reports to other agencies or news releases that would prompt a report to the NRC (in accordance with 10 CFR 50.72(b)(2)(xi)). The NRC staff also assessed violations of administrative requirements that could be reportable under the current License Condition but that may not have a duplicative requirement in a regulation or other regulatory requirement. The NRC staff finds that the requirements to report such problems within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> with written reports to follow using the LER process is not needed. The NRC staff is confident that the information related to such violations that is actually important to the NRCs regulatory functions would come to light in a time frame comparable to the 60-day LER requirements. The information would become available to the appropriate NRC staff through the inspection program, updates to program documents, resultant licensing actions, public announcements, or some other reliable mechanism.
The NRC staff finds that the elimination of Section 2.G in the Seabrook Station Facility Operating License will not result in a loss of information to the NRC that would adversely affect either its goal to protect public health and safety or its ability to carry out its various other regulatory responsibilities. Therefore, the elimination of Section 2.G of the Facility Operating License is acceptable.
TS 6.5, Reportable Event Action, for Seabrook Station requires that the NRC be notified pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.73 for any REPORTABLE EVENTS, but does not reflect subsequent changes in the regulation such as requiring LERs within 60 days instead of 30 days. The NRC staff finds the elimination of TS 6.5 acceptable since the required report is defined in an established NRC regulation that is also applicable to this licensee.
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commissions regulations, the New Hampshire State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10). 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 and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commissions 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.
7.0 REFERENCE
- 1. NRCs model SE published in the Federal Register on August 29, 2005 (70 FR 51098).
Principal Contributor: E. Thomas Date: April 17, 2006 Enclosure
