ML052210002

Seabrook Station Unit 1- Issuance of Amendment Recapture of Zero-Power and Low-Power Testing Time

ML052210002
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	12/28/2005
From:	Miller G E Plant Licensing Branch III-2
To:	Peschel J M, St.Pierre G F Florida Power & Light Energy Seabrook
Nerses V, NRR//DLPM, 415-1484
References
TAC MC6548
Download: ML052210002 (14)

Text

December 28, 2005Mr. Gene St. Pierre, Site Vice Presidentc/o James M. Peschel Seabrook Station FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC PO Box 300 Seabrook, NH 03874

SUBJECT:

SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTRE: RECAPTURE OF ZERO-POWER AND LOW-POWER TESTING TIME (TAC NO. MC6548)

Dear Mr. St. Pierre:

The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 105 to Facility Operating License(FOL) No. NPF-86 for Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1. The amendment consist of a change to the FOL in response to your application dated March 28, 2005, as supplemented by letter datedSeptember 23, 2005. The amendment extends the expiration date of the FOL from October 17, 2026, to March 15,2030, to recapture zero- and low-power testing time. The extended date is 40 years from when the full-power license was issued, in accordance with Section 103.c of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Sections 50.56, and 50.57, andNuclear Regulatory Commission policy as stated in the Staff Requirements Memorandum SECY-98-296, dated March 30, 1999.A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. Notice of Issuance will be included inthe Commission's biweekly Federal Register notice.Sincerely,/RA/G. Edward Miller, Project M anagerPlant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationDocket No. 50-443

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 105 to FOL No. NPF-86 2. Safety Evaluationcc w/encls: See next page Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 cc:

Mr. Peter BrannAssistant Attorney General State House, Station #6 Augusta, ME 04333Resident InspectorU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Seabrook Nuclear Power Station P.O. Box 1149 Seabrook, NH 03874Town of Exeter10 Front Street Exeter, NH 03823Regional Administrator, Region IU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406Office of the Attorney GeneralOne Ashburton Place, 20th Floor Boston, MA 02108Board of SelectmenTown of Amesbury Town Hall Amesbury, MA 01913Ms. Deborah BellFederal Emergency Management Agency Region I J.W. McCormack P.O. &

Courthouse Building, Room 401 Boston, MA 02109Mr. Tom CrimminsPolestar Applied Technology One First Street, Suite 4 Los Altos, CA 94019Mr. Stephen McGrail, DirectorATTN: James Muckerheide Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency 400 Worcester Road Framingham, MA 01702-5399Philip T. McLaughlin, Attorney GeneralSteven M. Houran, Deputy Attorney General 33 Capitol Street Concord, NH 03301Mr. Bruce Cheney, DirectorNew Hampshire Office of Emergency Management State Office Park South 107 Pleasant Street Concord, NH 03301Mr. M. S. Ross, Managing AttorneyFlorida Power & Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420Mr. Rajiv S. KundalkarVice President - Nuclear Engineering Florida Power & Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420Mr. James M. PeschelRegulatory Programs Manager Seabrook Station FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC PO Box 300 Seabrook, NH 03874Mr. David MooreVice President, Nuclear Operations Support Florida Power & Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420Ms. Marjan MashhadiSenior Attorney Florida Power & Light Company 801 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Suite 220 Washington, DC 20004 December 28, 2005Mr. Gene St. Pierre, Site Vice Presidentc/o James M. Peschel Seabrook Station FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC PO Box 300 Seabrook, NH 03874

SUBJECT:

SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTRE: RECAPTURE OF ZERO-POWER AND LOW-POWER TESTING TIME (TAC NO. MC6548)

Dear Mr. St. Pierre:

The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 105 to Facility Operating License(FOL) No. NPF-86 for Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1. The amendment consist of a change to the FOL in response to your application dated March 28, 2005, as supplemented by letter datedSeptember 23, 2005. The amendment extends the expiration date of the FOL from October 17, 2026, to March 15,2030, to recapture zero- and low-power testing time. The extended date is 40 years from when the full-power license was issued, in accordance with Section 103.c of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Sections 50.56, and 50.57, andNuclear Regulatory Commission policy as stated in the Staff Requirements Memorandum SECY-98-296, dated March 30, 1999.A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. Notice of Issuance will be included inthe Commission's biweekly Federal Register notice.Sincerely,/RA/G. Edward Miller, Project M anagerPlant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationDocket No. 50-443

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 105 to FOL No. NPF-86 2. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: See next page DISTRIBUTION

PUBLICDRobertsJHannonJWermielGHill (2)WBatemanLPLI-2 R/FGEMillerJCalvoACRSDLPM DPR CHoldenCRaynorGImbroOGCGMatakas, RGN-IAccession Number: ML052210002OFFICENRR/LPLI-2/PMNRR/LPLI-2/LAEMEB/BC DCI/CVIB/SCSRXB/BCEEIB/BCNAMEGEMillerCRaynorGImbroMMitchellJWermielJCalvoDATE11/29/0511/15/058/17/0511/08/058/19/058/22/05OFFICESPLB/BCOGCNRR/LPLI-2/BCNAMEJHannonJHullDRobertsDATE8/17/0511/28/05 12/22/05OFFICIAL RECORD COPY FPL ENERGY SEABROOK, LLC, ET AL.

• DOCKET NO.50-443SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSEAmendment No. 105License No. NPF-861.The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:A.The application for amendment filed by FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC, et al. (thelicensee), dated March 28, 2005, as supplemented by letter dated September 23, 2005, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I;B.The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of theAct, and the rules and regulations of the Commission;C.There is reasonable assurance: (i) that the activities authorized by thisamendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with theCommission's regulations;D.The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense andsecurity or to the health and safety of the public; andE.The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of theCommission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.

________________*FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (FPLE Seabrook) is authorized to act as agent for the following:

Hudson Light & Power Department, Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Company, and Taunton Municipal Light Plant. FPLE Seabrook has exclusive responsibility and controlover the physical construction, operation and maintenance of the facility. 2.Accordingly, Facility Operating License NPF-86 is amended by changes to theOperating License as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment.3.This license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance and shall be implementedwithin 30 days of issuance.FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION/RA/Darrell J. Roberts, ChiefPlant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Changes to the Operating License Date of Issuance: December 28, 2005 ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 105FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-86DOCKET NO. 50-443Revise the Facility Operating License No. NPF-86 by removing the page identified below andinserting the enclosed page. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains marginal lines indicating the areas of change.RemoveInsertPage 7Page 7 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATIONRELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 105 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-86FPL ENERGY SEABROOK, LLCSEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1DOCKET NO. 50-44

31.0INTRODUCTION

By letter dated March 28, 2005, as supplemented by letter dated September 23, 2005,FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (FPLE or the licensee) submitted a request for a change to the Operating License for Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 (Seabrook). The current operating licensed term for Seabrook ends on October 17, 2026. This is 40 yearsfrom the date of the zero-power operating license, which was issued on October 17,1986. Theamendment would extend the expiration date of the operating license from October 17, 2026, toMarch 15, 2030. The extended date for termination of the operating license would be 40 yearsafter issuance of the full-power operating license which was issued on March 15, 1990. This proposed amendment is not a request for license renewal under Title 10 of the Code of FederalRegulations (10 CFR) Part 54.The supplement dated September 23, 2005, provided additional information that clarified theapplication, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did notchange the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) staff's original proposedno significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register onMay 24, 2005 (70 FR 29797).

2.0REGULATORY EVALUATION

Section 103.c of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), provides that a licenseis to be issued for a specific period not to exceed 40 years. Section 50.51.(a) of 10 CFR specifies that each license will be issued for a fixed period of time not to exceed 40 years fromthe date of issuance. Additionally, 10 CFR 50.56 and 10 CFR 50.57 allow the issuance of anoperating license pursuant to 10 CFR 50.51 after the construction of the facility has beensubstantially completed, in conformity with the construction permit and when other provisions specified in 10 CFR 50.57 are met. Consistent with Section 103.c of the Act and Sections 50.51, 50.56, and 50.57 of 10 CFR, the licensee, by its application of March 28, 2005,and supplement dated September 23, 2005, seeks an extension that would permit Seabrook tooperate for the full 40-year lifetime from the date when the full-power operating license wasissued. The proposed extension is consistent with the Commission's policy stated in the StaffRequirements Memorandum (SRM) dated March 30, 1999, from Andrew L. Bates, Acting Secretary, to William D. Travers, Executive Director for Operations. The SRM was in responseto SECY-98-296, "Agency Policy Regarding Licensee Recapture of Low-Power Testing or Shutdown Time for Nuclear Power Plants," and stated:The Commission has approved the staff's plans to grant the Grand Gulf licenseamendment to amend the expiration date of the license to recover the time spent in low power testing before receiving the Full Power Operating License (FPOL).

The Commission also approved the granting of similar requests from other licensees provided that the 40-year license term began with the issuance of a Low Power Operating License (LPOL) and a separate FPOL was issued.

3.0TECHNICAL EVALUATION

The NRC staff has evaluated the environmental and safety issues associated with the proposedamendment which would allow 41 months of additional plant operation for Seabrook. The major safety issues are the effects of aging and neutron fluence on plant structures and equipment. This is addressed in Section 3.1.FPLE's request for an extension of the operating license is based on the fact that a 40-yearservice life was considered during the design and construction of the plant. Although this does not mean that some components will not wear out during the plant's lifetime, design featureswere incorporated that provide the ability to inspect structures, systems, and componentsduring this lifetime. Surveillance, ability to inspect, and maintenance practices, that wereimplemented in accordance with the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (Code) for inservice inspection and testing of pumps and valves and Seabrook's Technical Specifications (TSs), provide assurance that any degradation in the plant's safety equipment will be identified and corrected to provide safe operation of the plant'sproposed license extension period. The specific provisions and requirements for ASME Code testing are set forth in 10 CFR 50.55a. 3.1Safety Assessment 3.1.1Neutron Damage of the Reactor Pressure Vessel The reactor pressure vessel (RPV) was designed and fabricated in accordance with therequirements of Section III, Class 1, of the ASME Code Edition, Addenda, and ASME CodeCases applicable at the time of design and construction. Operating limitations of the ASMECode and of Appendix G, "Fracture Toughness Requirements," of 10 CFR Part 50 are also applicable. The RPV and the reactor coolant system were designed to allow inspections inaccordance with Section Xl of the ASME Code. The NRC staff's evaluation approving theprograms and their implementation with respect to these structures is contained in the Seabrook Safety Evaluation Report (NUREG-0896 and its nine supplements).Over the operating life of a reactor vessel, ferritic materials exposed to neutron irradiation willundergo a decrease in fracture toughness. A surveillance program in accordance with therequirements of Appendix H, "Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Program Requirements," of10 CFR Part 50, monitors changes in fracture toughness. The surveillance program ensuresthat the safety margins remain sufficient to prevent brittle failure of the reactor vessel.

According to the currently-approved version of the reactor vessel surveillance program withdrawal schedule, contained in the Seabrook Technical Requirements Manual, threecapsules have been withdrawn to date. Results from capsules U and Y have been reported to the NRC. Capsule V was scheduled to be withdrawn during the refueling outage at the end ofCycle 10. The results of the analysis of capsule V must be reported to the NRC within one year ofwithdrawal. The results from capsules U and Y, as analyzed using the guidance in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.99, indicate that the surveillance data are credible. Accordingly, the ReferenceTemperature nil-ductility transition (RTNDT ), Reference Temperature pressurized thermal shock (RTPTS ) and upper-shelf energies were determined for each vessel beltline material. It wasdetermined that the plate and weld material upper-shelf energies will remain above 50 ft-lbthrough the end of the original license period and through the period being sought for recapture. Also, based on surveillance data or based on RG predictions, as appropriate, the

RTPTS values are below the screening criteria at the end of the period being sought forrecapture. Finally, the adjusted RTNDT values have been used to adjust the operatingparameters, i.e., reactor coolant system pressure/temperature limitati ons on heatup, cooldown,and low temperature overpressure protection (LTOP) specified in TS 3/4.4.9.3.1.2Compliance with Appendices G and H of 10 CFR Part 50, and 10 CFR 50.61 Appendix G of 10 CFR Part 50, and 10 CFR 50.61, contain screening criteria for Charpyupper-shelf energy (USE) and pressurized thermal shock, respectively. Appendix H of 10 CFR Part 50 contains a description of reactor vessel surveillance program requirements.The screening criteria in Appendix G are that the reactor vessel beltline material have a USE ofno less than 50 ft-lb. The data from the licensee's response to Generic Letter 92-01, Revision 1, Supplement 1, as entered into the Reactor Vessel Integrity Database, wereevaluated by the NRC staff and the minimum USE at the end of the requested licenseextension period is above 60 ft-lb for the material with the minimum USE, lower-shell plate R1808-2. The minimum USE is above the minimum required USE of 50 ft-lb which satisfies the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix G.Appendix G also requires that the plant operating parameters (i.e., reactor coolant systempressure/temperature limitations on heatup, cooldown, and LTOP based on RTNDT) must beadjusted to account for the effects of neutron radiation. Seabrook used results of availablesurveillance capsule data to adjust the plant operating parameters, as required.The screening criteria in 10 CFR 50.61 are that the reference temperature RTPTS values be less than 270 oF for plates, forgings, and axial welds, and 300 oF for circumferential welds at theexpiration of the license. According to 10 CFR 50.61, the assessment of the beltline materialsmust be updated upon request for a change in the expiration date for the facility. The requestfor recapture of testing time constitutes a request for change in the expiration date; therefore, an updated assessment is required. By letter dated September 23, 2005, Seabrook providedupdated values for RTPTS for all of the reactor vessel beltline materials. The values, which arepresented in Table 1, satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 50.61 at the end of the requestedperiod of recapture.In response to a request for additional information, the licensee provided by letter datedSeptember 23, 2005, a description of the effect of a recapture period on the surveillance capsule withdrawal schedule. The withdrawal schedule was determined per the guidelines inAmerican Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E-185. The RTNDT temperature shift (RTNDT ) values were calculated using updated fluence values assuming 40 effective full-poweryears (EFPYs) at the end-of-license (EOL) for all reactor vessel beltline materials. The projected maximum EOL transition temperature increase of the beltline materials is less than 100 oF. As the maximum transition temperature shift is less than 100 oF at EOL, the number ofsurveillance capsules required to be tested per ASTM E-185 is unchanged at three capsules.

The Seabrook surveillance capsule program has pulled and tested three capsules to date. Afourth capsule is scheduled to be removed at a time when the capsule fluence corresponds to not-less-than-once or greater-than-twice the peak inside-diameter fluence at EOL. Thescheduled removal time is 21 EFPYs with a fluence of approximately 4.24 x 10 19 n/cm 2. With anew EOL fluence of 2.20 x 10 19 n/cm 2, the last capsule will meet the ASTM E-185 criteriaremoval time criteria and the current reactor vessel surveillance program is unaffected. Therefore, the proposed license expiration date does not require revision of the existing Seabrook surveillance capsule withdrawal schedule.Based on the above, there is reasonable assurance that Seabrook will, for the proposed licenseterm extension requested, continue to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.61, Appendices Gand H, and their operating license with respect to the RPV.Table 1: RTPTS Calculations for Seabrook Beltline Region Materials, 40 EFPYsMaterialFluence(x10 11 n/cm 2 ,E>1.0 MeV)FFCF (F)RTPTS (c)(F)Margin (F)RTNDT(U) (a)(F)RTPTS (b)(F)Intermediate Shell PlateR-1806-12.201.2128.534.53440109Intermediate Shell PlateR-1806-22.201.213744.834079Intermediate Shell PlateR-1806-32.201.2147.557.53410102Lower Shell Plate R-1808-12.201.213744.83440119Lower Shell Plate R-1808-22.201.213744.8341089Lower Shell Plate R-1808-32.201.214453.23440127Using C/S Data (d)2.201.2139.547.817 (d)40105Intermediate and Longitudinal Weld Seams (Heat # 4P6052) 2.201.2130.737.137.1-6014Using C/S Data (d)2.201.2112.415.015 (d)-60-30 MaterialFluence(x10 11 n/cm 2 ,E>1.0 MeV)FFCF (F)RTPTS (c)(F)Margin (F)RTNDT(U) (a)(F)RTPTS (b)(F)Intermediate to LowerShell Girth Weld Seams (Heat # 4P6052) 2.201.2130.737.137.1-6014Using C/S Data (d)2.201.2112.415.015 (d)-60-30Notes:(a)Initial RTNDT values are measured values(b)RTPTS = RTNDT(U) + RTPTS + Margin (F)(c)RTPTS = CF

• FF(d)Using Credible Surveillance Data3.1.3Structures The concrete and steel Category I structures at Seabrook were designed and constructed inaccordance with the General Design Criteria of Appendix A, "General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50. This is discussed in Sections 3.1 and 3.2 of the Updated Final Safety Evaluation Report. The licensee's design basis, fabrication, construction, and implementation of quality assurance (QA) criteria for the plant were reviewed by the NRC staff when the plant was being licensed for low-power operation. The NRC staff's evaluationapproving the programs and its implementation with respect to these structures are contained in NUREG-0896 and its nine supplements. Industrial experience with concrete and steelstructures confirms that a service life in excess of 40 years may be anticipated.The major codes and specifications used in the design and construction of the Category Iconcrete and steel structures were, respectively, American Concrete Institute (ACI) 318-71, "Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete," and the American Institute of Steel Constructions Specification, "Specification for the Design, Fabrication, and Erection ofStructural Steel for Buildings." The foundations of the seismic Category I structures are reinforced concrete designed to ACI 318-71. Section 3.8 of NUREG-0896 stated that thecriteria that were used in the analysis, design, and construction of seismic Category I structures at Seabrook account for anticipated Ioadings and postulated conditions that may be imposed onthe structures during their service lifetime, which would include the requested 3.4 years ofadditional power operation. These criteria are in conformance with the established criteria, codes, standards, andspecifications acceptable to the NRC staff. The licensee's use of the indicated codes,standards, and specifications in the plant's design, analyses, and construction, and the licensee's QA program required by Appendix B, "Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50, as approved by NUREG-0896 and itssupplements, provide reasonable assurance that the concrete and steel structures will, for theproposed license term extension requested by the licensee, continue to meet the applicableprovisions of the rules and regulations of the Commission, and the Seabrook license.3.1.4 Mechanical Equipment With regard to equipment lifetime, Seabrook was designed, licensed, and constructed for a40-year service life. The reactor coolant system components and support systems wereanalyzed for the integrated effects of radiation damage and cyclic loadings (with added margin)that could reasonably be expected to occur in the 40-year lifetime from the FPOL. Surveillanceand maintenance practices were implemented in accordance with the ASME Code for inservice inspection and inservice testing of pumps and valves, a maintenance program satisfying 10 CFR 50.65 requirements, and the facility's TSs. These TSs are part of the plant's operatinglicense and have been approved by the NRC, as are all subsequent changes to the TSs. Thespecific provisions and requirements for ASME Code testing are set forth in 10 CFR 50.55a.Surveillance, maintenance, and testing requirements for mechanical equipment are in place atthe plant to verify operability, or to detect degradation and ensure that the equipment that doesdegrade is replaced or other corrective actions are taken. In addition, subcomponents such as nonmetallics (e.g., gaskets and O-rings) are inspected and replaced as necessary, as part ofroutine maintenance in order to ensure the design life of equipment. The licensee stated that surveillance, inspection, and testing requirements at Seabrook, which apply during the operating life of the plant, include the following:ASME Code Section XI: Equipment that is safety-related is ASME CodeClass 1, 2, or 3 and is subject to the inservice inspection and testing requirements of Section XI and 10 CFR 50.55a, except where relief has been granted in writing from these requirements. These requirements apply throughout the operating life of a plant and will provide reasonable assurancethat mechanical components will be properly monitored throughout the plantlifetime.Technical Specifications (TSs): 10 CFR 50.36 requires the establishment oflimiting conditions for operation (LCOs) for certain equipment. (LCOs are the lowest functional capability or performance levels of equipment required for safeoperation of the facility). This equipment is subject to the surveillance andtesting requirements in the TSs to assure systems are operable. Thesesurveillance requirements include calibration and inspection of systems andcomponents to ensure that operation of the plant will remain in accordance withthe [LCOs].10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J: Equipment and components associated withcontainment penetrations, including containment isolation valves, are subject to the leak testing requirements in Appendix J, "Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors." This is for Type B and C testing of valves and penetrations, and Type A testing of the overall containment structure. These tests verify the integrity of the containment and associatedcomponents, and confirm that the containment and associated components arecapable of performing their designed safety function as assumed in the accident analysis for Seabrook. From this evaluation, the NRC staff considers that compliance with the codes, standards, andregulatory requirements to which mechanical equipment were analyzed, constructed, tested, and inspected provide adequate assurance that the structural integrity of equipment important to safety will be maintained during the operating lifetime of the plant and during the additionalperiod authorized by this amendment. Any significant degradation by such equipment would be discovered and the equipment restored to an acceptable and operable condition.3.1.5Electrical Equipment Aging analysis has been performed for all safety-related electrical equipment in accordancewith 10 CFR 50.49, "Environmental qualification of electric equipment important to safety fornuclear power plants," identifying qualified lifetimes for this equipment. These lifetimes have been incorporated into plant equipment maintenance and replacement practices to ensure thatall electrical equipment important to safety remains qualified and available to perform its safety function regardless of the overall age of the plant. If a component has a qualified life of less than 40 years, its replacement is scheduled through the maintenance program. Therefore, the NRC staff considers that the environmental qualification program will support the proposedamendment.3.1.6 QA and Maintenance Programs In licensing Seabrook, the NRC staff reviewed the QA programs and the conduct of operationsincluding the maintenance procedures at Seabrook. The QA programs for Seabrook's operations will assess how the organization is following procedures and meeting requirementsfor these operations. This would include the maintenance programs at Seabrook that assurethe equipment is operable. In NUREG-0896, the NRC staff concluded that the QA programsand maintenance procedures were acceptable. The maintenance programs must operate in conformance with 10 CFR 50.65, "Requirements for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants."Inspections by the NRC staff of the QA and maintenance programs at Seabrook, since the plantwas licensed, found that these programs remain acceptable. The QA programs meet therequirements of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50.Therefore, the NRC staff considers that the licensee's implementation and use of theseprograms at Seabrook provides reasonable assurance that equipment important to safety will,for the proposed license term extension requested by the licensee, be in conformity with the applicable provisions of the rules and regulations of the Commission, and the Seabrook license.Based on the discussion above and on the safety and environmental issues involved withgranting an extension to the operating license, there are no safety issues that would precludethe additional operation of Seabrook. Based on this, the NRC staff concludes that theproposed amendment is acceptable; however, it should be noted that the above evaluationwould not be sufficient for license renewal under 10 CFR Part 54.

4.0STATE CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New Hampshire and MassachusettsState officials were notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State officialshad no comments.

5.0ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21, 51.32, and 51.35, an environmental assessment and finding of nosignificant impact has been prepared for the proposed amendment and published in the Federal Register on December 20, 2005 (70 FR 75487). Accordingly, based upon theenvironmental assessment, the staff has determined that the issuance of the amendment willnot have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.

6.0 CONCLUSION

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.Principal Contributor: V. Nerses R. HardiesDate: December 28, 2005