ML20034H783
| ML20034H783 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05200001 |
| Issue date: | 01/14/1993 |
| From: | Kelly G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Duncan J GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17179A859 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9303220069 | |
| Download: ML20034H783 (12) | |
Text
.
i
/ pro
- coq'o UNITED STATES
[ gr/[,,g I
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r,.
- .#/., ;
wAssincTow, o. c. 20sss
%, w }
F January 14, 1993 NOTE T0:
Ja
- ncan, E
}
FROM:
Gleja
))g, P@g,vDSSA,NRR
SUBJECT:
UPDATED ABWR PRA ISSUE STATUS PUNCH LIST I have enclosed a further updated punch list for ABWR PRA issues.
I expect the Open Item where the staff was awaiting GE to list assumptions / reliability values for systems that are not part of the certified design, but are modeled in the PRA will be marked confirmatory next time.
I have not received a submittal from you on internal flooding (from hot high pressure fluids) subcompartment analysis although you indicated that I should have received one on December 18, 1992.
Enclosure:
as stated
-I i
1 l
l 1
i 9303220069 930309 PDR ADOCK 05200001 i
l A
PDR l
L
,v.
l l
The following chart is a' summary of the status of issues raised by the staff I
concerning the ABWR PRA. This chart has been coordinated with GE to assure that it is as. accurate as possible in portraying. issue status. The chart is
{
current as of January 14. 1993.
i An issue is judged " confirmatory" in the rhart if GE has submitted (by fax, discussion, meeting handout, or letter) sufficient information for the staff l
to draw its conclusion regarding the issue. Most of the information submitted.
by GE has been provided in a preliminary form. All information must be
}
translated by GE into SSAR modifications that capture issue resolution. A few-of the issues in the confirmatory list are being tracked there for completeness, although they were written up as " resolved" in the DFSER.
An issue is judged to be "open" in the chart if the staff is awaiting GE's response on staff questions or if the staff still has the issue under review.
l
.}
t f
i t
1 1
I i
l t
i
~.
4 J
January 14. 1993 i
i ISSUE DESCRIPTION STATUS ACTION-l l
CONFIRMATORY ISSUES i
- 1. RPS Reliability 0-1 (Closed =in f
DFSER)
?
i
and other fault trees in DFSER)
{
- 3. GE to defend 10RV S-2.
l frequency (Confirmatory Item
.I 19.1.5.2-1) j
- 4. GE to defend 10RV C-1 (Confirmatory success criteria item 19.1.5.3-1)
- 5. GE to defend one S-1 (Closed,in l
unplanned trip per year DFSER) i
- 6. GE to evaluate 0-2 (0 pen Item l
support system failures 19.2.1.5.2-1) l as initiating events
- 7. GE to confirm LOSP I-1 (COL Action Item-frequency and other 19.1.5.2-1) f site-specific-l parameters j
- 8. Confirm ATWS success C-2 (Closed in criteria DFSER)
-t j
- 9. Confirm RHR success SC-1 (Closed in criteria DFSER) j
- 11. GE to justify 0-5 (0 pen Item f
train-level CCF 19.1.5.4-1) j approach is adequate
- 12. GE to justify test C-4A (Confirmatory and maintenance data Item.19.1.5.5.2-1) analysis
sensitivity to' outage 19.1.5.5.3-1)-
[
times and surveillance i
intervals l
I h
i h
I
t i
b
HPCF pump failure _ data DFSER)
- 15. GE to correct S-11 (Confirmatory credit taken for fire Item 19.1.5.4-1) i j
water
- 16. GE to provide write 0-22a, 0-22B (0 pen i
up on PRA as a design Item 19.1.2.2-1) l tool
- 17. Staff questioned S-5 TO S-8, I-14 l
seismic capacity of the (Confirmatory Item following equipment:
19.1.6.3.2-1 and fuel assembly, flat-part of Open Items bottom tank, diesel 19.1.2.2.2-1 and generator, electrical 19.1.6.3.2-2) equipment
- 18. Staff proposed use 5-10 (Closed in of LLNL hazard curves DFSER)-
- 19. GE to address SA-1 (Closed in hazard curve DFSER) uncertainties
- 20. GE to confirm 1-10, 0-21B (0 pen seismic capacities of Item 19.1.2.2.2-1) equipment and incorporate into design specifications
seismic walkdown technigt..
applicant to perform a DFSER) site-specific seismic PRA
- 24. GE to correct the S-3 (Confirmatory treatment of firewater item 19.1.5.4-1) in the Seismic Class'11 CET 6
- requirements" and 19.1.2.2-1) insights to " Interface write up"
- 27. Determine if CETs 0-13B (0 pen Item need to address 19.1.7.2-1) wetwell-drywell bypass
- 28. Modify CETs for 0-17A, -17B (0 pen severe accident Items 19.1.7.5-1, phenomena 19.1.7.5-2, 19.1.7.6.1-1, 19.1.7.6.2-1, and 19.1.7.6.2-2)
- 29. Flashing during C-6 (0 pen Item l
Venting 19.1.8-1)
- 30. Justify aspects of 0-14 (0 pen Item rupture disc set point 19.1.7.3-1)
- 31. Assess the impact 0-16B 0-18E. (0 pen of CCI on source terms Items 19.1.7.5-1 and 19.1.8-1)
- 32. Uncertainty 0-18A, -188, -18C Analysis (0 pen Items Identify risk 19.1.7.7-1, significant 19.1.7.3-1, and issues from 19.1.7.4-1) previous BWR studies Screen issues for applicability to ABWR i
- 33. Rupture disc S-9 (0 pen item operation before 24 19.1.7.3-2) hours
- 35. Credit for COPS 5-4 (0 pen Item 19.1.7.3-1)
[.
.e-i
.(Open Item Insights 19.1.2.2-1)
' 37. GE to compare PRA 0-1B (0 pen Items
- i sequences from.
19.1.2.3-2, operating BWRs to the 19.1.5.11.2-1)
ABWR PRA sequences and identify why ABWR has L
lower CDF i
- 38. RWCU as a high SC-2 (Open Item:
pressure DHR source 19.1.11.4-2)-
- 39. AC Power Recovery Not an issue in DFSER.-
- I
- 40. Het risk impact of 0-15 (0penItem passive flooder system 19.1.7.4-1)
- 41. Backend Uncertainty 0-18C (0 pen Item Analysis - Perform 19.1.7.7-1) l sensitivity analyses l
for issues of potential risk significance to ABWR
- 42. Uncertainty 0-18E, 0-16 (0 pen Analysis - Treatment of Items 19.1.7.5-1 and CCI coolability in CET
-2)
- 43. Uncertainty 0-180 (0 pen Item Analysis - Treatment of 19.1.7.6.1-1) direct containment heating in CET l
- 44. Consequence related (CA-1,2,3) Staff
(
issues -
believes that no i
- site acceptability further action
- correct' weather required by GE.
treatment
- revise consequence analysis as part of PRA i
update
- 45. Fire ' analysis input Open Items to RAP 19.1.2.2.2-4 and 19.1.6.4-6 l
i 4
~
T
l f
1 I
i i
i 1SSUE DESCRIPTION STATUS-ACTION l
OPEN ISSILES j
{
informal submittals and majority of its SSAR submit followed by-write them up in the updates on PRA issues in the staff's review SSAR.
December 1992.
of these submittals.
(Waiting for GE's complete submittal) 4 i
- 2. GE is to analyze GE's previous submittals on GE submited LOCAs outside of these LOCAs were not-reanalysis on 11/5-containment (0-4) acceptable to the staff or and a supression the ACRS.
pool bypass analysis' on 12/17/92. Staff is reviewing and will complete its review by January 20, 1993.- 0-4B (0 pen Item 19.1.11.4-1)
- 3. GE is to list 0-21 A (0 pen Item assumptions / reliability 19.1.5.4-2) t values for systems that j
are not part of the i
certified design, but are modeled in the PRA l
based on an up-to-date updated requantification.
12/29/92.
PRA-1A plant model There are a series of (0 pen Item-l questions outstanding 19.1.5.11.2-1) related to this submittal.
I i
(GE
'I seismic capacities of capacity figures for the to submit by systems not in the Reactor Service Water Pump 12/31/92) Open Item-certified design House.
19.1.6.3.2-1
[
- Treatment of wetwell-applicability of vacuum support vacuum j
drywell bypass in CET breaker operating breaker leak test experience data to ABWR data received on j
(10/27/92). GE provided 12/10/92.- Staff to ordering of top events in complete FSER input j
CET on 11/3.
on 2/26/93. 0-18G (0 pen Item 19.1.7.2-t 1)
{
?
I d
~
, ~ -
l
.j 6
- 7. Accident management Staff evaluation provided GE submittal on
)
to GE in draft Severe additional guidance Accident Closure chapter.
for COL applicant on GE's planned response accident management t
discussed 10/5/92.
plan received on 12/14/92 as new 3
section 19.9.14.
Staff to complete
{
FSER input by 2/26/93. NRC-2
- 8. SAMDA submittal Revised SAMDA analysis GE to modify submitted 6/30/92 and submittal to addrest discussed with GE 10/8/92.
concerns discussed during 10/8/92 meeting.
(GE submitted ca 12/18/9?) HRC-3
- 9. Containment GE has proposed to address GE to reevaluate isolation failure this issue by extending swimic issue after during seismic event analysis of LOCAs outside completing analysis containment (19E.2.3.3) to of issue for seismically-initiated internal events. (GE events. The approach.for to submit by analysis of LOCAs outs!de 12/31/92) (0-4, 0-containment (for mternal 19)
If all HCLPF events) was sub wquently sequence values rejected by staff and is 0.69, Ge need not now being addressed as perform any further issue 0-4.
analysis for containment and item will become i
confirmatory.
- 10. GE to provid decay The staff has sent GE a (GE submitted on heat removal list of formal questions.
12/18/92) Staff to reliability study complete review by 3/26/93. 0-20 (0 pen Item 19.1.2.2.3-1)
M. GE to provide The staff is awaiting a (GE bmitted on i
internal flooding subcompartment analysis of 12
/J2) Staff to analysis the effect of high pressure comp ete review by pipe. breaks on the walls 3/26/93.
I-9 (0 pen between divisions.
Items 19.1.2.2.2-5 Analysis expected from GE 6nd 19.1.6.5-1) in mid-December.
quN.3 M
t I i
- 12. Human factors in GE made related submittals GE to provide PRA (C-5, 0-7 thru 0-on sensitivity of CDF to response.
(GEto i
10, I-2 thru l-7) human error (10/16/92 and submitted on 6/1/92), identification of 12/15/92) C-5 to I-human errors in Level 1, 7 To be provided in Level 2, and seismic new 19D.7.
analyses (6/25/92), and PRA data uncertainty analysis (6/18/92). Staff requested additional information on l
10/27/92.
- 13. GE to provide PRA-The staff has discussed The staff has based seismic margins with GE its concerns with transmitted guidance analysis the ABWR seismic margins on performing a PRA-submittal and has based margins transmitted questions to analysis for GE. GE has responded by evolutionary fax and meeting handouts to designs.
(GE many of these questions, submitted on.
12/31/92) SA-2 t
(Ope., Items 19.1.6.3.2-1, 19.1.6.3.4.1-1)
- 14. GE to provide PRA-GE has submitted its The staff has based input to ITAAC version of PRA-based ITAAC transmitted its insights.
comments to GE on GE's ITAAC submittal based on PRA insights.
GE has not provided a
^
completion date for ITAAC. GE and the staff are still I
discussing the particulars of PRA-based ITAAC.
PRA-3 1
(0 pen Items-19.1.2.4.2-1, 19.1.5.2-4, 19.1.5.4-3, 19.1.6.3.2-3, 19.1.6.4-4, i
19.1.6.4-5)
)
i
- 15. Site specific The staff's draft SECY The staff's action design verification:
paper on Design is to modify the external floods, certification and Licensing siting criteria for transportation hazards Policy Issues Pertaining to the ABWR since no Passive and Evolutionary site-specific Advanced Light Water external flooding Reactor Designs states that analysis has been 10 CFR 52.47 requires the provided.- The analysis of both internal siting criteria will
~
and external events. At exclude sites where the Design Certification it would be possible stage, site-specific events for external floods such as tornadoes and to exceed the height extreme wind may be of the site grade enveloped using bounding level and where analyses to show that the other non-enveloped events are insignificant.
external events are In performing the COL a threat. GE review, the staff will believes that it-review the site-specific need not take any characteristics to ensure action and seeks that events enveloped by staff confirmation.
the ud.nding analyses have The staff is been properly addressed.
awaiting Commission action on staff recommendations.
I-8
- 16. GE is to analyze The Reactor Systems Branch SRXB. 0-3 (0 pen interfacing LOCAs is not satisfied with the Items 19.1.5.2-2 and resolution proposed by GE
-3) for its upgrading of low pressure system piping.
This issue will remain open until GE/ staff agree on upgrade criteria and the staff PRA people can review it to determine if the resolution has any negative effect on its conclusions.
GE has submitted its proposed resolution to this issue.
1 i
4 l
- 17. GE to use PRA GE submitted its revised GE submitted revised insights to suggest RAP input on November 11, Appendix K 12/92.
areas to be added to 1992. Rest of revision due Staff asked the ABWR reliability 12/4/92.
clarifying questions assurance program in December.
GE responded January 8, 1993. Staff to l
complete review in l
February.
1-15 (0 pen Item 19.1.5.9-1) 6 l
e l
1 i
1 l
l 1
l 1
l
t The followina issues belona to other branches 3
- 31. Compliance with EPZ j
Emergency Plan Criteria and Methodology
.i t
e i
1 a
1
)
6 f