ML20057A065

Discusses Review Schedule for AP600 Design Certification Application

ML20057A065
Person / Time
Site:	05200003
Issue date:	08/30/1993
From:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Liparulo N WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
References
NUDOCS 9309100396
Download: ML20057A065 (4)

Text

_

j$ e clu.J' h-Cx UNITED STATES

~g l'

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n

,E WASWNGTON, D. C. 20555

1. g August 30, 1993 Docket No.52-003 Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Activities Westinghouse Electric Corporation P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230

SUBJECT:

REVIEW SCHEDULE FOR THE AP600 DESIGN CERTIFICATION APPLICATION The staff has reevaluated its approach to reviewing the AP600 design certifi-cation application, and concludes that it is appropriate to modify certain intermediate milestones to incorporate the lessons that have been learned from the evolutionary design reviews and to account for delays in the AP600 testing schedule.

It is the staff's understanding that the current testing schedule is running 4-5 months later than that assumed in SECY-93-097, " Integrated Review Sched-ules for the Evolutionary and Advanced Light Water Reactor Projects," dated April 14, 1993. When it developed the review schedule, the staff believed that it could develop the draft safety evaluation report (DSER) without all of the tests completed. At the time, the results from only one test were expected to be available after the DSER was scheduled to be developed. Now the staff understands that Westinghouse will be completing tests and submit-ting preliminary data and analyses of the results for three major testing programs after the staff is scheduled to issue the DSER.

Recent events and changes to the design of the AP600 design test facilities (that could lead to modifications to the design of the AP600) demonstrate the need for these programs to be complete (or nearly complete) before developing certain affected portions of the DSER. The staff feels strongly that a meaningful DSER can be prepared only after key aspects of the AP600 test program have been completed. Preparation of the DSER without insights from the test program would result in a premature design evaluatic, by the staff that could necessitate re-review of the design after the test program is completed.

In addition, it is the staff's understanding that Westinghouse is developing a

" focused probabilistic risk assessment (FPRA)" to address the issues concern-ing the regulatory treatment of non-safety systems for passive plant designs as they apply to the AP600 design. The staff is planning to issue a draft h$(h 0100PG g@

t 9309100396 930830 59 i

PDR ADOCK 05200003 A

PDR

August 30, 1993 Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo Commission paper shortly that addresses its position on this issue. Although the approaches to resolution of this issue will not have been reviewed by the Commission, and, therefore, will not represent a final agency position at the time the draft is issued, the staff concludes that it is appropriate for Westinghouse to propose its resolution for the AP600 design expeditiously after the draft Commission piper is released to support the development of the DSER. Therefore, we request that you forward the results of that analysis and the appropriate modifications to the design certification application as soon i

as practicable to support the staff's review. Those technical and procedural areas that are not adequately addressed in this submittal will likely result in a DSER for these areas that is very limited in scope with opea items that are general in describing the staff's concerns. Guidance from the Commis, ion received subsequent to your submittal will be factored into the review should it differ from the staff's position.

The staff also concludes that it would facilitate the review of the AP600 SSAR if Westinghouse updates the SSAR in the November-December 1993 timeframe to i

ensure that the staff fully understands the implications of the proposed i

changes that have been forwarded to the staff in your responses to its requests for additional information.

As a result of these concerns, the staff proposes to issue the DSER in two stages. The first portion of the DSER would be issued in May 1994 in accor-dance with SECY-93-097, and would consist of those chapters that should not be r

significantly affected by the results of the design certification test program. Technical and procedural areas that are not adequately addressed in the RTNSS submittal will be addressed only in a limited manner. The second portion would be issued after the staff has had the opportunity to review the test results and the final RTNSS information. This approach would make the most efficient use of the staff's limited resources as well as those of Westinghouse.

In addition, the staff understands that Westinghouse intends to issue a revised submittal addressing the inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC) for the AP600 by the end of this year. The staff's experi-ence with the two evolutionary plant reviews has shown that the most efficient way to develop and review the ITAAC is to complete the design and resolve the open items that are discussed in the DSER before submittal of the final package, Therefore, the staff concludes that it would be best for Westing-house to finalize the AP600 ITAAC after the design has been completed by Westinghouse and all portions of the DSER have been issued by the staff.

However, the staff still recommends that policy issues concerning the contents of the ITAAC continue to be discussed to facilitate early resolution.

i i

l Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo August 30, 1993 P

If you have any questions regarding this matter, you can contact the project manager, Thomas J. Kenyon, at (301) 504-1120.

Sincerely, (Original signed by)

Dennis M. Crutchfield, Associate Director for Advanced Reactors and License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc: See next page DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File PDR PDST R/F TMurley/FMiraglia,12G18 WRussell, 12G18 DCrutchfield RBorchardt TEssig TKenyon i

RHasselberg TGody, Jr., EDO JMoore, 15B18 i

PShea ACRS (11) i C

j e

0FC:

LA:PDST:ADAR PM:PN$TiADAR PM:PDSy:AdAR (A)SC:PDST:ADAR NAME:

PShea Q M TKehbn:sg RHassdlberg TEssig[N 08/M3' 08/ /93 08/d/93 08/t1/93 DATE:

(A)DhDST:ADAR ADAR d',

DM/

f 0FC:

3 NAME:

RBohardt kthbd Tdurley DATE:

08/7 7/93 08/f8/93 08/3 0/93 L

0FFICIAL RECORD COPY:

DOCUMENT NAME: SCHEDULE.0LY

Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo Westinghouse Electric Corporation Docket No.52-003 AP600 cc:

Mr. B. A. McIntyre Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Westinghouse Electric Corporation Energy Systems Business Unit P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Mr. John C. Butler Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Westinghouse Electric Corporation Energy Systems Business Unit Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Mr. M. D. Beaumont Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division Westinghouse Electric Corporation One Montrose Metro 11921 Rockville Pike Suite 350 Rockville, Maryland 20852 Mr. Sterling Franks U.S. Department of Energy NE-42 Washington, D.C.

20585 Mr. S. M. Modro EG&G Idaho Inc.

Post Office Box 1625 Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Mr. Steve Goldberg Budget Examiner 725 17th Street, N.W.

Room 8002 Washington, D.C.

20503 Mr. Frank A. Ross U.S. Department of Energy, NE-42 Office of LWR Safety and Technology 19901 Germantown Road Germantown, Maryland 20874 4