ML20057B370
| ML20057B370 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05200003 |
| Issue date: | 08/13/1993 |
| From: | Kenyon T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Liparulo N WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9309210261 | |
| Download: ML20057B370 (5) | |
Text
bhoA hlc s
[
,%'o UNITED STATES i'
8
'n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
[
.. j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 k...../
August 13, 1993 Docket No.52-003 Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Activities Westinghouse Electric Corporation P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230
Dear Mr. Liparulo:
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) ON THE AP600 As a result of its review of the June 1992 application for design certifica-tion of the AP600, your February 25, 1993, response to the staff's RAI, and the July 14, 1993, meeting on Control Room and TSC Habitability, the staff has determined that it needs additional information in order to complete its review. The additional information is needed in the area of emergency planning (Q100.10).
Enclosed is the staff's question.
Please respond to this request within 90 days of the date of receipt of this letter.
You have requested that portions of the information submitted in the June 1992 application for design certification be exempt from mandatory public disclo-sure. While the staff has not completed its review of your request in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 2.790, that portion of the submit-ted information is being withheld from public disclosure pending the staff's final determination. The staff concludes that this RAI does not contain those portions of the information for which exemption is sought. However, the staff will withhold this letter from public disclosure for 30 calendar days from the date of this letter to allow Westinghouse the opportunity to verify the i
staff's conclusions.
If, after that time, you do not request that all or portions of the information in the enclosures be withheld from public disclo-sure in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790, this letter will be placed in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Public Document Room.
i 200007
'The numbers in parentheses designate the tracking numbers assigned to the questions.
]
bh hbbo$oa-hh I
PDR_
1
Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo August 13, 1993 This RAI affects nine or fewer respondents, and therefore, is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under P.L.96-511.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, you can contact me at (301) 504-1120.
Sincerely, original signed by:
Frederick W. Hasselberg Thomas J. Kenyon, Project Manager Standardization Project Directorate Associate Director for Advanced Reactors and License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
1 As stated cc w/ enclosure:
See next page DISTRIBUTION:
- Central File PDST R/F 1Murley/FMiraglia DCrutchfield
- PDR RBorchardt TEssig TKenyon RHasselberg TGody, Jr., EDO JMoore, 15B18 MSiemien, 15B10 PShea EFox, 9H15 FKantor, 9H15 ACRS (11) w/o encl.
OFC:
LA:PDST:ADAR PM:PDST:@@
PM:PDET;ADAR.
(A)SC:PDST:A_DAR NAME:
PSheaitGS TKenyon:Ig /
RHassNerg[aTEbi[
08/9/h3 08/9/93 08/ 4 /93_ j f
08//J/93 DATE:
y 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY:
" p/P DOCUMENT NAME: AP600TSC.RAI
. '4$
4!
i I
i l
Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo Westinghouse Electric Corporation
,f 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 l'
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
\\
'I REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE WESTINGHOUSE AP600 DESIGN EMERGENCY PLANNING 100.10 In accordance with 10 CFR 50.34(f)(2)(xxv), an applicant must provide for an onsite Technical Support Center (TSC) and Operational Support Center (OSC). Guidance for the function and habitability of the TSC are provided in NUREG-0696 and Supplement I to NUREG-0737.
In Q100.6, the staff concluded that the design considerations for emergency planning specified in the AP600 SSAR were not sufficient because the facilities and equipment necessary to support TSC operations were not specified as recommended in Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737 and NUREG-0696. Additionally, the staff asked for a description of design considerations for onsite emergency response facilities as part of the AP600 design.
As a result of the July 14, 1993, meeting on Control Room and TSC Habitability, a portion of the design details for the TSC were provided and the staff is now able to identify specific issues of concern. Of primary concern to the staff is the need for the TSC to remain functional in a manner comparable to the Main Control Room under accident conditions. Address the following concerns:
The staff is particularly concerned with the AP600's ability to a.
adequately respond to plant emergencies when non-vital ac power is unavailable and only " passive" safety features can be relied upon. Describe Westinghouse's plans for meeting the require-ments for maintaining TSC functionality / habitability during plant accidents. Do these plans include events involving a loss of non-vital AC power?
{
l b.
If TSC functionality / habitability cannot be maintained, do these functions revert to the Main Control Room (MCR)?
c.
Was a job task analysis used during the design of the MCR habitability system? Has a task analysis been performed to estimate any additional number of personnel manning the MCR l
during accident conditions?
d.
Has a task analysis been employed to consider the effects of vital TSC functions reverting to the Main Control Room during events in which TSC functionality / habitability are lost (such as loss of non-vital ac power events)?
e.
How are MCR temperature, humidity, oxygen and carbon dioxide levels expected to change due to TSC functions reverting to the MCR during these events?
Enclosure
i
'l f.
Has Westinghouse considered providing TSC functionality and/or habitability by means of any source of power other than the non-vital AC power system?
1 i
i l
i l