ML20059D221

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Sbwr Design Certification & Requests That Response to Encl Questions Be Provided within 30 Days of Dtd Ltr

ML20059D221
Person / Time
Site:	05200004
Issue date:	11/26/1993
From:	Malloy M Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Marriott P GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
References
NUDOCS 9401070075
Download: ML20059D221 (5)

Text

v ,jm

<1 x ,

gggb( "

j g

g,f sh uc u .

1

,.-k '

~

UNITED STATESJ  ;

i g ' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION: <

q gg( E W ,([/ j j ' WASHINGTON, D.C..20566-0001

[pc #4 * ,P '

November 26. 1993L

/DocketNo.52-004 .

l t. ,0

..q L!

Mr. Patrick W. Marriott, Manager Y Licensing & Consulting Services .i GE< Nuclear Energy j 175 Curtner-Avenue. "

-San Jo.t2, California 95125 d

Dear Mr. Marriott:

3..

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) REGARDING THE SIMPLIFIED :i'

[ BOILING WATER REACTOR (SBWR) DESIGN s Based on its review of the GE Nuclear Energy (GE) February 28, 1993, supple- . I

? ment to the .SBWR~ application and a conference call with GE on OctoberL 6,"1993, the staff has determined that- it needs additional information to support its d review activities related to the. SBWR design certification. ' Some. additional '

'iaformation on human-systemsLinterfaces as' discussed in Sectioni13.2,?Sec-- *

t. n.13.5, and. Chapter:l needed:(Q620.1-Q620.11).ll of SBWR-standard Please provide a response. safety analysis report:(SSAR);is to~the enclosed._' ques-tions within ~30 days of the date of this . letter. The staff may~. forward additional questions regarding the SSAR once -it- reviews the SSAR revision J discussed in-Q620.1 of the enclosure. - Clarification' of your answers ~ toc this 1 RAI may also be.needed at a later date. i Please forward a copy.of your response directly to:- l Dr. John 0'Hara

'{

Brookhaven National Laboratory '!

Department of. Nuclear Energy Building 130,.32 Lewis Road

.{

Upton,lNew York 11973' .;

1 r

-060002 I ..-

..q .

l ,

Ot- 1 i ' i

~

• The numbers in parentheses designate the tracking numbers assigned to the.

. questions; Tp j p

j 5

st 9401070075.931126- p- '

PDR ADOCK'0520 4' dgy 3 g

?

1 4.

~

Mr. Patrick W. Harriott - November 26, 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, please contact me at (301) 504-1178 or Mr. Son Ninh at (301) 504-1125.

C o rcly, (Original signed by Jerry N. Wilson for)

Melinda Malloy, Project Manager Standardization Project Directorate Associate Directorate for Advanced Reactors and License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

Distribution:

RAI on the SBWR Design  ; Central l File : DCrutchfield/WTravers

~PDR_ RBorchardt cc w/ enclosure: TMurley/FMiraglia,12G18 JNWilson See next page WRussell, 12G18 PShea JMoore, 15B18 ACRS (11) '

WDean, 17G21 MMalloy FHasselberg SNinh BBoger/SWeiss, 10H5 DLange, 10D24 REckenrode, 10024 PEng, 10D24 GGalletti,10D24 CGoodman, 10D24 BSheron/TKing, NLS007 MFinkel stein, .15B18 GSuh (2),'12E4 WBateman, 17G21 PDST R/F .

i .-

0FC LA:P, DST PM:PDST PM:PDSTf y 11HFO//, S$[DS'f NAME PSheaN N1$:tz Sd M. Mgek JNVi[ son -

I DATE 11///b3 11/24/93 11/4 [93 11/N/93 11/2h/93 0FFICIAL RECOR CO : SBWR9405.MM e

Mr.LPatrickW.'Marriott

~

, - Docket No.'52-004 2* ; / General: Electric Company > .;

t ec:- . Mr. Laurence' S. : Gifford i GE Nuclear Energy:. i 12300 Twinbrook Parkway: ,

- Suite 315'- -

Rockville,' Maryland 20852

]

Director, Criteria &. Standards Division Office of. Radiation Programs i U.S. Environmental Protection Agency  ;

- 401'M Street, S.W. '

Washington, D.C. 20460 Mr. Sterling Franks- >

U.S. Department of Ert :) '

t%

< 6..ngton, D.C. 20585

)

Mr. John.E. Leatherman ,

SBWR Licensing Manager i GE Nuclear. Energy  ;

175 Curtner Avenue, M/C 781 San Jose, California 95125-Mr. Frank.A.~ Ross

- Program Manager, ALWR Office of LWR. Safety & Technology U.S. Department of Energy ...

. NE-42 l 19901' Germantown Road  :

Germantown, Maryland'.20874 Mr. Victor G. Snell, Director. -i Safety and Licensing- 1 AECL-Technologies  ;

9210 Corporate Boulevard Suite 410  ;

Rockville,T Maryland' 20850 l i

y 1

-1

'I q

l l

6

'l '

1. y "

~'

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) ON THE SIMPLIFIED BOILING WATER REACTOR (SBWR) DESIGN Human-Systems Interfaces 620.1 During a conference call between Nuclear Regulatory Commission and GE Nuclear Energy (CE) staffs on October 6, 1993, GE indicated that it intended to submit complete revisions of Section 13.2, " Train- -

ing," Section 13.5, " Plant Procedures," and Chapter.18, " Human Factors Engineering," of the SBWR standard safety analysis report (SSAR) by the first week of November 1993. The revised submittal is expected to be very similar to the information provided in Amend-ment 32 of the advanced boiling water reactor (ABWR) SSAR. Provide the SSAR revisions and include in the' submittal the additional information (detailed in Questions 620.2 through 620.9 below) as agreed during the call.

620.2 In SECY-91-272, " Role of Personnel and Advanced Control Rooms in Future Nuclear Power Plants," dated August 27, 1991, the staff i stated that it believed that the role of the operator in the passive plant control rooms would be significantly different than that of operators in evolutionary plants. Specifically, operators will use non-safety-related control systems before safety systems in respond-ing to a plant event. Based on the differences in approach to system usage, the staff believes that a fully integrated control room prototype will be needed. Please explain, in detail, why no prototype is proposed for the SBWR design.

620.3 GE stated during the conference call on October 6,1993, that it intended to incorporate the standard features used for the ABWR-design on the SBWR. Justify, in detail, why the use of each stan-dard feature previously identified for an evolutionary plant is acceptable for a passive plant, given the staff's position as stated in SECY-91-272.

620.4 If computerized procedures will be implemented as part of the SBWR control room design, provide as part of the SSAR, a section'which  ;

includes the technical basis for selection of computerized proce-dures, as well as a detailed description of the planned development and verification and validation procedures required to develop these procedures and the digital interface.

620.5 Explain the differences in operating philosophy between an active plant design which utilizes active components, such as pumps, to mitigate an accident and a passive plant design which utilizes natural forces to mitigate an accident. Discuss how these differ-ences will affect operator cognitive tasks and design of the human l system interfaces.

620.6 Provide the task analysis used to derive the minimum inventory of '

controls, displays, and alarms contained in SSAR Appendix 18F.

I Enclosure I l

l

620.7 Three critical operator actions are identified in the emergency procedures guidelines (EPGs). Please provide specific references to the EPG steps covering the probabilistic risk assessment (PRA)-based actions, a discussion of how the actions were identified, and state whether the PRA included an analysis of level 1, 2, and 3 events.

620.8 GE has stated that the minimum set of controls, displays, and alarms described in SSAR Appendix 18F includes Visual Display Unit (VDU) and divisional VDU-based items. Is it GE's intent to include only those items designated as " fixed position" in the SBWR Tier 1 Design Document; i.e., in the inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptaace criteria (ITAAC); or will the entire minimum inventory be included in the ITAAC7

'620.9 Identify the technical contact for the SBWR EPGs and indicate whether the EPGs are based on Revision 4 of the BWR Owners Group Guidelines.

620.10 Discuss what control barriers there will be between passive safety feature actuation and operator intervention.

620.11 Describe the provisions for control room habitability during the 72-hour period immediately following a design-basis accident.