ML20062N467
| ML20062N467 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, 05000470, 05000495 |
| Issue date: | 06/11/1976 |
| From: | Moeller D Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Rowden M NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML093450149 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-80-515, FOIA-80-555 NUDOCS 8203010136 | |
| Download: ML20062N467 (3) | |
Text
_ _ _ _
.& **t,#o,[
UNITED STATES
/
NUCLEAR REGULATORY CC.'.1f.11SSION 4
g ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTCR SAFEGUARDS
,g l
VIASHINGTcN. O. C. 23555 4
/
Jime 11,1976'
?****
Wannrable Marcus A. Powdcn rhi, un U.S. Nuclear Regulatcry Waion Washingten, DC 20555 A 4"'ICN -
REPCRI' CN ShMP1, SICtE AND hTESTER DUDMU u BAIABEE-CF-PIANI CESIGN AS APPLIID TO CQtSCSTICN.52KIDu:.uCU
Subject:
INC. CESSAR-80
Dear Mr. Pcwden:
.s.
3-5, 1976, the Advisory C=rtittee en Reacter At its 194th meeting, on June Safeguards reviewed the application of the Stiene ard Webster Enginee Q)rporatica fer a Preli=lnary Design Approval of its
(
single unit CWtion Engiceering, Inc..CESSAR-80 prcisurized-water-O nuclear steam supply system (NSSSI.%IESnR-41 design was ccndu
~
discussed in its report of February 11, 1976. Se descriptica of 11, 1976 report is applicable to was SWESSAR-P1 provided in the February CESSAR-80; the lattar was reviewed and a rescrt provide on September 17, 1975.
discussions with representatives af the Stene ard Webster ngineering e
Ce CcIn-C=missicn (NPC) Staff.
Corporaticn and the Nuclear Pagulat.rf
~
mittee also had the tenefit of the decu:aents listed.
'!he arrangement of SNESSAR-P1 provides e.xtensive physical separation o critical safety-related equignent to protect against v.u.a code failures Scwever, cem-
===nt-hted with fires or other egerational centingencies.
plate design details fer Shep1'have not been developed and the cence Cen-has not yet been applied to a ecc:plete nuclear pcwer plant design.
sequently, further review of the pnysical separaticn arrangement shcu be made prict to the Final Design Approval or whe
'Ibe Ccanittee wishes to be kept infor:ned.
A matter of major cencern in the NPC Staff's review has been the safety-
~
related interfaces between the ShuSAR-P1 SCP design and the CISSAR-80 NSSS design, en one hand, and the cu= tem-designed site-related i
~and components, en the other h nd.related to the SWESSAR-Pi/CE l h I
~
B203010136 810804 PDR FOIA t MADDEN 80-555 PDR lZ.
t 2-June 11, 1976
] Honorable Marcus A. Powden.
s in.sthe Safety Analhis Reports for these two standardired designs.
tecco-mittee believes that these interface requirements are satisfacterf for a l
"- ' Preliminarf Design Approval, but expects de MPC Staff-and the Applicant- -- - - - - -
to continue to armire them further in connection..with the prc;csal to use.
these designs for an actual plant when it is reviewed for a ccnstruction i
- ~~
permit. te interfaces between ShTSSAR-P1 and the site-related features are defined in the SWESSAR-P1 Safety Analysis Fa;crt, but have not yet been subjected to de test of a c=glete design for a nucle tr peser plant. Se
-=
i NBC Staff should review these interfaces in greater depth when a ccnstruction permit applicaticn is received.
t te Cemittee remar.ds that, duri.g the design, precurement, construc-
, v-i tion, and start =p, H-aly and acprcpriate interdisciplinary system analyses be performed to assure ecc:plete fr.cuional cm::patibility across'each interface? :.;.. '
a--
for the entire spectrt:1 of anticipated cperations and pestulated. design 5 asisj.
accident conditicns.
~
2e coordinatien of interdependent instrtmentaticn and centrols in the nuclear.
island and in the balance of plant will require' attentica at the time when 7:
SNESSAR-P1 is used as a pcrtien of a nuclear pcwer plant license application.
2ese matters should be locluded in the.NBC S**#s standard review plans.
Se pre;csed cr'ientation of the t=rbine-generatcr-with-raroect to the-nuclear-
~ ~
Island is suitable for a single unit.installatien. For -"1tiple unit p:mer plants the location and-crientaticrf of the units shculd be such. as to yield acceptably Icw probabilities of da: age by Icw-trajecterf turbine-generatcr missiles, or suitable missile shielding shculd be provided.
Be SWESSAR-?1 and the CSSSAR-80 USE3 designs, as do many others, utilize the
' ' concept of' t*m-track centinucus duty systec:s which perfor::t critical service- - - -
functions. In scme cases the probability of failure of one of these systec:s is not lcw te failure of the second system to start or em may cause progressively damaging conseg:ences. te Cccmittee reccamends that failures of this kind be evaluated to determine if the necessarf reliability exists for these systems. and whether ram-W1 measures are ageregriate..
Although Sh'ESSAR-P1 and CSSSAR-80 include previsions for protection against industrial sabotage, the Ccm ittee believes that further steps can be taken beyond those provided. Prior to the use of ShTSSAR-Pl/CSSSAR-80 as a ;cetien of an application for a nuclear ;cwer plant license, the Utility-Applicant l
should be required to demonstrate that acceptable ir h trial sabetage pro-visions will te incorporated into the plant design.
'i ;
1~~I'
. C.! :'
- r+.: *.
e O
6 a
gy4y.
w m
w w
)
Honorable Marcus A. Pcvien - June.11, 1976 1
i r
te S'ESSAR-P1' design includes scme provisiens which anticipate the =ain-tenance, inspectica, and. cperatienal needs of de plant throughout its service life, including cleaning and decentamination of the primary coolant systs, and eventual decccmissioning..Scwever, unen Sim,-Plf f s used. as a portien
~
" ~of a nuclear ocwer plant license applicatien-hhe cccmittee-believes that
.- u
~ ' the NBC Staff and the Applicant should further review medods and. procedures.
-- ~ ' for removing ace-"1ated radicactive conta::u.naticn whereby maintenance and inspection progra=s and ultimate decarmissioning-can. be ::cre effectively 1
and safely carried out.
1 Generic problems related to large water reacters are discussed in de Cc:mit-tee's re;crt dated April 16, 1976. Tr.cse p chle=s wievant to SrdSAR-P1 and CESSA*4-80 should be dealt with appropriately by.de NRC Staff and de W i m t as solutions are found..
1 no: Advisory Ccraittee en Paactor Safeguards believes that the items men-M ~2
- - =
tiened above can be resolvind during de standardized plant licensing process and that, if due censideration is given to de-foregoing und to the recc: men-dations in the c*ittee's report of September 17, 1975-en CISSAa-80, Prelim -
'~
laary Design Approval for SWESSAR-P1 to'be used in conjunction with CESSAR-50
(
can be granted in ac=crd with the spirit and pur;cses set forth.in de F
- s-F sion's policy statement on standardization of nuclear power plants as described in IRSE-1341, "P cgratic Information for the I.icensing.of Standardized..
Nuclear Power Plants" and in ccnfer=ance with the Pagulatices of Appendix 0
~ to Part 50 and Section 2.110 of Part. 2 of Title 10 of the Code cf Federal Regulations.
Sincerely ycurs, 024 UP A oade w. w er Chair =an References
- 1. Pressurired^4ater Paactor Reference Nuclear Pcwer Plant Safety Analysis Report (SWESSAR-P1) and Amendments 1 thrcugh 25.
2.
Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation letters l
a.
January 12, 1976 - Res;cnses to Cutstanding Issues b.
February 18, 1976 - Design Ioad Rejection Capability 3.
Report to the Advisory Cc:'mittee en Reactor Safeguards in the Matter of Stone and Webster Engineering Corporatien St:ndard Safety Analysis
~j Report PWR Reference Nuclear Pcuer Plant. STcSSAR-P1 (and its relation-(
- ship to the CESSAR Standard NSSS Design) Docket No. Sm 50-495, Published: May 1976, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory C=iecion, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
~~
~
er e
-