ML20071M516
Text
U.7 D I fg
,,d arcvy'O'
['
UNITED STATES 5
E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. 20666
%,,,,,/
April 9, 1992 NOTE TO: The Chairman Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Curtiss /
Commissioner Remick Commissioner de Plangue FROM:
James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations I
SUBJECT:
PROGRAM FOR REVIEW 0F VENDOR TEST PROGRAMS TO SUPPORT DESIGN CERTIFICATION OF ADVANCED REACTORS The staff has developed an overall program to evaluate, monitor and approve the vendor test programs for advanced reactors.
Enclosed for your information is a copy of the program.
. /
es r
xecutive irector for Operations
Enclosure:
Memo fm Beckjord & Murley to EDO dated 4/6/92 cc:
SECY OGC j
r 1
p b
l
~
b 9
940004023B 940629 PDR COfftB NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR
It M LL Q '-
A W hs p eseg'o UNITED STATES j
h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION c
.,I W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 April 6, 1992 i
g*...+,/
MEMORANDUM FOR:
James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations FROM:
Thomess E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Eric S. Beckjord, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
SUBJECT:
PROGRAM FOR THE REVIEW 0F VENDOR'S TEST PROGRAMS TO SUPPORT THE DESIGN CERTIFICATION OF ADVANCED REACTORS We have developed a program to evaluate, monitor, and approve the vendor's-testing programs to support the design certification of advanced reactors, as we previously described in SECY-91-273, " Review of Vendor's Test Programs to Support the Design Certification of Passive Light Water Reactors," August 27, i
1991. The staff developed this program (Enclosure 1) to be used for any advanced reactor design, including the AP600 and SBWR passive light water reactors.
The staff will implement this program on a sampling basis similar to the power reactor inspection programs. All elements of this program will not have to be applied to every test that a vendor may conduct. We will evaluate the various vendor programs and individual tests to determine which elements of our program to apply, ranging from every element for some tests to none for other l
tests.
We are also developing a detailed implementation plan for reviewing the Westinghouse AP600 test program. Once this plan is completed, we will notify CONTACTS:
S. Reynolds, NRR
- l 504-3245 R. Caruso, NRR 504-1813 L. Shotkin, RES 492-3530 YdO Enclosure
James M. Taylor April 6, 1992 the Westinghouse Electric Corporation of our program and plans for implement-ing it for the AP600 test program. We anticipate spending no more than four FTE per year (two from NRR and two from RES; staff and contractors) to review the Westinghouse AP600 test program, but if additional resources are needed, they will be provided from expanded contractor support. We believe that our review of the AP600 test program will focus on the areas listed in Enclo-sure 2.
Y Q cD J
k i,%
S. Beckjord, Di}
rector Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research rv b Thomas E. Murley, Director l
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l
Enclosures:
1.
Program for Review of Vendor's Test Programs l
Advanced Reactors 2.
AP600 Test Program Review l
l 3
e
~
I
i PROGRAM FOR REVIEW OF VENDOR'S TEST PROGRAMS FOR i
ADVANCED REACTOR DESIGNS 1
l O
l 1
3
's eM buimr. v i L i re,.
I i
l l
s 2.
Vt-NDOH ' S IESt PHU6 HAM PLAN 1
I 2.
INDIVIDUAL l
IESlb
-l t
i
\\
2.1 REVIEW i
1E s. f Atlt 111 1
i j
2.2 ht V1 E mi j
INDIVIDUAL lEbl FL At.
I l
l 2.3 LutouC,1 FEE-lEs1 FhEDICIluNs i
)
1 1
2.4 MON 110R TE511tG f,CT IVlllEd 2.5 REVIEW f
IE51 hEnULIS t
i i
ti 2.6 REVIEW.
COnFLE1Eb ILEI5 J
l J
j J
~-
ADDllJONAL
- j 1ESlING i
1 4
i I
d
i I
l PROGRAM FOR REVIEnf l
-0F VENDOR'S TEST PROGRAM FOR ADVANCED REACTOR DESIGNS Statement of Puroose A structured program for the review of the various vendor's test programs for l
advanced reactor designs is necessary to support licensing, certification, and l
the safety determinations that the NRC will have to make.
The purpose of this program is to provide a formal process to evaluate and monitor vendor's testing programs to support the design certification of advanced reactors.
10 CFR 52.47(b)(2)(1)(A) states in part that an applicant for a design
~
certificate for a standardized nuclear power plant design which differs significantly from the light water reactor designs described in 10 CFR 52.47(b)(1), or which uses simplified, inherent, passive, or other innovative means to accomplish its safety functions, must adequately demonstrate the performance of the' safety features in the design through tests, analyses, or experience; must have evaluated the interdependent effects among the safety f
features of the design, and have found them to be acceptable; and must have shown that sufficient data is available to establish the ability of the f
l analytical tools to perform the requisite safety analyses.
Testing of structures, systems, components, and scaled models of design elements in a controlled environment is one method that can be used by vendors l
to establish the adequacy of both equipment and analytical tools. These tests l
can simulate the expected operating conditions in a small portion of the plant, without the need to construct the entire facility or subject it to an actual transient or accident. The tests can provide confidence that the equipment will perform properly in the plant, if they are properly designed, l
conducted, and scaling effects are properly characterized.
Testing under controlled conditions also provides an opportunity to investi-gate the ability of equipment to function beyond its design limits, so that its
- robustness" can be determined. This is important in understanding the safety margins in the design, and it can also provide insights into potential l
failure modes.
l The NRC staff has a' strong interest in ensuring that vendor's test programs l
are properly designed to include a full range of operational, transient, and accident conditions, especially when the tests involve systems or phenomena for which there is not a significant experience base. This is particularly important if the systems in question are important to safety. Additionally, I
\\
l
early involvement in such test programs provid'es' the staff with' the oppor-l tunity to better understand the performance and limitations of structures, systems, and components, and reduce the possibility of misunderstandings and misconceptions.
t This document provides a framework for reviewing vendor's proposed test programs for advanced reactor designs.
It does not provide prescriptive requirements for the test programs, or for their review, but instead describes the factors that the staff will take into account as it considers each vendor proposal.
The level of effort devoted to any individual aspect of a test plan will depend on the reactor design, the phenomena of interest, and the level of expertise that the staff has in the discipline'under consideration.
Staff reviews will be minimal if the testing of new components is mainly intended to verify the incorporation of evolutionary improvements. The staff will consider the test plan more thoroughly when the testing is associated with new phenomena, novel uses of existing components, or a unique environment.
I This framework is structured to reflect the several phases associated with every test program:
(1) development of the program plan, (2) construction of the facilities, (3) formulation of the test conditions, (4) execution of the tests, (5) evaluation of the data, and (6) feedback of the test results, which may require additional testing. As with ever.y test program, it recognizes that the results may indicate the need for additional testing, or testing of a different kind. The staff does not intend that the acceptance of any individ-ual plan, or test, or test result, precludes the need for additional actions in the future.
Ob 2
1',-
l.
REVIEW OF VENDOR'S TEST PROGRAM PLAN
- vendor will identify specific technical issues and design attributes, involving software and hardware, requiring testing
- vendor will submit complete test program plan (should be submitted four to six months prior to submittal of the first individual test The test program plan should describe the critical attributes pl an).
and safety functions of the design.and how the. testing will vcrify or validate them.
- vendor will include a matrix showing the planned tests versus the critical attributes and safety functions of the design (to be included as a part of the test program plan)
- NRC will review complete test program plan, including the matrix
- NRC will provide recommendations for modifications to the program and/or test matrix, as appropriate
.E vill *termine -that the test program plan is' considered adequate to demonstrate the acceptable performance of the critical attributes and safety functions of the design or require changes and additions t
2.
REVIEW OF INDIVIOUAL TESTS 2.1 REVIEW OF TEST FACILITY
- NRC will evaluate suitability of facility to meet test program objectives (review facility design against test expectations)
- NRC will review scaling rationale and potential affects on test objectives
- NRC will review measurement equipment and accuracy (includes instru-mentation)
- NRC will observe, where possible, checkouts and calibration of test equipment and instrumentation
- NRC will review data acquisition methods and data qualification plans
- NRC will observe shakedown (pretesting) and acceptance testing of the facility
- NRC will require necessary modifications to the facility (e.g.,
additional instrumentation) to provide data necessary for design certification 3
e n-
f
- NRC will recommend that the test facility not be dismantled until NRC reviews are completed.
(This is an attempt to prevent a vendor from l
l having to reconstruct a facility to perform additienal required testing.)
2.2 REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE INDIVIDUAL TESTS l
- vendor should submit the individual test pla1s, including test f
conditions, no later than 15 days prior to perfore'..; the individual The test plans should provide critical information related to tests.
i instrumentation and monitoring equipment, data acquisition, and sensitivity
- vendor should review, as applicable, the results of the previously completed tests useful in developing the individual test plan l
i
- NRC will assess the adequacy of the test plan, assure that test I
objecti.ves are appropriate and can be met
- NRC will provide comments on the planned testing, identifying defi-ciencies and recommend specific improvements and changes I
- NRC will identify additional testing needed
- NRC will identify possible modifications to the test facility and instrumentation that are necessary to correct deficiencies and provide the test data needed for design certification f
- NRC will accept test plan 2.3 CONDUCT PRE-TEST PREDICTIONS
- NRC may recommend or select tests that will require pre-test predic-l tions by the vendor and/or NRC
- vendor will review their pre-test and post-test predictions against test results and submit review results, including actual, initial, and bounding conditions
- NRC will review NRC pre-test and post-test predictions against test l
results and results of vendor's reviews
- NRC may require additional testing and/or select more tests for pre-l test and post-test predictions.
l 2.4 MONITORING OF TESTING ACTIVITIES
- NRC will have personnel at the vendor's test sites to monitor testing activities 4
l i
- NRC will review test equipment and instrumentation calibrations and setup l
- NRC will verify the types and quality (range and accuracy) of test equipment and instrumentation and their installation locations to satisfy the documented test plans
- NRC will observe performance of test, including data acquisition
- NRC will review post-test instrumentation and test equipment check-l outs and calibration checks
- NRC will review initial test results and determine if additional testing or modifications and retesting is necessary
- NRC will accept performance of test or require modifications and/or retesting 2.5 REVIEW OF TEST RESULTS
- vendor will submit the test report; the test report is to describe how the test met the objectives and to discuss and resolve any anomalous results
- vendor will retain the test plans, procedures, raw data, analyses, and test reports in an auditable and retrievable form for the life of the design certification
- NRC will review test results, ensure results provide the data neces-sary for design certification, and evaluate impacts of anomalous results
- NRC will accept test results or require additional testing J
i 2.6 REVIEW OF PREVIOUSLY COMPLETED TESTS l
(tests completed-prior to the initiation of this program)
- vendor will provide full documentation on the tests, including the test procedures
- vendor will provide test reports within 120 days from the date this program is implemented, including all qualified (reviewed and cali-brated) raw data taken from the tests
- NRC will perform selected post-test facility inspections
- NRC will accept tests and results or require additional testing 5
i e
i f-3.
ADDITIONAL TESTING
- NRC may require vendors to perform additional testing as the design and/or construction is changed
- NRC may require vendors to perform additional testing beyond those originally approved (this may be necessary if information from other tests or analyses indicates that previous testing and analyses are not adequate to satisfy.the 10 CFR 52.47 requirements)
)
- NRC may require additional confirmatory testing l
l i
l l
t 6
i l
AP600 TEST PROGRAM REVIEW The staff is developing a detailed implementation plar. for reviewing the Westinghouse (H) AP600 test program, and our initial impression is that the review will include the following broad elements.
1.
The staff will evaluate the M test program to ensure that it identifies the specific technical issues and design attributes for reactor and containment systems which require testing, and described how each test relates to the critical attributes and safety functions of the design, and may determine that the test matrix should be expanded to include additional operating conditions or transients.
The staff will also determine which experiments should be accompanied by pre-test predic-tions from the vendor.
2.
In the evaluation of the suitability of the thermal-hydraulic test facilities, which are proposed to meet the test program objectives, the staff will focus on the scaling rational and how scaling effects will be taken into account in the application of the test results to the final design. The instrumentation associated with the thermal-hydraulic and integral system testing facilities will also be reviewed to ensure that appropriate parameters are properly measured.
3.
When a particular test or test series is associated with new phenomena, novel uses of existing components, or a unique environment, the staff will station observers at the test facility for that test or test series. A y_try oreliminary review of the AP600 test program indicates that observers should be provided for some se)arate-effects tests, depressurization blowdown tests, containment 1 eat transfer tests, and high and low pressure integral systems tests.
4.
The staff believes that, at a minimum, it will be necessary to review the pre-and post-test calculations of certain separate-effects and integral system experiments.
It is likely that the staff will also perform some of its own calculations of these experiments.
5.
E will provide the staff with the results of all experiments performed ~
in support of the AP600 application and the analyses that show how the results support the licensing case. The staff will review and evaluate those analyses and test results. The staff review may determine that additional tests or test series must be performed, in which case additional staff effort may be required to review the tests, their results, and subsequent analyses.
ah p
l 4
}
. _,