ML20091L259

Expresses Appreciation Re NRC Interest in AP600 Design

ML20091L259
Person / Time
Site:	05200003
Issue date:	08/21/1995
From:	Mcintyre B WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
To:	Crutchfield D NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
DCP-NRC0385, DCP-NRC385, NUDOCS 9508290062
Download: ML20091L259 (2)

Text

-

l

\\

l

\\

.43 M.

l-

^

a Westinghouse.

Energy Systems in ass -

Pittsburgh Pennsylvania 15230-0355 y

Electfic Corporation

DCP/NRC0385 August 21,1995

' Document Control Desk :

i L U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission -

Washington, D C. 20555; LATTENTIONi

' DENNIS CRUTCHFIELD

(

SUBJECT:

GUIDANCE ON DESIGN CONTROL DOCUMENT PREPARATION -

n j

s 4

! Dear Mr. Crutchfieldi

,Your letter of June 9,1995 provided guidance on preparation of a design control document (DCD) for i

. the AP600 and suggested that, based on the evolutionary plant experience, an uly preparation of the DCD would be beneficial to the overall schedule process. Westinghouse appreciates the NRC's i

interest in expediting the AP600 design certification review and is incorporating a number of the items j

. delineated in your letter into the AP600 Standard Safety Analysis Report (SSAR) as it is revised in 1

. response to NRC requests for additional information. This will ease the transition from the SSAR to the certified design material.

1

Proprietary information is one cf the items discussed in your June 9,1995 letter. As you are aware, Westinghouse is in the process of reducing the amount of proprietary information contained in the revised SSAR in response to your letter of October 21,1992. We are also specifying the COL.

information ite'ms in self contained subsections of the AP600 SSAR as a part of the revision process which is a recomniendation in your guidance. Conceptual design information in the AP600 SSAR is -

designated 'as'such.

i

-.In contrast to the evolutionary plant designs, the AP600 Probabilistic Risk Assessment report is not a part of the SSAR.c Therefore, Westinghouse is faced with determining what PRA portions to include

-in the DCD, rather than what to remove. The objective of reviewing the PRA information, however, is the samen This activity consumed the most significant time in the DCD preparation for the evolutionary designs.- The majority of that exercise was devoted to an industry effort to work with the

' NRC staff to determine what selected portions of a PRA should be part of a DCD. Now that l

Edetermination has been made, writing the PRA section of a DCD is a relatively simple activity.

lHowever, this cannot be accomplished for the 'AP600 until the NRC completes the review of the

'-AP600 PRA.

s 4

Mh

('

k

!M

.95082900621950821:

U

.kDR. ADDCK:052000042

[-

PDR g

1

~4

~

.x.

DCP/NRC0385' August 21.1995 While many_ofihe issues associated with the preparation of the DCD were resolved during the revi:w-of the evolutionary ALWR designs, several of the key issues, such as identification of applicable regulations and even the need for a DCD are being reexamined as a past of resolving the comments on the notices of proposed rulemaking for the evolutionary plants. Westinghouse will continue to implement appropriate suggestions from your June 9,1995 letter in the AP600 SSAR as it is revised.

Westinghouse will also closely follow the rulemakings for the evolutionary plants to stay' abreast of what constitutes acceptable certified design material. This approach will enable the AP600 Certified Design Manual to be submitted to the NRC very soon after the FDA is issued.

A Brian A. McIntyre, Manager Advanced Plant Safety and Licensing

/nja 2349-

-