ML20126K436
| ML20126K436 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/14/1992 |
| From: | Kennedy J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| PROJECT-679A NUDOCS 9301070122 | |
| Download: ML20126K436 (11) | |
Text
.
'o UNITED STATES
["
k NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
l WASHING T ON, D. C. 20555
't,...o #'
December 14, 1992 Project No. 679 ORGANIZATION: Atomic Energy of Canada, Ltd., Technologies (AECLT)
SUBJECT:
MEETING WITH AECL TECHNOLOGIES TO DISCUSS THE CANADIAN DEUTERIUM URANIUM (CANDU) 3 PREAPPLICATION REVIEW On October 15, 1992, members of the Advanced Reactors Project Directorate (PDAR) of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) and members of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) met with representatives of AECLT to discuss the NRC's preapplication review plan for CANDU 3.
The meeting was requested by AECLT. A list of attendees is included as Enclosure 1.
The meeting agenda is provided in Enclosure 2.
Jim Dyer, PDAR Director, opened the meeting by stating that even though the Commission advocates early interaction with potential standard design certification (SDC) applicants, the CANDU 3 preapplication review scope, content, and schedule remain under the purview of the NRC.
PDAR will, however, take into consideration suggestions or recommendations made by AECLT regarding the CANDU 3 preapplication review.
Louis Rib, AECLT, stated that the mpetus for the meeting was a September 23, 1992, letter Trom Jim Dyer to Denny Shiflett, AECLT, regarding the availability of proprietary information on the CANDU 3 design. This letter indicated that PDAR had reviewed the material already submitted for review of the CANDU 3 design, and noted that some pertinent proprietary information-would be needed to complete the pwapplication review on a definitive l
schedule. AECLT believed that the NRC had previously decided in a letter-dated April 11, 1991, that the NRC needed no additional submittals to complete the preapplication review.
Janet Kennedy, PDAR, informed AECLT that the l
April 11, 1991, letter did not state that the NRC-would not require any additional information.
In the September 23, 1992, letter, the staff identified a need for an updated CANDU-3 Safety Analysis Report, information regarding fuel performance acceptance criteria,-and information regarding CANDU 3 severe accident analyses.
In addition, a request was previously issued regarding experimental database information in support of the CANDU 3-design.
In Enclosure 2, as Attachment I to the meeting agenda, AECLT provided their comments on the proposed CANDU 3 preapplication-review scope.
For each chapter of the preapplication review, AECLT identified what documents they i
have submitted that address the subject area. One of the more sensitive areas 1'
of review to AECLT is the area of severe accidents. AECLT inquired as to where the NRC requirements are contained for severe accidents. Tom Cox, PDAR, y
3 indicated that the NRC's policies on severe accidents are contained in NUREG-I j%
)
1226, " Development and Utilization of the NRC Policy Statement on the Q/i
/
Regulation of Advanced Nuclear Power Plants," and in the Commission's " Policy OUOON n r n tD u T(1 M Cl!! f F M * ~ " $ {, 8 [ 3 7f 9301070122 921214
'" M M
s AECL Technologies December 14, 1992 Statement on Severe Reactor Accidents Regarding future Designs and Existing Plants." Tom Cox also noted that the NRC expects AECLT to evaluate event sequences involving substantial core damage at the preapplication review stage.
AECLT stated that no severe accident analysis has been done for CANDU 3.
As such, AECLT would like to see this issue remain open for the preapplication review. AECLT did note that they have submitted to the NRC a i
document entitled "CANDU 3 Systematic Review of the Plant Design for Identification of Initiating Events," which identifies 84 initiating events (and associated event trees) with a potential for release of radionuclides from their normal location.
PDAR informed AECLT that the issue of severe accidents would have to be addressed at the preapplication stage.
The staff believes that this information is necessary for the NRC to make key recommendations on the licensability of the CANDU 3 design in the U.S.
For the issue of design codes and standards, Jim Dyer informed AECLT that NRC will be looking at whether the CANDU 3 design complies with U.S. codes and standards. Janet Kennedy noted that the CANDU 3 documentation available to the NRC does not identify whether or not the design meets U.S. requirements.
The documentation identifies what Canadian design standards apply, but there is no comparison of Canadian standards with U.S. standards.
This is an area of focus for the preapplication review.
Another area of concern to AECLT is the issue of experimental database information in support of the CANDU 3 design.
The major NRC effort to evaluate the experimental databases in supgrt of tAe CANDU 3 design is being performed by RES. Although RES initiated the work, Jim Dyer informed AECLT that NRR has identified this as an issue for the preapplication review. At the preapplication stage, PDAR wants to identify any major areas for which the design is not supported by experimental data.
Development of experimental data to support unique design features could be a long lead time item.
PDAR wants to inform AECLT early on about areas needing more data support.
AECLT noted that their belief is that CANDU 3 work being performed by the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research should be considered separate.from the preapplication review work being performed by NRR. One of the major areas of concern for AECLT is the issue of fee recovery, Jim Dyer stated that, at this time, none of the-current work ongoing in RES is fee recoverable.
Jim Dyer also noted that he understood AECLT's concern regarding research work,- but i-that NRR is involved in the work ongoing at RES and is counting on RES to supply information in support of PDAR's preapplication review.
Examples of RES work that PDAR will use in the preapplication review is the experimental database review, and review of the computer codes used in the design of the CANDU 3.
Ed Throm, PDAR, noted that the. computer codes are necessary for the preapplication review for the NRC to make a judgment on whether or not the accident analysis presented by AECL is conservative and the assumptions made r
are defensible.
As identified in Attachment 1 to Enclosure 2, AECLT wanted to add a chapter to-the preapplication review scope to address areas for which the CANDU 3 design
- - ~
-.4 5
AECL Technologies
- December 14, 1992
-does not meet the specific NRC requirement, but for.which the design provides equivalent safety.
The equivalent safety issues have been submitted to the NRC in the form-of Technology Transfer Reports -(TTRs). Tom Cox stated that PDAR would not address'each TTR in a separate chapter of-the prea) plication review, but would address the TTRs as the subject area arc;e in tie various preapplication review issues.
For example, the TTR or emergency core cooling would be addressed in the chapters on special safety systems and accident analysis.
PDAR did agree to consider addressing specific: NRC-requirements which AECL1 has stated are not technically relevant to CANDU 3 such as certain Regulatory Guides and _10 CFG requirements. These requirements were identified in previous AECLT submittals-to the NRC.
Finally, PDAR addressed some open issues remaining from previous meetings or correspondence.
The first was the Canadian export permit for transmittal of the Canadian codes to the NRC. _ AECLT stated that although the export permit had been signed, they are currently trying to find out what further action needs to be taken to get the codes transferred to the NRC. AECLT believed it will be straightened out by November 1,1992.
Second, there is a previous request on the docket for information-regarding experimental databases'in support of the CANDU 3 design. AECLT stated that they are working on compiling the requested information, and the first response will be forth-coming soon.
Lastly,.AECLT inquired about the status of the preapplication review schedule. Jim Dyer iold AECLT that a Commission paper on the preap-plication review schedules was in concurrence.
The schedules in-this paper 4
attempt to address the needs of each of the preapplicants. AECLT stated that if for-some reason it-appeared that the schedules would not be met due to -
resource constraints or_some unknown factcr, they would like the NRC to at-least address the equivalent safety issues identified in the various TTRs that-have been submitted.
Jim Dyer said that-the staff would consider AECLT's recommendation.
Original signed by:
' Janet L. Kennedy, Project Manager Advanced Reactors Project Directorate-Associate Directorate for Advanced Reactors and License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
1.
List of Attendees pistribution: THCox RMeyer 2.
Meeting _ Agenda Central File _
EFGoodwin Llother NRC PDR JLKennedy ACRS (10)
.cc w/ enclosures:
TEMurley.
EThrom OGC L
See next page FJMiraglia RDePriest EJordan-L PMCrutchfield ZRRosztoczy PDAR R/F J
WDTravers' JClane CANDU R/F MMSlosson DEbert hbAR LA:PDLR:ADAR PM:PDAR:ADARg
-SC:PDAR: DAR 'D:
LLutherg/
- JLKennedy:sa THCo fC MM ssM
/.:2///92-
/.2/ G-/92
/2/0Tr/92 I
/92 l
OFFICIAL. RECORD COPY Document-Name:- SUMRY10.15 r
,4
D AECL Technologies December 14, 1992 CANDU Project No. 679 cc:
Louis N. Rib, Licensing Consultant AECL Technologies 9210 Corporate Boulevard, Suite 410 Rockville, Maryland 20850 Bernie Ewing, Manager Studies and Codif: cation Division Atomic Energy Control _ Board P.O. Box 1046, Station B 270 Albert Street Ottawa, Ontario, Canada KlP SS9 A.M. Mortada Aly, Senior Project Officer Advanced Projects Licensing Group Studies and Codification Division Atomic Energy Control Board P.O. Box 1046, Station B 270 Albert Street Ottawa, Ontario, Canada KlP 559 A.0, Hink, Project Director - CANDU-3 AECL CANDU 2251 Speakman Drive Mississaugua, Ontario, Canada L5K 182 L. Manning Muntzing Newman & Holtzinger, P.C.
1615 L Street, N.W., Suite 1000-Washington, DC 20036 Steve-Goldberg, Budget Examiner Office of Management -and Budget 725 17th Street, NW.
Washington, DC 20503 Mr. Dennis R. Shiflett Vice President / General Manager AECL Technologies 9210 Corporate Boulevard, Suite 410 Rockville, Maryland 20850 E
s.-
EEL 014RE_1 NEETING WITH AECL TECHNOLOGIES'T0 DISCUSS-CANDU 3 PREAPPLICATION REVIEW.
Name Affiliation Janet L. Kennedy NRC/NRR/ADAR/PDAR Edward D. Throm NRC/NRR/ADAR/PDAR Robert E. DePriest NRC/NRR/ADAR/PDAR Thomas H. Cox NRC/NRR/ADAR/PDAR James E. Dyer NRC/hRR/ADAR/PDAR Ralph Heyer NRC/RES Zoltan Rosztoczy NRC/RES John C. Lane NRC/RES David Ebert NRC/RES L
Hichael H. Fletcher AECL Technologies Robert L. Ferguson AECL Technologies Louis N. Rib AECL Technologies Raymond W. Durante AECL Technologies 4
1' l-m w-9
~. - -. -..
9 ENCLOSURE 2-g CANDU 3 PREAPPLICATION REVIEW AECLT-NRC MEETING AGENDA
- October 15,1992 --
1 i
1.
INTRODUCTION 1.1 Participants 1.2 Discussion Issues A mutually-agreeable scope for the preapplication review has not been established.
4 AECLT recommendations for preapplication review have not been i
included.
The NRR preapplication review schedule has not been establistied and NRR has indicated further delays.
The NRC/RES roles in the preapplication review and NRC/RES role in NRR's research program are not kept separated.-
'NRR's recent requests for additional information appear to co-mingle such requests for the research program and the preapplication review.
c
1.3 Purpose
To discuss these issues and arrive at (1) a_ mutually-agreeable working outline -
for the review, (2) a proposed schedule for the review, and (3) a methodology ;
for continuing the review and the research program independently.
2.
DISCUSSION 1-2.1 - -' Comments on NRC's PSER outline (Mtg. June 29,1992) to -
include AECLT's recommendations (ltr Nov. 19, 1991).
2.2 Role of RES in PSER development.
1-L
~2.3
. Separation of RES role in PSER from research role.
2.4 Role of proprietary information in review (Attachment 2).
E
- 1
-4
'...,,m.-
r
, _ -.,. _. ~
-4,,-,.,
~
2.5 Role of recent RAI's (June 29, 1992 and Septe.w.- 23,1992)inthe-preapplication review.
2.6-NRC schedule for preapplication review.
2.7 Future Actions-Mutually-agreeable scope of review SECYs re Policy Issues and Schedule 3.
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS i
(
2
ATTACHMENT 1 10/5/92 COMMENTS ON NRC/NRR PSER OUTLINE Chapter Title / Content 1
INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
Review Criteria Policy Issues Outstanding Issues New Requirements 2
DESIGN CODES AND STANDARDS (NRC Issue ?)
CSA Standards (8/29/89) 3 SEISMIC DESIGN (TTR-413: Ch. 2, CSR/SDG-002) 4 SAFETY CLASSIFICATION OF STRUCTURES, SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS Group 1 and Group 2 Philosophy (CSR/SDG-004, Ltr 09/16/92)
TTR-413 - Classification of SSC, Ch. 3 TTR-410 - Ch. 2 & 3 5'
REACTOR Coefficients of Reactivity (future TTR)
Reactivity Control Levices Used During Normal Operation Materials Horizontal Pressure Tubes (TTR-291)
RCS Pressure Boundary Past Experience and Problem Areas ASME Code Relief Requests (Mat'l & Rolled Joint) 6 SPECIAL SAFETY SYSTEMS Containment System (TTR-411 future)
Emergency Core Cooling Syste.m (TTR-409 & 276)
Shutdown System No. 2 (TTR-306)
Shutdown System No. 2 (TER-306)
- = Suggested modifications / additions to NRC's PSER outline 1
7 ON LINE FUELING AND FUEL IIANDLING (TTR 305) 8 PRODUCTION AND CONTROL OF TRITIUM (REP 2/91) 9' INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL (TTR 306) 10' ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS (TTR-423,1TR-429) 11 MAIN CONTROL ROOM AND SECONDARY CONTROL AREA (TTR-412) 12 TESTING REQUIREMENTS (NRC issue?)
Development, Verification and Validation of Analytical Tools Development Tests 13 SAFETY ASSESSMENT Accident Analysis (Classification of DBAs and accident initiators - systematic review)
Source Term (TTR-384)
Containment Performance (TTR-411 future) 14' PROBABILISTIC SAFETY ASSESSMENT (CPSA, Systematic Review) 15' SPECIFIC ISSUES - Equivalent Safety Findings Comparison w/SECY 90-016 TTR-429 Comparison w/NRC GDC TTR-423 TTR-410 Primary Heat Transport System Emergency Core Cooling TTR-409 Auxiliary Support Systems (future) 1TR-412 Containment Design & Performance (future)
TTR-411 Reactivity Coefficients (future)
TTR-16' NRC REOUIREMENTS NOT TECHNICALLY RELEVANT TO CANDU 3 SDC (LTR 11/19/91) 17' SDC APPLICATION DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS BEYOND PART 52.47 18' CONCLUSION APPENDIX CANDU 3 DESIGN DESCRIPTION 2
-o A'ITACHMENT 2 10/14/92 CANDU 3 PREAPPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION BUBMITTAL SCHEDULE SUBMITTAL TITLE DATE List of CANDU Documents Requested by NRC 07/08/89C Unique Aspects of the Technical Characteristics of 07/27/89C CANDU 3 CANDU 3 Technical Outline 07/27/89C CANDU 3 Conceptual Safety Report 08/29/89C (Vols. 1 & 2)
Canadian Codes & Standards (Canadian Standards 11/14/89C Association) (2 Vols.)
CANDU 3 Conceptual Probablistic Safety Assessment 11/14/89C CANDU 3 Technical Description (Vols. 1 & 2) 11/14/89C Atomic Energy Control Board Regulations and 11/14/89C Supporting Documents Applicable to CANDU 3 Operating Policies and Principles - Supporting 11/14/89C Documents Applicable to CANDU 3 Operating Policies and Principles - CANDU 6 11/14/89C ont Point Lepreau (Unit 1)
CANDU 6 Probabilistic Safety Study Summary (July-1988) 12/19/89C CANDU Fuel Channel Technology (Abstract) 02/07/90C L
CANDU LOCA Analysis Technology (Abstract) 10/90C CANDU 3 Licensing Review Basia Document (LRBD)
Ol/91C Canadian Tritium Experience 02/91C CANDU Fuel Channe) Technology (TTR 291) 03/91C CANDU On-Power Fueling Technology (TTR-305) 03/91C 1
s
I (.
CANDU 3 PREAPPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION SUBMITTAL SCHEDULE SUBMITTAL' TITLE DATE CANDU LOCA Analysis Technology (TTR-276) 04/91C CANDU Shutdown Systems Technology (TTR-306) 05/91C Recommendations for Prc..)lication Review Plan 11/91C o
NRC Requirements Not Technically Relevant to CANDU 3 Standard Design Cartification o
NRC guidance Not Technically Relevant to CANDU 3 Standard Design Certification CANDU 3 Technical Outline (Rev. 10) 04/92C CANDU 3 Systematic Review of the Plant Design for 06/92C Identification of Initiating Events ESI:
Primary Heat Transport System (TTR-410) 07/92C Comparison of CANDU 3 with NRC Positions for 07/92C Evolutionary Light Water Reactor (LWR) Certification Issues in SECY-90-016 (TTR-429)
CANDU 3 and the U.S.RtTRC General Design Criteria 07/92C (TTR-423)
CANDU Source Term Calculation (TTR-384) 09/92C ESI:
Emergency Core Cooling (TTR-409) 09/92C ESI:
Classification of. Systems and Components 09/92C (TTR-413)
ESI:
Auxiliary Support Systems (TTR-412)
TBD ESI:
Containment Design and Performance (TTR-411)
TBD ESI:
Reactivity Coefficients-TBD C
= Completed Action l
= To Be Determined I
l l
et\\ recept \\rlf\\ agenda 2
@