ML20137F694

Responds to Which Stated That 27 Key Licensing Issues Associated w/AP600 Design Certification Evaluation Must Be Resolved to Maintain Review Schedule of SECY-97-051. Completion Times Should Be Based on STS Values

ML20137F694
Person / Time
Site:	05200003
Issue date:	03/27/1997
From:	Collins S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Bruschi H WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
References
NUDOCS 9704010184
Download: ML20137F694 (3)

Text

_. _ _ _. ___ _ _._ _.._ _ - _. _ ._._ _ . _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _

1 amo hM b i

ug$ UNITED STATES l f '.

g

,j 2

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. 20065 4 001

! March 27, 1997 fyOD3 Mr. Howard J. Bruschi, General Manager Nuclear Projects Division l Westinghouse Electric Corporation P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, PA 15230

SUBJECT:

OPTIMIZED COMPLETION TIMES AND SURVEILLANCE FREQUENCIES - AP600 l TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS )

1

Dear Mr. Bruschi:

J In my letter to you dated March 6, 1997, I stated that the 27 key licensing i issues associated with the AP600 design certification evaluation must be' l

resolved soon to maintain the review schedule of SECY-97-051, " Schedule for '

I the Staff's Review of the AP600 Design Certification Application," dated i February 26, 1997. I also stated that you would be informed of the staff's positions on these matters when they have been finalized by Office of Nuclear i Reactor Regulation management. One of the issues (key issue #26) involves the

! extent of the review that the staff will perform on the AP600 Technical i Specification (TSs). After more than two years of discussions between the

! staff and Westinghouse, the AP600 TSs were updated in Revision 9 to the AP600

Standard Safety Analysis Report in August 1996. The content of the revised l AP600 TSs were modeled after NUREG-1431, " Standard Technical Specifications ,

l (STS), Westinghouse Plants," to the maximum extent possible. Since the AP600 '

! is a first-of-a-kind, advanced, passive pressurized-water reactor that employs i new design features not found in current plants, it was necessary to develop s TSs beyond those in the STS.

! Because Westinghouse needed to provide TSs for the AP600 which are not i directly addressed in the STS, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission'(NRC) staff I l encouraged the development of an optimization methodology for the limiting  ;

conditions of operation completion times and surveillance frequencies which  !

! would enhance the consistency and technical basis of the times found in the j

TSs. The staff envisioned that Westinghouse would utilize insights and risk .

calculations derived from the AP600 probablistic risk assessment (PRA) to l

. justify departures from the STS and confirm the appropriateness of the

] completion times and surveillance frequencies for the AP600 unique design d

features. Westinghouse eventually developed a completion time and surveil-lance frsquency optimization methodology derived from criteria that employ logic trees using design basis thermal-hydraulic analyses, PRA success criteria thermal-hydraulic analyses (without any risk quantification), and en- 4 gineering judgment. However, the implementation of the Westinghouse optimization methodology has fallen short of the staff's expectations because the staff does not have the detailed information it needs to complete the review. The Westinghouse responses to the requests for additional information on this matter have not provided sufficient quantifiable justification for the i gDD i

methodology.

prTau $ $' g6CWY

i .

Mr. Howard J. Bruschi March 27, 1997

> o j.

On the basis of the information submitted thus far, the staff has determined

that the PRA results are inconclusive relative.to the completion times and

surveillance frequencies, and that the results of the optimization criteria

. would have to be justified entirely by engineering judgments on a case-by-case basis. It is now evident that completing the review of the optimized comple-tion times.and surveillance frequencies in the AP600 TSs will require substan-l tial resources from both Westinghouse and the NRC. The extent of this j evaluation would be expected to engage staff resources that are currently L being applied to complete our final safety evaluation report in other areas of.

the AP600 design certification review.

Therefore, the staff concludes that, in consideration of the current AP600 review schedule, the completion times and surveillance frequencies for the i' 4 AP600 TSs should be based on the STS values. Where the AP600 design has no i -equivalent STS system, we suggest that the times be based on the STS treatment of the comparable safety function.

l l

The staff continues to believe that the use of PRA to further refine the AP600 '

TSs is a worthwhile endeavor which can be pursued in conjunction with the staff's development of regulatory guides and standard review plans for risk-

. informed TSs,. separate from the AP600 design approval. -

4

! If your staff has any questions on the details of this issue, please contact

! Bill Huffman at (301) 415-1141.

l <

. Sincerely, l I

original signed by

Frank J. Miraglia

Samuel J. Collins, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation j

Docket No.52-003 I

l cc: See next page

• DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File PDST R/F SCollins/FMiraglia, 0-12 G18-PUBLIC ACThadani, 0-12 G18 RPZimmerman, 0-12 G18 l TTMartin l MSlosson TRQuay

TJKenyon WHuffman JSebrosky l DJackson JMoore, 0-15 B18 . WDean, 0-17 G21

! ACRS (11) CGrimes, 0-13 H15 GHolahan, 0-8 E2 l MRuben, 0-10 E4 AChu, 0-13 H15- GHsii., 0-8 E23

Al.evin, 0-8 E23 JLyons, 0-8 E23 JNWilson, 0-10 D22 l GHsii, 0-8 E23 MWohl, 0-10 E4 5

DOCUMENT NAME: A: TOP 30.#26 *See previous concurrence n .. .e m. w .wa m m.m.m c cmm .n au.new c r - cm m .n.ch no.new r - u. em

0FFICE- PM

PDST:DRPM l Fen TSB:ADRP l D:DSSA l l l' NAME WCHuffman:ste:A&- CErimes* GHolahan*

j DATE 03DI /97 03/19/97 03/20/97 l 2 , . .m a n. r mm m m. m.m c cop mom m 9v.ncm r - cm m .n.ce nu.nce. r - No copy l OFFICE ADT:NRR l D:DSPM7& I, M l l l NAME ACThadani* TTKartin d M RTins i DATE 03/20/97 03/2497 N 63ar497 l OFFICILL RECORD COPY

b I

Mr. Howard J. Bruschi Docket No.52-003 j Westinghouse Electric Corporation AP600 ,

-cc: Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo, Manager Mr. Frank A. Ross.

Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Analysis U.S. Department of Energy, NE-42 i a Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division Office of LWR Safety and Technology i- Westinghouse Electric Corporation 19901 Germantown Road i P.O. Box 355 Gemantown, MD 20874

{ Pittsburgh, PA 15230

Mr. Ronald Simard, Director 3 Mr. B. A. McIntyre Advanced Reactor Program

! Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Nuclear Energy Institute j Westinghouse Electric Corporation 1776 Eye Street, N.W.

, Energy Systems Business Unit Suite 300 Box 355 Washington, DC 20006-3706  ;

Pittsburgh, PA 15230 i

l .

Ms. Lynn Connor i Ms. Cindy L. Haag Doc-Search Associates {

j Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Post Office Box 34 1 i Westinghouse Electric Corporation Cabin John, MD 20818 l l Energy Systems Business Unit

Box 355 Mr. James E. Quinn, Projects Manager l Pittsburgh, PA 15230 LMR and SBWR Programs l GE Nuclear Energy

! Mr. M. D. Beaumont 175 Curtner Avenue, M/C 165

! Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division San Jose, CA 95125 l Westinghouse Electric Corporation

One Montrose Metro Mr. Robert H. Buchholz

11921 Rockville Pike GE Nuclear Energy l Suite 350 175 Curtner Avenue, MC-781 j Rockville, MD 20852 San Jose, CA 95125 Mr. Sterling Franks Barton Z. Cowan, Esq.

i U.S. Department of Energy Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott NE-50 600 Grant Street 42nd Floor l 19901 Germantown Road Pittsburgh, PA 15219 j Germantown, MD 20874 Mr. Ed Rodwell, Manager i

! Mr. S. M. Modro PWR Design Certification i

Nuclear Systems Analysis Technologies Electric Power Research Institute 4 Lockheed Idaho Technologies Company 3412 Hillview Avenue l Post Office Box 1625 Palo Alto, CA 94303

Idaho Falls, ID 83415 Mr. Charles Thompson, Nuclear Engineer

AP600 Certification  !

! NE-50  !

19901 Germantown Road

{ Germantown, MD 20874 1

)

\

f i

.