ML20195H116

Provides Guidance Re Scope of Design & NRC Review of RESAR SP/90 Design.Westinghouse Intends to Apply for Design Certification for RESAR SP/90 Design Currently Inhouse for Preliminary Design Approval Review

ML20195H116
Person / Time
Site:	05000601
Issue date:	11/22/1988
From:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Johnson W WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
References
NUDOCS 8811300223
Download: ML20195H116 (8)

Text

I

.

• sa ur i

+ UNITED STATES

! g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

+

• WASHINGTON. D. C. 20666 L :j k . o. . . p# November 22, 1988 Docket No. 50-601 l Mr. W. J. Johnson Nuclear Safety Department Westinghouse Electric Corporation Water Reactor Division Box 355 Pittsburg, Pennsylvania 15230

SUBJECT:

SCOPE OF DESIGN AND SCOPE OF STAFF REVIEW CF RESAR SP/90 Although not formally documented, it is the staff's understanding that Westinghouse intends to apply for design certification for the RESAR SP/90 design currently inhouse for a Preliminary Design Approval (PDA) review. This letter provides guidance regarding the scope of the design and the scope of the staff's review should you decide to pursue such an application. We request that you use it in preparing the application for an FDA and the accompanying Licensing Review Basis.

Scope of Design In the proposed regulation 10 CFR Part 52, the staff has defined the desired scope of designs for standard plants requesting certification. The proposed regulation states that "Ideally, the designs for which certification is sought will be for essentially complete plants." It also states that "the NRC will give priority in allocation of resources to support reviews and approval of applications for essentially corplete plants."

Should you decide to pursue the application for design certification of RESAR SP/90, we request that the application be for a design whose scope is essentially complete and consistent with the proposed 10 CFR Part 52 in order for us to give appropriate priority to your application's review.

Scope of Staff Review The staff will be considering issues that may go beyond the Standard Review Plan involving such subjects as fire protection, electrical systems and others.

Some of these items are briefly discussed in the enclosure to this letter.

The draft and final SER regarding the review of the PDA application for RESAR SP/90 subjectsmay(already reflect staff i.e.,fireprotection). Theseconsideration ofaddressed issues will be these issues for certain in the Licensing Review Basis document after the decision on the PDA application is reached.

$$k $(($ b!bb i d n o I

L

Mr. 'W. J. Johnson November 22, 1988 a' Because your position concerning design certification of the RESAR SP/90 has not been formally documented, we request you inform us of ycur intentions in this matter along with your schedule for submitting your application, including the submittal of the Final Reference Safety Analysis Report, and the scope of

the design within 30 days from receipt of this letter. The schedule may be discussed in terms of receipt of the PDA for the facility design.

i Sincerely, I

j Dennis M. Crutchfield

, Acting Associate Dir tor for Projects

! Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

As stated i cc w/ enc 1:

j- See next page 6

k i

!l I

i l

Mr.'W. J. 'ohnson Docket No. 50-601 RESAR-SP/!t ec:

Trevor Pratt Brookhaven National Laboratory Building 130 Upton, New York 11973 Mr. William Schivley Westinghouse Electric Corporation ECE-410 Mail Stop 4-08 Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230

ENCLOSURE POTENTIAL REVIEW SUBJECTS FOR STANDARD PLANT DESIGNS The staff met to discuss major issues related to the review of advanced light water reactor applications. Included in the discussions were issues in which the scope of the staff's acceptance criteria may go beyond that of the current Standard Review Plan to e mure improved design, construction, and/or operation of these advanced plants. The staff's positions on these matters will be .

l finalized during the development of the Licensing Review Basis (LRB) for the Westinghouse designs. The following are brief discussions of the staff's current views on some of these matters.

i

1. 60 YEAR LIFE:

For applications proposing a 60-year deitgn life, the staff would review the designs for a 60-year life notwithstanding the fact that a 40-year license term limitation is presently in the regulations. It is the applicants' responsibility to identify the components and systems which '.

are affected. Applications for design certific3 tion will have to provide information and programs to support design life, and the reviews for such issues as fatigue, corrosion and themal aging.

2. FIRE PROTECTION:

Improved fire protection criteria are needed in view of the significant ,

contribution of fires to core melt probability. The current Appendix R -

and BTP 9-5.1 requirements (e.g. 20 ft, separation) should be replaced by  ;

a requirement for safe shutdown capability in the event of a corplete loss of any fire area.

3. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS:

The staff considers that (1) proposed Technical Specifications should be developed as early as practicable, but be submitted no later than the FDA application,(2)proposedlechnicalSpecificationsrepresentativeofthe design should be submitted for review and approval by the staff as part of the FDA submittal, and will be included in the Design Certification process, and (3) applicants should identify design features that are necessary for testing and maintenance during operation without challenging safety systems.

The Technical Specifications should be developed, where practicable, based upon risk and reliability considerations.

4. TESTING AND MAINTENANCE:

1 Certification of a design will be based in part upon a probabilistic risk assessment of that design. In that the validity of a PRA is highly dependent on the reliability of systems, structures and components, the

. staff requires assurance that programs will be implemented which will ensure that the reliability of those systems, structures and components l (assured in analyses) will be maintained throughout plant life. There-fore, a program to assure design reliability must be provided as part of  ;

i the FDA application. This program which will be certified as part of the design should address items such as (1) the Technical Specifications and ISI/IST,(2)theMaintenanceProgram,(3)PlantProcedures,and(4)

Security.

5. INDUSTRY USE OF MAAP:

Review of the NAAP code is unnecessar MELCOR and Source Term Code STCP) Package (y since codes the staff can apply its own in its evaluations. ,

6. STATION BLACKOUT AND ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:

Future ALWRs should adopt improved electrica, systemt to ensure a safe shutdown of the reactor. These systems should provide, in part, for diverse power sources in order to eliminate the concerns related to  !

station blackout. General guidelines will be developed and finalized '

during development of the LRB.

7. LEAK BEFORE BREAK:

Leak before break can be considered where justified. Where applicable, designs must address good practices in order to maintain steam generator tube integrity. Also, designs should address issues of material embrittle-ment associated with current vessel materials and vessel supports. l A new rule and draf t SRP Section 3.6.3 have been issued. The EPRI design requirements has adopted these criteria. ,

8. SOURCE TERMS:

The staff is concerned that the licensing basis source term "TID 14844' is not consistent with current knowledge. Therefore, with EPRI input, realistic source terms will be established to be uniformly applied to future ALWRS.

9. PHYSICAL SECURITY:

Sabotage should be addressed in all future ALWRS applications. As a i minimum, infornation should be provided to demonstrate the existence of adequate physical barriers to protect vital equipment in accordance with 10 CFR 73.55(c) in accordance with and to identify 10 CFR 73.05 d).(access control points to all vital areas [

4

10. O_BE/0YNAMIC ANALYSIS HETH005:

The staff agrees that the OBE should not control the design of safety 4 systems as now required by 10 CFR 100 Appendix A. The staff will take

this issue under consideration as part of the design certification f

process.

1

i 11. TYPE C CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE RATE:

Containment leakage is acknowledged by the staff as being a function of containment pressure.

12. HYDROGEN GENERATION:

10 CFR 50.34(f) related to the issue of a 100% r,etal water reaction will be invoked for ALWRs consistent with Commission Policy and proposed 10 CFR Part 52.

1 I

re, < #l Mr. W. J. Johnson November 22, 1988 Because your position concerning design certification of the RESAR SP/90 has not been formally documented, we request you inform us of your intentions in this matter along with your schedule for submitting your application, including the submittal of the Final Reference Safety Analysis Report, and the scope of the design within 30 days fron receipt of this letter. The schedule may be discussed in terms of receipt of the PDA for the facility design.

Sincerely,

/s/

Dennis M. Crutchfield Acting Associate Director for Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

As stated i cc w/ enc 1:

See next page DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File NRC PDR PDSNP R/F EHylton TKenyon EJordan BGrimes OGC-Rockville ACRS (10)

LRubenstein GHolahan DCrutchfield l

l i

4 i

1 (WSCOPE) *SEE PREVIOUS C0hCURRENCE

• LA:PDSNP EHylton

• HWADSNP *D:PDSNP CMiller

• ADR4 *A:0:DRSP A :, //d-

! ig6h}un LRubenstein GHolahan chfield 11/15/88 11/15/08 11/16/88 11/16/88 11/16/88 DCx{/CE 11//

i

r

. i

Mr. W. J. Johnson i 1 i

Because your position concerning design certification of the RESAR SP/90 has i not been formally documented, we request you inforin us of your intentions in '

this matter along with your schedule for submitting your application, including

'l the submittal of the Final Reference Safety Analysis Report, and the scope of ,

4 the design within 30 days from receipt of this letter. Tne schedule may be  ;

i discussed in terms of receipt of the PDA for the facility design.  !

l i j Sinewely, l

4 i

Dennis M. Crutchfield j Acting Associate Director for Projects

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation  ;

4 i

Enclosure:

j As stated  !

cc: See next page

. DISTRIBUTION: I

Docket File  !

! NRC PDR j PDSNP R/F Elfylton TKenyon

! EJordan BGrimes

! OGC-Rockville r i

ACRS(10) i

! LRubenstein l GHolahan i 0Crutchfield 1

5P F$ SNP 0:PDb ADR p 0:DR$P (A)ADP {

on TKe'nyon Chiller LRubenstc'n Holahan 0CRutchfield i 11/fy/88 11&f/88 11//c /88 11/<'4 /88 114b /88 11/ /88 {

l.7t'u H L l 1

I I

i

_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ -'