ML20199K023

Forwards List of Items That Westinghouse Needs to Address During Appeal of Issue Re AP600 Containment Coatings

ML20199K023
Person / Time
Site:	05200003
Issue date:	01/30/1998
From:	Joseph Sebrosky NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
NUDOCS 9802060083
Download: ML20199K023 (3)

Text

. . __ - .-. _ . . - _ _ - _ - .-

,t j, January 30, 1998 APPLICANT: Westinghouse Electric Corporation PROJECT: AP600

SUBJECT:

DOCUMENTATION OF AP600 INFORMAL CORRESPONDENCE TO WESTINGHOUSE CONCERNING CONTAINMENT COATINGS Westinghouse and the staff have had several discussions concerning containment contings. The staff's position was sent to Westinghouse in a July 30,1997, letter and Westinghouse's response is contained in a November 21,1997, letter (NSD NRC g7 5441).

Recent discussions with Westinghouse indicate that there maybe a need to have a meeting on the issue, in order to prepare for the potentla! meeting a !ist of itams that Westinghouse must address during the meeting was developed by the staff. The enc!osed list was sent by facsimile to Westinghouse on January 27,1998.

original signed by:

Joseph M. Sebrosky, Project Manager Standardization Project Directorate .

Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 52 001 Attachmer,ts: As stated cc w/atts See next page DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File PDST R/F SCollins/FMiraglia,012 G18 PUBLIC BSheron,012 G18 RZimmerman,012 G18 JRoe DMatthews Touay TKenyon BHuffman JSebrosky DScaletti JNWilson WDean,016 E* 5 ACRS (11) JMoore,0-15 B18 GGeorgiev,0 7 H15 '}]~T.~d] i ;

JDavis, T 7 C6 JPeralta,0-g A1 RLobel,0-8 H7 EThrom,0-8 H7 l

DOCUMENT NAME: A:\ COATING. DOC To receive a copy of this document, Indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure "E" = Copy with attachment / enclosure ,"N" = No copy OFFICE PM:PDST:DRPM D:PDST:DRPM l l l NAME JMSebrosky:sg1%F TRQuay1L0 .

DATE M/Sd98 (f 02/P/98

,9 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY w , *. ...s 9902060003 900130 PDR ADOCK 05200003 ll

.. . , o . .

lll H -- PDR

- 6

. Westinghause Electric Corporation Docket No.52-003 cc: Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo, Manager Mr. Frank A. Ross Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Anahsis U.S. Department of Energy, NE 42 Nuclear and Advanced Techology Division Office of LWR Safety and Technology Westinghouse Electric Corporation 19901 Germantown Road P.O. Box 355 Germantown, MD 20874 Pittsburgh, PA 15230 Mr. Russ Bell Mr. B. A. McIntyre Senior Project Manager, Programs Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing r sJearEnergyInstitute Westinghouse Electric Corporation 1776 l Street, NW Energy Systems Business Unit Suite 300 Box 355 Washington, DC 20006-3706 Pittsburgh, PA 15230 Ms. Lynn Connor Ms. Cindy L. Haag Doc search Associates Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Post Office Box 34 Westinghouse Electric Corporation Cabin John, MD 20818 Energy Systems Business Unit Box 355 Dr. Craig D. Sawyer, Manager Pittsburgh, PA 15230 Advanced Reactor Programs GE Nuclear Energy Mr. M. D. Beaumont 175 Curtner Avenue, MC-754 Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division San Jose, CA 95125 Westinghouse Electric Corporation One Montrose Metro Mr. Robert H. Buchholz 11921 Rockville Pike GE Nuclear Energy Suite 350 175 Curtner Avenue, MC 781 Rockville, MD 20852 San Jose, CA 95125 4

Mr. Sterling Franks Barton Z. Cowan, Esq.

U.S. Department of Energy Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott NE 50 600 Grant Street 42nd Floor 19901 Germantown Road Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Germantown, MD 20874 Mr. Ed Rodwell, Manager Mr. Charles Thompson, Nuclear Engineer PWR Design Certification AP600 Certification Electric Power Research Instituto NE 50 3412 Hitiview Avenue 19901 Germantown Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Germantown, MD 20874 Mr. Robert Malers, P.E.

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Radiation Protection Rachel Carson State Office Building P.O. Box 8469 Harrisburg, PA 17105-8469

e .6 AP600 Containment Coatings January 27,1998 The following are a list of items that Westinghouse needs to address during the appeal of the issue.

j e Westinghouse has not provided a quantitative or experimental bases which demonstrate why failure of the containment coatings will not prevent functioning of the engineering safety features. Calculations are required to determine if failure of the coatings will result in blockage of strainers. The analysis must be reviewed by the NRC staff since there is uncertainty in the calculations. Even if Westinghouse were to perform a transport analysis, the staff is not likely to accept it without additional experimental validation Westinghouse provides some qualitative discussions on what it believes will occur upon failure of containment coatings (e.g., assumes onlylocalized failure of coatings, assumes coating material will settle on the bottom of various compartments and will not get transported in sufficient ouantitles which are undefined - to the intake screens) but has not provided any evidence of this mechanism besides engineering judgment.

e in addition to the staff's concems on debris transport to the containment sumps, the performance characteristics of the passive containtnent cooling system (PCS) are based i

on an experimental test program with the coating. No testing is known to exist with either degraded coatings or without coatings. The justification for the mass and heat transfer  !

correlations, the PCS film model and the water coverage model are all based on testing '

with the coating. In the Large Scale Test (LST), the coating exists on both the exterior and the interior surface of the vessel. Failure of the coating willimpact heat transfer, film formation and water coverage. Westinghouse has not provided any data or experimental evidence as to why deterioration of the containment coatings will not affect the design basis properties of the containment shell and the PCS performance.

e The evolutionary designs have effectively agreed to a safety-related coating program by committing to implement Reg Guide 1,54 to satisfy the requirements of Appendix B to 10 CFR part 50. Westinghouse needs to demonstrate that protective coatings used in the AP600 are non-safety related, and clearly substantiate the basis for its current exception (in SSAR Appendix 1A) to RG 1.54 and the endorsed ANSI standards (i.e., explain why the provisions of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 and 10 CFR Part 21 do not apply to protective coatings in the AP600).

Enclosure

. . _. - _ _ - . . - - . . -