ML20211L275

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of 970923 Meeting W/Westinghouse in Monroeville,Pa Re Status of Completion of AP600 Design Documentation in Several Review Areas in Order to Support Final QA Insp
ML20211L275
Person / Time
Site: 05200003
Issue date: 10/07/1997
From: Huffman W
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
NUDOCS 9710100151
Download: ML20211L275 (13)


Text

. '. 1cckn F3h

'5 z - os 5

[ pen *, UNITED STATES

= 0 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WAS'4lNGTON, D.C. 30446 4 001

\.....[ October 7,1997 APPLICANT: Westinghouse Electric Corporation PROJECT: AP600

SUBJECT:

SUP9 ARY OF MEETING TO REVIEW COMPLETENESS OF WESTINGHOUSE DOCUMEN-TATION NEEDED TO SUPPORT A FINAL QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA) INSPECTION The subject meeting was held on September 23, 1997, at the Monroeville, Pennsylvania, offices of the Westinghouse Electric Corporation between representatives of Westinghouse and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. The purpose of the meeting was to review the status of completion of AP600 design documentation in several review areas in order to ascertain Westinghouse's readiness to support a final QA inspection for the AP600 project. Reviews were conducted to determine the completion status of the AP600 piping design, and the completeness of documentation supporting the docketed material on NOTRUMP, LOFTRAN, and WGOTHIC computer code verifications and validations. In addition, the staff cenducted some discussions concerning general QA issues related to subcontractor QA controls.

The meeting was begun with a description of the Westinghouse document manage-ment sy. item and computer code configuration control methodology. NRC staff reviewers subsequently broke into separate groups to review documentation in the areas AP600 piping design, reactor system small break loss-of-coolant accident and transient analyses codes (NOTRUMP and LOFTRAN), and Containment testing and analysis. At the end of the day, the NRC and Westinghouse staff met to discuss the NRC observations from its document review.

Highlights from the review include the following items:

AP600 Pioino Desian Review Observations Westinghouse is proposing to complete the stress analyses of all ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 large-bore piping systems (3 inches nominal pipe diameter J and greater) by design certification. At this time, 80 percent of the piping /

systems have been completed and Westinghouse states that the remaining piping /

systems will be finished by the end of October 1997. Westinghouse is not planning to complete the stress analyses of the small-bore pi sing systems A (less than 3 inches nominal pipe diameter) although most of t1ese piping F{d /n systems will be preliminarily routed and space allocated in the plant for them. Westinghouse is also not planning to finalize the lar

- stress analyses by using the latest seismic input loadings. ge-bore piping Nor is Westing-house planning to complete the fatigue analyses for the ASME Code Class 1 piping systems. It is Westinghouse's intention for the COL applicant to verify the adequacy of the piping design by using the latest seismic input loadings and to complete the ASME Code Class I fatigue analyses.

4 Wl3 i!!i! !!!!(! !l!! !

Bu A

'28au Zu8L PDR EiB RE CETER C8PY

October 7, 1997 In addition, the staff noted that Westinghouse has not analyzed the large-bore piping systems for some dynamic loads. These limiting loads are caused by-the mass-energy release resulting from a postulated double-ended guillotine break of the feedwater piping at the steam generator nozzle. Nor has Westinghouse analyzed the submerged piping in the in-containment refueling water storage tank (IRWST) for the dynamic transient loads caused by the discharge of the first three stages of the pressurizer ADS valves. The IRWST loads were found by Westinghouse to be significant (up to 13 g's on the tank wall). Westing-house did evaluate the impact of the IRWST loads on the reactor coolant loop and on the passive residual heat removal heat exchanger tubing, and found it to be small - mainly because these major components are not near or in direct line with the discharge loads. It is Westinghouse's intention that the. COL applicant complete the piping analyses for the dynamic loads and IRWST loads.

In the area of high- and moderate-energy line break analyses, Westinghouse has completed its analyses of the 12 auxiliary lines and the reactor coolant loop piping for which leak-before-break (LBB) is assumed. For those non-LBB high-l energy lines, Westinghouse has essentially completed the high-energy line break analyses (except for pipe whip restraint design details which will be completed by the COL applicant). Similarly, Westinghouse plans to complete the environmental qualification evaluation (e.g., flooding, subcompartment pressurization, temperature, and humidity) within the next month.

The staff identified to Westinghouse the above areas where it considers the piping design is incomplete or has not been finalized. The staff stated that it will discuss with NRC management the extent to which Westinghouse plans to complete the AP600 piping design by design certification and develop a position on its acceptability.

Observations on Documentation Comoleteness in the areas of NOTRUMP. LOFTRAN.

and WG0THIC Westinghouse uses an electronic (paperless) record storage system. QA records are scanned into this system within a year of their generation and the original paper copy is subsequently destroyed. The records are retrievable electronically via a variety of sort methods (e.g. key words; subjects, dates, record number, etc.) and car, be displayed upon a CRT in real time. The NRC 4 staff found that reviewing documents on the CRT is cumbersome and not condu-

) cive to a thorough audit. All records can be printed as hard copies, however, the printing takes time and reduces the time for actual auditina.

.The NRC staff's conclusions were that a list of documents should be prepared and sent to Westinghouse in advance to the final QA audit so that Westinghouse 4 can produce hard copies for our review. Westinghouse will work with the staff to identify what documents will need to be available in hard copy to support the final QA audit.

The staff found that all the documentation that it requested to review was available. Some inconsistencies were found with the such things as legibility of notes, document author and reviewer comments, and the discernible extent of

October 7, 1997 reviewer's review. However, no'~ generic issues on the completeness of the documentation were observed. One document. related to the model setu) of the-t

~SPES test facility, was'found_to contain numerous changes and notes witch did not appear to have been addressed or reviewed.in accordance with Westinghouse

QA procedures. The _ staff immediately brought this to the attention of I

Westinghouse which agreed that the observed modifications to the oocument were

not satisfactory.

! The staff's overall observations were that-the Westinghouse documentation and l records are sufficiently complete _and available to support a final QA audit, j

~

The NRC project manager informed Westinghouse that bated on the staff's review, that it would recommend that the final QA review be conducted in l November 1997, assuming that adequate-technical staff support was available.

Attachment 1 is the list of meeting attendees. Attachment 2 are slides-presented on the Westinghouse configuration control process for computer 7 codes.

A draft of this meeting summary was provided to Westinghouse to allow them the

opportunity. to ensure that the representation of comments and discussion ~ was accurate.-

$ . original signed by:

William C. Huffman, Project Manager Standardization Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office Of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No.52-003 Attachments: As stated cc w/atts: See next page DISTRIBUTION w/ attachments:

? Docket; File: PDST R/F TKenyon PUBLIC BHuffman DTJackson JSebrosky _ DScaletti JNWilson GCwalina, 0-9 D4 RGramm, 0-9 Al SBlack, 0-9 Al LSpessard, 0-9 E4 RCaruso, 0-8 E2 TCollins, 0-8 E23 CBerlinger, 0-8 H7 GBagchi, 0-7 HIS DISTRIBUTION w/o attachments:

SCollins/FMiraglia, 0-12 G18 BSheron, 0-7 D25 RZimmerman, 0-12 G18 JRoe_ DMatthews TQuay WDean, 0-5 E23 ACRS (11) JMoore, 0-15 B18-RPettis, 0-9 D4 JPeralta, 0-9 Al RLandry, 0-8 E23 EThrom, 0-8 H7 DTerao, 0-7 E23 DOCUMENT-NAME: A: MINI-QA. SUM T. . n .e w. e ,n. me m aw n.m c con we.m .n. cam.ne.ne.= r con we en. chm.nvenewin v . no . ,

OFFICE PM:PDST:DRPM 0;PDST:DRPM l l 4 NAME WCHuffman:M7RQuay Pu DATE 10/ 7 /97 10/ 7 /97 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY

1 Westinghouse Electric Corporation Docket No.52-003 cc: Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo, Manager Mr. Frank A. Ross Nuclear Safaty and Regulatory Analysis U.S. Department of Energy, NE-42 Nuclear ant %dvanced Technology Division Office of LWR Safety and Technology Westinghout; Clectric 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 Nuclear Energy Institute Westinghouse Electric Corporation 1776 I Street, NW Energy Systems Business Unit Suite 300 Box 355 Washington, DC 20006-3706 Pittsburgh, PA 15230 4 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 i 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 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 Institute NE-50 3412 Hillview Avenue 19901 Germantown Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Germantown, MD 20874 3

WESTINGHOUSE - NRC AP600 READINESS REVIEW MEETING ATTEM)EES SEPTEM8ER 23, 1997 Ntg ORCANIZATION TUPPER WESTINGHOUSE NOVENDSTERN WESTINGHOUSE GRESHAM WESTINGHOUSE LINDGREN WESTINGHOUSE JOHNSON WESTJNGHOUSE KLOES WESTINGHOUSE PIPLICA WESTINGHOUSE MANDAVA WESTINGHOUSE LAPAY WESTINGHOUSE BRIAN MCINTYRE WESTINGHOUSE (PART TIME)

PETTIS NRC PERALTA NRC LANDRY NRC l

THROM NRC TERA 0 NRC BILL HUFFMAN NRC Attachment 1

- - - . - . - _ - - _ - - - - _ - - - - - - - - ---=. -. - - -. - . - . . - . -

N Table 1: Comparison of Software Documentation Requiremerits for Various Kinds of Software Development  ;

t i

Development d Large Dedicahon d Extemei Development-SmallInternal Single Applic Pryn or Mantenance d Configurti

%,g Program -WP 4.19 Program-WP 4.19.4 l Use Program-WP 4.19.5 n Change-WP 4.19.5 Prop -WP 4.19.6  ;

o Project Moni:onng ProjectTechnical NA NA NA NA l l ty Quality Definition i Assurance WP 4.19- Appendix A  ;

i Software Software Fechonal NA PWP RequirementsSechon- include (chanys) SCS 4 .ai,3 Changes-l Requirements Specificahon Document- (Program Documentaban withm project calc note (Sdtware Changa Specifi- ,

! WP 4.19- Appendix B Package) (Ref.configod cabon) .

l version)

Software Design Seaware Design NA NA NA ' SCS Software Design t and Coding Specmcation Document- Changes-Large Programs j Documene dian WP 4.19 - Appendx C Only i Configurabon CC Prognus Abstract CC Prognun Abstract CC Program Abstraca NA CC Program Change Request i Control Form Fonn Fonn Fonn i WP 4.19.2 User User Manual- Renew and Sign Off PWP UserDocumentaban NA SCS UserDeumentation Documentaban WP 4.19 - Appendix D Sechon or UserManual Changes or User Manual .

Changes  !

t Validation Validation Package- Review and Sign Off,or PWP ValidationSecton or include validation SCS Yaiidsbon Sechon or WP 4.19.1 WP 4.19.1 Appendu 8 Prepare Validation Pkg- Separate Validsbon Package within project cale note Separate Validahon Package- i WP 4.19.1 Appendx B WP 4.19.5 Appendix B WP 4.19.1 Appendix B Error Reportmg UserList + EnorReporting User List + Error User List + Error Reporbng NA NA WP 4.19.3 Procedure wiet User Reporbng Pmcedure Procedure with User Manual  !

Manual with Release Lir

, installabon Per WP 4.19 step 24 and PerWP 4.19 step 24 and Per WP 419.5 step 11 and NA Per WP 4.19.2 step 7. c

.go, Tesbog WP 4.19.2 step 7. WP 4.19.2 step 7. WP 4.19.2 step 7.

i y Rebrement Per WP 4.1f steps 25-29, Per WP 4.19 steps 25-29, Not addresed,but us? NA NA 5 thru Config Contml thru Config Control WP 4.19 steps 25-29 l

~

I

CErtftguraticn Csntrol of ComputGr Programs ESBU Procedure WP-4.19.2 \

i I

Configuration Management A system applying technical and administrative direction to identify configuration items, control changes, report status, and verify compliance.

Ireludes documents, hardware, software, i.e. the world.

Configuration Control A system for controlling, protecting, duplicating, and releasing computer programs.

/tmp_mnt/bcee/battt/old/WT419/wp4192. doc August 23,19961:54 pm Page 1/ 8

9;@ Tmh.q. ireamrJAjgy_ff;in --

J;r+ym@rr#ffWi

-,w E e,m , .

[ .. .

  • Cognizant Group:

4 o Create "T-Configured" version of the software.

+ (Build executable.)

+ (Create configuration record.)

+ (Move executable to Test Directory accessible by Validation Group.)  ;

i

  • Validation Group; o Perform and document validation testing.

l

  • Verification Group:

, o Perform independent review. P

.

  • Cognizant Group:

o Submit signed-off Config Control Request Form.

i  !

I ,

.! i,

! 09/22/97 "vm i

t s, , ..

,a  : m wa.,:, -

tio..

~

"?

y g;

' ~

yg;;

    • fi[ y s

%f~1

~7

s. . . . ; -;;; ;3> ;-& pg g 4, -

l

  • Config Control

Contact:

o Create "F-Config" version of the software.

4 + (Create configuration record.) l

+ (Move executable to directory accessible by production users.)  ;

  • Config Control

Contact:

o Create microfiche listings of all source code.

i

  • Cognizant Group:

o Issue release letter.

o (Describe version changes and method of accessing new version.)

t 09/22/97 "vm i

I i i .

Varficatisn and Validation o(f Computer Software '

ESBU Procedure WP-4.19.1 i

, SIMPLIFIED DEFINITIONS Validation - Testing to ensure the operation of a program is consistent with Functional Requirements and User Manual.

] Documented by the Validation Package.

Validation Package - Documentation from this procedure.

Verification , Review / checking of the validation package. ,

Responsible Group - Developer (s).

Vall lation Group - Person (s) who execute this procedure.

Verification Group - Person (s) who do the verification.

Dev. lopers and Validators of the program cannot be Verifiers.

The 3eveloper MAY be the Validator. **

Regression Testing - Re-Running previously successful tests.

(Did we break something that worked before?)

    • Change from implication of previous procedure.

/tmp mnt/bome/battt/old/WP419/wp4191 doc August 26,199611:56 am Page 1/8

, , . , _ . . . , -+c -

wv-----<r7---~- 7 "

V3r ftcation and Validation o{f Computer Software ESBU Procedure WP-4.19.1 VALIDATION PACKAGE OUTLINE

a. Program Name, Version, Hardware / Software Configuration
b. Source code listing or RefmpN
c. Baseline Documents - Reference to User Manual, Func Spec
d. [ Validation / rest Plan] + Test Specification + Expected Results
e. Evaluation of Test Results vs. Expected Results
f. Adequacy / Limits of Validation
g. List of known (previously existing) problems

/tmp_mnt/bome/battt/old/WP419/wp4191. doc August 26,199611:56 am Page 2 / 8

Vardftcatisn and Validation of Computer Software ESBU Procedure WP-4.19.1 ACCEPTABLE METHODS OF VALIDATION -

1 1

1. Review of source code.

I This method must be used along with 2 or 3 below, i

2. Program testing -

Comparison of program outputs to expected results from i

a. Hand calculations
b. Exact analytical solutions
c. Experimental results 4
d. Known solutions for similar or standard problems i
e. Measured plant data
f. Published data
g. Alternate verified calculational methods
3. Engineeringjudgement -

Used in cases where the correct solution cannot be calculated, due to complexity of algorithms.

This should be combined with Method 1 above.

, a. For modifications to an existing program,

compare new results to previous results.

Are the differences as expected 7

b. Perform parametric sensitivity analysis.

Are the trends as expected ?

/tmp.mnt/bomehartt/old/WP419hvp4191. doc August 26,199611:56 am Page 3 / 8 i

i .

, WP-4.19,1

VALIDATION PROCESS SCHEMATIC I

)'

FUNCTIONAL USER REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENTATION

( J l

.i VALIDATION PLAN (APPROACH, GENERAL METHOD) l u

VALIDATION TEST SPEC l

AND ANTICIPATED RESULTS
f TESTABLE 3

l SOFTWARE

! TEST RESULTS AND COMPARISON TO ANTICIPATED RESULTS .

1 COMMENTS TO l u DEVELOPERS i

l i

@ COMPLETION OF VALIDATION PACKAGE g l U i ,

I VERIFICATION q and SIGN OFF y

! A i

RECORDS MANAGEMENT (FILING) i

, Circled numbers correspond to WP-4.19.1 procedure steps.

_