ML19282D607: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Created page by program invented by StriderTol
 
StriderTol Bot change
 
Line 15: Line 15:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:Experience from Simplified Safety Evaluation Report Common Q Platform Pilot Project Richard Stattel.
{{#Wiki_filter:Richard Stattel.
Sr. Electronics Engineer, Instrumentation & Controls Branch, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Sr. Electronics Engineer, Instrumentation & Controls Branch, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Experience from Simplified Safety Evaluation Report Common Q Platform Pilot Project


Common Q Platform
2 Common Q Platform TR Approved - 2000 Calvert PAMS - 2003 Palo Verde CPC - 2003 TR Updated - 2013 WDT NSAL - 2017 TR Revision 4 - 2019 TR Simplified Review Schedule:
* TR Approved - 2000
Application for review received (June 2019)
* Calvert PAMS - 2003
Supplement 1 - Summary of changes (July 2019)
* Palo Verde CPC - 2003
Supplement 2 - CPU Load Change (August 2019)
* TR Updated - 2013
Supplement 3 - Equipment Qualification Report (September 2019)
* WDT NSAL - 2017
Draft SE complete (October 2019)
* TR Revision 4 - 2019 TR Simplified Review Schedule:
* Application for review received (June 2019)
* Supplement 1 - Summary of changes (July 2019)
* Supplement 2 - CPU Load Change (August 2019)
* Supplement 3 - Equipment Qualification Report (September 2019)
* Draft SE complete (October 2019) 2


Common Q Platform Qualifying Aspects of Common Q TR for Simplified Review Process
3 Common Q Platform Qualifying Aspects of Common Q TR for Simplified Review Process The Common Q Platform was previously approved.
* The Common Q Platform was previously approved.
WDT Changes being made were known to the NRC due to previous operability reviews conducted in 2017 and 2018.
* WDT Changes being made were known to the NRC due to previous operability reviews conducted in 2017 and 2018.
Additional changes to TR were considered to be minor.
* Additional changes to TR were considered to be minor.
A new module addition to platform - DI621 Equipment Qualification Test Results for new module to be provided Other minor report corrections and clarifications to be made.
* A new module addition to platform - DI621
The NRC did not expect the changes to affect any of the TR safety conclusions or methods of evaluation.
* Equipment Qualification Test Results for new module to be provided
* Other minor report corrections and clarifications to be made.
* The NRC did not expect the changes to affect any of the TR safety conclusions or methods of evaluation.
3


Common Q Platform 4
4 Common Q Platform


Common Q Platform 5
5 Common Q Platform


Common Q Platform Unanticipated Complications Discovered During TR Review
6 Common Q Platform Unanticipated Complications Discovered During TR Review A new operating system for the FPDS was being introduced to the platform.
* A new operating system for the FPDS was being introduced to the platform.
Instead of a single module (DI621), the TR and test report included an additional 16 modules.
* Instead of a single module (DI621), the TR and test report included an additional 16 modules.
The TR change also added 7 new modules that had not undergone complete equipment qualification.
* The TR change also added 7 new modules that had not undergone complete equipment qualification.
Westinghouse requested a revision to the method of making setpoint and configuration changes to the system during plant operations.
* Westinghouse requested a revision to the method of making setpoint and configuration changes to the system during plant operations.
6


Lessons Learned Summary
Though we were able to perform the evaluation using the simplified review process, several of the issues discovered during the review could have pushed the evaluation out of the process.
* Though we were able to perform the evaluation using the simplified review process, several of the issues discovered during the review could have pushed the evaluation out of the process.
If the applicant had persisted in requesting the method change, the evaluation would have required RAIs and would have been extended significantly.
* If the applicant had persisted in requesting the method change, the evaluation would have required RAIs and would have been extended significantly.
The NRC could have limited its review to the original anticipated project scope but this would likely have resulted in a subsequent second submittal.
* The NRC could have limited its review to the original anticipated project scope but this would likely have resulted in a subsequent second submittal.
7 Lessons Learned Summary
7


End of Presentation Questions            8}}
Questions 8
End of Presentation}}

Latest revision as of 22:14, 2 January 2025

Presentation of Experiences of Simplified Safety Evaluation Report Common Q Platform Pilot Project
ML19282D607
Person / Time
Issue date: 10/09/2019
From: Richard Stattel
NRC/NRR/DE/EICB
To:
Richard Stattel 415-8472
References
Download: ML19282D607 (8)


Text

Richard Stattel.

Sr. Electronics Engineer, Instrumentation & Controls Branch, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Experience from Simplified Safety Evaluation Report Common Q Platform Pilot Project

2 Common Q Platform TR Approved - 2000 Calvert PAMS - 2003 Palo Verde CPC - 2003 TR Updated - 2013 WDT NSAL - 2017 TR Revision 4 - 2019 TR Simplified Review Schedule:

Application for review received (June 2019)

Supplement 1 - Summary of changes (July 2019)

Supplement 2 - CPU Load Change (August 2019)

Supplement 3 - Equipment Qualification Report (September 2019)

Draft SE complete (October 2019)

3 Common Q Platform Qualifying Aspects of Common Q TR for Simplified Review Process The Common Q Platform was previously approved.

WDT Changes being made were known to the NRC due to previous operability reviews conducted in 2017 and 2018.

Additional changes to TR were considered to be minor.

A new module addition to platform - DI621 Equipment Qualification Test Results for new module to be provided Other minor report corrections and clarifications to be made.

The NRC did not expect the changes to affect any of the TR safety conclusions or methods of evaluation.

4 Common Q Platform

5 Common Q Platform

6 Common Q Platform Unanticipated Complications Discovered During TR Review A new operating system for the FPDS was being introduced to the platform.

Instead of a single module (DI621), the TR and test report included an additional 16 modules.

The TR change also added 7 new modules that had not undergone complete equipment qualification.

Westinghouse requested a revision to the method of making setpoint and configuration changes to the system during plant operations.

Though we were able to perform the evaluation using the simplified review process, several of the issues discovered during the review could have pushed the evaluation out of the process.

If the applicant had persisted in requesting the method change, the evaluation would have required RAIs and would have been extended significantly.

The NRC could have limited its review to the original anticipated project scope but this would likely have resulted in a subsequent second submittal.

7 Lessons Learned Summary

Questions 8

End of Presentation