ML20058Q268

Forwards Comparison of Advanced LWR Requirements Document & GE Advanced BWR Ssar Design

ML20058Q268
Person / Time
Site:	05000605
Issue date:	06/12/1990
From:	Wilkins D GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To:	Murley T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20058Q265	List: ML20058Q262 ML20058Q268
References
NUDOCS 9008220012
Download: ML20058Q268 (10)

Text

k _..

Q

,. - GE Nucoeer Energy osaw a new. Aaeus sump wer Aww hoewn 5 m kst.CA95125 CS 925 6555 L

June 12,1990 L i

Dr. Thomas E. Murley, Director .

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

omnarison of ALWR llacui>ements

)ocument and GE ABW-1 SSA 1 Desian.

Please find attached our comparison of the ALWR Requirements Document-and  !

the GE ABWR SSAR design.

{

- - i GE has been a major participant in the EPRI ALWR Requirements Program-  ;

since-its inception in 1985, and'has worked closely with EPRI to achieve  !

consistency of the.ABWR SSAR design with the ALWR requirements.- This

~

effort has involved extensive technical dialog betweenLGE,tthe Utility i Steering Committee and the ALWR Program staff over the last"five. years.

During this process, numerous' enhancements were' incorporated into-the i ABWR SSAR design to meet the ALWR requirements. A' detailed comparison'of I the ABWR SSAR design to the several'thousand ALWR requirements' documented i in the 13 chapters shows that the ABWR complies with all but the smal1 i number of ALWR requirements shown in the:atta'chment. The'results of this comparison have been reviewed with the EPRI ALWR program staff.  ;

~

Table 1A documents areas where the' ABWR SSAR design'is different from specific' ALWR requirements. Several of these stem'from differences '

between ALWR requirements-and-GE's approach to addressing current regulatory requirements.- In all cases, we believe the ABWR S$AR design ,

provides an acceptable level .of safety.

In addition, someiitems are still under discussion with EPRI ALWR Program i' staff. It is tiikely that' these differences will be resolved in-the future. These areas are provided _in Table IB.

4 w:DRW90 080:j 9008220012 900816 PDR ADOCK 05000603 A PDC

m a

I .g ; .

y-  !

Dr. Thomas E. Murley June-12, 1990 Page 2 The comparisonsL in' the. attached. tables were.made with respect to the-version of the ALWR Requirements Document Volume 11 Chapter status listed in Table 2.

I hope the attached comparison is' helpful in~ demonstrating to you and your staff that the ABWR SSAR design.is highly consistent with the LALWR requirements.

Sincerely,

~

i D. R. Wilkins l Attachments

~

cc: ALWR Utility Steeri_ng Comittee NRC Comissioners ACRS Chairman-D. J. McGoff, DOE J. Taylor, EPRI' ,

B. Wolfe. GE w:DRW90-080:j L

f

30 a.- ...

. .e g < ,

. .i L. ..

' TABLE 1A- ,

l~ -

LIST OF DIFFERENCES FROM: SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-

'l l.- ' Operating basis earthcuake. -

-2. Timing of fission protuct release.

L 3. Metal water reaction. ..

-4. Containment overpressure protection. .

~ 5 .~ Electrical power distribution.- I o

6. Standby ens treatment system charcoal filters. -

7.. Fuel casli size.

8. . Main control room work station redundancy.-

9. Main control room restrooms.

[

j i

L-I i

i 1

i

-[

w:DRW90 80:j

-- . - -* . - ,e.-.., ,.__y, , , . . - . ,, , , ,m.,,

sj

. - ->l

< ., \

q

: -TABLE 1A: u DIFFERENCES FROM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS i

1. Doeratina Basis Earthauake Reference  !

Chapter 1, Rev. IB,-Section 4.6.2.4.4.1,iPage 1.4-12 requires t' hat.the ". ...

magnitude of the OBE shall be . . . independent of. the magnitude of the SSE."'

Section 2.3.1.10 and: Table 1.2 6 require-the use'of 0.lg for the 0BE.

SSAR Design The SSAR design has been analyzedLfor; an.OBE level corresponding:to' a value!

equivalent to half the SSE' level, i.e., a . bounding value of 0.15 g.

2. Timina of Fission Product Release r

Rtfernace Chapter 5, Rev.1-A, Section -1.2.3.4,' Page 5.1-11' requires that the ' Require-ments document will assume that release of substantial amounts of fission; prod- J L ucts . . . would occur no sooner than about one hour after scram of the reac- '

tor."

_l SSAR Desian .

The-SSAR analysis was done with two sets of assumptions - . one used the assump-

~

tions stated in the requirements and the second assumed instantaneous release.

For both analyses the design met the applicable criteria. . t

.4 i

w:DRW90 80:j

_ u .a. _, . -_ . ~. t

.. . e  ;

17f . .

1 0 4

- gyt i TABLE 1A. j DIFFERENCES FROM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS ,

.)

q

3. Metal' Water Reaction j i

Reference (

Chapter 5 s ocifies"that the containment shall- be! designed to handle ". . . an .

N amount of h drogen equivalent to~ that generated by oxidation of 75 percent of the fuel-c1 dding surface. . ." .

t l

l

$$AR Desian +

The SSAR design uses inerting.to prevent hydrogen detonation and has sufficient

~

. i, pressure capability, making the. design insensitive to the percent of oxidation.'

The design pressure is. determined by design basis accident LOCAs and sufficient' .

margin exists between design pressure and, applicable stress limits to handle -!

100% metal water reaction. .

l $

4. Containment Overnressure Protection .

Reference l The ALWR requirements-are silent with regard to containment-overpressure pro- [

tection, but are intended to: provide adequate containment performance without requiring a containment vent. .j

, a SSAR Desian ,

The ABWR SSAR design includes an overpressure protection feature, consisting of

, rupture disks and recloseable valves to preclude a'large release of. fission. .

products resulting from uncontrolled. failure of . containment due to overpres-sure. The ABWR meets the ALWR-requirements without-reliance'on this contain 1 .

ment overpressure protection feature. ,

i

)

i y

L r;ERW90 80:j i

s 6,ef- -s y + w w-,w- mi gv.,seen, , ew e - &* * * --ege*** e gM+t-'*-aM,e

'4 TABLE 1A g .,

DIFFERENCES FROM $PECIFIC REQUIREMENTS l

1. - 5. Electrical Power Distribution Reference  :

A three tier electrical distribution network is required by. the ALWR require- '

ments. Chapter 11, Rev. 0, Section 2.3.2, and Chapter 11, Section 4.3.3. page. '

11.4-9 (dedicated nonsafety buses)--require that ".-. . the onsite. power distribution system shall follow a three-tier conce st. . . . . ....A second tier shall 1nclude the distribution systems supplying power to permanent

> nonsafety loads. . ."- The rationale states that this: concept ". . .. in' particular recognizes th'at redundant power sources. . = . must be- provided. . < .

for nonsafety loads expected to remain operational' at all times (e.g.,;during 'a -

loss of offsite - power).- Chapter 11, Rev. 0, Section 2.3.9, page 11.2 8, requires ".:. . non Safety circuits are not connected to safety circuits....."

In addition, other requirements also relate to this issue. These requirements ,

include Chapter 9. Rev. lA, Section 8.3.2.3.8, page 9.8-37 (powering drywell.

cooler fans during loss of off-site power events)- and Chapter _11, Section -

2.3.4, page 11.2-7 (dedicated sources for permanent nonsafety power loads) and i Section 4.3.3 page ll.4-9.(dedicated.non safety buses).

SSAR Design ThezSSAR design has a two tiered power distribution system. Loads that would comprise the ALWR second tier have been allocated to either special top tier  !

buses'or isolable sections of safety buses, eliminating the second tier. ' The j isolable non IE loads' connected to the safety buset are the instrument air compressor, 250V DC: battery chargers, computer power supplies,- three motor- '

control. centers and the reactor ' water cleanup system pumps. - The SSAR -design meets the four purposes stated in the. rationale of.Section 2.3.9'of Chapter ll, r

i L

I

!  ?

w:DRW90 80:j r

. . - - . .. _ _ . . _ . . _ . - , , - . - - . . . -. _ - . . - __ _ _ , _ _ , . .a .-.-..._._....._.d

1 3 .

-e

- -TABLE-IA DIFFERENCES FRod SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS 1

.f

6. SGTS Charcoal Filters j Reference Chapter 9,isection 8.3.4.1.3 requires no charcoal filters in the SGTS.

$$AR Design .

The SGTS design includes charcoal filters in the system.

! 7. Fuel' Cask Sire .;

L Reference -

Chapter 7 Section 2.3.2.5.1, Page 7.2-30,: requires that the-plant:be designed for ". . . the largest multiple assembly spent fuel-shipping cask being de- "

signed by the DOE.

SSAR Design The cask loading facility is 10 feet square, large enough to accommodate' the GE IF300 cask, which is the largest currently available. - l

8. Main Contro1' Room Work Station Redundan v Reference Chapter 10,Rev.0,.Section2.2.10,page10.2-7,sta'es-that"Thioperatorsand t supervisor in the Main Control, Room will interface' the plant'through redundant-The supervisor's workstation will be identical to the oper-

~

workstations...

ator's workstation except that' all of its plant equipment control functions -

shall be normally disabled."

'i '

ll SSAR Design -

l In the SSAR design, the' main 1 control' room has operator work. stations:and a monitoring-only. work station for the shift supervisor. The work stations in the SSAR design each have different- functional requirements and none are:. identical-to any of the others. However, they have functional redundancy and meet all of the ALWR requirements regarding reliability and the definition of work.statica 4

functional allocation based upon comprehensive task analyses.

l 1

I j

i. w:DRW90-80:j

'?

. . . , - . - , , , . - ..,,,,%---- , .- .- -_m, ,, - .~.,_.-_.1, _ , . , . . . , . , _ ~ . - . . . . , . . - . , - . . . . . . _ . . . . , . . . . ,

e-l,

, y, ,

>e. .3 ..,  !

s.

',  :?.  :, _

.4-

' TABLE 1A-DIFFERENCES FROM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS

9. Main control Room Restrooms Reference ,l Chapter 10, Rev. O, Section 4.9.1.4'. . Page~ 10.4-61, requires that the restroom ,

for main control room personnel. "shall not be shared with areas outside the.-

. main- control room." The'accompanyin creases.the traffic into the control:g area.Rationale states, "A shared restroom in-SSAR Desian The SSAR. arrangement provides restrooms1 which are located directly outside:the main control room. ' These facilities are. shared with areas outside the main- i control room.

l l

f i

i 5

l-

.s i i i

i i*

t w:0RW90-80:j i.

..t

,b;il' ff_r,. .

t

. *,[3.

[

• 1 4 , ,

-b , TABLE 1B- l

. DIFFERENCES WHERE DISCUSSIONS ARE ONG0 LNG :

1. Radwaste Buildina ,

Reference

!! Chapter 12,'Section 2.2.7.4 requires that' interior walls shall not be used for j

structural support.- y .

L SSAR Desian . .

I The SSAR design utilizes interior load bearing walls for' structural support, in ,

the large multi-story radwaste butiding.

, a

- t r

2. Fuel Pool Level Indication j Reference i 4 Chapter 8, Section g.3.6.1, requires fuel pool level indication in addition to l a low and high level, alarm, s i

SSAR Desian The SSAR. design has a-level switch provided for low and high level alarms, to

. signal. the small . level changes expected during normal operation.

3. .SGTS Filter Redundancy 7

Reference ,

Chapter.9, Section 8.3.4.1.3 recuires that- th' e SGTS: have: redundant divisions withtwosets,includingthepass<vecomponents(filters).: i SSAR Desian The SSAR design has redundant active components but uses a common passive '

filter train.

l w:DRW90-80:j i

%4 - -.__.. _______ __ _ _ _ . _ __ ... .#, , , ,, _ , , . . ,  %, , , , , , . _ , .,.g.y.%, -ew.. . . . . , . ,

. t,, ' .. ,

TABLE 2 ,

J ALWR RE0b1REMENTS DOCUMENT VOLUME-II CHAPTER STATUS. 3/14/90 Ch& git,t Status 1 Revision 1-8, Issued 1/90(l) 1, Appendix A Revision 0, Updated 2/90 1, Appendix B Revision 1 B, Issued 2/90- -

1 2 Revision I-A, Issued 12/90, plus boiler room 11/29/89-  ;

3 Revision I-A,1 Issued 12/89, plus boiler room 2/20/90  !

4 Revision 1 A,' Issued 20/89, plus comment resolution 2/90  !

5 Revision I A,' Issued Issued 11/89 11/89(I) 6 Revision-1-A, 7 Revision I A, Issued 1/90, plus boiler room 1/31/90  !

8 Revision 1 B, Issued 2/90- 'i 9 Revision liA, Issued 1/90,~plus boiler room 2/22/90(l) 10 Revision 0, Issued-10/89 ,

11_ Revision I A ' Issued 1/90

. 12 Revision I-A, Issued 1/90, plus boiler room 2/22/90 13 Revision I-A, Issued 11/89-

. l (1)Plus agreements / discussions at GE/EPRI ALWR Program Staff meetings and telecons 5/4/90, 5/I2/90 and 5/23/90.

l i

a s

w:DRW90-80:j