ML20198M932

Forwards Open Items Associated W/Chapter 3.2 of AP600 Safety Evaluation Rept

ML20198M932
Person / Time
Site:	05200003
Issue date:	12/04/1997
From:	Joseph Sebrosky NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Liparulo N WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
References
NUDOCS 9801200167
Download: ML20198M932 (5)

Text

_ _ - _ _ _ . - . _ ._ - - - - - - - ~ ~

~~p;-Q~

^

fuogk 3 2 4 8.3 l p UNITED STATES  !

~

'j g NUCLEAR REQULATORY COMMISSION WAsHINuTON, D.C. sese6-coM December 4, 1997 k*.... '

Mr. Nicholas J. Liparuk, Manager '

, Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Analysis Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division Westinghouse Electric Corporation t

P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, PA 15230

SUBJECT:

OPEN ITEMS ASSOCIATED WITH CHAPTER 3.2 OF THE AP600 SAFETY EVAf.UATIOh' itEPORT (SER)

Dear Mr,

' Liparulo:

9 The Civil Engineering and Geosciences Branch (ECGB) of the Division of Engineering has provided an SER for Chapter 3.2. However, the SER contained some open items. These open items have been extracted from the SER and can been found in the enclosure to this letter, in addition, the staff has previously identified an open item relative to the quality group classifica-

+

tion of a portion of the Chemical and Control System inside containment. This issue was  ;

identified as Open item 230.140F in a letter to Westinghouse dated October 16,1997. Although ~

this item will be discussed in Section 5.2.1.1 of the SER, resolution of the item is also needed to

• achieve an acceptable conclusion in SER Chapter 3.2. '

4 Ycu have requested that portions of the information submitted in the June 1992, application for design certification be exempt from mandatory public disclosure. While the staff has not .

completed its review of your request in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 2.790, that portion of the submitted information is being withheld from pub!ic disclosure pending the staff's final determination. The staff concludes that these follow on questions do not contain those portions of the information for which exemption is sought. However, the staff will withhold this letter from public disclosure for 30 calendar days from the date of this letter to allow Wes'ing-house the opportunity to verify the staffs conclusions, if, after that time, you do not request that all or portions of the information in the enclosures be withheld from public disclosure in accor-dance with 10 CFR 2.790, this letter will be placed in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Public Document Room.

4 NRC RECErgs enmr 9901200167 971204 PDR ADOCK 05200003 E- _

PDR

l

)

l g., i!

d Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo 2- December 4, 1997 ,

9

' H Ji - if you have any questions regarding this matter, you may contact me at (301) 415-1132.-

Sincerely, q l

1

- original signed by: }

-t Joseph M. Sebrosky, Project Manager -

Standardization Project Directorate i Division of Reactor Prowam Management i Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation "

J l

Docket No.52-003 w

Enclosure:

As stated J

cc w/ encl: See next page DISTRIBUTION:

• Enclosure to be bold for 30 days

• Docket File PDST R/F TQuay )

• PUBLIC TKenyon WHuffman l JSebrosky. DScaletti JNWilson WDean,0-5 E23 ACRS (11) JMoore,0-15 B18 HBrammer,0-7 H15 DOCUMENT NAME: A: ECGB_32.RAI To receive a copy of this document, Indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure E" = Copy iwith cttachment/ enclosure "N" = No copy l:

OFFICE - PM:PDST:DRPM i ECGB:DE lE D:PDST:CRPM ] l s NAME JSebrosky'sg ,PfYJ HBrammer'///6' TQuayM DATE's 1219/97 (/ 12/3 /97 12/4 /W// JOR OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

w ,

ii r.

3 e

k ,.d-2 m  :

k h. ' .Y

• 3 ..g.

2

,, -:j

+3 41 ,y. ._. , . . , . _

)

Mr. Nmholas J. Liparuto Docket No.52-003 i Westinghouse Electric Corporation AP600 cc: Mr. B. A. McIntyre Ms. Cindy L. Maag -  !

Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing  :*

Westinghouse Electric Corporation Westinghouse Electric Co,poration Energy Systems Business Unit Energy Systems Business Unit  :

P.O. Box 35f Box 355

- Pittsburgh, P 15230 Pittsburgh, PA 15230 [

Enclosure to be dis . 'ded to the following addressees after the result of the proprieta;y evaluation is received tro., Westinghouse:

Mr. Russ Bell Ms. Lynn Connor  !

Senior Project Manager, Programs DOC-Search Associates ,

Nuclear Energy institute- Post Office Box 34 1776 i Street, NW Cabin John, MD 20D18 l Suite 300 t Washington, DC 20006 3706 Mr. Rob, t H. Bechholz GE Nuclear Energy -

Dr. Craig D. Sawyer, Manager 175 Curtner Avenue, MC-781 Advanced Reactor Programs San Jose, CA 95125 GE Nuclear Energy 175 Curtner Avenue, MC 754 Mr. Stor~ g Franks i San Jose, CA 95125 U.S. Department of Energy NE 50 Barton Z. Cowan, Esq. 19901 Germantown Road Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott Germantown, MD 20874 600 Grant Street 42nd Floor s Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Mr. (.harles Thompson, Nuclear Engineer  !

AP600 Certification Mr. Frank A. Ross NE 50 U.S. Department of Energy, NE-42 19901 Germantown Road .

Office of LWR Safety and Technology Germantown, MD 20874 4

19901 Germantown Road Germantown, MD 20874 Mr. Ed Rodwell, Manager PWR Design Certification - ,

Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview As enue t Palo Alto, CA 94303 d

t

. y 7

9

} .

i

_ ,- _.a.,_..___ a.,._ .- _ -. . . . _ - . _ _ . .

I

< i Open hems Associated with Chapter 3.2 210.234F Open Hem from Section 3.2.1 Solamic Classification l

i

, Positions C.1 and C.4 in RG 1.29 state that the pertinent quality assurance requirements of Appenduc B to 10 CFR Part 50 should be applied to all activities affecting the safety-related ,

functions of (1) all Seismic Category I 88Cs, and (2) those portions of SSCs covered under Posibons C.2 and C.3. Sections 3.2.2.3,3.2.2.4, and 3.2.2.5, and Table 3.21 of the 88AR state that 10 CFR 50, Appendix 5 applies to all AP600 Equipment Class A, B, and C (A8ME Class 1, ,

2, and 3), SSCs, which are all classified as Seismic Catopory 1. The staff concdudes that this is en acceptable commitment to Hem (1) above. However, the 88AR does not appear to address item (2). To satisfy Position C.4 in RG 1.29, the pertinent quality assurance roedroments of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 should be applied to all Seismic category ll 88Cs. A cr,mmitment to this effec; should be added to Section 3.2.1.1.2 and Table 3.2-1 of th) 88AR. This was DSER r Open hem 3.2.1 1. In a telephone conferonos call on August 21,19g7, Westinghouse agreed to submit their response to this issue. Therefore, pendinc submittal of an acceptable response in the SSAR, Open hem 3.2.1 1 remains open. .

210.235F Open item from Section 3.2.2 Quality Group Classification  :

The staff's review of the information in Section 3.2.2, Table 3.21, Table 3.2 3, and app;icable P&lDs of the bSAR has concluded that Quality Group classifications for the majority of the AP600 SSCs are consistent with the guidelines in RG 1.26, and are, therefore, acceptable. The status of one remaining unresolved DSER open item is discussed below.

e Safety Classificatio, of Passive Core Cooling System (PXS)

Section 3.2.2.5, Table 3.2 3, and P&lDe in Figures 6.3-1 and 6.3-2 of the SSAR collectively identify the following portions of the PXS as AP600 Class C (QG C and ASME Class 3):

e ti.e accumulators and vesselinjection piping system up to the ASME Class 1 check valves; e the vessel injection piping system from the in containment refueling water storage tank (IRWST) to the ASME Class 1 check valves; and a the injection piping system from the containment sump to the vessel injection piping coming from the IRWST.

All of the above systems and components perform an emergency core cooling function i following postulated design basis events. RG 1.26 recommends that such systems be classified as QG B (ASME Class 2), in the December 22,1992 and June 27,1994 responsta to G210.1 and 210.29 respectively, Westinghouse stated that the basis for  ;

classifying these systems and components as QG C is that: t e QG C is essentially equivalent to QG B, except that it has less stringent construction .

inspection and inservice inspection rules; Enclosure

- - - - . - -._L ~. , r,--l~,. - ._,_i...-__,.,,c...,.,,_---_ - , , . ., ,La-a,,.-e, ,,.n + n, ,,,-,,,,-,e.i .,_.n r,-- ,

4

. 2- ,

e - all of these systems and components are located inside containment, therefore, activity releases are contained; e minor leakage does not affect the functional performance of these systems and f components; e there is contkvsous water level monitoring of the accumulators and IRWST that detects leaks; and 1

After evaluating the four items above, the staff concluded that the classifications of the PXS and components identified in the first paragraph above can satisfy the guidelines in RO 1.26 if the QG C classification remains and a commitment is made in the 63/,R that, during construction, portions of these systems will be Inspected to ASME Class 2 (QG 2) tulos. The basis for this staff position is that the enhanced quality of the items inspected to ASME Class 2 rules is sufficient to satisfy the guidelines of RG 1.26, ..nd the features described in the first four items above are sufficient to allow the less stringent in service inspection rules of ASME Class 3 (QG C). This was DSER Open item 3.2.21. In a meeting on July 25,1995, Westinghouse proposed to resolve this issue by revising SSAR Subsection 3.2.2.5 to state that for AP600 Class 3 lines that provide an ECCS function, the welds will be required to be spot radiographed. The staff has determined that this commitment will result in a piping system whose construction is somewhat enhanced.

However, the staff believes that the weld quality for ECCS needs to be consistent with the systems safety functions. Therefore, the butt welds in ECCS piping should be examined in accordance with the rules of ASME Section ill, ND-5222, using only the full radiography option. The commitment to fully radiograph welds is made in SSAR Section 3.6.3 2 for the ASME Class 3 accumulator discharge piping as a part of the staff's evaluatica of the leak before break issne. This is discussed in Gection 3.6.3.5 of this chapter. Therefore, the staff's position is that in order to provide reasonable assurance that the affected systems will perform their safety function when required, SSAR Section 3.2.2.5 should be revised to provide a similar commitment for the remaining of the ECCS welds in the  !

systems that are listed in Section 3.2.2.5. Therefore, DSER Open item 3.2.2-1 remains open.

k P

.,-. -- - e -,. - - - - - v-,,-em ,-.r-,,,.: . - . - - . -c-+