ML23270B971
| ML23270B971 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/27/2023 |
| From: | Ossy Font NRC/NRR/DANU/UARP |
| To: | Steven Lynch NRC/NRR/DANU/UARP |
| References | |
| Download: ML23270B971 (8) | |
Text
September 27, 2023 MEMORANDUM TO:
Steven Lynch, Acting Branch Chief Advanced Reactor Policy Branch Division of Advanced Reactors and Non-Power Production and Utilization Facilities Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM:
Ossy Font, Project Manager /RA/
Advanced Reactor Policy Branch Division of Advanced Reactors and Non-Power Production and Utilization Facilities Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF OCTOBER 12, 2022, PERIODIC ADVANCED REACTOR STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC MEETING On October 12, 2022, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff held an information meeting with a question-and-answer session with stakeholders to discuss advanced reactor topics including:
CNCS/NRC Third Interim Report Discussion of Draft Outline for Natrium Construction Permit Application Part 53 Update: Status and Overview of Revisions; Fire Protection Requirements in Framework B Overview of the Part 53 Subpart F Interim Staff Guidance Technology-Inclusive, Risk-Informed, and Performance-Based Methodology for Seismic Design of Commercial Nuclear Plants Seismically Isolated Nuclear Plants Guidance The meeting notice is available in the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) at Accession No. ML22284A147, and the presentation slides are available at ADAMS Accession No. ML22284A141. The Enclosure to this summary provides the attendees for the meeting as captured by Microsoft Teams.
For each topic listed above, the NRC staff provided information and allotted time for stakeholder comments and questions. Stakeholders provided feedback on several of the topics and asked clarifying questions. NRC staff stated that the feedback was appreciated. No follow-up actions were identified. Members of the public were in attendance and the NRC did not receive public meeting feedback forms.
CONTACT:
Ossy Font, NRR/DANU 301-415-2490
The NRC staff provided updates of the Advanced Reactor Integrated Schedule of Activities on the NRCs public website at https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/advanced/integratedreview-schedule.html. The NRC staff noted that the schedule reflects activities that have recently been completed, updated, or added since the August 18, 2022, advanced reactor stakeholder meeting.
The NRC staff presented an update to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC)/NRC report describing the attributes of the Silicon carbide (SiC) coating properties and attributes based on the review of the Advanced Reactor Fuel (AGR) program data.
There was a question on how the licensing of TRISO fueled plants are proceeding without specific SiC end-state attributes determined. The NRC staff is assuming that fission product retention is similar to the AGR program, and, therefore, the report will list desirable SiC attributes. Specific TRISO fueled design reviews will use the identified parameters as supporting information for a case-by-case review. Specific uses of the report information in the CNCS review process should be directed to mediarelations-relationsmedias@cnsc-ccsn.gc.ca.
Another question inquired about the timeline to close identified gaps. The NRC staff does not know the timeline, as that would take additional research/study which is dependent upon other stakeholders such as the US Department of Energy.
Lastly, a stakeholder asked, What is the most important SiC attribute? The NRC staff identified the non-columnar grain boundary as an important attribute for intact SiC coating fission product retention (similar to AGR retention).
During the next topic, the NRC staff discussed TerraPowers draft proposed table of contents for their forthcoming construction permit application for the Natrium design. The Natrium draft table of contents can be found in ADAMs at Accession No. ML22258A301. The staff noted differences between the Natrium draft table of contents and that found in advanced reactor content of application project (ARCAP) and technology inclusive content of application project (TICAP) guidance. One of the differences noted was with the structure of Chapter 6 and 7 of the safety analysis report (SAR) found in TICAP guidance document NEI 21-07, Revision 1, Technology Inclusive Guidance for Non-Light Water Reactor Safety Analysis Report: For Applicants Utilizing NEI 18-04 Methodology (ML22060A190). NEI 21-07, Revision 1 proposes that safety related (SR) structures, systems, and components (SSCs) be identified in Chapter 6 of the SAR and non-safety related special treatment (NSRST) SSCs be identified in Chapter 7 of the SAR. The NRC noted that the Natrium draft table of contents included both SR and NSRST SSCs in Chapter 7 of the SAR. The staff further noted that the proposed difference in these chapters had merit because as a TerraPower representative pointed out during the meeting, grouping of systems and subsystems that include both SR and NSRST SSCs is thought to aid the applicant in better describing the design and aid the NRC staff reviewers in better understanding the design. As an example, the TerraPower representative pointed to Section 7.2.3, Sodium Cover Gas System, as a system that included both SR and NSRST systems and subsystems.
In response to a question from the public during the meeting, the NRC staff noted that ARCAP and TICAP are guidance documents and not requirements. To the extent that applicants would like to deviate from the guidance, the staff suggested that preapplication engagement would help the NRC staff better understand the structure of an application so that questions or concerns could be discussed and resolved prior to the application being submitted.
The next presentation by the NRC staff provided a status update on the ongoing Part 53 rulemaking activities. The presentation focused on the current rulemaking schedule, the recently issued draft proposed rule package that will support upcoming ACRS meetings, fire protection requirements in the package, and recent feedback received on the rule.
Several stakeholders provided feedback on the topic. One stakeholder noted that the proposed requirements for Construction Permit applications to include a description and results of a PRA are burdensome and not reasonable. The comment not only applied to the Part 53 rulemaking activities, but also to the ongoing Parts 50/52 harmonization rulemaking efforts. Another stakeholder appreciated the discussion on Part 53, but noted that the staffs presentation did not address the six key issues conveyed in the NEI/USNIC August 31, 2022, letter (e.g., QHOs, ALARA, FSP). These have been discussed with external stakeholders during previous meetings. Another stakeholder expressed concern that the Part 53 rulemaking activities are entering a period where external stakeholders have limited opportunity to comment on the proposed rule package. The NRC staff noted that there will be multiple meetings at which stakeholders can communicate with the staff and that the formal public comment period would provide another opportunity for stakeholders to submit comments, after which the NRC staff will formally respond. Another stakeholder also reiterated an ongoing concern of their specific to draft fire protection requirements in Part 53, suggesting that deterministic requirements will apply to non-safety related SSCs. The NRC staff clarified that is not the intent of the draft requirements and discussed this point using examples. The final stakeholder provided support on the NRC staffs response on this issue.
The next NRC staff presentation covered development of several interim staff guidance (ISG) documents in support of the Part 53 rule language package. Among these were draft guidance documents addressing the review of staffing plans, operator licensing, and human factors engineering (HFE) for Part 53 facility applicants.
A stakeholders questions covered staffing approaches for very safe plants. The NRC staff pointed out that staffing was adapted to plant specific needs for safety and also accommodates an alternate approach using Generally Licensed Reactor Operators. The stakeholder also inquired about the opportunity to provide comments. The NRC staff pointed out that these ISGs were part of the Part 53 proposed rule package and public comments would be accepted regarding them during the Part 53 rules public comment period that will occur after the federal register notice is issued. The stakeholder also made a general comment questioning the extent of the NRCs involvement in the licensing of operators. The NRC staff highlighted that the licensing of operators is a mandated responsibility of the NRC under the Atomic Energy Act.
Finally, the stakeholder expressed a concern that the human factors engineering requirements could be extended too broadly to the entire plant. The NRC staff clarified that the scope of the HFE requirement is targeted at contexts where there is a nexus to safety or emergency preparedness.
Another stakeholder asked if the operator licensing examination guidance included the use of augmented reality and virtual reality. The NRC staff stated that it was not explicitly included for exams, but its something that the NRC can take into consideration for simulation facilities more broadly. The NRC staff also noted that, within the context of operator licensing examinations, theres also a statutory need to ensure that uniform conditions are maintained in the operator licensing process.
The last stakeholder provided a perspective that the scope of rule language could be amended to provide a targeted focus on reactor and radiation safety versus plant safety. Another stakeholder also expressed a similar perspective about focus being placed on the plant versus the reactor. The NRC staff discussed the basis for the existing language used.
The next two presentation were on seismic related topics; specifically, on technology-inclusive, risk-informed, and performance-based methodology for seismic design of commercial nuclear plants and seismically isolated nuclear plants guidance.
To see information regarding previously held periodic advanced reactor stakeholder public meetings, please visit the NRCs public website at https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/advanced/details.html#stakeholder.
Please direct any inquiries to me at 301-415-2490 or via e-mail at Ossy.Font@nrc.gov.
Enclosure:
Attendance List
Meeting Notice ML22284A147 Meeting Summary Handouts ML22284A141 NRC-001 OFFICE NRR/DANU/UARP/PM NRR/DANU/UARP/BC NRR/DANU/UARP/PM NAME OFont SLynch OFont DATE 09/27/2023 09/27/2023 09/27/2023 Enclosure October 12, 2022, Periodic Advanced Reactor Stakeholder Public Meeting Attendance List NAME AFFILIATION Tom Roberts (Guest)
ACRS Mohamed Shams NRC William Jessup NRC Ossy Font NRC Donna Williams NRC Boyce Travis NRC Marcia Carpentier NRC William Reckley NRC Mihaela Biro NRC William Kennedy NRC Steven Vitto NRC Mallecia Sutton NRC Brian Glowacki NRC Jim Xu NRC Chen, Ben NRC Ramon Gascot Lozada NRC Jason Piotter NRC Maurin Scheetz NRC Matthew Hiser NRC James O'Driscoll NRC Christopher Regan NRC Joseph Sebrosky NRC Tom Boyce NRC John Segala NRC Stephanie Devlin-Gill (She/Her/Hers)
NRC Thomas Scarbrough NRC Ben Adams NRC Zackery Helgert NRC Michelle Hayes NRC Marty Stutzke NRC Stephen Philpott NRC David Desaulniers NRC Candace de Messieres NRC Hanh Phan NRC Reed Anzalone NRC Tony Nakanishi NRC David Burgess NRC Jordan Hoellman NRC Michael Orenak NRC
2 Gurcharan Matharu NRC Anthony Valiaveedu NRC Amy Cubbage NRC Scott Tonsfeldt NRC Ian Jung NRC Donald Palmrose NRC Yuken Wong NRC Anders Gilbertson (He/Him)
NRC Jeffrey Schmidt NRC Robert Taylor NRC Theresa Buchanan NRC Jing Xing NRC Matthew Humberstone NRC Nicholas Hansing NRC Jesse Seymour NRC Lauren Nist (She)
NRC Charles Moulton NRC Belkys Sosa NRC Todd Hilsmeier NRC Christopher P. Chwasz NRC Contractor James C. Kinsey Jr NRC Contractor Chisholm, Brandon M.
NRC Contractor Tom King (Guest)
NRC Contractor Tom Hicks (Guest)
NRC Contractor Cyril Draffin (U.S. Nuclear Industry Council (USNIC))
Public Leigh Lloveras (Breakthrough Institute)
Public Rani Franovich (Breakthrough Institute)
Public Peter Hastings (Kairos Power)
Public Edwin Lyman Public Burg, Rob Public Jason A. Christensen Public Ciocco, Jeff Public Scott E. Ferrara Public STADTLANDER, Richard Public Paul A. Demkowicz Public NICHOL, Marcus Public Courtenay, Christopher C Public HOLTZMAN, Benjamin Public Schichlein, Lisa (GE Power Portfolio)
Public
3 Grabaskas, Dave Public Eric Oesterle Public Henderson, Ryan Donald Public PIMENTEL, Frances Public Enfinger, Timothy (GE Power Portfolio)
Public Friesen, Carl D Public Kaniel Z. Tilow Public O'NEILL, Martin Public Hahn, Matthew Public Ashley Harper Public Bergman, Jana Public Don Eggett Public Lance Sterling Public Lipinski, Pearle M.
Public Spalding, Amanda J Public Wyche, Altheia Public Justin Hawkins Public Adam Stein (Breakthrough Institute) (Guest)
Public Robert Budnitz (Guest)
Public Nick Kellenberger (Guest)
Public Guest Public Ross (Guest)
Public Ingrid Nordby (X-energy)
(Guest)
Public Mike Empey (Guest)
Public David Koenigsfeld (Guest)
Public mike keller (Guest)
Public Henneke, Dennis (GE Power Portfolio)
Public Brandon Hartle (X-energy)
(Guest)
Public Charlotte Geiger (X-energy)
(Guest)
Public Deborah A Luchsinger (Services - 6)
Public Benjamin D. Kosbab Public
- Attendance list based on Microsoft Teams Participant list. List does not include individuals that connected via phone.