ML18155A557
| ML18155A557 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/05/2018 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research |
| O'Donnell E | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18155A547 | List: |
| References | |
| RG-1.167 RG-1.167 | |
| Download: ML18155A557 (2) | |
Text
Regulatory Guide Periodic Review Regulatory Guide Number: 1.167, Revision 0
Title:
Restart of a Nuclear Power Plant Shut Down by a Seismic Event Office/Division/Branch: RES/DE/SGSEB Technical Lead: Vladimir Graizer Staff Action Decided: Revise
- 1. What are the known technical or regulatory issues with the current version of the RG?
RG 1.167 contains information specific to requirements for restarting a nuclear power plant following shutdown by an earthquake due to observed damage or exceeding the operating basis earthquake (OBE). It is a companion to RG 1.166, Pre-Earthquake Planning and Immediate Nuclear Power Plant Operator Post-Earthquake Actions. The latter provides guidance on pre-earthquake planning and on assessing exceedance of the OBE.
Both of the related guides endorse with exceptions Electric Power and Research Institute (EPRI) NP-6695 Guidelines for Nuclear Power Plant Response to an Earthquake (1989). In the years following the issuance of EPRI-6695, a significant amount of experience has been gained on the effects of earthquakes on nuclear power plants worldwide and the actions needed for their restart. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) documented lessons learned from all significant earthquakes affecting nuclear power plants pre-2010 in Safety Reports Series No. 66, Earthquake Preparedness and Response for Nuclear Power Plants (2011). The report draws upon insights from three multiunit nuclear power plants in Japan and one in Armenia that experienced beyond-design-basis earthquakes. In addition to those plants, experience has been gained with the 2011 shutdown of the North Anna nuclear power plant following the Mineral, Virginia earthquake due to ground motion exceeding the safe shutdown earthquake. Based on the lessons learned in establishing the effects of the earthquakes on the plants and the actions undertaken to restart them, a significant update of the EPRI-6695 was prepared and published in 2013 as EPRI report 3002000720, Guidelines for Nuclear Plant Response to an Earthquake.
The American Nuclear Society/American National Standards Institute (ANS/ANSI) standard ANS/ANSI-2.23-2016, Nuclear Power Plant Response to an Earthquake, incorporates the significant changes and additions included in EPRI report 3002000720.
ANS/ASNI-2.23-2016 builds on EPRI NP-6695 by adding guidance on action levels that clarify what should be done, when it should be done, and by whom. It provides more comprehensive guidance than EPRI NP-6695 for short term actions to be performed by a licensee following an earthquake, and for long term post-earthquake evaluations. To take advantage of the more comprehensive guidance, the guides should be combined and updated to endorse ANS/ANSI-2.23-2016 rather than the earlier guidance of EPRI NP-6695.
Regulatory Guide Periodic Review
- 2. What is the impact on internal and external stakeholders of not updating the RG for the known issues, in terms of numbers of licensing and inspection activities?
There are no new large power reactor license applications anticipated in the near future (next 3 to 5 years). Thus, there is no immediate need for revising the guide to address their licensing. For small modular reactors, the review of the NuScale design certification is under review and it is premature to develop unique guidance to address that design.
- 3. What is an estimate of the level of effort needed to address identified issues in terms of full-time equivalent (FTE) and contractor resources?
Revision of the RG will take approximately 0.3 FTE of NRC staff time.
- 4. Based on the answers to the questions above, what is the recommended staff action for this guide (Reviewed with no issues identified, Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration, Revise, or Withdraw)?
Revise
- 5. If a RG should be revised, provide a conceptual plan and timeframe to accomplish this.
The staff plans to update and combine this guide with RG 1.166 by end of the fourth quarter of FY 2018, and issue it for public comment in the second quarter of FY 2019.
NOTE: This review was conducted in May 2018 and reflects the staffs plans as of that date. These plans are tentative and subject to change.