ML18337A268
| ML18337A268 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinch River |
| Issue date: | 12/03/2018 |
| From: | Tennessee Valley Authority |
| To: | NRC/NRO/DLSE |
| Sutton M, Fetter A | |
| References | |
| Download: ML18337A268 (23) | |
Text
TVA Clinch River SMR Project Early Site Permit Application Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Full Committee Meeting December 6th, 2018
Acknowledgement and Disclaimer Acknowledgment: "This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE-NE0008336."
Disclaimer: "This presentation was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof."
l 2 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
Presentation Outline Clinch River Nuclear Site - Overview Dan Stout Early Site Permit Application - Overview Ray Schiele Emergency Preparedness Archie Manoharan l 3 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
Clinch River Nuclear Site - Overview Dan Stout Director, Nuclear Technology & Innovation l4 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
TVAs Mission l 5 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
TVA Clinch River Site Site Access to 500 KV and 161 KV transmission Neighbor to DOE, an interested customer Basic Infrastructure Abundant and skilled workforce Strong community support TVA owned/controlled Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards l 6
Early Site Permit Application (ESPA)
An Early Site Permit assesses site suitability for potential construction and operation of a nuclear power plant.
Application includes:
Site Safety Analysis Report to address impacts of the environment on the plant
Environmental Report
Emergency Plans (Part 5A and Part 5B)
Exemptions (Part 6)
ESPA based on a plant parameter envelope (PPE)
Composite of reactor and engineered parameters from four U.S. light-water SMR designs with unique design features that bound the safety and environmental impact of plant construction and operation
Developed based on NEI 10-01 guidance with margin added to specific parameters
Assumes two or more SMR units of a single design
Up to 800MWt for a single unit with a combined nuclear generating capacity not exceeding 2420 MWt (800 MWe)
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards l 7
l 8 NRC Issues ESP Environmental Review Hearing(s)
Safety Review Notice of Hearing, Opportunity 4/4 4 Contentions Filed 6/12 Audits & RAIs Comment Period DEIS 4/26 FEIS 6/21 Scoping Meeting 5/15 PSER 8/4 ACRS Subcomm. Meetings FSER 8/17 SER w/ no OIs 10/20 Commission Hearing Audits & RAIs Notice of Intent 4/13 2 Contentions Admitted 10/10 2017 2018 2019 2020 ESPA Accepted 12-30-16 ESPA Rev. 1 Submitted 12-15-17 ESPA Rev. 2 Planned Submittal Dec 18 5/15 8/22 FEIS FSER Commission Ruling 5/3 ASLB Ruling 7/31 TVA Appeals 11/6 Contested Hearing Terminated Full ACRS 12/5 NRC Review of ESPA 10/17 11/14 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
ESPA Summary Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards l 9 NRC Commenced Review in FY 17 Contains more than 8000 Pages Supported by over 80,000 pages in referenced documents Efficient Use of Audits Few Requests for Additional Information (RAIs)
Frequent, Clear, and Candid Communication
Early Site Permit-Overview Ray Schiele Licensing Manager l10 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
Application Organization Part 1 - Administrative Information Part 2 - Site Safety Analysis Report
Chapter 1 - Introduction and General Description
Chapter 2 - Site Characteristics
Chapter 3 - Aircraft Hazards
Chapter 11 - Radioactive Waste Management
Chapter 13 - Emergency Planning
Chapter 15 - Transient and Accident Analysis
Chapter 17 - Quality Assurance Part 3 - Environmental Report Part 4 - Limited Work Authorization - Not Used Part 5 - Emergency Plan Part 6 - Exemptions and Departures Part 7 - Withheld Information Part 8 - Enclosures Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards l 11
ESPA Development Regulatory bases for the SSAR:
NRC Regulations10 CFR 20, 10 CFR 50, 10 CFR 52, and 10 CFR 100 NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition NRC Regulatory Guide 1.206, Combined License Applications for Nuclear Power Plants (LWR Edition)
RS-002, Processing Applications for Early Site Permits Regulatory bases for the ER:
National Environmental Policy Act, NRC Regulations10 CFR 51 and 10 CFR 52, NRC Regulatory Guide 4.2, Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power
- Stations, NRC Regulatory Guide 4.7, General Site Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power Stations, NUREG-1555, Federal, regional, state and local environmental statutes, as applicable, and RS-002, Processing Applications for Early Site Permits.
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards l 12
ESPA NRC Interactions Pre-Environmental Report Visit PPE Development Pre-application Site Visit Alternative Sites Visit ESPA Readiness Review Hydrology and Health Physics Audit Seismic/Geotechnical Audit Environmental and Meteorology Audit QA Inspection Meteorology and Health Physics Audit March 2013 September 2014 October 2014 June 2015 August 2015 April 2017 May 2017 May 2017 April 2018 May 2018 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards l 13
ASER/ACRS Committee Timeline April 2018 May 2018 July 2018 August 2018 September 2018 October 2018 October 2018 November 2018 December 2018 1st Set ASERs Issued ACRS Subcommittee Meeting SSAR Sections 2.1, 2.2, 3.5.1.6, 15.0.3 ASER - SSAR 13.3 Issued ACRS Subcommittee Meeting SSAR Section 13.3 ASER - SSAR 2.5 Issued ACRS Subcommittee Meeting SSAR Section 2.5 2nd Set ASERs Issued ACRS Subcommittee Meeting SSAR Sections 2.3, 2.4, 11.2/11.3, 17.0 ACRS Full Committee Meeting Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards l 14
l 15 Emergency Preparedness Archie Manoharan Licensing Engineer Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
ESPA - Emergency Preparedness Approach l 16 Emergency Planning (EP) Information Layout - 3 Areas Part 2, SSAR, Section 13.3, Emergency Preparedness Plume exposure pathway (PEP) emergency planning size (EPZ) sizing methodology Part 5, Emergency Plan Two major features (Onsite) Emergency Plans Part 5A - Site Boundary EPZ Emergency Plan Part 5B Mile EPZ Emergency Plan Part 6, Exemptions and Departures 2 sets of exemption requests Exemption requests for a PEP EPZ at Site Boundary Exemption requests for a 2-mile PEP EPZ The final EPZ size for the Clinch River Site will be determined at COLA stage Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
PEP EPZ Sizing Methodology l 17 Takes SMR design and safety advancements into consideration Dose-based, consequence-oriented approach to determine an appropriate EPZ size Consistent with the NUREG-0396 sizing rationale - spectrum of accidents are addressed Approach has the same dose criteria as NUREG-0396 - 1 rem total effective dose equivalent (TEDE)
Technical Criteria - PEP EPZ should:
Criterion A - encompass those areas in which projected dose from design basis accidents (DBAs) could exceed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) early phase protective action guide (PAG)
Criterion B - encompass those areas in which consequences of less severe core melt accidents could exceed the EPA early phase PAG Criterion C - be of sufficient size to provide for substantial reduction in early health effects in the event of more severe core melt accidents Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
PEP EPZ Sizing Methodology l 18 Step 1 - Accident scenario selection
DBA from Chapter 15
Design and site specific Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) for severe accident scenarios
Considers - all modes, internal & external events, applicable fuel handling, spent fuel pool, and multi-module accidents
Sequences with mean core damage frequency (CDF) greater than 1E-8 per reactor-year (rx-yr)
Criterion B: Less severe core melt scenarios - Mean CDF greater than 1E-6 per rx-yr, intact containment
Criterion C: More severe core melt scenarios - Mean CDF greater than 1E-7 per rx-yr, containment bypass or failure Step 2 - Determine source term releases from selected accidents Step 3 - Calculate dose consequences at distance Step 4 - Compare the dose at distance to EPA early phase PAG COL applicant would perform an analysis using the PEP EPZ size methodology, with site-and design-specific input, to justify the PEP EPZ size for the COLA Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
PEP EPZ Sizing Methodology - Example Analysis l 19 Criteria A & B: DBA and less severe accidents
Dose consequences do not exceed the early phase EPA PAG - 1 rem total effective dose equivalent (TEDE)
Criterion C: More severe accidents
Calculate distance at which conditional probability to exceed 200 rem whole body exceeds 1E-3 per rx-yr
Verify the PEP EPZ is of sufficient size to provide for substantial reduction in early health effects Design-Specific Example Analysis - Evaluates NuScale Power Plant at Clinch River Site Criteria Site Boundary Dose TEDE (rem)
EPA Early Phase PAG Limit TEDE (rem)
A: Design Basis Accidents 0.104 1
B: Less Severe Core Melt Accidents 0.158 1
C: Reduction in Early Severe Health Effects No accident scenarios met the required screening criteria.
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
Part 5 - Emergency Plan l 20 Part 5 of the ESPA contains the major features of two distinct Emergency Plans for Clinch River Site in accordance with 10 CFR 52.17(b)(2)(i).
Part 5A Describes major features of an Emergency Plan for a PEP EPZ consisting of the area encompassed by the Site Boundary.
Part 5B Describes major features of an Emergency Plan for a PEP EPZ consisting of an area approximately two miles in radius surrounding the Clinch River Site.
Both plans address the 16 planning standards in NUREG-0654,Section II, which reflects the requirements in 10 CFR 50.47(b)(1) through 10 CFR 50.47(b)(16) and Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50 considering the requested exemptions described in Part 6 of the ESPA Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
Part 6 - Exemptions and Departures Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards l 21 Pursuant to 10 CFR 52.7, Specific Exemptions, which is governed by 10 CFR 50.12, Specific Exemptions, TVA requested exemptions from the following emergency preparedness requirements for the Clinch River Site:
Certain standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b) regarding onsite and offsite emergency response plans for nuclear power reactor
Certain requirements of 10 CFR 50.33(g) and 10 CFR 50.47(c)(2) to establish PEP EPZ for nuclear power plants
Certain requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, which establish the elements that make up the content of emergency plans Two Sets of Exemptions
Exemptions for a PEP EPZ established at the Site Boundary
Deviate from 10-mile PEP EPZ
Various elements of a formal offsite emergency plan
Evacuation time estimates
Certain elements of offsite notifications and exercises
Exemptions for an approximate 2-mile PEP EPZ
Deviate from 10-mile PEP EPZ
Emergency Preparedness Approach - Summary l 22 ESPA COLA PEP EPZ Methodology (Part 2, SSAR, Section 13.3)
Approval of the dose-based, consequence oriented methodology for determining the PEP EPZ size Approval of design specific implementation of the methodology approved in the ESPA EPZ Size (Part 6)
Approval to deviate from the current 10-mile PEP EPZ requirements based on the methodology to determine PEP EPZ size Approval of design specific PEP EPZ size based on design specific implementation of the methodology Emergency Plan (Part 5)
Approval of the major features of the Site Boundary and 2-mile emergency plans presented in Part 5 Approval of the remaining elements of either the Site Boundary or 2-mile emergency plans OR a new plan based on design specific PEP EPZ size using methodology Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards