ML20073R878
Text
I), Jb l
f...
.~ ~
p aa i
UNITED STATES 3
... E NUCLF.AR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 201i66 April 22, 1993 MEMORANDUM FOR: The Chairman Comissioner Rogers Comissioner Curtiss Comissioner Remick i
Comissioner de Planque FROM:
James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations j
SUBJECT:
QUARTERLY STATUS REPORT OF ADVANCED LIGHT WATER REACTOR REVIEWS (JANUARY - MARCH 1993)
J In a memorandum of June 20, 1991, I directed the staff to prepare quarterly i
reports outlining the status of its reviews of advanced reactor designs. The enclosed quarterly report is the seventh in the series and covers from January 1 through March 31, 1993.
In this report, the staff addresses the review status of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Utility Requirements Document (URD) for passive reactors, the GE Nuclear ~ Energy-(GE) Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) design, the Asea Brown Boveri-Combustion Engineering (ABB-CE) System 80+
design, the Westinghouse AP600 design, and the GE Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (SBWR) design. The report consists of three sections:
(1) an executive sumary, (2) a discussion of technical and policy issues that could affect the schedule for more than one project, and (3) the status of the review of each advanced reactor project, ames
. Ta" ecutive 5irector for Operations
Enclosure:
As Stated cc: SECY l
l Michael J. Case, NRR 504-1134
QUARTERLY STATUS REPORT OF ADVANCED LIGHT WATER REACTOR REVIEWS JANUARY-MARCH 1993 I.
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
This is the seventh quarterly report to the Commission on the status of the NRC staff's design certification reviews of evolutionary and advanced light-water reactors (ALWRs).
The report addresses the GE Nuclear Energy (GE) Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) design, the Asea Brown Boveri-Combustion Engineering (ABB-CE) System 80+ design, the Westinghouse AP600 design, the GE Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (SBWR) design, and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Utility Requirements Document (URD) for passive reactor designs.
This report also includes a discussion of technical and policy issues that could affect the schedule for more than one project.
The staff and individual vendors have made significant progress on each of the advanced light-water reactor projects.
Extensive efforts by the staff, GE, and ABB-CE have resulted in specific inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC) examples that will serve as a template for all ALWR designs.
Although the development of this set of template ITAAC was a more difficult and time consuming task than anticipated, its completion removes a major obstacle to finishing the evolutionary design reviews. A significant amount of design development and review work remains to be completed by both the vendors and the staff, but there does not appear to be any major policy or technical issues that will prevent the eventual staff approval of the evolutionary designs.
Although the staff continues to resolve technical issues with GE and-ABB-CE, its ability to prepare the FSER on these designs is largely dependent on submission of the final certified standard safety analysis report (SSAR) including ITAACs.
For the ABWR, because so much informa-tion is needed to address the open issues in the draft final safety evaluation report (DFSER), GE revised its submission date for the certified SSAR and ITAACs to July 31, 1993.
The staff estimated in SECY-93-041, " Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) Review Schedule,"
that it could issue the final design approval for the ABWR in approxi-mately nine months from the date GE identified.
ABB-CE completed its response to the System 80+ draft safety evaluation report (DSER) in February. However, ABB-CE acknowledged that more information is needed to supplement some of its responses. The staff completed a team review of 11 prototype ITAAC at the end of March.
ABB-CE. intends to submit all of its ITAACs by June 30, 1993, after it incorporates the lessons learned from this review.
i ENCLOSURE
_ _ ~
The staff made important progress on the issue of the regulatory treatment of active non-safety systems in the passive designs. This issue is important for the early review efforts on the AP600 and SBWR designs and for completion of the final safety evaluation report (FSER) for the EPRI URD for passive designs.
EPRI submitted a proposed process for determining the regulatory treatment of non-safety systems based on an agreement between NRC senior management and the Utility Steering Committee made in January 1993.
The staff is reviewing this document and expects to inform the Commission of its position on this issue in 1
the next quarter.
The staff continued its review of the AP600 and SBWR design certifi-4 cation application material.
For the AP600, the staff has issued almost 800 requests for additional information (RAls) to Westinghouse and Westinghouse has responded to more than three-fourths of them.
For the SBWR, on March I,1993, the staff received additional application information from GE.
The staff is reviewing this information to determine whether the application contains all the information required by 10 CFR Part 52.
The staff will complete this review early in the next quarter.
i As a result of the delays in submittals (especially with regard to ITAAC) and the resource impact associated with staff support of the revised ABWR schedule, the staff is preparing revised integrated review schedules for standardized and advanced. light-water reactor projects.
Although these schedules will reflect the experience gained in the certification reviews and the substantial progress made on first-of-a-kind issues such as ITAAC, the schedules remain fundamentally linked to the timely receipt of high-quality design information from the vendors.
The staff will provide these estimates to the Commission in the next quarter.
II.
TECHNICAL AND POLICY ISSUES THAT COULD AFFECT REVIEW SCHEDULES In items A through E, the staff discusses the status of five major policy issues that may affect the schedules for reviewing design applications.
A.
ITAAC The resolution of ITAAC is the most critical issue in reviewing l
the evolutionary LWR designs.
l.
MILESTONES FOR LAST QUARTER a.
Continue to review ITAAC submittals from the vendors and meet with the vendors, as necessary, to resolve issues raised during the review.
l l
b.
Expedite the resolution of selected system ITAACs for the ABWR with the multi-disciplinary NRR review team.
l j
l !
i I
I l
)
l l-c.
Brief thelstaff on the status of and the lessons l
1 earned from ITAAC development.-
2.
MILESTONES ACCOMPLISHED j
During this quarter, the staff made significant progress on ITAAC issues from both a generic and design-specific perspec-tive.
In-a memorandum to the Commission dated March 11,.
1993, the staff described its approach to resolve the issue i
of generic ITAAC requirements such as welding and equipment qualification.
In this approach, these generic requirements would be incorporated into the ITAACs for the specific appli-cable structures and systems of the design.
To effectively implement this technical approach and' to resolve issues in the DFSER for the ABWR, the staff formed a multi-disciplinary ITAAC review team. From January 11 l
through 21, 1993, the team reviewed ten. system ITAACs for the l
ABWR..In addition, from March'8 through 12, 1993, the' team i
completed five more.ITAAC systems (two building ITAAC, one-l electrical ITAAC, and'one I&C ITAAC). GE is using the re-sults of. these reviews as a." template" for the other. ABWR ITAACs.
1 Representatives from ABB-CE, Westinghouse, and the Department l
of Energy (DOE) attended both of the ITAAC review sessions.
l The staff' anticipates that the other vendors will-use the i
ITAAC " template" developed from the ABWR design and the other l
1essons learned when developing their ITAACs.
-l On March 5, 1993, ABB-CE submitted 11 prototype ITAACs for the System 80+ design. These ITAACs reflected staff comments l
and the industry review of the System 80+ ITAAC that was-l completed in February. The staff reviewed these revised r
ITAACs and provided appropriate feedback to ABB-CE in.the-last week of March.
l In order to ensure consistent application of the lessons
~
learned during the ITAAC reviews, the staff conducted a training session on ITAAC for its reviewers.
In addition, the staff is writing preliminary review guidance, based on the lessons learned from the team reviews, to use in review-l ing the final versions of ITAAC.
3.
MILESTONES NOT ACCOMPLISHED None.-
. 1a
4.
EFFECT ON SCHEDULE AND REC 0VERY GE intends to submit its final ITAACs for the ABWR design by July 31, 1993. ABB-CE intends to submit its ITAACs by June 30, 1993, after incorporating staff feedback on the 11 prototype ITAACs. Westinghouse is following ITAAC develop-ment on both the GE and ABB-CE dockets and intends to submit revised AP600 ITAACs in June 1993.
The staff factored these estimates into its Commission paper on integrated review schedules for standardized and advanced light-water reactor projects.
5.
MILESTONE PLANNED FOR NEXT QUARTER Prepare ITAAC review guidance and conduct an NRR training session.
B.
SEVERE ACCIDENT CLOSURE The probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) (FSER Chapter 19.1) and closure of severe accidents (FSER Chapter 19.2) represents a significant element of the staff review of advanced designs.
To closo the issue of severe accidents for advanced designs, the staff requires a balanced approach between severe accident pre-vention and mitigation. The basis for the review is to ensure that advanced plants have a higher degree of severe accident safety performance than previous designs and to take advantage of lessons learned from performance of PRAs, operating experience, and severe accident research.
1.
MILESTONES FOR LAST QUARTER a.
Develop a revised schedule for ABWR final design approval.
b.
Meet with ABB-CE on issues related to this topic in January 1993.
2.
MILESTONES ACCOMPLISHED The staff is using the Commission's Severe Accident Policy Statement and the Commission-approved positions from SECY-90-016, " Evolutionary Light Water Reactor (LWR) Certifi-cation Issues and Their Relationship to Current Regulatory l
Requirements," as primary guidance in determining the accept-l ability of the evolutionary designs for severe accidents.
In l
SECY-93-087, " Policy, Technical, and Licensing Issues Per-taining to Evolutionary and Advanced Light-Water Reactor (ALWR) Designs," the staff refines its positions regarding l l
I l
i certain severe accident issues for evolutionary designs and l
makes its recomendations on numerous severe accident issues i
for the passive designs.
The staff issued this paper to the j
Comission on April 2,1993.
1 During this quarter, the staff continued to work with primar-ily GE, ABB-CE, and EPRI on issues related to severe accident closure to ensure that resolution is achieved consistent with Comission guidance and can be accomplished consistent with schedules established for other SSAR chapters. The staff has not identified any major implementation difficulties with respect to those goals.
Also, during the quarter, the staff briefed the ACRS on severe accident closure for the ABWR.
Another meeting is planned for the next quarter and will address comittee concerns and discuss final resolution of issues. ABB-CE submitted the severe accident report for the System 80+ which incorporated the resolution of issues raised in the staff review of the initial report.
3.
MILESTONES NOT ACCOMPLISHED None.
1 4.
EFFECT ON SCHEDULE AND REC 0VERY None.
5.
MILESTONE PLANNED FOR NEXT QUARTER i
i Unless the Comission's consideration of the severe accident closure issues presented in SECY-93-087 raises generic items affecting this issue, the staff will no longer provide an update on severe accident closure in future quarterly re-ports.
Significant design-specific implementation issues will be covered in the project sumary section of this re-port.
C.
DIVERSITY OF DIGITAL INSlRUMENTATION SYSTEMS The staff has proposed new requirements for digital instrumenta-tion and control (I&C) systems for evolutionary and advanced LWR plants to address potential comon-mode failures in digital I&C system software. These new requirements are described in l
SECY-93-087. This issue is still unresolved on both the ABWR and l
System 80+ designs, however, progress toward resolution is being l
made consistent with the staff position.
l l
1 !
I
_~
~
1.
MILESTONE FOR LAST QUARTER Continue to work with the vendors on this issue and, if-necessary, seek and implement guidance from the Commission on this subject.
2.
MILESTONES ACCOMPLISHED After carefully reviewing ACRS, industry, and. vendor com-ments, the staff has developed a. final position on this issue.
which is contained in SECY-93-087, " Policy,J Technical, and Licensing Issues Pertaining to Evolutionary.and Advanced Light-Water Reactor (ALWR)-Designs." The staff's basic recommendations on this issue are the following: '(1) the applicant shall assess the defense-in-depth and diversity of the proposed instrumentation and control system to demon-strate that vulnerabilities to common-mode failures have-adequately been addressed, (2) the applicant shall analyze each postulated common-mode failure for each event that is 1
_I evaluated in the accident ~ analysis section of. the safety analysis report and demonstrate adequate diversity within the design for each of.these events, (3) if a postulated common-mode failure could disable a safety function, then a diverse
-means, with a documented basis that the diverse means'is l
unlikely to be subject to the same common-mode failure, shall be required to perform either the same function ^or a di.f-ferent function, and (4) a set'of safety-grade displays-and controls located in the main control room shall be provided
-for manual', system-level actuation of critical safety func-tions and monitoring of parameters that support the-safety--
functions..The displays and controls shall be independent and diverse from the safety computer system identified in items 1 and 3.
~
l In addition, during this quarter, the staff continued to work t
with GE and ABB-CE on the design specific implementation of this issue.
l 3.
MILESTONES NOT ACCOMPLISHED None.
l' 4.
EFFECT ON SCHEDULE AND RECOVERY None.
5.
MILESTONE PLANNED FOR NEXT QUARTER
~
Unless the Commission's consideration of the digital instru-mentation diversity issue presented in SECY-93-087 changes i
the staff position, the staff will no longer provide.an l
update on diversity of digital instrumentation systems in l l
~
i l
.. i future quarterly reports.
Significant design-specific imple-mentation issues will be covered in the project sumary section of this report.
)
D.
REGULATORY TREATMENT OF NON-SAFETY SYSTEMS IN PASSIVE REACTOR DESIGNS Since the design philosophy for the passive advanced light-water reactor departs from current licensing practices, new regulatory and review guidance is needed so that the staff can appropriately i
review the AP600 and SBWR submittals.
This policy issue is being addressed in the staff review of the EPR_I passive URD. Delayed resolution of this issue could affect the early review milestones for AP600 and SBWR and the EPRI passive URD FSER.
1 l
1.
MILESTONES FOR LAST QUARTER a.
Discuss this issue at the NRC/EPR.I senior management i
meeting in January 1993, l
b.
Promptly seek and implement the recommendations of the Commission on this subject.
i 2.
MILESTONES ACCOMPLISHED l
Prior to this quarter, the staff met several times with EPRI.
to determine steps needed to resolve the issue of regulatory j
treatment of active non-safety systems, and define the scope of requirements and acceptance criteria to ensure that they l
have adequate capability and availability when required.
In a meeting between NRC senior management and the Utility Steering Committee on January 22, 1993, an agreement was reached on an overall process for determining the regulatory treatment of non-safety systems, and the importance of pas-sive systems and/or components for meeting NRC Safety Goals and requirements. On February 23, 1993, EPRI submitted a draft of a proposed process. The staff is reviewing this document. The staff is preparing its position on issues involving the. regulatory treatment of non-safety systems and expects to send these positions to the Commission in the next quarter.
3.
MILESTONES NOT ACCOMPLISHED None.
l 4.
EFFECT ON SCHEDULE AND RECOVERY None. l l
5.
MILESiu.a PLANNED FOR NEXT QUARTER Complete preparation of staff positions on the issues involv-ing the regulatory treatment of non-safety systems in the passive design.
E.
NEPA SAMDAs The staff previously indicated that the resolution of the National Environmental Policy Act Severe Accident Mitigation Design Alter-natives (NEPA SAMDAs) may delay the projected review schedules.
1.
MILESTONE FOR LAST QUARTER Continue to work with GE and the industry while reviewing the design alternatives for the ABWR.
2.
MILESTONES ACCOMPLISHED 4
The staff has received GE's response to questions about the 10 CFR 50.34(f) requirements for the ABWR.
GE has also submitted the Technical Support Document for the SAMDA review of the ABWR. The staff is reviewing this information. A safety evaluation is currently being prepared that will address the concerns related to consideration of design alternatives identified in 10 CFR 50.34(f)(1)(1).
The safety i
evaluation that considers the 50.34(f) design alternatives will provide much of the basis for the environmental apprai-sal of the SAMDA issues.
The environmental appraisal will be completed concurrently with the development of the proposed design certification rule.
i 3.
MILESTONES NOT ACCOMPLISHED None.
4.
EFFECT ON SCHEDULE AND REC 0VERY None.
5.
MILESTONE PLANNED FOR NEXT QUARTER The staff will no longer provide a separate update on the NEPA SAMDA issue in future quarterly reports unless new policy issues result from the on;cing ABWR review or the initial review of this issue on System 80+ design.
Signifi-cant design-specific implementation issues will be covered in the project summary section of this report.
.=
III.
PROJECT MILESTONES j
A.
ABWR 1.
MILESTONES FOR LAST QUARTER 1
a.
Develop a revised schedule for ABWR final design approval.
b.
Meet with GE as necessary to resolve open issues identified in the DFSER.
c.
Expedite the resolution of selected system iTAACs for the ABWR with the multi-disciplinary NRR review team.
i d.
Receive GE's submittal of the final SSAR to resolve i
DFSER open issues.
d e.
Begin preparation of the FSER.
2.
MILESTONES ACCOMPLISHED During the quarter,'the staff focused on three major tasks with respect to the ABWR review. Since~ nearly half of the DFSER open items were related to ITAAC, the.' staff formed a i
multi-disciplinary team to review and resolve selected ABWR ITAAC issues. -Section I.A of this report _contains a detailed i
.j A second major task for the. staff was to establish a detailed schedule for completing the ABWR review once a final, certi-fied SSAR and Tier 1 document is received from GE. -In 1
SECY-93-041, " Advanced Boiling Water Reactor'(ABWR) Review 1
Schedule," the staff provided the Commission with an aggres-sive review schedule to complete the ABWR review and the underlying assumptions used to develop the schedule.
Because it needed to develop substantial information to address the open issues from the DFSER, GE revised its esti-mate on when it-could submit the certified SSAR and ITAAC.
In a letter of March 8, 1993, GE gave July 31 as the submit-I tal date for the final certified SSAR and ITAACs. The staff estimates that it can issue the final design approval for the ABWR approximately nine months from the date of this final submittal.
The third major area of staff activity involved the contin-uing activities with GE to resolve DFSER open items. These included management meetings, an audit of the ABWR structural design, and numerous telephone conferences and face-to-face meetings to discuss specific review topics. -
= - -.
I
-c' 3.
MILESTONES NOT ACCOMPLISHED Because.it needed to develop such a large amount of infor-mation on ABWR open issu u, GE did not submit the final SSAR as had been anticipated-in the last quarterly report. As a i
consequence, the staff continued to' resolve open items and FSER preparation has been extended.
j 4.
EFFECT ON SCHEDULE AND RECOVERY The schedule given in SECY-93-041 is very aggressive and can
{
only be attained.if the ABWR review retains its top priority:
~
and GE submits timely, high-quality information on the open i
and confirmatory items. The schedule leaves no time margin for delays.
5.
MILESTONE PLANNED FOR NEXT. QUARTER.
']
Continue to pursue resolution of ITAAC issues'and DFSER open items.
B.
ABB-CE SYSTEM 80+
1.
MILESTONES FOR LAST QUARTER L
a.
Continue'to meet with ABB-CE to discuss and resolve-open. items identified in the DSER.
b.
Meet with the ACRS on the System 80+ DSER.
c.
Receive submittals from ABB-CE on the DSER open items and ITAACs.
l l
2.
MILESTONES ACCOMPLISHED 1
The DSER for the System 80+ design contained 637 open. items and 130 confirmatory items.
In early February, ABB-CE com-pleted its responses to the DSER. However, ABB-CE acknow-ledged that more information is needed to supplement some of i
l its responses. ABB-CE also anticipated submitting a majority l
of its ITAACs in January.
This submittal was delayed in_ t order to incorporate industry review comments and lessons learned from the ABWR ITAAC review efforts and thereby more efficiently use both staff and ABB-CE resources.Section I.A of this report discusses ITAAC issues in more detail.
l l
The staff and ABB-CE continued to work together to resolve l
DSER open items. Major areas discussed include ITAACs, l
application of the new source term in calculating offsite l l l
i l.
-=
l
~
.I doses for design-basis accidents, and the ABB-CE approach to resolving the interfacing system loss-of-coolant-accident-(ISLOCA) issue. The staff and ABB-CE briefed the ACRS on the System 80+ DSER.
3.
MILESTONE NOT ACCOMPLISHED None.-
)
4.
EFFECT ON SCHEDULE AND RECOVERY-Delays in the final submittals (especially with regard to ITAACs) in conjunction with the resource impact in a few limited areas (e.g., PRA and severe accidents) associated with staff support of the revised ABWR schedule will delay
-the System 80+ review schedule. The staff will submit lan updated schedule for the System 80+ project in its Commission paper on integrated review schedules for, standardized and
. advanced light-water reactor projects.
5.
-MILESTONE PLANNED FOR NEXT QUARTER Continue to work with ABB-CE to resolve DSER open issues.
C.
WESTINGHOUSE AP600-1.
MILESTONE FOR LAST QUARTER l
Continue to. review the AP600 application including sending RAls.
2.
MILESTONES ACCOMPLISHED In December 1992, Westinghouse submitted the information noted as missing or incomplete in the staff's original-accep-tance review of the AP600 application. As a result, the staff was able to proceed further into the early review stages of the AP600 design.
i On February 24, 1993, NRC and Westinghouse senior management met ~to discuss critical issues affecting the review of the AP600 project. These issues included the regulatory treat-3 ment of non-safety systems in the AP600 design, ITAACs, PRA, and the testing program for the AP600.
Other staff activity during the quarter concentrated on two j
major areas:
issuing requests for additional information i
(RAls) to Westinghouse and evaluating Westinghouse testing plans for the AP600. Since receiving the AP600 application in June, the staff has issued almost 800 RAls to Westing-house. Westinghouse has responded to more than three-fourths-i of these requests. i l
l l
,l
Westinghouse plans to complete all testing necessary for the AP600 design by the end of 1993 with the exception of auto-matic depressurization system (ADS) testing which will be completed in the spring of 1994.
The staff met with Westing-house many times in order to develop a fundamental under-standing of both the test program and the facilities at which the testing will take place.
In addition, the. staff contin-J ues to monitor activity at the ROSA-V facility, where NRC confirmatory testing for the AP600 design will take place.
Facility modification design work is under way and is ex-pected to be completed in November 1993.
3.
MILESTONES NOT ACCOMPLISHED ~
None.
I 4.
EFFECT ON SCHEDULE AND RECOVERY The staff's schedule for completing AP600 RAls as established i
in SECY-92-294, " Acceptance Review of the Westinghouse Elsc-tric Corporation's Application for Final Design Approval and Design Certific e W for the AP600 Design," is April 1993.
The staff will submit an updated schedule for the AP600 project in its Commission paper on integrated review sched-ules for standardized and advanced light-water reactor pro-
)
jects.
5.
MILESTONE PLANNED FOR NEXT QUARTER Complete issuing RAls on the AP600 application.
D.
SBWR 1.
MILESTONES FOR LAST QUARTER Continue to review the SBWR design, including sending RAIs, if appropriate.
)
2.
MILESTONES ACCOMPLISHED The staff had previously determined that the SBWR application did not contain all'the information required by 10 CFR Part 52.
The staff continued its review of the SBWR applica-tion material and issued more than 200 RAls to GE. On March 1,1993, the staff received GE's supplement to the SBWR application. The staff is reviewing this information to determine if it completes the application. The staff will complete this review early in the next quarter.
3.
MILESTONES NOT ACCOMPLISHED None. g
-- - -, - ~ - -.
,.4y
--- w
4.
EFFECT ON SCHEDULE AND RECOVERY The staff will establish a formal review schedule for the SBWR design in its Commission paper on integrated review schedules for standardized and advanced light-water reactor l
projects.
5.
MILESTONE PLANNED FOR NEXT QUARTER Complete acceptance review of the SBWR application, including j
sending RAIs, if appropriate.
j l
l E.
EPRI UTILITY REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENT FOR PASSIVE REACTORS
\\
l
'1.
MILESTONES FOR LAST QUARTER a.
Pursue resolution of the policy issue on regulatory treatment of non-safety systems.
b.
Continue to review the EPRI response to the DSER and to prepare the FSER.
2.
MILESTONES ACCOMPLISHED During the quarter, staff activity concentrated on developing its final positions on policy, technical, and licensing i
l issues pertaining to evolutionary and advanced light-water designs. The staff prepared SECY-93-087 in which it recom-mends final positions for Commission approval on 20 issues that are fundamental to the agency's decisions on the accept-ability of the evolutionary and passive LWR designs.
j l
l In the Commission paper, the staff also discusses 13 issues.
I for which its position is not yet final. These issues j
involve the following general topic areas:
(1) the regula-i tory treatment of non-safety systems in passive designs, (2) source-term issues for the passive' designs, and i
(3) simplification of offsite emergency planning for'the passive designs. The staff expects to develop separate Commission papers on each of these topics in the next quar-ter.
In addition, the staff continued to pursue resolution of other open items identified in the DSER for the EPRI passive URD.
l 3.
MILESTONES NOT ACCOMPLISHED None.,
1
l 4.
EFFECT ON. SCHEDULE AND' RECOVERY' The staff will prepare updated estimates for the completion of the FSER on the EPRI passive URD in its-Commissior, paper on integrated review schedules for standardized and advanced.
light-water reactor projects.
5.
MILESTONES PLANNE'D FOR NEXT QUARTER a.
-Develop and issue staff positions on the remaining passive plant policy issues.
~
b.
Continue to prepare the EPRI passive URD FSER.
i.
l 1
i l
l I
l 14 L
l
-10 4
hl B S ea 1
l l
1 l
l l
1 1
i
!.