ML20126J585
| ML20126J585 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/07/1985 |
| From: | King T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Speis T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8506190037 | |
| Download: ML20126J585 (4) | |
Text
I E c c -- ..
r4y y eT , k n; n G June 7, 1985 rugue BOCUMENT POOM y; JM 10 P456 MEMORANDUM FOR: Themis P. Speis. Director, DST ,NRR TIME REQUESTED FROM: Thomas L. King, Chief ARG, DST, NRR
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MAY 31,1985 MEETING.WITH DOE /GA/GCRA ON DOE'S HTGR PROGRAM At DOE's request a meeting was held on May 31, 1985 to discuss the status of DOE's HTGR concept selection process and proposed HTGR licensing plan, our infomal coments on DOE's proposed top level regulatory criteria and
^; the process by which they intend to develon lower level criteria, design basis accidents and identify safety related systems, structures and components.
A copy of the agenda and list of attendees is attached.
I Significant items from the meeting were:
- 1) Industry has recommended selection of the modular, steel vessel HTGR concept with the steam generator outside the reactor vessel. DOE has -
redirected their base technology program to concentrate on this single i concept and expects to fomally endorse the concept by the end of FY 85.
The pebble bed is the reference core design with some work still underway on an annular prismatic core design as a backup. A final decision on the core design will also be made by the end of FY 85. The status of the concept selection is to be documented by DOE in a letter to NRC later this month.
l
- 2) DOE indicated that their schedule for interaction with NRC on the conceptual design remains as outlined in their proposed "HTGR Licensing Plan" submitted via letter J. Vaughan to W. Dircks, dated April 26, 1985.
This calls for interactions in FY 85 on top level criteria and the process for developing design basis accidents and lower level criteria; interactions in FY 86 on the identification and resolution of major safety issues and the supporting base technology program and interactions in FY 87 on reviewing a Preliminary Safety Information Document. The first fomal submittals for review on top level criteria and DBA selection could come later this month.
- 3) From a previous briefing (in January 1985) on DOE's proposed top level criteria we had generated (as a result of ARG/AEB/RAB review) three suggested additions to their top level criteria which were discussed at length with DOE. No agreement was reached with DOE on how to handle these suggested additions. This subject will be addressed again when DOE fomally submits the top level criteria for our review.
~~ -
$ 85%29ed37 ypp.
-=> .................. ..................... ..................... ..................... .................... ..................... ....................
""'"'I ................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... .... ................ ....................
t u.s.apo 2,es-4ao.247 "c " * "O/8CI NRCM O240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY . .- _ .
i.: .-- , ;- -
- 1. w .~ we y y ,.
- 4) The process to be used to select design basis i.ccidents was presented by GA Technologies. It is based upon a probabilistic approach which looks at a spectrum of accident scenarios and wased upon the probability and radiological consequences from each selects enveloping accidents as DBAs and excludes accidents below an as yet undefined prjbability.
DOE intends to provide us with a formal submittal on tnis subject in July 1985 and ask for our review. My first impression on their method was favorable since it appears to provide information related to both a comprehensive look at accident scenarios along with an understanding of their consequences and risk as part of the DBA selection process.
If you desire to discuss these points further or see the handouts from the meeting I am available at your convenience.
N Thomas L. King, Chief Advanced Reactors Group Division of Safety Technology Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attachments:
As stated cc: R. Foulds RES J. Hulman, AEB J. Minns , RAB
. M. El-Zeftawy, ACRS l
Disbribution l
Central File j INRC PDR ARG r/t T. King ARG Staff r
1 cmcep ..ARG:
DST: ,RF .. ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... .................... ....................
"'^ "'" 4 ..I.9.".......... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... .................... ....................
ears) . 6. ./. .)..........
. ./. 8 5 .................... ..................... .................... ..................... .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
l exc ronu sia no,soiwncu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY ~. ... .
- " " " 8 8-* *2
l
.. 4 A
AGENDA - 5/31/85 DOE BRIEFING ON HTGR 9:00 a.m. Introduction NRC 9:10 a.m. Status of HTGR Concept Evaluation DOE j9:30a.m. Discussion of HTGR Licensing Plan ALL 10:00 a.m. Discyssion of NRC Comments on DOE's ALL Proposed Top Level Regulatory Criteria for the HTGR 11:00 a.m. Proposed Approach to Development of HTGR GA
. Licensing !ases:
- Design Basis Accident Selection
- Safety Related Structures, Systems
- and Components
- Design / Safety Criteria 12:00 p.m. LUNCH 1:00 p.m. Continuation 2:30 p.m. Summary and Conclusion 3:00 p.m. Adjourn e ------ - - .--m----m.-- n----- , . - - , ,----,,m,
kefdc A75.
Mendq 4r7c-d)&ce r/n -
k C MWJa/at ddC 4x kic G,1 Fitco A Saa,oy .GA h&B R kl f SCEA eb (cpp TH EL . _
. M - (A L lluc< m s N R c /naa /057 /'e n g_ _ _ __
7~ L. . Kw c prc.lWalkT~/ne.s
(?. D . G u (d.s HEC (2ES 0$ 0MN AfRc /NRR/D3r/Ac4 C% (kde s tyJ b // P/M J. B. 06ak &A p wcuK. e- b AT . .
W.L.g3 7. edk.tA cm W & 0ut, . _.
S p alay .lyscL BNZ . .
L.i.ovo P WAt.xca SWl~C M ,'ye L a ,,y h :.
op.WL(yp',ta) 7 G. G
%enap n }yL m
HQD EL- b6fThwY hC4Gb f N/LC.
vG L. %,pa $ Nik. f ans __. . . . .
l I
_.-. _ -_.. ,,_ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ - __m.__. _ . _ , . . _ - ., . ..