ML22059A040

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
NRC Staff Presentation to Support ACRS Public Meeting to Include Content of Proposed Rulemaking to Align Licensing Processes and Incorporate Lessons Learned from New Reactor Licensing
ML22059A040
Person / Time
Issue date: 03/02/2022
From: O'Driscoll J
NRC/NMSS/DREFS/RRPB
To:
James O'Driscoll
References
10 CFR Part 50, 10 CFR Part 52, NRC-2009-0196, Part 50/52, RIN 3150-AI66
Download: ML22059A040 (40)
v • d • e


Text

ADAMS Accession No. ML22059A040 ACRS Briefing:

Content of Proposed Rulemaking to Align Licensing Processes and Incorporate Lessons Learned from New Reactor Licensing March 2, 2022 1

OPENING STATEMENT Joy Rempe - ACRS Chairman AGENDA Lawrence Burkhart - ACRS Technical Support Branch 2

PROPOSED DRAFT RULEMAKING 3

REMARKS Vicki Bier - ACRS Subcommittee on Regulatory Policies and Practices Chairman Brian Smith - Director, Division of New and Renewed Licenses, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 4

NRC Staff Presenters Jim ODriscoll, NMSS Rulemaking Project Manager Omid Tabatabai, NRR Senior Project Manager 5

Todays Meeting

  • Discuss the purpose and content of the proposed rule
  • Discuss items of interest from the February subcommittee meetings
  • Provide an update on next steps and the rulemaking schedule
  • Receive ACRS members perspectives 6

Purpose of the Rulemaking

  • Implement Commission direction in SRM-SECY-15-0002, Proposed Updates of Licensing Policies, Rules, and Guidance for Future New Reactor Applications, to:

- Align Parts 50 and 52 reactor licensing processes

- Improve clarity

- Incorporate lessons learned in recent licensing proceedings

- Reduce unnecessary burden on applicants and staff 7

Scope of the Proposed Rule

  • Number of technical areas: 11
  • Number of items in scope: 61
  • Items with rulemaking recommendation: 60

- Number of items with rulemaking and guidance development or revision: 18

- Number of guidance documents with rule: 13

  • Number of 10 CFR parts affected by rulemaking: 9 8

Alignment of Parts 50 and 52

  • The proposed rule addresses four areas where the NRCs policies and direction for new reactors have resulted in requirements and guidance for Part 52 applicants only:

- Application of Severe Accident Policy Statement (1)

- Probabilistic Risk Assessment Requirements (3)

- Three Mile Island Requirements (1)

- Fire Protection Design Features and Plans (1) 9

Lessons Learned from Recent Experience

  • The proposed rule covers topics for which the NRCs recent experience with new light water reactor licensing has resulted in lessons learned Operator Physical Fitness Emergency Licensing Security For Duty Planning (5) (2) (4) (7)

Part 52 Applicability of Environmental Other Processes Miscellaneous Licensing Protection to the 10 CFR Topics Process Part 52 Process (1) (9)

(21) (5) 10

Estimates of Costs and Savings

  • Total net averted costs to industry and the NRC between $16.1 million and $25.5 million
  • To account for sensitivity to plant-specific conditions, the NRC staff performed an uncertainty analysis, which found that the chance of net averted costs is greater than 99%
  • Rulemaking would yield unquantified benefits as well (regulatory efficiency, public confidence) 11

Topics for Further Discussion

  • Relationship to non-LWRs
  • Cumulative effects of changes to the design when the plant is built
  • Cutoff accident frequency for credible accidents
  • Flexibility for changes related to digital I&C
  • Definition of essentially complete design 12

Relationship to Non-LWRs

  • Cross-cutting item
  • The item was added in response to public comments on the regulatory basis
  • The goal of the discussion and proposed changes is to explain how this rulemaking activity fits with other licensing process efforts and rulemakings that relate to non-light water technology 13

Cumulative Effects of Changes During Construction

  • Part 50 and Part 52 remain distinct processes
  • Part 52 is based on:

- Essentially complete nuclear plant design

- Final design information

- Resolution of all safety issues

- Finality for resolutions in subsequent proceedings 14

Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Design

  • Change: Extend the current PRA requirements in Part 52 to apply to Part 50 power reactor license applicants
  • Affected regulations:
  • §50.34(a), Preliminary safety analysis report
  • §50.34(b), Final safety analysis report
  • Aligns Parts 50 and 52 on the use of PRA in the design of the facility and ensures that similar risk information is supplied in applications for new power reactor CPs or OLs under Part 50
  • Public comments:

- Ten comments; expressed concern over changes and need for clarification on how to meet requirements

- In response to comments, NRC changed the cost model to reflect the significant effort required to complete an upgrade prior to loading fuel

  • Cost/benefit: Development of PRA, rulemaking; qualitative 15

Cutoff Accident Frequency for Credible Accidents

  • A discrete cutoff accident frequency for credible accidents is not defined
  • The changes to 10 CFR 50.59(c) would align the Part 50 change process with Part 52 with regard to consideration of severe accidents
  • This rulemaking does not further define credible or what is substantial 16

Review of Changes Related to Digital I&C

  • Endorsement of NEI 96-07 Appendix D unaffected
  • Current interim staff guidance unaffected

Review of Changes Related to Digital I&C (contd)

  • Staff will ask for the level of detail necessary to meet a safety finding
  • Design acceptance criteria are not needed
  • Proposed change process for standard design approvals would use current methods 18

Clarify the Phrase Essentially Complete Design

  • Change: Add standardized definition of essentially complete design to Part 52
  • Affected regulations:
  • §52.1, Definitions
  • Add clarity and efficiency; reduce scope of information needed for review
  • Public comments:

- Review September 24, 2021 NEI letter to NRC

  • Cost/benefit: Cost-beneficial 19

Questions 20

Recap and Next Steps

  • Complete concurrence on draft proposed rule
  • Submit the proposed rule to the Commission
  • Plan for additional public meeting(s) during the public comment period for the proposed rule 21

Rulemaking Schedule Submit proposed Issue final rule to the rule Commission May 2022 October 2024 22

Contact Information Jim ODriscoll, Project Manager Division of Rulemaking, Environmental, & Financial Support Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Email: James.ODriscoll@nrc.gov Phone: 301-415-1325 Omid Tabatabai, Senior Project Manager Division of New Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Email: Omid.Tabatabai@nrc.gov Phone: 301-415-6616 23

SUPPORTING INFORMATION 24

Abbreviations ACRS Advisory Committee on Reactor LAR License Amendment Request Safeguards LWR Light-Water Reactor ADAMS Agencywide Documents Access and ML Manufacturing License Management System NEI Nuclear Energy Institute AEA Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended NEIMA Nuclear Energy Innovation and CFR Code of Federal Regulations Modernization Act COL Combined License NMSS Office of Nuclear Material Safety and CP Construction Permit Safeguards DAC Design Acceptance Criteria NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission DC Design Certification NRR Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation DG Draft Regulatory Guide OL Operating License ECCS Emergency Core Cooling System PRA Probabilistic Risk Assessment EP Emergency Planning RG Regulatory Guide ESP Early Site Permit SDA Standard Design Approval FFD Fitness For Duty SECY Office of the Secretary FRN Federal Register Notice SRP Standard Review Plan FSAR Final Safety Analysis Report SSC Structure, System, and Component I&C Instrumentation and Controls STP South Texas Project ISG Interim Staff Guidance TMI Three Mile Island ITAAC Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria 25

References ADAMS Accession Document Title Number/FR Citation Regulatory Guide 1.70, Revision 3, Standard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear ML011340122 Power Plants: LWR Edition, dated November 1978 SECY-90-241, Level of Detail Required for Design Certification Under Part 52, dated July 11, 1990 ML003707877 IEEE Std. 603-1991, Standard Criteria for Safety Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations, dated https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/

December 31, 1991 document/159411 NEI 01-01/EPRI TR-102348, Revision 1, Guideline on Licensing Digital Upgrades, dated March 2002 ML020860169 NEI 00-04, Revision 0, 10 CFR 50.69 SSC Categorization Guideline, dated July 2005 ML052910035 Regulatory Guide 1.201, Revision 1, Guidelines for Categorizing Structures, Systems, and Components ML061090627 in Nuclear Power Plants According to Their Safety Significance, dated May 2006 NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power ML063410307 Plants: LWR Edition, Chapter 13.3, Revision 3, Emergency Planning, dated March 2007 NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power ML12193A107 Plants: LWR Edition, Chapter 19.1, Revision 3, Determining the Technical Adequacy of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Results for Risk-Informed Activities, dated September 2012 Regulatory Guide 4.7, Revision 3, General Site Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power Stations, dated ML12188A053 March 2014 NEI 96-07, Appendix C, Revision 0 - Corrected, Guideline for Implementation of Change Processes for ML14091A739 New Nuclear Power Plants Licensed Under 10 CFR Part 52, dated March 2014 Results of Periodic Review of Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.201, dated April 23, 2015 ML15091A788 26

References (contd)

ADAMS Accession Document Title Number/FR Citation Interim Staff Guidance COL-ISG-025, Changes During Construction Under 10 CFR Part 52, dated July ML15058A377 2015 NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power ML15089A068 Plants: LWR Edition, Chapter 19.0, Revision 3, Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Severe Accident Evaluation for New Reactors, dated December 2015 International Atomic Energy Agency, Specific Safety Requirements No. SSR 2/1, Revision 1, Safety of https://www.iaea.org/

Nuclear Power Plants: Design, dated February 2016 publications/8771/

safety-of-nuclear-power-plants-design NRC Letter to NEI Related to the Public Meeting of March 28, 2018, Regarding Avoiding Delays in ML18123A245 Issuance of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Combined Licenses, dated May 9, 2018 Regulatory Issue Summary (RIS) 2002-22, Supplement 1, Clarification on Endorsement of Nuclear Energy ML18143B633 Institute Guidance in Designing Digital Upgrades in Instrumentation and Control Systems, dated May 31, 2018 Regulatory Guide 1.206, Revision 1, Applications for Nuclear Power Plants, dated October 2018 ML18131A181 DI&C-ISG-06, Revision 2, Licensing Process, dated December 2, 2018 ML18269A259 NEI 18-04, Revision 1, Risk-Informed Performance-Based Technology Inclusive Guidance for Non Light ML19241A472 Water Reactor Licensing Basis Development, dated August 2019 NEI Letter to the NRC, Part 50/52 Lessons Learned Rulemaking, dated March 9, 2020 ML20108F543 NEI 96-07, Appendix D, Revision 1, Supplemental Guidance for Application of 10 CFR 50.59 to Digital ML20135H168 Modifications, dated May 2020 27

References (contd)

ADAMS Accession Document Title Number/FR Citation Public Meeting to Discuss the Status of Rulemaking to Align Licensing Processes and Apply Lessons ML20141L609 Learned from New Reactor Licensing [NRC-2009-0196; RIN 3150-AI66] held April 29, 2020, dated May 26, 2020 Regulatory Guide 1.233, Guidance for a Technology-Inclusive, Risk-Informed, and Performance-Based ML20091L698 Methodology to Inform the Licensing Basis and Content of Applications for Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Non-Light Water Reactors, dated June 2020 NRC Letter to NEI, Part 50/52 Lessons-Learned Rulemaking: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ML20156A308 Transparency and Stakeholder Engagement, dated September 8, 2020 Regulatory Guide 1.200, Revision 3, An Approach for Determining the Technical Adequacy of ML20238B871 Probabilistic Risk Assessment Results for Risk-Informed Activities, dated December 2020 Regulatory Guide 1.237, Revision 0, Guidance for Changes During Construction for New Nuclear Power ML20349A335 Plants Being Constructed Under a Combined License Referencing a Certified Design Under 10 CFR Part 52, dated February 2021 Design Review Guide (DRG): Instrumentation and Controls for Non-Light-Water Reactor (Non-LWR) ML21011A140 Reviews, dated February 26, 2021 NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power https://www.nrc.gov/reading Plants: LWR Edition, last reviewed/updated March 9, 2021 -rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr08 00/index.html NEI, Industry Comments on the Regulatory Basis for Alignment of Licensing Processes and Lessons ML21144A164 Learned from New Reactor Licensing (Docket ID: NRC-2009-0196), dated May 14, 2021 28

References (contd)

ADAMS Accession Document Title Number/FR Citation Regulatory Guide 1.187, Revision 3, Guidance for Implementation of 10 CFR 50.59, Changes, Tests, and ML21109A002 Experiments, dated June 2021 NUREG-1021, Revision 12, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, dated ML21256A276 September 2021 Draft Interim Staff Guidance; Request for Comment, Safety Review of Light-Water Power-Reactor 86 FR 71101 Construction Permit Applications, dated December 14, 2021 Draft FRN to Support ACRS Subcommittee Meeting - 10 CFR Part 50/52 Rulemaking to Align Licensing ML22020A002 Processes and Lessons Learned from New Reactor Licensing, dated January 27, 2022 ACRS Subcommittee Public Meeting - NRC Presentation for 10 CFR Part 50/52 Rulemaking to Align ML22020A001 Licensing Processes and Lessons Learned from New Reactor Licensing, dated February 1, 2022 Draft Guidance Documents to Support ACRS Subcommittee Meeting Regarding Part 50/52 Proposed ML22040A074 Rulemaking, dated February 15, 2022 ACRS Subcommittee Public Meeting - NRC Presentation for 10 CFR Part 50/52 Rulemaking to Align ML22046A035 Licensing Processes and Lessons Learned from New Reactor Licensing, dated February 18, 2022 29

ACRS ITAAC PRESENTATION MARCH 2, 2022

Atomic Energy Acts ITAAC Requirements Section 185b. (42 U.S.C. 2235(b)) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA),

and 10 CFR 52.97(b) require that the Commission identify within the combined license the Inspections, Tests, and Analyses (ITAs), including those applicable to emergency planning, that the licensee shall perform, and the acceptance criteria that, if met, are necessary and sufficient to provide reasonable assurance that the facility has been constructed and will be operated in conformity with the license, the provisions of the AEA, and the Commissions rules and regulations. To fulfill this requirement, the Commission included ITAAC in Appendix C to the combined license (COL) for VEGP Units.

Following issuance of the combined license, Section 185b. requires that the Commission ensure that the prescribed ITAs are performed and, before operation of the facility, find that the prescribed acceptance criteria are met. The NRC codified the requirement to ensure completion of the ITAs in 10 CFR 52.99(e) and codified the requirement to find that the acceptance criteria are met in 10 CFR 52.103(g).

In the July 19, 2013, Staff Requirements Memorandum for SECY-13-0033, Staff Requirements - SECY-13-0033 - Allowing Interim Operation Under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Section 52.103 (ADAMS Accession No. ML13200A115), the Commission delegated the responsibility for the 10 CFR 52.103(g) finding to the staff.

Staffs two-pronged approach to fulfill the requirements

  • First, the staff reviews 100 percent of the licensees ITAAC Closure Notifications (ICNs) submitted under 10 CFR 52.99(c)(1). These reviews verify that the licensee provided a sufficient basis to demonstrate that the ITAs were performed as required and that the results met the prescribed acceptance criteria. The staff also reviews 100 percent of the ITAAC Post Closure Notifications (IPCNs) submitted under 10 CFR 52.99(c)(2) to verify that the ITAAC are still satisfied notwithstanding new, material information.
  • Second, the staff performs independent inspections of a carefully selected sample of ITAAC to independently verify (1) the licensees performance of the ITAs and (2) that the obtained results met the prescribed acceptance criteria.
  • Additionally, these inspections also verified that the licensee (1) had quality construction programs, processes, and procedures; (2) provided adequate quality assurance (QA) oversight of construction activities; and (3) identified and corrected conditions adverse to quality.
  • Moreover, a sample of the ICNs were inspected against their associated closure packages to verify the accuracy of the information reported in the ICNs.

ITAAC Prioritization Process While the scope of the NRCs inspection programs is comprehensive, 100-percent inspection is neither necessary nor efficient when evaluating licensee performance. For this reason, the NRC historically has relied on a risk-informed sample-based inspection program. For VEGP, the Construction Inspection Program (CIP) focused on a select sample of predefined inspection targets (i.e., targeted ITAAC).

The methodology for prioritizing the ITAAC for inspection was based in part on a quantitative process called the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). AHP is a method of comparison used to reduce the subjectivity in prioritization and provide structure to the decision-making process.

The prioritization process was managed such that the rating given each ITAAC correlated to the amount of assurance one could obtain from inspecting that ITAAC. In this way, it was not the ITAAC that was prioritized, but rather the value of inspecting that ITAAC, to maximize the agencys ability to detect any significant construction flaw.

The Technical Report on the Prioritization of Inspection Resources for Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC) (ADAMS Accession No. ML060740006), contains further detail on the AHP process.

The process for prioritizing the ITAAC for inspection is described in OI NRR-LIC-210, Prioritization of Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC) for Inspection (ADAMS Accession No. ML20057D521).

ITAAC Prioritization Process (contd)

The first step in the prioritization process classifies and groups the ITAAC into families to facilitate ITAAC inspection sampling within each family. ITAAC are classified based on (1) the activities performed to implement it, and/or (2) its acceptance criterion. The ITAAC Matrix (see next slide) establishes a logical way to group the ITAAC into families for inspection sampling purposes, but it does not provide directions on what ITAAC to inspect.

ITAAC are grouped by selecting the single best combination of a matrix column (i.e.,

construction program) and a matrix row (i.e., construction process or system, structure, or component) that best covers the ITAACs construction activities. For example, all ITAAC for the as-built inspection of instrumentation and control components will be binned in the matrix family

[A10] formed by the intersection of column (A) and row (10).

The use of the ITAAC Matrix provides a consistent framework for developing the inspection program for each new or advanced reactor design and establishes a sound, efficient, inspection sampling approach. Because the ITAAC within a family are similar, an equivalent licensee performance can be expected for each of them.

ITAAC Prioritization Process The second step involves rank-ordering the ITAAC based upon certain defined attributes that make one ITAAC more or less important to inspect. The defined attributes are:

(1) safety significance, (2) propensity for making errors, (3) construction and testing experience, (4) the opportunity to verify ITAAC completion by other means, and (5) licensee (applicant) oversight. {Not used}

Each attribute is weighted based on its importance in achieving the overall objective of detecting significant construction flaws.

ITAAC MAINTENANCE RULE 10 CFR 52.99(c)(2)

ITAAC post-closure notifications. Following the licensees ITAAC closure notifications under paragraph (c)(1) of this section until the Commission makes the finding under 10 CFR 52.103(g), the licensee shall notify the NRC, in a timely manner, of new information that materially alters the basis for determining that either inspections, tests, or analyses were performed as required, or that acceptance criteria are met. The notification must contain sufficient information to demonstrate that, notwithstanding the new information, the prescribed inspections, tests, or analyses have been performed as required, and the prescribed acceptance criteria are met.

10 CFR 52.103(g) vs. ITAAC MAINTENANCE What does ITAAC are met mean in 10 CFR 52.103(g)?

At the time of the 52.103(g) finding the staff will consider all acceptance criteria are met if both of the following conditions hold:

  • All ITAAC were verified to be met at one time; and
  • The licensee provides confidence, in part through the notifications in 10 CFR 52.99(c), that the ITAAC determination bases have been maintained and the ITAAC acceptance criteria continue to be met, and the NRC has no reasonable information to the contrary.

This approach will allow licensees to have ITAAC-related structures, systems, or components, or security or emergency preparedness related hardware, undergoing maintenance or certain other activities at the time of the 10 CFR 52.103(g) finding, if the programs credited with maintaining the validity of completed ITAAC guide those activities and the activities are not so significant as to exceed a threshold for reporting.

ITAAC MAINTENANCE THRESHOLDS Material Error or OmissionIs there a material error or omission in the original ITAAC closure notification?

Post Work Verification (PWV)Will the PWV use a significantly different approach than the original performance of the inspection, test, or analysis as described in the original ITAAC notification?

Engineering ChangesWill an engineering change be made that materially alters the determination that the acceptance criteria are met?

Additional Items to Be VerifiedWill there be additional items that need to be verified through the ITAAC?

Complete and Valid ITAAC RepresentationWill any other licensee activities materially alter the ITAAC determination basis?

Post 10 CFR 52.103(g) Finding Pursuant to 10 CFR 52.103(h), after the Commission makes the 10 CFR 52.103(g) finding, the ITAAC do not, by virtue of their inclusion in the combined license, constitute regulatory requirements for the licensee.

While ITAAC are no longer requirements after the 10 CFR 52.103(g) finding, subsequent changes to the facility or procedures described in the final safety analysis report (as updated) must comply with the requirements in 10 CFR 52.98(e) or (f), as applicable.

The technical specifications in the combined license NPF-91, Appendix A, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Units 3 and 4 Technical Specifications, become effective upon a finding that the acceptance criteria in the license (ITAAC) are met in accordance with 10 CFR 52.103(g).

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML22059A040&oldid=3430113"