ML22192A177
| ML22192A177 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/22/2022 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | |
| Snodderly M | |
| References | |
| NRC-2016 | |
| Download: ML22192A177 (45) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards NuScale Subcommittee Docket Number:
(n/a)
Location:
teleconference Date:
Wednesday, June 22, 2022 Work Order No.:
NRC-2016 Pages 1-28 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1716 14th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009 (202) 234-4433
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1
1 2
3 DISCLAIMER 4
5 6
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIONS 7
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS 8
9 10 The contents of this transcript of the 11 proceeding of the United States Nuclear Regulatory 12 Commission Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, 13 as reported herein, is a record of the discussions 14 recorded at the meeting.
15 16 This transcript has not been reviewed, 17 corrected, and edited, and it may contain 18 inaccuracies.
19 20 21 22 23
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
+ + + + +
3 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS 4
(ACRS) 5
+ + + + +
6 NUSCALE SUBCOMMITTEE 7
+ + + + +
8 WEDNESDAY 9
JUNE 22, 2022 10
+ + + + +
11 The Subcommittee met via Videoconference, 12 at 1:00 p.m. EDT, Walter L. Kirchner, Chairman, 13 presiding.
14 COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
15 WALTER L. KIRCHNER, Subcommittee Chairman 16 JOY L. REMPE, Chairman 17 DAVID A. PETTI, Member-at-Large 18 RONALD G. BALLINGER, Member 19 VICKI M. BIER, Member 20 CHARLES H. BROWN, JR. Member 21 VESNA B. DIMITRIJEVIC, Member 22 GREGORY H. HALNON, Member 23 JOSE A. MARCH-LEUBA, Member 24 MATTHEW W. SUNSERI, Member 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
2 ACRS CONSULTANTS:
1 DENNIS C. BLEY 2
STEPHEN P. SCHULTZ 3
DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICIALS:
ALSO PRESENT:
7 BILL ACTON, NuScale 8
BRIAN ARNHOLT, NuScale 9
BEN BRISTOL, NuScale 10 JOHN BUDZYNSKI, NRR 11 KRISTOPHER CUMMINGS, NuScale 12 JEFF EHLERS, NuScale 13 LIZ ENGLISH, NuScale 14 BOB HOUSER, NuScale 15 MEGHAN MCCLOSKEY, NuScale 16 JOSH PARKER, NuScale 17 GETACHEW TESFAYE, NRR 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1
I.
Opening Remarks................4 2
II.
Discussion of NPM-20 Design and Plans for 3
Upcoming Standard Design Approval 4
Application.............. 6 5
III.
Opportunity for Public Comment........28 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
4 P R O C E E D I N G S 1
1:00 p.m.
2 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN KIRCHNER: Good 3
afternoon. The meeting will now come to order.
4 This is a meeting of the Advisory 5
Committee on Reactor Safeguards NuScale Subcommittee.
6 I'm Walt Kirchner, Chair of the subcommittee.
7 With us for the meeting today, I think the 8
entire committee is in attendance. For the record, 9
that would be Ron Ballinger, Vicki Bier, Charles 10 Brown, Vesna Dimitrijevic, Greg Halnon, Jose March-11 Leuba, Dave Petti, Joy Rempe, and Matt Sunseri.
12 We also have our consultants, Dennis Bley 13 and Steve Schultz, in attendance. Mike Snodderly is 14 the Designated Federal Official for this meeting.
15 The subcommittee will discuss with staff 16 from NuScale their plans for an eventual standard 17 design approval application of their US460 design.
18 The ACRS was established by statute and is 19 governed by the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).
20 The NRC implements FACA in accordance with its 21 regulations found in Title 10 of the Code of Federal 22 Regulations, Part 7. The committee can only speak 23 through its published letter reports. We hold 24 meetings to gather information and perform preparatory 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
5 work that will support our deliberations at a full 1
committee meeting.
2 The rules for participation in all ACRS 3
meetings were announced in the Federal Register on 4
June 13th, 2019. The ACRS section of the U.S. NRC 5
public website provides our charter, bylaws, agendas, 6
letter reports, and full transcripts of all full and 7
subcommittee meetings, including slides presented 8
therein. The agenda for this meeting was posted 9
there. As stated in the Federal Register notice, 10 members of the public who desire to provide written or 11 oral input to this subcommittee may do so and should 12 contact the Designated Federal Official five days 13 prior to the meeting, as practicable.
14 This is an MS Teams hybrid meeting. The 15 communications channel has been open to allow members 16 of the public to monitor the open portions of this 17 meeting. The ACRS is now inviting members of the 18 public to use the MS Teams link to view slides and 19 other discussion materials during these open sessions.
20 The MS Teams link information was placed in the agenda 21 for this meeting on the ACRS public website.
22 As stated in that agenda, portions of this 23 meeting may be closed to protect proprietary 24 information pursuant to the U.S. Code.
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
6 We have received no written comments or 1
requests to make oral statements from members of the 2
public regarding today's meeting. However, there will 3
be an opportunity for public comment, and we have set 4
aside ten minutes at the end of this meeting for 5
comments from members of the public attending or 6
listening to our meeting. Written comments may be 7
forwarded to Mike Snodderly, the Designated Federal 8
Official.
9 A transcript of the open portion of the 10 meeting is being kept, and it is requested that 11 speakers identify themselves and speak with sufficient 12 clarity and volume so that they can be readily heard.
13 Additionally, participants should mute themselves when 14 not speaking, please.
15 And we'll now proceed with the meeting.
16 So I am going to call on Mark Shaver of NuScale to 17 introduce today's speakers and begin their 18 presentation.
19 Mark, the floor is yours.
20 MR. SHAVER: Thank you. This is Mark 21 Shaver from NuScale Power. I'm the licensing manager.
22 I will be one of the presenters today, and, with me, 23 Chris Cummings, a Licensing Engineer V, will also be 24 a presenter. Liz English from NuScale licensing is 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
7 also in the room.
1 While Chris and I will be the presenters, 2
we will potentially call on folks back in the 3
Corvallis office or elsewhere, as needed, to answer 4
more in-depth technical questions. And we'll ask 5
those people to remember to introduce themselves 6
before speaking with their name and position.
7 I'd like to thank you for having us here.
8 This is a good opportunity, I think, to get the ACRS 9
up to speed on the design changes and what NuScale has 10 been doing the last couple of years. So we look 11 forward to this opportunity.
12 With that, I think we can start the 13 presentation. I'd like to acknowledge the DOE for the 14 funding.
15 Next slide, please. So as I said, I'm the 16 licensing manager of NuScale Power. My scope of 17 responsibility in this presentation will really be on 18 the standard design approval application. And I'll 19 show how that fits in with our overall licensing 20 strategy for the US460 design, but we will not be 21 getting into content on COLA or any other 22 applications.
23 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: This is Joy, and I 24 had a question about this slide, or did you want to 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
8 talk more about the mockup in this slide?
1 MR. SHAVER: The mockup is a to-scale 2
upper module mockup in Corvallis, Oregon.
3 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: I've actually been 4
there and crawled through it, but I'm just curious are 5
you going to update the mockup to reflect the new 6
design?
7 MR. SHAVER: Not to my knowledge.
8 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: Okay. I just was, 9
when I saw the picture, I couldn't help but wonder.
10 Also, are the staff planning to use the same design-11 specific SRPs you used for the design that's going 12 through the certification, or are you going to try and 13 encourage the staff to do something a bit different?
14 MR. SHAVER: Yes. We are following the 15 SRS and the SRP, but we're largely leveraging the work 16 we did for the DCA, which I'll talk a little bit about 17 the relationship of the scope and content between the 18 DCA and the SDA shortly. That's on --
19 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: Okay. I'll wait.
20 MR. SHAVER: All right. So how I'd like 21 to start is to discuss why are we here, why did we 22 make design changes. So really, after the DCA, 23 NuScale went and took a comprehensive look all the way 24 at the plant level from an economics --
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
9 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: Excuse me. Whoever 1
is on the phone line needs to mute because we're 2
getting an echo in the room. I'm sorry to interrupt 3
you, but it will make it much nicer.
4 MR. SHAVER: Sure. So we really took a 5
look at the entire plant. The DCA design was a new 6
and novel design. The first time, we had gone through 7
a lot of the analyses, and we went through both to 8
optimize it from an economics perspective as much as 9
we could without impacting safety, as well as to 10 implement some design changes that our first customer 11 was requesting.
12 So really what we found was that the steam 13 generator specifically was very underutilized. There 14 was a lot of margin in the steam generator. Also, the 15 fuel was underutilized. So those two things really 16 drove looking at the power uprate and how much power 17 we could get out of the existing steam generator and 18 fuel. Some other changes, like air cooled, were 19 driven by the customer.
20 MEMBER BROWN: This is Charlie Brown. I 21 just wanted to springboard off of Joy's question about 22 some of the materials from earlier meetings, public 23 meetings or meetings you had with the staff, showed a 24 number of design changes that you all had in mind. I 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
10 presume you're going to cover those in the closed 1
session?
2 MR. SHAVER: Yes, that is correct.
3 MEMBER BROWN: Okay, all right. So there 4
are deviations for the original approval?
5 MR. SHAVER: Yes, that's correct. And 6
that's really what's driving the new standard design 7
approval application.
8 MEMBER BROWN: Okay. Thank you very much.
9 MR. SHAVER: So we've also added some 10 additional engineering safety features to eliminate 11 events or to simplify safety analyses. We'll get into 12 those, as well, in the next presentation.
13 And one thing I wanted to note up-front is 14 that the current evaluation of the PRA, there's no 15 significant alterations to the risk insights.
16 Next slide, please.
17 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: So you mentioned 18 some of the changes simplifying the accident analyses 19 and eliminating certain events, and I'm sure you're 20 familiar with the letter we wrote on the prior design 21 and some of the areas that we focused on in that 22 letter. And I believe, but we'll find out more in the 23 closed session or in subsequent reviews, that perhaps 24 that some of the items in our first letter were also 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
11 addressed from the simplified safety analysis. Would 1
you comment on that in the open session a bit?
2 MR. SHAVER: Yes, we think so. We think 3
the comments that were made are addressed.
4 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: Okay. So, yes, so 5
maybe our letter helped create some of the changes a 6
bit, too?
7 MR. SHAVER: I would say those were in the 8
work anyway, but I think they're aligned with the 9
changes.
10 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: Okay. Thank you.
11 CONSULTANT BLEY: This is Dennis Bley.
12 Could I ask you kind of a question about your strategy 13 here in licensing? For this modification, you're 14 coming in for an SDA rather than a design cert, which 15 leaves some things kind of unresolved. I'm sort of 16 guessing that you figure those things that would be 17 unresolved if this was your only process here, the 18 SDA. Some of those things that wouldn't be resolved 19 under the SDA by itself you can refer back to the 20 design cert and not have as much review as one might 21 get if this SDA was coming in all by itself; is that 22 right?
23 MR. SHAVER: Yes, we would expect a 24 streamline review based on leveraging information 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
12 that's in the DCA. And I've got some more information 1
on that in the next slide.
2 CONSULTANT BLEY: Oh, good. Okay. I'll 3
wait for that.
4 MR. SHAVER: So I wanted to explain some 5
nomenclature just so that we're all on the same page 6
and speaking to the same words. So VOYGR-6 product in 7
NuScale, the VOYGR is a NuScale product that's offered 8
for customers. The 6 indicates six modules. There 9
could be a VOYGR-12 with 12 modules, et cetera. And 10 there could be different configurations for this 11 overall product.
12 The design that will be represented in the 13 SDAA is US460. That's the United States baseline 14 design at 460 megawatts, which is a six-pack. So the 15 US460 is the design, and the SDA is a VOYGR-6 product.
16 You can think of VOYGR as a marketing product.
17 NPM-20, just to note, is the NuScale power 18 module that will be represented in the SDA design, 19 that will be the uprated module from what was seen in 20 the DCA.
21 So for this US460 design, we've chosen to 22 pursue Part 52 through a complete standalone standard 23 design approval application, and that will be followed 24 by a COLA. So what I mean by a standalone SDA is we 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
13 will not be referencing or incorporating by reference 1
the design certification application content.
2 So while this is a standalone, there is 3
substantial portions of it that have not changed, so 4
we would expect the NRC to be able to leverage in 5
their review using a risk-informed review, leverage 6
that information and focus on more of the design 7
changes rather than things that haven't changed.
8 CONSULTANT BLEY: Well, this is Dennis 9
again. Will the original design with the design cert 10 that exists be an offering, or is this is now the 11 offering from NuScale is the 460?
12 MR. SHAVER: We would, we're anticipating 13 that the US460 design be what customers choose, but, 14 certainly, we would offer either design if a customer 15 were interested.
16 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: Well, to follow on 17 Dennis's question then, again, a lot of the details 18 will be discussed in the closed session, but it just 19 seems like some of the changes in your optimization 20 and whatever, new design might be reasonable and 21 important to consider for the one that is still, it's 22 not an SDA, but the Commission has an issue to rule, 23 so it's going through the DCA process. What's the 24 NuScale position on that? Are you going to try and do 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
14 some sort of backfits?
1 MR. SHAVER: No, we say the DCA is a 2
standalone application that was reviewed and found to 3
be acceptable on its own merits, so we're not going to 4
go back and change it or backfit anything. The DCA 5
will stand as-is, and this new uprated design will 6
have a standalone SDAA. So we view the two as 7
separate licensing efforts, separate designs.
8 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: Thank you.
9 MR. SHAVER: So that being said, as I've 10 kind of started talking about, we started the 11 application with the approved DCA Revision 5 Tier 2 12 FSAR information. That's the foundation. We are not 13 rewriting all the content from scratch. We do the DCA 14 Rev 5 language and are updating it for the design 15 changes.
16 So we've really, besides updating for the 17 design changes, we will add in additional information 18 to address the DCA carve outs, and we'll specifically 19 talk in the next presentation about how we're doing 20 that, as well as optimizing content. And we'll have 21 more on that, as well. So we really focused this 22 content on safety-related significant content.
23 So our first customer will be referencing 24 this SDA in their COLA under Subpart C. And that 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
15 application will be forthcoming on the heels of the 1
SDA application. But we didn't plan on talking about 2
that scope here today, but I just wanted to make sure 3
it was clear how it fit together.
4 Next slide, please. So I'd like to talk 5
a little bit about the SDAA content. NuScale went 6
through and comprehensively looked at what was 7
required for the design certification under Subpart B 8
as part of the DCA. And when we decided to go with an 9
SDAA, we looked at what was required by Subpart E.
10 That's in the middle column. However, we also looked 11 at what would be needed to support a COL applicant.
12 And then we decided to include things in the SDAA that 13 would be required for a COLA to reference, independent 14 if it was required or not. I know this is a little 15 bit busy slide, but in the next slide I've highlighted 16 some things to point out.
17 Next slide, please. So, first, I'd like 18 to highlight -- back one slide. There we go. That 19 one.
20 So I'd like to highlight what's different 21 from the DCA to the SCA. Essentially, one of the main 22 differences between Subpart E and Subpart B is 23 there's no Tier 1 information in Subpart E. So that's 24 the main thing is we won't have any Tier 1 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
16 information. However, we will have ITAAC. That's 1
been moved to Part 8. And one other thing to note 2
besides Tier 1 information is that there will not be 3
an environmental report.
4 Next slide.
5 CONSULTANT BLEY: On that last point, I 6
guess, when there's a COLA, that would have to include 7
the environmental report, right?
8 MR. SHAVER: Correct. That is required 9
for a COLA. Actually, go back. There's another slide 10 on --
11 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN KIRCHNER: Well, 12 alternately, your customer could do an ESP.
13 MR. SHAVER: Certainly. Maybe go back a 14 slide. There's another slide with highlighting. Yes, 15 there we go.
16 So I also wanted to highlight what 17 information will be part of the SDA, even though it's 18 not required to support a COLA, and that's Part 4 19 information, tech specs, and Part 8, ITAAC. So while 20 ITAAC, we want to make sure there's ITAACs included in 21 the application. Since we don't have Tier 1, that 22 will be in Part 8.
23 And also another thing I wanted to note 24 was the site parameters is usually Chapter 5 of Tier 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
17 1, and we won't have that, but we still will have in 1
Chapter 2 of the Tier 2 information the site-specific 2
parameters that we assume to do our analyses.
3 CONSULTANT BLEY: Before you leave this 4
slide, you're not mentioning it here, but you will 5
have to do the update on the safety analysis report.
6 You show that as a yes. And you show the QA program 7
as a yes. I'm curious as to why you need to change 8
the QA program.
9 MR. SHAVER: QA program is required, and, 10 since this is a standalone application, we'll submit 11 our QAPD along with the applications as part of Part 12 10.
13 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN KIRCHNER: So this 14 is Walt Kirchner. A further question on Part 8. Are 15 you, first order, carrying over the ITAACs from the 16 DCA to the SDAA, or do you expect new ITAACs?
17 MR. SHAVER: The ITAAC will be updated 18 with the design change information. They will not be 19 exactly the same as what was in --
20 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN KIRCHNER: Okay.
21 Thank you.
22 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: Along with that, on 23 the ITAACs, there was one related to water level 24 sensors in the containment, as well as the reactor 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
18 vessel. Has NuScale made any progress in the 1
development of the sensor in the last couple of years 2
since the certified application went forward so that 3
some of that ITAAC could be resolved, or what's the 4
status on the water level sensor?
5 MR. SHAVER: I'd have to refer to 6
engineering on the line for that question.
7 MR. CUMMINGS: I'd also save that question 8
for the closed portion of the meeting.
9 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: Well, it's actually, 10 I'm not saying anything that's not in the open with 11 respect to this radar-based sensor, so, yes, I'd like 12 to know about that for --
13 MR. CUMMINGS: Well, we'll take a note and 14 see if we can provide an update on that.
15 MR. SHAVER: All right. Next slide, 16 please.
17 I also wanted to go over our expected 18 review. We have proposed in a letter to the NRC a 19 four-phase review with Phase A being the RAIs, Phase 20 B being the SER without open items; and Phase A and 21 B together would constitute the NRC's technical 22 review.
23 Phase C would be the ACRS review, and that 24 would be a single pass-through, and Phase D would be 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
19 the final safety evaluation report.
1 I understand there were some questions 2
from the ACRS on having a single pass-through, and 3
this was done for a couple of reasons. One is that we 4
think that you all will be much more familiar with our 5
design and technology than during the review of the 6
DCA. Also, with going through the subcommittee and 7
full committee last time, those two were largely the 8
same. I believe there were only a few extra members 9
who hadn't seen it, so it was largely giving the same 10 information to the same people twice.
11 And in some cases, the first round to the 12 ACRS, we thought it really was too early to get the 13 value out of it. There were too many open items in 14 the FSER.
15 So for all those reasons, we think it 16 would be reasonable to go through one round of ACRS 17 review.
18 MEMBER BROWN: Before you go on, just on 19 that note, don't take this negatively, please. It's 20 not a negative. Just because an SER has been issued 21 without open items does not necessarily mean there 22 will not be comments from the committee. That ought 23 to be understood.
24
- Secondly, secondly, I
think that's 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
20 largely, particularly in my area, demonstrating, which 1
is the I&C area, there was a comprehensive look given 2
at the original DCA. A lot of stuff, and it's well 3
put together and we really got it done very well. You 4
all did a very good job on that. Deviations from that 5
would raise a lot of questions; and if we don't see 6
those before that meeting, that could create some 7
issues. Just because the staff necessarily accepts 8
them doesn't necessarily mean the committee will.
9 That's our job is to make sure we provide an alternate 10 viewpoint if we think it's necessary.
11 So nothing negative about the comments, 12 just the process issue with how we proceed.
13 MR.
SHAVER:
Understood.
And we 14 appreciate that. I think that's a good comment, and 15 we'll note that down you'd like information early with 16 plenty of time to review it.
17 MEMBER BROWN: If there's changes.
18 MR. SHAVER: On the changes.
19 MEMBER BROWN: Yes, if there's major 20 changes. The stuff that's lookalike, we need to say 21 lookalike and here's where we made a change. That 22 way, you really reduce the structure and stuff that 23 you need to look at because the I&C is largely 24 dependent upon its architecture, and, if that stays 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
21 the same, it's the same characteristics and then a few 1
nuances, that makes it very, very easy to try to 2
assess those nuances without looking at the whole 3
scope, which is more difficult, I'd say.
4 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN KIRCHNER: Well, 5
perhaps, at the end of the presentation, we can have 6
a discussion on this because I think you've got some 7
slides coming up on TRs, and that's clearly something, 8
it's beneficial for all parties that we look at them 9
as they are ready and conduct a review as appropriate 10 and not find ourselves in a situation where we have 11 the SER and all the TRs and not well sequenced in 12 terms of those TRs that are important to the FSAR and 13 the SER. So I'd just make that note at this point.
14 And then, with the staff, we can discuss further how 15 the review sequence might unfold. Thank you.
16 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: So along those 17 lines, it's your view that you would provide at the 18 very end a complete SER with no open items and all the 19 topical reports, or was your vision that you would 20 have groupings and provide it in a way similar to what 21 we're doing actually with another application where 22 they are giving us a final SE from the staff with no 23 open items, but they've grouped it into appropriately 24 group sections so that we cannot be something that 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
22 would delay the final certification that were just 1
right after the staff. It was just their last SE. Is 2
that your vision that you would have grouped this so 3
that --
4 MR. SHAVER: Yes.
5 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: -- it would not be 6
something at the very end? Because sometimes --
7 MR. SHAVER: Yes.
8 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: -- don't understand 9
that we do this almost simultaneously with the staff.
10 MR. SHAVER: That's a good point, and I 11 could have been more clear on that. Yes, we do expect 12 a phase review each topical report and really chapter 13 could go on its own, or maybe we group topical reports 14 with the chapters they support. The intent was not to 15 wait until all the SERs were complete for all of the 16 chapters and all the topical reports and then dump a 17 massive amount of information in the lap and --
18 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: Because some of the 19 design developers have been confused about that.
20 MEMBER BROWN: You could imagine some 21 topical reports being ready for review during Phase A 22 and Phase B?
23 MR. SHAVER: Correct, yes, yes. We want 24 to move topical reports through on their own time line 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
23 at their own pace. And if they're ready to come to 1
you, then we don't want to hold that to the end. And 2
I intended to represent that with the blue boxes being 3
overlapping.
4 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: That helps. The 5
only other thing I guess I'd comment on is, as you'll 6
recall from the DCA review, as you were going through 7
the ACRS review, some of the comments made by members 8
led NuScale to actually change some features of the 9
design at the last minute. And, of course, that is 10 the risk of waiting because, although your analysis 11 indicates there aren't any important risk-significant 12 changes, that is a risk, and I just thought it was 13 good to kind of say that out in the open here.
14 MR. SHAVER: Yes, I understand.
15 MEMBER BALLINGER: This is Ron Ballinger.
16 I've got now some experience with an actually ongoing 17 review with this grouping issue, and I would caution 18 NuScale to discuss with the staff and have that 19 grouping be very well considered because what can 20 happen is you end up with, you can end up with non-21 overlap, if you will, where you've got one chapter 22 which refers to another chapter which is at a 23 different group, and you end up with confusing things 24 going on where there's no relationship, the 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
24 relationship is not quite there. So the groups have 1
go to be very well considered.
2 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN KIRCHNER: This is 3
Walt. Thanks, Ron. Yes, that's certainly on my mind, 4
too, based on our experience. And in our discussion 5
with staff and NuScale, we can reflect that. Chapter 6
3 comes to mind as an example of one that hopefully 7
would be up-front so that we're not revolving back to 8
previously reviewing material and cross-checking or 9
looking, you know, for some of the design principles 10 and requirements that often are covered in Chapter 3.
11 So we can hold this for our interaction 12 with the staff and the applicant.
13 MR. SHAVER: Great. I'd like to note I 14 did hear back from engineering. And Jeff Ehlers, are 15 you on the line to discuss the water level sensor?
16 MR. EHLERS: Yes. Can you hear me?
17 MR. SHAVER: Yes.
18 MR. EHLERS: Okay. Yes, my name is Jeff 19 Ehlers. I'm the plant systems engineering manager.
20 Yes, so for the containment water level, we're 21 utilizing a thermal dispersion sensor for that 22 technology, for that indication. I wasn't sure what 23 the specific question about it was, or if that was 24 just all you were curious about is what we were going 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
25 to utilize.
1 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: Oh, for the DCA, we 2
had a radar-based sensor, so have you totally changed 3
what the sensor is?
4 MR. EHLERS: Yes, working with different 5
vendors, we found the most reliable indication was 6
going to be the thermal dispersion sensor based on the 7
conditions.
8 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: What are you going 9
to use for in the reactor vessel, pressure vessel?
10 Has it changed also?
11 MR. EHLERS: No. The reactor vessel is 12 the same.
13 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: So it's the radar-14 based sensor. And have you made any progress with 15 qualifying it? And with this new thermal dispersion 16 sensor, it would be nice if you could provide us, I 17 mean, have you updated the, isn't it like advanced 18 instrumentation topical report, and has that been 19 updated since you've done the DC? Maybe it would be 20 good to get a copy to us. I'd be very interested in 21 hearing about the progress and efforts to qualify it 22 and the appropriate conditions, radiation, as well as 23 temperature.
24 MR. EHLERS: Yes, we'll have to follow-up 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
26 on the status of those with you.
1 ACRS CHAIRMAN REMPE: Okay. Thank you.
2 And this seems like something that is probably going 3
to want to be a backfit for the certified sign, but 4
actually it was just an ITAAC, so probably it isn't 5
really a backfit, it's just the topical report that 6
needs to change.
7 MEMBER MARCH-LEUBA: On the topic of level 8
sensors, thermal dispenser sensors have switches. It 9
only detects one level. It doesn't measure the level 10 in the containment. We will be interested in 11 reviewing what you've done. I mean, this is not a 12 level sensor, it's a switch, correct?
13 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN KIRCHNER: Okay.
14 Let me propose something here, though. Now we're 15 getting into, really into the details of the actual 16 design. This open presentation is on the actual SDA 17 approach. I think we are best holding our detailed 18 technical questions to the next session.
19 Let's proceed with this, and then I'm not 20 trying to shut off the dialogue, but why don't you go 21 through your presentations? I think we can pick up a 22 number of these issues when we get to the closed 23 session and we talk about, you present first your 24 design changes and then we can ask questions.
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
27 MEMBER MARCH-LEUBA: Can you tell us in 1
the open session about the duration between the two 2
green diamonds, your anticipated schedule between 3
submitting and --
4 MR. SHAVER: Not at this point. We're not 5
prepared to discuss -- we're still working with the 6
NRC on that.
7 I believe that concludes my presentation 8
for the open session.
9 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN KIRCHNER: Mike, a 10 procedural question. Are we going to hear anything 11 from the staff on this today or just information from 12 NuScale?
13 MR. SNODDERLY: Yes, the staff is here 14 observing, but there is no, they do not, to the best 15 of my knowledge --
16 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN KIRCHNER: Well, let 17 me make the offer then. Does anyone from the NRC 18 staff wish to make a comment at this point or reflect 19 on any of our comments?
20 Hearing none, okay. I think, at this 21 point, is this the end of your presentation, NuScale?
22 Mark, is this --
23 MR. SHAVER: Yes, it is.
24 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN KIRCHNER: Okay.
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
28 Thank you. Well, thank you for that.
1 Let's turn now, I know we have members of 2
the public on with us. This is an opportunity for 3
members of the public to make a comment. Please state 4
your name, affiliation if appropriate, and your 5
comment.
6 I am not hearing anything. Does anyone 7
out there wish to make a comment from the public?
8 Okay. Hearing none, I think this completes the open 9
portion of our meeting today. For the closed portion, 10 we have a separate link for those people who are 11 authorized to participate.
12 And so with that, we'll close out this 13 open portion of our subcommittee meeting, and I direct 14 those who are invited to attend the closed portion to 15 sign on.
16 We'll take, I think it's 1:36 Eastern 17 time. Let's try and re-engage by ten minutes of the 18 hour2.083333e-4 days <br />0.005 hours <br />2.97619e-5 weeks <br />6.849e-6 months <br />, 1:50. NuScale, I'll ask you to be looking at 19 working with Mike to make sure that participants are 20 authorized.
21 And with that, thank you everyone. And 22 I'll adjourn this meeting.
23 (Whereupon, the above-entitled matter went 24 off the record at 1:37 p.m.)
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
LO-120286 NuScale Power, LLC 1100 NE Circle Blvd., Suite 200 Corvallis, Oregon 97330 Office 541.360-0500 Fax 541.207.3928 www.nuscalepower.com June 14, 2022 Docket No. 99902078 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738
SUBJECT:
NuScale Power, LLC Submittal of Presentation Materials Entitled ACRS Subcommittee Presentation: US460 Design and SDAA Overview, PM-119782, Revision 1 (Open Session)
The purpose of this submittal is to provide presentation materials to the NRC for use during the upcoming Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) NuScale Subcommittee Meeting on June 22, 2022. The materials support NuScales ACRS Subcommittee Presentation: US460 Design and SDAA Overview, of the NuScale Standard Design Approval Application.
The enclosure to this letter is the nonproprietary version of the presentation entitled ACRS Subcommittee Presentation: US460 Design and SDAA Overview.
This letter makes no regulatory commitments and no revisions to any existing regulatory commitments.
If you have any questions, please contact Mark W. Shaver at 541-360-0630 or at mshaver@nuscalepower.com.
Sincerely, Mark W. Shaver Manager, Licensing NuScale Power, LLC Distribution: Michael Dudek, NRC Getachew Tesfaye, NRC Bruce Bavol, NRC Mike Snodderly, NRC
Enclosure:
ACRS Subcommittee Presentation: US460 Design and SDAA Overview, PM-119782, Revision 1 (Open Session)
LO-120286 NuScale Power, LLC 1100 NE Circle Blvd., Suite 200 Corvallis, Oregon 97330 Office 541.360-0500 Fax 541.207.3928 www.nuscalepower.com
Enclosure:
ACRS Subcommittee Presentation: US460 Design and SDAA Overview, PM-119782, Revision 1 (Open Session)
1 PM-119782 Rev. 1 Copyright © 2022 NuScale Power, LLC.
NuScale Nonproprietary US460 Design and SDAA Overview Mark W. Shaver Licensing Manager - SDA Kristopher Cummings Licensing Engineer V June 22, 2022 ACRS Subcommittee Presentation (Open Session)
2 PM-119782 Rev. 1 Copyright © 2022 NuScale Power, LLC.
NuScale Nonproprietary Acknowledgement and Disclaimer This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE-NE0008928.
This presentation was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States (U.S.)
Government. Neither the U.S. 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 U.S. Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. Government or any agency thereof.
PM-119782 Rev. 1 Copyright © 2022 NuScale Power, LLC.
NuScale Nonproprietary Agenda - Open Portion SDAA Content SDA Review 3
PM-119782 Rev. 1 Copyright © 2022 NuScale Power, LLC.
NuScale Nonproprietary High Level Design Changes Why we are here and how did we get here?
The SDA submittal is an engineering optimization of the NuScale DCA to allow for better customer use and deployment. The SDA maintains the approved technical and licensing basis from the DCA while maintaining the overall safety and risk profile.
Redesigned site layout to accommodate a 6 NPM configuration NPM optimized for increased power output; ease of maintenance, manufacturing and operation while maintaining safety margins:
o Steam generator was over designed for 160MWth application (DCA) and allows for increased power output while maintaining design limits o
Additional testing is being completed to validate performance of NPM engineered safety features at new power level o
Additional engineered safety features added to eliminate certain events and simplify Chapter 15 analysis Current evaluation of SDA design changes does not significantly alter the DCA PRA risk insights.
4
PM-119782 Rev. 1 Copyright © 2022 NuScale Power, LLC.
NuScale Nonproprietary Standard Design Approval (SDA) Application Content 5
6 PM-119782 Rev. 1 Copyright © 2022 NuScale Power, LLC.
NuScale Nonproprietary 10 CFR Part 52 Process and SDA Strategy
- For the VOYGR-6 product (US460 design), NuScale has chosen to pursue Part 52 through a complete, stand-alone Standard Design Approval Application (SDAA) followed by a Combined License Application (COLA).
- The SDAA will:
o Utilize approved DCA Revision 5 Tier 2 FSAR information as foundation o Update content for design changes o Address DCA carve-outs o Optimize content, focusing on safety and risk-significance
7 PM-119782 Rev. 1 Copyright © 2022 NuScale Power, LLC.
NuScale Nonproprietary SDA Application Content APPLICATION PART DESIGN CERTIFICATION (10 CFR 52 subpart B)
SDAA - Required by Regulation (10 CFR 52 subpart E)
SDAA - Needed to Support COL Include as Part of SDAA Submittal Transmittal Letter Yes Yes N/A Yes Part 1: General and Financial Information (financial info. Not required)
(financial info. Not required)
N/A Yes Part 2: Safety Analysis Report - Tier 1 Yes No No No
Ch. 1 - Introduction Yes No No No
Ch. 2 - Unit Specific SSCs Design Descriptions and ITAAC Yes No ITAAC Only ITAAC Only (see Part 08)
Ch. 3 - Shared SSCs and Non-SSCs Design Descriptions and ITAAC Yes No ITAAC Only ITAAC Only (see Part 08)
Ch. 4 - Interface Requirements Yes No No No
Ch. 5 - Site Parameters Yes No No No (in FSAR Ch. 2)
Part 2: Safety Analysis Report - Tier 2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Part 3: Environmental Report Yes No No No Part 4: Technical Specifications Yes No Yes Yes Part 5: Emergency Plans Optional (Limited Scope) Not in NuScale DCA No No No Part 6: Security Plans Optional (Limited Scope) Not in NuScale DCA No No No Part 7: Exemptions, Departures, and Variances Yes, if Applicable Yes, if Applicable N/A Yes - Exemptions Part 8: License Conditions; Inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria Yes, (ITAAC only) NuScale DCA references Part 2 Tier 1 No Yes (only ITAAC)
Yes (only ITAAC)
Part 9: Withheld Information Yes, NuScale DCA provides list of tables and figures Yes N/A Yes Part 10: Quality Assurance Program Description Yes, NuScale DCA references separate topical report Yes Yes Yes Part 11: Supplemental Information (e.g., Limited Work Authorization)
Yes, if applicable None for NuScale DCA No No No
8 PM-119782 Rev. 1 Copyright © 2022 NuScale Power, LLC.
NuScale Nonproprietary SDA Application Content (included for COLA)
APPLICATION PART DESIGN CERTIFICATION (10 CFR 52 subpart B)
SDAA - Required by Regulation (10 CFR 52 subpart E)
SDAA - Needed to Support COL Include as Part of SDAA Submittal Transmittal Letter Yes Yes N/A Yes Part 1: General and Financial Information (financial info. Not required)
(financial info. Not required)
N/A Yes Part 2: Safety Analysis Report - Tier 1 Yes No No No
Ch. 1 - Introduction Yes No No No
Ch. 2 - Unit Specific SSCs Design Descriptions and ITAAC Yes No ITAAC Only ITAAC Only (see Part 08)
Ch. 3 - Shared SSCs and Non-SSCs Design Descriptions and ITAAC Yes No ITAAC Only ITAAC Only (see Part 08)
Ch. 4 - Interface Requirements Yes No No No
Ch. 5 - Site Parameters Yes No No No (in FSAR Ch. 2)
Part 2: Safety Analysis Report - Tier 2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Part 3: Environmental Report Yes No No No Part 4: Technical Specifications Yes No Yes Yes Part 5: Emergency Plans Optional (Limited Scope) Not in NuScale DCA No No No Part 6: Security Plans Optional (Limited Scope) Not in NuScale DCA No No No Part 7: Exemptions, Departures, and Variances Yes, if Applicable Yes, if Applicable N/A Yes - Exemptions Part 8: License Conditions; Inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria Yes, (ITAAC only) NuScale DCA references Part 2 Tier 1 No Yes (only ITAAC)
Yes (only ITAAC)
Part 9: Withheld Information Yes, NuScale DCA provides list of tables and figures Yes N/A Yes Part 10: Quality Assurance Program Description Yes, NuScale DCA references separate topical report Yes Yes Yes Part 11: Supplemental Information (e.g., Limited Work Authorization)
Yes, if applicable None for NuScale DCA No No No
9 PM-119782 Rev. 1 Copyright © 2022 NuScale Power, LLC.
NuScale Nonproprietary SDA Application Content (differences from DCA)
APPLICATION PART DESIGN CERTIFICATION (10 CFR 52 subpart B)
SDAA - Required by Regulation (10 CFR 52 subpart E)
SDAA - Needed to Support COL Include as Part of SDAA Submittal Transmittal Letter Yes Yes N/A Yes Part 1: General and Financial Information (financial info. Not required)
(financial info. Not required)
N/A Yes Part 2: Safety Analysis Report - Tier 1 Yes No No No
Ch. 1 - Introduction Yes No No No
Ch. 2 - Unit Specific SSCs Design Descriptions and ITAAC Yes No ITAAC Only ITAAC Only (see Part 08)
Ch. 3 - Shared SSCs and Non-SSCs Design Descriptions and ITAAC Yes No ITAAC Only ITAAC Only (see Part 08)
Ch. 4 - Interface Requirements Yes No No No
Ch. 5 - Site Parameters Yes No No No (in FSAR Ch. 2)
Part 2: Safety Analysis Report - Tier 2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Part 3: Environmental Report Yes No No No Part 4: Technical Specifications Yes No Yes Yes Part 5: Emergency Plans Optional (Limited Scope) Not in NuScale DCA No No No Part 6: Security Plans Optional (Limited Scope) Not in NuScale DCA No No No Part 7: Exemptions, Departures, and Variances Yes, if Applicable Yes, if Applicable N/A Yes - Exemptions Part 8: License Conditions; Inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria Yes, (ITAAC only) NuScale DCA references Part 2 Tier 1 No Yes (only ITAAC)
Yes (only ITAAC)
Part 9: Withheld Information Yes, NuScale DCA provides list of tables and figures Yes N/A Yes Part 10: Quality Assurance Program Description Yes, NuScale DCA references separate topical report Yes Yes Yes Part 11: Supplemental Information (e.g., Limited Work Authorization)
Yes, if applicable None for NuScale DCA No No No
10 PM-119782 Rev. 1 Copyright © 2022 NuScale Power, LLC.
NuScale Nonproprietary SDA Review
11 PM-119782 Rev. 1 Copyright © 2022 NuScale Power, LLC.
NuScale Nonproprietary SDA Review Path Source: LO-100168 on 4/22/2021
Full Name User Actio Timestamp Snodderly, Michael Joined 6/22/2022, 12:35:46 PM Burkhart, Larry Joined 6/22/2022, 12:42:59 PM Andy Lingenfelter NuScale Joined 6/22/2022, 12:43:08 PM Mark Chitty (NuScale)
Joined 6/22/2022, 12:43:09 PM Thomas Griffith (NuScale)
Joined 6/22/2022, 12:43:10 PM Dennis Bley Joined 6/22/2022, 12:47:12 PM Toby Walter Joined 6/22/2022, 12:47:13 PM Walker, Sandra Joined 6/22/2022, 12:48:02 PM Kirchner, Walt Joined 6/22/2022, 12:48:11 PM Rempe, Joy Joined 6/22/2022, 12:50:06 PM Lu, Shanlai Joined 6/22/2022, 12:52:11 PM Rau, Adam Joined 6/22/2022, 12:52:56 PM Stephanie Terwilliger (NuScale)
Joined 6/22/2022, 12:53:41 PM Carrie Fosaaen - NuScale Joined 6/22/2022, 12:54:22 PM Istar, Ata Joined 6/22/2022, 12:55:47 PM Makar, Gregory Joined 6/22/2022, 12:56:51 PM Jose March-Leuba (ACRS)
Joined 6/22/2022, 12:56:58 PM Amber Berger (NuScale)
Joined 6/22/2022, 12:57:30 PM Josh Parker (NuScale Power)
Joined 6/22/2022, 12:57:31 PM Fehmida Mesania - NuScale Power Joined 6/22/2022, 12:57:31 PM Nadja Joergensen (NuScale)
Joined 6/22/2022, 12:57:37 PM Ghosh, Amitava Joined 6/22/2022, 12:57:50 PM Susan Baughn Joined 6/22/2022, 12:57:56 PM Halnon, Gregory Joined 6/22/2022, 12:58:00 PM Peter Subaiya (NuScale)
Joined 6/22/2022, 12:58:01 PM Jeremiah Doyle (NuScale)
Joined 6/22/2022, 12:58:10 PM Nolan, Ryan Joined 6/22/2022, 12:58:13 PM Tokey, Jason Joined 6/22/2022, 12:58:15 PM Bavol, Bruce Joined 6/22/2022, 12:58:22 PM Budzynski, John Joined 6/22/2022, 12:58:23 PM Tim Tovar, Dir Plant Ops, NuScale Joined 6/22/2022, 12:58:28 PM Skov, Tammy Joined 6/22/2022, 12:58:42 PM Ben Bristol Joined 6/22/2022, 12:58:43 PM Collier, Alex Joined 6/22/2022, 12:58:53 PM Stubbs, Angelo Joined 6/22/2022, 12:59:09 PM Sarah Fields Joined 6/22/2022, 12:59:25 PM Grady, Anne-Marie Joined 6/22/2022, 12:59:31 PM Tetter, Keith Joined 6/22/2022, 12:59:34 PM Allyson Callaway (Fuels, NuScale)
Joined 6/22/2022, 12:59:40 PM Alec Reeve, NuScale Power Joined 6/22/2022, 12:59:47 PM Robert Gamble (NuScale)
Joined 6/22/2022, 12:59:49 PM Widmayer, Derek Joined 6/22/2022, 12:59:53 PM Lehning, John Joined 6/22/2022, 12:59:58 PM Boeyink, Julia Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:17 PM Reichelt, Eric Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:22 PM Staudenmeier, Joseph Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:25 PM Honcharik, John Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:29 PM Schiller, Alina Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:43 PM
Barrett, Antonio Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:43 PM Armstrong, Kenneth Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:44 PM Bhatt, Santosh Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:44 PM Thompson, Jason Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:44 PM Miller, Joshua Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:45 PM Vivanco, Ricky Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:46 PM Elisa Fairbanks, NuScale Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:46 PM Kyra Perkins Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:51 PM Jon Bristol NuScale Power Joined 6/22/2022, 1:00:54 PM Evren Ulku - NuScale Power Joined 6/22/2022, 1:01:00 PM Luca Brasi Joined 6/22/2022, 1:01:20 PM Park, Sunwoo Joined 6/22/2022, 1:01:28 PM Pravin Sawant (NuScale)
Joined 6/22/2022, 1:01:32 PM Patton, Rebecca Joined 6/22/2022, 1:01:37 PM Meghan McCloskey (NuScale)
Joined 6/22/2022, 1:02:00 PM Bates, Melissa Joined 6/22/2022, 1:02:01 PM Stutzcage, Edward Joined 6/22/2022, 1:03:05 PM Wagage, Hanry Joined 6/22/2022, 1:03:09 PM Drucker, David Joined 6/22/2022, 1:03:12 PM Lien, Peter Joined 6/22/2022, 1:03:20 PM Jeff Ehlers Joined 6/22/2022, 1:03:25 PM Daniel Lassiter Joined 6/22/2022, 1:04:04 PM Walton, Shandeth Joined 6/22/2022, 1:04:10 PM Steven Pope Joined 6/22/2022, 1:04:11 PM Li, Chang Joined 6/22/2022, 1:05:31 PM John Volkoff Joined 6/22/2022, 1:05:54 PM Haider, Syed Joined 6/22/2022, 1:06:52 PM Bill Acton Joined 6/22/2022, 1:06:55 PM Brian Meadors - NuScale Joined 6/22/2022, 1:08:19 PM Tamela Cohen - NuScale Joined 6/22/2022, 1:08:47 PM