ML23156A612
| ML23156A612 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | SHINE Medical Technologies |
| Issue date: | 06/07/2023 |
| From: | Michael Balazik NRC/NRR/DANU/UNPL |
| To: | SHINE Technologies |
| References | |
| Download: ML23156A612 (16) | |
Text
APPLICANT: SHINE Technologies, LLC
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF PUBLIC MEETING ON MAY 11, 2023, WITH SHINE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC On May 11, 2023, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff conducted a hybrid (in person and virtual) observation meeting with representatives of SHINE Technologies, LLC (SHINE). The meeting was conducted in accordance with NRC Management Directive 3.5, Attendance at NRC Staff-Sponsored Meetings (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML21180A271). SHINE requested this meeting with the NRC staff to present its plans for revising the seismic design basis for installing components and process equipment in SHINEs Medical Isotope Production Facility (the facility). SHINE plans to implement a risk-informed performance based seismic approach to the installation of components and process equipment. The meeting notice and agenda, dated April 19, 2023, are available at (ML23117A199). The list of meeting attendees and the presentation used in the meeting are provided as enclosures to this summary.
SHINE began the presentation with a discussion of SHINEs current seismic design basis as described in SHINEs final safety analysis report. SHINE then described the challenges for installing structure, systems, and components (SSCs) using the current seismic design approach. These challenges included spatial conflicts with oversized structural supports, depth and spacing with anchor interference, rigorous seismic analysis, and significant impacting cost and schedule. SHINE explained the benefits of using a risk-informed, performance based, seismic design methodology. These benefits include seismic design requirements informed by level of risk, use of SSC limit states not restricted to elastic behavior, use of more standard support designs and spacing, and space constraints to better facilitate SSC installation. For the revised seismic design methodology, SHINE plans to use guidance in the American National Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS)-2.26-2004, Categorization of Nuclear Facility Structures, Systems, and Components for Seismic Design, reaffirmed on May 27, 2010. SHINE plans to use the categorization methodologies in ANSI/ANS-2.26-2004 to select seismic design categories and limits states for Quality Level 1 and Quality Level 2 SSCs.
SHINE also plans to generate site-specific uniform hazard response spectra using the data from the United States Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model and use deterministic methods to determine site amplification with existing soil profiles. ANSI/ANS-2.26-2004 references the use of American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) standard ANSI/ASCE/SEI 43-19, Seismic Design Criteria for Structures, Systems and Components in Nuclear Facilities, for the seismic design approach of SSCs. The NRC staff asked SHINE whether ANSI/ASCE/SEI 41-17, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, applies in SHINEs situation since the facility building is currently constructed. SHINE stated it would check on the applicability of ANSI/ASCE/SEI 41-17. The NRC staff and SHINE also discussed factoring uncertainty into the seismic analysis.
SHINE anticipates supplementing its final safety analysis report to describe the revised seismic approach in approximately 6 to 8 months. The NRC staff expressed interest in performing a June 7, 2023 regulatory audit in accordance with LIC-111, Regulatory Audits (ML19226A274), once SHINE starts implementing the revised seismic approach.
There were no comments from members of the public at this meeting.
Please direct any inquiries to Michael Balazik at 301-415-2856 or Michael.Balazik@nrc.gov.
Sincerely, Michael F. Balazik, Project Manager Non-Power Production and Utilization Facility Licensing Branch Division of Advanced Reactors and Non-Power Production and Utilization Facilities Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 05000608
Enclosures:
- 1. List of Attendees
- 2. SHINEs Presentation Signed by Balazik, Michael on 06/07/23
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF PUBLIC MEETING ON MAY 11, 2023, WITH SHINE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC DATED: JUNE 7, 2023
DISTRIBUTION:
PUBLIC LTran, NRR MBalazik, NRR NParker, NRR JBorromeo, NRR HCruz, NRR LRakovan, NMSS SStovall, NRR APrinaris, NRR CMunson, NRR RidsNrrDanu Resource RidsOgcMailCenter Resource
ADAMS Accession Number: ML23156A612 NRC-001 OFFICE NRR/DANU/PM NRR/DANU/LA NRR/DANU/BC NRR/DANU/PM NAME MBalazik NParker JBorromeo MBalazik DATE 6/5/2023 6/6/2023 6/6/2023 6/7/2023 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY LIST OF ATTENDEES
MAY 11, 2023, MEETING WITH SHINE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
Name Organization Eric Schutt SHINE Technologies, LLC Tracy Radel SHINE Technologies, LLC Jeff Bartelme SHINE Technologies, LLC Kevin OConnor SHINE Technologies, LLC Aric Cowne SHINE Technologies, LLC Christopher Hewitt Simpson Gumpertz & Heger (supporting SHINE)
Benjamin Kosbab Simpson Gumpertz & Heger (supporting SHINE)
Marc Anderson Sargent & Lundy (supporting SHINE)
Joshua Borromeo U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Holly Cruz U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Michael Balazik U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Linh Tran U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Clifford Munson U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Jeremy Wachutka U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Scott Stovall U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Andrew Prinaris U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Sunwoo Park U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ben Chen Argonne National Laboratory Mory Diané Oklo Inc.
Enclosure 1 Seismic Design Basis of the SHINE Facility TRACY RADEL, VICE PRESIDENT OF ENGINEERING
Enclosure 2
l Confidential l © SHINE Technologies, LLC 1© SHINE Technologies, LLC 1 Agenda
Current Seismic Design Basis Motivation for Change Revised Seismic Design Basis Methodology oRadiological Hazard oSeismic Hazard oDesign of Structures, Systems, and Components Summary
© SHINE Technologies, LLC 2 Current Seismic Design Basis
Uses Sections 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 of NUREG-0800, as described in the FSAR Response spectra generated in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.60, Revision 2, Design Response Spectra for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants Uses deterministic soil structure interaction to generate in-structure seismic demand Results in seismic requirements similar to a commercial power reactor or Seismic Design Category (SDC) 5 facility QL-1 and QL-2 structures, systems, and components (SSCs) are designed to this design basis earthquake (DBE)
QL-1 SSCs are required to maintain elastic behavior Does not account for lower risk at SHINE facility
© SHINE Technologies, LLC 3 Motivation for Change
Currently faced with significant challenges in installation of SSCs oSpatial conflicts with oversized structural supports oDepth, spacing, and tolerance for anchors oQL-1 and QL-2 SSCs require rigorous seismic analysis with significant impact on cost and schedule What will be gained in the new approach:
oSeismic design requirements informed by level of risk oSSC Limit States not restricted to elastic behavior (i.e., Limit State D) oUse of more standard support designs and spacing oManage space constraints to better facilitate SSC installation
© SHINE Technologies, LLC 4 Revised Seismic Design Basis Methodology OVERVIEW
Objective:
oRecharacterize seismic hazards commensurate with level of radiological risk associated with the SHINE facility Approach:
oUse categorization methodology in American National Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS)-2.26-2004, Categorization of Nuclear Facility Structures, Systems, and Components for Seismic Design, to select SDC and Limit States for QL-1 and QL-2 SSCs oGenerate site-specific seismic spectra for SDC-3 oAssign SSC design requirements in a graded fashion based on SDC
© SHINE Technologies, LLC 5 Revised Seismic Design Basis Methodology CATEGORIZATION METHODOLOGY
Unmitigated dose analysis performed in accordance with Section 6.2 of ANSI/ANS-2.26-2004 oSSCs and all other relevant engineered mitigating features are assumed not to function unless the robustness of each mitigating feature can be demonstrated to survive the postulated event oUses mean values for the parameters related to material releases, dispersal in the environment, and health consequences oThe computed dose consequences are the total effective dose equivalent (TEDE), and the dose to the public is based on the maximally exposed off-site individual, located at the exclusion area boundary
Robustness is assessed in accordance with Sections 6.2.9 and 6.3.2.5 of ANSI/ANS-2.26-2004
SDCs are assigned in accordance with Table 1 and with guidance from Table A.3 of ANSI/ANS-2.26-2004
Limit States are assigned in accordance with Section 5 and with guidance from Appendix B of ANSI/ANS-2.26-2004
© SHINE Technologies, LLC 6 Revised Seismic Design Basis Methodology PRELIMINARY CATEGORIZATION RESULTS
Public Dose (rem) Worker Dose (rem)
Unmitigated release of 8 batches of target solution 1.1E+01 4.9E+01 (nominal source term as defined in Table 11.1-1 of the FSAR) with facility structure assumed intact 1.3E-01 4.9E+01 with irradiation unit confinements assumed intact 1.7E-02 2.3E-01 Unmitigated release of full facility tritium inventory 1.4E-01 7.9E+00
Based on preliminary dose results and guidance in Table A.3 of ANSI/ANS-2.26-2004, the facility structure and concrete confinements are categorized as SDC-3 Tritium and supercell confinements are categorized as SDC-2 Facility structure and concrete confinements have been designed and constructed to SDC-5 comparable seismic requirements, meeting robustness criteria
© SHINE Technologies, LLC 7 Revised Seismic Design Basis Methodology AT-BEDROCK SPECTRA
Use at-bedrock uniform hazard response spectra (UHRS) data from United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) oThe SHINE facility is located in one of the lowest-seismic hazard regions in the country oBased on the low seismic hazards present and the limited radiological consequences of failure, the SHINE facility presents a very low level of risk oUSGS data is appropriate to use for generating design response spectra (DRS) for design of SDC-3 and lower SSCs Benchmark UHRS against other compatible seismic hazard studies in the area to confirm that the USGS UHRS are reasonable
© SHINE Technologies, LLC 8 Revised Seismic Design Basis Methodology SITE RESPONSE AND NEAR-SURFACE SPECTRA
Use a deterministic site response analysis methodology and existing soil profile for the SHINE facility to generate near-surface UHRS from at-bedrock UHRS oUse existing site-specific geotechnical information to generate site amplification from bedrock to near-surface spectra oSubsurface profiles, properties, and variability are anticipated to be consistent with those used for the existing soil-structure interaction (SSI) analysis of the facility Use near-surface UHRS to define SDC-3 DRS in accordance with Section 2 of American Society of Civil Engineers/Structural Engineering Institute (ASCE/SEI) 43-05, Seismic Design Criteria for Structures, Systems, and Components in Nuclear Facilities
© SHINE Technologies, LLC 9 Revised Seismic Design Basis Methodology DESIGN OF STRUCTURES, SYSTEMS, AND COMPONENTS
Design each SSC based on its SDC and Limit State, determined using categorization methodology in ANSI/ANS-2.26-2004 Select the appropriate seismic design requirements oSDC-3 Design to current licensing basis seismic acceptance criteria with SDC-3 seismic demand, or Design to applicable section of ASCE/SEI 43-05 with SDC-3 seismic demand oSDC-2 Potential interaction with SDC-3 SSCs o Design to International Building Code (IBC) acceptance criteria with SDC-3 seismic demand No potential interaction with SDC-3 SSCs o Design to IBC acceptance criteria with ASCE 7 seismic demand
© SHINE Technologies, LLC 10 Summary
SHINE faces challenges related to installation of SSCs due to current seismic design basis SHINE is revising the seismic design basis to align with the level of risk for the facility oUsing categorization methodologies in ANSI/ANS-2.26-2004 to select SDC and Limit States for QL-1 and QL-2 SSCs oGenerating site-specific UHRS from USGS NSHM oUsing deterministic methods to determine site amplification with existing soil profiles oDesigning SSCs in accordance with updated seismic design requirements
© SHINE Technologies, LLC 11