ML23256A290
| ML23256A290 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/18/2023 |
| From: | Mary Johnson NRC/NRR/DNRL/NLRP |
| To: | Lauren Gibson NRC/NRR/DNRL/NLRP |
| References | |
| Download: ML23256A290 (7) | |
Text
September 18, 2023 MEMORANDUM TO:
Lauren K. Gibson, Branch Chief Licensing Renewal Projects Branch Division of New and Renewed Licenses Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM:
Marieliz Johnson, Project Manager /RA/
Licensing Renewal Projects Branch Division of New and Renewed Licenses Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
U.S. NUCLEAR REGUALTORY COMMISSION
SUMMARY
OF THE AUGUST 18, 2023, PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS POSSIBLE EFFICIENCIES ON THE SUBSEQUENT LICENSE RENEWAL REVIEW On August 18, 2023, an observation public meeting was held between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff and the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) concerning possible efficiencies on the Subsequent License Renewal (SLR) review. Participants included personnel from the NRC, NEI, industry and members of the public.
The public meeting notice can be found in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) Accession No. ML23229A530. This meeting notice was also posted on the NRC public website.
Enclosed are the meeting agenda (Enclosure1) and list of participants in the meeting (Enclosure 2).
CONTACT: Marieliz Johnsons, NRR/DNRL 301-415-5861
SUMMARY
The purpose of this meeting was to discuss with NEI and the public opportunities to increase efficiencies in the staffs review of SLR applications. The meeting started with opening remarks from Brian Smith, Director of the Division of New and Renewed Licenses. Then, Brett Titus from NEI gave a presentation (slides ML23228A004). He discussed, among other topics, the number of applications expected to be submitted in the upcoming years, ideas to make the SLR application reviews more efficient, and next steps. Lauren Gibson from the NRC then gave a presentation (slides ML23228A002). She discussed the number of hours spent by reviews over time, what has already been implemented to make the SLR application reviews more efficient, what the staff is currently working on, and items the industry could do to help make the NRC review more efficient. After the presentations, NRC, NEI and members of the industry engaged in an open discussion about how we can reach maximum efficiencies on the SLR application reviews.
Highlights of the discussion:
NEI proposed that NRC consider the overall safety impact (risk significance) of the items that NRC staff is reviewing. The NRC staff noted that we are currently constrained by the deterministic requirements in 10 CFR Part 54 to evaluate whether the intended function of the structure, system, and component (SSC) would be maintained.
NEI proposed opportunities for a graded approach with less depth of review for Aging Management programs of greater maturity and stability. The NRC staff has already been internally considering similar strategies.
Industry questioned where the guidance is to support the staffs requests for additional information that ask for more detail to be added to either the commitment table or the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) summary. The NRC staff responded that the guidance is not specific in this area, however, adding a detail to the table or the summary is the only way for the staff to ensure that it would be covered by 10 CFR 50.59, Changes, tests and experiments after issuance. Therefore, the staff asks for this on a case-by-case basis when they feel the item is of such importance that it needs to be included.
Industry also asked how much of the review focuses on whether the application matches Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL). The NRC staff responded that matching GALL is only part of what is considered. The other part is whether its appropriate for the applicant to match GALL given their plant-specific operating experience.
Industry noted that the GALL is very prescriptive and gets more prescriptive over time with updates.
Industry and the NRC both emphasized good communication before and throughout the review.
NRC requested that licensees follow the numbering in the GALL because it makes our internal tracking easier. Industry brought up concerns with doing this, such as having to put not used or not applicable throughout the application.
NRC requested that licensees review previous plants audit reports and breakout questions.
Industry requested that the breakout questions be made public earlier than in the audit report, which is 90 days after the audit ends.
Both sides agreed to a periodicity of every 2-3 months and looking into whether more granular detail is available from the industry and NEI on the areas that use the most resources.
The next meeting is tentatively scheduled to be held in October. Until then, the NRC will continue to work on those improvements that do not require coordination with industry.
- via email NRR-106 OFFICE NRR/DNLR/NLRP: PM NRR/DNRL/NLIB: LA NRR/DNRL/NLRP: PM NAME MJohnson SGreen MJohnson DATE 9/13/2023 9/15/2023 9/18/2023
U.S. NUCLEAR REGUALTORY COMMISSION
SUMMARY
OF THE AUGUST 18, 2023, PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS POSSIBLE EFFICIENCIES ON THE SUBSEQUENT LICENSE RENEWAL REVIEW Meeting Agenda Time Topic Organization 10:00am-10:15am
Introductions
All 10:15am-11:15am Discussion NRC and NEI 11:15am-11:30am Opportunity for public comments NRC and Public 11:30am Adjourn All
U.S. NUCLEAR REGUALTORY COMMISSION
SUMMARY
OF THE AUGUST 18, 2023, PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS POSSIBLE EFFICIENCIES ON THE SUBSEQUENT LICENSE RENEWAL REVIEW List of Attendees Name Affiliation Allen Hiser Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
Angela Wu NRC Austin Im NRC Bo Pham NRC Brian Harris NRR NRC Brian Smith NRC Briana Arlene NRC Christopher Tyree NRC Jamie Heisserer (She/Her/Hers)
NRC John Wise NRC Kim Conway NRC Lance Rakovan NRC Lauren Gibson NRC Leah Parks (She/Her)
NRC Lloyd Desotell NRC Marieliz Johnson NRC Mark Yoo NRC Mitchell Dehmer NRC Robert Hoffman NRC Robert Williams NRC Steve Wyman NRC Steven Bloom NRC Ted Smith NRC Tony Nakanishi NRC Brett TITUS Nuclear Energy Institute Lloveras Leigh Breakthrough Institute Casey A Muggleston Constellation Christopher D Wilson Constellation Fletcher Iba S Ello Fletcher Constellation Julian Andres A Laverde Constellation Lydia S Dworakowski Constellation Deann Raleigh Curtiss Wright Keith J Miller Dominion Energy Paul Aitken Dominion Energy Christopher Salz DPS Paul F Guill Duke Energy Rounette K Nader Duke Energy Jeff Gromatzky Enercon Garry Young EPRI Todd Evans Luminant Scott Clausen Morgan Lewis Amy G Aughtman Southern Co.
Brandon Kenneth Marlow Southern Co.
Steven Dolley SP Global Terry Herrmann Structint Daniel Green TVA Eric Ashley Michael TVA Jonathan Delaune TVA Peter John Donahue TVA William J Baker TVA Charlyne A Smith UFL Matthew Golliet Westinghouse Paul B Young Xcel Energy Russell J Lidberg Xcel Energy Sara L Scott Xcel Energy Fran Clairmont DMD Lori Hekking Mike Gallagher (Guest)
Rob Burg Todd Evans