ML23263A262
| ML23263A262 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/12/2023 |
| From: | David Wright NRC/OCM/DAW |
| To: | Carper T US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works |
| Shared Package | |
| ML23263A261 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML23263A262 (1) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON , O.C . 20555-0001 COMMISSIONER September 12, 2023 The Honorable Thomas R. Carper Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington , DC 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am responding to the July 14, 2023, letter regarding the NRC staff's draft proposed rule that would establish a risk-informed, technology-inclusive regulatory framework for advanced reactors , also known as "Part 53."
As stated in the letter, the NRC staff have provided the Commission with an extensive proposal that seeks to balance flexibility for different technologies with the need to provide applicants with predictability. This is one of the more consequential rulemakings that the NRC has performed because Part 53 has the potential to drastically alter the trajectory of the United States nuclear industry. To meet the moment, the NRC must think outside of the box, and I believe that as Commissioners, we must demonstrate leadership by being risk-informed and not just risk averse. With this rule , we have an opportunity to create a regulatory pathway that is useable and useful to the applicants and the technologies it is being created for, which will benefit the American public.
I take the concerns that the letter raised very seriously. I have also heard from external stakeholders that they have not been listened to and that their concerns have not been addressed . Since they are the end-users of this rule , I have been talking to them and , more importantly, actively listening. While I recognize that not all dissenting views can be accommodated, I have made every attempt to give our stakeholders the opportunity to share
2 their different perspectives so that I can consider them and make the most informed decision possible.
On May 16, 2023, the Commission held a public meeting 1 specifically to receive feedback on the proposed Part 53 rulemaking . My colleagues and I heard from a diverse group of stakeholders including representatives from the U.S. Department of Energy, the Nuclear Energy Institute, ClearPath, X-energy, BWX Technologies, Inc., the Union of Concerned Scientists, and the NRC staff. While not all stakeholders expressed the same views, many shared the same concerns identified in the letter (i.e., the two-framework structure, the use of quantitative health objectives as performance criteria , the principle of "As Low As Reasonably Achievable" as a design requirement, beyond-design-basis-events, the facility safety program, and inconsistent use of terminology). I believe this meeting was a step in the right direction in terms of developing a Commission position on these items.
With Part 53 , we not only have the opportunity but the responsibility to reimagine licensing for advanced nuclear reactors and to encourage innovation while verifying safety. This new approach should accommodate various pathways for licensing that would be commensurate with the wide range of technologies and electrical capacities currently anticipated. Therefore, I plan to recommend an approach that allows the applicant to propose their own overall risk metric and safety case for the NRC's review and approval. The details of each applicant's risk metric (e.g., how it is calculated , what threshold values would be acceptable) would be contained in guidance, rather than codified in the rule . Under this approach, an applicant could apply for a license under Frameworks A and B in the draft proposed rule but could also propose an alternative approach without the need for further 1 The meeting 's agenda, transcript, slides, and video recording are available at:
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/tr/2023/index.html
3 rulemaking or exemptions. This will provide much-needed flexibility to the NRC staff and applicants as we all gain experience with advanced reactor technologies.
I plan to submit my vote for this rulemaking in the near future , and I look forward to working with the other Commissioners on editing and improving the draft proposed rule so that it provides reasonable assurance of adequate protection, while enabling and not disabling the safe use of nuclear technology. I fully expect that the Commission will conclude our efforts in time for the NRC staff to complete this rulemaking significantly ahead of the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act required deadline of December 31, 2027.
Sincerely, l
David A. Wright