ML24206A257
| ML24206A257 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 99902028, Nuclear Energy Institute |
| Issue date: | 07/24/2024 |
| From: | Nichol M Nuclear Energy Institute |
| To: | Mohamed Shams Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Document Control Desk |
| References | |
| RIN 3150-AK3, SRM-SECY-23-0021, 10 CFR Part 53, RIN 3150-AK31, NRC-2019-0062 | |
| Download: ML24206A257 (1) | |
Text
Marc Nichol Executive Director Phone: 202.739.8131 Email: mrn@nei.org July 24, 2024 Mr. Mohamed Shams Director, Division of Advanced Reactors and Non-Power Production and Utilization Facilities U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001
Subject:
NEI Input for Addressing Commission Memorandum SRM-SECY-23-0021 - Proposed Rule:
Risk-Informed, Technology-Inclusive Regulatory Framework for Advanced Reactors (RIN 3150-AK3)
Project Number: 689
Dear Mr. Shams:
The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)1 and our members reiterate our appreciation for the NRC staffs continuing efforts to develop the proposed rule on a risk-informed, performance-based, technology-inclusive regulatory framework for advanced reactors, known as Part 53. The purpose of this letter is to provide input to the NRC on activities related to 1) development of Part 53 to address the SRM, 2) need for content of application guidance for Part 53 that is not already under development, 3) alternatives to Framework B, 4) rulemaking considerations that are still unaddressed in Part 53. We recognize that the staff is focused on revising the draft proposed rule consistent with the directions provided by the Commission, and that publication of the proposed rule later this year will provide additional opportunities for public input. This input is intended to help clarify our perspectives on the Commission SRM-SECY 0001 and address topics related to, but outside of, the development of the proposed rule package that warrant near-term stakeholder engagement.
Development of Part 53 Proposed Rule Language The Commission clarified in SRM-SECY-23-0021 that Part 53 should be a single framework that allows flxeibility in the acceptability determinations for Part 53 applications to be appropriately flexible, considering how probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) insights are relied upon to support the licensing application, together with factors such as safety margin, simplicity of design, and treatment of uncertainties. This desired outcome aligns with NEIs longstanding comments on Part 53. 2,3,4 This 1 The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) is responsible for establishing unified policy on behalf of its members relating to matters affecting the nuclear energy industry, including the regulatory aspects of generic operational and technical issues. NEIs members include entities licensed to operate commercial nuclear power plants in the United States, nuclear plant designers, major architect and engineering firms, fuel cycle facilities, nuclear materials licensees, and other organizations involved in the nuclear energy industry.
2 Comprehensive Industry Comments on the NRCs Rulemaking on 10 CFR Part 53, Risk-Informed, Technology-Inclusive Regulatory Framework for Advanced Reactors, (Docket ID NRC-2019-0062) dated August 31, 2022 3 Comprehensive Industry Comments on the NRCs Rulemaking on, Risk-Informed, Technology-Inclusive Regulatory Framework for Advanced Reactors (RIN-3150-AK31; NRC-2019-0062) dated November 5, 2021 (ML21309A578) 4 NEI Paper on Licensing Approaches for the NRCs Rulemaking on, Risk-Informed, Technology-Inclusive Regulatory Framework for Advanced Reactors (RIN-3150-AK31; NRC-2019-0062) dated September 28, 2021 (ML21274A070)
Mr. Mohamed Shams July 24, 2024 Page 2 Nuclear Energy Institute outcome is achieved primarily through the pursuit of two of the Commissions directed changes: 1) disapprove the codification of the Quantiative Health Objectives (QHOs)..[and].. specify that applicants must propose a comprehensive plant risk metric (or set of metrics), and 2) not apply consensus PRA standards as a strict checklist of requirements for PRA acceptability determinations (i.e., delete most of the details in 53.450).
As orginially proposed, Part 53 QHO and PRA requirements would have resulted in the Licensing Modernization Project (LMP) being the only known licensing approach that would be capable of complying with Part 53 requirements. The NRC changes to Part 53 in response to the Commissions direction are expected to be flexible, inclusive, and enable many forms of risk-informed licensing approaches to be capable of complying with Part 53 requirements. In this regard, a Part 53 that allows the use of LMP, IAEA, conservative supplemental evaluations, bounding (including the alternative evaluation for risk insights (AERI) approach), and other approaches by providing high-level, performance-based requirements would result in new framework that is workable for all advanced reactors.
Part 53 Content of Application Guidance Not Currently Under Development As the NRC develops more flexible approaches to using risk-insights in Part 53, guidance is needed to provide clarity on the implementation of Part 53 requirements for the development of the licensing methodology and the content of application for the various types of licensing approaches that are expected to be pursued (e.g., LMP, IAEA, conservative supplemental evaluations and bounding approaches).5 NEI is offering to develop technology-inclusive risk-informed and performance-based (TI-RIPB) guidance for the various licensing approaches that would be viable in Part 53. This guidance would support the development of specific licensing methodologies for Part 53, that would be equivalent to the LMP methodlogy that was developed for Parts 50 and 52 and is suitable for use in Part 53. NEI began development of such guidance in 2021 and discontinued the effort when the NRC decided to pursue a two-framework solution to Part 53. NEI is seeking NRC feedback before we invest available resources.
We would utilize our experience in developing LMP and would submit it to the NRC for endorsement, similar to our efforts to develop NEI 18-04, which was subsequently endorsed by NRC in Regulatory Guide 1.233. Although not anticipated, if there are needed changes to NEI 18-04 to align with Part 53 requirements, that would be addressed through the effort to develop TI-RIPB guidance for Part 53.
If the NRC is supportive of NEI developing guidance, then we will work with the staff to ensure that the development of this guidance is consistent with the NRCs schedule and plans for stakeholder engagement.
Alternatives to Framework B NEI has worked with our members to develop industrys perspective on the Commissions request for the NRC Staff to develop an options paper for the use of Framework B. In evaluating Framework B, it is noted 5 Technology-inclusive, Risk-informed, Performance-based Approaches for Development of Licensing Bases Under Part 53 (ML21274A070)
Mr. Mohamed Shams July 24, 2024 Page 3 Nuclear Energy Institute that the NRCs changes to Part 53 to make it more flexible and inclusive, pursuant to the removal of QHOs from the rule and the elimination of details in the PRA requirements, would achieve the industrys long requested single Part 53 framework. Making Part 53 flexible and inclusive in the approaches for applying risk-insights would also enable the AERI approach developed under Framework B to be used to comply with Part 53 requirements. As such, there is nothing unique in Framework B that is not already available under Parts 50 and 52 today, or in a future Part 53. Therefore, our recommendation is that the NRC pursue Option 3 by discontinuing pursuit of Framework B, with the exception of moving AERI into guidance in Part 53.
Financial Qualifications Standard for Non-Electric Utility Applicants Part 53 should provide adequate stakeholder engagement on the proposed requirements in §53.1670 and in §53.6370 that a CP, OL, or COL applicant possess or have reasonable assurance of obtaining the funds necessary for the activities for which the permit or license is sought. In SRM-SECY-2018-0026 (July 14, 2022), the Commission disapproved a proposed rule submitted by the NRC staff in 2018, but directed the staff to solicit stakeholder feedback on this matter through a series of questions in the Federal Register notice for the Part 53 proposed rule. The staff included these questions, including whether a different FQ standard should be used for merchant new reactor applicants, in the draft proposed Part 53 rule provided to the Commission last year. While SRM-SECY-23-0021 does not mention FQ, we believe the Commissions directive in SRM-SECY-2018-0026 still applies, and that the specific FQ questions listed therein should be included in the forthcoming Part 53 proposed rule to allow for adequate stakeholder feedback. NEI intends to respond to those questions in full at the proposed rule stage.
We believe that the foregoing topics, at a minimum, would benefit from stakeholder engagement as the staff works to implement the Commission directions in SRM-SECY-23-0021 and develop a proposed Part 53 for public comment. We would welcome the opportunity to engage with the staff to further share our views on these important issues.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me, or Jon Facemire at jwf@nei.org.
Sincerely, Marc Nichol, Executive Director C:
Mr. Robert Taylor, NRR, NRC Mr. Steve Lynch, NRR, NRC NRC Document Control Desk