ML103260128

Withdrawn NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2011-02 Licensing Submittal Information and Design Development Activities for Small Modular Reactor Designs

ML103260128
Person / Time
Issue date:	02/02/2011
From:	Wesley Held NRC/NRO/ARP, Division of Policy and Rulemaking
To:	Blount T, Mayfield M
Wesley Held, NRO/ARP, 415-1583
References
G20110142, LTR-11-00874, SECY-2011-0142 RIS-11-002
Download: ML103260128 (9)

See also: RIS 2011-02

Text

Withdrawn

NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2011-02, Licensing

Submittal Information and Design Development Activities

for Small Modular Reactor Designs, dated

February 2, 2011, has been withdrawn.

ADAMS Accession Number: ML103260128

See Federal Register notice dated October 25, 2016

81 FR 73448

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF NEW REACTORS

WASHINGTON, DC 20555-0001

February 2, 2011

NRC REGULATORY ISSUE SUMMARY 2011-02

LICENSING SUBMITTAL INFORMATION AND DESIGN DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

FOR SMALL MODULAR REACTOR DESIGNS

ADDRESSEES

All applicants for a construction permit (CP), early site permit (ESP), combined license (COL),

standard design certification (DC), standard design approval (DA), or manufacturing license

(ML) for a nuclear power plant that references a small modular reactor (SMR) design under the

provisions of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Domestic Licensing

of Production and Utilization Facilities, or 10 CFR Part 52, Licenses, Certifications, and

Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants. For the purpose of this regulatory issue summary (RIS),

SMRs are defined using the International Atomic Energy Agency definition of small- and

medium-sized reactors with an electrical output of less than 700 megawatts.

INTENT

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this RIS to obtain new or updated

information on the scheduling of CP, ESP, COL, DC, DA, or ML application submissions related

to advanced reactor designs. These designs include integral pressurized-water reactors, high-

temperature gas-cooled reactors, liquid-metal-cooled reactors, and other small- or medium-

sized reactor designs. The purpose of this RIS is to facilitate the establishment of a predictable

and consistent method for reviewing applications. To this end, the NRC also seeks new or

updated information on the status of a number of other addressee activities as discussed below.

This RIS is a follow-on to RIS 2010-03, Licensing Submittal Information for Small Modular

Reactor Designs dated February 25, 2010, which seeks similar information. The staff asks any

potential applicant that meets the criteria in the addressee section above to also submit a

response to this RIS.

This RIS does not transmit or imply any new or changed requirements or staff positions.

Submission of advanced notice of the addressees plans or comments in response to this RIS is

strictly voluntary. Although no specific action or written response is required, this information

will enable the NRC to plan effectively for anticipated licensing-related review and inspection

activities.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The design-centered review approach (DCRA) is the NRCs strategy to manage the licensing

review workload, and the updated information that this RIS solicits will aid the agencys

RIS 2011-02

Page 2 of 7

schedule and resource planning efforts. The NRC outlined the DCRA in RIS 2006-06, New

Reactor Standardization Needed to Support the Design-Centered Licensing Review Approach,

dated May 31, 2006. In summary, the DCRA is a review strategy for COL applications that

reference a particular design. This approach will use, to the maximum extent practicable, a

one issue, one review, one position strategy to optimize the review effort, the resources

needed to perform these reviews, and the review schedules. Specifically, the staff will conduct

one review for each issue associated with a particular design, reach a decision on each issue,

and if possible rely on that decision in reviewing subsequent applications. Applicants must

achieve a consistent level of standardization for the DCRA to be fully effective. As discussed at

an NRC-sponsored workshop in October 2009 on SMRs, the philosophy of one issue, one

review, one position can also be used across designs and reactor technologies to address

policy or technical issues generally associated with SMRs.

SUMMARY OF ISSUE

The NRC anticipates receiving a number of CP, ESP, DC, DA, ML, and COL applications

starting as early as 2012 for a number of advanced reactor designs. The review of these

advanced reactor designs will require the resolution of a number of important policy and

technical issues. The NRC expects that many of these issues will require an indepth review and

that the resolution of some issues will involve decisions by the Commission.

RIS 2006-06 suggests that COL and DC applicants form design-centered working groups

(DCWGs) to facilitate the standardization of COL applications. The NRC staff seeks information

on potential DCWGs for each of the designs. As discussed at the October 2009 SMR

workshop, this process may also be beneficial for working groups generally associated with

SMRs and with specific reactor technologies. The NRC would appreciate information about the

formation of such groups that may interact with the staff on generic or technology-related policy

or technical issues. The NRC must identify possible applications and other interactions to

formulate resource needs and budget requests for future fiscal years. In addition, the NRC staff

expects to issue requests for additional information (RAIs) to complete its reviews. The staff

seeks standardized responses to RAIs associated with applications consistent with the DCWGs

or generic or technology-related working groups. Applicants will need to adhere to a specified

RAI response period, including coordination within the DCWG or other working groups, to

enable the NRC to maintain its anticipated review schedules.

The NRC encourages potential applicants to provide the agency with design and licensing

plans, construction plans, and preapplication activities that will be used to demonstrate

compliance with NRC safety and environmental requirements, such as quality assurance

requirements. In addition, information that potential applicants submit to the NRC will allow it to

coordinate preapplication activities and, as appropriate, conduct vendor audits before the

submission of applications. Furthermore, information on vendors and consultants that assist in

the preparation of the application will facilitate a more efficient licensing review of the

applications. Regulatory Position C.IV.7 in Regulatory Guide 1.206, Combined License

Applications for Nuclear Power Plants (LWR Edition), issued June 2007, provides more

information on preapplication activities (http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/reg-

guides/power-reactors/rg/01-206/).

RIS 2011-02

Page 3 of 7

VOLUNTARY RESPONSE

The NRC is developing preapplication, licensing, and project plans for the advanced reactor

program. To support this effort, the NRC is seeking new or updated information on schedules

for submitting CP, DC, DA, ML, ESP, and COL applications and on the status of a variety of

design-related activities for small- and medium-sized reactors. The NRC may share the

planned application schedules with other Federal agencies to support its planning efforts related

to the licensing of new plants. If a prospective applicant deems this information proprietary, a

request to withhold information from public disclosure in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, Public

Inspections, Exemptions, Request for Withholding, may accompany the information.

RIS 2004-011, Supporting Information Associated with Requests for Withholding Proprietary

Information, dated June 29, 2004, provides additional information about requests for

withholding proprietary information from public disclosure. The NRC requests that potential

applicants request withholding only for information that they currently treat as proprietary and,

provide, where necessary, the proprietary information in designated attachments to their

response to this RIS.

If an addressee chooses to provide a voluntary response, the NRC would like to obtain the

information within 45 days of the date of this RIS. Respondents should provide the NRC with

the information outlined below, based on realistic, best estimate predictions of applications or

other submittals.

Design and Licensing Submittal Information

• When (month and year) are applications planned for design-related applications and

what NRC action will be requested (i.e., DC, DA, ML, or COL that does not reference a

DC or DA)?

• Will the applicants be organized into DCWGs? If known, what is the membership of the

DCWG and which party is the primary point-of-contact designated for each DCWG?

Have protocols been developed to provide coordinated responses for RAIs with generic

applicability to a design center?

• Which applicant that references the design will be designated as the reference COL

applicant or, alternatively, how will various applications (e.g., CP, DC, COL) be

coordinated to achieve the desired design-centered licensing review approach?

• When (month and year) will CP, COL, or ESP applications be submitted for review? In

addition, what are the design, site location, and number of units at each site?

• Are vendors or consultants assisting in the preparation of the application(s)? If so,

please describe roles and responsibilities for the design and licensing activities.

RIS 2011-02

Page 4 of 7

Design, Testing, and Application Preparation

• What is the current status of the development of the plant design (i.e., conceptual,

preliminary, or finalizing)? Has the applicant established a schedule for completing the

design? If so, please describe the schedule.

• What is the applicants current status (i.e., planning, in progress, or complete) for the

qualification of fuel and other major systems and components? Has the applicant

established a schedule for completing the qualification testing? If so, please describe

the schedule.

• What is the applicants status (i.e., planning, in progress, or complete) in developing

computer codes and models to perform design and licensing analyses? Has the

applicant defined principal design criteria, licensing-basis events, and other fundamental

design/licensing relationships? Has the applicant established a schedule for completing

the design and licensing analyses? If so, please describe the schedule.

• What is the applicants status in designing, constructing, and using thermal-fluidic testing

facilities and in using such tests to validate computer models? Has the applicant

established a schedule for the construction of testing facilities? If so, please describe

the schedule. Has the applicant established a schedule for completing the thermal-

fluidic testing? If so, please describe the schedule.

• What is the applicants status in defining system and component suppliers (including

fuel), manufacturing processes, and other major factors that could influence design

decisions? Has the applicant established a schedule for identifying suppliers and key

contractors? If so, please describe the schedule.

• What is the applicants status in the development and implementation of a quality

assurance program?

• What is the applicants status in the development of probabilistic risk assessment

models needed to support applications (e.g., needed for Chapter 19 of safety analysis

reports or needed to support risk-informed licensing approaches)? What are the

applicants plans for using the probabilistic risk assessment models in the development

of the design?

• What is the applicants status in the development, construction, and use of a control

room simulator?

• What are the applicants current staffing levels (e.g., full-time equivalent staff) for the

design and testing of the reactor design? Does the applicant have plans to increase

staffing? If so, please describe future staffing plans.

• What are the applicants current and future plans for using contractors to support plant

design and testing (e.g., how many part-time and full-time contractors does or will the

applicant employ)?

RIS 2011-02

Page 5 of 7

White Papers and Technical/Topical Reports

• What are the applicants plans on the submittal of white papers or technical/topical

reports related to the features of their design or the resolution of policy or technical

issues? Has the applicant established a schedule for submitting such reports? If so,

please describe the schedule.

• For ESP applicants, will the applicant seek approval of either proposed major features

of the emergency plans in accordance with 10 CFR 52.17(b)(2)(i) or proposed

complete and integrated emergency plans in accordance with 10 CFR 52.17(b)(2)(ii)?

Manufacturing Licenses

• Describe possible interest in the use of the provisions in Subpart F, Manufacturing

Licenses, of 10 CFR Part 52 instead of, or in combination with, other licensing

approaches (e.g., DC or DA).

• Describe the expected combination of manufacturing, fabrication, and site construction

that results in a completed operational nuclear power plant. For example, what systems,

structures, and components are being fabricated and delivered; which of these are being

assembled on site; and which are being constructed on site?

• Describe the desired scope of a possible manufacturing license and what design or

licensing process would address the remainder of the proposed nuclear power plant.

For example, would the manufacturing license address an essentially complete plant or

would it be limited to the primary coolant system basically consisting of the integral

reactor vessel and internals?

Addressees that choose to provide a voluntary response should send it to the U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

BACKFIT DISCUSSION

This RIS requires no action or written response. Any action on the part of addressees to

provide information on standardization or advanced notice of intent to pursue a COL in

accordance with the guidance contained in this RIS aids the NRC in planning the use of its

resources and is strictly voluntary. Therefore, this RIS does not constitute a backfit under

10 CFR 50.109, Backfitting, and the staff did not perform a backfit analysis.

FEDERAL REGISTER NOTIFICATION

The NRC did not publish a notice of opportunity for public comment on this RIS in the Federal

Register because the RIS pertains to an administrative aspect of the regulatory process that

involves the voluntary submission of information on the part of addressees.

RIS 2011-02

Page 6 of 7

CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW ACT

The NRC has determined that this action is not a rule as designated by the Congressional

Review Act (5 U.S.C. §§ 801-808) and, therefore, is not subject to the Act.

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT STATEMENT

This RIS contains information collection requirements that are subject to the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). These information collections were approved

by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB control numbers 3150-0011 and

3150-0151.

The NRC estimates that the burden to the public for these voluntary information collections will

average 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing

data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the

information collection. Send comments on this burden estimate or any other aspects of these

information collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Information

Services Branch (T-5 F53), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-

0001, or by e-mail to Infocollects.Resource@nrc.gov, and to the Desk Officer, Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-10202, (3150-0011), Office of Management and

Budget, Washington, DC 20503.

PUBLIC PROTECTION NOTIFICATION

The NRC may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an

information collection request or requirement unless the requesting document displays a

currently valid OMB control number.

RIS 2011-02

Page 7 of 7

CONTACT

Please direct any questions about this matter to the technical contact listed below.

/RA/

Michael E. Mayfield, Director

Advanced Reactor Program

Office of New Reactors

/RA/

Thomas B. Blount, Acting Director

Division of Policy and Rulemaking

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical Contact: Wesley W. Held, Project Manager

NRO/ARP/ARB1

(301) 415-1583

E-mail: wesley.held@nrc.gov

Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site,

http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections.

RIS 2011-02

Page 7 of 7

CONTACT

Please direct any questions about this matter to the technical contact listed below.

/RA/

Michael E. Mayfield, Director

Advanced Reactor Program

Office of New Reactors

/RA/

Thomas B. Blount, Acting Director

Division of Policy and Rulemaking

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical Contact: Wesley W. Held, Project Manager

NRO/ARP/ARB1

(301) 415-1583

E-mail: wesley.held@nrc.gov

Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site,

http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections

DISTRIBUTION:

PUBLIC

ARP R/F RidsOeMailCenter RidsNroArp

MMayfield, NRO RidsOgcMailCenter RidsNroArpArb2

SMagruder, NRO RidsOIS RidsNroArpArb1

WReckley, NRO RidsNroOd

ADAMS Accession Number: ML103260128 *via e-mail NRO-002

OFFICE NRO/ARP/ARB1 Tech Editor* NRO/ARP/ARB1 OGC/CRA OE

TRothschild (SCrockett NHilton (CFaria-Ocasio

NAME WHeld KAzariah-Kribbs* WReckley*

for)* for) *

DATE 11/19/10 11/29/10 1/26 /11 1/18 /11 1/20/11

OFFICE NRO/PMDA OIS NRO/ARP OGC/NLO NRR/DPR/LA

MZobler (SVrahoretis

NAME BGusack TDonnell * MMayfield CHawes* CMH

for)

DATE 1/21/11 1/13 /11 1/25/11 1/25 /11 1/28/11

OFFICE NRR/DPR/PGCB NRR/DPR/PGCB NRR/DPR

NAME TMensah SRosenburg TBlount

DATE 1/31/11 1/31/11 2/1/11

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY