ML19227A238: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:}}
{{#Wiki_filter:United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Official Hearing Exhibit In the Matter of:                  TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY (Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application)
Commission Mandatory Hearing Docket #: 05200047 Exhibit #: TVA-005-MA-CM01                    Identified: 8/14/2019 Admitted: 8/14/2019                          Withdrawn:
Rejected:                                      Stricken:
Other:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY                                          Docket No. 52-047-ESP (Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application)
Hearing Exhibit Exhibit Number: TVA-005 Exhibit
 
==Title:==
Tennessee Valley Authoritys Presentation Slides: Safety Panel
 
Safety Panel ESPA Emergency Preparedness Approach Archie Manoharan - Licensing Engineer Alex Young - Design Engineer 1
 
ESPA - Emergency Preparedness Approach Emergency Planning Information - 3 Areas Emergency Plan
        -  Two major features Emergency Plans
              -    Part 5A - Site Boundary plume exposure pathway (PEP) emergency planning zone (EPZ) Emergency Plan
              -    Part 5B Mile PEP EPZ Emergency Plan Exemptions and Departures
        -  2 sets of exemption requests in Part 6 - accompany the less than 10-mile EPZ emergency plans in Part 5
              -    Exemption requests for a PEP EPZ at Site Boundary
              -    Exemption requests for a 2-mile PEP EPZ PEP EPZ Sizing Methodology
        -  Dose-Based, consequence-oriented and risk-informed approach
        -  Reasonable assurance for adequate protection
        -  Described in Part 2, SSAR, Section 13.3, Emergency Preparedness The final EPZ size for the Clinch River Site will be determined in a future application NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 18 2
 
Part 5 - Emergency Plan TVA developed two distinct major features of an emergency plan.
Each plan proposes major features under 10 CFR 50.47 and appendix E to Part 50, as required by 10 CFR 52.17(b)(2)(i) and addresses the 16 planning standards in NUREG-0654, Section II.
      -  Part 5A - major features of an Emergency Plan for a PEP EPZ consisting of the area encompassed by the Site Boundary.
      -  Part 5B -major features of an Emergency Plan for a PEP EPZ consisting of an area approximately two miles in radius surrounding the Clinch River Site.
Letters of Support for the project from local counties and State NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 19 3
 
Part 5A - Emergency Plan (Site Boundary EPZ)
NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 20 4
 
Part 5B - Emergency Plan (2-Mile EPZ)
NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 21 5
 
Part 6 - Exemptions and Departures Pursuant to 10 CFR 52.7, Specific Exemptions, which is governed by 10 CFR 50.12, Specific Exemptions, TVA requested exemptions from:
10 CFR 50.47(b) regarding onsite and offsite emergency response plans for nuclear power reactor 10 CFR 50.33(g) and 10 CFR 50.47(c)(2) to establish PEP EPZ for nuclear power plants 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, which establish the elements that make up the content of emergency plans Two Sets of Exemptions Exemptions for an approximate 2-mile PEP EPZ
      -  Deviate from 10-mile PEP EPZ Exemptions for a PEP EPZ established at the Site Boundary
      -  Deviate from 10-mile PEP EPZ
      -  Various elements of a formal offsite emergency plan
      -  Evacuation time estimates
      -  Certain elements of offsite notifications and exercises NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 22 6
 
Part 2 - PEP EPZ Sizing Methodology SMR design and safety advancements Consistent with NUREG-0396 sizing rationale
    - Addresses a broad spectrum of accidents
    - Aligns with recommended dose criteria
    - Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) early-phase (Protection Action Guides)
(PAGs) - 1 roentgen equivalent man (rem) total effective dose equivalent (TEDE)
NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 23 7
 
Part 2 - PEP EPZ Sizing Methodology Technical Criteria Criterion A - design basis accidents
      -  EPA early-phase PAG Criterion B - less severe core melt accidents
      -  Core Damage Frequency (CDF) 1E-6 per reactor-year (rx-yr)
      -  Intact containment
      -  EPA early-phase PAG Criterion C - more severe core melt accidents
      -  CDF 1E-7 per rx-yr
      -  Containment bypass or failure
      -  Sufficient size to provide Reduction in Early Severe Health Effects A future application would implement the EPZ size methodology, with site- and design-specific input, to determine the EPZ size for the Clinch River Site NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 24 8
 
Design-Specific Example Analysis Evaluates NuScale Power Plant at Clinch River Site Criteria  Site Boundary Dose TEDE (rem)        EPA Early Phase PAG Limit TEDE (rem)
A                  0.104                                        1 B                  0.158                                        1 C                No accident scenarios met the required screening criteria.
NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 25 9
 
Non-Design-Specific Plant Parameter NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 26 10
 
Summary - Emergency Preparedness Approach Part 5 Emergency Plan Approval of the major features of the Site Boundary (Part 5A) and 2-mile emergency plan (Part 5B)
A future application would describe a complete and integrated emergency plan Part 6 Exemptions Primarily to deviate from the current 10-mile PEP EPZ size requirement based implementation of the dose-based, consequence-oriented methodology Part 2 Plume Exposure Pathway EPZ Methodology Risk-informed, dose-based, consequence-oriented approach customized for SMR technology Approval to use the methodology for design and site specific implementation in a future application NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 27 11}}

Latest revision as of 16:29, 16 March 2020

Official Exhibit - TVA-005-MA-CM01 - Tennessee Valley Authority'S Presentation Slides: Safety Panel
ML19227A238
Person / Time
Site: Clinch River
Issue date: 08/07/2019
From: Codevilla D, Dreke R
Tennessee Valley Authority
To:
NRC/OCM
SECY RAS
References
52-047-ESP, ASLBP 17-954-01-ESP-BD02, RAS 55147
Download: ML19227A238 (12)


Text

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Official Hearing Exhibit In the Matter of: TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY (Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application)

Commission Mandatory Hearing Docket #: 05200047 Exhibit #: TVA-005-MA-CM01 Identified: 8/14/2019 Admitted: 8/14/2019 Withdrawn:

Rejected: Stricken:

Other:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Docket No. 52-047-ESP (Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application)

Hearing Exhibit Exhibit Number: TVA-005 Exhibit

Title:

Tennessee Valley Authoritys Presentation Slides: Safety Panel

Safety Panel ESPA Emergency Preparedness Approach Archie Manoharan - Licensing Engineer Alex Young - Design Engineer 1

ESPA - Emergency Preparedness Approach Emergency Planning Information - 3 Areas Emergency Plan

- Two major features Emergency Plans

- Part 5A - Site Boundary plume exposure pathway (PEP) emergency planning zone (EPZ) Emergency Plan

- Part 5B Mile PEP EPZ Emergency Plan Exemptions and Departures

- 2 sets of exemption requests in Part 6 - accompany the less than 10-mile EPZ emergency plans in Part 5

- Exemption requests for a PEP EPZ at Site Boundary

- Exemption requests for a 2-mile PEP EPZ PEP EPZ Sizing Methodology

- Dose-Based, consequence-oriented and risk-informed approach

- Reasonable assurance for adequate protection

- Described in Part 2, SSAR, Section 13.3, Emergency Preparedness The final EPZ size for the Clinch River Site will be determined in a future application NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 18 2

Part 5 - Emergency Plan TVA developed two distinct major features of an emergency plan.

Each plan proposes major features under 10 CFR 50.47 and appendix E to Part 50, as required by 10 CFR 52.17(b)(2)(i) and addresses the 16 planning standards in NUREG-0654,Section II.

- Part 5A - major features of an Emergency Plan for a PEP EPZ consisting of the area encompassed by the Site Boundary.

- Part 5B -major features of an Emergency Plan for a PEP EPZ consisting of an area approximately two miles in radius surrounding the Clinch River Site.

Letters of Support for the project from local counties and State NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 19 3

Part 5A - Emergency Plan (Site Boundary EPZ)

NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 20 4

Part 5B - Emergency Plan (2-Mile EPZ)

NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 21 5

Part 6 - Exemptions and Departures Pursuant to 10 CFR 52.7, Specific Exemptions, which is governed by 10 CFR 50.12, Specific Exemptions, TVA requested exemptions from:

10 CFR 50.47(b) regarding onsite and offsite emergency response plans for nuclear power reactor 10 CFR 50.33(g) and 10 CFR 50.47(c)(2) to establish PEP EPZ for nuclear power plants 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, which establish the elements that make up the content of emergency plans Two Sets of Exemptions Exemptions for an approximate 2-mile PEP EPZ

- Deviate from 10-mile PEP EPZ Exemptions for a PEP EPZ established at the Site Boundary

- Deviate from 10-mile PEP EPZ

- Various elements of a formal offsite emergency plan

- Evacuation time estimates

- Certain elements of offsite notifications and exercises NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 22 6

Part 2 - PEP EPZ Sizing Methodology SMR design and safety advancements Consistent with NUREG-0396 sizing rationale

- Addresses a broad spectrum of accidents

- Aligns with recommended dose criteria

- Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) early-phase (Protection Action Guides)

(PAGs) - 1 roentgen equivalent man (rem) total effective dose equivalent (TEDE)

NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 23 7

Part 2 - PEP EPZ Sizing Methodology Technical Criteria Criterion A - design basis accidents

- EPA early-phase PAG Criterion B - less severe core melt accidents

- Core Damage Frequency (CDF) 1E-6 per reactor-year (rx-yr)

- Intact containment

- EPA early-phase PAG Criterion C - more severe core melt accidents

- CDF 1E-7 per rx-yr

- Containment bypass or failure

- Sufficient size to provide Reduction in Early Severe Health Effects A future application would implement the EPZ size methodology, with site- and design-specific input, to determine the EPZ size for the Clinch River Site NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 24 8

Design-Specific Example Analysis Evaluates NuScale Power Plant at Clinch River Site Criteria Site Boundary Dose TEDE (rem) EPA Early Phase PAG Limit TEDE (rem)

A 0.104 1 B 0.158 1 C No accident scenarios met the required screening criteria.

NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 25 9

Non-Design-Specific Plant Parameter NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 26 10

Summary - Emergency Preparedness Approach Part 5 Emergency Plan Approval of the major features of the Site Boundary (Part 5A) and 2-mile emergency plan (Part 5B)

A future application would describe a complete and integrated emergency plan Part 6 Exemptions Primarily to deviate from the current 10-mile PEP EPZ size requirement based implementation of the dose-based, consequence-oriented methodology Part 2 Plume Exposure Pathway EPZ Methodology Risk-informed, dose-based, consequence-oriented approach customized for SMR technology Approval to use the methodology for design and site specific implementation in a future application NRC Commission Hearing - Safety Panell 27 11