ML18304A258

October 17, 2018 Summary of Category 1 Public Teleconference with NRC and NuScale Power, Llc., to Discuss the Staff'S Feedback on NuScale Proposed Supplemental Response to Request for Additional Information No. 9415

ML18304A258
Person / Time
Site:	NuScale
Issue date:	11/07/2018
From:	Prosanta Chowdhury NRC/NRO/DLSE/LB1
To:	Samson Lee NRC/NRO/DLSE/LB1
Chowdhury P/NRO/415-1647
References
Download: ML18304A258 (7)

Text

November 7, 2018 MEMORANDUM TO: Samuel S. Lee, Chief Licensing Branch 1 Division of Licensing, Siting and Environmental Analysis Office of New Reactors FROM: Prosanta Chowdhury, Project Manager /RA Greg Cranston for/

Licensing Branch 1 Division of Licensing, Siting and Environmental Analysis Office of New Reactors

SUMMARY

OF THE OCTOBER 17, 2018, U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CATEGORY 1 PUBLIC TELECONFERENCE WITH NUSCALE POWER, LLC., TO DISCUSS THE STAFFS FEEDBACK ON NUSCALE PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NO. 9415 On October 17, 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff held a Category 1 teleconference public meeting with NuScale Power, LLC., (NuScale) to discuss the staffs feedback on NuScale proposed supplemental response to the staffs Request for Additional Information (RAI) No. 9415 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession Number ML18288A545). This RAI is related to NuScale Design Certification Application, Chapter 18, "Human Factors Engineering." No members of the public participated in this meeting.

The public meeting notice can be found in ADAMS under Accession Number ML18275A084.

This meeting notice was also posted on the NRC public web site.

CONTACT: Prosanta Chowdhury, NRO/DLSE 301-415-1647

S. Lee Enclosed is the Meeting Agenda (Enclosure 1), List of Attendees (Enclosure 2), and Meeting Summary (Enclosure 3).

Docket No.52-048

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/encl.: DC NuScale Power, LLC Listserv

ML18304A258 NRO-002 OFFICE NRO/DLSE/LB1: PM NRO/DLSE/LB1: LA NRO/DLSE/LB1: PM NAME PChowdhury* CSmith* PChowdhury (GCranston for)

DATE 10/31/2018 10/31/2018 11/07/2018 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CATEGORY 1 PUBLIC TELECONFERENCE WITH NUSCALE POWER, LLC., TO DISCUSS THE STAFFS FEEDBACK ON NUSCALE PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTALRESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NO. 9415 MEETING AGENDA Time Topic 1:00 p.m. - 1:05 p.m. Introduction 1:05 p.m. - 2:45 p.m. Discussion on NuScales proposed supplemental response to RAI 9415 2:45 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Public Comments 3:00 p.m. Adjourn Meeting Enclosure 1

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CATEGORY 1 PUBLIC TELECONFERENCE WITH NUSCALE POWER, LLC., TO DISCUSS THE STAFFS FEEDBACK ON NUSCALE PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTALRESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NO. 9415 LIST OF ATTENDEES Name Organization Brian Green U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

James Gaslevic NRC Lauren Nist NRC Prosanta Chowdhury NRC Nadja Joergensen NuScale Power, LLC (NuScale)

Paul Pieringer NuScale Doug Bowman NuScale Enclosure 2

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CATEGORY 1 PUBLIC TELECONFERENCE WITH NUSCALE POWER, LLC., TO DISCUSS THE STAFFS FEEDBACK ON NUSCALE PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTALRESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NO. 9415

SUMMARY

On October 17, 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff held a Category 1 teleconference public meeting with NuScale Power, LLC., (NuScale) to discuss the staffs feedback on NuScales proposed supplemental response to Request for Additional Information (RAI) No. 9415 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession Number ML18288A545). This RAI is related to NuScale Design Certification Application, Chapter 18, "Human Factors Engineering." Attendees for this meeting are listed in Enclosure 2.

No members of the public joined this meeting.

At this teleconference public meeting, the staff discussed their feedback on NuScale proposed supplemental response to RAI 9415 as follows:

1. The staff agrees that a combined license (COL) information item is not necessary or appropriate for the Design Implementation (DI) Results Summary Report (RSR).

2. The proposed edits to the design implementation inspection, test, analysis, and acceptance criterion (ITAAC) language in Tier 1. Table 3.15-1, ITAAC No. 1 and associated Tier 2, Table 14.3-2 ITAAC Discussion provide a good starting point for more discussion to refine the ITAAC wording.

The staff is still evaluating the portions of NuScales proposal that discuss the four DI activities.

The detailed discussions at this meeting involving the NuScales proposed supplemental response (ML18288A545) resulted in the following actions:

1. The staff will identify words in the DI Implementation Plan (IP) that limit applying future Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) insights to the human factors engineering (HFE) program.

2. NuScale will propose changes to the DI IP to remove any implied limitation on the application of PRA insights to the HFE program.

3. NuScale will review Tier 1 and Tier 2 information to ensure final design configuration is being described, not the process used to develop the design.

4. The staff will evaluate proposed ITAAC language for acceptability in light of the proposal to not submit a DI RSR.

The staff stated that they would consider whether they would need the scope of the ITAAC to expand to include verification that the COL applicant appropriately address the Human Engineering Discrepancies (HEDs) that are not resolved prior to completion of the design certification review.

Enclosure 3

The staff understands that NuScale plans to resolve the Priority 1 HEDs identified prior to and from verification and validation (V&V) activities, which are issues with direct safety consequences or potential safety impact, prior to issuing the V&V RSR, and NuScale also stated in its response to RAI 9415 (ML18172A318) that it would resolve the Priority 2 HEDs, which are those that may adversely impact personnel performance in a way that has potential consequences to plant performance or structure, system, and component operability, before NuScale turns over the HFE program to a COL holder. Because NuScale plans to take care of these types of issues, NuScale asked at the public meeting why the staff would need to verify that the COL applicant adequately address issues of less significance. The staff stated that the verification would be important in those cases where Priority 1 or 2 issues were identified after design certification.