ML23292A081
| ML23292A081 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/30/2013 |
| From: | Piccone J Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards |
| To: | |
| References | |
| RG-3.014, Rev 0 | |
| Download: ML23292A081 (2) | |
Text
Regulatory Guide Periodic Review Regulatory Guide Number: 3.14, Revision 0
Title:
Seismic Design Classification for Plutonium Processing and Fuel Fabrication Plants Office/division/branch: NMSS/SFAS Technical Lead: Josephine Piccone Staff Action Decided: Reviewed with no issues identified (1) What are the known technical or regulatory issues with the current version of the Regulatory Guide (RG)?
Regulatory Guide 3.14, Seismic Design Classification for Plutonium Processing and Fuel Fabrication Plants, provides guidance to applicants for a plutonium processing and fuel fabrication facility license regarding an acceptable method for identification of principal structures, systems, and components important to safety that must be designed to withstand the effects of earthquakes.
Although the staff has no specific technical issues or concerns with the guidance in RG 3.14, it may need to update its guidance or develop guidance specific to reprocessing facilities if an application for a reprocessing facility license is expected.
(2) What is the impact on internal and external stakeholders of not updating the RG for the known issues, in terms of anticipated numbers of licensing and inspection activities over the next several years?
Currently, the guidance in RG 3.14 is used in the licensing basis of the Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication facility (MFFF). Since its guidance remains generally relevant, there is no immediate need to update the content of RG 3.14. There is no known impact on licensing or inspection activities.
In addition, at this time there are no license applications, other than the MFFF, pending before the Commission and none are expected in the near future. As a result, there are no impacts on licensing and inspection activities with the current RG versions.
(3) What is an estimate of the level of effort needed to address identified issues in terms of full-time equivalent (FTE) and contractor resources?
NMSS/SFAS cannot provide a meaningful estimate at this time of the resources it would require to revise RG 3.14 to extend its applicability to reprocessing facilities. However, any revisions to RG 3.14 for applicability to reprocessing facilities would likely be minor and not require significant resources.
(4) Based on the answers to the questions above, what is the staff action for this guide (Reviewed with no issues identified, Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration, Revise, or Withdraw)?
Reviewed with no issues identified. However, if sufficient industry interest in licensing a reprocessing facility is expressed, and if the Commission directs the staff to prepare for the reviews, then the staff could consider issuing new or revised guidance.
(5) Provide a conceptual plan and timeframe to address the issues identified during the review.
NOTE: This review was conducted in September 2013 and reflects the staffs plans as of that date. These plans are tentative and are subject to change.