advanced reactor program overview of small modular reactor

Advanced Reactor Program Overview of Small Modular

Reactor Licensing Michael Mayfield, Director

Division of Advanced Reactors and RulemakingOffice Of New Reactors

May 30, 2012

Licensing in the U.S.• Pertinent Regulations are 10 CFR Parts 50 and 52• Part 52 developed to address licensing challenges experienced under 10 CFR

Part 50• Goals for 10 CFR Part 52:

– Stable and predictable licensing process– Resolve safety and environmental issues before authorizing construction– Reduce financial risk to licensees – Encourage standardization

• Part 20: Radiation Protection • Part 50 : Technical requirements for Safety and emergency preparedness• Part 51: Environmental requirements (NEPA)• Part 73: Security requirements• Part 100: Siting Criteria

2 2

Licensing in the U.S.

• Regulations and regulatory guidance are based on light water reactor technology

• Increasing use of probabilistic risk assessments (PRA) informing licensing decisions on safety

• The current regulatory structure is adequate for licensing other technologies (e.g. used to license Peach Bottom 1, Fort Saint Vrain)

• NRC evaluating the need for changes in guidance to support reviews of non-LWR technology

3 3

iPWR LicensingiPWR Licensing Review Process

Pre-Application Phase Activities

• Limited contact with potential Licensees and Applicants

• Limited topical/technical report reviews and feedback to potential Licensees and Applicants

• Existing review tools and processes used for all potential Licensees and Applicants

• Existing technical review methodology used as historically applied

Current Licensing Review Process

Pre-Application Phase Activities

• Extensive coordination between NRC and potential Licensees and Applicants

• NRC more engaged in review of technical design development - direct feedback to potential Licensees and Applicants

• Technical review guidance documents and regulations compared to potential designs to determine changes needed

• Updated technical review methodology incorporating Commission direction for use of risk-informed review approaches

4

iPWR Licensing (Cont.)

• Why Are We Planning To Do iPWR Licensing Reviews Differently?• Directed to do so: SRM-SECY 11-0024, “Use of Risk Insights to

Enhance the Safety Focus of Small Modular Reactor Reviews”• In order to gain efficiencies by engaging designers, potential

licensees, and stakeholders in meaningful pre-application interactions

• In order to identify / resolve key technical and policy issues as early in the pre-application process as possible

• To incorporate lessons learned from LLWR licensing reviews

5

Scope• SMRs fall into three broad groups based on reactor

technology

– High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactors• NGNP Alliance (prismatic)

– Small Pressurized Water Reactors• NuScale• mPower• Holtec HI-SMUR 140• Westinghouse SMR

– Liquid Metal-Cooled Fast Reactors• GE Hitachi PRISM• Toshiba 4S• Gen4 Energy Gen4 Module (Hyperion) • Advanced Reactor Concepts ARC-100

6

HTGRsNext Generation Nuclear Plant

• DOE funded program to use a Generation IV reactor for electricity and/or hydrogen production

• Joint DOE/NRC NGNP Licensing Strategy issued in August 2008

• DOE will not proceed with phase 2. Will focus on R&D and developing Regulatory Framework

• NRC working with DOE and INL on key policy issues.

7

NGNP Alliance

8

AREVA Prismatic Reactor (Based on AREVA ‘s ANTARES concept)

Reactor Power: 625 MWt

Outlet Conditions: 16.7Mpa, 566°C

Coolant: Helium

Fuel Design: TriSO particle

Refueling: 417 full power days

Licensing Plan: Construction Permit

Reactor

Steam Generators

Circulator

8

• Technology– Pressurized Water Reactors with nuclear steam supply components within the

reactor vessel for most designs

• Current iPWR designs being discussed:– Domestic

• NuScale Power – NuScale (45 MWe)• B&W – mPower (180 MWe)• Westinghouse (>225 MWe)• Holtec International - HISMUR (145 MWe)

– International• CNEA & INVAP, Argentina - CAREM (27 MWe)• KAERI, South Korea – SMART (100 MWe)

Integral Pressurized Water Reactors

9

NuScale Technology


Electrical Output: 45 MWe

Outlet Conditions: 1850 psig, 575°F

Coolant: Light Water

Fuel Design: Approximately halfheight,17 x 17 fuel bundles, UO2 fuelpellets, clad material – Zirc-4 or advanced Clad, negative reactivity coefficients, U235 enrichment = 4.95%

Refueling: 24 months

Licensing Plan: Design Certification

10

B&W mPower Technology



Outlet Conditions: 609°F

Coolant: Light water

Fuel Design: Standard PWR fuel

Refueling: 4 years


11

Westinghouse SMR


Electrical Output: >225 MWe


Fuel Design: Partial Height derivative of the 17x17 fuel bundles used in the AP1000 LLWR

Refueling: 24 months


12

Holtec HI-SMURHoltec Inherently Safe Modular Underground Reactor




Fuel Design: 32 assemblies standard 17x17 fuel bundles <5 wt% enrichment

Refueling: 3+ years

Licensing Plan: Construction Permit

13

Regulatory Review Landscape

• Experienced staff available to support iPWR reviews

• Skill-gap assessments performed for non-LWR technologies and gap closure plans being implemented

• Post-Fukushima impacts will be addressed for new designs

• Applicable operating experience from LWRs will be addressed (e.g., steam generator tubing and fuel cladding performance)

14

Policy Issues and Approaches• NRO MISSION:

• “…serve the public interest by enabling the safe, secure, and environmentally responsible use of nuclear power in meeting the Nation’s future energy needs.”

• Some of the critical policy issues for SMRs include

• Control Room Staffing• EP• Mechanistic Source Term• Security Requirements• Risk Informing SMR reviews• Multi Module Licensing• Manufacturing Licenses• Fees• Decommissioning Funding• Insurance and Liability 15

Policy Issues and Approaches• Control Room Staffing :

• Appropriate number of on-site licensed operators

• Proposed Resolution (SECY-11-0098):

• Near-term – SMR applicants to request an exemption from existing regulations.

• Task analysis will be critical to the staff’s review of an applicant’s human factors engineering (HFE) program.

• Long-term - Rulemaking to change staffing requirements for SMRs

16

Policy Issues and Approaches• Emergency Planning:

• Appropriate size of EPZ• Extent of onsite and offsite emergency

planning• Appropriate number of response staff

needed• Alert and notification requirements

• Proposed Resolution (SECY-11-0152):• Current NRC regulations allow for case-by-

case basis review.• NRC willing to consider generic resolutions

to emergency planning requirement issues for SMRs.

• Potential applicants should engage NRC early with specific proposals on emergency plans.

• Source term computation methodology is a key technical issue.

17

Policy Issues and Approaches

• Security Requirements :

• Appropriate number of security staff and adequate security of protected area


• Current framework is adequate

• SMR applicants to defend approaches that apply design features (e.g., underground, less reliance on human actions) that would allow reduced staffing

18

Policy Issues and Approaches• Risk-Informed Review Initiative

• Development of a framework to more fully integrate the use of risk insights into SMR reviews

• Development of risk-informed licensing review plans

• Goal of enhanced safety focus appropriate to SMRs and increased efficiency

• Proposed Resolution (SECY-11-0024):• Exploring more efficient approaches to conducting licensing reviews

relative to organizational structure• Develop procedures and process for new approach• Develop design Specific Review Standards for two iPWR

designs• Perform pilot study of an iPWR application by applying a more

risk-informed-technology neutral regulatory review framework.

19 19

Policy Issues and Approaches

• Decommissioning Funding :

• Adequate funding to fully decommission plant


• Near-term - SMR applicants likely to request an exemption from existing regulations.

• Reduced size and quantity of components• Reduced size of site; • Accessibility may be more difficult• Consideration of multi-modules (some still in

operation, some in decommissioning)

• Long-term - Rulemaking to change decommissioning funding requirements for SMRs

20

Policy Issues and Approaches• NRC Annual Fees Issue:

• Industry has argued current fees would impact SMRs disproportionately when measured against capacity.

• Proposed Resolution (Commission Memorandum):

• Links annual fees to thermal power levels• Minimum reactor fee set for reactors with less than or equal to

250 MWt• Establishes variable scale where the annual fee based linearly

on thermal power greater than 250 MWt• A multi-modular plant would receive single site treatment for

licensed reactor modules up to 4000 MWt

• New fee structure is needed at time of issuance SMR license (if OL), or by the 52.103(g) finding (if COL).

21 21

Policy Issues and Approaches• Insurance and Liability :

• Adequate insurance to cover nuclear accidents


• Revise guidance or regulations to ensure a multi-modular site obtains adequate insurance.

22

Policy Issues and Approaches• Multi-Module Licensing Issue:

• How do we license facilities with multi-modules (e.g., single facility license vs. license for each module)?

• Proposed Resolution (SECY-11-0079):• Staff considered three options

• Single facility license• Master facility license and individual

reactor module licenses• Individual reactor module licenses

• Staff’s recommendation to the Commission was to issue individual reactor module licenses

• Staff committed to engage its stakeholders before continuing to develop the specific aspects of this approach23 23

Industry SMR Plans Affecting NRC

• Industry Identified Target Markets:– Remote and Island Communities

• Arctic, India, Malaysia, Middle East– Mining and Oil & Gas Production

• Remote and Energy intensive Sites– Government Facilities

• GHG reduction, Energy Security– Co-Location with industrial sites– Replacement of “old coal”

• NRC design review seen as a key element for building an export market – “provenness” (design certification plus ‘run time’ in

country of origin)

24

Current SMR initiatives• Privately funded designs

– Continuing industry interest in “hybrid energy systems” for domestic deployment

– Privately Funded HTGR Initiatives – Quintessential Power; Xenergy– Privately Funded Fast Reactor Initiatives – Toshiba 4S; Gen4Energy;

GE-H PRISM (initial design was DOE funded); GA’s gas-cooled fast reactor

– Privately Funded iPWR Initiatives – Nuscale (original concept funding from DOE); mPower; Westinghouse; Holtec

• DOE Programs– SMR Funding Opportunity– DOE RFI on advanced reactors– DOE Lab initiatives – SNL announced SFR design; LANL supporting

Gen4Energy through CRADA

• DOC Efforts to foster export Market

25

Current SMR initiatives (Cont.)• Savannah River MOAs

– Pu disposition effort at SRS – link to the MOA– Pu disposition in UK – technology link to SRS effort– SRS MOA with Nuscale, PRISM, Gen4Energy, Holtec

• DARPA initiative – small SMR for forward deployment (didn’t materialize)

• International Initiatives– CNEA & INVAP, Argentina - CAREM– KAERI, South Korea – SMART– SFR interest (Korea); – Barge Reactors (Russia); – Pebble Bed HTGR (China); – GIF; INPRO– DOC Team America effort

• Desirability of a National Strategy– Blue Ribbon Commission Element 7

26

Challenges for NRC

• Uncertainty in SMR vendor submittal schedules.

• Submittal of pre-application design information– Completeness and quality of submittals – Designers proposing unique features that may

present the staff with challenges to conducting future certification and licensing reviews

• Policy Issues• Licensing Issues• Technical Issues

27

Challenges for NRC (Cont.)

• Wide range of technologies being discussed absent significant testing programs to support their development

• Generally little if any regard for fuel fabrication, waste storage or transportation

• Regulatory infrastructure weak for non-LWR technologies• Academic infrastructure nearly non-existent for non-LWRs–

limited supply of scientific and engineering talent to support design and deployment

• Lack of a coordinated approach creates significant uncertainty about where NRC, research community, and academia should be investing resources for the future

• If an appreciable fraction of total SMR initiatives materialized, it would create an untenable situation for the NRC.

28

Conclusion • NRC Pushing to Be Ready

– NRC is committed to ensuring that policies, require ments, and regulatory guidance are in place to support reviews of SMRs, consistent with support resources

– Pre-Application discussions on-going with two iPWR vendors and initial outreach from a third.

• NRC will accomplish our mission to ensure adequate protection of public health and safety and the envi ronment for new reactors licensed under 10 CFR Part 50 or Part 52

• The efficiency of licensing process will depend on :– the level of engagement from potential applicants, and external

stakeholders early in the process– Submitted complete and high-quality applications

29 29

advanced reactor program overview of small modular reactor

Documents