CONTACT: Joseph Williams, NRR

301-415-1470

POLICY ISSUE

INFORMATION

May 8, 2002 SECY-02-0076

FOR: The Commissioners

FROM: William D. Travers 

Executive Director for Operations

SUBJECT: SEMI-ANNUAL UPDATE OF THE FUTURE LICENSING AND INSPECTION

READINESS ASSESSMENT (FLIRA)

PURPOSE:

This paper informs the Commission of the staff’s new reactor licensing activities since issuance

of SECY-01-0188, "Future Licensing and Inspection Readiness Assessment" (FLIRA), dated

October 12, 2001. 

BACKGROUND:

In SECY-01-0188, the staff assessed its technical, licensing, and inspection capabilities, and

also described enhancements supporting the licensing of advanced reactors. The designs

considered were the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR), the Gas Turbine-Modular Helium

Reactor (GT-MHR), the AP1000, and the International Reactor Innovative and Secure (IRIS). 

The staff also committed to provide the Commission semi-annual updates on the status of new

reactor licensing activities and the associated resources and schedules, and to develop an

advanced reactor research plan. 

DISCUSSION:

This paper and its attachment provide the status of early site permit (ESP) activities,

construction inspection program development, design certification reviews, possible reactivated

plants, the advanced reactor research plan, interactions with stakeholders, international and

intergovernmental activities, and staff training and development. Cross-cutting issues which

can affect new reactor licensing, including rulemakings, regulatory infrastructure development,

resources, and critical skill gaps, are also discussed.
The Commissioners -2-

Potential Technical and Policy Issues

NRC readiness activities will address a number of potential technical and policy issues related

to new reactor licensing activities. Some of these issues are design-specific (e.g.,

GT-MHR-related), while others are technology-neutral or generic (e.g., regulatory infrastructure

development activities). The staff will submit individual papers to the Commission on various

policy issues according to the schedule given in Table 1. However, the staff expects to identify

additional issues associated with new reactor licensing and regulatory infrastructure

development activities, and will engage the Commission as appropriate. 

Table 1

New Reactor Licensing Commission Correspondence

Issue Completion

SECY-02-xxxx, Proposed Rule to Update 10 CFR Part 52 May 2002

Exelon’s Legal and Financial Issues (Update to SECY-01-0207) August 2002

NEI Petitions on 10 CFR Part 52 September 2002

Advanced Reactor Research Plan November 2002

Pre-application Activities

Since the FLIRA report was issued, industry plans for ESPs, and the AP1000, GT-MHR, and

PBMR designs have changed. The staff shifted resources through the planning, budgeting,

and performance management (PBPM) process to support the new schedules. 

Recently, Exelon announced that it will not proceed with the PBMR project beyond the

completion of the current feasibility study phase. The staff is assessing the impact of this

announcement on new reactor licensing activities and priorities. The staff plans to meet with

Exelon in May to discuss plans and schedules for bringing the PBMR pre-application review to a

logical conclusion. 

In recent meetings with the staff, Framatome has expressed interest in design certification

reviews of a boiling water reactor (BWR) and a pressurized water reactor (PWR) incorporating

passive safety features. In a letter dated April 18, 2002, General Electric requested preapplication review of the European Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) design.

Advanced Reactor Research Plan

The staff is developing an advanced reactor research plan. Applicants and designers are

responsible for demonstrating that the required level of safety is provided for the proposed

reactor design and technology, but NRC will need to do research to confirm the applicant’s

safety basis. The plan focuses on development of the necessary tools and data, as well as the

technical bases for potential regulatory changes, to support an effective advanced reactor

licensing process. The plan identifies actions with long lead times so that the staff can prepare

these tools in a timely fashion. The staff recognizes that some information can be obtained
The Commissioners -3-

through international cooperation as well as through work done by reactor designers and NRC

contractors. The staff briefed the Commission on March 19, and the Advisory Committee on

Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) on April 11, 2002. A SECY paper on the research plan will be

submitted in the fall of 2002.

Regulatory Infrastructure Development for Advanced Reactor Licensing

The current NRC regulatory infrastructure, including Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations

(10 CFR) Part 52, is adequate to support new reactor licensing. However, the FLIRA described

regulatory infrastructure changes to make new reactor licensing reviews for both evolutionary

and new technologies more effective and efficient, as well as reducing unnecessary regulatory

burden during a licensing review. The staff has prepared a proposed revision to 10 CFR Part

52, and has initiated activity on other items identified in the FLIRA.

 

Resources

The staff developed resource-loaded schedule models for use in planning and budgeting. 

These models form the basis of the staff’s ongoing budgeting and planning, and are based on

review schedules estimated by the staff, resources derived from those given in the FLIRA, and

the staff’s assessment of projected industry application dates.

The staff noted in the FLIRA that its schedule estimates were nominal values and that these

schedules assumed that adequate resources would be available to conduct activities as

required. The FLIRA also stated that if resources were limited, activities would take longer to

complete. In recent months, as the staff developed projected budgets for new reactor activities

for specific fiscal years, it has become apparent that the availability of staff and contractor

assistance could also affect the FLIRA assumption, thereby affecting the staff's ability to meet

the stated schedules. 

New reactor licensing resources are expected to rise sharply over the next few years. The NRC

faces a significant challenge to provide adequate resources and maintain expertise for new

reactor licensing activities without compromising existing programs. These challenges are

further complicated by the uncertainty in industry schedules, as shown by the recent

announcement of Exelon’s withdrawal from the PBMR project, and interest in pre-application

reviews for new designs by Framatome and GE. Slippages in industry schedules could result in

excess available new reactor licensing resources which would need to be reassigned to other

activities, while accelerated industry schedules could result in significant shortfalls and the

staff’s inability to meet schedules. 

The staff has attempted to temper the impact of uncertainty in its early planning by increasing

reliance on contractor assistance to support new reactor activities. Contractor efforts are more

flexible and can be shifted to other activities if planned work does not materialize. However,

they are more expensive than staff resources, costing about twice as much as equivalent staff

effort. 

The staff has asked the industry to communicate its plans and decisions to the staff as early as

possible. This information will aid the staff in acquiring and budgeting its resources. The staff

will use the PBPM process to prioritize work, integrating new reactor licensing activities in the

overall NRC budget.
The Commissioners -4-

Critical Skill Gaps

The FLIRA report identified skills critical to performing reviews of new reactor licensing

applications. As part of the NRC’s strategic workforce planning effort, the staff is currently

using various strategies to address new reactor licensing critical skill gaps. NRC will continue

to use these strategies and identify new strategies to retain and recruit a high quality diverse

staff with critical technical skills. Other strategies, such as expanding recruitment outreach

programs and moving staff where their skills are most needed, will continue to be discussed as

the industry plans become formalized and the staff is able to better assess its resource needs

for new reactor licensing reviews.

CONCLUSION:

In SECY-01-0188, the staff concluded that the licensing processes described in Title 10 of the

Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 52 are ready to be used and that the NRC is ready

to complete new reactor licensing activities currently underway. These conclusions remain

valid, but additional work is needed to ensure that the staff will be ready to review applications

for early site permits and combined licenses, and to implement a construction inspection

program for new nuclear power plants. 

The staff’s principal activities since issuance of SECY-01-0188 have been:

• Initial review of the AP1000 design certification submitted on March 28, 2002, after

completion of the pre-application review for that design.

• Continuation of the PBMR pre-application review. The overall scope of this effort is

changing as a result of Exelon’s recent decision to end its participation in this project.

• Initiation of pre-application review for the GT-MHR.

• Preparation of an advanced reactor research plan that will be used to formulate and

implement NRC’s future research programs.

• Initiation of other infrastructure development, including rulemakings and construction

inspection program revisions.

The staff’s budget planning is based on the resource estimates given in SECY-01-0188. This

planning shows that the timing of applications for ESPs, and requests for pre-application and

design certification reviews of advanced reactor designs could have a large impact on NRC

resource needs over the next few years. Activities leading to a COL will have the highest

priority for new reactor licensing resources. The staff is assessing the resource impacts of

recent developments such as Exelon’s PBMR decision and recent initiatives by Framatome and

General Electric. The NRC faces a significant challenge in the scheduling of resources to

complete these reviews on schedules that will meet industry needs without compromising

existing programs.

As formal industry commitments are received for new reactor licensing activities, and the staff

gains additional knowledge through pre-application reviews and initial assessments, the staff

will use the PBPM process to assign priorities and allocate resources to support the new reactor

licensing activities. The strategic workforce planning initiative will be used to close skill gaps
The Commissioners -5-

and ensure adequate staff is available to complete work. The staff will continue to present

policy issues affecting new reactor licensing for Commission consideration.

COORDINATION:

The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed this paper and has no legal objection. The

Office of the Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this paper for resource implications and has

no objections.

/RA/

William D. Travers

Executive Director

 for Operations

Attachment: As stated
licensing activities. The strategic workforce planning initiative will be used to close skill gaps

and ensure adequate staff is available to complete work. The staff will continue to present

policy issues affecting new reactor licensing for Commission consideration.

COORDINATION:

The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed this paper and has no legal objection. The

Office of the Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this paper for resource implications and has

no objections.

/RA/

William D. Travers

Executive Director

 for Operations

Attachment: As stated

DISTRIBUTION: See attached

ACCESSION NO. ML020980176 *see previous concurrence

OFC PM:NRLPO (A)DD:NRLPO Tech Ed D:NRLPO NMSS

NAME JWilliams TBergman PKleene JLyons ELeeds

DATE 05/01/02* 04/29/02* 04/05/02* 04/30/02 04/10/02*

OFC DSARE/RES Region II PMAS OGC DPBA/OCFO

NAME FEltawila CCasto* RCorreia* JMoore TPulliam

DATE 04/30/02* 04/08/02 04/09/02 04/09/02* 04/09/02*

OFC ADIP:NRR RES NRR DEDRP HR

NAME WBorchardt AThadani BSheron for

SCollins

WKane PBird

DATE 05/01/02* 04/30/02* 4/10/02* 5/6/02* 04/09/02*

OFC EDO

NAME WTravers 

DATE 05/8/02

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Attachment

UPDATE TO THE FUTURE LICENSING

AND INSPECTION READINESS

ASSESSMENT

MAY 2002
- 1 -

INTRODUCTION

This attachment to the May 2002 update to SECY-01-0188, “Future Licensing and Inspection

Readiness Assessment,” summarizes the status of pre-application activities, regulatory

infrastructure development, and stakeholder interactions. 

SUMMARY OF PRE-APPLICATION ACTIVITIES

Early Site Permits

In a December 20, 2001, letter to Chairman Meserve, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)

provided an update on industry activities, identifying three potential applicants for an early site

permit (ESP): 

• Exelon Generation Company (Exelon) stated in a March 1, 2002, letter that it

intends to apply for an ESP by June 2003. Exelon announced on April 30, 2002,

that this application will be for the Clinton site.

• Dominion Generation (Dominion) has indicated it will apply for an ESP at the

North Anna site in 2003.

• Entergy Operations, Incorporated (Entergy) has indicated it will make an ESP

application for the Grand Gulf site in 2003.

Entergy, Exelon and Dominion are seeking funding from the Department of Energy to offset

some of their application costs through the “Nuclear Power 2010" initiative discussed below.

During ESP pre-application activities between now and June 2003, the staff will allocate

resources, identify reviewers, establish contracts, schedule meetings with applicants, and

interact with the public and other interested stakeholders. 

AP1000

The Westinghouse AP1000 passive advanced light-water reactor design is a larger version of

the AP600 design certified under 10 CFR Part 52 in December 1999. On March 28, 2002, 

Westinghouse applied for design certification of the AP1000. The staff is performing the

application acceptance review, and will inform Westinghouse of its review plans and schedule.

The AP1000 pre-application review, completed in March 2002, addressed the following issues:

 Applicability of the AP600 test program to the AP1000 design

 Applicability of the AP600 analysis codes to the AP1000 design

 Acceptability of Westinghouse’s proposed use of design acceptance criteria

(DAC) in the instrumentation and control (I&C), control room (human factors),

and piping design areas for the AP1000

 Acceptability of applying three exemptions granted for the AP600 to the AP1000

design
- 2 -

The staff’s assessment regarding the DAC issue was presented to the Advisory Committee on

Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) on March 8, 2002, and was forwarded to the Commission in

SECY-02-0059 on April 1, 2002. The staff’s assessments of the other three issues were

provided to Westinghouse on March 25, 2002. 

Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR)

On December 5, 2000, Exelon asked the NRC staff to conduct a pre-application review of the

PBMR design and technology for possible licensing in the United States. The staff’s

recommendations for the PBMR pre-application review were described in SECY-01-0070, “Plan

for Pre-Application Activities on the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor,” dated April 25, 2001, which

were approved in a June 19, 2001, Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM). 

On April 16, 2002, Exelon announced that it will not be proceeding with the PBMR project

beyond the completion of the current feasibility study phase. The staff is assessing the impact

of this announcement on new reactor licensing activities. The staff plans to meet with Exelon in

May 2002, to discuss plans and schedules for bringing the PBMR pre-application review to a

logical conclusion. Following this meeting, the staff will determine what products will be

prepared to document the staff’s assessment of the PBMR design. 

During 2001 and early 2002, the staff conducted a series of public meetings with Exelon and

interested stakeholders to obtain information on topics related to the staff’s pre-application

review. At Exelon’s request, NRC’s initial pre-application review focused on legal and financial

issues and Exelon’s proposed licensing approach. In SECY-01-0207, “Legal and Financial

Issues Related to Exelon’s Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR),” dated November 20, 2001,

the staff provided its preliminary position on operator staffing, fuel cycle impacts, financial

qualifications, decommissioning funding, minimum decommissioning costs, antitrust review,

number of licenses, annual fees, financial protection, and testing requirements for a combined

license (COL).

On March 27, 2002, the staff held a public workshop to discuss the positions presented in

SECY-01-0207 with Exelon and other stakeholders. Following the workshop, General Atomics

submitted written responses to the issues discussed in the paper. NEI has requested a

meeting with the staff for additional discussions. After this meeting, NEI will provide written

feedback on these issues. Based on these submittals and stakeholder comments received at

the workshop, the staff will revise its positions, as necessary, and make recommendations on

policy issues related to the legal and financial matters for Commission approval in August 2002.

The staff also completed a preliminary assessment of Exelon’s proposed licensing approach for

the PBMR. Exelon’s approach was to conform with the current regulations while recognizing

that many of the current regulatory requirements are based on light water reactor (LWR)

technology. A risk-informed process would be used to define events for which the plant is to be

designed, acceptance criteria, and a classification process whereby design requirements are

specified for structures, systems, and components. In its preliminary evaluation, dated

March 26, 2002, the staff concluded that the licensing approach proposed by Exelon, if

adequately implemented, is a reasonable process for ensuring that the Commission’s

regulations are met and for identifying PBMR-specific regulatory requirements. 
- 3 -

Implementation of Exelon’s proposed licensing approach requires additional design and PRA

information that has not yet been provided. A detailed PRA is required for implementation of

Exelon’s proposed risk-informed regulatory approach. Furthermore, the degree to which the

staff may be able to rely on PRA information for the PBMR will be a consideration due to the

limited operating experience for such designs. In its preliminary evaluation, dated March 26,

2002, the staff informed Exelon that while the PRA confirms risk insights for a design, licensing

activities will be a mix of “deterministic” analyses supplemented with risk insights. The staff

would continue to assess issues such as treatment of uncertainties, margins of safety, and

defense-in-depth as part of its review.

The staff had planned to prepare a Commission paper this summer to engage the Commission

on potential policy issues associated with the PBMR design, including proposed licensing-basis

accidents, the need for containment versus confinement, application of a mechanistic source

term, and reduced emergency planning zones. The staff is evaluating the need to interact with

the Commission on these issues at this time in light of the change in Exelon’s plans.

Gas Turbine-Modular Helium Reactor (GT-MHR)

On February 18, 2002, General Atomics (GA) submitted a pre-application licensing plan for the

GT-MHR. This plan describes the proposed scope of and a tentative schedule for GA's future

interactions with the staff on the GT-MHR pre-application review. On March 29, 2002, the staff

informed GA of its plans to proceed with the GT-MHR pre-application review. Many of the

activities and information contained in SECY-01-0070, “Plan for Pre-application Activities on the

Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR),” and SECY-01-0207, “Legal and Financial Issues

Related to Exelon’s Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR),” will also apply to the GT-MHR

pre-application review. Resource estimates for the pre-application review were previously

provided to the Commission in SECY-01-0188.

Output from the GT-MHR pre-application review will include SECY papers to the Commission

on policy, technical and safety issues, seeking guidance and approval of proposed staff actions. 

Feedback will be provided to GA on technical and process issues once Commission guidance is

received. 

It is estimated that the pre-application review will take approximately 21 months, assuming

timely submittals and responses to staff requests for additional information. Consistent with the

Commission’s 1995 fee policy for advanced reactor designs, GA will be assessed fees under

10 CFR Part 170 for NRC’s pre-application activities that are specific to the GT-MHR. 

International Reactor Innovative and Secure (IRIS)

The IRIS design is an integral light water reactor, with all reactor coolant piping and heat

transport systems located inside the reactor vessel. There have been no new activities related

to IRIS. The request for IRIS pre-application review may be received later in calendar year

2002.

Framatome Boiling and Pressurized Water Reactors

Framatome ANP is considering whether to apply for design certification, and is evaluating two

designs: a PWR and a BWR incorporating passive safety features. Framatome met with the
- 4 -

staff on March 13, 2002, to present the features of its SWR-1000 BWR design, and to discuss

the design certification process. The SWR-1000 design was developed in Germany by

Siemens. Framatome will present its PWR design in mid-2002. This design is similar to the

large EPR (European PWR) jointly developed by Framatome and Siemens. 

Framatome intends to hold additional discussions with the staff on the NRC requirements for

design certification. A decision to proceed with the design certification application will be made

early next year.

European Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR)

The ESBWR is a 4000 MWt reactor, using natural circulation for normal operation, with passive

safety features. On April 18, 2002, the General Electric Company (GE) requested a preapplication review of the ESBWR. This design is based on the certified advanced BWR

(ABWR) and the simplified BWR (SBWR) designs. The staff will discuss this request with GE,

and will provide schedule and budget information in the next FLIRA update.

Reactivated Plants

Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, and the Bellefonte units remain in a deferred status. On

October 24, 2000, NRC issued an order extending the construction permit (CP) for Watts Bar

Unit 2 to December 31, 2010. On July 11, 2001, the Tennessee Valley Authority requested

extension of the construction permits for Bellefonte Units 1 and 2 to October 1, 2011, and

October 1, 2014, respectively. The staff is currently reviewing this request. 

On January 30, 2002, NRC issued an order extending the CP for Energy Northwest Nuclear

Project No. 1 (WNP-1) to June 1, 2011. On April 24, 2002, Energy Northwest announced that a

consultant’s report recommended that WNP-1 not be completed as a commercial nuclear

power plant. The staff will not provide additional updates on the status of WNP-1, unless it

appears this recommendation will not be followed.

The Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Unit 1 is already licensed to operate. The staff considers

recovery of this reactor to be a restart activity rather than a new reactor licensing activity. 

Therefore, this plant will no longer be included in future updates of new reactor licensing

activities. 

SUMMARY OF REGULATORY INFRASTRUCTURE ACTIVITIES

The FLIRA report described regulatory infrastructure changes that would make future licensing

reviews for both evolutionary and new reactor technologies more effective and efficient, as well

as reducing unnecessary regulatory burden during a licensing review. A summary of regulatory

infrastructure activities for the past several months is given below.

10 CFR Part 52 Rulemaking

The staff is preparing a rulemaking to revise 10 CFR Part 52, “Early Site Permits, Standard

Design Certifications, and Combined Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants.” This revision is based

on lessons learned during the previous design certification reviews, and on discussions with

nuclear industry representatives about the early site permit and combined license review
- 5 -

processes. The proposed rule is described in SECY-02-xxxx, which is expected to be issued in

May 2002. 

NEI has submitted two petitions for rulemaking regarding Part 52. In the first petition, NEI

proposes two new sections to 10 CFR Part 52 to allow existing siting and programmatic

information that was previously reviewed and approved by the NRC to be incorporated by

reference and treated as resolved. NEI’s second petition proposes to eliminate the requirement

for an ESP applicant to include, and for the NRC to review, alternative sites, alternative energy

sources, and need for power in an ESP application. The NRC published these petitions for

public comment, and is currently reviewing the petitions and stakeholder comments. The staff

plans to provide recommendations on the petitions to the Commission in September 2002.

Alternative Site Review Rulemaking

The NRC regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act are contained in

10 CFR Part 51. Section 51.45 sets forth the general requirements for the contents of

environmental reports, including consideration of alternatives to proposed actions. Alternative

sites must be considered in applications for a construction permit under 10 CFR Part 50, and

for an early site permit or a combined license under 10 CFR Part 52, unless the combined

license application makes reference to an early site permit. 

The staff believes that clarifying the regulatory criteria for the alternative site review in

10 CFR Part 51 will reduce licensing uncertainty on this matter, supporting a timely and efficient

review. The staff is currently preparing a rulemaking plan on this topic. In addition, as noted

above, a recommendation on an NEI petition on alternative siting will be given to the

Commission in September 2002.

10 CFR Part 50 Appendix I Rulemaking

Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50 provides dose criteria for demonstrating acceptable compliance

with the as-low-as-reasonably-achievable (ALARA) radiation protection principle for LWRs. In

1994, the NRC revised 10 CFR Part 20 to incorporate the International Council on Radiation

Protection 26 methodology. At that time, the Commission decided not to revise Appendix I

because it would not be a substantial safety benefit. However, the NRC and industry agreed

that Appendix I should be updated if new reactor applications were received.

The staff believes that this rulemaking will reduce licensing uncertainty on this issue, support a

timely and efficient review, and may decrease resource expenditures for the hearings for new

applications. Because of the changes in industry schedules, the prioritization of current

workload, and staffing issues, this rulemaking activity will begin in FY 2003 as opposed to

FY 2002, as reported in the FLIRA.

Construction Inspection Program (CIP)

Dominion, Entergy, and Exelon have indicated their intent to submit ESP applications in 2003. 

Therefore, high priority has been given to revising the inspection guidance for these activities. 

A team composed of NRR and regional personnel is reviewing existing guidance and

determining what CIP changes are needed. The team is also using contract resources to
- 6 -

review current construction inspection procedures to determine if new procedures need to be

developed.

Industry and staff representatives are working on issues associated with ESP applications and

inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC) implementation guidance. The

staff and NEI are discussing ESP data collection activities which take place prior to the permit

application to ensure needed information is included in the applications, and to provide

appropriate inspection and audit guidance.

NEI provided its position regarding ITAAC implementation and the transition to power

operations on November 20, 2001. Staff comments on ITAAC implementation will be provided

to NEI in May 2002. 

Staff positions on programmatic ITAAC were forwarded to the Commission in SECY-02-0067

on April 15, 2002. The Commission’s decision on programmatic ITAAC could affect what

inspections are performed and the inspection sequence. The team will revise the CIP based on

the Commission’s decision.

Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Initiatives

The staff’s current risk-informed, performance-based rulemaking initiatives are intended to

reflect the results of risk assessments and the current understanding of reactor safety issues. 

The staff is developing a common set of risk-informed objectives that will be used to evaluate

the current regulatory structure and to develop proposed changes, which will apply both to

operating and advanced reactors.

NEI intends to submit a white paper proposing a risk-informed, performance-based regulatory

framework later in 2002. NEI’s proposed scope of work for this framework involves the actions

needed to develop a conceptual framework of regulations, including general design criteria and

general operating criteria.

Staff efforts will be informed by the NEI proposal. Additional details regarding these efforts will

be provided to the Commission in the June 2002 update to the Risk-Informed Regulation

Implementation Plan.

SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDER INTERACTIONS

The staff has been actively seeking interactions with stakeholders, including internal, public,

national and international. Meetings with applicants and industry representatives have been

open to the public. The staff plans to continue its open interactions with all stakeholders

throughout its new reactor licensing activities. 

Intergovernmental Interactions

“Nuclear Power 2010" is a Department of Energy (DOE) initiative with the aim of building a new

nuclear power plant in the United States by the end of the decade. Under this initiative, the

government and the private sector will work together to (1) identify sites for nuclear power

plants, (2) demonstrate the efficiency and timeliness of key NRC processes for licensing of new

plants, and (3) conduct research needed to make the safest and most advanced nuclear plant
- 7 -

technologies available in the United States. To this end, DOE is planning to share part of the

applicant’s cost of demonstrating the Part 52 licensing process. DOE continues to support

HTGR development, and has begun research, with NRC cooperation, to ensure that these

technologies can be considered as options in the United States. 

International Interactions

During 2001, the staff visited Germany, Japan, China, South Africa and the United Kingdom to

exchange technical information for infrastructure development in support of future licensing

work. These visits focused on HTGR design, technology and safety, the regulatory

infrastructure in other countries, technical issues such as fuel qualification and performance,

nuclear-grade graphite behavior, high temperature materials performance, and codes and

standards. Foreign regulators assigned to the NRC have participated in advanced reactor

activities such as the pre-application review of the AP1000 design. The staff is discussing

additional exchanges of experts with our foreign counterparts. 

NRC will continue to draw on the existing international HTGR-related experience and research. 

Foreign countries have extensive gas-cooled reactor operational experience, including fuel

performance and qualification data, and graphite behavior data. The NRC’s future research

programs will take full advantage of currently available information, and will explore cooperative

efforts with international partners. It is expected that the international HTGR community (China,

Japan, and the European Commission) will play an important role in providing experimental

data and means for code validation. 

Formal bilateral agreements are being discussed with various international partners. NRC’s

active participation in the ongoing research programs, as well as initiating new cooperative

efforts with various countries and organizations in formulating future research programs, will

deliver mutual benefits while offsetting costs. Such joint efforts will reduce the scope of the

additional confirmatory research that the NRC may have to conduct. The advanced reactor

research plan will also address domestic and international cooperation. 

HTGR Safety and Research Workshop

In October 2001, RES sponsored a workshop on HTGR safety and research issues, focusing

on identifying HTGR safety issues and the need to support licensing reviews of new HTGR

designs. Various national and international experts attended. Priorities were assigned to

various research topics which would be helpful in planning future research programs, and

assessing and allocating optimum resources. Insights from the workshop were a significant

input in the staff’s development of the draft advanced reactor research plan.

Nuclear Safety Research Conference (NSRC)

In October 2001, a special NSRC session was held on safety and research issues related to the

advanced reactors. This conference provided a forum for dialogue among various participants

to develop useful insights in planning future research programs. 
- 8 -

OECD/CSNI Workshop

In February 2002, NRC staff representatives attended the Organization for Economic

Cooperation Development (OECD) Committee for Safety of Nuclear Installations (CSNI)

Workshop on Advanced Nuclear Reactor Safety Issues and Research Needs. This workshop

provided an overview of the advance reactor designs being considered worldwide. Participants

discussed advanced reactor concepts being studied, and identified safety issues and research

needs.

Regulatory Information Conference (RIC)

On March 5, 2002, the staff conducted a session on new reactor licensing at the RIC. The

theme of the session was “The regulatory challenges associated with new plant licensing

actions.” A panel of experts from NRC, DOE's Near-term Deployment Roadmap Panel, NEI,

and a public interest group representative discussed a series of questions with the audience. 

Legal and Financial Issues Workshop

Details regarding the March 27, 2002, workshop on legal and financial issues are provided in

the PBMR discussion above.