Withdrawn

NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2012-12, “Licensing 

Submittal Information and Design Development Activities 

for Small Modular Reactor Designs,” dated 

December 28, 2012, has been withdrawn.

 

ADAMS Accession Number: ML12319A181

See Federal Register notice dated October 25, 2016

81 FR 73448
ML12319A181

UNITED STATES 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION 

OFFICE OF NEW REACTORS 

WASHINGTON, DC 20555-0001 

December 28, 2012 

NRC REGULATORY ISSUE SUMMARY 2012–12 

LICENSING SUBMITTAL INFORMATION AND DESIGN DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES 

FOR SMALL MODULAR REACTOR DESIGNS 

ADDRESSEES 

All holders of and applicants for a power reactor early site permit (ESP), combined license 

(COL), standard design certification (DC), standard design approval (DA), or manufacturing 

license (ML) referencing a small modular reactor (SMR) design under Title 10 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 52, “Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear 

Power Plants,” or all holders of and applicants for a power reactor construction permit (CP) 

referencing an SMR design under 10 CFR Part 50, “Domestic Licensing of Production and 

Utilization Facilities.” SMRs are defined using the International Atomic Energy Agency definition 

of small- and medium-sized reactors with an electrical output of less than 700 megawatts. 

INTENT 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this regulatory issue summary (RIS) 

to obtain new or updated information on the scheduling of CP, ESP, COL, DC, DA, or ML 

application submissions related to SMR designs. These designs include integral pressurizedwater reactors, high-temperature gas-cooled reactors, liquid-metal-cooled reactors, and other 

SMR designs. The purpose of this RIS is to help establish a predictable and consistent method 

for reviewing applications. To this end, the NRC also seeks new or updated information on the 

status of a number of other addressee activities, as discussed below. This RIS follows up on 

RIS 2011-02, Revision 1, “Licensing Submittal Information and Design Development Activities 

for Small Modular Reactor Designs,” dated December 27, 2011, which seeks similar 

information. The staff asks any potential applicant that meets the criteria in the addressee 

section above also to submit a response to this RIS. 

This RIS does not transmit or imply any new or changed requirements or staff positions. 

Submission of advanced notice of the addressee’s plans or comments in response to this RIS is 

strictly voluntary. Although no specific action or written response is required, this information 

will enable the NRC to plan effectively for anticipated licensing-related review and inspection 

activities.
RIS 2012-12 

Page 2 of 6 

BACKGROUND INFORMATION 

The design-centered review approach (DCRA) is the NRC’s strategy to manage the licensing 

review workload, and the updated information that this RIS solicits will aid the agency’s 

schedule and resource planning efforts. The NRC outlined the DCRA in RIS 2006-06, “New 

Reactor Standardization Needed To Support the Design-Centered Licensing Review Approach,” 

dated May 31, 2006. In summary, the DCRA is a review strategy for COL applications that 

reference a particular design. This approach will use, to the maximum extent practicable, a 

“one issue, one review, one position” strategy to optimize the review effort, the resources 

needed to perform these reviews, and the review schedules. Specifically, the staff will conduct 

one review for each issue associated with a particular design; reach a decision on each issue; 

and, if possible, rely on that decision in reviewing subsequent applications. Applicants must 

achieve a consistent level of standardization for the DCRA to be fully effective. As discussed at 

an NRC-sponsored workshop on SMRs in October 2009, the philosophy of “one issue, one 

review, one position” can also be used across designs and reactor technologies to address 

policy or technical issues generic to SMR designs. 

SUMMARY OF ISSUE 

The NRC anticipates receiving a number of CP, ESP, COL, DC, DA, and ML applications, 

starting as early as 2013, for a number of SMR designs. RIS 2006-06 suggests that COL and 

DC applicants form design-centered working groups (DCWGs) to facilitate the standardization of 

COL applications. The NRC staff seeks information on potential DCWGs for each of the 

designs. As discussed at the October 2009 SMR workshop, this process also may benefit 

working groups generally associated with SMRs and with specific reactor technologies. The 

NRC is seeking information on the formation of such groups that may interact with the staff on 

generic or technology-related policy or technical issues. The NRC must identify possible 

applications and other interactions to formulate resource needs and budget requests for future 

fiscal years. 

The NRC encourages potential applicants to provide the agency with design and licensing 

plans, construction plans, and pre-application activities that will be used to demonstrate 

compliance with the NRC’s safety and environmental requirements. In addition, information that 

potential applicants submit to the NRC will allow the agency to coordinate pre-application 

activities and, as appropriate, conduct vendor audits before the submission of applications. 

Furthermore, it will facilitate a more efficient licensing review of the applications. Regulatory 

Position C.IV.7 in Regulatory Guide 1.206, “Combined License Applications for Nuclear Power 

Plants (LWR Edition),” issued June 2007, provides more information on pre-application activities 

(http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/reg-guides/power-reactors/rg/01-206/). 

In the staff requirements memorandum on SECY-11-0024, “Use of Risk Insights To Enhance 

the Safety Focus of Small Modular Reactor Reviews,” dated May 11, 2011, the Commission 

directed the staff to use the risk-informed and integrated review framework for staff 

pre-application and application review activities on integral pressurized-water reactors design 

applications. To do this effectively, and to take advantage of lessons-learned from recently 

completed reactor design reviews, the staff expects to expand the scope of pre-application 

activities. Information submitted in response to the questions related to white papers and 

technical or topical reports will be especially useful in helping the NRC plan and schedule staff 

activities. 
RIS 2012-12 

Page 3 of 6 

VOLUNTARY RESPONSE 

The NRC is developing pre-application, licensing, and project plans for the advanced reactor 

program. To support this effort, the NRC is seeking new or updated information on schedules 

for submitting CP, ESP, COL, DC, DA, and ML applications and on the status of a variety of 

design-related activities for SMRs. The NRC may share the planned application schedules with 

other Federal agencies to support its planning efforts on the licensing of new plants. If a 

prospective applicant deems this information proprietary, a request to withhold information from 

public disclosure in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, “Public Inspections, Exemptions, Request 

for Withholding,” must accompany the information. RIS 2004-11, “Supporting Information 

Associated with Requests for Withholding Proprietary Information,” dated June 29, 2004, 

provides additional information about requests for withholding proprietary information from 

public disclosure. The NRC asks potential applicants to request withholding only for information 

that they currently treat as proprietary and to provide, where necessary, the proprietary 

information in designated attachments to their response to this RIS. 

If an addressee chooses to provide a voluntary response, the NRC would like to obtain the 

information within 45 days of the date of this RIS. Respondents should provide the NRC with 

the following information, based on realistic, best-estimate predictions of applications or other 

submittals: 

Design and Licensing Submittal Information 

• When (month and year) are applications planned for design-related applications and 

what NRC action will be requested (i.e., a CP, DC, DA, or ML, or a COL that does not 

reference a DC or DA)? 

• Will the applicants be organized into DCWGs? If known, what is the membership of 

the DCWG, and which party is the primary point-of-contact designated for each DCWG?

• Have protocols been developed to provide coordinated responses for requests for 

additional information with generic applicability to a design center? 

• Which applicant that references the design will be designated as the reference COL 

applicant, or, alternatively, how will various applications (e.g., CP, DC, or COL 

applications) be coordinated to achieve the desired design-centered licensing review 

approach? 

• When (month and year) will CP, COL, or ESP applications be submitted for review? In 

addition, what are the design, site location, and number of units at each site? 

• Are vendors or consultants assisting in the preparation of the application(s)? If so, 

please describe their roles and responsibilities for the design and licensing activities. 

 
RIS 2012-12 

Page 4 of 6 

Design, Testing, and Application Preparation 

• What is the current status of the development of the plant design (i.e., conceptual, 

preliminary, or finalizing)? Has the applicant established a schedule for completing the 

design? If so, please describe the schedule. 

• What is the applicant’s current status (i.e., planning, in progress, or complete) for the 

qualification of fuel and other major systems and components? Has the applicant 

established a schedule for completing the qualification testing? If so, please describe 

the schedule. 

• What is the applicant’s status (i.e., planning, in progress, or complete) in developing 

computer codes and models to perform design and licensing analyses? Has the 

applicant defined principal design criteria, licensing-basis events, and other fundamental 

design and licensing relationships? Has the applicant established a schedule for 

completing the design and licensing analyses? If so, please describe the schedule. 

• What is the applicant’s status in designing, constructing, and using thermal-fluidic testing 

facilities and in using such tests to validate computer models? Has the applicant 

established a schedule for the construction of testing facilities? If so, please describe 

the schedule. Has the applicant established a schedule for completing the 

thermal-fluidic testing? If so, please describe the schedule. 

• What is the applicant’s status in defining system and component suppliers (including 

fuel), manufacturing processes, and other major factors that could influence design 

decisions? Has the applicant established a schedule for identifying suppliers and key 

contractors? If so, please describe the schedule. 

• What is the applicant’s status in the development and implementation of a quality 

assurance program? 

• What is the applicant’s status in the development of probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) 

models needed to support applications (e.g., needed for Chapter 19 of safety analysis 

reports or needed to support risk-informed licensing approaches)? Does the applicant 

plan to use the PRA for any risk-informed applications (i.e., risk-informed technical 

specifications, risk-informed inservice inspection, risk-informed categorization and 

treatment, risk-informed inservice testing, etc.). What are the applicant’s plans for using 

the PRA models in the development of the design? At what level will the PRA be 

prepared, and when will it be submitted in the application process? 

• What is the applicant’s status in the development, construction, and use of a control 

room simulator? 

• What are the applicant’s current staffing levels (e.g., full-time equivalent staff) for the 

design and testing of the reactor design? Does the applicant have plans to increase 

staffing? If so, please describe future staffing plans. 

• What are the applicant’s plans on the submittal of white papers or technical and topical 

reports related to the features of its design or the resolution of policy or technical issues? 
RIS 2012-12 

Page 5 of 6 

• Has the applicant established a schedule for submitting such reports? If so, please 

describe the schedule. 

• Will ESP applicants seek approval of either “proposed major features of the emergency 

plans” in accordance with 10 CFR 52.17(b)(2)(i) or “proposed complete and integrated 

emergency plans,” in accordance with 10 CFR 52.17(b)(2)(ii)? 

• Describe possible interest in the use of the provisions in Subpart F, “Manufacturing 

Licenses,” of 10 CFR Part 52, instead of, or in combination with, other licensing 

approaches (e.g., DC or DA). 

• Describe the desired scope of a possible ML and what design or licensing process would 

address the remainder of the proposed nuclear power plant. For example, would the ML 

address an essentially complete plant or would it be limited to the primary coolant 

system that basically comprises the integral reactor vessel and internals? 

• Describe the expected combination of manufacturing, fabrication, and site construction 

that results in a completed operational nuclear power plant. For example, what systems, 

structures, and components are being fabricated and delivered? Which of these are 

being assembled onsite? Which of these are being constructed onsite? 

Addressees that choose to provide a voluntary response should send it to the 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 

20555-0001. 

BACKFIT DISCUSSION 

This RIS requires no action or written response. Any action on the part of addressees to 

provide information on standardization or advanced notice of intent to pursue a CP, ESP, COL, 

DC, DA, or ML, in accordance with the guidance contained in this RIS, helps the NRC to plan its 

resources and is strictly voluntary. Therefore, this RIS does not constitute a backfit under 

10 CFR 50.109, “Backfitting.” Consequently, the staff did not perform a backfit analysis. 

FEDERAL REGISTER NOTIFICATION 

The NRC did not publish a notice of opportunity for public comment on this RIS in the Federal 

Register because it pertains to an administrative aspect of the regulatory process that involves 

the voluntary submission of information on the part of addressees. 

CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW ACT 

The NRC has determined that this RIS is not a rule under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

(5 U.S.C. 801–808) and, therefore, is not subject to the CRA. 

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT STATEMENT 

This RIS contains information collection requirements that are subject to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

approved these existing requirements under OMB control number 3150-0011. 
RIS 2012-12 

Page 6 of 6 

The NRC estimates that the burden to the public for these voluntary information collections will 

average 12 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing 

data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 

information collection. Send comments on this burden estimate or any other aspects of these 

information collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Information 

Services Branch (T-5F53), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, 

or by e-mail to Infocollects.Resource@nrc.gov and to the Desk Officer, Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-10202, (3150-00011), Office of Management and Budget, 

Washington, DC 20503. 

PUBLIC PROTECTION NOTIFICATION 

The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a request for 

information or an information collection requirement unless the requesting document displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

CONTACT 

 

Please direct any questions about this matter to the technical contact listed below. 

/RA/ by JLuehman for /RA/ 

Laura Dudes, Director 

Division of Construction Inspection and 

 Operational Programs 

Office of New Reactors 

Mary C. Muessle, Acting Director 

Division of Policy and Rulemaking 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

Technical Contact: Mark Notich, Senior Project Manager 

 NRO/DARR/SMRLB1 

 301-415-3053 

 E-mail: mark.notich@nrc.gov

Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, 

http://www.nrc.gov, under the headings “NRC Library,” “Document Collections.”

 
RIS 2012-12 

Page 6 of 6 

The NRC estimates that the burden to the public for these voluntary information collections will 

average 12 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing 

data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 

information collection. Send comments on this burden estimate or any other aspects of these 

information collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Information 

Services Branch (T-5F53), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, 

or by e-mail to Infocollects.Resource@nrc.gov and to the Desk Officer, Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-10202, (3150-00011), Office of Management and Budget, 

Washington, DC 20503. 

PUBLIC PROTECTION NOTIFICATION 

The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a request for 

information or an information collection requirement unless the requesting document displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

CONTACT 

 

Please direct any questions about this matter to the technical contact listed below. 

/RA/ by JLuehman for /RA/ 

Laura Dudes, Director 

Division of Construction Inspection and 

 Operational Programs 

Office of New Reactors 

Mary C. Muessle, Acting Director 

Division of Policy and Rulemaking 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

Technical Contact: Mark Notich, Senior Project Manager 

 NRO/DARR/SMRLB1 

 301-415-3053 

 E-mail: mark.notich@nrc.gov

Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, 

http://www.nrc.gov, under the headings “NRC Library,” “Document Collections.” 

DISTRIBUTION: PUBLIC DARR R/F 

ADAMS Accession Number: ML12319A181 *via e-mail NRO-002

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

OFFICE PM:NRO/DARR/SMRLB1 LA:NRO/DARR/SMRLB1 BC:NRO/DARR/SMRLB1 Tech Editor* D:NRO/DARR 

NAME MNotich RRobinson* SMagruder CHsu MMayfield 

DATE 11/14/12 11/15/12 11/29/12 11/26/12 11/27/12 

OFFICE D:NRO/PMDA D:OIS OE* OGC* LA:NRR/DPR* 

NAME BGusack (MTonacci for) TDonnell NHilton (RFretz for) MCarpentier CHawes 

DATE 12/8/12 12/13/12 12/19/12 12/19/12 12/21/12 

OFFICE PM:NRR/DPR/PGCB BC:NRR/DPR/PGCB D:NRO/DCIP (A)D:NRR/DPR 

NAME TAlexion DPelton (EBowman for) LDudes (JLuehman for) MMuessle 

DATE 12/21/12 12/26/12 12/27/12 12/28/12