To provide for more timely and effective regulation of advanced reactors, the Commission encourages the earliest possible interaction of applicants, vendors, other government agencies, and the NRC to provide for early identification of regulatory requirements for advanced reactors and to provide all interested parties, including the public, with a timely, independent assessment of the safety and security characteristics of advanced reactor designs. Such licensing interaction and guidance early in the design process will contribute towards minimizing complexity and adding stability and predictability in the licensing and regulation of advanced reactors.
1. Acquire/develop sufficient knowledge, technical skills, and capacity to perform non-LWR regulatory activities.
2. Acquire/develop sufficient computer codes and tools to perform non-LWR regulatory reviews.
3. Establish a flexible non-LWR regulatory review process within the bounds of existing regulations, including the use of conceptual design reviews and staged-review processes. This flexibility will accommodate potential applicants having a range of financial, technical, and regulatory maturity, and a range of application readiness.
4. Facilitate industry codes and standards needed to support the non-LWR life cycle (including fuels and materials).
5. Identify and resolve technology-inclusive (not specific to a particular non-LWR design or category) policy issues that impact regulatory reviews, siting, permitting, and/or licensing of non-LWR nuclear power plants (NPPs) 6. Develop and implement a structured, integrated strategy to communicate with internal and external stakeholders having interests in non-LWR technologies.
There is not an explicit regulatory reference to
an applicant’s use of the PPE. The
regulation in 10 CFR 52.17(a)(1)(i) requires an applicant for an early site
permit (ESP) to describe the specific number, type, and thermal power level of
the facilities or range of facilities that the applicant plans to deploy at its
proposed site. Although this regulation
does not explicitly discuss the PPE approach, the NRC has decided that the PPE
approach is an acceptable way of meeting § 52.17(a)(1). See the letter to NEI, dated February 5,
2003, on use of the PPE approach (ADAMS Accession No. ML030230071).
Yes, any person can petition to amend a design
certification rule (DCR) under 10 CFR 52.63(a)(1). However, in determining whether to codify a
propose amendment, the Commission will give special consideration to comments
from applicants or licensees who referenced the DCR. Similarly, an entity other than the original
applicant could apply for renewal of a certified design provided that the entity
has been qualified as an alternate vendor under 52.73(a).
The regulatory processes associated with issuing
licenses, certifications, and approvals are described in various regulations
and guidance documents. A summary is
provided in NUREG/BR-0298, “Nuclear
Power Plant Licensing Process.” A
related document with more discussions of the environmental reviews performed
to support the siting and construction of nuclear power plants is provided in NUREG/BR-0468, “Frequently Asked Questions About License Applications for New
Nuclear Power Reactors.”