JK August, ANS/Chair ANSI Washington DC March 28, /28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC1

 Discussions with NIST  Scope of work  Requests sent Jan-Feb  Most responses  “We’re good”  We use ANSI protocols; we’re always current  Lists of nuclear standards used  Other 3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC2

SDOPoints of Contact Dist list ACI (American Concrete Institute)Doug ACI (American Concrete Institute)Matthew AISC (American Institute of Steel Construction)Charlie ANS (American Nuclear Society)Jim ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers)John ASMEKevin ASTM Intl.Joe AWS (American Welding Society)Annette AWS (American Welding Society)Andrew IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers)James IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) IEEE NPECJack Cartern ISO (International Standards Organization)No contact yet identifiedn MSS (Manufacturing Standardization Society)David NFPA (National Fire Protection Association)Paul NFPA (National Fire Protection Association)Meghan NFPA (National Fire Protection Association)Greg Other contacts 3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC3

 Standard/Title Priority  ANS Determining Design Basis Flooding 1  ANS Radiological Emergency Response Plans 2  ANS Design Requirements for New Fuel Storage 3  ANS Surface Faulting at Nuclear Facilities 4  ANS Design for Consolidation of LWR Spent Fuel 5 3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC4

 Basis Discussion  Original Idea (pre March 13, 2011: Fukushima)  New Construction  Materials and Hardware  Few Nuclear Processes  like Coding SSC for new plants  Today  Support operating plants  NEI support/Current vision  Long-term disarray for processes support 3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC5

 Are we getting new plant issues?  Do we have the right priorities?  Do we know what SDOs see or want?  Do we know what will benefit new plants?  Can we support new nuclear initiatives like SMRs?  Are we supporting new Gen3+ LWRs?  Why aren’t nuclear utilities at the NESCC?  Does NEI represent them adequately? 3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC6

 What do we need?  Current thinking is that we lack the information to ATQ  Standards Database Effort was to help organize that information  We are dealing with around 1400 Standards and 500 Reg Guides, minimally  That’s only starters  20 NRC document categories/Other Standard-like documents 3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC7

Endorsed, we will reference them in our Reg Guides 3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC8

 Get priorities for work  Understand how those fit, overall  Especially between SMRs and Gen3+LWRs  Get focused to accomplish NESCC goals  Improve use of nuclear standards  Existing  New  Use nuclear standards to raise safety, simplify work, lower costs 3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC9

 Regulatory Guides versus Standards  Keep track of needed work  Allow cross-referencing and use of existing standards  Currently in paused mode  Idea was to create a web-enabled database accessible to all to cross references Regulatory Documents and Standards they referenced 3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC10

3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC11

3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC12

400 Reg Guides 1400 Standards This is a big table!!!! 3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC13

3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC14

 Rather complex  Lots of information  Needs to be done well, to be useful now…  …and carry Nuclear Standards into the future.  Basically, calls for a database approach 3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC15

3/28/2013 NESCC Standards Meeting ANSI Washington, DC16