Pre-Licensing Vendor Design Review
- Phase 1: Pre-Licensing Assessment of Compliance with Regulatory Requirements
- Phase 2: Pre-Licensing Assessment for Any Potential Fundamental Barriers to Licensing
- Phase 3: Follow-up
- Status of Pre-Licensing Vendor Design Reviews
A Pre-Licensing Vendor Design Review (VDR) is an optional service provided by the CNSC when requested by a vendor.
A VDR is a feedback mechanism that enables CNSC staff to provide feedback early in the design process based on a vendor's reactor technology. Nuclear power plant designs can include small modular reactor (SMR) concepts, advanced reactor concepts or more traditional designs. The assessment is completed by the CNSC at the request of the vendor. The word “pre-licensing” signifies that a design review is undertaken prior to the submission of a licence application to the CNSC by an applicant seeking to build and operate a new nuclear power plant. An application by a vendor for a review is not an application for a licence to prepare a site or to construct or operate a nuclear power facility, and is not an indication of intent to proceed with a project.
This review does not certify a reactor design or involve the issuance of a licence under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, and it is not required as part of the licensing process for a new nuclear power plant. The conclusions of any design review do not bind or otherwise influence decisions made by the Commission.
The objective of a review is to verify, at a high level, the acceptability of a nuclear power plant design with respect to Canadian nuclear regulatory requirements and expectations, as well as Canadian codes and standards. These reviews also identify fundamental barriers to licensing a new design in Canada and assures that a resolution path exists for any design issues identified in the review.
A vendor who has completed a phase 2 pre-licensing vendor design review, has committed to increased regulatory efficiencies at the time of licensing. The results of Phase 2 will be taken into account mainly for the Construction Licence Application and is likely to result in increased efficiencies of technical reviews.
The reviews take place in three phases, each of which is conducted against related CNSC regulatory documents and Canadian codes & standards:
Phase 1: Pre-Licensing Assessment of Compliance with Regulatory Requirements: This phase involves an overall assessment of the vendor's nuclear power plant design against the most recent CNSC design requirements for new nuclear power plants in Canada as indicated in REGDOC-2.5.2, Design Of Reactor Facilities: Nuclear Power Plants or Design of Small Reactor Facilities (RD-367) as applicable, as well as all other related CNSC regulatory documents and Canadian codes & standards.
Phase 2: Pre-Licensing Assessment for Any Potential Fundamental Barriers to Licensing: This phase goes into further details with a focus on identifying any potential fundamental barriers to licensing the vendor's nuclear power plant design in Canada.
Phase 3: Follow-up: This phase allows the vendor to follow-up on certain aspects of Phase 2 findings by:
- seeking more information from the CNSC about a Phase 2 topic; and/or
- asking the CNSC to review activities taken by the vendor towards the reactor's design readiness, following the completion of Phase 2.
Because a pre-licensing vendor design review does not lead to a regulatory decision, CNSC staff must strike a balance between, on the one hand, protecting a vendor’s sensitive commercial information and, on the other hand, securing CNSC staff access to this information for the purposes of performing an effective review and communicating the CNSC’s activities to the public transparently, to the extent practicable. As a result, the overall conclusions and key findings of a pre-licensing vendor design review are posted by the CNSC in an executive summary for public information. However, release of detailed discussions and review results are at the discretion of the vendor.
For more Information on the CNSC's Pre-licensing Vendor Design Review, please refer to REGDOC-3.5.4, Pre-Licensing Review of a Vendor’s Reactor Design.
Pre-licensing vendor design reviews are carried out within a service agreement
A service agreement is a legal document that establishes the terms and conditions between the CNSC and a reactor vendor. These terms and conditions enable the CNSC to conduct a pre-licensing vendor design review in accordance with the Nuclear Safety and Control Act and its regulations. The agreement serves as a mechanism for:
- preserving the CNSC’s regulatory independence by reinforcing the fact that the review being undertaken:
- does not certify a reactor design
- does not involve the issuance of a licence under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act
- is not required as part of the licensing process for a new nuclear power plant; the conclusions of any design review do not bind or otherwise influence future decisions made by the Commission
- recovering costs from effort expended by CNSC staff
- ensuring that the objectives and conduct of a review remain consistent from one vendor to the next, thereby ensuring fairness of treatment
- striking a balance between, on the one hand, protecting a vendor’s sensitive commercial information and, on the other hand, providing CNSC staff access to this information for the purposes of performing an effective review and transparently communicating the CNSC’s activities to the public, to the extent practicable
Status of Pre-licensing Vendor Design Reviews
Participating vendors and their review completion dates are outlined below. Please note that planned completion dates for current reviews may be adjusted as needed by mutual agreement.
Current pre-licensing vendor design reviews
The following table presents an overview of vendors who have established service agreements with the CNSC for pre-licensing engagement using the vendor design review process for their new reactor designs.
The duration of each review is estimated based on the vendor’s proposed schedule. A Phase 1 review typically takes 12–18 months and a Phase 2 review takes 24 months.
At the end of the review for each phase, an executive summary of the project report will be posted on this Web page.
|Vendor design review service agreements in force between vendors and the CNSC|
|Vendor||Name of design and cooling type||Approximate electrical capacity (MW electrical)||Applied for||Review start date||Status|
|Terrestrial Energy Inc.||IMSR
Integral Molten Salt Reactor
|200||Phase 1||April 2016||Complete|
|Phase 2||December 2018||
Assessment in progress
|Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation||MMR-5 and
|5-10||Phase 1||December 2016||Complete|
|Phase 2||Pending||Project start pending|
|LeadCold Nuclear Inc.||SEALER
|3||Phase 1||January 2017||On hold at vendor's request|
|ARC Nuclear Canada Inc.||ARC-100
|100||Phase 1||September 2017||Complete|
|Moltex Energy||Moltex Energy Stable Salt Reactor
|300||Series Phase 1 and 2||December 2017||Phase 1 assessment in progress|
|SMR, LLC. (A Holtec International Company)||SMR-160 Pressurized Light Water||160||Phase 1||July 2018||Assessment in progress|
|NuScale Power, LLC||NuScale Integral pressurized water reactor||60||Phase 2*||January 2020||Assessment in progress|
|U-Battery Canada Ltd.||U-Battery High-temperature gas||4||Phase 1||Pending end 2019||Project start pending|
|GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy||BWRX-300 boiling water reactor||300||Phase 2*||January 2020||Assessment in Progress|
|X Energy, LLC||Xe-100 High-temperature gas||75||Phase 2*||July 2020||Project start pending|
*Phase 1 objectives will be addressed within the Phase 2 scope of work.
The following table presents an overview of vendors who have applied for service agreements with the CNSC to conduct a vendor design review for their new reactor designs. Although it typically takes a few months for the CNSC to establish and sign a service agreement, this time period can vary, depending on:
- the organizational and technical readiness of the vendor
- sufficient completeness of the vendor’s design activities for the Phase of VDR applied for
- the vendor’s financial readiness to undertake the vendor design review
- other legal, timing or business aspects that may influence a vendor’s decision to proceed
The CNSC does not provide details on a vendor’s decision to enter or complete the vendor design review process. For additional information, please contact the vendor directly.
|Vendor design review service agreement between vendors and the CNSC under development|
|Vendor||Name of design and cooling type||Approximate electrical capacity (MW electrical) per unit/module||Application received||Applied for|
|Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC||eVinci Micro Reactor solid core and heat pipes||Various outputs up to 25 MWe||February 2018||Phase 2*|
|StarCore Nuclear||StarCore Module
|10||October 2016||Series Phase 1 and 2|
*Phase 1 objectives will be addressed within the Phase 2 scope of work.
For questions about vendor design review, contact email@example.com.
Completed vendor pre-licensing vendor design reviews
Note: Due to the commercially sensitive and proprietary information in the full report, the CNSC is only able to post the Executive Summaries.
For any detailed information concerning the results of a vendor design review, please contact the associated vendor.
ARC Nuclear Canada Inc. – ARC-100:
- Phase 1 Pre-Licensing Vendor Design Review Executive Summary: ARC Nuclear Canada Inc. (October 2019)
Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation – MMR:
- Phase 1 Pre-Licensing Vendor Design Review Executive Summary: Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation (USNC) (February 2019)
Terrestrial Energy Inc. – IMSR 400:
- Phase 1 Executive Summary: Pre-Project Review of Terrestrial Energy’s 400-thermal-megawatt integral molten salt reactor (IMSR400) (PDF, November 2017)
Candu Energy* – EC 6 (Enhanced CANDU):
* On October 2, 2011, SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. acquired certain assets of AECL's commercial operations. The business operates as a wholly owned subsidiary called Candu Energy Inc.
- Phase 1 Executive Summary: Pre-Project Review of AECL's Enhanced Candu – EC 6 (PDF, April 2010)
- Phase 2: Executive Summary: Pre-Project Review of Candu Energy's Enhanced Candu – EC 6 (PDF, April 2012)
- Phase 3: Executive Summary: Pre-Project Review of Candu Energy's EC6TM Reactor Design (PDF, June 2013)
Westinghouse – AP1000:
- Phase 1 Executive Summary: Pre-Project Review of Westinghouse's Advanced Passive Plant Design (AP1000TM) (PDF, January 2010)
- Phase 2: Executive Summary: Pre-Project Review of Westinghouse's Advanced Passive Plan Design (AP1000TM) (PDF, June 2013)
ATMEA – ATMEA1:
AREVA – EPR:
- Phase 1 Review terminated effective December 27, 2012
AECL – ACR-1000:
- Phase 1 Executive Summary: Pre-Project Review of AECL's Advanced CANDU Reactor (ACR-1000) (PDF, December 2008)
- Phase 2 Executive Summary: Pre-Project Review of AECL's Advanced CANDU Reactor (ACR-1000) (PDF, August 2009)
- Phase 3 Executive Summary: Pre-Project Review of AECL's Advanced CANDU Reactor (ACR-1000) (PDF, December 2010)
Need more information?
For information, contact the CNSC.
- Date modified: