ML18072A045: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:March 19, 2018 | {{#Wiki_filter:March 19, 2018 MEMORANDUM TO: Gregory T. Bowman, Chief Reactor Oversight Process Assessment Branch Division of Inspection and Regional Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Ami N. Agrawal, Reactor Operations Engineer /RA/ | ||
Inspection and Regional Support Branch Division of Inspection and Regional Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation | |||
MEMORANDUM TO: Gregory T. Bowman, Chief Reactor Oversight Process Assessment Branch Division of Inspection and Regional Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation | |||
FROM: Ami N. Agrawal, Reactor Operations Engineer | |||
/RA/ | |||
==SUBJECT:== | ==SUBJECT:== | ||
==SUMMARY== | ==SUMMARY== | ||
OF THE REACTOR OVERSIGHT PROCESS WORKING GROUP PUBLIC MEETING HELD ON MARCH 1, 2018 | OF THE REACTOR OVERSIGHT PROCESS WORKING GROUP PUBLIC MEETING HELD ON MARCH 1, 2018 On March 1, 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff hosted a Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) Working Group (WG) public meeting with the Nuclear Energy Institutes (NEIs) ROP Task Force and other industry representatives. A summary of the discussion topics is provided below. contains the meeting attendance list. (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML18072A061) contains the presentations materials and handouts discussed during the meeting. (ADAMS) Accession No. ML18072A065 contains the Performance Indicator (PI) | ||
Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) Log and the FAQs discussed during the meeting. | |||
On March 1, 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff hosted a Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) Working Group (WG) public meeting with the Nuclear Energy | |||
(Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML18072A061) contains the presentations materials and handouts discussed during the | |||
meeting. | |||
==Enclosures:== | ==Enclosures:== | ||
: 1. Attendance List | : 1. Attendance List | ||
: 2. Presentation Materials | : 2. Presentation Materials | ||
: 3. FAQs | : 3. FAQs CONTACT: Ami N. Agrawal, NRR/DIRS (301) 415-8310 | ||
G. Bowman 2 Frequently Asked Questions In the area of the PI program, FAQ 18-01 was the only FAQ that was open at the time of this meeting. This FAQ requested that a definition of initial transient for boiling water reactors be added to NEI 99-02 guidance regarding the unplanned scrams with complications performance indicator. Staff and the ROP Task Force discussed proposed wording for the definition. The staff stated that a proposed resolution might be presented at the next ROP public meeting, scheduled for April 5. | |||
Industry submitted two new FAQs. FAQ 18-02 requests to delay the effective date of the IE01 and IE03 performance indicators for Watts Bar Unit 2 until 3Q2018 to allow sufficient data for an accurate assessment value. FAQ 18-03 requests a plant-specific exemption from the guidance related to the unplanned scrams with complications performance indicator for Columbia due to unique circumstances surrounding a plant scram on August 20, 2017. The NRC will review and comment on these FAQs during the next ROP WG public meeting. | |||
Industry submitted two new FAQs. FAQ 18-02 requests to delay the effective date of the IE01 and IE03 performance indicators for Watts Bar Unit 2 until 3Q2018 | |||
Inspection Finding Resolution Management (IFRM) | Inspection Finding Resolution Management (IFRM) | ||
The NRC staff discussed that the IFRM process aims to increase the efficiency with which NRC dispositions potentially greater than green inspection findings, and was piloted during calendar year 2017. The staff is currently performing an effectiveness review to assess the | The NRC staff discussed that the IFRM process aims to increase the efficiency with which NRC dispositions potentially greater than green inspection findings, and was piloted during calendar year 2017. The staff is currently performing an effectiveness review to assess the agencys experience with IFRM over the past year and determine whether and how the process should be carried forward. Staff has collected internal feedback and sought industry feedback to also be considered during the effectiveness review. Industry feedback was largely supportive of the IFRM process, with a specific request for the staff to ensure guidance for robust communications with licensees as issues move through the IFRM process, in particular around the time of the inspection finding review board. | ||
Timing of Closure of Greater-than-Green Findings | Timing of Closure of Greater-than-Green Findings The NRC staff provided a history behind the white paper describing the staff-initiated recommendation to eliminate the four-quarter requirement for safety-significant inspection findings to remain Action Matrix inputs, in order to provide licensees an incentive to have supplemental inspections completed as soon as possible. The staff also described an additional proposal that PIs that cross a threshold should remain Action Matrix inputs until the appropriate supplemental inspection is completed, even if the PI returns to Green before the inspection is complete. The rationale for the change to PIs was also to encourage licensees to complete supplemental inspections as soon as possible, and to treat PIs that cross a threshold the same as safety-significant inspection findings. The staff discussed some cons associated with the recommendations, which included a concern that Regions would be pressured to inspect licensees desiring to close a safety-significant finding or PI before a quarter ended, and a concern that there would potentially be more failures of supplemental inspections because licensees may inform the NRC of inspection readiness prior to being fully ready. Based on feedback from the Regions, the staff has made this initiative a low priority effort, and is not currently working on a SECY paper to forward the recommendations to the Commission. | ||
Safety Culture Common Language | |||
The NRC staff provided a history behind the white paper describing the staff-initiated recommendation to eliminate the four-quarter requirement for safety-significant inspection findings to remain Action Matrix inputs, in order to provide licensees an incentive to have supplemental inspections completed as soon as possible. The staff also described an additional proposal that PIs that cross a threshold should remain Action Matrix inputs until the appropriate supplemental inspection is completed, even if the PI returns to Green before the inspection is complete. The rationale for the change to PIs was also to encourage licensees to complete supplemental inspections as soon as possible, and to treat PIs that cross a threshold the same as safety-significant inspection findings. The staff discussed some cons associated with the recommendations, which included a concern that Regions would be pressured to inspect licensees desiring to close a safety-significant finding or PI before a quarter ended, and a concern that there would potentially be more failures of supplemental inspections because licensees may inform the NRC of inspection readiness prior to being fully ready. Based on feedback from the Regions, the staff has made this initiative a low priority effort, and is not currently working on a SECY paper to forward the recommendations to the Commission. | |||
Working Group to Update the ROP for Regulatory Actions Taken Following the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident | G. Bowman 3 The NRC staff from the ROP Assessment Branch (IRAB) discussed the effectiveness of the Safety Culture Common Language Initiative and asked for feedback on the initiative from the industry and NEI. All industry stakeholders were in agreement that the Common Language Initiative was deemed to be highly successful. | ||
Licensee Event Reporting Tool The NRC staff presented a conceptual pilot of an online application for licensees to submit Licensee Event Reports. The industry representatives stated that they would review the proposed concept and would provide comments on the initiative. The industry indicated that NRCs online application would not result in any increase in efficiency for industry users, and they would not recommend it as a voluntary initiative. They offered to continue to engage with the staff regarding reporting requirements through the NEI Modernization of Reporting Requirements working group and in future ROP public meetings. | |||
The NRC staff from ROP Inspection Branch (IRIB) in Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), Division of Inspection and Regional Support (DIRS) provided an update on the ROP/Fukushima working | Working Group to Update the ROP for Regulatory Actions Taken Following the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident The NRC staff from ROP Inspection Branch (IRIB) in Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), Division of Inspection and Regional Support (DIRS) provided an update on the ROP/Fukushima working groups efforts. A handout for the update was provided (ADAMS Accession No. ML18057B032) and included a brief background discussion, highlights of efforts to date, and next near-term efforts. The NRC indicated that first milestone to brief NRR would be extended past the March 31, 2018 date in order to solicit additional feedback at the April 2018 ROP public meeting. External stakeholders also provided the following feedback: | ||
* Technical Specification Surveillance Requirements (TS SRs) are an important aspect of operations/safety. Expanding the scope of IP 71111.22, | * Technical Specification Surveillance Requirements (TS SRs) are an important aspect of operations/safety. Expanding the scope of IP 71111.22, Surveillance Testing, to allow for sample selection of FLEX may dilute the focus on TS SRs. | ||
* There should be coordination between the ROP/Fukushima working group and the Engineering working group (ADAMS Accession No. ML17172A620) to ensure coordination of inspection resources and to ensure that recommendations from the two groups do not conflict. | * There should be coordination between the ROP/Fukushima working group and the Engineering working group (ADAMS Accession No. ML17172A620) to ensure coordination of inspection resources and to ensure that recommendations from the two groups do not conflict. | ||
* Consideration should be given to leveraging existing activities performed as a result of Emergency Planning drills. | * Consideration should be given to leveraging existing activities performed as a result of Emergency Planning drills. | ||
The NRC will continue to engage external stakeholders throughout the process to solicit feedback. | |||
The NRC will continue to engage external stakeholders throughout the process to solicit feedback. | Update on Radiation Protection Topics Related to the ROP The NRC staff from the Radiation Protection and Consequence Branch in the Division of Risk Assessment (DRA) discussed revisions to the radiation protection (RP) baseline inspection procedures and reinstatement of the Health Physics Position Program and provided | ||
Update on Radiation Protection Topics Related to the ROP | |||
The NRC staff from the Radiation Protection and Consequence Branch in the Division of Risk Assessment (DRA) discussed revisions to the radiation protection (RP) baseline inspection procedures and reinstatement of the Health Physics Position Program and provided | |||
Actions from this Meeting No Actions of note | G. Bowman 4 a status on the revision to the RP Significant Determination Process (SDPs) (IMC 0609 App C and D) and Regulatory Guides 8.7 and 1.8. | ||
Aging Management issues The NRC staff discussed potential changes to several baseline inspection procedures which address licensee performance concerning management of aging effects in a period of extended operation. Future presentations will be made as changes to the procedures are finalized. | |||
Actions from this Meeting No Actions of note | |||
G. Bowman 5 | G. Bowman 5 DISTRIBUTION: | ||
RidsNrrOd RidsAcrsmailcenter RidsRgnIIIMailCenter RidsRgnIVMailCenter RidsNrrDirsIrib JClark RidsNrrDirsIrab ERuesch MMiller RidsOgcMailCenter RidsOPAMail TGody RidsRgnIMailCenter RidsRgnIIMailCenter KObrien RidsNrrDirs GSuber AVegel RidsNrrDirsIrgb RidsNrrDraAphb AStone MScott RLorson MShuaibi JMunday MFranke PLouden JGiessner TPruett RLantz MFerdas BDavis JWillis ESchrader ADAMS ACCESSION NO: ML18072A045 ADAMS Package No. ML18072A036 | |||
NAME AAgrawal THipschman GBowman AAgrawal | *concurred via email OFFICE NRR/DIRS/IRIB* BC:NRR/DIRS/IRIB* BC:NRR/DIRS/IRAB* NRR/DIRS/IRIB* | ||
NAME AAgrawal THipschman GBowman AAgrawal DATE 3/ 14 /18 3/ 19 /18 3/ 16 /18 3/ 19 /18 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY | |||
REACTOR OVERSIGHT PROCESS PUBLIC MEETING ATTENDANCE LIST March 1st, 2018 Steve Catron NextEra Julio Lara NRC Danny Stephens Columbia Generating Station Janelle Jessie NRC Desiree Wolfgramm Columbia Matthew Domke NRC Don Gregoire Columbia Neil Day NRC Danny Stephens Columbia Ayesha Athar NRC Larry Parker STARS Alliance Eric Ruesch NRC Rob Burg EPM William Holston NRC Tony Pate Watts Bar Mike Montecalvo NRC Kimberly Hulvey Watts Bar Olivier Lareynie NRC Jerry Hiatt NEI Dan Helton NRC Phil Couture Entergy Nuclear Operations David Garmon NRC Don Gregoire Energy Northwest Dan Merzke NRC Ellen Anderson NEI Molly Keefe NRC Bruce Mrowca ISL Global Russell Gibbs NRC Deann Raleigh Curtiss-Wright Jo Bridge NRC Ken Heffner Certrec Jesse Robles NRC Michael Murray STPNOC Eric Thomas NRC Tony Zimmerman Duke Energy Erin Anners SNC James Pak Dominion Erin Henderson TVA Jim Landale Exelon James Polickoski TVA Greg Halnon First Energy Deann Raleg Curtiss Wright David Gudger Exelon Robn Ritzman First Energy Marty Murphy Xcel Ebaide Esoimeme OIG James Slider NEI | |||
*Please note that the attendance list may not include all attendees. | |||
Enclosure 1}} | |||
Revision as of 16:16, 21 October 2019
| ML18072A045 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/19/2018 |
| From: | Ami Agrawal NRC/NRR/DIRS/IRIB |
| To: | Gregory Bowman NRC/NRR/DIRS/IRAB |
| Agrawal A, NRR/DIRS, 415-8310 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18072A036 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML18072A045 (6) | |
Text
March 19, 2018 MEMORANDUM TO: Gregory T. Bowman, Chief Reactor Oversight Process Assessment Branch Division of Inspection and Regional Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Ami N. Agrawal, Reactor Operations Engineer /RA/
Inspection and Regional Support Branch Division of Inspection and Regional Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF THE REACTOR OVERSIGHT PROCESS WORKING GROUP PUBLIC MEETING HELD ON MARCH 1, 2018 On March 1, 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff hosted a Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) Working Group (WG) public meeting with the Nuclear Energy Institutes (NEIs) ROP Task Force and other industry representatives. A summary of the discussion topics is provided below. contains the meeting attendance list. (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML18072A061) contains the presentations materials and handouts discussed during the meeting. (ADAMS) Accession No. ML18072A065 contains the Performance Indicator (PI)
Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) Log and the FAQs discussed during the meeting.
Enclosures:
- 1. Attendance List
- 2. Presentation Materials
- 3. FAQs CONTACT: Ami N. Agrawal, NRR/DIRS (301) 415-8310
G. Bowman 2 Frequently Asked Questions In the area of the PI program, FAQ 18-01 was the only FAQ that was open at the time of this meeting. This FAQ requested that a definition of initial transient for boiling water reactors be added to NEI 99-02 guidance regarding the unplanned scrams with complications performance indicator. Staff and the ROP Task Force discussed proposed wording for the definition. The staff stated that a proposed resolution might be presented at the next ROP public meeting, scheduled for April 5.
Industry submitted two new FAQs. FAQ 18-02 requests to delay the effective date of the IE01 and IE03 performance indicators for Watts Bar Unit 2 until 3Q2018 to allow sufficient data for an accurate assessment value. FAQ 18-03 requests a plant-specific exemption from the guidance related to the unplanned scrams with complications performance indicator for Columbia due to unique circumstances surrounding a plant scram on August 20, 2017. The NRC will review and comment on these FAQs during the next ROP WG public meeting.
Inspection Finding Resolution Management (IFRM)
The NRC staff discussed that the IFRM process aims to increase the efficiency with which NRC dispositions potentially greater than green inspection findings, and was piloted during calendar year 2017. The staff is currently performing an effectiveness review to assess the agencys experience with IFRM over the past year and determine whether and how the process should be carried forward. Staff has collected internal feedback and sought industry feedback to also be considered during the effectiveness review. Industry feedback was largely supportive of the IFRM process, with a specific request for the staff to ensure guidance for robust communications with licensees as issues move through the IFRM process, in particular around the time of the inspection finding review board.
Timing of Closure of Greater-than-Green Findings The NRC staff provided a history behind the white paper describing the staff-initiated recommendation to eliminate the four-quarter requirement for safety-significant inspection findings to remain Action Matrix inputs, in order to provide licensees an incentive to have supplemental inspections completed as soon as possible. The staff also described an additional proposal that PIs that cross a threshold should remain Action Matrix inputs until the appropriate supplemental inspection is completed, even if the PI returns to Green before the inspection is complete. The rationale for the change to PIs was also to encourage licensees to complete supplemental inspections as soon as possible, and to treat PIs that cross a threshold the same as safety-significant inspection findings. The staff discussed some cons associated with the recommendations, which included a concern that Regions would be pressured to inspect licensees desiring to close a safety-significant finding or PI before a quarter ended, and a concern that there would potentially be more failures of supplemental inspections because licensees may inform the NRC of inspection readiness prior to being fully ready. Based on feedback from the Regions, the staff has made this initiative a low priority effort, and is not currently working on a SECY paper to forward the recommendations to the Commission.
Safety Culture Common Language
G. Bowman 3 The NRC staff from the ROP Assessment Branch (IRAB) discussed the effectiveness of the Safety Culture Common Language Initiative and asked for feedback on the initiative from the industry and NEI. All industry stakeholders were in agreement that the Common Language Initiative was deemed to be highly successful.
Licensee Event Reporting Tool The NRC staff presented a conceptual pilot of an online application for licensees to submit Licensee Event Reports. The industry representatives stated that they would review the proposed concept and would provide comments on the initiative. The industry indicated that NRCs online application would not result in any increase in efficiency for industry users, and they would not recommend it as a voluntary initiative. They offered to continue to engage with the staff regarding reporting requirements through the NEI Modernization of Reporting Requirements working group and in future ROP public meetings.
Working Group to Update the ROP for Regulatory Actions Taken Following the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident The NRC staff from ROP Inspection Branch (IRIB) in Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), Division of Inspection and Regional Support (DIRS) provided an update on the ROP/Fukushima working groups efforts. A handout for the update was provided (ADAMS Accession No. ML18057B032) and included a brief background discussion, highlights of efforts to date, and next near-term efforts. The NRC indicated that first milestone to brief NRR would be extended past the March 31, 2018 date in order to solicit additional feedback at the April 2018 ROP public meeting. External stakeholders also provided the following feedback:
- Technical Specification Surveillance Requirements (TS SRs) are an important aspect of operations/safety. Expanding the scope of IP 71111.22, Surveillance Testing, to allow for sample selection of FLEX may dilute the focus on TS SRs.
- There should be coordination between the ROP/Fukushima working group and the Engineering working group (ADAMS Accession No. ML17172A620) to ensure coordination of inspection resources and to ensure that recommendations from the two groups do not conflict.
- Consideration should be given to leveraging existing activities performed as a result of Emergency Planning drills.
The NRC will continue to engage external stakeholders throughout the process to solicit feedback.
Update on Radiation Protection Topics Related to the ROP The NRC staff from the Radiation Protection and Consequence Branch in the Division of Risk Assessment (DRA) discussed revisions to the radiation protection (RP) baseline inspection procedures and reinstatement of the Health Physics Position Program and provided
G. Bowman 4 a status on the revision to the RP Significant Determination Process (SDPs) (IMC 0609 App C and D) and Regulatory Guides 8.7 and 1.8.
Aging Management issues The NRC staff discussed potential changes to several baseline inspection procedures which address licensee performance concerning management of aging effects in a period of extended operation. Future presentations will be made as changes to the procedures are finalized.
Actions from this Meeting No Actions of note
G. Bowman 5 DISTRIBUTION:
RidsNrrOd RidsAcrsmailcenter RidsRgnIIIMailCenter RidsRgnIVMailCenter RidsNrrDirsIrib JClark RidsNrrDirsIrab ERuesch MMiller RidsOgcMailCenter RidsOPAMail TGody RidsRgnIMailCenter RidsRgnIIMailCenter KObrien RidsNrrDirs GSuber AVegel RidsNrrDirsIrgb RidsNrrDraAphb AStone MScott RLorson MShuaibi JMunday MFranke PLouden JGiessner TPruett RLantz MFerdas BDavis JWillis ESchrader ADAMS ACCESSION NO: ML18072A045 ADAMS Package No. ML18072A036
- concurred via email OFFICE NRR/DIRS/IRIB* BC:NRR/DIRS/IRIB* BC:NRR/DIRS/IRAB* NRR/DIRS/IRIB*
NAME AAgrawal THipschman GBowman AAgrawal DATE 3/ 14 /18 3/ 19 /18 3/ 16 /18 3/ 19 /18 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
REACTOR OVERSIGHT PROCESS PUBLIC MEETING ATTENDANCE LIST March 1st, 2018 Steve Catron NextEra Julio Lara NRC Danny Stephens Columbia Generating Station Janelle Jessie NRC Desiree Wolfgramm Columbia Matthew Domke NRC Don Gregoire Columbia Neil Day NRC Danny Stephens Columbia Ayesha Athar NRC Larry Parker STARS Alliance Eric Ruesch NRC Rob Burg EPM William Holston NRC Tony Pate Watts Bar Mike Montecalvo NRC Kimberly Hulvey Watts Bar Olivier Lareynie NRC Jerry Hiatt NEI Dan Helton NRC Phil Couture Entergy Nuclear Operations David Garmon NRC Don Gregoire Energy Northwest Dan Merzke NRC Ellen Anderson NEI Molly Keefe NRC Bruce Mrowca ISL Global Russell Gibbs NRC Deann Raleigh Curtiss-Wright Jo Bridge NRC Ken Heffner Certrec Jesse Robles NRC Michael Murray STPNOC Eric Thomas NRC Tony Zimmerman Duke Energy Erin Anners SNC James Pak Dominion Erin Henderson TVA Jim Landale Exelon James Polickoski TVA Greg Halnon First Energy Deann Raleg Curtiss Wright David Gudger Exelon Robn Ritzman First Energy Marty Murphy Xcel Ebaide Esoimeme OIG James Slider NEI
- Please note that the attendance list may not include all attendees.
Enclosure 1