ML18164A085: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
| issue date = 06/13/2018
| issue date = 06/13/2018
| title = Enclosure Briefing Material
| title = Enclosure Briefing Material
| author name = Bridge J L
| author name = Bridge J
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DIRS/IRAB
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DIRS/IRAB
| addressee name =  
| addressee name =  
Line 9: Line 9:
| docket =  
| docket =  
| license number =  
| license number =  
| contact person = Bridge J L, NRR/DIRS, 415-4052
| contact person = Bridge J, NRR/DIRS, 415-4052
| document type = Meeting Briefing Package/Handouts
| document type = Meeting Briefing Package/Handouts
| page count = 6
| page count = 6
Line 15: Line 15:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:Enclosure 3 Reactor Oversight Process Meeting Briefing Material May 24, 201 8  ML18164A085
{{#Wiki_filter:Enclosure 3 Reactor Oversight Process Meeting Briefing Material May 24, 2018 ML18164A085  


1 1 Reactor Oversight Process Self-AssessmentMary Anderson, Self Assessment LeadDivision of Inspection and Regional SupportOffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Key Messages*Fully implemented the ROP self-assessment process:-Completed ROP metrics assessment-Performed program evaluations
1 1
-Conducted focused assessment on the engineering inspection program*ROP provided objective, risk-informed, understandable, and predictable  
Reactor Oversight Process Self-Assessment Mary Anderson, Self Assessment Lead Division of Inspection and Regional Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Key Messages
* Fully implemented the ROP self-assessment process:
- Completed ROP metrics assessment
- Performed program evaluations
- Conducted focused assessment on the engineering inspection program
* ROP provided objective, risk-informed, understandable, and predictable oversight
* Identified improvements to the ROP 2


oversight*Identified improvements to the ROP 2
2 Revised ROP Self-Assessment Process
2Revised ROP Self-Assessment Process*Three elements defined in IMC 0307:1.Measure effectiveness of and adherence to ROP governance documents2.Monitor ROP revisions and to assess effectiveness of recent changes3.Conduct focused assessments and regional peer reviews 3 4Element 1 CY 2017 ROP Self-AssessmentElement 2Element 3 3 CY 2017 ResultsElement 1:  Measure effectiveness of and adherence to the current program*Metrics assessment:-22 of 26 metrics were determined to be Green
* Three elements defined in IMC 0307:
-Three metrics were Red; one metric was Yellow*Responsiveness to ROP feedback forms (Red)*Timely completion of performance deficiency determinations (Red)*Performance of lessons learned evaluations (Red)
: 1. Measure effectiveness of and adherence to ROP governance documents
*Completion of final significance determinations (Yellow)-Actions underway to address Red metrics*Program evaluations:-PI, inspection, SDP, and assessment programs 5 Element 2:  Monitor ROP revisions and assess effectiveness of recent program changes*ROP revisions that were monitored:-OIG audit of IMC 2515, Appendix C inspections*No effectiveness reviews were conducted in CY 2017:-Several recent ROP changes; allowing for operating time before assessing-Three reviews planned/underway in CY 2018 6 CY 2017 Results 4 Element 3:  Conduct focused assessment and regional peer review*Regional peer review:-Biennial. Not required in 2017.*ROP focused reviews:-Enhancements to the engineering inspection program.*ROP Baseline IP review:-Biennial. Not required in 2017.
: 2. Monitor ROP revisions and to assess effectiveness of recent changes
7 CY 2017 Results CY 2017 Conclusions*ROP provided effective oversight by meeting program goals and achieving intended
: 3. Conduct focused assessments and regional peer reviews 3
4 Element 1 CY 2017 ROP Self-Assessment Element 2 Element 3


outcomes*Ensured openness and effectiveness in supporting NRC mission and strategic goals of safety and security*Program was successful in being objective, risk-informed, understandable, and predictable*Program improvements implemented and underway based on lessons learned and
3 CY 2017 Results Element 1: Measure effectiveness of and adherence to the current program
* Metrics assessment:
- 22 of 26 metrics were determined to be Green
- Three metrics were Red; one metric was Yellow
* Responsiveness to ROP feedback forms (Red)
* Timely completion of performance deficiency determinations (Red)
* Performance of lessons learned evaluations (Red)
* Completion of final significance determinations (Yellow)
- Actions underway to address Red metrics
* Program evaluations:
- PI, inspection, SDP, and assessment programs 5
Element 2: Monitor ROP revisions and assess effectiveness of recent program changes
* ROP revisions that were monitored:
- OIG audit of IMC 2515, Appendix C inspections
* No effectiveness reviews were conducted in CY 2017:
- Several recent ROP changes; allowing for operating time before assessing
- Three reviews planned/underway in CY 2018 6
CY 2017 Results


feedback from stakeholders 8
4 Element 3: Conduct focused assessment and regional peer review
5 9 Plans for CY 2018 ROP Self-AssessmentElement 1Element 2Element 3 2018 Planned Effectiveness Reviews1.Inspection Finding Resolution Management (IFRM) pilot (underway)2.Closure of IP 95001 inspections (underway)3.Safety Culture Common Language 10}}
* Regional peer review:
- Biennial. Not required in 2017.
* ROP focused reviews:
- Enhancements to the engineering inspection program.
* ROP Baseline IP review:
- Biennial. Not required in 2017.
7 CY 2017 Results CY 2017 Conclusions
* ROP provided effective oversight by meeting program goals and achieving intended outcomes
* Ensured openness and effectiveness in supporting NRC mission and strategic goals of safety and security
* Program was successful in being objective, risk-informed, understandable, and predictable
* Program improvements implemented and underway based on lessons learned and feedback from stakeholders 8
 
5 9
Plans for CY 2018 ROP Self-Assessment Element 1 Element 2 Element 3 2018 Planned Effectiveness Reviews
: 1. Inspection Finding Resolution Management (IFRM) pilot (underway)
: 2. Closure of IP 95001 inspections (underway)
: 3. Safety Culture Common Language 10}}

Latest revision as of 18:24, 5 January 2025

Enclosure Briefing Material
ML18164A085
Person / Time
Issue date: 06/13/2018
From: Jo Bridge
NRC/NRR/DIRS/IRAB
To:
Bridge J, NRR/DIRS, 415-4052
References
Download: ML18164A085 (6)
v • d • e


Text

Enclosure 3 Reactor Oversight Process Meeting Briefing Material May 24, 2018 ML18164A085

1 1

Reactor Oversight Process Self-Assessment Mary Anderson, Self Assessment Lead Division of Inspection and Regional Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Key Messages

  • Fully implemented the ROP self-assessment process:

- Completed ROP metrics assessment

- Performed program evaluations

- Conducted focused assessment on the engineering inspection program

  • ROP provided objective, risk-informed, understandable, and predictable oversight
  • Identified improvements to the ROP 2

2 Revised ROP Self-Assessment Process

  • Three elements defined in IMC 0307:
1. Measure effectiveness of and adherence to ROP governance documents
2. Monitor ROP revisions and to assess effectiveness of recent changes
3. Conduct focused assessments and regional peer reviews 3

4 Element 1 CY 2017 ROP Self-Assessment Element 2 Element 3

3 CY 2017 Results Element 1: Measure effectiveness of and adherence to the current program

  • Metrics assessment:

- 22 of 26 metrics were determined to be Green

- Three metrics were Red; one metric was Yellow

  • Responsiveness to ROP feedback forms (Red)
  • Timely completion of performance deficiency determinations (Red)
  • Performance of lessons learned evaluations (Red)
  • Completion of final significance determinations (Yellow)

- Actions underway to address Red metrics

  • Program evaluations:

- PI, inspection, SDP, and assessment programs 5

Element 2: Monitor ROP revisions and assess effectiveness of recent program changes

  • ROP revisions that were monitored:

- OIG audit of IMC 2515, Appendix C inspections

  • No effectiveness reviews were conducted in CY 2017:

- Several recent ROP changes; allowing for operating time before assessing

- Three reviews planned/underway in CY 2018 6

CY 2017 Results

4 Element 3: Conduct focused assessment and regional peer review

  • Regional peer review:

- Biennial. Not required in 2017.

  • ROP focused reviews:

- Enhancements to the engineering inspection program.

  • ROP Baseline IP review:

- Biennial. Not required in 2017.

7 CY 2017 Results CY 2017 Conclusions

  • ROP provided effective oversight by meeting program goals and achieving intended outcomes
  • Ensured openness and effectiveness in supporting NRC mission and strategic goals of safety and security
  • Program was successful in being objective, risk-informed, understandable, and predictable
  • Program improvements implemented and underway based on lessons learned and feedback from stakeholders 8

5 9

Plans for CY 2018 ROP Self-Assessment Element 1 Element 2 Element 3 2018 Planned Effectiveness Reviews

1. Inspection Finding Resolution Management (IFRM) pilot (underway)
2. Closure of IP 95001 inspections (underway)
3. Safety Culture Common Language 10
Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML18164A085&oldid=4982238"