ML18164A085: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
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

Revision as of 01:58, 17 June 2019

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)


Text

Enclosure 3 Reactor Oversight Process Meeting Briefing Material May 24, 201 8 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

-Conducted focused assessment on the engineering inspection program*ROP provided objective, risk-informed, understandable, and predictable

oversight*Identified improvements to the ROP 2

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 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-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