ML030860300
| ML030860300 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 07/17/2002 |
| From: | Long S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Wilson P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2003-0018 | |
| Download: ML030860300 (1) | |
Text
JSteven Long - Re: Format for Phase 3 Analyses From:
Steven Long >
,J4" To:
Peter Wilson Date:
7/17/02 12:50PM
Subject:
Re: Format for Phase 3 Analyses Pete and others, I looked at the attached file, and saw a list of content, NOT A FORMAT. What is says is "1c Phase 3 Analysis (if necessary)
"Concisely address each of the analysis aspects that follow.
"PRA tools used.
"Affected sequences "Influential assumptions "Sensitivity of results to each influential assumption:
"Contributions of greatest uncertainty factors and impact on assumptions, "Previous similar analyses if applicable)
"Proposed preliminary or final color."
For a complicated analysis like the one I'm doing for Davis-Besse or the one I did for IP2 SGTE, forcing the rationale and analysis into the order of the specified list of contents is guaranteed to make it unreadable. Since the 0609.01 doesn't say thisis the format, I don't intend to make it my format. If others insist, then I propose we write a readable risk-significance report and then reference it in an abstract that is force-fit to follow this content list format Steve
>>> Peter Wilson 07/17/02 12.27PM >>>
Please refer to the attached file. The attached manual chapter contain a brief outline on the general format for Phase 3 analyses. We need to use with format when documenting our analyses. This will enable the Regions to quickly incorporate our work into their SERP packages and will standardize our documentation with the Regions. I recommned contacting the SRA in the region we are supporting prior to documentation to ensure their needs our met. If you have any questions please call or stop by.
Pagýb -11