Text

EPRI HRA Users Group Review of Draft NUREG-1842
	ML061510601
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley, Millstone, Monticello, Calvert Cliffs, Dresden, Davis Besse, Peach Bottom, Browns Ferry, Salem, Oconee, Mcguire, Nine Mile Point, Palisades, Palo Verde, Perry, Fermi, Kewaunee, Catawba, Wolf Creek, Saint Lucie, Point Beach, Watts Bar, Hope Creek, Sequoyah, Byron, Braidwood, Summer, Prairie Island, Limerick, Turkey Point, Diablo Canyon, Callaway, Vogtle, Duane Arnold, Farley, South Texas, San Onofre, Quad Cities, Humboldt Bay, Bellefonte, Fort Calhoun, McGuire, LaSalle
Issue date:	05/23/2006
From:	Elawar Z, Grobbelaar J, Julius J, Rahn F; Electric Power Research Institute, Scientech
To:	; NRC/FSME
References
	NUREG-1842
	Download: ML061510601 (19)
	v • d • e

EPRI HRA Users Group Review of DRAFT NUREG-1842 Preliminary Comments May 23, 2006 Zouhair Elawar, HRA UG Chairman Jan Grobbelaar & Jeff Julius, Scientech LLC Frank Rahn, EPRI Copyright 2006 EPRI. All Rights Reserved.

Presentation Overview

Introduction

- EPRI HRA Users Group Overview

- NRC HRA Background

Recent NRC HRA Projects

Draft NUREG-1842 Overview

Review Comments - Initial Feedback

Summary: Current HRA tools and methods are sufficiently robust for successful risk-informed applications!

EPRI HRA UG Overview - Mission Charter Missions:

Develop a tool to enable different analysts employing the same HRA method to obtain comparable results (for plants similar in design, procedures, &

training).

To provide an HRA interface to the R&R Workstation.

To improve the ability to do sensitivity analyses on Human Error Probabilities used in the PRA model.

To develop standard guidelines for application of human reliability data, methods, and performance shaping factors.

A key goal for the project, ultimately, is to enable industry to converge to common methods.

Additions to the Mission Statement:

Ensure HRA Calculator helps satisfy the HRA Criteria of ASME PRA Std.

Coordinate with industry groups such as EPRI, Owners Groups, & USNRC to develop guidelines and training materials.

EPRI HRA Users Group Members AEP Jim Hawley, Steve Cherba, Yu Shen Ameren UE Keith Connelly, Mark Walz APS Zouhair Elawar Constellation Energy Jim Orr, George Lapinsky, Steve Kimbrough, Paul Jameson Detroit Edison Bob Slottke, Joe Lavelline, Jorge Ramirez George Baldwin, Song Hua-Shen, Fred Cietek, Barry Sloane, Tom Dominion Hook, Dave Bucheit, Ed Coen Duke Robert McAuley, Duncan Brewer EPRI Frank Rahn, Bill Hannaman EXELON John Steinmetz, Greg Kreuger Colin Keller, Sum Leung, Dennis Jondle, Gerry Kindred, Rick FENOC Stremple Ching Guey, Ken Kiper, Larry Rau, Mahmoud Heiba, Brien FPL Vincent, Mark Averett AREVA David Gerlits, Vesna Dimitrjievi, Laurent Michaud NMC Jim Masterlark, Brian Brogan, Frank Yanik, John Leiker

EPRI HRA Users Group Members (contd)

NPPD Joe Edom, Glen Seaman CANDU Owner Keith Dinnie, Marcello Oliverio, Sugata Ganguli, Ranbir Parmar, Group/OPG/NSS Ben Hryciw OPPD Jay Fluehr, Alan Hackerott, Tom Giebelhausen PG&E Amir Afzali, Nathan Barber, John Pyo PSEG Tom Carrier, Shahin Seyedhosseini SAROS Stuart Lewis SCIENTECH Jan Grobbelaar, Kaydee Kohlhepp, Jeff Julius, Dieter Spiegel SCE&G Leo Kachnik, Tyndall Estes SCE Michelle Carr, Parvis Moieni, Gary Chung Anees Farruk, Young Jo, David McCoy, Ed Ingram, Owen Scott, Southern Roger Hayes STPNOC Roland Dunn, Alice Sun, Ray Fine, Bill Stillwell TVA Bill Mims, Anne Robinson TXU Bob Lichtenstein, Dan Tirsun, Steve Karpyak Westinghouse David Finnicum, Gerard Samide, John Kitzmiller, Reed LaBarge Wolf Creek JC Patel, Vern Luckert, David Alford, Bill Ketchum

Recent NRC HRA Projects

April 2005 NUREG-1792 Good Practices issued

August 2005 SPAR-H model update published

Dec 2005 ACRS mtg - reviewed HRA (industry & NRC)

April 18, 2006 - NRC released draft NUREG-1842 Evaluation of Human Reliability Analysis Methods Against Good Practices for comment

Future:

- NRC Plans to release ATHEANA Users Guide

- Interface with Halden research reactor continues

- HERA database development continues

Draft NUREG-1842 Overview

The NRC is developing guidance for performing or evaluating HRA to support risk-informed decision-making, and in particular, the implementation of Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.200

Done in 2 phases

- 1st phase is NUREG-1792, Good Practices in HRA

- 2nd phase is NUREG-1842, Evaluating HRA Methods Against Good Practices

Draft NUREG-1842 evaluated the various HRA methods that are commonly used in regulatory applications, with a particular focus on their capabilities to satisfy the good practices, as well as their respective strengths and limitations regarding their underlying knowledge and data bases

Draft NUREG-1842 Methods, and Relation to the EPRI HRA Calculator

THERP

ASEP

HCR/ORE

CBDT

EPRI HRA Calculator

SPAR-H

SHARP1 (Framework used in the HRA Calculator)

SLIM-MAUD (Not used in the HRA Calculator)

FLIM (Not used in the HRA Calculator)

ATHEANA (Not used in the HRA Calculator)

Initial Comments (1 of 3)

1. Negative towards HCR/ORE & THERPs TRC

- The original HCR method was not substantiated by simulator experiments, so ORE developed (and HCR dropped).

- Use of a decision tree for sigma was also not substantiated by simulator (will be dropped from the HRA Calculator)

- HCR/ORE is one of the few data-driven methods, using plant-specific data.

- SPAR-H timing model is analogous to THERP TRC & should have a similar comment.

2. Definitions

- Some of the methods are not methods,

- Need to differentiate Process and Framework from Methods

3. Executive Summary

- Biased towards ATHEANA

- Implies need to re-do the HRA for each application

Initial Comments (2 of 3)

4. Scope Creep

- Why not evaluate against ASME/RG 1.200 instead of the Good Practices?

- ASME Addenda B is out now.

5. EPRI HRA Calculator Section

- Evaluated Version 2 and some issues addressed in Version 3

- Insufficient guidance on method selection will be fixed in future update, and emphasized in training.

- Users should be experts. Need to define expert and distinguish from practitioner. Utilities typically require qualification or training before using.

6. Example Applications may be useful

- Would be nice to see Results and Level of Effort

Initial Comments (3 of 3)

7. Question - Since NRC Regulation is one of the primary end users, has this document been reviewed by NRC Regulation before this public review?

- If not, the public should get a second chance to comment since revisions could be major.

8. Accuracy - all models are approximations in that they do not reflect actual as-operated plant in every detail of every minute, and in that sense are models are not accurate.

- HRA models are subject to the same model inaccuracies as hardware failures

- 1842 gives a false impression that HEPs are inaccurate (as a group)

Summary

Current HRA tools and methods are sufficiently robust for successful risk-informed applications.

Although industry is supportive of NRC research, and in fact is developing new methods / approaches itself, we believe that meeting the current standards (e.g. ASME PRA Standard as implemented by Reg Guide 1.200) is necessary and sufficient for Regulatory applications.

- Industry recognizes that the Good Practices document(s) indicates that not all good practices are required to meet RG 1.200 requirements.

- For new techniques to be widely embraced, they will need to benchmarked and vetted, and shown to be significantly better, not too complex, and sufficiently scrutable for industry use.

Contact Information

Public website:

www.epri.com/hra/index.html (Tell your non-HRA User Group friends!)

Support website for HRA Users Group:

www.epriweb.com/epriweb2.5/ecd/np/hra/index.html

- Use for bug reporting, suggestions, downloads

For software support & user group suggestions:

- Jan Grobbelaar (jgrobbelaar@scientech.com) (800) 862.6702

- Jeff Julius (jjulius@scientech.com) on (800) 862.6702

16300 Christensen Road, Suite 300 Tukwila, WA 98188; (206) 248-1818; (206) 248-1827 Fax

For Chairman & EPRI project management:

- Zouhair Elawar (zelawar@apsc.com) 623.393.5328

- Frank Rahn at 650 855.2037 or FRAHN@epri.com

Develop a Software Tool to conduct HRA

- For immediate use by members

- Defensible and reproducible

- Report-ready

Develop a Users Manual & Help supporting the tool

- Make the software tool easy to use

- Promote consistency

Develop HRA Guidelines & Conduct Training

- Promote consistency

- Maps to ASME PRA Standard for HRA

- Start with Level 1 PSA, build the foundation for future

SDP Fire/Flood Shutdown

HRA UG Overview -

HRA Calculator Apps

HRA Update to PRA Standards:

- Demonstrating compliance with ASME PRA Standard

Correct Owners Group Peer Review comments

- Such as adding Pre-Initiating events in System fault trees

Configuration Risk Management/SDP Process:

- Add/Alter Recovery Events

Training:

- Identification of PRA-important Scenarios & Procedures

Licensing Issues:

- Impact of plant design modification such as Timing/Instrumentation

EPRI HRA UG Overview -

HRA Models Pre-Initiator HRAs:

THERP Model (NUREG/CR-1278, 1983)

ASEP Model (NUREG/CR-4772, 1987)

Post-Initiator HRAs:

CBDTM/THERP Model combination

- CBDTM (EPRI TR 100259, 1992 & NUREG/CR-1278, 1983)

- Combination consists of cognitive & execution errors

HCR/ORE/THERP Model combination

- HCR/ORE (EPRI TR 100259, 1992 & NUREG/CR-1278, 1983)

Annunciator Response Model (NUREG/CR-1278, 1983)

SPAR-H (August 2005)

Draft NUREG-1842 Key Characteristics

Scope

Underlying Model

Underlying Data

Quantification Approach

Strengths

Limitations

Comment Timeline

Timeline

- April 18th Released April 18

- May 23rd Public Meeting (preliminary feedback &

discussion)

- Mid-June Comments due

Unless submitted in writing, then not valid!

To date only 2 utilities have provided comments

ML061510601

Text

Navigation menu

Search