ML18219A838

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
OIG-17-A-26-Status of Recommendations: Evaluation of Proposed NRC Modifications to the Probabilistic Risk Assessment Process, Dated August 7, 2018
ML18219A838
Person / Time
Issue date: 08/07/2018
From: Baker B
NRC/OIG/AIGA
To: Margaret Doane
NRC/EDO
References
OIG-17-A-26
Download: ML18219A838 (2)


Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL August 7, 2018 MEMORANDUM TO: Margaret Doane Executive Director for Operations FROM: Dr. Brett M. Baker /RA/

Assistant Inspector General for Audits

SUBJECT:

STATUS OF RECOMMENDATION: EVALUATION OF PROPOSED NRC MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT PROCESS (OIG-17-A-26)

REFERENCE:

ACTING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION, MEMORANDUM DATED JUNE 29, 2018 Attached is the Office of the Inspector Generals (OIG) analysis and status of the recommendation as discussed in the agencys response dated June 29, 2018. Based on this response, recommendation 1 is closed. The subject report had no other recommendations.

If you have questions or concerns, please call me at (301) 415-5915, or Paul Rades, Team Leader at (301) 415-6228.

Attachment:

As stated cc: R. Lewis, OEDO H. Rasouli, OEDO J. Bowen, OEDO J. Jolicoeur, OEDO EDO_ACS Distribution

Evaluation Report EVALUATION OF PROPOSED NRC MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT PROCESS OIG-17-A-26 Status of Recommendations Recommendation 1: Formally document evaluation results that will establish the agency position on NRCs use of licensee PRA models, to include reliable, verifiable cost data.

Agency Response Dated June 29, 2018: The staff agrees with the recommendation.

The staff appreciates OIGs audit of the evaluation of the proposed NRC modifications to the PRA process. The enclosure provides the recommended report documenting the evaluation results.

Contact:

Sunil Weerakkody, NRR/DRA, (301) 415-2870 OIG Analysis: OIG has reviewed the agencys final report on its review of various SPAR model options, additional cost benefit analyses, and challenges associated with SPAR model alternatives. The actions taken by the staff meet the intent of this recommendation. Therefore, this recommendation is now closed.

Status: Closed.