ML20059H725
| ML20059H725 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/06/1994 |
| From: | Sniezek J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Colvin J NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (FORMERLY NUCLEAR MGMT & |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9401310130 | |
| Download: ML20059H725 (2) | |
Text
...
o
.,I UNITED STATES
[
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
t WASHINGTON, D.C. 20li66-0001 l
i l
%.....p January 6,1994
)
Mr. Joe Colvin President and Chief Executive Officer Nuclear Management and Resources Council 1776 I Street, N.W.
Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006
Dear Mr. Colvin:
On December 16, 1993, the NRC staff met with NUMARC and industry representatives to discuss the graded application of 10 CFR Appendix B, Quality Assurance. As discussed at the meeting, the NRC considers this issue to be extremely important, and, in fact, the Regulatory Review Group identified the development of. guidance to address the use of graded quality assurance as one of its most important recommendations.
the benefits to be gained from a graded quality assurance program could be significant. First and foremost, in terms of enhanced public health and safety by focusing both the NRC's reviews and inspections and the industry's I
resources on the more safety-significant structures, systems and components' (SSCs); and, secondly, in terms of cost savings to the industry by avoiding the dilution of resources on less safety-significant issues.
l The NRC's regulations (10 CFR Part 50, Appendices A & B) require quality assurance programs that are commensurate (or consistent) with the importance to safety of the functions to be performed. However, the practice that has evolved has not been graded and, generally, has either been a full Appendix B program or none at all.
l In the development of guidance for the implementation of the maintenance rule, l
a methodology to determine the risk significance of SSCs within the scope of' the rule was proposed by industry in NUMARC 93-01 and endorsed by the NRC in Regulatory Guide 1.160. During the December 16th meeting,'it was-suggested that the staff and industry could build on the experience gained with the maintenancefule.to develop a policy and criteria for a graded quality assurance
. Once developed, they would then be tested in a pilot program, s to~ the V&V effort by industry with NUMARC 93-01. Considering:
$g the benefi t' could be realized from a parallel and coordinated effort g
with the e:rul'e implementation, the timing for developing guidance-8 for a graded quality assurar.ce program is important.
oE g
In view of the above, the NRC has established a steering group _of senior _
f managers to provide guidance to the staff and for the timely resolution of any _
L policy issues. The steering group membership includes myself, Jack Heltemes r)
(RES) and Bill Russell (NRR). The NRC's working level lead on this issue is 1()
Eg
- Gary Zech, Chief of the Performance and Quality Evaluation Branch. Mr. Zech k
will also be the NRC's day-to-day point of contact for NUMARC and industry on s
this subject. A schedule has been established that identifies the summer of 1994 for the development of guidance for a graded quality assurance program
. h)hk k!$ h!b b
maaqqggy ~d1
r Mr. Joe Colvin January 6,1994 l
that can be pilot-tested at a few utilities, starting in about September 1994.
This near-term goal, although ambitious, is important in terms of benefitting from the experience that will be gained by utilities in determining the risk significance of SSCs within the scope of the maintenance rule.
Once the pilot program is complete, the longer-term schedule includes the issuance of draft guidance for public comment in the spring of 1995 and a final regulatory guide in the spring of 1996, prior to the effective date of the maintenance rule in July 1996.
If you are in agreement with the views and priorities expressed above and with the approach described for the development of guidance for a graded quality assurance program, I request that you identify a senior level contact to interface with our steering group.
I look forward to your prompt response on this important issue.
b"rhIt$1I@ned bv Jamct H SnQri James H. Sniezek Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Regional Operations and Research DISTRIBUTION:
Central File /PDR RPEB R.F.
DRIL R.F.
EDO R.F.
JTaylor TMurley EJordan EBeckjord JHeltemes RVollmer AThadani MRubin TGody, Sr.
TMartin, RI SEbneter, RII JMartin, RIII JMilhoan, RIV BFaulkenberry, RV
- See previous concurrence OFC SEND BC:RPEB:DRIL:NRR D:DRIL:NRR ADT:NRR DD:NRR D:NM _,
DYkM!
NAME 10 GG7ech:cct CERossi WTRussell FJMiraglia urley JH i teF
/h
[) /93 O
S'" /93-F
/
/93 DATE PDR7 12 / 21 /93*
12_/ 21 /93*
/
4
- e.
'L 6;s) n Q
- c n
re, n
re, n
n n
cop,,
OFFICIAL RELGkD COPY
'11DCUMENT NAME: S:\\RPEbDOCS\\RPEB\\COLVIN.LTR