ML20126G200
| ML20126G200 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/21/1992 |
| From: | Rossi C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Hodges M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9301040107 | |
| Download: ML20126G200 (2) | |
Text
.
PD(2 o
[
UNITED STATES
~,,
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
.p WASHINGTON, 0. C. 20555
\\...../
December 21, 1992 4
MEMORANDUM FOR: M, Wayne Hodges, 01-setor Division of Reactor Safety Region I Albert F. Gibson, Director Division of Reactor Safety Region II Hubert J. Miller, Director Division o' Rea-tor Safety Region III C
SamuelJ. Collins, Directed Division of Reactor Safety c Region IV E
- q
(
E-Kenneth E. Perkins, Direct s E
t Division of Reactor Safety:& Pro ects Region V
-7 FROM:
y Charles E. Rossi, Director O
Division of Reactor Inspection and licensee Performance Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
BIENNIAL DROCEDURE REVIEWS By memoranda dated September 27, 1991 to quality assurance programs concerning biennial proced
- quested changes considered your responses and incorporated them, as appropriate reviews. We have memorandum.
for reviewing licensee-requestea changes in this quality assu into this 3rea.
NRC Committee for the Review of Generic Requirements ance rance program member comments have also been incorporated into this guidanc(e CRGR) staff Standards N18.7 and 3.2. Licensees typically commit to one 07 the diff Prcgram Requirements (OperationalRegulatory Guide (RG) 1.33, " Quality Assurance
/ANS every two years.." Plant procedures),shall be reviewed... no le requirement that "
" endorses ANSI N18.7-1976/ANS 3.2 and its (Section 5.2.15).
the frequency of subsequent reviews shall be specified and maEach version o on the complexity of the activity involved and may vary with time y vary depending t
plant reaches operational maturity.
system and following an unusual incidentrequires that applicable p as a given I
cation to a 0
transient, a significant operating error,such as an accident, an unexpected v[i or an equipment malfunction.
These l l lA
?
l.'. '.
ENCLOSURE Plant Procedure Review Guidance-Programmatic controls should specify that all applicable plant procedures will be reviewed following an unusual incident, such as an accident, an unexpected transient, significant operator error, or equipment malfunction ar i following any modification to a system, as specified by Section 5.2 of ANSI 1.7/ANS 3.2 which is endorsed by RG 1.33.
Non-routine procedures (procedures such as emergency operating procedures, off-normal procedures, precedures which implement the emergency plan, and other procedures whose usage may be dictated by an event) should be reviewed at least every two years and revised as appropriate.
At least every two years, the Quality Assurance (or other " independent")
organization should audit a representative sample of the routine plant procedures that are used more frequently than every two years. The audit is to ensure the acceptability of the procedures and verify that the procedure review and revision program is being implemented effectively.
The root cause of significant deficiencies is to be determined and corrected.
Routine plant procedures that have not been used for two years should be reviewed before use to detr mine if changes are necessary or desirable.
l
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _