ML20136B405

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests Paper on Various Approaches NRC Can Take to Strengthen QA at Nuclear Power Plants by 811211.Slides for Commission Briefing on QA Initiatives & long-term Study During Wk of 820913-17 Encl
ML20136B405
Person / Time
Issue date: 11/27/1981
From: Palladino N
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To: Dircks W
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
Shared Package
ML20136B092 List:
References
FOIA-84-293 NUDOCS 8601020584
Download: ML20136B405 (37)
v • d • e


Text

._. .-. . . _ ._. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

p .,

=c..cc.::ns t[.?,T .... jf Nove.aber 27, 1981 '

CHAIRMAN

/g MEMORANDUM FOR:

William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations FROM:

Nunzio.J. Palladino ~

SUBJECT:

QUALITY ASSURANCE i

NRC needs to take actions that will result in improved

! quality assurance at nuclear power plants.

Steps we are '

i could be taken, were brought up during our testimony tot - - -

Congressman Udall's Subcommittee last week. A list of  ;

corrective measures would include improvements to our. -

i inspection and enforcement program as well as considerations  ;

'such as third party audits, strict sanctions against non-performers, approved bidders lists, and certified -indepen-dent performance audi.ts of each utility's QA activities .

I would like-you to pull together the varvous'a'pproaches that could be taken to strengthen qual'ity aisurance, and

, provide the Commission a preliminary evaluation of the ones that appear most' promising from an effectiveness and cost standpoint. -

I'believe it i

recommen da ti ons' is desirable by December to 11, have an 1981. initial paper on your .

then focus on The Commission can further study by the Staff.the areas deemed worthy of implementation for ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ _ _ _ _

cc: Commissioner Gilinsky .

! Commissioner B' radford

< Commissioner Ahearne -

Commissioner SECY Roberts ,

. OGC OPE ACRS 1 '!

l l 4

i l

t

, i D601020504 PDR FOIA-851125 LEIGHTOS4-293 PDR '

+-  ;

i 1

l l

l SLIDES FOR COMMISSION BRIEFING ,

ON QUALITY ASSURANCE INITIATIVES JULY 15, 1982 ,

QUALITY ASSURANCE INTRODUCTION THE COMPLEXITY AND EXTENT OF THE QA PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED AT SEVERAL NUCLEAR _

POWER ~ PLANTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION HAVE CAUSED WIDESPREAD CONCERN CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT HEARINGS ON QA HAVE BEEN HELD IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: -

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT; COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS - NOVEMBER 19, 1981 SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY, AND NATURAL RESOURCES; COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS - DECEMBER 14, 1981 NOVEMBE,R 27, 1981 - CHAIRMAN DIRECTED STAFF TO ASSEMBLE APPR'0 ACHES TO STRENGTHEN QA .

DECEMBER 1, 1981 - CHAIRMAN PAL'LADINO, IN A SPEECH TO AIF, CHALLENGED THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY T0-REEXAMINE AND' UPGRADE ITS QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS JANUARY 29, 1982 - NRC STAFF BRIEFED COMMISSION ON PRELIMINARY EVALUATIONS OF VARIOUS QA INITIATIVES ' --

-j__'

FEBRUARY 4,1982 - INPO BRIEFED COMMISSION ON INDUSTRY ACTIONS FEBRUARY 10, 1982 - STAFF DIRECTED TO PREPARE MORE DEFINITIVE PLAN, INCLUDING SCHEDULE AND RESOURCES ~

' MARCH 4, 1982 - QA PRESENTATION TO ACRS APRIL 12, 1982 - MEETING WITH-INP0 TO EXCHANGE QUALITY ASSURANCE INFORMATION MAY 19, 1982 - SEMIOR AGENCY' MANAGEMENT MEETING TO DISCUSS 0A STRATEGY Slide No. 1 __ _ _

g .s e,_ CATEGORIES OF INITIATIVES N

I. CONFIDENCEINbUALITY -

FREQUENC'Y AND SEVERITY OF QA BREAKDOWNS DELAYS IN NRC RECOGNITION OF SCOPE AND EXTENT OF BREAKDOWNS PAST NRC EFFORTS EMPHASIZED PROGRAM CONTENT, FORMAT AND STRUCTURE POTENTIAL FAILURE OF QA TO PRODUCE INTENDED RESULT -

II. MANAGEMENT OF QUALITY 'I i

INADEQUATE TRAINING .

INADEQUATE DIRECTION INADEQUATE ATTENTION III. LONG-TERM REVIEW REVIEW PROGRAM.f0 G0 BEYOND SHORT-TERM EFFORTS'  ;

NEED TO FOCUS ON VIEWPOINTS OF NRC, INDUSTRY AND THE PUBLIC '

l l

Slide Nam 2 )

l INITIATIVE DETAILS I. CONFIDENCE IN QUALITY A. CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM DEVELOPMENTS PROGRAM HAS CHANGED OVER YEARS (MOSTLY ADDITIONS)

, CONSTRUCTION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM 1979-1980 -

CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT TEAN INSPECTIONS (TRIAL) W81 FOLLOWUP 0F ALLEGATIONS MAJOR REVISION IN PROGRESS TO MATCH PROGRAM TO AVAILABLE-RESOURCES

- INCREASE EMPHASIS ON'0BSERVATION OF WORK

- DECREASE RECORDS REVIEW

- INCREASE EMPHASIS ON INSPECTION OF DESIGN AND DESIGN CHANGES

, RESIDENT INSPECTOR NOW AT ALL SITES 7. IM COMPLETE B. CONSTRUCTIONASSESSMENTTEAMINSPECTIdN PAT TYPE INSPECTIONS AT. SELECTED CONSTRUCTION SITES COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT LICENSEE MANAGEMENT

~':-

" " ' ' ~ '

INDEPENDENT REVIEW 0F REGIONS INDEPENDENT REVIEW 0F INP0 C. MEASURES'AT NEAR-TERM OPERATING LICENSE FACILITIES SELF EVALUATION REGIONAL EVALUATION INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW Slide No. 3

INITIATIVE DETAILS (cont'd)

~

D. INTEGRATED DESIGN INSPECTION

/

',', . REVIEW SELECTED SYSTEM AND/OR STRUCTURE SAlto'.E CALCULATION CHECKS .

AS-BUILT VERIFICATION REVIEW DESIGN INTERFACES MANAGEMENT OF TOTAL DESIGN --

E. EVALUATION OF REPORTED INFORMATION

' IMPROVED SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF 50.55(E) AND PART 21 REPORTS COMPUTERIZED DIAGNOSIS '_

F. ENFORCEMENT

. STRONG ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS FOR QA BREAKDOWNS G. INDUSTRY INITIATIVE INPO DEVELOP CRITERI/.

SELF EVALUATIONS DECISION ON INPO EVALUATIONS Slide No. 4 i

l I

l INITIATIVE DETAILS (cont'd)

II. MANAGEMENT OF QUALITY A. MANAGEMENT SEMINARS AND LICENSEE QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM IMPROVE ATTITUDE AND PERFORMANCE .

PERSONAL COMMITMENT OF SENIOR. MANAGERS CONTINUING SERIES OF SEMINARS

'(

, PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON ACHIEVEMENTS UPGRADE QUALITY AND CERTIFICATION OF QA/QC PERSONNEL .

COMMUNICATION SYSTEM,TO MANAGEMENT FOR SUGGESTING QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS AND FOR COMMUNICATING ALLEGATIONS TO NRC - --

' . ~

,B. CRAFTSMANSHIP -

DISCUSS IMPROVEMENTS WITH MAJOR TRADE UNIONS QA/QC ACTIVITIES MUST REACH THE CRAFTSMAN ASSURE GOOD CRAFTSMANSHIP Slide No. 5

- ~

INITIATIVE DETAILS (cont'd) - - -

III. LONG-TERM REVIEW REVIEW EXISTING AND CONTINUING QA PROBLEMS EXAMINE RESULTS OF EARLIER INITIATIVES N

EXAMINE SUCCESSFUL PROGRAMS CONTRACTOR ASSISTANCE ADVISORY PANEL -

I j

t Slide No'. 6 4

, - - , , - - - - ,on .- .v--, ,, ----,~---.,m- -- . - - - - - - , - , , - - - - .

NT0L FACIL4 TIES 4

PLANTS MET WITH TO DATE 1

.DIABLO CANYON

~

SAN ONOFRE i

SUSQUEHANNA

~

! SUMMER

-E '

GRAND GULF -

LASALLE

  • ~

SHOREHAM ,

WATTS BAR ST. LUCIE PALO VERDE WATERFORD

, MEASURES AT NTOL FACILITIES -

N SELF EVALUATION COMPREHENSIVE SELF EVALUATION OF EFFECTIVENESS OF QA PROGRAM FOR DESIGN AND CONSTR,UCTION CERTIFICATION BY LICENSEE THAT FACILITY DESIGNED, CONSTRUCTED AND TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH FSAR AND OTHER LICENSING COM41TMENTS

, REGIONAL EVALUATION EXPANDED PRE-LICENSING REVIEW BY REGIONS REGION PARTICIPATES WITH NRR, IN EACH NTOL MEETING WITH APPLICANT 4 .

f INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW EVALUATION OF QUALITY OF DESIGN BASED ON DETAILED EXAMINATION OF SAMPLE COMPLETED FOR LASALLE AND SAN ONOFRE IN PROGRESS AT OTHER PLANTS WITH EXCEPT. ION.0F WATTS BAR Slice No. 7

ESTIMATED RESOURCES INVOLVED IN QA FOR e

i POWER REACTORS UNDER CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY NRC STAFF NRC CONTRACT (MAN YR) (STAFFYR) ($ THOU)

EXISTING 7500 44 400 COST OF INITIATIVES . 422 16 1905 i

)

4 i

1 i

t

  • I Slide No, a e

LONG-TERM REVIEW LTR OBJECTIVES (ININCREASINGORDEROFSPECIFICITY) ,

TO FORM THE BASIS FOR THE LONG-TERM DIRECTION OF NRC QA POLICIES AND PROGRAMS.

'N TO ASSESS EXISTING AGENCY AND INDUSTRY QUALITY ASSURANCE ACTIVITIES'IN A BROAD MANNER AND THEN RECOMMEND AN INTEGR ,,

. LONG-TERM AGENCY PLAN FOR QA.

r TO CONDUCT A THOROUGH' REVIEW 0F CONTINUING QUALITY AND QU -

ASSURANCE PROBLEMS, AND TO PROPOSE SOLUTIONS T0 IMPROVE THE QA PROGRAMS FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, TESTING, AND OPERATION.

l l

l.

l i

l l

._ LONG-TERM REVIEW l 2 h

i METHOD OF REVIEW ~

i REVIEWWILLINCLUDEADETAILEDASSESSMENTOFTHEPROBLEM5THAT-DEVELOPED AT FACILITIES SUCH AS DIABLO CANYON, SOUTH ~ TEXAS, j MIDLAND, MARBLE HILL AND ZIMER.

e i OBJECT IS TO CONCISELY IDENTIFY SPECIFIC

~

PROBLEMS THAT HAVE OCCURRED AND THEIR ROOT CAUSES, PARTICULARLY_ PROGRAMMATIC DEFICIENCIES.

1 ,.

N REVIEW WILL ALSO EVALUATE QA PROGRAMS AT' FACILITIES WHOSE Q i

PROGRAMS ARE OPERATING EFFECTIVELY.

^

OBJECT IS TO IDENTIFY POSITIVE ASPECTS THAT

?

4 SHOULD BE APPLIED GENERICALLT.

1 BOTH KINDS OF ASSESSMENTS WILL INCLUDE SITE VISITS BY REVIEW -

! PERSONNEL.

REVIEW PERSONNEL WILL INCLUDE REPRESENTATIVES FROM NRC HQ,

, NRC REGIONS, AND CONSULTANTS.

1 LONG-TERM REVIEW i

LTR COST-BENEFIT PROPOSED SOLUTIONS TO GENERIC AND PLANT-SPECIFIC QUALITY AND QUALITY ASSURANCE PROBLEMS WILL BE REVIEWED CRITICALLY TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS WOULD ACTUALLY RESOLVE THE IDENTIFIED PROBLEMS.

'(

c I

THIS EVALUATION WILL DEVELOP ESTIMATES OF THE QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE V.ALUE/ BENEFIT AND IMPACT / COST OF PROPOSED SOLUTIONS AND WAYS IN WHICH THEY SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED FOR ,

3 OPERATING PLANTS, PLANTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND FUTURE -

PLANTS, h

e l

. r - _ .

- _~ . .---_v . -,_ _ . ... _ , , - - - _

y ..,

  • s, LONG-TERM REVIEW PEER-REVIEW PANEL ADVISORY PANEL WILL BE ESTABLISHED TO PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS, ON DIRECTION AND SCOPE OF REVIEW AND TO PROVIDE PEER REVIEW SERVICE. .

i ,.

4 PANELMEMBERS[0BESELECTEDFROMGOVERNMENT, INDUSTRY, AND SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS.

5. ..'ii t TOPROVID5ABROADSPECTRUMOFINSIGHTSANDVIEWPOINTS, ASSURE A PROPER BALANCE OF CONSIDERATIONS IN FINDINGS -

AND RECOMiENDATIONS.

.e 9

9

LONG-TERM REVIEW

~

OTHER ISSUES FOCUSONCONSTRUCTIONPLANTS,BUTSOMEATTENTIONTO6PERATING PLANTS. QUESTICH: FOR OPERATING REACTORS, DO PREVIOUS REVIEWS, OPERATING HISTORY, STARTUP PROGRAMS, AND UPGRADES DUE TO TMI AND BULLETINS PROVIDE ADEQUATE ASSURANCE OF QUALI

-. IN-CONSTRUCTION?

K REVIEW TO CONSIDER FORMAL CERTIFICATION OF VARIOUS LEVELS ~0F

~

QA/QC PERSONNEL.

REVIEW TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION WITH LABOR UNIONS TO EXPLORE POTENTIAL METHODS AND INCENTIVES TO-EMBRACE THE CRAFTS ROLE --

.IN. ASSURING QUALITY CONSTRUCTION.

FORD AMENDMENT. WANT'AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE TO BE TRANSFERRABLE TO SUPPORT FORD AMENDMENT STUDY.

e h

' FORD AMENDMENT MANDATED STUDY

[_ .

AMENDMENT TO FY 82/83 NRC AUTHORIZATION BILL REQUIRES NRC TO CONDUCT A STUDY OF EXISTING AND ALTERNATIVE PROGRAMS FOR IMPROVING CONSTRUCTION QA/QC PROGRAMS.

4 t

IN CONDUCTING STUDY, COMMISSION SHALL OBTAIN COMENTS OF PUBLIC, LICENSEES, ACRS, AND PROFESSIONALS IN APPROPRIATE FIELDS. -

REPORT DUE TO CONGRESS 15 MONTHS AFTER ENACTMENT OF AUTHORIZATION  :

BILL'.

l l

- * = - - ~ - -y + -- . - - .--r

FORD AMENDMENT CONTENT OF STUDY ~

l STUDY SHALL INCLUDE AN ANALYSIS OF BASING NRC'S QA/QC INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ON A MORE PRESCRIPTIVE APPROACH THAN AT PRESENT FOR DEFINING PRINCIPAL AE CRITERIA FOR CONSTRUCTION.

CONDITIONING ISSUANCE OF cps ON LICENSEE SsDEMONSTRATING f HIS l

1 ABILITY TO INDEPENDENTLY MANAGE AN EFFECTIVE QA/QC PROGRAM.

USE OF AUDITORS / INSPECTORS FROM INDEPENDENT ASSOCIATIONS OF PROFESSIONALS.

IMPROVEMENT OF NRCs ORGANIZATION, METHODS AND PROGRAMS FOR QA DEVELOPMENT, REVIEW AND INSPECTION. -

CONDITIONING ISSUANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PERMITS ON LICENSEE USE OF INDEPENDENT QA INSPECTORS.

QA AND QC PROGRAMS AT REPRESENTATIVE SITES.

FORD AMENDMENT i

, PILOT PROGRAM i

NRC SHALL-UNDERTAKE PILOT PROGRAMS TO REVIEW AND EVALGATE' PROGRAMS THAT INCLUDE ONE OR MORE OF THE FIVE ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTS PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED.

PROGRAMS THAT USE INDEPENDENT INSPECTORS FOR AUDITING -

QA RESPONSIBILITIES OF CONSTRUCTION LICENSEES.

N THE PILOT PROGRAM SHALL INCLUDE AT LEAST'THREE CONSTRUCTION SITES t AT LEAST ONE AT WHICH QA/QC HAS BEEN SATISFACTORY.

AT LEAST TWO WITH REMEDIED PROGRAMS UNDERWAY AT WHICH -

MAJOR DEFICIENCIES HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED.

THE COMMISSION-MAY REQUIRE ANY CHANGES IN EXISTING QA/QC ORGANIZATIONS AND RELATIONSHIPS THAT MAY BE N$CESSARY AT SELECTED SITES TO IMPLEMENT THE PILOT PROGRAM.

FORD AMENDMENT REPORT

  • ~

DUE TO CONGRESS I5 MONTHS AFTER ENACTMENT OF AUTHORI ATION BILL. .

MUST INCLUDE

SUMMARY

OF INFORMATION RECEIVED- FR0ff'P,UBLIC, LICENSEES,

~

ACRS, AND PROFESSIONALS.

COMMISSION RESPONSE TO SIGNIFICANT COMMENTS RECEIVED. ,,

ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS OF THE PILOT PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS, INCLUDING LEGISLATIVE REC 0tHENDATIONS -

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS UNDERTAKEN OR INTENDED FOR IMPROVING QA/QC PROGRAMS FOR CONSTRUCTION. -

O

_ _ _ . , _ _ . _ - _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ m-__._________.___mm-_.

LTR TASKS

1. LITERATURE SEARCH AND REVIEW C 2. SITE VISITS AND REPORTS '

C 3. ANALYSIS OF NRC'S QA PROGRAM C 4. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OUTSIDE PROGRAMS

^

5.

C STUDY ON CERTIFICATION

6. INTERFACE WITH OUTSIDE GROUPS 'I C 7. QA AT OPERATING REACTORS C 8. ANALYSIS OF FORD ALTERNATIVES

~

C' 9. ESTABLISHMENT ND EVALUATION OF PILOT PROGRAM C 10. REPORT PREPARATION -

11. PEER PANEL
12. ANALYSE RESULTS OF EARLTER INITIATIVES S

C = TA'KS'FOR WHICH SUBSTANTIAL CONTRACTOR ASSISTANCE IS ANTICIPA

. . . . .. . . _. - . , , . . . , - . - - - - -~ ,-

i LTR TASKS

~

1. LITERATUR$SEARCHANDREVIEW _.

' DOCUMENTS ON NRC OR LICENSEE QA l

INSPECTION REPORTS .

INVESTIGATION REPORTS STUDIES OF PROGRAMS IN OTHER COUNTRTES OR INDUSTRIES i INSPECTION PROGRAM DEFINITIONS >

5 EXISTING STANDARDS FOR QA -

- - - 1 LICE SEE QA PLANS l LICENSING PRACTICE AND CRITERIA e

A y w -- e i, e e- -=-r-e----- I---- * *---.-w= ~ - - - - - < - w- t i- *m-,rr ~w+ve- -+>wy- ,

's LTR TASKS

2. SITE VISITS AND REPORTS PRE FIELD ACTIVITY ~

DEVELOPMENT OF ASSESSMENT PLAN AND METHODOLOGY DEVELOPMENT OF REFORT FORMAT PLANT VISITS ~MUST CONSIDER LTR ISSUES AND FORD ISSUES SCHEDULING

, FAMILIARIZATION WITH PLANT AND PLANT QA PROGRAM AND HISTORY FIELD ACTIVITY 'I

~

VISIT TO REGIONAL OFFICE <

~

VISIT TO CORPORATE OFFICE VISIT TO PLANT SITE

. DISCUSSIONS WITH REGIONAL AND RESIDENT INSPECTORS

~

DISCUSSIONS WITH LICENSEE PERSONNEL, CONTRACTORS REVIEW OF QA PROGRAM, SELECTED RECORDS ,

PLANT WALK THROUGH POST FIELD ACTIVITY ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS

)

POSTULATION AND EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES

~

PREPARATION OF REPORT .

)

A LTR TASKS ~

3. ANALYSIS OF NRC'S QA PROGRAM (FORD #4)

_ s EFFICIENCY OF ORGA.NIZATION IN HQ, REGIONS STAFFING IN HQ, REGIONS LICENSING CRITERIA INSPECTIONPROGRAMGOALS,DEFINITI0IANDIMPLEMENTATION

! QUANTIFICATION OF COSTS'/ BENEFITS OF ALTERNATIVE LEVELS OF INSPECTION EFFORT

{ PROCEDURE CHANGES IN REACTOR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM l -

ESTABLISH LOGICAL DEFINITION. FOR NRC QA PROGRAM IN CONTEXT -

0F AGENCY MISSION, SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS. ESTABLISH WHAT LEVEL OF ASSURANCE IT SHOULD PROVIDE AND DETERMINE

WHAT IS NEEDED IN TERMS OF RESOURCES TO GET THERE 1

i 4

w,,,vy,w--- ,,e - -w,a---ee-* - --- - - - ~ , ~ ~ ww sr ---m v e w -- n ee -n.m---e~ ~we ,--m - r

LTR TASKS

4. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF RELEVANT OUTSIDE PROGRAMS

~

~

OTHER CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRIES FAA SYSTEM

, REACTOR CONSTRUCTION IN OTHER COUNTRIES FEASIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING HOLDPOINTS

~

INSURANCE COMPANIES, ANI FEASIBILITY OF (STABLISHING. DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM, INCLUDING: ,

CRITERIA FOR SELECTION WHO WOULD PAY THE DESIGNEE -

WHO WOULD SUPERVISE THEM OVERLAP WITH CERTIFICATION CONCEPT  !

FAA EXPERIENCE USE OF AUDITORS / INSPECTORS FROM INDEPENDENT ASSOCIATIONS ,

3 OFPROFESSIONALS(FORD #3) i

LTR TASKS

5. ST*JDY ON CERTIFICATION AND QUALIFICATION OF QA PERSONNEL CONSIDERFORMALCERTIFICATIONOFVARIOUSLEV5LSOF QA/QC PERSONNEL .

AVAILABILITY OF TRAINING. STRUCTURING OF TR INING PD0 GRAMS FOR INDUSTRY, NRC INSPECTORS REVIEW OF, EXISTING CERTIFICATION STifdC,TURE ANALYSIS AND IDENTIFICATION OF WHICH QA AREAS REQUIRE CERTIFICATION

DEVELOPMENT OF PLAN FOR CERTIFICATION PROGRAM T

CONTACTS WITH PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES -

DRAFT CHANGES TO NRC RULES / GUIDANCE MODIFICATIONS TO THE INSPECTION PROGRAM

. ~ . -.

I i

I i

LTR TASKS

. l i

6. INTERF. ACE WITH CUTSIDE GROUPS NEED INPUT FROM PUBLIC, LICENSEES, ACRS AND PROFESSIONALS (FORD)

PUBLIC  : PEER PANEL?

LICENSEES : SITE VISITS 4

ACRS  : SCHEDULE BRIEFIFG'

{ . PROFESSIONALS  : ESTABLISH DIALOGUE WITH SOCIETIES ALSO CRAFTS / TRADES EXPLORE POTENTIAL METHODS AND INCENTIVES HAVEINITIATIVEDQISCUSSIONSWITHNUCLEARPOWERCONSTRbCTION STABILIZATION COMMITTEE SUBCOMMITTEE TO BE ESTABLISHED TO WORK WITH NRC

, - . , ee , - . - -w + - -. rm-, ,,~, , - ~ - .n-- -- #- ,nn - ,, - -----

7 . ...

~

LTR TASKS

7. QA AT OPERATING REACTORS SITE VISITS WILL INCLUDE OPERATING REACTORS i

OPERATING REACTORS POSE A DIFFERENT KIND OF OA/QC PROBLEM MUST LOOK AT ONGOING QA/QC FOR OPERATIONS, EVALUATE IT -

'(

FOR EFFECTIVENESS MUST ALSO ANSWER THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS REGARDING CONSTRUCTION

^~ ~

HOW MUCH ASSURANCE DO WE HAVE IN THE QUALITY OF TsE-CONSTRUCTION OF PRESENTLY OPERATING REACTORS?

WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THIS ASSURANCE?

DOPREVIOUSREVIEWS, INSPECTIONS,STARTUPPROGRAM5, TMI UPGRADES, ETC., PROVIDE ADEQUATE ASSURANCE OFQUApITYINCONSTRUCTION? ,

4.

. . _ ~. _ _ _ -_. _ - - _ . -- _ .

s l

9 a

LTR TASKS i

~

1, .

4 8. ANALYSIS OF FORD ALTERNATIVES MORE PRESCRIPTIVE AE CRITERIA

) *

--ISSUE-cps-BASED 0N LICENSEE DEMONSTRATION OF EFFECTIVE QA PROGRAM 'Is I

  • ~

USE OF AUDITORS / INSPECTORS FROM PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES ,

, , (SEETASK4)  ;

i '

IMPROVEMENT OF NRC'S QA PROGRAM (SEE TASK 3) 1 i-ISSUE cps BASED ON LICENSEE USE OF INDEPENDENT QA -

i 1

INSPECTORS l

t

. I i ,

i i t i  ;

e l

. r i i

8

. e I

3 4

LTR TASKS i

, ~

i T

4

9. ESTABLISHMENT AND EVALUATIN OF PILOT PROGRAM i -

i

  • 1 i

j 3 CONSTRUCTION SITES i

i MUST TEST ONE OR MORE OF 5 FORD ALTliRNATIVES i

i MUST INCLUDE PROGRAMS USING INDEPENDENT INSPECTORS

' NOT CLEAR HOW AMENABLE SOME FORD ALTERNATIVES ARE TO

~ . '

TESTING ATcC9NSTRUCTION SITES -

- ~ -

i . ,:

I -

i 4

I i

i

(

. . - - - , . - , . , , . , . .,,.n... , _ , . , , - , , - .,,,---,.,,--,-n,--n-..,_, , - . , _ . , . , , - , , . - , , . - - _ . _ w ,-,,- .-,-n ,-.,,, _ -----

l l

LTR TASKS t

f  !

i

10. REPORT PREPAP.ATION i

l i

ANALYSIS OF INFORMATION GATHERED

.i ,

a .

CLEAR DEFIt!ITION OF PROBLEM

~

i  !

CHARACTERIZATION OF ROOT CAUSES '( ,  !

1

' CHARACTERIZATION OF EFFECTIVE PRCGRAMS AND NON EFFECTIVE t PROGRAMS '

[

i i POSTULATION OF SOLUTIONS ^ :" E :

}

[ t j *

.t COST / BENEFIT ANALYSIS I

WRITING OF REPORT i I STAFF REVIEW 0F REPORT J '

) i 1 -

i 4

! I

t 4

l 1

i i

i I

i i

i I

i I

1 t LTR TASKS 1 1

i.

r i

i 1

i

11. PEER PANEL P

1

IDENTIFICATION OF PANEL MEMBERS b

-l

  • ESTABLISHMENT OF PANEL 4 ,

i 1

BRIEFINGS FOR PANEL 4 e i * '

/

ADDRESS COPMENTS OF PANEL

~ii" -

l, f t 1 .

l  ;

a 4

I; -

i 1

[

i 1- t i >

i  :

i i

i  ;

i 1

4 . .,

c

's ,

LTR TASKS

12. ANALYZE RESULTS OF EARLIER INITIATIVES t

1 MAY BE SUBSUMED UNDER OTHER TASKS e

Je

  • n OF
c-9 9

e ft i .

6 0

0

- - . - - - - , -- - a ,--. - -

c ., ,

TENTATIVE SCHEDULE J

SEPTEMBER 1982 INITIATIVE CONTRACT (S) FOR SITE VISITS (TASKS 2, 7.)

~

INITIATIVEINTERFACEWITHOUTSIDEGROUPS(TASK 6) j OCTOBER 1982 BEGIN SITE VISITS. APPR0XIMATELY 1 PER MONTH

'l NOVEMBER 1982 INITIATE STUDY OF NRC PROGRAMS (TASK 3) [ ,

BEGINANALYSISOFFORDALTERNATIVES(TASK 8)~

, SELECT SITES AND. ALTERNATIVES FOR PILOT PROGRAM i

INITIATEREVIEWOFOUTSIDEPROGRANS(TASK 4)

DECEMBER 1982 INITIATEPILOTPROGRAM(TASK 9[s

. ESTABLISH PEER PANEL (TASK 11)

BEGINSTUDYOFCERTIFICATIONANDQUALIFICATION(TASK 5)

JANUARY - CONTINUATION OF STUDIES JUNE 1983 ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS -:: 1I! ?' E ' ':

PROPOSAL OF SOLUTIONS

  • COST / BENEFIT OF SOLUTIONS -

1 JUNE 1983 BEGIN DRAFTING OF REPORTS .

l i

l l

r  : - - - --.

TENTATIVE SCHEDULE (CONT'D) 1 JULY - AUGUST, 1983 INTERNAL REVIEW AND P.EVISIONS i .---._

SEPTEMBER 1983 FINISH DRAFTS i .

OCTOBER 1983 COMISSION AND PEER REVIEW 0F REPORTS A

4

.; NOVEMBER 1983 REVISION OF REPORTS -

DECEMBER 1983 DELIVER REPORTS TO CONGRESS -- - --

a "

e 4

i 4

.. i i

i e

5 1

i i

i 3

, . . . _ _ . . . - . - . . _ _ . - . . . . . . _ , _ _ . . I

. _ ~ , . , _ . . . _ . . - , . . . . . . . _ ,

ESTIMATED NRC' CONTRACT' FUNDS INVOLVED IN QA INITIATIVES ($ THOUSANDS)

,j FY 83 l FY 84 _

i NTOL - SELF EVALUATION NT0L - INDEPENDENT DES. REV.

NTOL - REGIONAL EVALUATION INTEGRATED DESIGN INSPECTION 805 315 1

l- CONSTRUCTION ASSESS. INSP. , ,

EVALUATION OF REPORTED INFO.II) (250) -

-(350)

ENFORCEMENT INDUSTRY INITIATIVE - SHORT-TERM -

INDUSTRY-INITIATIVE - LONG-TERM

, MANAGEMENT ... PROGRAMS 100 CRAFTSMANSHIP - f, LONG-TERM REVIEW 750 100

.?

UNFUNDED SU8 TOTAL 1656 415 FUNDED SUBTOTAL 250 350 ,

TOTAL FOR INITIATIVES 1905 . 765 RESEARCH FUNDING FOR QA II 500 1000 NOTES:

(1) FUNDED WITH AEOD , ,

(2) ROUGI ESTIMATE

  • Slide D

NRC'S QUALITY ASSURANCE INITIATIVES 9

LONG-TERM STUDY t

BRIEFING SLIDES FOR PRESENTATIONS THE WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 13-17, 1982 AT BATTELLE PNL ',

l EG&G IDAHO i

SANDIA ALBUQUERQUE i

'~

DR. WILLARD ALTMAN -

NRC PROJECT MANAGER  !

OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT i

I FotA -tf-M3 l . P So

e -

l NRC COMMISSION t

EDO DIRCKS -

0 i

NRR NMSS RES l IE ,

DENTON l DAVIS  !

MINQGUE  ; DEYOUNG jf W -

i 1

i IE 1

I

?

4 l

l DIRECTOR DEYOUNG

DEPUTY

. SNIEZEK ,

1

..)

REACTOR DEQA  ! FFMS , EMERG.

PROGRAMS JORDAN COBB I PREP.

TAYLOR GRIMES ,

1 4

t i

1 '

ENGR. QA EVENTS ANAL.

j BAER HARPSTER 1

MILLS I '

i i

\

, \

a r

_ _ _ - - - - - _ . . , . _ _ _ ._,.- ._ _ , _ . _ _.-_ _ _ - . . . _ - . _ . _ , . _ . - - - . . . _ _ _ _ _ . - - . . . . - . _ , . _ - , _ . _ .

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20136B405&oldid=3375163"