ML20148K237
| ML20148K237 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/12/1997 |
| From: | Callan L NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Seale R Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| References | |
| ACRS-GENERAL, NUDOCS 9706170388 | |
| Download: ML20148K237 (7) | |
Text
Os EA Jo ps atou Ji UNITED STATES g
O g
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON D.C. 20555-0001
% *****,o 9
June 12, 1997 Dr. Robert L. Seale. Chairman Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Dear Dr. Seale:
I am responding to your letter of May 7,1997, to Chairman Jackson in which you presented the conclusions and recommendations resulting from your meeting with the NRC staff and the Nuclear Energy Institute to discuss design basis verification during the 441st meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeg'uards, which was held on May 1-3, 1997.
In your letter, you noted that the NRC will be relying on the results of probabilistic risk assessments
-(PRAs) to an ever increasing extent and that PRAs should be based on the current configuration of the plant. Therefore, you recommended that the results of the design-basis inspections currently being performed by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) should be shared with the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) and the Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (AE00).
Regarding the design-basis inspection results. NRR is preparing periodic assessments of the Architect / Engineer Design Inspection Program.
The purpose of the assessments is (1) to provide NRR management with a general overview of the results of the program, (2) to provide recommended actions and followup activities, and (3) to provide for trending and integration of specific inspection findings. NPR is also developing a database to help with the trending and integration of the individual inspection findings.
NRR intends to transmit the periodic assessments and the design inspection reports to AE00 and to RES for use in their reactor oversight activities and the evaluation of PRA assumptions, as appropriate.
Sincerely.
3 s.
L.
eph Callan Exe tive Director cc: Chairman Jackson Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Dicus g
\\
Commissioner Diaz Commissioner McGaffigan SECY N//f 889Og2 fp - 7 k 617 PDR g.. b (WfA
June 12, 1997 o
Dr. Robert L. Seale, Chairman Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Dear Dr. Seale.
I am responding to your letter of May 7,1997, to Chairman Jackson in which you presented the conclusions and recommendations resulting from your meeting with the NRC staff and the Nuclear Energy Institute to discuss design basis verification during the 441st meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, which was held on May 1-3, 1997.
In your letter, you noted that the NRC will be relying on the results of probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) to an eVEr increasing extent and that PRAs should be based on the current configuration of the plant.
Therefore, you recommended that the results of the design-basis inspections currently being performed by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) should be shared with the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) and the Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (AE0D).
Regarding the design-basis inspection results, NRR is preparing periodic assessments of the Architect / Engineer Design Inspection Program.
The purpose of the assessments is (1) to provide NRR management with a general overview of the results of the program, (2) to provide recommended actions and followup activities, and (3) to provide for trending and integration of specific inspection findings.
NRR is also developing a database to help with the trending and integration of the individual inspection findings.
NRR intends to transmit the periodic assessments and the design inspection reports to AE0D and to RES for use in their reactor oversight activities and the evaluation of PRA assumptions, as appropriate.
bfENf851gned by L J. Callan.
L. Joseph Callan Executive Director for Operations i
cc:
Chairman Jackson I
Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Dicus Commissioner Diaz Commissioner McGaffigan SECY JDJSTRIBUTION:
See attached page Document Name:
G:\\JLB\\GT970341.JLB i
- See previous concurrences 0FFICE Tech Ed l
PM:PGEB SC:PGEB l
C:PGEB l
l
' NAME BCalure*
JBirmingham*
FAkstulewicz*
DMatthews*
DATE 06/02/97 06/02/97 06/02/97 06/03/97 0FFICE C:PSIB D:WSP (A)D:DRPM m y p:fyli$fr/
EDQ l
NAME RGallo*
htt$spie MSlosson it/Ko9ffWs LCh4an l
DATE 06/03/97 06/1 1/97 06/ 4 /97 fi O6/k/97 06d 37 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY l"
)
9 a
DISTRIBUTION:
Green Ticket 970341 Dated June 12. 1997 Central File (w/ incoming) (GT 970341)
PUBLIC (w/ incoming) (GT 970341)
EDO #970341 EDO Reading NRR Mailroom (w/ incoming) (GT 970341)
PGEB r/f L. Callan H. Thompson E. Jordan P. Norry J. Blaha S. Collins /F. Miraglia R.'Zimmerman W. Travers i
T. Martin F. Gillespie M. Slosson S. Weiss D. Matthews F. Akstulewicz J. Birmingham R. Gallo M. Thadani M. Boyle, (e-mail MLB4)
S. Burns, 0GC K. Cyr, 0GC C. Paperiello, NMSS D. Morrison, RES (w/ incoming)
D. Ross, AE00 (w/ incoming)
J. Mitchell, OEDO
-0PA OCA ACRS File B. Sweeney I
Dr. R:bert. L. Ssale, Chairman Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
SUBJECT:
DESIGN BASIS VERIFICATION
Dear Dr. Seale:
I am responding to your letter of May 7,1997, to Chairman Jackson in which you presented the conclusions and recommendations resulting from your meeting l
with the NRC staff and the Nuclear Energy Institute to discuss design basis verification during the-441st meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor l
Safeguards, which was held on May 1-3, 1997.
In your letter, you noted that the NRC will be relying on the results of probabilistic risk assessments l
l (PRAs) to an ever increasing extent and that PRAs should be based on the current configuration of the plant. Therefore, you recommended that the results of the design-basis inspections currently being performed by the i
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) should be shared with the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) and the Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data-(AE00).
Regarding the design-basis inspection results, NRR is preparing periodic assessments of the Architect / Engineer Design Inspection Program.
The purpose of the assessments is (1) to provide NRR management with a general overview of the results of the program, (2) to provide recommended actions and followup activities, and (3) to provide for trending and integration of specific inspection findings. NRR is also developing a database to help with the trending and integration of the individual inspection findings.
NRR intends to transmit the periodic assessments and the design inspection reports to AE00 and to RES for use in their reactor oversight activities and the evaluation cf PRA assumptions, as appropriate.
Sincerely, L. Joseph Callan Executive Director for Operations cc: Chairman Jackson Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Dicus Commissioner Diaz Commissior.er McGaffigan SECY DISTRIBUTION: See attached page Document Name: G:\\JLB\\GT970341.JLB
- See previous concurrences
- N* = No copy "I ))j 0FFICE Tech Ed l
PM:PGEB l
SC:PGEB C:PGEB/ ;////
NAME BCalure*
JBirmingham*
FAkstulewciz*
DMatth&Ws' 06 02 97 g6 g02/97 g6 0FFICE C:P
/
(A)D:DRPM D:NRR ED0 l
NAME RGa W MSlosson SCollins LCallan DATE 06/A/97 06/ /97 06/ /97 06/ 97 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY i
Dr. R:bart. L. Seale, Chaircan j*
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards i
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
SUBJECT:
DESIGN BASIS VERIFICATION
Dear Dr. Seale:
i I am respond to your letter of May 7,1997, to Chairman Jack n in which 1
you presented e conclusions and recommendations resulting f m your meeting with the NRC sta f and the Nuclear Energy Institute to dis ss design basis 4
verification durith'As held on May.1-3,1997.the 441st meeting of the Advisory Co ittee Safeguards, which w In your tter, you noted that i
the NRC will be relylgg on the re..lts of probabili c risk assessments j-(PRAs) to an ever incr 4 sing extent and that PRAs ould be based on the
}
current configuration o the plant. Therefore, ou recommended that the I
results of the design-bas inspections curr ly being performed by the Office of Nuclear Reactor ulation (NRR) ould be shared with the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research ES) and th ffice for Analysis and Evaluation
{
of Operational Data (AE00).
Regarding the design-basis inspec on results, you should know that NRR is i
j issuing quarterly assessments of,th Architect / Engineer Design Inspection Program. - The purpose of the assessme ts is (1) to provide NRC management with j
a general overview of the resuTts of t program, (2) to provide recommended actions and followup activi 4es, and (3) to provide for trending and l
integration of specific i pection findin These assessments include the findings of the inspecti ns, a discussion o PRA, and recommended acency e
actions. NRR is also veloping a database t help with the trendi..g and l
integration of the i ividual inspection findi s.
]
NRR intends to fo ally transmit tr.o quarterly ass sments to AE00 and to RES i
for use in thei reactor oversight activities and th evaluation of PRA l
assumptions, appropriate.
i l
Sincerely, 1
/
L. Joseph Callan
/
Executive Director j
/
for Operations
{
/
a cc: Chairman Jackson i
Commissioner Rogers i
Commissioner Dicus Commissioner Diaz j
Commissioner McGaffigan
)
SECY l
l DISTRIBUTION:
See attached page J
Document Name:
G:\\JLB\\GT970341.JLB i
- See previous concurrences j
"N" - No copy
/V
{
OFFICE Tech Ed 1
PM:PGEB l
SC:PGEB l
C:PG@j///
l j
NAME BCalure*
JBirmingham*
FAkstulewciz*
DMattKeds l
Y j
OFFICE C:PSIB (A)D:DRPM D:NRR EDO NAME RGallo MSlosson SCollins LCallan DATE 06/ /97 06/ /97 06/ /97 06/ 97 1
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY l
- '~
j.
Dr. Robert. L. Seale, Chairman
' Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards 4
l U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commisr, ion
SUBJECT:
RECOMENDATION TO SHARE RESULTS OF DESIGN-BASIS INSPECTIONS WITH j
OTHER NRC OFFICES i
Dear Dr. Seale:
I am responding to your letter of May 7,1997, to Chairman Jackson in which
[
you presented the conclusions and recommendations resulting from the 441st 4
meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, which was held 1
May 1-3, 1997.
In your. letter, you noted that the NRC will be relying n the results of probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) to an ever increasi extent and that PRAs should be based on the current configuration of the ant.
4 Therefore, you recommended that the results of the design-basis nspections currently being performed by the Office of Nuclear Reactor R 1ation (NRR) 4' should be shared with the Offic of Nuclear Regulatory Res rch (RES) and the i
Office for Analysis and Evaluat n of Operational Data 00).
Regarding the design-basis inspect results, you ould know that NRR is issuing quarterly assessments of the Architect /En neer Design Inspection s
Program. The purpose of the assessments is (1) o provide NRC management with i
a general overview of the results of the,xpro m, (2) to provide recommended actions and followup activities, and (3) t rovide for trending and integration of specific inspection findi sh These assessments include the findings of the inspections, a discuss n of RRA, and recommended agency 1
actions.
NRR is also developing a d abase to help with the trending and I
integration of the individual insp tion findin NRR intends to formally trans the quarterly as essments to AE00 and to RES
-l for use in their reactor ove ight activities and he evaluation of PRA assumptions, as appropriat.
Sincerely, L. Joseph Cal n
Eucutive Direc or j
for Operations l
cc: Chai n Jackson Comm ssioner Rogers Commissioner Dicus Commissioner Diaz Commissioner McGaffigan SECY i
DISTRIBUTION: See attached page Document Name:
G:\\JLB\\GT970341.JLB
- See previous concurrence
//,
OFFICE Tech Ed #
PM:PGEB F SC:PGISAl>
C:PGEB NAME BCalure:sw JBirmingham FAkstgewicz DMatthews j
Y0 DATE 06/02/97 06/02/97 '
b /'P/97
/ /97
(
~
0FFICE (A)D:DRPM D:NRR EDO l
NAME MSlosson SCo11 ins LCallan DATE
/ /97
/ /97
/ /97 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
ACTIDIf
'I*
g
~
EDO Princ.tyol Carrespondence Control FROM:
DUE: 06/09/97 slb CDFTROL: G970341
.000 DT: 05/07/97 FINAL REPLY:
R. L. Seale ACRS TO:
O
- > 9 M7
/
J, C O Chairman Jackson FOR SIGNATURE OF :
- GRN CRC NO:
EDO DESC:
ROUTING:
DESIGN BASIS VERIFICATION Callan Jordan Thompson Norry Blaha Burns DATE: 05/09/97 Paperiello,NMSS Morrison, RES A3 SIGNED'TO:
CONTACT:
Ross, AEOD Mitchell, OEDO NRR Collins ACRS File SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:
Prtpare response to ACRS for EDO signature.
Add Commissioners and SECY as cc's (shown on original for reply).
NRR RECEIVED:
MAY 9, 1997 NRR ACTION:
DRPM:5L0$50N
~ - ~,,f,7, ' ',-~ ~ ~ " ~ ~7
- - " " ~ ~ ~ ~
i..,.'Li:
NRR ROUTING:
COLLINS
~ ~ ~ ~ -
MIRAGLIA
.,.. -.r. + ' t, *:. -
MARTIN
- 'J i' ~-
ZIMMERMAN TRAVERS B0HRER s.
\\
... _.I _ _
a
e UNITED ST ATES
~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
g e
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS o,,
W ASHINGTON. D. C. 20555
+.,...../
May 7, 1997 The Honorable Shirley Ann Jackson Chairman U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555-0001
Dear Chairman Jackson:
SUBJECT:
DESIGN BASIS [ VERIFICATION During the 441st meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, May 1-3, 1997, we met with representatives of the NRC staff and the Nuclear Energy Institute to discuss design basis verification.
We reviewed the staff criteria for evaluating licensee responses to the NRC request for design basis information pursuant to 10 CFR 50. 54 (f), staff initiatives to perform design inspections, and related industry activities and initiatives.
We also had the benefit of the documents referenced.
Conclusions and Recommendations We believe that the current four-phase approach is effective e
in identifying those licensees that need to take action to maintain their design basis.
The staff review of licensee responses appears to have been successful in identifying and prioritizing follow-up inspection activities, The design inspections conducted to date have shown that, in o
some cases, the actual plant configuration and procedure-do not correspond to the design basis upon which the plant was licensed.
This illustrates the value of the design inspection program and suggests that such a program be continued in some form.
The NRC will be relying on the results of probabilistic risk i
assessments (PRAs) to an ever-increasing extent as it embarks on risk-informed, performance-based regulation.
PRAs should be based on the current configuration of the plant.
Results of the design basis inspections shou 4d,
- then, be shared formally with the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research and the Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data.
Where inconsistencies between PRA assumptions and design inspection results are found, it may be of use to conduct M.01/G]Sh EDO -- G970341
_ _ _...__ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _. ~..
4 i,
]. #.* -
o-i i.',
)
2 l
sensitivity studies to establish the risk significance of these-incons.istencies.
Sincerely, j
5.
R.
L. Seale Chairman 1
l
References:
I 1.
Section (f) of 10 CFR 50.54, " Conditions of Licenses."
2.
Memorandum dated March 19, 1997, from L. J. Callan, Executive Director for Opera ions, NRC, to the Commissioners,
Subject:
4 Update on 10 CFR 50.54(f) Response Review Efforts: Pilot i
Process Results.
3.
Memorandum dated February 25, 1997,. from L.
J.
- Callan, Executive Director for Operations, NRC, to the Commissioners,
Subject:
Review, of Licensees' Responses to the 10 CFR
].
50.54(f) Letter of October 9,
- 1996, on the Adequacy and Accuracy of Design Bases Information for Nuclear Power Plants.
i 4.
Nuclear Energy Institute, NEI 96-05, draft Revision D,
l
" Guidelines for Assessing Programs for Maintaining the l
Licensing Basis," dated July 25, 1996.
5.
Nuclear Management and Resources Council, Inc., NUMARC 90-12, l
" Design Basis Program Guidelines," October 1990.
1
{
l i~
l 3
l I-i,.
1
.i A
4 4
4 i
p m.
,