ML20246B876
| ML20246B876 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/01/1989 |
| From: | James Shea NRC OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRS (GPA) |
| To: | Harold Denton NRC OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRS (GPA) |
| References | |
| REF-GTECI-A-17, REF-GTECI-A-40, REF-GTECI-A-47, REF-GTECI-MI, REF-GTECI-SC, REF-GTECI-SY, TASK-A-17, TASK-A-40, TASK-A-47, TASK-OR NUDOCS 8905090203 | |
| Download: ML20246B876 (23) | |
Text
'
1 p.
$[ %,
g UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 .
.5 Nj WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 y ;
b . . . . . #o i MRY 0 I 1989 MEMORANDUM FOR: Harold R. Denton, Director j Offi_ce of Grrvernmental and Public Aff airs
% - D A FROM: 4 James R. % e'a, Director International Programs, GPA
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEETING: STATUS OF GENERIC ISSUES, APRIL 25, 1989 On Tuesday, April 25, Messrs. Themis Speis, Warren Minners and Thomas Taylor from RES, and Frank Gillespie and George Schwenk from NRR, briefed the Chairman and the Commission, in the absence of Commissioner Carr, on the Status of Generic Issues. No Commission vote was required.
Mr. Speis was the main speaker and in his opening remarks stated that only 4 more issues had been identified since the last briefing of October 1987, bringing the total up to 735. Since that date 655 issues had been resolved by RES, leaving 80 issues for further action. Of the remaining 80 issues 3, were in the highest priority category of Unresolved Safety Issues (USIs), (down from 29 in October 1987); their resolution was to be expected by the end of the year. The three USIs are: ,
- USI A-17 Systems Interactions !
USI A-40 Seismic Design Criteria )
USI A-47 Safety Implications of Control Systems j l
One low priority issue had been elevated to high priority at the request of the Commission, namely Generic Safety Issue (GSI) 15,
" Radiation Effects on Reactor Vessel Supports", for which the task action plan was under development. The Chairman requested a report on this item, stating that the resolution of this task was of vital importance to plant life extension and re-licensing. Mr. Speis ended the RES part of the briefing with an overview of the remaining issues. The Chairman commended the RES staff on its timely and efficient efforts.
Contact:
"'--aaca Breskovic, GPA/IP b i 895b 90203 890501 PDR ORQ NGFZ g ,
[MM
Harold R. Denton Mr. Gillespie from NRR then explained the NRR implementation and tracking process for USIs and GSIs. He stated that of all plants under the program, all but one were currently carrying out corrective measures and that all USIs and GSIs had been completed I since the reorganization of NRR. He further stated that it generally took two outage periods for a utility to fully implement corrective measures to which the Chairman replied that he would like to see a more rapid pace in this area. He asked if Mr.
Gillespie thought the utilities were investing enough effort on these issues to which Mr. Gillespie replied in the affirmative.
Commissioner Rogers then requested a quantitative report on how the industry was implementing USIs and GSIs and if NRC actions had any effect on their implementation. Commissioner Roberts requested a report on the upcoming meeting between the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) and RES/NRR staff before the ACRS was to meet with the Commission in early May.
The Chairman closed the briefing by stressing the importance of a rapid and effective resolution of outstanding safety issues and suggested periodic progress reports to the Commission.
Attachment:
Handout: Commission Briefing on the Status of the Generic Issues Program, T.P. Speis, RES x23710, 4/25/89 cc w/attechment GPA/CA GPA/PA GPA/SLITP Regional Administrators Regional Public Affairs Officers Regional State Agreement Representatives Regional State Liaison Officers i
I
l:
l COMMISSION BRIEFING ON THE STATUS OF THE GENERIC ISSUES PROGRAM T. P. SPEIS RES, X23710 PRIL 25, 1989 I
l l
Q,,. .
fl CONTENTS 4
PAGE IDENTIFICATION, PRIORITIZATION, RESOLUTION (RES) l e HISTORY 1
PR0 CESS.......................................
2 RECAP.........................................
4 PROGRESS SINCE 10/21/87 BRIEFING..............
e STATUS OF ISSUES 7
REMAINING VS1S................................
SELECTED GSIS 11 GSI 99...................................
14 GSI B-56.................................
lp OTHER ACTIVITIES 17 REVIEW OF LOW PRIORITY ISSUES.................
o SOME REASONS FOR SCHEDULE SLIPPAGE 18 DELAYS........................................
IMPOSITION, IMPLEMENTATION, VERIFICATION (NRR) 19 e
SUMMARY
OF GENERIC ISSUE RESOLUTION STATUS.........
a
.- 1 GENERIC ISSUE PROCESS IDENTIFICATION [LL o
i L V
PRIORITIZATION RES V
RESOLUTION u
JL V
IMPOSITION NRR v
IMPLEMENTATION E !
V i
VERIFICATION NRR & REGIONS v
1
i l
RECAP 4 PROGRAM STARTED IN 1981 WITH 511 ISSUES IDENTIFIED TO BE PRIORITIZED:
TMI ITEMS (NUREG 0660 - 369 .
& 0737)
NUREGS 0371 8 0471 - 142 511 i
2 i i
c,
- i. .
g d
fr<
8 .-ADDITIONAL 224' ISSUES (INCLUDING HUMAN FACTORS ISSUES) IDENTIFIED IN THE PAST.
8 YEARS 4~ TOTAL. ISSUES ' IDENTIFIED AS OF'04/25/89 =
735 3
[.4
. PROGRESS'SINCE 10/21/87 BRIEFING RESOLVED 10/21/87 5/12/88 4/25/89
.PRIORITIZED LOW 25 24 24 PRIORITIZED DROP 62' 66 73 INTEGRATED w/oTHER ISSUES 119 121 122 RESOLUTION DEFINED IN NUREG-0737 88 88 88 RESOLVED 275 285 303 NON-SAFETY (LI, RI, &E) 41 44 45 SUB-TOTAL: 610(+18) 628(+27) 655 4
x, l
q ISSUES STILL To BE RESOLVED b , ,
10/21/87 5/12/88 04/25/89- .
USIs 9 9 3 HIGH: 32 28 20 MEDIUM 16 12 13 NEARLY 8 q RESOLVED 12 11 To BE PRIORI. 52. 15 36 SUB-TOTAL:.121 105 30 i
1 l
l 5 {
__-____mm_______ __ . _ __.- . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _
l
.. I SUM iRy 10/21/87 5/12/88 04/25/89 RESOLVED 610 (83%) 628 (86%) 655 (89%)
TO BE RESOLVED 121 (17%) 105 (14%) 80 (11%)
TOTAL: 731 733 735 i
6
\
1
> 'l i
REMAINING USIs A-17 A-40 A-47 l
7 e - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - _ - _ - - _ - _ _ - _ _ -
' ob +
+ .
,? !
ri i
L USI A-17: SYSTEMS INTERACTIONS YR.. PLAN RESOLUT10N'DATE: 12/89
' CURRENT RESOLUTION DATE: 12/89 a STATUS: CRGR REVIEW 0F DTR 10/88C ACRS REVIEW-OF DTR 08/88C CRGR REVIEW OF FTR 09/89 ACRS REVIEW OF FTR 09/89
'FRN 12/89 J
l 8
- w. . .
.=. -
i V
i o ,-.
e
. a.
~l, USI A-40: SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERI A 5-YR.-PLAN R!! SOLUTION.DATE: 06/89 CURRENT RESOLUTION.DATE? 06/89 STATUS: CRGR REVIEW OF.DTR 03/88C L
ACRS REVIEW OF DTR DECLINED CRGR REVIEW OF'FTR. 04/89 ACRS. REVIEW OF FTR 04/89
~
FRN ' 06/09 c.
9
?
1 r \
- i. . I ..
- US1'A-47:' SAFETY IMPl.lCATIONS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS 5-YR. PLAN RESOLUTION DATE: 06/89 CURRENT. RESOLUTION DATE: 08/89 STATUS: CRGR. REVIEW 0F DTR 12/87C ACRS REVIEW'0F DTR 11/87C CRGR REVIEW OF FTR 03/89 ACRS REVIEW 0F-FTR 04/89 FRN 08/89 i
IO o_ _ _ _ -
.; y
$ 1.
x
, . , -l, L ,
I I
GSI-99, " LOSS OF RHR CAPABILITY IN PWRS" ,
(HIGH PRIORITY) 1 0 . FOCUSED ON 2 MODES OF CCF 0F RHR COOLING:
AIR BINDING OF RHR PUMPS DURING MID-LOOP OPERATIONS LOSS OF RilR PUMP SUCTION DUE TO AUTOCLOSURE INTERLOCK-RELATED SPURIOUS CLOSURES OF THE RHR SUCTION / ISOLATION VALVES 1
i Ii 1 o
GSI-99 CONT'D.)
GL 88- SUDTO R OLS 8 CPS WITH GUIDANCE AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO REDUCE THE LIKEllH00D AND CONSEQUENCES OF A ,
LOSS OF DECAY HEAT REMOVAL:
IMPROVE PROCEDURES AND INSTRUMENTATION TO HELP OPERATOR PREVENT AND MITIGATE LOSS OF DECAY HEAT REMOVAL 4
12 I
m.m_______._.____._m. ___ ... -___
GSI-99 (CONT'D)
DEVELOP PROCEDURES THAT WILL PERMIT TIMELY CLOSING OF CONTAINMENT OPENINGS DURING A DEGRADATION IN DECAY HEAT REMOVAL.
i l
13
- _ - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - l
B-56, " DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY" (HIGH PRIORITY) 5-YR.. PLAN. RESOLUTION DATE: 09/89 CURRENT RESOLUTION DATE: 09/89 STATUS:- .CRGR REVIEW 0F DTR 09/88C ACRS REVIEW OF DTR 11/88C ISSUE REG GUIDE'FOR-COMMENT ll/88C CRGR REVIEW OF FTR 07/89 ACRS REVIEW 0F FTR 07/89 ISSUE FINAL REG.
GUIDE 09/89 l
1.
l L
I4 e . 4
r m.
l l.9 hx.
- 3 1
(~: ,
l B-56 (CONT'D.)
. RESOLUTION 0F'USI A-44 INCLUDED THE NEED FOR A DIESEL RELIABILITY PROGRAM TO MAINTAIN THE RELIABILITY LEVEL-OF EDGS AT OR ABOVE LEVELS SELECTED FOR RESPONSE TO'.THE SB0 RULE (10CFR50.63) l5
l i
B-56 (CONT'D)
O CONCLUDING STAFF EFFORTS DIRECTED AT DEFINING THE PRINCIPAL ELEMENTS OF AN EDG RELIABILITY PROGRAM AND TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR NRC USE IN REVISION OF REG. GUIDES, SRP, AND INSPECTION MODULES.
9 COORDINATING WITH NUMARC TO DEVELOP A RELIABILITY PROGRAM CONSISTENT WITH INDUSTRY PRACTICES AND COMMISSION DESIRE TO MINIM 1ZE UNNECESSARY TESTING.
l6 w- --_
l l
l l
REVI,W OF LOW PRIORITY ISSUES IN ACCORDANCE WITH COMMISSION REQUEST, EXTENSIVE STAFF REVIEW 0F 25 LOW PRIORITY ISSUES RESULTED IN 1 ELEVATED TO HIGH: GSI 15, " RADIATION EFFECTS ON REACTOR VESSEL CUPPORTS." TASK ACTION PLAN FOR RESOLUTION BEING DEVELOPED BY STAFF.
i t
i l7
- t DELAYS S' DEPENDENT ON INDUSTRY ACTIONS FOR RESOLUTION E.G., GSI-29, " BOLTING DEGRADATION OR FAILURE IN NUCLEAR POWER PLAtlTS."
8 DEPENDEllT ON PLANT EXPERIENCE TO DEMONSTRATE EFFECTIVENESS OF RESOLUTION, E.G., GSI~B-55, " IMPROVE.
REtlABILITY OF TARGET R0cK SAFETY RELIEF VALVES."
I 3
l 18 4.,
D SE .
NIC 0 7 7 S OFR 5 0 6 5 E IIN 1, 1, ) U TR -
S CEY 1 1 9 AVB 8 S
/ I
- 4 S 1 C
/ I U 4 R T D E A E E_ D N T
S f S_
N 8 0 7 E E N SDE NPC 72, 62, 0 6 T A
D G
E O OEI 1 H I ILL 1 T TP .
2 T U CPY 0 L AIB 0 F O - O S 5 0 N E
SD 5 O NE 0 8 8 6 I 1 T E
L OS 2 0 2 IO 4, 3, 6 2 A S TF 1 Z S CF 1 1 R
- I L
I AI ( A C M I S R R S M O F
N 0 6 0 I E
E LO AI 4 6 3 5, 3, 6 S
E G TT Y H OC 1 1 B T F TA D O O E TSS Y T R R RE A O OC P I O M I S
- E RR P
t I G
- R PP RS S !
l Y
G fl S G *
- 1
- T I I
G H P L
_W
/l. 3 d' 9* %q'o . ! UNITED STATES
- [
- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 ff ;$
g'*
- ..+
W X 0 1 1989 MEMORANDUM FOR: Harold R. Denton, Director j Offi_ce of G7vernmental'and Public Affairs
%_ - I A
- i. FROM: 4JamesR.The'a, Director L International Programs, GPA !
l !
l
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEETING: STATUS OF GENERIC ISSUES, APRIL 25, 1989 On Tuesday, April 25, Messrs. Themis Speis, Warren Minners and Thomas Taylor from RES, and Frank Gillespie and George Schwenk from NRR, briefed the Chairman and the Commission, in the absence of Commissioner Carr, on the Status of Generic Issues. No Commission vote was required.
Mr. Speis was the main speaker and in his opening remarks stated that only 4 more issues had been identified since the last briefing of October 1987, bringing the total up to 735. Since that date 655 issues had been resolved by RES, leaving 80 issues for further action. Of the remaining 80 issues 3, were in the highest priority category of Unresolved Safety Issues (USIs), (down from 29 in October 1987); their resolution was to be expected by the end of the year. The three USIs are:
USI A-17 Systems Interactions .
- USI A-40 Seismic Design Criteria USI A-47 Safety Implications of Control Systems One low priority issue had been elevated to high priorit request of the Commission, namely Generic Safety Issue (y at 15 GSI) the
" Radiation Effects on Reactor Vessel Supports", for which the task action plan was under development. The Chairman requested a report 3 on this item, stating that the resolution of this task was of vital !
importance to plant life extension and re-licensing. Mr. Speis I ended the RES part of the briefing with an overview of the remaining issues. The Chairman commended the RES staff on its timely and efficient efforts. !
j t
Contact:
p Clarence Breskovic, GPA/IP 1 49-20364 pfM
) .s I}E 3
/
2?&f&W' v3y b$
1
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J
4
- a. .
py .. ,
, p-L: ,. ' Harold"Ri.Denton- -2 Mr. Gill'espie from NRR.then explained the NRR implementation ~and Le.
tracking-process for USIs and GSIs. He stated that of all plants under the program, all but one were currently carrying.out corrective. measures and that all USIs and GSIs.had been completed since.the reorganization of NRR. He further stated that it generally;took two outage periods for a utility to fully implement !
-corrective measures to-which the Chairman replied that he-would i like to see a-more rapid pace in this area. He asked if Mr.
Gillespie thought the utilities were investing enough effort on
'these issues to which Mr.'Gillespie replied in the affirmative.
Commissioner Rogers then regtested a quantitative report on how the industry was' implementing USIs and GSIs and if NRC actions had any effect on.their implementation. Commissioner Roberts requested a report on the upcoming meeting between the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) and RES/NRR staff before the ACRS was to meet with the Commission in early May.
.The Chairman. closed the. briefing by stressing the importance of a rapid and effective resolution of outstanding safety issues and suggested periodic progress reports to the Commission.
Attachment:
Handout: Commission Briefing on the Status of the Generic Issues Program, T.P. Speis, RES x23710, 4/25/89 cc w/ attachment GPA/CA GPA/PA GPA/SI.ITP Regional Administrators Regional'Public Affairs Officers Regional State Agreement Representatives Regional State Liaison Officers GENERIC.RFT m
- 0FC :IP-LS :AD:IP.I5 :D:IPM : : : :
.....: ... . ....._ 3 4 ........,/, 4 4 ._ ....:___.......__:._...... ...:............:...__......
.NAME :B g ic:bkMRP : : : :
....___.....:...'etersonpWRShea .........:....__......:.........___:...._____:..._________:......-..
( DATE :5/ / /89 :5/)/89 :5/l /89 : : : :
4 COMMISSION BRIEFING ON THE STATUS OF THE GENERIC ISSUES PROGRAM T. P SPEIS RES, X23710 APRIL 25, 1989 i
l l
l 1
L-___--__--_---___________-__
4
=,
CONTENTS PAGE IDENTIFICATION, PRIORITIZATION, RESOLUTION (RES) e HISTORY l'
- PR0 CESS.......................................
2
- RECAP.........................................
4
- PROGRESS SINCE 10/21/87 B R I E F l flG . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- e. STATUS OF ISSUES 7
REMAINING US1S................................
. SELECTED GSIS 11 GSI 99...................................
14 GSI B-56.................................
i e OTHER ACTIVITIES 17 REVIEW OF low PRIORITY ISSUES.................
e SOME REASONS FOR SCHEDULE SLIPPAGE 18 DELAYS........................................
IMPOSITION, IMPLEMENTATION, VERIFICATION (NRR) 19 e
SUMMARY
OF GENERIC ISSUE RESOLUTION STATUS......... I
\
4
1... ,
GENERIC ISSUE PROCESS
>- IDENTIFICATION pLL 4 ,
n V
1 PRIORITIZATION RES V j RESOLUTION
, r d L v
IMPOSITION' NRR v
l L IMPLEMENTATION d 6 V
VERIFICATION NRR & REGIONS 3r l
l 1
_ _ _ - _ - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ i
WW -
L ' r_ c -
1 l
l RECAP 0 : PROGRAM STARTED IN 1981 WITH 511 i
' ISSUES IDENTIFIED TO BE PRIORITIZED:
, TMI 1TEMS (NUREG 0660 - 369 ,
8 0737)
NUREGs 0371 E 0471 - 142 511 4
i 2
6 ADDITIONAL 224 ISSUES (INCLUDING HUMAN FACTORS ISSUES) IDENTIFIED IN THE PAST 8 YEARS 8 TOTAL ISSUES IDENTIFIED AS OF 04/25/89 =
735 l
l 3 1 l
}
.. 7:
..1 PROGRESS SINCE 10/21/87 BRIEFING RESOLVED 10/21/87 5/12/88 4/25/89 .
PRIORITIZED LOW 25 24 2!t
-PRIORITIZED DROP 62 66 73
' INTEGRATED w/0THER lSSUES 119 ~1 21 122 RESOLUTION DEFINED IN NUREG-0737 88 88 88 RESOLVED 275 285 303 l
NON-SAFETY (LI, RI', 8E) 41 44 45 SUB-TOTAL: 610(+18) 628(+27) 655 h
e 4
.l'* e t y
- . . ['
g?J -
j k i :. ,
l rc ISSUES STILL To BE RESOLVED c.
?
10/21/87 5/12/88 04/25/89 l-
. USIS 9 9 3 32 28 20 HIGH-MEDIUM 16 12 13 NEARLY' RESOLVED' 12 11 8 TO BEL PRIORI., .
52_ h5 H
- SUB-TOTAL: 121 105 BD 5
2-_-_-__________.____ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
r _.
l .
SUM:'R1 10/21/87 5/12/88 04/25/89 RESOLVED 610-(83%) 628 (86%) 655 (89%)
TO BE RESOLVED 121 (17%) 105 (14%) 80 (11%)
TOTAL: 731 733 735 6
4 REMAINING USIs A-17 A-40 i
A-47 a
I f
f l
l 7
1 a--_-_-___
7y-f' + ,
L 1,1 / .. .
1 y
j i
l USI A-17: SYSTEMS' INTERACTIONS 5-YR, PLAN RESOLUTION DATE: 12/89 CURRENT RESOLUTION DATE: 12/89 STATUS:. CRGR REVIEW'0F DTR 10/88C ACRS REVIEW OF DTR 08/88C-CRGR REVIEW OF FTR 09/89 ACRS REVIEW OF FTR 09/89 FRN 12/89 l
8
- " - ^ - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ , , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
m . .
hc t
='1
- o .
a USI A-40: SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA' 15-YR. PLAN RESOLUTION DATE: 06/89 CURRENT RESOLUTION DATE: 06/89 STATUSi. CRGR REVIEW OF DTR 03/88C ACRS REVIEW OF DTR DECLINED CRGR REVIEW 0F FTR 04/89 ACRS REVIEW OF FTR 04/89 FRN 06/89 l
o 9
~
L L. .
d4 . .
} ;. . w' ^
s: .. '
V t i. -?,; -
A;. _
l I
l 1
i USI'A-47: SAFETY IMPLICATIONS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS 5-YR. PLAN RESOLUTION DATE:
06/89 :
CURRENT. RESOLUTION DATE:
08/89 12/87C l STATUS:- CRGR REVIEW OF DTR s ACRS REVIEW OF DTR 11/87C ,
03/89 j CRGR. REVIEW OF FTR ACRS REVIEW OF FTR 04/89 !
FRN 08/89 i
i d 1 10 i
_1_______________ .._____1:_
,, 1 e
i 1
l GSI-99, " LOSS OF RHR CAPABILITY IN PWRS" (HIGH PRIORITY) 0 FOCUSED ON 2 MODES OF CCF 0F RHR j COOLING: .
AIR BINDING OF RHR PUMPS DURING MID-LOOP OPERATIONS ;
i LOSS OF RilR PUMP SUCTION DUE TO l AUTOCLOSURE INTERLOCK-RELATED SPURIOUS CLOSURES OF THE RHR I
SUCTION / ISOLATION VALVES 1-l r 11 I
p a
L- -
V
- s. ,---
.g * -
i
-l
.l l
'GSI-99 CONT'D.) l
)
ISSUE RESOLVED IN 10/88, j GL 88-17 ' ISSUED TO PWR OLS & CPS WITH !
GUIDANCE-AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO REDUCE
.THE LIKEllH00D AND CONSEQUENCES OF A ;
LOSS OF DECAY HEAT. REMOVAL:
l IMPROVE PROCEDURES AND INSTRUMENTATION TO HELP OPERATOR l PREVENT AND MITIGATE LOSS OF DECAY- ',
HEAT REMOVAL !
I l
l l
l E
l 12 i
L .
f u______________. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ f
'" ,_.y.
e
-h 4 -' A
\
lU f e'
( ..;
-4...
'I.',
t GSI-99 (CONT'D)
- DEVELOP PROCEDURES THAT WILL PERMIT TIMELY CLOSING 0F
- CONTAINMENT OPENINGS DURING A--
. DEGRADATION IN DECAY HEAT REMOVAL.
l 1
l- )
! l' .
E 1
13
.1 Z=_____-__=___
9 . m..
g.:
<; o t
1 h
t <
)
.i s
L l B-56, " DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY" ;
(HIGH PRIORITY) ,
5-YR.~. PLAN RESOLUTION.DATE: 09/89 .!
CURRENT RESOLUTION DATE: 09/89 L STATUS: CRGR REVIEW OF DTR 09/88C c
' 1SSUE REG. GUIDE FOR l COMMENT ll/88C ,
(-
p ACRS. REVIEW OF FTR 07/89 q L ISSUE FINAL REG.-
GUIDE 09/89 i
14 d
. - . _ - A___--._---_--_.--_-_._.-.___.--__ _ - - _ _ . - - . - _ . _ _ . - - _ - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - -
, ,; .: +
/
- ,;' ^ -
i '
'4 i
l B-56 (CONT'D.)
RESOLUTION.OF USI A-44 INCLUDED THE NEED FOR A DIESEL RELIABILITY PROGRAM TO MAINTAIN THE RELIABILITY LEVEL OF EDGS
- AT OR AB0VE LEVELS SELECTED FOR. RESPONSE TO THE SB0 RULE (10CFR50.63);
I5
_,___.____mmm. __..E_..._____U.__
1
{
i 2
B-56 (CONT'D) 9 CONCLUDING STAFF EFFORTS DIRECTED AT DEFINING THE PRINCIPAL ELEMENTS OF AN EDG RELIABILITY PROGRAM AND TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR NRC USE IN REVISION OF REG. GUIDES, SRP, AND INSPECTION MODULES.
O C0ORDINATING WITH NUMARC TO DEVELOP A RELIABILITY PROGRAM CONSISTENT WITH INDUSTRY PRACTICES AND COMMISSION DESIRE TO MINIM 12E UNNECESSARY TESTING.
I6
-_ - _ - _ - - -- 1
(. a. .; > '
o g * '
REV1,W'0F LOW PRIORITY ISSUES IN ACCORDANCE WITH COMMISSION REQUEST, EXTENSIVE STAFF REVIEW 0F 25 LOW
. PRIORITY ISSUES RESULTED IN 1 ELEVATED TO HIGH: GSI-15, " RADIATION EFFECTS ON REACTOR VESSEL SUPPORTS." TASK' ACTION PLAN FOR RESOLUTION BEING DEVELOPED BY STAFF.
17 1 t
___.E_m_. __.__.._ml m . . . . . .._.m..~ -- -
7, I \
q .;. i
' ~
o , ^ ; ;; '
q -r:
o
' DELAYS S DEPENDENTION INDUSTRY ACTIONS FOR RESOLUTION E.G., GSI-29, " BOLTING DEGRADATION OR' FAILURE IN NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS."'
-S- DEPENDENT ON PLANT EXPERIENCE TO
' DEMONSTRATE EFFECTIVENESS OF RESOLUTION, E.G., GSI B-55, "lMPROVE RELIABILITY OF TARGET ROCK SAFETY-RELIEF VALVES."
18 dE.________
D SE NIC 0 7 7 S OFR 5 0 6 E IIN 1, 1, 5 ) U TR 9 S CEY 1 1 8 S AVB / I
- 4 1 C S / I U 4 R T D E A EE D N T TS E E S NN 8 0 7 T G N
SEE N C 7 2, 6 02, 6 A D E O ODI ILL 1 1 H I
2 T T
I TP CPY 0 I
0 F L AIB - O O
5 S 0 N E 5 O SD R 6 I NE 0 8 8 OS 2 0 2 1 T E 6 2 A U IO 4, 3, 1 Z S
S TF CF 1 1 - I I AI R L A
(
C M
S R I
M O R S I F E N 0 6 0 S LO 0 6 3 E 9
G AI TT 5, 3, 6 Y H OC 1 1 B T F TA D O O E TSS T
Y R RE R O OC A
I I P I O E RR W
t E S I
S
- G ' I R PP S
P
( G N S l G *
- T HG D W I I I E O L G H P 5
-