ML18346A517: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:}}
{{#Wiki_filter:Brian Gutherman          The Role of for the Nuclear Energy Institute NEI 12-04 In Improving the NRC REG CON December 12, 2018        Focus on Safety
 
NEI 12-04 Endorsement Status
* NEI 12-04, Revision 2 submitted to NRC in September 2018
* Deletes appendices and modifies the document to remove references to those appendices
* Corrects a section numbering error
* Endorsement is expected via a revision to Regulatory Guide 3.72
* Draft RG summer 2019
* Licensees and CoC holders awaiting formal endorsement to incorporate the revised guidance into 72.48 training programs
 
Part of Broader Regulatory Improvements
* The value of 72.48 guidance is limited to the information not requiring NRC approval to change
* Graded approach project seeks to increase the 72.48 change scope based on safety and risk, akin to Part 50 TS improvement program
* Long term value depends on the NRC having confidence that industry 72.48 processes will consistently identify those issues requiring NRC approval
* NRC inspection and enforcement program visibility increases with increased industry responsibility
 
Accomplishments of NEI 12-04
* Distinguishes between specific licensees, general licensees, and CoC holders, where appropriate
* Identifies the 72.212 Report as a licensing basis document requiring review for proposed activities (RIS 2012-05)
* Addresses unique needs of CoC holders having 72.48 authority and no history of 50.59 authority
* Addresses general licensee - CoC holder interface
* GL processing of CoC holder changes
* Cask FSAR revision(s) of record for GLs
* Brings 72.48 guidance into alignment with 50.59 for changes involving Methods of Evaluation (MOE)
* Solidifies the basis for licensee and CoC holder training programs
 
Lessons Learned
* Enforcement actions of 2000s resulted in lingering confusion for both industry and NRC
* 50.59 guidance did not translate to 72.48 as directly as imagined for general licensees and CoC holders
* Industrys request for NRC endorsement could have been defined better
* Some enforcement actions were based on different industry and NRC understanding of the rule and guidance rather than mistakes
 
What is Expected of Industry?
* Understand that the need, appropriateness, and technical quality of changes is assured before the 72.48 review
* Implement a rigorous 72.48 training/qualification program
* Ensure 72.48 documentation matches the elements of the 72.48 guidance, especially MOE changes
* Frequently and critically review your 72.48 training and implementation programs (solicit outside feedback)
* Embrace conservative decision-making and questioning attitude
* Licensees should critically review CoC holder work
 
What is Expected of the NRC?
* Consistency among Regions and individual inspectors
* Risk-informed decision-making
* More 72.48 knowledge in the Regions to improve inspection process efficiency
* Hold industry accountable for the integrity of the process
 
What Does Success Look Like?
* Industry better understands the 72.48 rule and guidance evidenced by fewer mistakes
* NRC increases confidence in 72.48 implementation and allows more information to be under licensee/CoC holder change control
* Fewer 72.48 enforcement actions
 
The Bottom Line
: 1. 10 CFR 72.48 intends for the NRC to review changes having a nexus to the original safety basis with a focus on public health and safety
: 2. Updating the 72.48 implementation guidance was necessary but not sufficient for long-lasting regulatory process improvement
: 3. Right-sizing information in licenses and CoCs will put change control authority where it belongs and better focus resources on safety
 
Questions?
mar@nei.org gutherman@comcast.net}}

Latest revision as of 09:19, 20 October 2019

Presentation Slides: Gutherman - Regulatory Improvements - 72.48
ML18346A517
Person / Time
Site: Nuclear Energy Institute
Issue date: 12/12/2018
From: Gutherman B
Nuclear Energy Institute
To: Haile Lindsay
NRC/NMSS/DSFM/IOB
Lindsay H
Shared Package
ML18338A059 List:
References
Download: ML18346A517 (10)


Text

Brian Gutherman The Role of for the Nuclear Energy Institute NEI 12-04 In Improving the NRC REG CON December 12, 2018 Focus on Safety

NEI 12-04 Endorsement Status

  • NEI 12-04, Revision 2 submitted to NRC in September 2018
  • Deletes appendices and modifies the document to remove references to those appendices
  • Corrects a section numbering error
  • Draft RG summer 2019
  • Licensees and CoC holders awaiting formal endorsement to incorporate the revised guidance into 72.48 training programs

Part of Broader Regulatory Improvements

  • The value of 72.48 guidance is limited to the information not requiring NRC approval to change
  • Graded approach project seeks to increase the 72.48 change scope based on safety and risk, akin to Part 50 TS improvement program
  • Long term value depends on the NRC having confidence that industry 72.48 processes will consistently identify those issues requiring NRC approval
  • NRC inspection and enforcement program visibility increases with increased industry responsibility

Accomplishments of NEI 12-04

  • Distinguishes between specific licensees, general licensees, and CoC holders, where appropriate
  • Identifies the 72.212 Report as a licensing basis document requiring review for proposed activities (RIS 2012-05)
  • Addresses unique needs of CoC holders having 72.48 authority and no history of 50.59 authority
  • Addresses general licensee - CoC holder interface
  • GL processing of CoC holder changes
  • Cask FSAR revision(s) of record for GLs
  • Brings 72.48 guidance into alignment with 50.59 for changes involving Methods of Evaluation (MOE)
  • Solidifies the basis for licensee and CoC holder training programs

Lessons Learned

  • Enforcement actions of 2000s resulted in lingering confusion for both industry and NRC
  • 50.59 guidance did not translate to 72.48 as directly as imagined for general licensees and CoC holders
  • Industrys request for NRC endorsement could have been defined better
  • Some enforcement actions were based on different industry and NRC understanding of the rule and guidance rather than mistakes

What is Expected of Industry?

  • Understand that the need, appropriateness, and technical quality of changes is assured before the 72.48 review
  • Implement a rigorous 72.48 training/qualification program
  • Ensure 72.48 documentation matches the elements of the 72.48 guidance, especially MOE changes
  • Frequently and critically review your 72.48 training and implementation programs (solicit outside feedback)
  • Embrace conservative decision-making and questioning attitude
  • Licensees should critically review CoC holder work

What is Expected of the NRC?

  • Consistency among Regions and individual inspectors
  • Risk-informed decision-making
  • More 72.48 knowledge in the Regions to improve inspection process efficiency
  • Hold industry accountable for the integrity of the process

What Does Success Look Like?

  • Industry better understands the 72.48 rule and guidance evidenced by fewer mistakes
  • NRC increases confidence in 72.48 implementation and allows more information to be under licensee/CoC holder change control
  • Fewer 72.48 enforcement actions

The Bottom Line

1. 10 CFR 72.48 intends for the NRC to review changes having a nexus to the original safety basis with a focus on public health and safety
2. Updating the 72.48 implementation guidance was necessary but not sufficient for long-lasting regulatory process improvement
3. Right-sizing information in licenses and CoCs will put change control authority where it belongs and better focus resources on safety

Questions?

mar@nei.org gutherman@comcast.net