ML16054A709: 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)
 
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
| number = ML16054A709
| number = ML16054A709
| issue date = 02/11/2016
| issue date = 02/11/2016
| title = 02/11/2016 E-mail Regarding Industry Response to NRC Comments on TSTF Draft Letter Regarding TSTF-425, Relocate Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee Control - RITSTF Initiative 5b.
| title = E-mail Regarding Industry Response to NRC Comments on TSTF Draft Letter Regarding TSTF-425, Relocate Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee Control - RITSTF Initiative 5b.
| author name = Mann B
| author name = Mann B
| author affiliation = Excel Services Corp
| author affiliation = Excel Services Corp
| addressee name = Honcharik M C
| addressee name = Honcharik M
| addressee affiliation = NRC/NRR/DPR/PLPB
| addressee affiliation = NRC/NRR/DPR/PLPB
| docket = PROJ0753
| docket = PROJ0753
| license number =  
| license number =  
| contact person = Honcharik M C
| contact person = Honcharik M
| case reference number = TSTF-425
| case reference number = TSTF-425
| package number = ML16054A498
| package number = ML16054A498
Line 15: Line 15:
| page count = 2
| page count = 2
| project =  
| project =  
| stage = Other
| stage = Draft Other
}}
}}


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:From: Brian Mann <Brian.Mann@excelservices.com> Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 3:00 PM To: Honcharik, Michelle Cc: TSTF  
{{#Wiki_filter:From:                   Brian Mann <Brian.Mann@excelservices.com>
Sent:                   Thursday, February 11, 2016 3:00 PM To:                     Honcharik, Michelle Cc:                     TSTF


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
[External_Sender] Industry response to NRC comments on TSTF draft letter regarding TSTF-425, "Relocate Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee Control - RITSTF Initiative 5b" Michelle, We asked industry PRA experts to review the comments provided in your e-mail dated January 8.  
[External_Sender] Industry response to NRC comments on TSTF draft letter regarding TSTF-425, "Relocate Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee Control -
 
RITSTF Initiative 5b"
: Michelle, We asked industry PRA experts to review the comments provided in your e-mail dated January 8.
Their only comments were on "Proposed Resolution, New Item (3rd Numbering)". The staff proposed adding:
Their only comments were on "Proposed Resolution, New Item (3rd Numbering)". The staff proposed adding:
Licensees should submit PRA quality information for their internal events PRA against RG 1.200, Revision 2, submit all peer review F&Os associated with the Internal Events PRA, and address the impact of those F&Os on the application.
Licensees should submit PRA quality information for their internal events PRA against RG 1.200, Revision 2, submit all peer review F&Os associated with the Internal Events PRA, and address the impact of those F&Os on the application.
The discussion stated:
The discussion stated:
Clarification Needed. Some licensees only consider an F&O to be open or closed with respect to whether they consider the F&O to be resolved in their model. The NRC currently considers an F&O to be closed if a subsequent peer review of the SR and the F&O considers it to be resolved in the model. (Therefore, the licensee would no longer have to submit the F&O and disposition as part of the application.) All open F&Os for Internal Events should be provided. F&Os associated with those external events that are evaluated quantitatively should also be provided.
Clarification Needed. Some licensees only consider an F&O to be open or closed with respect to whether they consider the F&O to be resolved in their model. The NRC currently considers an F&O to be closed if a subsequent peer review of the SR and the F&O considers it to be resolved in the model.
(Therefore, the licensee would no longer have to submit the F&O and disposition as part of the application.) All open F&Os for Internal Events should be provided. F&Os associated with those external events that are evaluated quantitatively should also be provided.
Industry comments:
Industry comments:
* The proposed addition should state open F&Os, consistent with the discussion.
* The proposed addition should state open F&Os, consistent with the discussion.
* The proposed addition should be clarified to state that only "Finding" level F&Os need be submitted. "Suggestion" level F&Os should not be submitted.
* The proposed addition should be clarified to state that only "Finding" level F&Os need be submitted. "Suggestion" level F&Os should not be submitted.
* The proposed addition should be clarified to not require submittal of self-assessment findings for plants that had Internal events peer reviews under RG 1.200 Rev 1.
* The proposed addition should be clarified to not require submittal of self-assessment findings for plants that had Internal events peer reviews under RG 1.200 Rev 1.
Therefore, we would propose to add:
Therefore, we would propose to add:
Licensees should submit PRA quality information for their internal events PRA against RG 1.200, Revision 2, submit all Finding-level peer review F&Os associated with the Internal Events PRA that have not been closed by a subsequent peer review, and address the impact of those F&Os on the application. Internal self-assessment findings need not be submitted.
Licensees should submit PRA quality information for their internal events PRA against RG 1.200, Revision 2, submit all Finding-level peer review F&Os
We look forward to discussing this on the 18th.
 
Brian


Brian D. Mann Vice President of Industry Programs EXCEL Services Corporation Direct (240) 880-0490 Main   (301) 984-4400 Mobile (804) 339-7034 E-mail: brian.mann@excelservices.com Web: www.excelservices.com Web: www.nukapedia.com}}
associated with the Internal Events PRA that have not been closed by a subsequent peer review, and address the impact of those F&Os on the application. Internal self-assessment findings need not be submitted.
We look forward to discussing this on the 18th.
Brian Brian D. Mann Vice President of Industry Programs EXCEL Services Corporation Direct (240) 880-0490 Main (301) 984-4400 Mobile (804) 339-7034 E-mail: brian.mann@excelservices.com Web: www.excelservices.com Web: www.nukapedia.com}}

Latest revision as of 17:46, 4 December 2019

E-mail Regarding Industry Response to NRC Comments on TSTF Draft Letter Regarding TSTF-425, Relocate Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee Control - RITSTF Initiative 5b.
ML16054A709
Person / Time
Site: Technical Specifications Task Force
Issue date: 02/11/2016
From: Mann B
Excel Services Corp
To: Michelle Honcharik
Licensing Processes Branch (DPR)
Honcharik M
Shared Package
ML16054A498 List:
References
TSTF-425
Download: ML16054A709 (2)


Text

From: Brian Mann <Brian.Mann@excelservices.com>

Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 3:00 PM To: Honcharik, Michelle Cc: TSTF

Subject:

[External_Sender] Industry response to NRC comments on TSTF draft letter regarding TSTF-425, "Relocate Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee Control -

RITSTF Initiative 5b"

Michelle, We asked industry PRA experts to review the comments provided in your e-mail dated January 8.

Their only comments were on "Proposed Resolution, New Item (3rd Numbering)". The staff proposed adding:

Licensees should submit PRA quality information for their internal events PRA against RG 1.200, Revision 2, submit all peer review F&Os associated with the Internal Events PRA, and address the impact of those F&Os on the application.

The discussion stated:

Clarification Needed. Some licensees only consider an F&O to be open or closed with respect to whether they consider the F&O to be resolved in their model. The NRC currently considers an F&O to be closed if a subsequent peer review of the SR and the F&O considers it to be resolved in the model.

(Therefore, the licensee would no longer have to submit the F&O and disposition as part of the application.) All open F&Os for Internal Events should be provided. F&Os associated with those external events that are evaluated quantitatively should also be provided.

Industry comments:

  • The proposed addition should state open F&Os, consistent with the discussion.
  • The proposed addition should be clarified to state that only "Finding" level F&Os need be submitted. "Suggestion" level F&Os should not be submitted.
  • The proposed addition should be clarified to not require submittal of self-assessment findings for plants that had Internal events peer reviews under RG 1.200 Rev 1.

Therefore, we would propose to add:

Licensees should submit PRA quality information for their internal events PRA against RG 1.200, Revision 2, submit all Finding-level peer review F&Os

associated with the Internal Events PRA that have not been closed by a subsequent peer review, and address the impact of those F&Os on the application. Internal self-assessment findings need not be submitted.

We look forward to discussing this on the 18th.

Brian Brian D. Mann Vice President of Industry Programs EXCEL Services Corporation Direct (240) 880-0490 Main (301) 984-4400 Mobile (804) 339-7034 E-mail: brian.mann@excelservices.com Web: www.excelservices.com Web: www.nukapedia.com