ML16054A709: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| author name = Mann B | | author name = Mann B | ||
| author affiliation = Excel Services Corp | | author affiliation = Excel Services Corp | ||
| addressee name = Honcharik M | | 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 | | contact person = Honcharik M | ||
| case reference number = TSTF-425 | | case reference number = TSTF-425 | ||
| package number = ML16054A498 | | package number = ML16054A498 | ||
Revision as of 08:20, 20 June 2019
| 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 Resolu tion, New Item (3rd Numbering)". The staff proposed adding:
Licensees should submit PRA quality info rmation for their internal events PRA against RG 1.200, Revision 2, submit a ll 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 consi ders 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 thos e 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 info rmation 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