ML20199E281

Reports Status of PRA Implementation Plan for Period of 971001-1231.Responds to Srm,Dtd 970528,which Related to Staff Plans for Using IPE Result to Assess Regulatory Effectiveness

ML20199E281
Person / Time
Issue date:	01/23/1998
From:	Callan L NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:
References
SECY-98-012, SECY-98-012-01, SECY-98-012-R, SECY-98-12, SECY-98-12-1, SECY-98-12-R, NUDOCS 9802020120
Download: ML20199E281 (27)

See also: IR 07100001/2012031

Text

._

t .

.

000000000 00000000000000

• .

. 8 RELEASED TO THE PDR

o.

E*,p,,,,g\ .

$

lNi $

i .._ }l$Q)9 V

.) a was  :

......... ........

.....

POLICY ISSUE

(Information)

Januan/ 23.1998 SECY-98-012

EQB: The Commissioners

EROM. L. Joseph Callar.

Executive Director for Operations

SUBJECT:

QUARTERLY STATUS REPORT ON THE PROBABILISTIC RISK

ASSESSMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

PURPOSE:

To report the status of the Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Implementation Plan for the

period of October 1 to December 31,1997, and to respond to a Staff Requirements

Memorandum dated May 28,1997, which relates to staff plans for using Individual Plant

Examination (IPE) results to assess regulatory effectiveness.

SUMMARY:

This paper describes accomplishments and changes to the staffs PRA Implementation Plan for

the period of October 1,1997 to December 31,1997, The principal accomplishments include

preparation of the final versions of Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.174 (formerly draft guide DG 1061)

and Standard Review Plan (SRP) Chapter 19, which provide general guidance on the use of

PRA in risk informed decisions for changes in a reactor current licensing basis, completion of the

South Texas graded quality assurance pilot program, publication (for public comment) of the

draft RG and SRP on risk-informed inservice inspection, and the development of the staffs plan

to use IPE results to assess regulatory effectiveness in resolving major safety issues. The

principal change is the delay of the application-specific regulatory guides and Standard Review

Plan sections from December 1997 to March 1998, to permit the incorporation of the policy

decisions associated with the finalization of RG 1.174.

CONTACT: NOTE: TO BE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE g

IN 5 WORKING DAYS FROM THE DATE OF

Ashok Thaaani, OEDO THIS PAPER Ol

, '1 Ii

415-1705 g

W!00G8 p ; p a s . 3. ? - A

N,k3[][${[]] 3 e _ , ,, > m y tv #

9002020120 400123 5 -

Oa+" 'e ' * \

_

-01 PDR __

. _ _ . _ _ ____ ---_ _. _______ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _

! ,

,

The Commissioners 2

BACKGROUND:

'

In a memorandum dated January C .1996, from the t!xecutive Director for Operations to

Chairman Jackson, the staff committed to submitting quarterly reports on the status of its

development of risk informed standards and guidance. Previous quarterly reports were

provided to the Commission on March 26, June 20, and October 11,1996, and on January 13,

April 3, July 22, and October 14,1997. This quarterly report covers the period from October 1,

1997 to December 31,1997.

DISCUSSION:

The significant accomplishments and changes to the PRA Implementation Plan in the past

quarter are summarized below.' More detailed information is provided in Attachment 1.

Significant achievements during the past quarter include:

Section 1: Reactor Regulation (NRR)

1.1 Develop Standard Review Plans for Risk Informed Regulation

NRR and RES staff met with ACRS and CRGR to discuss the final versions of the general

guidance on use of PRA in risk informed decision making in changes to the plant specific

current licensing basis; Standard Review Plan Chapter 19 (NRR lead) and Regulatory Guide

1.174 (RES lead). A Commission paper providing the final versions of these documents will be

provided to the Commission in the near future.

Draft Standard Review Flan 3.9.8 (NRR lead) and Regulatory Guide DG-1063 (RES lead) on

risk informed inservice inspection of piping were published for public comment and the subjects

of a public workshop on November 20 and 21,1997, The workshop was well attended by

industry representatives who offered a number of constructive comments, some criticisms, and

some suggestions for changing the guidance. Overall, the comments indicated strong support

for pursuing risk informed inservice inspection (RI-ISI) but in a manner which would necessitate

some modifications to the draft guidance.

1.2 Pilot Applications for Risk informed Regulatory Initiatives

The staff evaluation of the South Texas Project risk informed graded quality assurance (QA)

implementation plan was transmitted to the Commission via SECY 97-229 on October 6,1997.

I

The staff has modified the format of the PRA Implementation Plan to reduce

redundancy and improve readability. This revised format consists of the body of the

Commission paper, which now provides a summary of accomplishments and changes to the

plan for the past quarter, and the Plan's table (Attachment 1), modified to explicitly show where

milestones have been added, completed, or changed. Such changes are discussed and

additional information provided in endnotes to the table.

- , - - - - , . -- .- - - . . - - , . _ . - - .

- - - . - - - . - - . - . - - . - _ . - - - - . . _ . - . - - - . . -

,

,

.

'

The Commissioners 3

By SRM dated October 30,1997, the staff was informed that the Commission had no objection

to the issuance of the South Texas graded QA safety evaluation report. By letter dated

November 6,1997, the licensee was informed that the staff had approved the graded QA

change and was provided with the associated staff safety evaluation. ,

The staff has received risk informed inservice inspection pilot submittals from Surry 1, ANO 2,

and Vermont Yankee which are currerstly being reviewed for completeness. The staff will

develop a review schedule if the submittals are determined to be complete and in conformance

with the DG 1061 and DG 1063 submittal guidance. The staff is also developing schedules and

priorities for the review of other RI ISI pilot submittals as well as submittals expected

subsequent to the pilot RI ISI program approvals.

.

1.3 Inspections

The staff completed nine additional maintenance rule baseline inspections during this quarter,

which included inspection of licensee methods for using PRA in maintenance programs and

inspection of safety assessments performed by licensees when removing equipment from

service for maintenance in accordance with Paragraph (a)(3) of the Maintenance Rule. As of

December 31,1997, the staff has completed a total of 45 inspections.

Section 2: Reactor Safety Research (RES)

2.1 Develop Regulatory Guides

As discussed above, NRR and RES staff met with ACRS and CRGR to discuss the final

versions of Standard Review Plan Chapter 19 (NRR lead) and Regulatory Guide 1.174 (RES

lead). A Commission paper en policy issues was forwarded to the Commission as SECY-97-

287, dated December 12,1997. A Commission paper providing the final versions of these

documents will be provided in the near future.

2.4 Methods Development and Demonstration

A demonstration at the Seabrook nuclear power plant of the human reliability analysis method

ATHEANA (A Technique for Human Event Analys;s) has been completed. A medium break

LOCA scenario, including inappropriate termination of makeup (an error of commission), was

selected for analysis and simulator exercise. The ATHEANA demonstration helped plant

personnelidentify safety-related weaknesses in plant barriers and design. Specifically, the

exercise identified weaknesses in the use of well planned and tested emergency procedures as

well as identifying improvements needed in the draft ATHEANA documentation.

2.5 IPE and IPEEE Reviews

- The final version of NUREG-1560, *lPE Program: Perspectives on Reactor Saf9ty and Plant

Performance," has been submitted for publication. This report was initially issued in late 1996

for public comment. l Based on the comments received, the report was revised, with an

addrtional appendix written discussing the comments received and staff responses. '

---. - _ - . _ - . - - . . ., -- -

- - -. - _ _ - . , - . . --

- . -- .. . - _ - .

,

.

9

The Commissioners 4

The first IPEEE staff evaluation report, for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, was completed and

issued to the licensee on December 4,1997, in addition, requests for additionalinformation on

fifteen IPEEE submittals were prepared to send to licensees.

An interim report has been developed that provides preliminary IPEEE perspectives and

summarizes the information presented in the first 24 IPEEE submittals reviewed by the staff.

This interim report will be sent to the Commission in the near future. (A summary of the

significant preliminary perspectives from the first 24 IPEEE reviews was provided to the

Commission in Attachment 7 to SECY 97 234.)

Sectinn 3: Analysis and Evaluation of Operating Experience and Training (AtiOD)

3.1 Risk Based Trends and Patterns Analysis

Letters are in the concurret.ce process to distribute the common cause failure (CCF) database

and associated technical report to all U.S. nuclear utilities for their use. The database contains

CCF events from 1980 through 1995.

3.2 Accident Sequence Precursor (ASP) Program

All 1996 precursor analyses have been finalized, with the 1996 ASP report now in publication.

Three preliminary analyses of 1997 events are being reviewed. The annual Commission paper

describing the ASP program in more detail was sent to the Commission on December 23,1997

(SECY 97 296).

3.6 Staff Training

Development activities for the PRA Technology and Regulatory Perspectives (P 111) course

were comploted during this quarter. The first course presentation will be January 26 - February

6,1998. The staff has established a goal of having one Resident inspector at each she

complete the course by the end of 1998.

Significant changes made to the implementation Plan during the last quarter include:

Section 1: Reac'or Regulation (NRR)

1.1 Develop Standard Review Plans for Risk-Informed Regulation

As discussed above, the general regulatory guide and Standard Review Plan for use of PRA in

plant-specific current licensing basis changes will be transmitted to the Commission in the near

future. To permit efficient incorporation of the resolution of policy issues contained in these

I documents into the application-specific SRP sections on inservice testing and technical

l

specifications, completion of these SRP sections has been delayed until March 31,1998, a

change from their previous completion date of December 31,1997.

l

!

. . _ . _ _ . . .

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _

.

.

'

The Commissioners 5

i

l

1.2 Pilot Applications for Risk Informed Regulatory initiatives

The staff is currently developing a draft safety evaluation report (SER) for the Comanche Peak 1

risk informed inservice testing program (Rl IST) program. The licensee (TU Electric) is

currently developing a program that is sufficiently detailed and consistent with DG 1062. TU

Electric has indicated that it intends to complete a draft revision to their program description by

the end of January 1998. Assuming that the program is finalized by mid February, the staff

anticipates having a completed Comanche Peak Rl IST SER to the Commission in March 1998,

rather than December 31,1997.

The completion date for the graded quality assurance (GQA) pilot interactions has been revised

from March 1998 to July 1998 to reflect the anticipated issuance date of the final GOA

inspection guidance.

The staff received a supplemental amendment request from the San Onofre Nuclear

Generating Station (SONGS) in early January 1998 to put the configuration risk management

program description into the SONGS technical specif cations. SONGS has recently become

,

i

the lead plant for this Combustion Engineering Owner's Group (CEOG) activity, when the

originallead plant decided not to pursue risk-informed TS changes at this time. With receipt of

l the SONGS supplen etal request, the staff anticipates completing the SONGS review as the

l lead pilot plant and isung the license amendment by March 31,1998. This is a change from

'

the previous date of December 31,1997.

1.3 Inspections

The NRR Inspection Program Branch (P'PB) proposals for revising core inspection procedures

have been transmitted to the appropriate NRR technical branches having responsibility for

specific core inspection procedures. Due to the large number of branches involved, completing

all individual branch concurrences is anticipated to take an additional two months. The revised

completion date for th!s task is February 1998, a chan9e from the previous date of October

1997.

1.6 Evaluate Use of PRA in Resolution of Generic issues

As part of the IPE follow-up program, the staff is in the process of identifying generic issues to

be audited. These issues are those which have been explicitly identified and addressed by the

licensee as part of the IPE process.

A report that identifies the above generic issues and staff views on the adequacy of the

proposed resolution k. In preparation. The report will provide the basis for the selection of

generic safety issues to be audited. The staff has moved the completion date for this milestone

to March 1998, in order to utilize the report in the audit process.

In addition to the above issues, RCP seal LOCA had been identified as a dominant contributor

to core damage in many PWR IPEs. The staff has a separate ongoing activity in RES to

address this issue under Generic issue 23, and will utilize IPti insights in the proposed

resolution.

- _ _ _ . _ _- .- _ __ ..

'

.

.

"

The Commissioners 6

1.7 Regulatory Effectiveness Evaluation

in a Staff Requirements Memorandum dated May 28,1997 (Attachment 2), the Commission

requested that the staff provide the scope and schedule of activities relatad to using IPE results

to assess regulatory effectiveness in resolving major safety issues. With respect to scope, the

staff identified three major safety issues for assessment. The selection had been based on

both the potential risk significance of the issue, and the fact that probabilistic techniques were

used extensively in the resolution process. These issues include:

1, Resolution of USl A-44 Station Blackout at Nuclear Power Plants

2. Resolution of USl A-45 Decay Heat Removal Reliability

3. Resolution of USl A 09 Anticipated Transient Without Scram

To evaluate the three major issues, the staff will utilizJ both representative plants, and

information contained in NUREG 1560, to audit and draw conclusions regarding regulatory

effectiveness. Information generated under Task 1.6, as deteribed above, and Task 1.10, as

described below, will also be integrated into the assessment process. These tasks may expar!d

the staff's consideration of other cafety issues and effectiveness of the regulatory process. The

staff will inform the Commission of any additional safety issues that come under consideration.

The staff plans to complete Task 1.7 by the end of December 1998, and will recommend at that

time any additional staff action.

1.8 Advanced Reactor Reviews

Doe to personnel being assigned to higher priority activities, such as risk-informed pilot

initiatives and IPE followup activities, the staff is reassessing their position regarding the

development of an SRP, especially since there are no new advanced design certification

submittals anticipated. We will provide the results of this reassessment in a future update of

the PRA implementation Plan.

1.10 Evaluation of IPE Insights

The staff has developed an IPE followup plan (Attachment 3) which describes those actions to

be taken to ensure that plant improvements warranted by 'he IPE results are, in fact, made.

This plan consists of a number of items and its implementation involves NRR, RES, and the

Regions, as described in the plan.

Section 2: Reactor Safety Research (RES)

2,1 Develop Regulatory Guides

As discussed above, the general regulatory guide and Standard Review Plan for use of PRA in

risk informed decision making for plant specific current licensing basis charges will be

transmitted to the Commission in the near future. To permit efficient incorporation of the

resolution of policy issues contained in these documents into the application-specific regulatory

guides on inservice testing, graded quality ascurance, and technical specifications, completion

_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _

,

.

,

.

'

The Commissioners, 7

of these guides has been delayed until March 31,1998, a change from their previous

completion date of December 31,1997.

2.5 IPE and IPEEE Reviews

The staff has reviewed all the 76 IPE submittals and issued staff evaluatiun reports (SERs) on

their findings to each licensee, in three of the SERs, it is indicated to the licensees that the

staff was not able to conclude that the licensee met the intent of Generic Letter 88 20 for their

plant (s). These three IPEs include Crystal River 3, Susquehanna 1&2, and Browns Ferry 3.

The licensee for Crystal River 3 has indicated their intention to submit an updated analysis

(February 1998) addressing the staff's concerns. It is anticipated that the review of this new

IPE submittal will be concluded in June 1998. Discussions are still ongoing with licensees

regarding Susquehanna 182 and Browns Ferry 3.

Section 3: Analysis and Evaluation of Operating Experience and Training (AEOD)

3.6 Staff Training

Eight PRA for Regulatory Applications courses are now planned for FY 1998 and FY 1999 to

meet the needs of the technical staff. Funding for these courses was obtained by reducing the

number of SRA series from two to one per year. Modifications to the PRA Basics for

Regulatory Applications, PRA for Technical Managers, and PRA Technology and Regulatory

Perspectives courses have been made to 'alude the final draft R.G.1.174 and SRP, Chapter

19. Seven PRA for Technical Managers courses are planned for FY 1998, which will allow two -

thirds of agency technical managers to attend.

Procurement actions for acquisition of risk monitor software are in process. The EPRI Risk and

Reliability (R&R) Workstation is the current industry standard for risk monitors Current plans

are to integrate the R&R workstation into the reactor technology and PRA technology curricula

to improve student understanding of configuration management, the importance of plant

operations to the risk profile of the plants, and use of the tool to provide insights regarding the

use of risk informed applications by the industry. The workstation will also be used to

demonstrato the capabilities and limits of this and simi!ar tools as they are being used by the

industry.

4

Section 4: Nuclear Materials and Low Level Waste Safety and Safeguards Regulation (NMSS)

44 Risk Assessment of Material Una

The target schedule for the work to develop and demonstrate a risk assessment for industrial -

gauges containing cesium 137 and cobalt-60 using PRA (and other related techniques) has

been extended from July 1998 to September 1998. The extension is due to difficulties in

obtaining data from non-licensees related to actual and potential doses to the public resulting >

from gauges which enter the scrap metal cycle.

- . - - - - -- ___ _ _ , _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,

'

,

e

1

8

The tar 9et schedule for the work to develop and demonstrate risk assessment methods for

application to medical and industrial licensee activities has been determined to be September

1998 based on scheduling of a planned Commission paper on the topic.

4.5 - Framework for Use of PRA in'Reauintina Nuclear Materials

The target schedule for providing a p for developing a framework has been extended from

October 1997 to January 1998 to permit interoffice coordination.

COORDINATION:

The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed this paper and has no legal objections to its

issuance.

M G (/ *

L. Jclseph Callan

Executive Dire

VOperations -

Attachments:

As stated

DISTRIBUTION:

Commissioners

OGC

OIG

OPA

OCA  !

ACRS

ACNW

CIO

CFO

EDO

REGIONS

SECY

._ _ __

.

.

' ATTACHMENT 1

PRA IYPLEMENTATION PLAN TASK TABLE (December 1997)

1.0 REACTOR REGULATION

Cegulatory Activity Objectives Methods Target iend Status (tNs

Schedule Offee(s) queder)

1.1 DEVELOP Standard revew plans for NRC ' Evaluate available industry NRR

STANDAHL staff to use in rak 6nformed guidance. /RES

REV!EW PLANS regulatory decison making

FOR RISK. * Develop a broad sco

INF ORM* D standard rewew plan ( ,RP)

REGULAtlON chapters and a senes of

applicaton specife standard

revew plan chapters that

correspond to industry

initiatives.

• These SRPs will be

consistent with the Regulatory

Guides developed for the

industry.

• Draft SRPs transmitted to

Commisson to issue for

puble comment

G,neral 497C'

IS T 497C

ISI E97C

TS 497C

• Final SRP transmitted to

Commmagin for approval

General 1/98 in final renew

IST 393 Changed (Note 1)

ISt 498

TS 398 Changed (Note 1)

la PILOT * Evaluate the PRA methodology * Interface with Industry NRR/RES

APPLICATIONS ond deveksp staff positons on groups

FOR RISK. emerging, rak informed

INFORMED Initiatives enciuding those * Evaluaten of appropnate

REGUL ATORY essociated with documentaton te g .10 CFR.

INITIATIVES SRP. Reg Guides, mspecten

1. Motor operated vatves procedures. and industry 1. 2,96C

codes) to edentify elements

2 IST requirements entcal to acheving the entent

2a Comanche Peak of extsting requrements. 2a 398 Changed (Note 2)

2b Paio Verde 20.TDD

' Evaluaton of industry

3 ISirequirements proposain. 3 TBD

4 Graded quality assurance. * Evaluaton of industry pilot 4. 7/98 Changed (Note 3)

program implementaten.

5 Maintenance Rule 5 E95C

' As appropnate, complete

6 Techncalspecifcatons pilot revews and tasue staff

6a Commisstun Approval findings on regulatory 6a 597C

6b. Pilot Amendments issued requests. 6b.198 Changed (Note 4)

7. Other appleatens to be

identifed later (apphcations

related to desel generator start

times and hydrogen control are

expected)

1

C = Tash prewousy comp 6eted

1

_. ._

- -. . . - _ . ~ . - . - - .

. - . - _ - - - - - ~ . - ~ - . - . . - . - . - - - - -

,

4

Cegulatory ActMty Obrectrves Methods Target lead Status (this

_, Schedule Offee(s) quener)

1.3 lNSl%',TIONS * Provide guidance on the use of * Develop IC #00 technical 697C NRR

plant-specife and genene guidance on the use of PRAs

enformaton from IFEs and other in the power reactor inspecten

plant specife PRAs. program.

• Revse IC 25t$ Appendix C 7/g7 C

on the use of PRAs in the

power reactor inspecton

program.

• Propose guklance options t097 Completed

forint ton procedures

totot to 60 59 t,stuntons

and regular rnanntenance

observatens.

• Review core inspecten 1697 Completed

procedures and propose PRA

guidance where needed

• Complete revision to

propened core .nspecten 2/98 Changed (Note 5)

procedures

• losue dran Graded OA

Inspecten Procedure 498 Changed (Note 6)

• lasue final Graded QA

inspecton Procedure 7/98 C%nged (Note 6)

• Provide PRA training for * Identify inspector functons 7/96C NRR

inspen. tors whch should utilize PRA

methods as input to

AEOD/TTO for their

development and refinement

of PRA trairung for inspectors

'

• Develop consolidated and

comprehensive 2 3 week PRA 1697 NRR/ Completed

for regulatory ap AEOD

tranng course. picatens

' Provide PRA training for Senior

Reactor Analysts (SRA) * Conduct training for

Mantenance Rule baseline &960 NRR

inspectons

' Conduct training courses

according to SRA training Ongoing AEOD

programs

• Rotatonal assignments for

SRAs to gain working Ongoing NRR/RES

exponence

' Continue to provide expertise in * Monitor the use of nsk in Ongoing NTIR

risk assessment to support inspecten reports.

regionalinspection activites and

to communcate inspecten * Develop new methodologes

program guidance and and communcate appropnate

examples of its implementatort uses of nsk insights to

regional offces

• Update inspecten

procedures as needed

• Asset regional offces as

needed

• Conduct Maintenance Rule

baseline inspectons 7/98

2

_ _ __ __ _ -- .- . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . ._ _

- _ _ - _ _ . _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _

.

.

Cogulatory ActNi'y Objectwos Methods Lead

TarDet Status (this

Scheoute Offce(s) quarter)

14 OPERATOR Monstry insf.;s from HRAs and * Reese the Knowiedge and &95C

UCENSING

NRR

PRAs (including IPEs and Atwides (K/A) Cataicos

IPEEEs) and operating (NUREGs 1122 and 1123) to

1 e ronce to ioentify possible encorporate operating .

e ncements for inclusaon an exponence and nok 6nsghts

planned revisions to guidance for

operator licensing actuttes (rvtal * Revise the Examiner 197C

and requahfcation) Standards (NUREG-1021), as

needed to reflect PRA

Insights

19 EVENT ' Continue to conduct quantitative ' Continue to evaluate 50 72 Ongoing

ASSESSMENT NRR

event assessments of reactor events using ASP models

events while at. power and dunng

low power and shutdown

conddions

• Assess the desirab6ldy and * Define the current use of risk TBD NRR

feasibihty of conducting analysis methods and insights

quantitafive nok assessments on in current event assessments

non-power reactor events

• Assess the reasibility of

developing appropnate not;

assessment models

• Develop recommendations

an the feasitulity and

desirabihty of conducting

quantitative risk asses!,ments.

1C EVALUATE USE * Audit the adequacy of hcensee

OF PRA IN

• Identrry genere safety issues 198 NRR/RES Changed (Note 7)

analyses in IPEs and IPEEEs to to be audited

RECOLUTION OF identify plant-specifc apphcability

GENERIC ISSUES of genene issues closed out * Select plants to be sudded 398

i Changed (Note 7)

based on IPE and IPEEE for each issue.

programs.

• Desende and discuss TBD

l licensees * onetyses supporting

i

issue resolution.

• Evaluate results to determine TBD

regulatory response; i e., no

action, additional acids, or

regulatory accon.

1.7 REGULATORY * Assess the effectiveness of * Develop process / guidance ongoing NRRIRES

EFFECTNENESS maior safety resue resolution for assessing regulatory

EVALUATION afforts for reducing nsk to pubic effectiveness.

health and safety.

• Apply method to essess ongoing

reduction in nsk.

Note Work in this actuity will be

Integrated with broader agency * Evaluate resulting 12,98

efforts in response to DSI 23 Changed (Note B)

effectmeness of station

blackout and ATWS rules and

Unresolved Safety issue A-45.

• Propose modifications to TBD Changed (Note 8)

resolution approaches, as

needed (SBO rule

imp' ament.h vi and RCP seal

assue).

• Identify othe Swes for ongoing Changed (Note 8)

assessment 9 4;y:gnate.

)

3

,

.

.

.

.

.

. -.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

.

4

^

Regulatory Activity Objectrves Methods Target Lead Status (this

Schedule Offee(s) quader)

1.8 ADVANCED ' Contnue staff reviews of PRAs * Continue to apph current ongoing NRR

REACTOR for design certifcation staff review process

REVIEWS appicatens

-

• Devehp SRP to support revww * Develop draft SRP to tech TBD NRR

of PRAs for design certifcatic.a Changed (Note g)

staff for rev ew and

reviews of evolutonary reactors corcurrence

(ABWR and System 80+)

• rrialize SRP. TBD

• Develop indeper. dent technical ' Reevaluate nsk-based 12/96C

analyses and critena for NRR/ RES

aspects of the techncal bases

evaluating tndustry initiatives and for EP (NUREG4396) using

petitons regarding sirnphfcaten Inssghts from NUREG-1150

of Emergency Preparedness the new source term

(EP) regulations. Informat.m from NUREG-

1465. and available plant

design and PRA informaton

for the passive and

evolutonary reactor designs.

1.g ACCIDENT * Develop generic and plant * Deveioo plant-specife A!M TBD NRR/RES

MANAGEMENT specife nsk ins s to support insghtsinformaton for

staff auditsof accident selected plants to serve as a

management programs at basis for assessing

selected plants cor p6eteness of utihty A/M

program elements (e g ,

severe accident training)

1,10 EVALUATING IPE * Use insights from the staff ' Reyww the report *1PE E97C NRR/RES

INSIGHTS TO review of IPEs to idert.N Program Perspectives on

DETERMINF potental safety, Reactor Safet

NECESSARf technical ssues,topolicy, determineanden Performance *y and

and Plant the

identify

FOLLOW UP appropnate course of action to initiallist of required staff and

ACTIVnIES resolve tnese potentialissues, industry actions (if an )

and to identify possible safety including insghts on _

enhancements.

• Revww IPE results and 6/99 NRR/RES Changed (see

interact with heensees.

Attachment 3)

• Determine appropnate * Complete backfit analysis 12<99 NRR

approach for tracks tne Changed (see

and actions.

regulatory uses of 1 PEEE Attachment 3)

results * Followup on accident SSB i

NRR/ Changed (see

management programs and regions

Iconsee-stated actions. Attachment 3)

• If sopropriate develop 1298 NRR/ RES

a h for hnking

i PEEE data bases.

4

.

.

.

, .. .

. - - - - - - - _

. _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

.

20 REACTOR SAFE *Y RESEARCH

Cogulatory Adivty Objectives Methnos Target Lead Status (this

,

Schedule Offee(s) quarter)

<

11 DEVELOP Regulatory Guides for industry to * Draft PRA Regulatory

I

REGULATORY RES/NRR

use in rak informed regulaton 3uides transnuttedto

l GUIDES ;ommesson for aproval to ,

j

issue for pubic comment.

l

General C

l IST C

t

ISI C

GOA C

TS C

• Forwl PRA Regulatory

3uides transmitted to l

Commission for approval.,

Genersi 1/98 [

in final revww

IST 398 Changed (Note 1)

isi 498

GOA 396 Changed (Note 1)

TS 398 Changed (Note 1)

33 TECHNICAL * Provide techn. cal support to * Continue to provide ad hoc Continuing

SUPPORT agency users of risk RES

technical support to agency

assesernent in the form of PRA users

support for nak based

} regulaten activitwo, techncal * Expand the database of PRA Continuing

reviews, essue nok nodels available for staff use,

assessments, statist. cal expand the scope of avadabie

analyses, and aevelop 'nodels to include external event

guidance for agency uses of nok and low power and shutdown

assessment accidents, and refine the tools

weded to use these models, and

ontinue maintenance and user

w for SAPHIRE and

CS computer codes

• Support agency efforts in

'eactor safety improvements in Continuing

'ormer Soviet Union countnes.

3.3 SUPPORT FOR ' Modify 10 CFR 52 and develop * Develop draft guidance and

NRf1 STANDARD 5/98 RES

. Mance on the use of updated 'une.

REACTOR PRA ". tAs beyond denen cenirmation

REVIEWS (as desenbod in SECY 93487). * Solett pubic comment. 11/98

• Finales staff guidance and 12,99

'ulo =

,

24 METHODS * Devoiop, demonstrate, maintain. * Develoo and demonstrate 9/98

DEVELOPMENT and ensure the quality of RES

AND Tiethods for including aging

methods for performina, effects in PRAs.

DEMONSTRATION revww1ng, and ussng F4tAs

and related techniques for * Develop and demonstrate 9<98

,

existing reactor designs. Tethods for including human

errors of commissen in PRAs.

• Develop and comonstrate TBD

netfods to incorporate

gnaational performance into

• Develop and demonstrate 9/96

methods for flru nsk analysis.

• Develop and demonstrate 6/99

nothods for assessing

'ehability/nsk of digital

systems

5

,. .

. .. . .

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

.

.

'

Cegulatory Actrvity Objectives Methods Target Lead Status (this

Schedule Office (s) quarter)

15 IPE ANDIPEEE * To evaluate IPE/IEEE * Complete revews of IPE TBD

REV?EWS RES Changed (Note 10)

submittats to obtain reasonable 6ubmittals.

assurance that the hcensee has

adequately anatyzed the * Complete reviews of IPEEE 699

piant desgn and operations to bubmrttais

discovervulnersbees andto

document the sgnificant safety * Continue regionat IPE C

insghts resulting from yesentations

IPEstPEEEs

'lasue IPE insghts report for 10/96C

xiblic comment.

• FinalIPE 6nsghts report 9S7 Completed

• losue prehminary IPEEE 1/98 in final review

insghts report =,

• Initiate revew of eight 6/98 New milestone

additionalIPEEE submittals

• Comp 6ete contractor 6,98 New milestone

avsluations on twelve IPEEE

wbmittals

• lasue draft IPEEE insghts 699 New milestone

report for comment

• lasue final IPEEE insghts 1299

oport

2.6 GENERIC ISSUES ' To conduct genene safety issue * Continue to pnortize and

PROGRAM ma Continuing RES

ment activites, eserve genenc issues

inct ing pnorit&tation, resolution,

and documentation, for issues

relating to currently rating

reactors. for need

reactors as appropnate, and for

development or revtsion of

associated r ulat and

standards 6n me a

17 NEl INITIATIVE TO * Review NElinstetive to conduct * Agree on ground rules for

CONDUCT three pilot "whole plant"

198 RES/NRR

study.

"WHOLE PLANT * nsk intormed studes of

RISK STUDY requirements vs nsk and cost * Complete study TBD

2.8 PRA STANDARDS * work with industry to develop * Initiate actrvity. 9S7C RES

DEVELOPMENT national consensus standard for

PRA scope and quality * Finalize standard. TBD

19 LOW POWER AND * Collect studes of LP&S nsk as * Collect and review existing

SHUTDOWN 9S8 RES

a benchmark for assessi the .P&S nsk information (domestic

BENCHMARK need for further staff es and foregn).

RISK STUDY

• Instete additional work. 10S8

l

l 110 SAFETY OOAL 'Assesa need to revtse

REVISION Commissiorfs Safety Goalto *Initete disct=sion with ACRS 2/98 RES

l

i

make core damage frequency a * Recommendation to 198

fundame ital goal and make other Dmmission

changer,,

l

6

,

_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ - - _ - _ _ _ - - - _ .-. .

.. . . . . .

.

'

,

.

3 0 ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF OPERATING EXPERIENCE, AND TRAINING

Regulatory Otyctives Methods Target Lead Status (t*us

Activity Schedule Offee quarter)

3.9 RISK BASED * Use reactor opeisting * Trend performance of nsk. 1198 AEOD

TRENDS AND exponence data to assess the important components

PATTERNS trends and pottems in ooiapment,

ANALYSIS systems, inrtistire " .. hurrun * Trend performance of nsk. 1Z98

performance, s. ant important systems.

accxlent sequence.

.

l

• Trend fr of nsk. 3,98  !

6mportant events

• Trend human performance TBD

for rehatuity charactenstes

• Evaluate the effectiveness of * Trend reactor operating As Needed AEOD

teensee actons taken to exponence associated with

resolve nok signifcant safety specife safety issues and

losues assess nsk impications as a

measure of safety

performance

• Develop trending methods and * Develop standard trending C AEOD

special databases for use in and statistical anatysis

AEOD trending activttes and for procedures for 6dentified areas

PRA ap for rehatulity and statistcal

offees. pications in other NRC apphcations.

• Develop special software CCF.C

and databases (e g common Penode

cause failure)for use in updates

trending analys,s and PRA

studies

32 ACCIDENT * Ide, tify and rank nsk * Screen and analyze LERs, Ongoing AEOD

SEQUENCE sgnifcance of operatonal AITs, llTs. and events

PRECURSOR events identifed from etner sources

(ASP) PROGRAM to obtain ASP events.

• Perform independent revew Annual AEOD

of each ASP analyses, report,

Licensees and NRC staff peer Ongoing

review of each analysis.

• Complete quauty assurance

of Rev. 2 simphred piant 3,97C RES

specife models

• Complete feasitxl tudy for

low and shut 11/96C RES

• Complete initial containment

performance and C RES

consequence models.

• Compte development of the

Level 43 models 7/99 RES

• s Comge plant

the Rev. 3

specirc 11K)1 RES

• Complete extemal event

models for fire and earthquake TBD RES

• Complete low

power / shutdown models

TBD RES

• Provide supplemental * Share ASP analyses and Annual rpt AEOD

information on plant specife insights with other NRC

performance. offces and Regions.

,

7

e x

.

.

Regulatory Objectives Aethods Target Lead

ActMtf Status (this

Schedule Offee guarter)

33 tNDUSTRY 8t!SK * Provide a rnessure of industry * Develop program plan whch C AEOD

TRENDS nsk that es as complete as integrates NRR, RES and

possible to oetermine whether AEOD actMties whch use

not is increasing. decreasing, or desgn and operating

remaining constant over time exponence to assess the

emphed level of rtsk and how ll

es changing

• Update plan for nsk based Changed

ana!yss of reactor operating (Note 11)

exponence

• Imp 6ement program plan 6/99

elements whch willinclude

piard. specifc models and

insghts from IPEs,

component and system

relaatulity data, and other nsa.

important :;esgn and

operational data in an

integrated frame work to

scally evaluate industry

30 RISK BASED ' Estabish a comprehenstve set * Identify new or improved C

PERFORMANCE of performance indicators and AEOD

nsk-based Pls whch use

INDICATORS supplementary cerformance component aN system

rneasures whch are more rehabdity models & human and

clow*e related to nsk ar.d provide organizational performance

bolo e. sty indcation and evaluation methods

con 9mation of plant performance

problems. * Develop and test candidate

Pis/ performance measurts. 900

• Implement nak-based Pts

with Commission approval 101

35 COMPILE * Compile operating exponence * Manage and maintain SCSS

OPERATING Ongoing AEOD

lnformation In database systems and the PI data base, provice

EXPERIENCE suitable for uantitative rehatxlity oversjght and access to

DATA and rak ana is appications. NPRUS/ EPIX, obtain INPO's

Information Id be scrutable SSPl, compile IPE failure

to the source at the event level to data, collect plant-specife

i the exter.t practical and be rehability and availatxiety data.

!

suffcient for estimatino reinatxlity

and avestatxhty parameters for * Develop, manage, and Ongoing

NRC appleations maintain agency ostabases for

rahatxutyravailatulity data

(equipment performance

initiating events, CCF, AhP,

and human performance

data).

• Determine need to revise 698

LER rule to eliminate

unnecessary and less safety.

sgnifcant reporting

• Determine need to revise 6/98

reporting rules and to better

capture ASP, CCF, and

human performance events.

• Pubhsh revised LER rule. 10/9C

8

s 2 -, -

_ ____ ____ ___ _ _ _ __ _ _ _

.'

.

__

Regulatory Obrectrves Methods Target Lead

Actrvey Status Ohis ,

Schedule Offce quarter) t

i

36 STAFF TRAINING ' Present PRA cumculum as * Continue current cWacts to Ongoing AEOD

presently scheduled for FY present courses es

1998 scheduled.

• Maintain current reactor

technology courses that

include PMA ensghts and

apphcations

courses wa

• Rowew cunent PRA course

matenal to ensure consistency

wth Appendix C

• Develop and present Appendix * Prepare course materal C RES/AEOD

C training courses based on Appendix C.

• Present courses on C

Appendir C

• Determine staff requirements * Review JTAs performed to C AEOD

for traini} retuding date.

ty t a * Perform re seentatrve JTAs C

for staff ens (JTA Pilot

Program .

• Evaluate staff trainino C

requirements as identiTod in

the PRA im mentation Plan

and the Tec I Training

Needs Survey (Phase 2) and

incorporate them into the

training requerernents analysis.

• Analyze the results of the

JTA Pilot Program and C

determine requirements for

additional JTAs.

• Complete JTAs for other

staff posatons as needed. C

• Sohcit a review of the

proposed training C

requirements

• FAalize the requirements.

C

• Reese current PRA cumculum * Prepare new courses to Ongoing AEOD

and develop new training meet identified needs.

program to fulfill 6dentifed staff

neeos. * Rewse current PRA courses Ongoing

i

to meet identifed needs.

f

• Rewse current and New

PRA course to include Reg - 9/97C

Guide and SRP information

• Revise current reactor

technology courses as Ongoing ,

necessary to include

additional PRA Insigtds and

applications

• Present revised PRA training * Estabirah contracts for Ongoing AEOD

curnculum. presentata:.of new PRA

curnculum.

• Present revised reactor Ongoing

technoicgy courses.

rove courses based on Ongoing

9

- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - - _ _ -

.

.

4 0 NUCLEAR MATERIALS AND LOW. LEVEL WASTE SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS REGULATION

Regulatory ActMty Objectives Methods Target Lead Status (this

Schecale Offee(s) quarter)

4.1 VAllDATE RISK * Validate nsk anatysis * Hold a workshop consisting BS4 NMSS

ANALYSIS metxx3 ology developed to assess of experte si PRA and HRA to C

METHODOLOGY the relative profile or most hkoty examine existing work and to

DEVELOPEDTO contnbutors to misedministration provide recommendations for )

I

ASSESS MOST for the gamma stereotecte dence further methodologea! I

LIKELY FAILURE (gemma knife) development.

MODES AND

HUMAN * Examine the use of Monte 9/95

PERFORMANCE Carlo simulaten and its C

IN THE USE OF apphcation to relative nsk

INDUSTRIAL AND profding

MEDICAL

RADIATION * Examins the use of expert SSS

DEVICES judgement in developing error C

rates and consequence

measures

• Continue the development of * Develop functionalty based TBD RES/

the relative nsk methodology, with genene event trees NMSS

the additen of event tree

modehng of the trachvtherapy

remote after loader '

• Extend the appicaten of the ' Develop genere nsk TBD

metnodology and as further RES/

approaches. NMSS

development into additional

devees. including teletherspy

and the pulsed high dose rate

after loader

! 48 CONTINUE USE * Develop decisen enterna to * Conduct enhanced

OF RISK BS4 PR RES/NMSS

support reculatory decision partcipatory rulemaking to C

ASSESSMENT OF making tha't incorporates both establish radmiogeal entena

ALLOWABLE Final Rule

determaste end nsbbesed for decon.missoning nuclear Pubhshed

RADIATION engineenng judgement. sites; techncal e"prart for

RELEASES AND 7/97 C

rulemaking includtri

DOSES comprehenstve nskbood

ASSOCIATED assessment of resittual

WITH LOW LEVEL contamination.

RADIOACTIVE

WASTE AND * Develop uidance for

REstDUAL 2/98

ACTMTY.

I ng the radologeal

er ena for iconse terminston..

• Work wtth DOE and EPA to

the extent practcable to Ongoing

develop common approaches,

assumptons, and models for

evaluating nsks and attemative

remediaton methodologies

(nsk harmontraton)

4.3 DEVELOP * Develop a Branch Techncal * Solicit pubhc comments 5/97 C. NMSS/RES

GUIDANCE FOR Positen on conducting a

THE REVIEW OF Performance Assessment of a

RISK LLW disposal facdity * Pubhsh final Branch TBD,

ASSOCIATED Techncal Positen

WITH WASTE Dependent

REPOSITORIES on

Resources

10

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . .

_. . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ . .

.

..

.

.

RegulWory ActMty Obrectrves Methods Target Lead Status (tfus

Schedule Offee(s) cuarter)

44 RISK * Develop and demonstrate a nsk * Develop and demonstrate

ASSESSMENT OF B98 Changed (Note 12)

assessment for Industnal gauges methods for determining the

MATERIAL USES containing cessum-137 and nok associated with industnli

cobalt-60 using PRA and other gauges containing cessum..J7

related techrwques and cobalt 60

• The assessment should allow * Fnal report as NUREG 12s96

for mcdfcaton based on Changed (Note 12)

changes m regulatory * Wcrkin0 Group with &96

requrements Changed (Note 13)

contractor assetance to

identify and document a

• Use empircal data as much as t.achnical basis for a risk.

practcatde informed approach to the

regulaton of nuclear

• Develop and demonstrate nsk byproduct matenal, and to

assessment rnethods for develop plans for a graded

appicaten to medcal and approach to nuclear byproduct

industnel heensee actmtes matenal regulation based on

nsk mformaton

45 FRAMEWORK * develop a framework for * Provxkt plan for developing 1/98 NMSS Changed (Note 14)

FOR USE OF PRA applying PRA to nuclear matenal framework

IN REGULATING uses, similar to the one

NUCLEAR deve g'ed for reactor regulation * Complete framework

MATERIALS TBD

(SECY-95-280), where

appropnate.

!

'

1

11

.

_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - - - _ - _ - - _ - - - - -

.

.

, 5.0 HIGH LEVEL NUCLEAR WASTE REGULATION

Cogulatory ActNRy ObjectNes Methods Target Lead Status (this

Schedule Offee(s) cuarter)

51 REGULATION OF * Develop guidance for the NRC * Assist the staff in pre- Ongoing NMSS {

HIGH-LEVEL WASTE and CNWRA staffs in the use of hcensing actNtes and in

PA to evaluate the safety of HLW Icense appicaten revews

programs

• Develop a techncal

assessment capattityin totab

system and subsystem PA for

use in hcensing and pre- j

-

licensing revews.

• Combine specialized

techncal drsciplines (earth

scences and engineer )

with those of s,ystem__ rs ,

i

to improve ...u my.

_

• Idenhfy agnifcant events, * Perform sensitNtty studes Ongoing NMSS

processes, and parameters of key techncallasues ussng

effecting total system iterative performance

performance

assessment (IPA)

• Use PA and PSA methods, * Assist the staff to maintain Ongoing

results and insignts to evaluate NMSS

and to refine the regulatory

proposed change s to regulatons structure in HLW disposal

gove the ootential repository regulaticas that pertain to PA.

at Yucca ntain.

i

• Apply IPA analyses to advise

EPA in its development of a

l Yucca Mountain regulaten

1

[

~ * Apply IPA enalyses to

develop a site-specife

regulation for a Yucca

Mountain site

• Continue PA activites dunng * Provide guidance to the Ongr ng NMSS

interactions with DOE dunng the DOE on site charactenzation

pre-heensing phase of repository requirements ongoing oesign

development, site work, and hcensing issues

charactenzaton, and repository important to the DOE's

design. development of a complete

,

t

and high-quality license

appleation.

• Compare results of NRC's

Iterstrve performance

assessment to DOE's VA to

identify major

differences /rssues.

3.3 APPLY PRA TO * Demonstrate methods for PRA * P opere user needs letter to

SPENT FUEL of spent fuel storage facihtes. 497C RUS/NMSS

RES.

STORAGE

FACILITIES

• Conduct PRA of dry cask 9<99

storage.

3.3 CONTINUE USE OF *

Use PRA methods, results, and * t,pdate the database on

RISK ASSESSMENT End cf FY NMSS

insights to evaluate regulations transportation of raccactive 99

IN SUPPORT OF governing the transportation of

RADICACTIVE matenals for future

radcactive matenal. appications

MATERIAL

TRANSPC9TATION * Revalidate the results of &99

NUREG-0170 for spent fuel

shipment nsk estimates.

12

v '

A

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

'

.

4

, Notes

1. The general regulatory guide and btandard Review Plan for use of PRA in plant-specific

current licensing basis changes will be transmitted to the Commission in the near future,

To permit efficient incorporation of the resolution of policy issues contained in these

documents into the application-specific regulatory guides and SRP sections, completion of

these guides and sections has been delayed until March 31,1998, a change from their

previous completion date of December 31,1997.

2. The staffs RI IST team is currently working on a draft SE for the Comanche Peak RI-IST

program. The staff and TU Electric have been actively interacting through meetings and

discussions as the licensee develops a RI IST program description that is sufficiently

detailed and consistent with the draft Rl IST guidance provided in DG 1062. TU Electric

has indicated that it would be able to complete a daft revision to their RI IST Program

Description by the end of January 1998. The staff will continue to develop a draft SE

based on the licensee's responses to the staffs RAls and discussions with the licensee.

Assuming TU Electric finalizes its RI IST Program Description by mid February 1998, the

staff anticipates having a completed SE to the Commission on the proposed RI IST

program for Comanche Peak in March 1998.

3. The completion date for the Graded Quality Assurance pilot application has been revised to

July 1998 to reflect the anticipated issuance date of the final GOA inspection guidance.

4. With respect to the risk-informed TS pilot program, the staf' received a supplemental

amendment request from SONGS in early January 1998 tc put the configuration risk

management program (CRMP) description into the SONGS TS. The staff will review the

CRMP and, if acceptable, issue the risk-informed TS amendments for SONGS. Once

similar supplemental amendment requests are received frora the remaining pilot licensees,

the staff willissue those pilot plant amendments. Based on information from the CEOG,

the staff expects to receive the majority of the supplemental pilot amendment requests in

the first quarter of 1998. With receipt of the SONGS supplemental request, the staff

anticipates completing the SONGS review as the lead pilot plar:t and issue the amendment

by March 31,1998. This is a change from the previous date of December 31,1997, for

issuance of the lead pilot plant amendment, because of the decision by the originallead

plant not to oursue risk-informed TS changes at this time.

5. The NRR Intipection Program Branch proposals for revising core inspection procedures

have been transmitted to the appropriate NRR technical branches having responsibility for

l specific core inspection procedures. Due to the large number of branches involved,

completing all indivi :ual branch concunences is anticipated to take an additional two

months. The revised completion date for this task is February 1998.

6 A deci ion has been reached to generate the risk-informed regulatory documents in a

sequential manner, with the application specific guidance following the general regulatory

guide and standard review plan. Under this schedule, the regulatory guide for graded QA

will be finalized by the end of March 1998. Since the graded QA inspection procedure will

be dependent upon the technical content of the companion regulatory guide, the draft

graded QA Inspection Procedure will be prepared by April 1998 and finalized in July 1998

after having received appropriate NRC reviews.

,

13

a

- _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

-.

.

7.

' As part of the IPE follow-up program, the staff is in the process of identifying generic issues

to be audited. These issues will be those which have been explic.itly identified and

addressed by the licensee as part of the IPE process.

A report that identifies the above generic issues and staff views on the adequar.,y of the

proposed resolution is under preparation. The report will provide the basis for the selection

of generic safety issues to be audited and selected plants. The staff has moved the

completion date for this milestone to March 1998, in order to utilize the report in the audit

process.

In addition to the .uove issues, RCP seal LOCA had been identified as a dominant

contributor to core damage frequency in many PWR IPEs. The staff has a separate

ongoing activity in RES to address this issue under Generic Safety issue 23, and will utilize

IPE insights in the proposed resolution.

8. In at SRM (9700207) datsd May 28,1997, the Commission requested that the staff

proviie the scooe and Nhedule of activities related to using IPE results to assess

regulatory effectianc.s in resolving major safety issues. . lith respect to scope, the staff

identified three major safety issues for assessment. The selection had been based on both

!

the potential nsk significance of the issue, and the fact that probabilistic techniques were

used extensively in the resolution process. These issues include:

1. Resolution of USI A-44 Station Blackout at Nuclear Power Plants

2. Resolution of USI A-45 Decay Heat Removal Reliability

3. Resolution of USI A-09 Anticipated Transient Without Scram

To evaluate the three major issues, the staff will utilize both representative plants, and

information contained in NUREG-1560, to audit and draw conclusions regarding regulatory

effectiveness. Information generated under Task 1.6 and Task 1.10 will also be integrated

into the assessment process. In particular, the RCP seal LOCA and station blackout

issues are closely related; the station bisckout analysis in this activity willincorporate the

results of the RES seal LOCA analysis discussed in Note 7.

These tasks may expand the staff's consideration cf other safety issues and effectiveness

of the regulatory process. The staff willinform the Commission of any additional safety

issues that come under consideration. The staff plans to complete it analysin of the three

issues by the end of December 1998, and will recommend ai that time any additional staff

action.

9.

Due to personnel being assigned to higher priority activities, such as risk-informed pilot

initiatives and IPE followup activities, the staff is reassessing their position regarding the

development of an SRP, especially since there are no new advanced design certification

submittals anticipated.

10.

The staff has reviewed all the 76 IPE submittals and issued staff evaluation reports (SERs)

on their findings to each licensee. In three of the SERs, it is indicated to the licensees that

the staff was not able to conclude that the licensee met the intent of Generic Letter 88-20

for their plant (s). These three IPEs include Crystal River 3, Susquehanna 1&2, and

Browns Ferry 3. The licensee for Crystal River 3 nas indicated their intention to submit an

updated analysis (February ;998) addressing the staffs concerns, it is anticipated that the

14

___ - _ __- ____ _ ___ _____

.

t

review of this new IPE submittal will be concluded in June 1998. Discussions are still

ongoing wit! licensees regarding Susquehanna 1&2 and Browns Ferry 3.

.

11. This 'ask has been subsumed into the office operating plan, which is periodically updated.

12. The target schedule for the work to develop and demonstrate a risk assessment for

industrial gauges containing ces;um 137 and cobalt-60 using PRA (and other related

techniques) has been extended from July 1998 to September 1998. The extension is due

to difficulties in obtaining data from non-licensees related to actual and potential doses to

the public resulting from gauges which enter the scrap metal cycle.

13. The target schedule for the work to develop and demonstrate risk assessment methods for

app!ication to medical and industrial licensee activities has been determined to be

September 1998 based on scheduling of a planned Commission paper on the topic.

14. The target schedule for providing a plan for developing a framework has been extended

from October 1997 to December 1997 to permit interoffice coordination.

l

I

15

. - -

,

.

.

4

Attachment 2

Sta# Requirements Memorandum

dated May 28,1997

i

i

P

/.ES/ DST TEL 301-415-5062 Jur. 03'97 11:15 No.007 P.03

.

Acticn (Morrison, Nu/

Collins. NRR

• • • t

.

UNffED 5MES Cygg ,Cg]]gn

-

g NUCLEAR Rt0UL.AT0ftY C04mm8840N Jon]en

y *ApesGTon.or same Thotpson

% AN RESvuNse, FLk:AbE

( -

May 28, 1997 REFER TO g g 70507

Blahe

Ross, AE0D

!

MEMORANDUM 70: L. Joseph Callan .

Exec # iv' Director for Operationa

FROM:

k(%

Johr v. Hoyle, Secretary

~

SUBJECT: STAFF REQUIREMENTS - ERIEFING ON IPE INSIGHT

REPORT, 2:00 P.M WEDNESn&V, M&V 7, 1997.

COMMISSIOhT.RS' CCNFERENCE ROOM, ONE WHITE

FLINT NORTH, ROCXV:LLE, MARYLAND (OPEN To

-

PUBLIC ATTENDANCE)

.-

The countiwmivu was briefed by the NRC stef f en the Individual

Flant Examination (IPE) insight report. The Comission asked the

st a:l' to expedite activhium in .Le !vilu lug areas: (U using

IPE results to prioritize inspection activities: (2) improving

regional capabilities for the use of PRA and risk insights; and

(3) providin ted inspecttr training,

fEDO) MES)j iSECT suspense: wu'p3o 9700206

The Commission asked the stait to provice tne scopte anc scr.edule

of activities relar.ed to using IPE results to assess regulatory

effectiveness in resolving r.ager safety issues. The comissien

stacifically reqv.2ted that the staff provide an estimate cf the

average cost to respond to the Staticn Blackout. rule per persen-

rem averted 1.n achieving an average reduction in core damage

frequency of 2E-5/RY. These activities should be coordinated

with the regulatory effettiveness organization,

fEBO-) (NRR) (SECY suspense: 6/27/97) 9700207

After the IPE database has been placed on the Internet, the staff

should consider allowing licensees to update their IDES

voluntarily to reflect changer i.a plant configuration.

(RES)

-

,

.

.

.

. , , .

-

_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ..

.

-d

Attachment 3

lPE Follo36222matarn

The IPE program was initiated to have licensees evaluato the;r plants for vulnerabilities to

severe accidents and to take actions to correct these vulnerabilities, where appropriate. In this

process it was recognized that licensees would gain an appreciation of their plant's overall

susceptibility to severe accidents which would help in developing accident management

tirategies and programs. In this regard the IPE pregam was principally for the benefit o'

licensees. Now, however, as a result of completion of the IPE reviews (except for the three

plants where comn!stion is still under discussion) and insights report (NUREG-1560), the staff is

now in a position to utilize these results to follow up and see if:

-

any additional plant specific improvements are warranted,

-

licensees have followed through on the actions they indicated they were taking as a

result of their IPE, and

-

any additional generic regulatory activities should be undertaken.

To accomplish this the staff has developed an IPE followup program which willinvolve the

efforts of RES, NRR and the Regions. The followup program will consist of the following

sctivities:

1

1) reviewing the iPE results for risk significant items that may warrant further attention.

Examples of the screening criteria for selection of plants and items for additional

followup are as follows:

-

any contributor with a aCDF' >10-5/ RY or

-

any contributor with a 6LERF2 >104/RY

2) reviewing the IPE results for similar plants and whether or not actions taken by some

l'

plants are applicable to other plants of similar design,

{

3) reviewing licensee responses to specific containment performance improvement items

identified in the IPE generic letter supplements to see if additional actions are

warranted,

4) reviewing the basis for very low risk contributors that appear to be out of line with other

plants (i.e., was the analysis overly optimistic and should further action be taken?),

5) assessing licensee stated actions (e.g., safety enhancements) resulting from their IPE to

see if, in fact, they have been completed,

' Core Damage Frequency

8 Large Early Release Frequency

1

. _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ .

,

9

'

2

6) assessing licensee accident management programs to see if, in fact, they reflect the

results, assumptions and actions from the IPE. This action will be carried out through

the staff assessment of the licensee's Severe Accident Management Guidelines

(SAMG).

7) assessing the results for their implications for the resolution of generic safety issues or

other major safety issues.

These activities are in addition to actions already underway to incorporate '.ne IPE insights into

the NRC inspection program.

Implementation of this program will consist of RES providing to NRR information related tc

activities 1 through 4 above with NRR then discussing with licensees the appropriateness of

additional actions. This will provide licensees an opportunity to provide updated information

related to these activities and ultimatcly for NRR to take regulatory action, if such action is

warranted and can be justified by the backfit rule. Activities 5 and 6 will be performed by NRR, ,

with Regional followup as necessary. Activity 7 is addressed by items 1.6 and 1.7 of the PRA

Implementation Plan.

High priority issues identified in the screening process will be pursued as they are identified.

Dates for accomplishing these activities relative to IPE followup are:

.

RES supply information to NRR on items 1-4 12/98

.

NRR interact with licensees on appropriateness 6/99

of additional actions for items 1-4

.

Backfit analysis and actions complete 12/99

.

Item 5, identify items for Regional followup 9/98

.

Item 6, identification of IPE insights for Se'. sre Accident 9/98

Management Guidelines

The specific IPEEE followup schedule will be developed following the completion of the IPEEE 4

reviews.

. -