Briefing on Results of the Agency Action Review Meeting Commission - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
briefing on results of the agency action review meeting
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Briefing on Results of the Agency Action Review Meeting Commission - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

May 18, 2023 204 likes •652 views

Briefing on Results of the Agency Action Review Meeting Commission Meeting June 19, 2018 Agency Action Review Meeting Objectives Review licensees with performance issues Review Nuclear Materials and Waste Safety Program

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Briefing on Results of the Agency Action Review Meeting

  • Commission Meeting
  • June 19, 2018
slide-2
SLIDE 2

Agency Action Review Meeting Objectives

  • Review licensees with performance

issues

  • Review Nuclear Materials and Waste

Safety Program Performance

  • Review effectiveness of the Reactor

Oversight Process and the Construction Reactor Oversight Process

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Agenda

  • Reactor Licensee Discussions
  • Nuclear Materials and Waste Safety

Program Performance

  • Reactor Oversight Process Program

Performance

  • Construction Inspection and

Operational Program Performance

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Review of Performance at Pilgrim

David Lew Acting Regional Administrator, RI

4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Key Messages

  • Pilgrim continued to operate safely

and securely in 2017

  • Improvement noted but sustainability

remains to be assessed

  • Pilgrim remains in Column 4 and will

continue to receive enhanced

  • versight

5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Pilgrim Entered Column 4 in 2015

  • Degraded Cornerstone for more than

five quarters for tripping both scram performance indicators and a failed 95002

  • White finding in September 2015 for

not identifying and correcting a safety relief valve (SRV) failure

6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

NRC Heightened Oversight Activities

  • NRC completed review of Pilgrim’s

Recovery Plan

  • Region I issued Confirmatory Action

Letter (CAL) on August 2, 2017

  • CAL inspections in progress

–Five quarterly team inspections scheduled –More scheduled, if warranted

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

NRC Noted Progress in Pilgrim’s Recovery

  • Conservative decision making
  • Improved operator performance
  • Increased margins to performance

indicators thresholds

8

slide-9
SLIDE 9

NRC’s CAL Inspections Are Underway

  • Procedure quality
  • Safety Relief Valve (SRV) White finding
  • Human performance

–Operability Determinations and Functionality Assessments –Procedure Use and Adherence

  • Corrective Action Program

9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Substantial NRC Reviews of CAL Action Items Remain

  • Operations standards and site

leadership (includes risk-recognition and decision-making)

  • Engineering programs and equipment

performance (includes work management)

  • Nuclear safety culture

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

NRC Oversight Accounts for Planned Pilgrim Shutdown

  • NRC’s oversight strategy considers

potential issues stemming from announced permanent shutdowns

  • Enhanced quarterly assessments

include both Column 4 and permanent shutdown strategies

  • Insights on Pilgrim’s performance
  • NRC will continue to monitor

performance and adjust oversight as shutdown nears

11

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Next Steps

  • Implement and leverage Baseline

Inspection Program flexibilities

  • Continue to perform quarterly CAL

follow-up team Inspections

  • Supplement Resident staff on an as

needed bases

  • Maintain increased NRC management
  • versight and site visits

12

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Review of Performance at Arkansas Nuclear One

Scott A. Morris Deputy Regional Administrator, RIV

13

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Key Messages

  • ANO continued to operate safely and

securely in 2017

  • Performance at ANO has improved
  • Confirmatory Action Letter closed
  • ANO returned to column 1 oversight
  • ANO implementing longer-term actions

to sustain improvements

14

slide-15
SLIDE 15

ANO Entered Column 4 in 2015

  • Yellow finding: Stator drop event (1Q14)
  • Yellow finding: Flood protection

deficiencies (3Q14)

  • White performance indicator (Unit 2):

Unplanned scrams

15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

NRC Heightened Oversight Activities

  • Quarterly Confirmatory Action Letter

follow-up inspections

  • Dedicated branch for ANO oversight
  • Numerous management site visits
  • Several senior leadership meetings

16

slide-17
SLIDE 17

NRC’s CAL Inspections Focused on Six Principal Areas

  • Yellow findings
  • Corrective Action Program
  • Human performance
  • Equipment and engineering programs
  • Safety culture
  • Service water system

17

slide-18
SLIDE 18

NRC Inspections Verified Improved Performance

  • Comprehensive response to Yellow

findings

  • Better equipment reliability and safety

margins

  • Enhanced site staffing and training
  • Improved Corrective Action Program

18

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Inspections Verified Improved Performance (cont.)

  • Improved nuclear safety culture
  • Reinforced nuclear fundamentals
  • Improved procedure adherence and

quality

  • Established “operations-led”

philosophy

19

slide-20
SLIDE 20

ANO Working to Sustain Performance Improvements

  • Focusing on work management
  • Upgrading procedures and work

instructions

  • Upgrading plant equipment (e.g.,

service water system)

  • Developing plant staff

20

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Conclusions

  • All CAL actions verified complete and
  • bjectives met
  • Performance at ANO has improved

and appears sustainable

  • ANO returned to Column 1 oversight

21

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Nuclear Materials and Waste Safety Program Performance

Scott Moore, Deputy Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

22

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Mature Performance Evaluation Process

  • Systematic review to identify

significant: –Operational performance trends –Licensee performance issues –NRC program issues/gaps

23

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Well-defined Performance Criteria

  • Trending review of NMED, and Fuel

Cycle Operating Experience data

  • Abnormal Occurrences (AOs)
  • Significant enforcement actions
  • Strategic goals and performance

measures

24

slide-25
SLIDE 25

No Significant Performance Trends Identified

  • 410 NMED events
  • 5 Fuel Cycle

events

  • 11 AOs
  • 1 Special Event

Study on Y-90

  • Event numbers

small compared to the millions of uses

Figure 1. All NMED Events (4,938 total) from SECY 18-0048, “Annual Report to the Commission on Licensee Performance in the Nuclear Materials and Waste Safety Program Fiscal Year 2017”

779 515 462 431 476 421 517 495 432 410

577 411 378 354 398 350 426 406 362 347 202 104 84 77 78 71 91 89 70 63

250 500 750 1000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Number of Events Fiscal Year

NRC AS Total

25

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Met Strategic Goals

  • No nuclear materials licensees met

the AARM discussion criteria

  • Materials program met safety and

security performance metrics

  • No significant trending issues

identified

  • No significant NRC program issues

identified

26

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Reactor Oversight Process Self-Assessment

Mike King, Deputy Director Division of Inspection and Regional Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

27

slide-28
SLIDE 28

CY 2017 ROP Self-Assessment Supported the NRC’s Strategic Goals

Self- Assessment Elements 2016 2017 2018 2019 Metrics Yes Yes Yes Yes Program Evaluations Yes Yes Yes Yes Monitor ROP Revisions Yes Yes Yes Yes Effectiveness Reviews Yes Yes Yes Yes Regional Peer Reviews Yes Yes Focused Assessments Yes Yes Yes Baseline IP Assessments Yes Yes

Element 1 Element 2 Element 3

28

slide-29
SLIDE 29

CY 2017 ROP Self-Assessment Confirmed That the ROP was Effective

  • ROP provided effective oversight and

supported the NRC’s mission and strategic goals

  • There are 26 ROP performance

metrics: –22 metrics were Green in CY 2017 –Three were red and one was yellow, highlighting areas for focus

  • CY 2017 focused assessment:

–Engineering inspections

29

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Quadrennial Cycle with Flexible Engineering Focused Inspections

Comprehensive Engineering Team Inspection

BI: 350 Hours Resources: 5 Inspectors / 2 Contractors Onsite Presence: 2 Weeks

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Focused Engineering Inspection #1

BI: 210 Hours Resources: 3 Inspectors Onsite Presence: 2 Weeks

Focused Engineering Inspection #2

BI: 210 Hours Resources: 3 Inspectors Onsite Presence: 2 Weeks

Focused Engineering Inspection #3

BI: 210 Hours Resources: 3 Inspectors Onsite Presence: 2 Weeks

Year 4

Inservice Inspection

BI: 30 - 100 Hours Resources: 1-2 Inspectors Onsite Presence: 1-2 Week(s)

Inservice Inspection

BI: 30 - 100 Hours Resources: 1-2 Inspectors Onsite Presence: 1-2 Week(s)

30

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Implementing Enhancements To the Engineering Inspection Program

  • Finalize working group

recommendations (completed)

  • Commission paper (SECY)(summer 2018)
  • Develop new inspection procedures

(July - August 2018)

  • Ensure reliability of inspection guidance

(fall/winter 2018)

  • Implement approved ROP changes

(CY 2020)

31

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Plans for CY 2018 ROP Self- Assessment

Self- Assessment Elements 2016 2017 2018 2019 Metrics Yes Yes Yes Yes Program Evaluations Yes Yes Yes Yes Monitor ROP Revisions Yes Yes Yes Yes Effectiveness Reviews Yes Yes Yes Yes Regional Peer Reviews Yes Yes Focused Assessments Yes Yes Yes Baseline IP Assessments Yes Yes

Element 1 Element 2 Element 3

32

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Assessing Trends in Regional Inspection Findings

33

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Improving the Inspection Process for Licensee Event Report Reviews

  • Recently identified issue during an

IP 95003 lessons learned review associated with dispositioning LERs

  • Separate feedback from external

stakeholder on timeliness of LER closeout

  • Confirmed no impact on plant

assessment and conducted extent of condition reviews

  • Assessing process enhancements to

better manage LER review and closeout

34

slide-35
SLIDE 35

ROP Program Goals Fully Met in 2017

  • Program Goals

Objective Risk-informed Understandable Predictable

35

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Construction Reactor Oversight Process (cROP) Self-Assessment

Paul Krohn, Deputy Director Division of Construction Inspection and Operational Programs (DCIP), Office of New Reactors (NRO)

36

slide-37
SLIDE 37

cROP Remains Effective

  • The cROP continues to provide

effective oversight and achieved its intended outcomes

  • Both construction units remain in the

Licensee Response column

  • Reduced staffing due to V.C.

Summer’s construction termination

37

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Cumulative Inspection Hours Vogtle

38

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Preparing for ITAAC Surge

  • Completed activities to identify or

resolve potential challenges for Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC) closure and verification –Demonstration project of the ITAAC inspection program and closure verification process –Tabletop exercise for complex ITAAC –Implemented metrics to measure performance

39

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Focusing on Operational Readiness

  • Issued public version of the plan to

support transition from cROP to ROP

  • Formation of the Vogtle Readiness

Group (VRG)

  • Developing guidance to

communicate 10 CFR 52.103(g) finding to Commission

40

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Conclusion

  • Senior NRC managers affirmed the

appropriateness of agency actions

41

slide-42
SLIDE 42

List of Acronyms

  • AARM – Agency Action Review

Meeting

  • ANO – Arkansas Nuclear One
  • AO – Abnormal Occurrence
  • CAL – Confirmatory Action Letter
  • IP – Inspection Procedure
  • ITAAC – Inspections, Tests, Analyses,

and Acceptance Criteria

  • NMED – Nuclear Materials Event

Database

42

slide-43
SLIDE 43

List of Acronyms (cont.)

  • NMSS – Office of Nuclear Material

Safety and Safeguards

  • NRC – U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission

  • NRR – Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation

  • QA – Quality Assurance
  • ROP – Reactor Oversight Process
  • SRV – Safety Relief Valve
  • VRG – Vogtle Readiness Group

43