1 / 37

The Reactor Oversight Process: Development and Results

The Reactor Oversight Process: Development and Results. Tom Houghton Nuclear Energy Institute September 20, 2005. What is NEI?. The Nuclear Energy Institute is the industry’s policy organization, whose mission is to foster the beneficial uses of nuclear technology in its myriad forms

colby
Download Presentation

The Reactor Oversight Process: Development and Results

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Reactor Oversight Process:Development and Results Tom Houghton Nuclear Energy Institute September 20, 2005

  2. What is NEI? • The Nuclear Energy Institute is the industry’s policy organization, whose mission is to foster the beneficial uses of nuclear technology in its myriad forms • NEI’s membership includes 250 corporate members in 14 nations • NEI and its predecessor organizations have served the nuclear industry since 1953 • NEI’s key organizations are • Governmental Affairs • Communications • Nuclear Generation

  3. NEI 2006 Business Plan

  4. In April 2000 NRC implemented the new Reactor Oversight Process • The new process revised, and for the first time, integrated NRC’s inspection, assessment and enforcement programs • This presentation will describe • Reasons for the change • Results to date

  5. Industry Performance improved dramatically in the 1980s • Safety • Production (capacity factor) • Cost ($/kw)

  6. U.S. Capacity Factor 1981-2001

  7. US Electricity Production Cost Estimates (1981-2000)(in constant 2000 cents/kWh) Source: Pre 1995: UDI, Post 1995: RDI Modeled Production Cost

  8. U.S. Production Costs 1988-2000

  9. Industry’s safety performance, as measured by NRC and WANO indicators, continued to improve

  10. Significant Events: Industry Average (1985-2000) Source: NUS

  11. Safety System Performance Source: WANO 2001 Performance Indicators

  12. Collective Radiation Exposure - BWRs

  13. Industrial Accident Safety Rate US Manufacturing IASR US Finance, Insurance, Real Estate IASR US Nuclear IASR* #Number of accidents resulting in lost work, restricted work, or fatalities per 200,000 worker hours *Full- time, on- site employees Sources: WANO and BLS

  14. Despite objective evidence of improving safety, NRC Violations continued to increase

  15. Increase was driven by a 100% jump in Level IV Violations (minor process and procedure errors)

  16. The consequences of the old approach were significant, both economically… …AND in diverting NRC and industry resources from focusing on more risk significant areas

  17. NRC agreed a new approach was appropriate • NRC’s internal reviews found the previous approach inefficient, untimely, very subjective and inscrutable to licensees and the public • Advances in risk assessment provided confidence that risk-informed performance indicators and simplified risk analyses could be used as effective assessment tools

  18. Cornerstone Chart

  19. Regulatory Oversight ProcessRisk-Informed, Performance-Based Assessment, Inspection and Enforcement Regulatory Oversight Model Licensee Provides Self Assessment & Audit Plans* Licensee Provides Self Assessments & Audit Results* Develop Inspection Plan Conduct Inspections Assess Results Determine Regulatory Action Licensee Assesses & Corrects Deficiencies Licensee Provides Safety Performance Indicators * Future

  20. What are appropriate roles for Licensees and Regulators? Performance Model for Successful Plant Operations Inputs Management Actions Outputs People Safety Performance HumanPerformance Plant SelfAssessment CorrectiveAction Processes Cost Effective Production Procedures

  21. Reactor Oversight Process • Public Meetings • Press Releases • NRC WebSite • PDR/ADAMS • Assessment Reports • Inspection Plans • Inspection Findings • Performance Indicators Communications Agency Response Management Conference Monitor Licensee Actions NRC Inspections Additional Regulatory Actions Assessment Process (Action Matrix) Enforcement Cornerstones of Safety Significance Evaluations Significance Evaluations Significance Determination Process Performance Indicator Thresholds Supplemental Inspections Event Response (SI/AIT/IIT) Generic Safety Inspections Risk Informed Baseline Inspections Performance Indicators Inspections Performance Indicators

  22. Performance BandsSAMPLE INDICATOR Licensee Response Increased Regulator Response Required Regulator Response Unacceptable Performance

  23. ACTION MATRIX INCREASING SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE One or Two inputs White (in different cornerstones) in a Strategic Performance Area; Cornerstone objectives fully met Repetitive/multiple degraded cornerstones, Multiple Y or 1R input; Cornerstone met-longstanding issues or signif safety margin reduction One Degraded Cornerstone (2 W or 1 Y input) or any 3 W inputs in strategic performance area; Cornerstones met-minimal reduction in safety margin All Assessment Inputs (PIs and Inspection Areas) Green; Cornerstone objectives fully met Overall Unacceptable Performance; Operation not permitted. Unacceptable safety margin. RESULTS Management Meeting Routine Resident Inspector Interaction SRI/BC Meet with Licensee DD/RA Meet with Licensee Management EDO (or Commission) Meet with Senior License Management Commission Meeting with Senior Licensee Management Licensee Action Licensee Corrective Action Licensee Corrective Action with NRC Oversight Licensee Self Assessment with NRC Oversight Licensee Performance Improvement Plan with NRC Oversight Baseline and Team Insp. Focused on Cause of Overall Degradation NRC Inspection Risk-Informed Baseline Inspection Program Inspection Followup Baseline and Inspection Focused on Cause of Degradation RESPONSE -10 CFR 2.204 DFI -10 CFR 50.54(f) Letter -CAL/Order Regulatory Actions None -Document Response to Degrading Area in Inspection Report Docket Response to Degrading Condition Order to Modify, Suspend or Revoke Licensed Activities Assessment Report DD review/sign Assessment Report (w/ inspection plan) DD review/sign Assessment Report (w/ inspection plan) RA review/sign Assessment Report (w/ inspection plan) RA review/sign Assessment Report (w/ inspection plan) COMMUNICATION Public Assessment Meeting SRI or Branch Chief Meet with Licensee SRI or Branch Chief Meet with Licensee RA Discuss Performance with Licensee Commission Meeting with Senior Licensee Management EDO (or Commission) Discuss Performance with Senior Licensee Management Regional Review Only Headquarters Review

  24. Performance Indicator Trend

  25. Greater than GreenPerformance Indicators

  26. Inspection Finding Trend

  27. Greater than GreenInspection Findings

  28. Inspection FindingsFY 2002 - 2004

  29. “Greater than Green” Trend

  30. Crosscutting Issues

  31. Industry Actions • Developing crosscutting criteria • Performance indicators • MSPI • Replacement for Scrams w/ loss of normal heat removal PI • Alternate RCS leakage PI • Significance Determination Process (SDP) improvements

  32. ROP continues to evolve • Availability of data has enhanced public confidence • Continue to modify performance indicators and significance determination process for inspections • Focuses industry &regulator on risk significant issues • Degrading performance can be identified before serious increase in risk to public • Has resulted in performance improvements by focusing on problem areas • Has demonstrated need to reassess deterministic regulations • HOWEVER, ROP is not a substitute for vigilance, and a willingness to aggressively pursue off normal conditions

More Related