I ,!*

Q\SN REG(K

1~1 0

Y.5-

MEETING COM

BRIEFN REVIEW

ISSION

Luis Reyes, EDO

James Dyer, NRR

Jack Strosnider, NMSS
List of Acronyms

* AARM - Agency Action Review Meeting

* AO - Abnormal Occurrence

* CAL - Confirmatory Action Letter

* CY - Calendar Year

* EOC - End-of-Cycle meeting

* FAQ - Frequently Asked Question

* FY - Fiscal Year

* MSPI - Mitigating Systems Performance Index

* NMED - Nuclear Materials Event Database

* Pi - Performance Indicator

* PM - Performance Measures

* ROP - Reactor Oversight Process

* SDP - Significance Determination Process

2
Elements of the AARM

* NRC Management Directive 8.14

* Review of agency actions:

Industry trends (SECY-05=0069)

oReactor Oversight Process (ROP) selfassessment (SECY-05-0070)

Individual plants per action matrix

oSignificant nuclear material issues

and licensee trends

3
Sp,S

00

is 0

REACTOR LICENSEE

BRIEFING

Luis Reyes, EDO

James Dyer, NRR

James Caldwell, Rill

Bruce Mallett, RIV

Stuart Richards, NRR/DIPM/IIPB
Reactor Industry Trends

Program

* Identifies trends in safety performance

a Communicates performance to

stakeholders

a Provides feedback to ROP

* Supports NRC performance goals

5
FY 2004 Results

a No statistically significant adverse

trends in safety performance

* All industry trend performance

indicators within short term prediction

limits

6
ROP Self-Assessment

* Annual self-assessment to consider if

program goals are met and to identify

areas for improvement

* Diverse inputs for self-assessment

oSelf-Assessment metrics

o.ROP internal feedback process

oComments from external survey

oFeedback at meetings/conferences

.Direction from the Commission

7
Overall Results

* Effective in monitoring plant activities

and focusing resources

* Successfully supported agency goals

* ROP improved based on feedback and lessons learned

* Most metrics were met

* Continued focus on stakeholder

involvement

* Range of views on ROP

8
Performance Indicator (P1)

Program

* Significant activities/results

Mitigating Systems Performance Index

(MSPI)

oComplicated Scrams Pi

.Davis-Besse Lessons Learned Task'

Force action item follow up - Reactor

Coolant System Leakage

cone self-assessment metric not met

9
Performance Indicator (P0)

Program (cont)

Challenges and planned actions

oImprove timeliness and efficiency of

the Frequently Asked Questions

(FAQs) process

frDiscuss with stakeholders the role of

Pis in identifying poorer performing plants

Implement MSPI

10
Inspection Program

9 Significant Activities/Results

oBaseline Inspection Program completed

Implemented Davis-Besse Lessons

Learned Task Force action items

.Pilot engineering inspections

*AlI self-assessment metrics met

11
Inspection Program (cont)

e Challenges and planned actions

oAdjust existing inspection resources

based on results

PAssess results of pilot engineering

inspection

oImprove inspection of safety culture

12
Significance Determination

Process (SDP)

* Significant activities/results

*SDP improvement plan progress

*Continued development of SDPs

o Four self-assessment metrics not met

13
Significance Determination

Process (cont)

* Challenges and planned actions

oFurther improve SDP

timeliness/efficiency

o Develop pre-solved Phase 2 tables

o.Finalize additional SDPs

14
Assessment Progran

* Significant activities/results

Improved guidance on substantive

cross-cutting issue documentation

Improved guidance on exiting

multiple/repetitive degraded

cornerstone column with similar

adjustments being implemented for

IMC 0350 facilities

oAIl self-assessment metrics met

15
Assessment Program (cont)

* Challenges and planned actions

oDocumenting cross-cutting aspects in

inspection reports

* Lessons learned from Davis-Besse

Oversight Panel

16
ROP Deviations

CY 2004

* Indian Point Unit 2

* Cooper

* Salem/Hope Creek

17
Resources/Resident

Demographics

e Resource expenditure trends

* Demographic trends

o Lower resident turnover rate

compared to CY 2003

oExperience level remains high

18
Plant Discussion -

Cooper

e Reason for Discussion

0 Current Performance

* Next steps

19
Plant Discussion

Point Beach

e Reason for Discussion

e Current Performance

* Next steps

20
Plant Discussion

Perry

* Reason for Discussion

* Current Performance

* Next steps

21
Plant Discussion

Davis-Besse

e Reason for Discussion

* Current Performance

* Next steps

22
GNR REcGo

0$

1CO: io 0

i5 0

44*

MATERIALS LICENSEE

BRIEFING

Luis Reyes, EDO

Jack Strosn ider, N MSS

Samuel Collins, RI

William Travers, Rll
Material Licensee

Performance Evaluation

Program

* Systematic review of available information

Identify significant issues and performance trends

frConfirm adequacy of programs and actions being taken

Identify candidate material licensees for discussion at AARM

24
Material Licensee

Trends Evaluation Program

* Performance monitored and measured

through use of graded approach

*Strategic Outcomes

o Performance Measures

oAbnormal Occurrence Criteria

oReporting requirements/precursor

metrics

25
Material Licensee

Trends Evaluation Program

Fiscal Year 2004 Results

* All NRC strategic and performance

goals in Materials and Waste Arenas

met in FY 2004 (all goals met since FY

1997)

c No significant adverse trends identified

* Few events occurring per licensee

26
Material Licensee -

Honeywell International, Inc.

* Reason for Discussion

* Current Performance

* Next steps

27
Material Licensee s

Westinghouse Columbia Fuel

Plant

e Reason for Discussion

* Current Performance

* Next steps

28
Material Licensee -

Baxter Healthcare Corporation

* Reason for Discussion

* Current Performance

* Next steps

29
Summary

The AARM:

* Continues to be an integral part of the

NRC oversight process

* Provided opportunity to review actions

taken for licensees with significant performance problems

* Provided opportunity to review industry and licensee performance trends

30