-" PA REGU 0

lieTing on the Agency

Action Review Meeting

Luis Reyes, EDO

May 16, 2006
L

List of A cronyms

* AARM

e AFI

* AO

* ASP

> CAL

* EDO

e FY

* HP

* IMC

* Ip

* MSPI

- Agency Action Review Meeting

- Area for Improvement

- Abnormal Occurrence

- Accident Sequence Precursor

- Confirmatory Action Letter

- Calendar Year

- Executive Director for Operations

- Fiscal Year

- Human Performance

- Inspection Manual Chapter

- Inspection Procedure

- Mitigating Systems Performance

Index

2
List of Acronyms (cont)

e NMED

* NMSS

* OSTP

, Pl

* PI&R

* PRA

* ROP

, SC

* SCWE

* SDP

- Nuclear Materials Events Database

- Office of Nuclear Material Safety and

Safeguards

- Office of State and Tribal Programs

- Performance Indicator

- Problem Identification and

Resolution

- Probabilistic Risk Assessment

- Reactor Oversight Process

- Safety Culture

- Safety Conscious Work Environment

- Significance Determination Process

3
Elements of the AARM

* NRC Management Directive 8.14

* Review of agency actions:

oSignificant nuclear material issues

and licensee trends (SECY-06-0087)

wIIndustry trends (SECY-06-0076)

o Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) self-assessment (SECY-06-0074)

s Individual plants per Action Matrix

4
NIR REGU-

<- 0

1-1

MATERIALS AND WASTE

PRAMS PERFORMANCE

Jack Strosnider, NMSS
erformance Evaluation

Program

*Systematic review of available

information to identify significant:

iOperational performance trends

ooLicensee performance issues

oNRC program issues/gaps

6
Performance Criteria

* Strategic Outcomes

* Performance/Precursor Measures

* Abnormal Occurrences

* Significant Enforcement Actions

* SECY-02-021 6 Criteria

oSignificant licensee performance

issues

woNRC program gaps

Trending review of Event Data

7
Strategic Outcomes and

Performance Measures

eAII Strategic Measure goals met

in FY 2005

*AII Performance and Precursor

Measure goals met in FY 2005

8
AbRnormal Occurrences

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

__-T- v---- -t-------

__

_- - ---

. _ _ . .

_1 ---- - F-- -

z - 7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Li1

EM

Elevated External Radiation Levels / Removable Contamination

Fuel Cycle Facility

Personnel Overexposure

Medical / Dose to Embryo

9
Significant NRC Enforcement

Actions

5 yr avg.

/ (3.8)

-I- I

2001

m Severity Level I

2002

m Severity Level 1i

2003 2004 2005

10
Trending Review of Event

Data

e16 quarters reviewed (101011/01 to

9130105), 2038 events during this period.

* No significant performance trends

identified.

* No significant change from previous

16-quarter period (10/01/00 to 9130104):

2060 events during that period

11
Licensee Performance

ssuesl NRC Program Gaps

*No licensee performance issues

identified per SECY-02-0216

*No significant trending issues

identified

No NRC program gaps or failures

identified

12
Conclusion

eAll strategic and performance

goals met in FY 2005

*No adverse performance trends

identified

*No licensee performance issues

reaching AARM threshold

*NRC Programs providing effective

oversight

13
SNIR

M I& r

REACTOR LICENSEE

BRIEFING

James Dyer, NRR

Stuart Richards, NRR/ADROIDIRS

James Caldwell, RilI
Reactor Industry Trends

Program

* Identifies trends in safety

performance

* Communicates performance to

stakeholders

* Provides feedback to ROP

*Supports NRC performance goals

15
FY 2005 Results

* No statistically significant adverse

trends in safety performance

based on long-term trending

*Safety System Actuation

Indicators Exceeded Prediction

Limit in FY2006

Accident Sequence Precursor

(ASP) Program

16
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

oROP internal feedback process

P*Independent Evaluations

oComments from external survey

oFeedback at meetings/conferences

oDirection from the Commission

17
Overall Results

* Effective in monitoring plant activities and focusing resources

*Successfully achieved performance goals and intended outcomes

* ROP improved based on feedback

and lessons learned

* Most metrics were met

* Continued focus on stakeholder

involvement

• Range of views on ROP

18

. . .
Performance Indicator

Program

Significant activities/results

Po\/MSPI implemented

> Improved Frequently Asked

Question process

frEfforts to improve Pi effectiveness

oThree of seven metrics not met

19
Performance Indicator

Program (cont

*Challenges and planned actions

w*Complete MSPI implementation

PDiscussion with stakeholders on

increasing Pi effectiveness

.Improvements in barrier integrity

and initiating events Pis

20
Inspection Program

Significant Activities/Results

Baseline Inspection Program

completed at all plants

> Implemented Davis-Besse lessons

learned and Office of Inspector General

recommendations

> Adjusted resources based on detailed

inspection procedure analysis

> Piloted engineering inspections

One of eleven metrics not met

21
spection Program (cont

.*Challenges and planned actions

iRefine process to ensure

effective use of resources

P Conduct revised engineering

inspections

oDevelop guidance and training

for safety culture

22
ignificance Determination

Process

*Significant activities/results

OSDP improvement plan progress

o-Continued SDP improvements

oDeveloped Pre-solved Phase 2

tables

o Two of eight metrics not met

23
Significance Determination

Process (cont

oC~hallenges and planned actions

PFurther improve SDP

timeliness/efficiency

oMonitor recent process

improvements

AIssue pre-solved Phase 2 tables

o NRC management review option

24
Assessment Program

* Significant activities/results

Improved guidance on cross-cutting

issues

Improved guidance on IMC 0350

process based on lessons learned

Developed approach for addressing

safety culture

N One of eleven metrics not met

25
Assessment Program (cont)

GIChallenges and planned actions

Implement safety culture

enhancements and associated

training

oAssess improved guidance on

cross-cutting issues

26
ROP Deviations

*Davis-Besse - May 2005

*Salem/Hope Creek - July 2005

* Indian Point Unit 2 - October 2005

* Point Beach - December 2005

* Deviations reviewed and resulted

in some programmatic changes

27
IAesourceslResident

Demographics

oResource expenditures trending

up; increased regional budget

Demographic trends

iExperience level remains high

PSite staffing levels steady

o Resident turnover rate not

excessive

28
Plant Discussion

Davis-Besse

* Reason for Discussion

AdMC 0350 to ROP during 2 nd Qtr

oROP Deviation - inspect licensee

assessments

*:urrent Performance - Column I

Next Steps m Continue ROP Deviation

29
Plant Discussion - Perry

* Reason for Discussion

>Column IV Since August 2004

* Current Performance

P.Column IV

o.Two White Findings Remain Open

0 HP and Pl&R Cross-Cutting Issues

* Next Steps

PCAL Follow-up Inspections

30
Plant Discussion

Point Beach

* Reason for Discussion

o.-Column IV

* Current Performance

0U 0Engineering Issues remain

*Next steps

oCAL revised, focus on engineering

31
Summary

The AARM:

I is important for oversight of both the

Materials and Reactor Programs

* Continues to be an integral part of the

NRC process

* Provided opportunity to review NRC

actions taken for licensees with

performance problems

*Provided opportunity to review

industry and licensee performance trends

32