NQA 4-2017 Agenda

AGENDA

STANDARDS COMMITTEE on

NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANCE (NQA)

Hilton Cincinnati Netherland Plaza 35 W. Fifth Street

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 USA www.cincinnatinetherlandplaza.hilton.com

513-421-9100

8:00 AM – 1:30 PM

Thursday, April 6, 2017

of 50

NQA Standards Committee AGENDA

April 6, 2017

1.0 CALL TO ORDER/OPENING REMARKS/INTRODUCTIONS

The general session is scheduled to be called to order at 8:00 a.m.

2.0 RECORD OF ATTENDANCE 3.0 APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 27, 2016 MEETING MINUTES

Chair to review any changes and call a vote to approve. 4.0 ADOPTION OF AGENDA

Chair to review any changes, call for new items of business, and call a vote to adopt.

5.0 AWARDS

Award presentations (as applicable).

6.0 PERSONNEL ACTIONS

6.1 Appointments/Reappointments/Resignation/Etc.

Summary of Standards Committee membership actions taken in closed session The Subcommittee chairs are requested to introduce any new appointed members

for their Subcommittee.

6.1.1 NQA Standards Committee 6.1.2 Subcommittee on Applications 6.1.3 Subcommittee on Assessment and Verification

6.1.4 Subcommittee on Engineering and Procurement

6.1.5 Subcommittee on Interfaces and Administration 6.1.6 Subcommittee on Program Management Process

6.1.7 Subcommittee on Software Quality Assurance

6.1.8 Subcommittee on Waste Management 6.1.9 Subcommittee on International Activity 6.1.10 Europe International Working Group

of 50


April 6, 2017

6.2 Balance of Interest

Pages 11-12 contains the current balance of interest for the Standards Committee. The Chair requests the members to identify any change in their balance of interest.

6.3 BNCS Nominations

7.0 SPECIAL ISSUES AND TOPICS

7.1 Future NQA-1 Editions

7.2 Update on Certification Activity 8.0 BNCS REPORT 9.0 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT

Summary of Actions/Topics from this Meeting. 10.0 SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS AND IWG REPORTS

PowerPoint presentations should include the following, as applicable: Subcommittee’s status of TPN’s and associated ballots. New or revised TPN’s (Standards Committee approval required). Status outstanding inquiries (Standards Committee approval required). Additional SC status/activity report. 10.1 Subcommittee on Applications

10.2 Subcommittee on Assessment & Verification

10.3 Subcommittee on Engineering & Procurement Processes

10.4 Subcommittee on Interface & Administration

10.5 Subcommittee on International Activity

of 50


April 6, 2017

10.6 Europe International Working Group

10.7 Subcommittee on Program Management Processes

10.8 Subcommittee on Software Quality Assurance

10.9 Subcommittee on Waste Management

11.0 TPN TPN Approved Between Meetings

TPN # 17-02 to develop a new NQA-1 Part IV side by side comparison, NCA 3800-2013 to NQA-1-2015.

SC Applications TPN was approved under Record 16-2889, Standards Committee Ballot # 16-3565RC1

Proposal will be developed under Record # 17-515 TPN 17-03 to Review NQA-1, against the new IAEA GS-R-2, to determine the need for a NQA-1 Subpart.

SC Applications TPN was approved under Record 17-36, Standards Committee Ballot # 17-47 Proposal will be developed under Record # 17-516

TPN 17-04 to Review existing 4.1.x Subparts to reduce the need to develop a revision to the Subparts (4.1.x’s) simply because a new edition of NQA-1 is issued

SC Applications TPN was approved under Record 17-35, Standards Committee Ballot # 17-49

Proposal will be developed under Record # 17-517 Pending TPN related Records/Ballots Record 17-31

SC-SQA TPN to Modify Part III Subpart 3.1-3.1, Table 401.4 second column to be better aligned with

the associated requirements in Part I Requirement 3 S401. Standards Committee Ballot 17-790 scheduled to close

Record 16-2904

SC-SQA TPN to evaluate the applicability and adequacy of the software quality assurance

requirements and guidance of NQA-1-2015. Subcommittee Ballot # 16-3580, closed 12/19/16

NEW TPN May be presented this time

of 50


April 6, 2017

12.0 INQUIRIES

12.1 Subcommittee on Applications

None

12.2 Subcommittee on Assessment & Verification

Record #15-1553 Record established: 10/02/15 PM: D. Grannan Subject: Recording measurements Status:

Record # 15-1881 Record established: 8/14/15 PM: K. Morris Subject: Requirement 15/Paragraph 404: Proper disposition for anomalies found to be

conforming items Status:

Record # 15-2265 Record established: 10/06/15 PM: E. Groover Subject: Electronic tagging for identifying non-conforming items Status:

Record # 16-871

Record established: 4/07/16 PM: J. McIntyre Subject: Auditor Independence Status:

Record # 16-1716 Record established: 7/19/16 PM: J. Ice Subject: Lead Auditor Status:

12.3 Subcommittee on Engineering & Procurement Processes

Record # 15-1189 Record established: 5/19/15 PM: ? (currently Schrotke) Subject: Commercial Grade Survey, Part II, Subpart 2.14, Section 603 Status:

of 50


April 6, 2017

Record # 16-274 Record established: 2/05/16 PM: W. Ware Subject: Material & Analytical Testing Status:

Record # 16-1843

Record established: 8/05/16 PM: ? Subject: Inquiry on NDE Controls Status: SC-AV did not find the inquiry to be related to their work.

Transferred to SC-EPP

Record # 16-1963

Record established: 8/17/16 PM: W. Ware Subject: Certificate of Conformance Status:

Record # 16-2043 Record established: 8/22/16 PM: W. Ware Subject: Requirement 7 paragraph 200(c), Interpretation of “direct evaluation” Status:

Record # 16-3045 Ron prepared a report Subject: Supplier Evaluation Status: Inquiry TG concluded the inquiry to be consulting in nature pending

Subcommittee (SC-PMP and SC-EPP) approval.

12.4 Subcommittee on Interface & Administration

12.5 Subcommittee on International Activity

12.6 Europe International Working Group

12.7 Subcommittee on Program Management Processes

Record # 15-2239

Record established: 9/30/15 PM: M. Vann Mitchell Subject: Design Process Status:

of 50


April 6, 2017

Record # 16-438

Record established (reopened): 8/23/16 Subject: Application on the Fabricating and Manufacturing PM: B. Blyth Status: 10/2016 Report - Subcommittee determined the inquiry to be consulting;

Oliver Martinez to notify the inquirer. Record # 16-763

Record established: 3/24/16 PM: A. Appleton Subject: Subcontract of Auditing Status: 10/2016 SC AV reported - PM being selected and that they were beginning

work.

Record # 16-878

Record established: 4/07/16 PM: ? Subject: QA Program development

Status: Inquirer was asked to re-phrase question 1 of 2 questions.

Record # 16-884

Record established: 4/09/16 PM: ? Subject SPMT planning and procedure in the site

Status:

Record # 16-1237

Record established: 5/17/2016 PM: H. AL Jaberi Subject: Qualification of Inspection and Test Personnel Status: 1/12/17 email from Jerry Ice requesting to have the inquiry withdrawn.

ITEM CLOSED

Record # 16-2080

Record established: 8/24/16 PM: B.Blyth Subject: Application Subpart 2.15 of NQA-1 in the site. Status:

Records# 16-2920

Subject: Technical Evaluation for Commercial Grade Items Status: Inquiry TG concluded the inquiry to be consulting in nature pending

Subcommittee approval. Record # 16-3045

Subject: Supplier Evaluation Status: Inquiry TG concluded the inquiry to be consulting in nature pending

Subcommittee (SC-PMP and SC-EPP) approval.

of 50


April 6, 2017

Record # 16-2780

Record established: 11/11/16 PM: Vickery Subject: Uncertainty/tolerance of M&TE Status: For SC-PMP and SC EPP Review

12.8 Subcommittee on Software Quality Assurance Record # 16-1392

Record established: 6/10/16 PM: ? Subject: Design Control and Commercial Grade Dedication Status:

12.9 Subcommittee on Waste Management

Record # 16-1862 Record established: 8/09/16 PM: ? Subject: Applicability to personnel testing computer programs Status:

12.10 Other Open Inquiries

Record # 17-730

Established: 3/21/17 Subject: QA Records Storage Facility

Status: Record # 17-732

Established: 3/21/17 Subject: Design Inputs

Status: Record# 17-426

Established: 2/15/17 Subject: Procurement document review

Status:

Record # 17-252 Established: Subject: Internal Audit - Auditor Independence Status: Initially went to BPV III and it was concluded that it was an NQA-1

Interpretation. BPV III Staff Secretary believes it may be consulting in nature and that the question should be rephrased to comply with guidance for submitting interpretations.

of 50


April 6, 2017

Record # 16-2079 Established: 8/23/16 Subject: Voltage/Amperage Monitoring for Welding

Status: Originally went to BPV III but may come to NQA for a response. Rich McIntyre agreed to review the inquiry.

Question (1): Where voltage and amperage ranges are specified in a Welding Procedure Specification (WPS), are the amperage and voltage values required to be controlled parameters under the provisions of NQA-1, Requirement 9, as required by NCA-4134.9? Question (2): If the response to Question (1) is yes, and in accordance with the provisions of NQA-1, Requirement 9, as required by NCA-4134.9, does the control of those voltage and amperage values include verification to ensure that the welding parameters are maintained within the ranges required by the Welding Procedure Specification (WPS)? Question (3):Do the instruments or other measuring and test equipment used to measure those voltage and amperage values require periodic calibration and adjustment as needed to ensure accuracy under the provisions of NQA-1, Requirement 12, as required by NCA-4134.12?

13.0 GOVERNMENTAL AND REGULATORY ORGANIZATION REPORTS

Written reports are requested for inclusion in the minutes.

13.1 NRC – see pages 13-28

13.2 DOE

13.3 IAEA

13.4 DNFSB – see pages 29-30

14.0 COMMITTEES AND STANDARD ORGANIZATION REPORTS

Written reports are requested for inclusion in the minutes.

14.1 ASQ – see page 31

14.2 ANS – see page 32

14.3 ISO – see page 33

14.4 ASME Section III, General Requirements – see pages 34-45 14.5 NEI

14.6 AIA

14.7 NITSL – see pages 46-50

14.8 EPRI

of 50


April 6, 2017

14.9 ASTM

14.10 NIRMA 14.11 Nuclear Industry Assessment Committee

14.12 NUPIC 15.0 PREVIOUS ISSUES AND ASSIGNMENTS

16.0 NEW BUSINESS 17.0 ANNOUNCEMENTS

17.1 Business or Professional Announcements

18.0 ACTION ITEM SUMMARY FROM MEETING Norm Moreau or Rusty Dekleine to provide a recap of the day’s activity and assignments.

19.0 PDH The Profession Development Hour sign-in sheet will be circulated for Standards Committee member credit. 20.0 FUTURE MEETINGS

20.1 Next NQA Meeting

Dates 1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd Choice October 15-20, 2017 Santa Fe,

New Mexico Salt Lake City, Utah

Sacramento, California October 22–27, 2017

20.2 Related Meetings

21.0 ADJOURNMENT

The meeting is scheduled to adjourn at 1:30 p.m.

of 50

March 24, 2017

O10500000

Standards Committee on Nuclear Quality Assurance

Total Membership - 35

AA

R. Jolly - Bechtel Power Corporation 1

T. Muraki - Advanced Technology 2

D. Prigel - Black Eagle Energy Inc. 3

J. Yanek - Fluor 4

AB

D. Brown - Sargent & Lundy, LLC 1

J. McIntyre - Sargent & Lundy 2

M. Nicol - EnergySolutions, Inc. 3

R. Sacco - Black & Veatch 4

AF

J. Adkins - Nuclear Quality Consultant 1

K. Ake - The Shelby Group LLC 2

H. Kirschenmann - Portage Inc. 3

N. Moreau - Theseus Professional Svces LLC 4

C. Moseley - 5

W. Sowder - Quality Management Services Co., LLC 6

R. Symes - 7

AI

R. Schrotke - Ron Schrotke, LLC 1

M. Tannenbaum - Electric Power Research Institute 2

T. Van Valkenburg - Los Alamos National Laboratory 3

AK

N. Barker - 1

W. Bryan - ANSYS Inc. 2

J. DeKleine - Curtiss-Wright, Nuclear Division 3

M. Hayse - Independent Consultant 4

C. Martin - National Security Technologies, LLC 5

K. Morrell - Savannah River Nuclear Solutions 6

G. Szabatura - AREVA Inc 7

AO

J. Bergstrom - Exelon Generation 1

G. Danielson - US Department of Energy 2

T. Dunn - Performance Development Corp 3

K. Rhoads - Dominion 4

M. Smith - Nuclear Innovation North America 5

D. Sparkman - 6

W. Ware - Southern Nuclear Operating Co. 7

D. Winchester - PSEG Nuclear 8

AT

W. Horton - Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 1

R. McIntyre - US Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2

Non-Voting Members

Duli C. Agarwal, PE

Joe W. Anderson, PE

Sidney Bernsen, Ph.D.

Robert Lee Blyth

Milton Concepcion-Robles

Michael J. Mason

James A. Perry, PE

1 of 50

March 24, 2017

Tallapragada V. Sarma

2 of 50

1

NRC Report for NQA-1 Meetings

April 2017 – Cincinnati, OH

Table of Contents

1. Amendments to 10 CFR 50.55a –Codes and Standards 2

2. NRO DCIP Quality Assurance and Vendor Inspection Branch Activities 2

3. New Reactor Licensing Activities 4

4. Multinational Design Evaluation Program (MDEP) Activities 9

5. 10 CFR Part 21 Rulemaking 11

6. Commercial Calibration and Testing Services Status 11

7. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.231 for Commercial-Grade Design and Analysis Computer Programs 11

8. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.164 for Dedication of Commercial-Grade

Items for Use in Nuclear Power Plants (Draft DG-1292) 12

9. Revision to Regulatory Guide 1.28, (Draft DG-1326) 12

10. NRC Staff Safety Evaluation for Duke Energy Use of 2011 NIRMA Technical

Guides 13

11. NRC Staff Interface with Nuclear Procurement Issues Committee 13

12. NRC Information Notice 2016-01, Reverse Engineering Issues 14

13. Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) Update 14

of 50

2

1. Amendment to 10 CFR 50.55a – ASME Code Edition/Addenda Current ASME Edition/Addenda

The NRC has approved:

Section III, Division 1 and Section XI, Division 1 of the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code through the 2008 Addenda (76 FR 36232).

The Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants (OM Code) through the 2006 Addenda (76 FR 36232).

Next ASME Edition/Addenda

The next proposed amendment to 10 CFR 50.55a includes:

The 2009 Addenda, the 2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda, and the 2013 Edition of the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code.

The 2009 Edition, 2011 Addenda and 2012 Edition of the Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants (OM Code).

NRC Staff has addressed the public comments received and is in the process of preparing the final rule for publication. The final rule is expected to be published in the first quarter of 2017.

In preparation for the next rulemaking action, a review of the 2015 Edition of the ASME BPV Code and OM Code for incorporation by reference in 10CFR50.55a has been completed. The scope of the rulemaking action along with draft conditions are currently under development with a proposed rule publication following shortly after the 2009-2013 rule becomes final. The NRC discussed its preliminary positions on the 2015 Editions during a public meeting held on August 22, 2016.

2. NRO DCIP Quality Assurance and Vendor Inspection Branch Activities NRO Vendor Inspection

The NRO vendor inspection program is described in Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 2507, “Vendor Inspections.” This IMC was last updated on October 3, 2013. This IMC is implemented by various Inspection Procedures (IPs) including:

IP 43002: Routine Inspections of Nuclear Vendors;

IP 43003: Reactive Inspections of Nuclear Vendors;

IP 43004: Inspection of Commercial-Grade Dedication Programs;

IP 43005: NRC Oversight of Third Party Organizations Implementing Quality Assurance Requirements;

IP 36100: Inspection of 10 CFR Part 21, Programs for Reporting Defects and Noncompliance;

IP 37805: Engineering Design Verification Inspections;

IMC 0617: Vendor and Quality Assurance Implementation Inspection Reports; and

of 50

3

IMC 2507: Vendor Inspections

FY 17 Vendor Inspection Plans

AP1000 modular construction

AP1000 mechanical and electrical qualification test programs

Digital Instrumentation and Control for AP1000

Valve and pump manufacturing

Commercial-grade dedication organizations

Reverse engineering activities

Vendor Inspection Reports Issued, Completed, and Planned Inspections

AZZ Nuclear/NLI, Fort Worth, TX – issued

C&D Technologies, Attica, IN - issued

Paxton & Vierling Steel Company, Carter Lake, IA - issued

General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems (GA-EMS), San Diego, CA -issued

Pentair Valves and Controls, Mansfield, MA – issued

GE Hitachi, Wilmington, NC – issued

Westinghouse Electric Company, Cranberry Township, PA - issued

WECTEC, Charlotte, NC – issued

Westinghouse Electric Company, Warrendale, PA – issued

Enercon, Oklahoma City, OK - issued

Creusot Forge, Le-Creusot, France – issued

Curtiss Wright EMD, Cheswick, PA – issued

PEICo, Phoenix AZ - issued

CB&I, Laurens SC - completed

Westinghouse Waltz Mill Site, Madison, PA -completed

Target Rock, Industrial Division, Curtiss-Wright, Farmingdale, NY -completed

L&S Machinery Company, Latrobe, PA - scheduled

Swagelok Company, Solon, OH -scheduled

PEICo, Memphis, TN – scheduled

Ametek Solid State Controls, Columbus OH -scheduled

Previously issued NRC inspection and trip reports are located at:

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/oversight/quality-assurance/vendor-insp/insp-reports.html

of 50

4

New Vendor Inspection Quality Assurance Website Links

The NRC has implemented website pages to make it easier to become familiar with and follow vendor inspection and QA related activities:

http://nrcweb.nrc.gov:400/reactors/new-reactors/oversight/quality-assurance/vendor-insp.html.

As part of our Vendor Outreach and Communications Strategy, the 2016 Annual Vendor Times newsletter is now available on our public website at the below link. Topics of interest include the 2016 Vendor Inspection Trends, the 2016 NRC Workshop on Vendor Oversight, Guidelines for Implementation of 10 CFR Part 21 Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance,” – Draft Guide 1291, Part 21 Rulemaking, Commercial Grade Dedication – Draft Guide 1292, NRC’s Expanded Recognition of the International Laboratory Accreditation (ILAC) process, Regulatory Issue Summary 2016-01, and Technical Corner –The importance of Establishing Proper Technical Requirements When Purchasing Equivalent Components.

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/oversight/quality-assurance/vendor-oversight.html

The Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page addresses Quality Assurance for New Reactors and currently has three main categories: 10 CFR Part 21 FAQs, Commercial Grade Dedication FAQs, and Enforcement FAQs. The page provides quick links to questions we have received in the past about the mentioned topics:

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/oversight/quality-assurance/qual-assure-faqs.html

The web page link below serves as a categorization tool and provides a list of all applicable QA Inspections for New Reactor Licensing and Vendor QA Inspection reports that have either a Notice of Nonconformance (NON) or Notice of Violation (NOV) within a specific criterion of 10 CFR 50 Appendix B or 10 CFR Part 21 related issue. The page is routinely updated with every new inspection report that is released:

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/oversight/quality-assurance/nonconformances-violations.html

The web page link below describes the vendor inspection program (VIP). The VIP verifies that reactor applicants and licensees are fulfilling their regulatory obligations with respect to providing effective oversight of the supply chain. It is accomplished through a number of activities, including: performing vendor inspections that will verify the effective implementation of the vendor’s quality assurance program, establishing a strategy for vendor identification and selection criteria, and; ensuring vendor inspectors obtain necessary knowledge and skills to perform inspections. In addition, the VIP addresses interactions with nuclear consensus standards organizations, industry and external stakeholders, and international constituents:

http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1626/ML16265A631.pdf

3. New Reactor Licensing Activities As of January 6, 2017, the status of new reactor licensing under 10 CFR Part 52 is as follows:

of 50

5

Design Certification

The NRC staff has issued the following design certifications:

Design Applicant

Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) General Electric (GE) Nuclear Energy

ABWR Design Certification Rule (DCR) Amendment

South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company

System 80+ Westinghouse Electric Company

Advanced Passive 600 (AP600) Westinghouse Electric Company

Advanced Passive 1000 (AP1000) Westinghouse Electric Company

Economic Simplified Boiling-Water Reactor (ESBWR)

GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy

Design Certification Applications Received

The NRC has received the following design certification applications:

Design Applicant Status

U.S. EPR AREVA NP, Inc. Suspended

U.S. Advanced Pressurized-Water Reactor (US-APWR)

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.

Under Review

ABWR Design Certification Renewal

Toshiba Corporation Power Systems Company

Withdrawn

of 50

6

ABWR Design Certification Renewal

GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Under Review

Advanced Power Reactor 1400 (APR1400)

Korea Electric Power Corporation and Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co., Ltd.

Under Review

NuScale NuScale Power, LLC Under Acceptance Review

Early Site Permits (ESPs)

The NRC staff has issued the following ESPs:

Site Applicant

Clinton ESP Site Exelon Generation Company, LLC

Grand Gulf ESP Site System Energy Resources Inc.

North Anna ESP Site Dominion Nuclear North Anna, LLC

Vogtle ESP Site Southern Nuclear Operating Company

PSEG Site PSEG Power, LLC, and PSEG Nuclear, LLC (PSEG)

\

The staff is currently reviewing the following ESP applications:

Site Applicant

Clinch River Nuclear Site Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)

Victoria County Station* Exelon Nuclear Texas Holdings, LLC (Exelon)

of 50

7

Combined License (COL) Applications Received

By issuing a combined license (COL), the NRC authorizes the licensee to construct and (with specified conditions) operate a nuclear power plant at a specific site, in accordance with established laws and regulations. A COL is valid for 40 years from the date of the Commission finding, under Title 10, Section 52.103 (g), of the Code of Federal Regulations [10 CFR 52.103(g)], that the acceptance criteria in the combined license are met. A COL can be renewed for an additional 20 years. The following is the current status of combined license applications received by the staff:

Proposed New Reactor(s) Design Applicant Status

Bell Bend Nuclear Power Plant U.S. EPR

PPL Bell Bend, LLC Withdrawn

Bellefonte Nuclear Station, Units 3 and 4

AP1000 Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)

Withdrawn

Callaway Plant, Unit 2 U.S. EPR

AmerenUE Withdrawn

Calvert Cliffs, Unit 3 U.S. EPR

Calvert Cliffs 3 Nuclear Project, LLC and UniStar Nuclear Operating Services, LLC

Withdrawn

Comanche Peak, Units 3 and 4 US-APWR

Luminant Generation Company, LLC (Luminant)

Suspended

Fermi, Unit 3 ESBWR Detroit Edison Company

Issued

Grand Gulf, Unit 3 ESBWR Entergy Operations, Inc. (EOI)

Withdrawn

Levy Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2

AP1000 Duke Energy Florida, LLC (DEF)

Issued

Nine Mile Point, Unit 3 U.S. EPR

Nine Mile Point 3 Nuclear Project, LLC and UniStar Nuclear

Withdrawn

of 50

8

North Anna, Unit 3 ESBWR Dominion Virginia Power (Dominion)

Under Review

River Bend Station, Unit 3 ESBWR Entergy Operations, Inc. (EOI)

Withdrawn

Shearon Harris, Units 2 and 3 AP1000 Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (PEC)

Suspended

South Texas Project, Units 3 and 4

ABWR Nuclear Innovation North America, LLC (NINA)

Issued

Turkey Point, Units 6 and 7 AP1000 Florida Power and Light Company (FPL)

Under Review

Victoria County Station, Units 1 and 2

ESBWR Exelon Nuclear Texas Holdings, LLC (Exelon)

Withdrawn

Virgil C. Summer, Units 2 and 3 AP1000 South Carolina Electric & Gas (SCE&G)

Issued

Vogtle, Units 3 and 4 AP1000 Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC)

Issued

William States Lee III, Units 1 and 2

AP1000 Duke Energy Issued

Currently, there are six licensees with Combined Licenses. Two combined licenses were issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company and its financial partners on February 10, 2012 for Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Units 3 and 4. Two combined licenses were issued to South Carolina Electric & Gas and its financial partner on March 30, 2012 for Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station Units 2 and 3. One Combined License was issued to DTE Electric Company on May 1, 2015, for the Enrico Fermi Nuclear Plant Unit 3. Two combined licenses were issued to South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company on February 12, 2016 for South Texas Project Units 3 and 4. Two combined licenses were issued to Duke Energy Florida, LLC on October 26, 2016 for Levy Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2. Two combined licenses were issued to Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC on December 19, 2016 for William States Lee III Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2

of 50

9

Small Modular Reactors (LWR designs)

The NRC refers to light water reactor (LWR) designs generating 300 MWe or less as small modular reactors (SMRs). The NRC has engaged in varying degrees of pre-application activities with several SMR designers over the past several years. The NRC received a design certification application from, NuScale Power, LLC in December 2016 and is currently performing an acceptance review.

Below is a summary of the reactor designers and a potential license applicant with whom the NRC has engaged with for pre-application activities.

Design Application Type Applicant

NuScale Design Certification

NuScale Power, LLC

BWXT mPower™ Pre-Application BWXT mPower, Inc.

SMR-160 Pre-Application SMR Inventec, LLC, a Holtec International Company

Clinch River Nuclear Site

Early Site Permit Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)

Non-LWR Vision and Strategy and Implementation Action Plans:

As the NRC prepares to review and regulate a new generation of non-light water reactors, a coherent vision and strategy is needed to assure NRC readiness to efficiently and effectively conduct its mission for these technologies. On January 3, 2017, the NRC issued its "Vision and Strategy for Safely Achieving Effective and Efficient Non-Light Water Reactor Mission Readiness." The vision and strategy described in this report, once executed, will achieve the goal of assuring NRC readiness to effectively and efficiently review and regulate advanced reactors.

The NRC is also preparing implementation action plans (IAPs) to identify the specific activities the NRC will conduct in the near-term (0-5 years), mid-term (5-10 years) and long-term (beyond 10 years) timeframes to achieve non-LWR readiness. In the fall of 2016, the NRC released Volume 1 and Volume 2 its draft near-term IAPs to obtain stakeholder feedback. The staff will release mid- and long-term IAPs in early 2017.

4. Multinational Design Evaluation Program (MDEP) Activities MDEP is a multinational initiative to develop innovative approaches to leverage the resources and knowledge of mature, experienced national regulatory authorities who are tasked with the regulatory design review of new reactor plant designs. Some of the issue-specific working

of 50

10

groups established under the MDEP organization that the NRC participates in are the Codes and Standards Working Group (CSWG), whose goal is to achieve harmonization of code requirements for pressure-boundary components, and the Vendor Inspection Cooperation Working Group (VICWG), whose goal is to maximize the use of the results of inspections obtained from other regulators’ efforts in inspecting vendors.

Vendor Inspection Cooperation Working Group (VICWG)

The MDEP VICWG was formed because component manufacturing is currently subject to multiple inspections and audits similar in scope and in safety objectives, but conducted by different regulators to different criteria. The primary goal of the VICWG is to maximize the use of the results obtained from other regulators’ efforts in inspecting vendors.

The MDEP VICWG continues to achieve its short-term goals and is making progress towards achieving its long term goals. The VICWG continues to focus on maximizing information sharing, joint inspections (multiple regulators inspecting to the regulatory requirements of one country), and witnessing of other regulators’ inspections. Kerri Kavanagh of the NRC is the current vice Chair of the VICWG. The NRC participated in 7 witnessed and joint inspections, including the one led by ASN at Creusot Forge, Le Creusot, France during the week of November 28, 2016. The NRC issued a publically available International Trip Report dated February 21, 2017. The NRC will continue to participate in future VICWG joint inspections.

The working group enhances the understanding of each regulator’s inspection procedures and practices by coordinating witnessed inspections of safety related mechanical pressure retaining components (Class 1) such as pressure vessels, steam generators, piping, valves, pumps, etc., and quality assurance inspections. Witnessed inspections consist of one regulator performing an inspection to its criteria, observed by representatives of other MDEP countries. The benefits to the observing countries include additional information and added confidence in the inspection results. MDEP regulators are using the experience gained during conduct of VICWG witnessed inspections in their inspection planning.

The MDEP VICWG held its 18th meeting during the week of November 13, 2016, in Paris, France. This meeting included members from France, Canada, Finland, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. Representatives from the International Atomic Energy Agency and the World Nuclear Association were present and made presentations.

The group reviewed updated tables of inspections conducted under the VICWG protocol and discussed planned inspections for 2017. NRC, KINS, ASN, and ONR representatives provided details of their planned inspections for 2017 to help members identify inspections they would like to participate in or receive information on the outcome. The group discussed results of the MDEP Steering Technical Committee (STC) proposal for the future of VICWG. The group will continue to concentrate VICWG activities on vendor inspection cooperation. In performing this activity, VICWG will share experience and lessons learned to enable the representatives to respond to areas of emerging risk (i.e., counterfeit, suspect, and fraudulent items (CSFI) and reverse engineering). The group also discussed recommendations for the vendor inspection session of the MDEP workshop in Paris, France in September 2017. The next MDEP VICWG meeting will be held in Washington DC, the week of April 4 – 6, 2017, and will include a visit to Curtiss Wright EMD in Cheswick, PA, on April 7, 2017 to witness activities such as the fabrication of AP1000 reactor coolant pumps.

of 50

11

5. 10 CFR Part 21 Rulemaking The NRC staff is currently reviewing the Revision 1 of NEI 14-09, “Guidelines for Implementation of 10 CFR Part 21, Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance,” dated February 2016, which the NRC plans to endorse in a Regulatory Guide. The NRC staff has completed draft guide DG-1291, “Evaluating Deviations and Reporting Defects and Noncompliance.

Based on Project AIM recommendations and rebalancing of agency’s work load, Part 21 rulemaking has been cancelled. The NRC continues to work on issuing DG-1291 for public comment later this year and hopes to issue the final regulatory guide in 2017.

6. Commercial Calibration and Testing Services Status On March 16, 2016, the NRC issued Regulatory Issue Summary (RIS), 2016-01, “Nuclear Energy Institute Guidance for the Use of Accreditation in Lieu of Commercial Grade Surveys for Procurement of Laboratory Calibration and Test Services.” The NRC staff is issuing this RIS to notify addressees of one method found acceptable by the NRC staff for procurement of calibration and testing services performed by domestic and international laboratories for use in safety-related applications. Both domestic and international laboratories are required to be accredited by accreditation bodies (ABs) that are signatories to the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) (hereafter referred to as the ILAC accreditation process) in order for licensees and suppliers of basic components to use these services in lieu of performing commercial-grade surveys. On April 1, 2016, the NRC staff approved the license amendment request submitted by Union Electric Company (dba, Ameren Missouri, the licensee) to change the operating quality assurance program revision 31, for Callaway Plant, Unit 1, to adopt NEI 14-05. Revision 1. The NRC staff plans to participate in a second NUPIC joint utility observation of the ILAC MRA peer evaluation process for a European Accreditation Body in September of 2017.

7. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.231 for Commercial-Grade Design and Analysis Computer Programs In 2012, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) submitted Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) 1025243 - “Plant Engineering: Guideline for the Acceptance of Commercial-Grade Design and Analysis Computer Programs Used in Nuclear Safety-Related Applications” for staff review and approval. EPRI 1025243 describes a dedication methodology for commercial-grade design and analysis computer programs for use in meeting regulatory requirements. EPRI 1025243 follows the method provided in EPRI NP-5652, which the NRC conditionally endorsed in Generic Letter 89-02.

On July 1, 2015, the NRC issued for public comment, DG–1305, ‘‘Acceptance of Commercial-Grade Design and Analysis Computer Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.’’ The DG provides new guidance that describes acceptance methods that the NRC staff considers acceptable in meeting regulatory requirements for acceptance and dedication of commercial-grade design and analysis computer programs for nuclear power plants. The DG-1305 public comment

of 50

12

period is now closed. 40 comments were received from NEI, other stakeholders, and the public.

On January 4, 2017, the NRC issued Regulatory Guide 1.231, “Acceptance of Commercial Grade Design and Analysis Computer Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.” This regulatory guide (RG) describes acceptance methods that the NRC staff considers acceptable in meeting regulatory requirements for acceptance and dedication of commercial-grade design and analysis computer programs used in safety-related applications for nuclear power plants. This RG endorses Revision 1 of EPRI 1025243, with respect to acceptance of commercial-grade design and analysis computer programs associated with basic components for nuclear power plants. The RG is publicly available in ADAMS at Accession No. ML16126A183.

8. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.164, “Dedication of Commercial-Grade Items for Use in Nuclear Power Plants” (Draft DG-1292) In September, 2014, the EPRI issued the 2014 Technical Report 3002002982, “Plant Engineering: Guideline for the Acceptance of Commercial-Grade Items in Nuclear Safety-Related Applications” - Revision 1 to EPRI NP-5652 and TR-102260. The NRC staff participated during many of the EPRI technical advisory group (TAG) meetings held at EPRI’s offices in Charlotte, North Carolina.

This report describes a methodology that can be used to dedicate commercial-grade items for use in safety-related applications. The scope of applications for which commercial-grade item dedication is used has evolved significantly since the EPRI published its reports Guideline for the Utilization of Commercial Grade Items in Nuclear Safety Related Applications (NCIG-07) (NP-5652) and Supplemental Guidance for the Application of EPRI Report NP-5652 on the Utilization of Commercial Grade Items (TR-102260) in 1988 and 1994, respectively. The guidance in this final report reflects lessons learned and addresses challenges that have been identified through expanded use of the original guidance. This report supersedes both original reports in their entirety.

Draft Guide DG-1292, “Dedication of Commercial-Grade Items for Use in Nuclear Power Plants,” was issued on June, 30, 2016, for a 60 day public comment period. The NRC staff received and evaluated 29 comments from NEI, other stakeholders and the public. This new RG approves for use (with 2 staff regulatory positions) Revision 1 to the EPRI NP-5652 and TR-102260, with respect to acceptance of commercial-grade dedication of items used as basic components for nuclear power plants.

The NRC staff has completed update of DG-1292 and it will be issued as Regulatory Guide 1.164, “Dedication of Commercial-Grade Items for Use in Nuclear Power Plants.” RG -1.164 is currently under final internal NRC Office review should be issued in the spring of 2017.

9. Revision to Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.28, (Draft RG 1326) The NRC staff continues to endorse the previous guidance in the current RG 1.28, Quality Assurance Program Criteria (Design and Construction), Revision 4, issued in June 2010, and is not aware of any issues that would preclude its use. Revision 4, of RG 1.28 extended the scope of the NRC’s endorsement to include NQA-1, Part II. Part II contains amplifying QA requirements for certain specific work activities that occur at various stages of a facility’s life.

of 50

13

The work activities include, but are not limited to, management, planning, site investigation, design, computer software use, commercial-grade dedication, procurement, fabrication, installation, inspection, and testing.

In June 2015, the NRC staff completed a review and identified that differences exist between the previously NRC accepted guidance (NQA-1-2008 and NQA-1a-2009 addenda) and the most recently issued guidance from the ASME (NQA-1b-2011, NQA-1-2012 and NQA-1-2015). Therefore, the staff has developed draft RG-1326 with the intent to approve for use, with several regulatory positions, the guidance from ASME NQA-1b-2011, NQA-1-2012 and NQA-1-2015.

Draft RG-1326 is undergoing internal NRC review, but should be released for public comment within the next few months.

10. NRC Staff Safety Evaluation for Duke Energy’s Use of 2011 NIRMA Technical Guides (TGs) On May 11, 2015, the NRC issued the Safety Evaluation for the Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Amendment to the Quality Assurance Topical Report (QATR) to revise the QATR to reference the following 2011 Nuclear Information and Records Management Association (NIRMA) technical guides (TGs):

TG 11-2011, “Authentication of Records and Media,”

TG 15-2011, “Management of Electronic Records,”

TG 16-2011, “Software Quality Assurance Documentation and Records,”

TG 21-2011, “Required Records Protection, “Disaster Recovery and Business Continuation”

This change allows use of the 2011 NIRMA technical guides instead of the older 1998 version, which are listed in Attachment 1 of Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-018, “Guidance on Managing Quality Assurance Records in Electronic Media.” Specifically, the newer 2011 version of the NIRMA technical guides provide additional implementing details that continue to meet the quality assurance record requirements contained in Appendix B, Criterion XVII.

11. NRC Staff Interface with Nuclear Utilities Procurement Issues Committee (NUPIC) During the week of February 13, 2017, NRC staff participated and made presentations at the NUPIC Lead Auditor conference and General Membership Meeting in Cherry Hill, NJ. The NRC addressed ongoing staff initiatives including an update on vendor inspection activities and key findings from those inspections.

The NRC periodically accompanies a NUPIC Joint Utility Audit team to observe selected audits and ensure that the audit process used for suppliers of components to the nuclear industry remains an acceptable alternative to the NRC's vendor inspection/audit program. The NRC staff continues to rely on the effectiveness of the NUPIC joint utility audit process for evaluating the implementation of quality assurance programs of suppliers to the nuclear industry.

of 50

14

On January 16-20, 2017, NRC observed the performance of a NUPIC joint utility audit of Curtiss-Wright Nuclear Division in Cincinnati, OH. Tennessee Valley Authority led the audit, with participation from Omaha Public Power District, Talen Energy, Nebraska Public Power and Societatea Nationala Nuclearelectrica (SNN) using the NUPIC checklist, Revision 20. The NRC concluded that the NUPIC checklist was effectively implemented and resulted in appropriate findings.

During the week of June 19, 2017, the NRC will be participating and making presentations at the 2017 Annual NUPIC Vendor Meeting and General Membership Meetings in New Orleans, LA.

The NRC issues trip reports to document NRC observation of audits performed by NUPIC that are available at the below web-site link:

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/oversight/quality-assurance/nupic-industry.html

13. NRC Infortmation Notice 2016-01 Reverse Engineering issues

On July 15, 2016, NRC Information Notice 2016-09: “Recent Issues Identified when using Reverse Engineering Techniques in the Procurement of Safety-Related Components was issued. The NRC is issuing this information notice to inform addressees of issues that the NRC staff has identified concerning the supply of replacement safety-related components. Specifically, this IN describes instances where reverse engineering techniques were used to manufactured replacement components, and where the components were supplied without first verifying the supplied components met all safety-related design requirements. The NRC expects that recipients will review the information for applicability to their facilities and consider actions, as appropriate, to avoid similar problems. During the March 15th 2017 NRC Regulatory Information Conference (RIC) technical session on “Nuclear Supply Chain – Opportunity to Excel,” a Reverse Engineering Guidance Update was presented by the Electric Power Research Institute and AZZ | Nuclear Logistics made a presentation on the importance of customer communications when the supplier performing reverse engineering activities .

14. Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) Update NRC Waste Management Summary and Update Spent Nuclear Fuel Assemblies in Dry Storage in the US As of the end of 2016, 102,416 commercial spent fuel assemblies are being stored in 2,471 storage systems (some of those systems are storing greater-than-Class C waste). One year ago 93,426 spent fuel assemblies were stored in 2,277 storage systems, which indicates that 8,990 spent fuel assemblies were placed into 194 storage systems in 2016 in the United States alone during 2016.

of 50

15

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Rulemaking) The Commission approved publication of the proposed 10 CFR Part 61 rule and the associated draft guidance on March 26, 2015 for public comment. Seven public meetings were held to disseminate the rulemaking information and comments were accepted through September 21, 2015. Several major themes arose during the comment period. Specifically, the staff received comments on whether the new rule should be applied to existing facilities that do not anticipate receiving additional large quantities of depleted uranium and whether major portions of the rule should be designated as Compatibility C, granting agreement states more flexibility in implementing the rule. Comments were also received on if the 1000-year compliance period was appropriate for long-lived radionuclides. The final rule was developed after staff evaluated the significant public comments. On September 16, 2016, staff delivered the final 10 CFR Part 61 rule to the Commission for their review. Staff received a vote approving the final rule for issuance from Commissioner Baron on February 1, 2017. Staff is awaiting two more votes from the Commission. Waste Control Specialists Consolidated Interim Storage Facility Waste Control Specialists LLC (WCS) is seeking a license to operate a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) for spent fuel and GTCC waste storage for 40 years in accordance with 10 CFR Part 72. The WCS CISF facility is located approximately one-half mile east of the Texas-New Mexico state boundary and occupies approximately 25 square miles of property (primarily in Texas with nominal acreage in New Mexico) owned by WCS in northwestern Andrews County, Texas. WCS CISF will provide dry storage capacity for canisterized spent nuclear fuel at the WCS site in the same storage overpack designs as those currently licensed and used at the original storage sites. Construction of the WCS CISF is planned to start in September 2019 and operation is planned to begin in December 2020. NMSS/DSFM completed the application Acceptance Review and has begun reviewing the application and generating Requests for Additional Information (RAIs). Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance (ELEA) Consolidated Interim Storage Facility A second proposed ISF, Holtec International has partnered with the Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance (ELEA) to license, construct, and operate a consolidated interim storage facility in New Mexico on land owned by ELEA. The initial license application will seek authorization to store approximately 5,000 MT of spent fuel contained in 500 canisters, but the environmental report that will be included with the application analyzes the full capacity of the facility, which is 100,000 MT in 10,000 canisters. Holtec has met with NRC staff for a pre-application meeting for a 10 CFR Part 72, site-specific, 40-year license for its HI-STORE consolidated interim storage facility (CISF). Branch Technical Position on Concentration Averaging and Encapsulation On February 25, 2015, staff issued the revision to the Branch Technical Position on Concentration Averaging and Encapsulation (BTP CA). The regulatory requirements for licensing a low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility describe a system for classifying low-level radioactive waste for near-surface disposal. Classification of LLW is based on the concentrations of certain radionuclides, and 10 CFR 61.55(a)(8) specifically allows for

of 50

16

averaging of concentrations in determining the waste class. BTP CA expands on those regulatory requirements by describing acceptable averaging methods that can be used in classifying waste. Staff has conducted inspector training classes for the NRC Regional inspection staff and agreement state inspectors. NRC staff participated in an EPRI working group to ensure uniform understanding and implementation of the revised positions in the guidance document. EPRI’s guidance document (Implementation Guidance for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Branch Technical Position on “Concentration Averaging and Encapsulation, Revision 1”) was published on September 26, 2016. Graded Dry Storage Licensing Framework NRC staff, along with representatives from industry, continue to work to develop a graded approach to dry cask storage licensing that reflects the reduced risk that dry casks pose to members of the public and the environment so that resources at all levels are focused on the most safety significant areas of dry storage licensing. Industry has desired a more risk-informed framework for dry storage for many years because 10 CFR Part 72 licenses and Certificates of Compliance (CoC) contain a level of detail that is not commensurate with the risk of storing spent fuel assemblies in dry storage systems. NRC Publishes Guidance Report on Nondestructive Examination for Dry Casks A new guidance document has been published titled, Nondestructive Examination Guidance for Dry Storage Casks. The report “reviews nondestructive examination (NDE) methods and their applicability to aging effects in concrete overpack and metal canister components…” The report will aid the NRC staff with reviews of renewal applications for welded canister-type dry storage systems. It is available on the NRC website using Accession No. ML16270A535.

of 50

The views and opinions presented are solely the author’s. No information contained in this document, presentation, nor any associated discussion should be construed as official or unofficial views or positions of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.

1/1

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board’s

Technical Staff Liaison Report

to the ASME Committee on Nuclear Quality Assurance

Provided at the Spring 2017 Main Committee Meeting

Walter S. Horton, Ph.D., Member of the Main Committee & Software Subcommittee

Several staffing issues e.g., attracting new nuclear quality assurance (QA) staff, maintaining existing QA staff, and improving the qualification of the nuclear QA workforce at defense nuclear facilities continue to be a concern of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board). Following the completion and success of the Board’s QA knowledge transfer pilot project, the Board directed a second group of six new staff members participate in a second knowledge transfer project.

Members of the Board’s staff continue to monitor the ongoing efforts of DOE concerning the compliance of Radcalc with DOE’s software quality assurance requirements. (See RADCALC—An Analytical Tool for Shippers of Radioactive Materials and Waste, Including Transuranic Waste-Transportation and Hydrogen Gas Determinations—http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/em/FactsheetRadcalc20100527.pdf)

Members of the Board’s staff evaluated the Software Quality Assurance (SQA) Program of the contractor Los Alamos National Laboratory in November, 2016. Members of the Board’s staff continue to monitor the corrective actions identified during the SQA review.

Members of the Board’s staff continue to monitor DOE and Bechtel National Inc. (BNI) efforts to perform commercial grade dedication (CGD) of two emergency turbine generators for the High Level Waste Facility at the Waste Treatment Plant in Hanford, WA. BNI has recently updated many internal CGD implementing procedures after numerous DOE findings on their original set of procedures.

Members of the Board’s staff continue to monitor the corrective actions identified during the Quality Assurance (QA) and Software Quality Assurance (SQA) review of the National Nuclear Security Agency (NNSA) Nevada Field Office (NFO) and the prime contractor, National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), in Las Vegas NV.

Members of the Board’s staff continue to monitor the corrective actions of a review of the instrumentation and controls system of the critical assembly machines at the DOE NNSA National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC). The review team identified several concerns relating to the SQA program in identifying and managing safety software. The concerns relating to the SQA program for the NCERC software are very similar to the concerns that were cited in DNFSB/TECH-25 for the Los Alamos Criticality Experiments Facility. In January 2000, DNFSB/TECH-25 reported that Los Alamos had identified short and long term plans to address the SQA deficiencies and that the “new SQA process is expected to be applied

of 50

The views and opinions presented are solely the author’s. No information contained in this document, presentation, nor any associated discussion should be construed as official or unofficial views or positions of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.

2/1

during the upgrade of the software descriptions and development of new computer-controlled systems.”

Members of the Board’s staff continued to monitor DOE and Consolidated Nuclear Security, LLC (CNS) efforts to properly complete structural repairs at the Pantex Plant. The issues with the repairs involved meeting QA and structural requirements of mechanical rebar splices from an unqualified vendor (requiring commercial grade dedication) and faulty testing/emplacement of concrete.

Members of the Board’s staff continue to review and contribute to the development and release of the DOE Commercial Grade Dedication Handbook as part of the Board’s oversight of DOE’s safety related directives. While the Board does not endorse the handbook, the Board does consider the area of Commercial Grade Dedication as an important nuclear safety topic.

A member of the Board’s staff submitted inquiry 15-2265 regarding the acceptability of using electronic tagging through software databases for identifying non-conforming items. Specifically, a number of program reviews and audits identified the use of software databases to identify and electronically tag non-conforming items in lieu of using a “legible marking, tagging, or other methods not detrimental to the item, on (emphasis added) either the item, the container, or the package containing the item” as required by Part I Requirement 15 paragraph 200. Thus, one cannot determine an item’s conformance through visual inspection alone since there is no marking or tagging physically on the item itself to distinguish itself as non-conforming. Inadvertent use of these non-conforming items relies on the software database to “flag” the item when someone attempts to use the item in the facility.

of 50

REPLY TO: Charles H. Moseley, Jr 1321 Heritage Heights Lane Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587 919-435-8105; 919-435-8105(Fax) [email protected]

ASQ Liaison Report Cincinnati, Ohio

April 6, 2017

Infrastructure and Process Improvements

ANSI performed their reaccreditation audit in December 2014. A revision was submitted to ANSI to close out the audit. ANSI approved the Standards Committee Operating Manual on July 2, 2015. This places ASQ in an excellent position as a Standards Development Organization for the next three years.

The national ASQ Standards Committee Vice Chair is assigned the responsibility for maintaining the ASQ Operating Manual. This position is currently filled by the Energy and Environmental Standards Chair.

Energy and Environmental Division Standards

Work to revise ANSI/ASQC E1, Quality Program Guidelines for Project Phase of Nonnuclear Power Generation Facilities has been suspended. There is no current schedule. A new champion has been identified.

The EED Standards Chair informed the Division that some utilities have asked ASQ to “dust off” the draft of ANSI/ASQC E3, Quality Guidelines for Commercial Operations Phase of Nonnuclear Power Facilities, but no action has been taken.

ANSI/ASQC E2 -1996. Guidelines for Inspection Planning has not been active for over twenty years.)

ANSI/ASQC E4, Quality Systems for Environmental Data and Technology Programs, was reviewed and approved by ANSI and was published in February of 2014. We have a few more years before having to decide the next course of action

Actions are taking place to revise the ASQC Quality Auditor’s Handbook that was last published by ASQC in 1986. This handbook was very popular in the mid- eighties and could be useful to utilities in the struggling nuclear renascence as well as international users. A late 2014 survey of utilities by the undersigned found little current interest. Many organizations still use the 1980s document to train their auditors and there is a lot of interest in revising it for international users.

Personnel

The undersigned serves as Vice Chair of the National ASQ Standards Committee. His current term will expire in December 2017.

Respectfully submitted,

C. H. Moseley, Jr.

of 50

ANS Liaison Report REPLY TO:

Cincinnati, Ohio Charles H. Moseley, Jr

April 6, 2017 1321 Heritage Heights Lane Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587

919-435-8105; 919-435-8105(Fax) [email protected]

This report is from the liaison representative from ANS to ASME NQA who also serves as the ASME NQA liaison to the ANS Standards Board. ANS 3.2 Activity ANSI 18.7/ ANS3.2 Management, Administrative, and Quality Assurance Controls for the Operational Phase of Nuclear Power Plants is the main ANS standard of interest to the NQA committee. It was last published in 2012 There are four NQA Main committee members on the existing 3.2 working group so communications are very effective. The 2012 edition provides the Managerial, Administrative and QA controls necessary to implement 10CFR 50 Appendix B for operating Nuclear Power Plants. The revision references NQA-1 2008/2009 in many places as the standard for the implementation of the Quality Assurance requirements. The 3.2 Chairman reconstituted the working group in 2010, including five utility representatives that served on the NEI QA Task Force. (Over seventy operating nuclear units were represented on the WG.) The NRC issued Revision 3 to Regulatory Guide 1.33 in June 2013. (The last draft of Regulatory Guide 1.33 was issued for comment in 1983.) This was a major step forward in achieving consistent quality requirements for the nuclear industry. The new revision does not affect existing plants that are committed to earlier versions of 3.2 (ANSI 18.7 1972 and 1976.) The Working Group has decided to Reaffirm the NRC endorsed 2012 edition. Balloting is currently underway to accomplish this course of action. Other ASNS Quality Related Standards ANSI/ANS-15.2, Quality Control for Plate-type Uranium-aluminum Fuel Elements was reaffirmed in September 2016. There is an intention to revise the document to address new materials. ANSI/ANS-15.8-1995, Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Research Reactors was Reaffirmed in 2013. No action is planned for this year. Both standards are formatted in the eighteen criteria and are consistent with NQA-Part 1. Other Items of Interest The ANS Standards Committee has recently finished a significant reorganization of the entire Standards Board and Consensus Committees. .

C. H. Moseley, Jr. ANS Standards Board Member ANS LLW Reactors Member ANS 3.2 Member

of 50

Progress with the Nuclear Industry Specific draft ISO Standard – ISO 19443

Quality management systems — Specific requirements for the application of ISO 9001 and IAEA GS‐R

requirements by organizations in the supply chain of the nuclear energy sector

ASTM International administers the Nuclear Technical Advisory Group (NTAG) provides all US support to

the ISO Technical Committee 85 ‐ Nuclear Energy (ISO/TC 85). The NTAG is responsible for the US review

and balloting of all standards developed by ISO/TC 85. ISO/TC 85/Working Group 4 (ISO/WG 85/WG 4) is

currently developing ISO 19443, a quality management standard for the nuclear supply chain.

The 8th meeting of the ISO/TC 85/WG 4 was hosted by AREVA in Paris, France, November 7‐10, 2016.

The WG dispositioned the 371 comments received from Committee Draft (CD) that had been circulated

to 22 countries. The draft document was updated to reflect the comments, and was submitted for

translation prior to issuance for comment as a Draft International Standard (DIS) draft.

The DIS draft was subsequently issued for comment on March 10, 2017. The open voting period is

March 10 through June 1, 2017. After comments are received, WG 4 plans to meet to disposition new

comments and then issue a Final Draft International Standard (FDIS) for ballot. ASTM coordinates

comments and submits votes for the US.

Concurrent with the review and approval process for this draft standard, WG 4 is also preparing and

plans to issue several guidance documents to assist users in implementation of the new standard. A

meeting for this purpose was held in Ispra, Italy in March 2017. Drafts for three guidance documents are

being prepared:

Safety, classification & risk management, grading & cascading along the supply chain, Leader:

UK, Support: France

Documentation management, Leader: Japan, Support: Italy & USA

Auditing, Leader France, Support: Germany.

A report from the March 2017 meeting will be provided verbally at the NQA meeting in Cincinnati in

April, 2017.

of 50

FormRev4,Feb2011

BNCSEX‐OFFICIO&TASKTEAMREPORTFORM

BNCSReport Page1

Date: 3/7/17

Committee or Task Group: BPV III Div 1, Div 2, Div 3, Div 4, Div 5

Prepared by: John Minichiello

Each Task Group or Committee must report on their activities regarding the specific BNCS Strategic Objectives on the form provided below. If “none” or “n/a” under a specific category, so state. BPV III Divisions:

Div 1: Class 1, 2, 3 & MC Components; Supports; and Core Support Structures Div 2: Concrete Containments Div 3: Containments for Transportation and Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High Level Radioactive Material and Waste Div 4: Fusion Energy Devices (in development) Div 5: High Temperature Reactors

I. Industry & Government

I1 – Initiate Activities to Support New Reactor Standards Development Needs

Div 2 GOAL: o Revision to ASME III Division 2 to support New Reactors (SMR included). Our

WG Modernization will be exploring this. Note that SMRs involve relatively small containments, where steel works to be a better option than concrete form cost, schedule and construction ease point of view. Based on this, we do not see concrete containment as a practical option for SMRs.

MEASUREMENT:

o Revision to ASME III Division 2 to support New Reactors

TARGET: o The Special Working Group on Modernization within the Joint Committee has

been tracking new nuclear plant technologies and this is a standing item on their agenda. No additional requirements have been identified by the industry to be necessary to support SMR concrete containment developments at this time. Although it is proving difficult to get information on containments for new technologies as much of it is proprietary, use of concrete containment has not been found to be feasible for SMRs that are in the works from construction and schedule point of view.

DIV 4 GOAL:

o Issuance of ASME III Division 4 Code Rules MEASUREMENT:

o Publication of first section of Division 4 Fusion codes rules to be included in ASME III.

of 50

FormRev4,Feb2011


BNCSReport Page2

TARGET: o To publish the first section of the new Division 4 Fusion Code Rules. The new

section has been developed including different fusion component types with an attempt to make it country technology neutral.

DIV 5 GOAL:

o Revision to ASME III Division 5 to support High Temperature Reactors

MEASUREMENT: o Revision to ASME III Division 5 to support High Temperature Reactors

TARGET:

o Concurrent with the formation of SG-HTR, there were a series of planning documents or roadmaps submitted to the Chair of BPV III. SG-HTR has identified high priority items to be implemented in 2017 edition and the beyond 2017 editions at the meeting in January 2015. Some items, such as the two code cases on the new elastic, perfectly plastic (EPP) methodologies for strain limits and creep-fatigue damage evaluations of 304 and 316 stainless steels, have been approved. The high priority list has been updated in May 2016. Items include; extension of EPP to other Division 5 metallic materials, a new material code case for Alloy 617 (nickel alloy), extension of material allowables for 500,000 hr design, determination of effective allowable stresses for Class B components, and digital representations and equations for materials properties (2019 ed), and pursuance of an “all temperature code” for metallic components, construction rules for compact heat exchangers, a new material code case for Alloy 709 (stainless steel), and incorporation of non-irradiated and irradiated graphite material properties (beyond 2019 ed).

I2 – Develop Risk Technology Applications for New Codes & Standards

Div 1 GOAL: o Develop rules for risk-informed classification of components

MEASUREMENT:

o Short term: Publication of Code Case N-720 (Record 09-1060) o Long term: Publication in ANS 30.2 or other ANS standard

TARGET:

o Publication of Code Case by 2017.

of 50

FormRev4,Feb2011


BNCSReport Page3

G1 – Regulatory Endorsement of NC&S

DIV 2 GOAL: o Obtain NRC Endorsement of the 2013 Edition of Section III, Division 2. We have

briefly discussed this with somewhat unclear outcome as many members did not understand the issue. Clayton Smith will be making a presentation at the Nov meeting to get a sense of where the Committee wants to go with this.

MEASUREMENT:

o None at this time

TARGET: o The Committee has decided that NRC endorsement of Div. 2 would not be of any

specific benefit to our consumers and has thus dropped this item, which will be deleted in the next report.

DIV 3 GOAL:

o Achieve U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) endorsement of Section III, Division 3

MEASUREMENT:

o The NRC has established strategic goals related to the challenges of future licensing of storage and transportation containments. Considering the two goals that relate directly to Division 3, the first goal, making Division 3 relevant, has already been achieved with the incorporation of strain-based acceptance criteria into the 2013 Edition of Division 3. The final goal, endorsement of Division 3, is continuing. The NRC completed its in-house review of Division 3 and during the August 2014 BPV Code Week provided over fifty review comments to the appropriate ASME Section III, Division 3 committees for discussion and clarification. The Division 3 committees can now proceed with detailed deliberations and any necessary Code revision efforts. Publication of all such actions would finally permit the NRC to proceed with endorsement of Division 3.

TARGET:

o The 2019 Edition of Division 3 has been established as the target goal for publishing necessary revisions in order to satisfy NRC review comments. This is an aggressive target but endorsement by the NRC is a high priority for BPV III. Final endorsement of Division 3 by the NRC is difficult to estimate at this time.

DIV 5 GOAL:

o Endorsement of Division 5 by NRC

MEASUREMENT: o Incorporation of Division 5 in 10 CFR 50.55a Codes and Standards

of 50

FormRev4,Feb2011


BNCSReport Page4

TARGET: o U.S. NRC has drafted a set of General Design Criteria (GDC) for general

advanced reactor plant designs and for the sodium fast reactor and modular high temperature gas reactor specific designs. SG-HTR and SG-ETD have reviewed the draft and provided the comments to NRC staff on the committee.

o A presentation on Division 5 endorsement was presented to ESAC in July 2016 to request input for possible actions.

o The issue on Division 5 endorsement had been brought up at the August 2016 ASME-NRC management meeting and an update at the March 2017 ASME-NRC management teleconference.

o Two task groups, one on metallic structures and components, the other on non-metallic support structures, have been formed by SG-HTR to develop a roadmap for the NRC endorsement of Division 5. The membership of the task groups includes NRC staff. The ASME/NRC Task Groups activities will factor in NRC/ACRS comments from prior reviews going back to the days of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor. Further, current and historic activities by National Laboratories and reactor vendors and their subcontractors will be reviewed. The objective of the roadmap is to facilitate NRC’s ultimate endorsement of Division 5. It is planned that the roadmap will be proposed to SG-HTR by January 30, 2018.

R2 – Identify/Increase Application of NC&S for Nuclear Facilities

BPV III GOAL: o ASME develops the Nuclear Code of the future with an initial target

publication date of June 2025. An early draft vision statement for this objective is: “A simplified Code that recognizes and utilizes modern construction methodology, governs the complete lifecycle of the component or system, maintains appropriate margins of safety, invokes performance based value added requirements and provides separate administrative and technical requirements.”

MEASUREMENT:

o Vision and Concept Development – incorporating input form codes and standard volunteers, ASME staff, and external stakeholder develop a vision, business plan, and conceptual design and obtain necessary approvals.

o Content Development – develop and implement a resource loaded plan and schedule to develop the 2025 Code; implement the plan.

o Governance Development – develop concept for governance including: funding considerations; publication considerations; structure, membership & operation of 2025 Code committee(s); and Code issuance and regulatory acceptance/ endorsement.

of 50

FormRev4,Feb2011


BNCSReport Page5

TARGET o Vision and Concept Development – end of CY 2015, now 2016 o BPV III Executive Committee to provide consistent guidelines for all BPV III

consolidation and modernization activities (2017) o Content Development – Summer of CY 2024 o Governance Development – end of CY 2017 and reaffirmed Spring of CY 2023

DIV 1 GOAL: o BPV III establishes rules for repair of components that support the needs of newly

constructed plants like Watts Bar 2, as well as new plant construction (with emphasis on those licensed to 10CFR Part 52), including modular construction.

MEASUREMENT:

o BPV III forms a Task Group on Component Repair (TGCR) with the charter to achieve the objective defined above. Members of the TGCR will include representatives from Section XI Repair and Replacement Sub Group, Watts Bar Unit 2, and new plant construction for either Vogtle or VC Summer.

o Code Cases or revisions to BPV III that establish rules for repair of components are approved and published.

TARGET

o TGCR formed by December 2014 o Code Cases or revisions approved and published by June 2016. Code Case N-

801-1 has been issued which contains provisions for performing repairs of Stamped components using Section III rules.

o Another code case in preparation that would allow NA certificate holders to perform repairs on equipment they are installing provided that the repair does not require welding (Record 16-75). This action was board approved in January 2017.

DIV 1 GOAL:

o Develop new rules to allow for construction of larger components prior to identification of an Owner (Record 13‐1783)

MEASUREMENT:

o Revise NCA-3256(b) to eliminate the restrictions imposed by that paragraph for construction of items prior to Owner involvement. CS Connect record 13-1783 has been created and the proposed change is under consideration by SGGR.

TARGET:

o Publication in the 2019 Edition.

of 50

FormRev4,Feb2011


BNCSReport Page6

R3 – Identify Needs for New Nuclear Codes and Standards or New Code Sections

DIV 1 GOAL: o Develop Sec. III Appendix for the design and fabrication of high density

polyethylene pipe (HDPE pipe) MEASUREMENT:

o Mandatory appendix developed, published, and accepted by the regulator. Note that the developing TG includes representatives from the regulator

TARGET:

o This appendix passed and was published in the 2015 Edition; review is underway for additional enhancements. Regulator acceptance via 10CFR50.55a in 2017 (tentative, based on regulator schedule).

DIV 1 GOAL: o Update existing Rules for Impactive and Impulsive Loads.

MEASUREMENT:

o Develop a proposed code change for to update existing rules.

TARGET: o Publish Phase 1 rules in a code case by the end of 2015. Record 13-1438 was

established to provide a Code Case with a strain-based alternative to the rules of Appendix F for piping systems.

DIV 5 GOAL: o Develop Subsection HH Subpart B that provides construction rules for composite

materials as nonmetallic core support structures for use in high temperature reactors.

MEASUREMENT:

o This effort is on-going and initial draft was letter balloted.

TARGET: o To be determined.

DIV 5 GOAL: o Add to Division 5 allowable stresses for graphite based on the testing defined in

Division 5.

of 50

FormRev4,Feb2011


BNCSReport Page7

MEASUREMENT: o Effort on-going.

TARGET:

o To be determined II. GLOBAL LEADERSHIP: GL1 - Enhance Globalization of ASME NC&S:

BPV III GOAL: o Revise current BPV III requirements for use of Registered Professional Engineers

to eliminate this as a jurisdictional specific requirement that is a barrier to global application of BPV III certification and stamping requirements.

o Plan International meetings

MEASUREMENT: o June 2014 Code Week – Joint BPV III/TOMC TG reached consensus opinion and

obtained TOMC approval to prepare Code Revisions for affected standards o Code Cases or revisions to BPV III that implement consensus opinion approved

and published. o International meetings held.

TARGET:

o Code revisions approved and published for 2017 Code edition (Record 15-209 on this subject is in progress).

o Joint workshop and meetings with BPV III and BNCS were held in Shanghai, September 2016

Div 2 GOAL:

o Increase Global Participation in Division 2 Code Revisions. The Committee has initiated a number of steps to improve both membership and participation internationally:

• Active recruitment of members – we have added and continue to recruit new members from China, Korea, England and India etc. We have recently added one contributing member from China and also approved one WG member from Korea (see attached email).

• Proactive and timely support of international inquiries • We have adjusted meeting time/schedule to enable international

participants to call in

MEASUREMENT: o Increase Global Membership (will track on yearly basis)

of 50

FormRev4,Feb2011


BNCSReport Page8

TARGET: o We have added new international contributing members and are also actively

engaged with international organizations like SNERDI to help harmonize or modernize our future Code provisions)

DIV 4 GOAL:

o Enhance the global involvement of membership within the BPV III Division 4 by establishing global network of fusion user membership for the Sub-Group and its supporting Work Groups.

MEASUREMENT:

o Establishment and approval of 5 work groups. .

TARGET: o Established 5 new work groups to support the SG Fusion Energy Devices with

officers and membership representing the global fusion user base. There are 25 members of the SG Fusion Energy Devices representing 8 different countries and many different global companies.

DIV 5 GOAL:

o Enhance the global involvement of membership in Division 5 revisions

MEASUREMENT: o Enhance the Global Membership

TARGET: Ongoing Goal

GL2 - Support ASME and Related Symposiums, Conferences & Workshops:

DIV 4 GOAL: o Global Involvement of Fusion Users in Committee activities

MEASUREMENT:

o One meeting a year of the SG Fusion Energy Devices will be held outside of ASME Code Week and outside of the USA.

TARGET: see Measurement

Div 2 GOAL:

o Develop Rules for beyond design basis accidents specifically for the evaluation of impulsive and impactive loadings. Note that currently there is no consensus in the Committee as of now on whether to go forward with BDBE requirements although some members seem to lobby for it. The Chair believes we need direction from ASME on this one since the scope of current ASME Codes only covers design basis requirements.

of 50

FormRev4,Feb2011


BNCSReport Page9

MEASUREMENT:

o Develop funding for testing of impulsive loading effects on concrete containments.

TARGET: o Funding was obtained for testing of impulsive loading effects on prestressed

concrete panels in the fall of 2015, for use in improving provisions in the Code related to impulsive loading.

o The Phase 1 testing was completed and a report will be issued within next few months. The JC will be discussing the outcome of the results at the upcoming face to face meeting in Detroit at the ACI Fall Convention

R1 - Identify and Evaluate Technologies for Applications in Nuclear Codes & Standards:

DIV 2 GOAL: o Explore use of grouted tendons in prestressed concrete o Explore use of high strength/performance concrete and reinforcement o Explore and allow use of sustainable materials and practices

MEASUREMENT:

o WG Modernization will be taking on these and provide a recommendation to the Joint Committee

TARGET:

o Each of the 3 topics was added to the Spring 2016 meeting agenda for the Special Working Group on Modernization and discussed at their Spring 2016 meeting. All 3 have subsequent follow up actions that are being tracked and require completion before a recommendation can be made to the Joint Committee. No further update at this time.

DIV 4 GOAL:

o Develop Rules for Fusion Components within the parameters of the BPV charter. MEASUREMENT:

o Develop rules for Fusion Components that are considered part of the pressure boundary and/or structural integrity of a fusion system and incorporate into the new fusion code rules. This is being worked in a Phased Approach using the approved Division 4 Roadmap.

TARGET:

o Issuance of first section of the fusion component rules by the next BPV Edition after the 2017 edition.

DIV 5 GOAL:

o Modernize and simplify design analysis methods for Div 5, Subsection HB, Subpart B.

of 50

FormRev4,Feb2011


BNCSReport Page10

MEASUREMENT:

o Develop design analysis methods that are more adaptable to modern finite element technology and eliminate stress classification.

TARGET: o Code cases for the strain limits and creep-fatigue damage evaluations based on

the Elastic, Perfectly Plastic (EPP) methodologies for 304 and 316 stainless steels have been approved by BNCS. Issue EPP Code Cases for other materials in Subsection HB, Subpart B by August 2018.

DIV 5 GOAL:

o Introduction of new metallic materials into Division 5, Subsection HB, Subpart B.

MEASUREMENT: o Develop Div 5 material code cases.

TARGET:

o The R&D and data generation to support a Div 5 Alloy 617 Code Case have been ongoing for several years. An Alloy 617 Code Case and its supporting background and data packages are being drafted. Code Committee approval process for sub-tier records has been initiated in August 2016. It is anticipated that the approval process will take place over a two-year period.

DIV 5 GOAL:

o Develop rules with modern technology such as new simplified analysis methods that replace current linear analysis in elevated temperature design and design rules for compact heat exchangers.

MEASUREMENT:

o Develop whitepaper to discuss the Code considerations for compact heat exchangers.

o Develop technical basis. o Develop new rules for compact heat exchangers for high temperature reactors

TARGET:

o A whitepaper entitled, “ASME Code considerations for the compact heat exchanger,” was issued in August 2015.

o Three awards were made by DOE Nuclear Energy University Projects (NEUP) to university teams to develop Division 5 rules and design evaluation methods for compact heat exchangers. Experts from SG-ETD are collaborators to two university teams. Work will begin on October 1, 2016 for a three-year period. It is anticipated that results from these projects will support the development of a Division 5 code case on compact heat exchangers in 2021 time frame

of 50

FormRev4,Feb2011


BNCSReport Page11

o DOE Office of Nuclear Energy has announced a call for an FY17 NEUP integrated research project ($5M over 3 years) on the development of methodologies and procedures to support ASME Section III N-stamping of compact heat exchangers. University teams are encouraged to collaborate with ASME code experts and compact heat exchanger manufacturers. Proposals have been received and are currently being evaluated by DOE..

III. OPERATION & CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT: O1 – Develop/Implement a Business Plan to Enhance Responsiveness & Improve Productivity

DIV 2 GOAL: o Div 2 has taken a number of steps to improve the participation by members and

also streamline the work process to improve efficiency. Completion Date:

o July 2015 TARGET:

o Survey of membership completed recently indicates that members are generally satisfied with the changes and would like to continue.

o Note that Div 2 has already initiated an action on this in our WG Modernization group. The work will be carried out in collaboration with our international partners from China like SNERDI and progress updates provided on regular basis

o .

IV. EDUCATION & UNIVERSITY RELATIONS: S2 – Increase the conversion of engineering students and retention of early career members

DIV 2 GOAL:

o Div 2 will initiate a university outreach program to connect with both potential faculty and prospective student members using our existing connections

MEASUREMENT:

o Number of academic members and student members TARGET:

o We have added at least 1 university professor and are in the process of adding a couple more from overseas (Korea and China).

of 50

FormRev4,Feb2011


BNCSReport Page12

O2- Recruitment GOAL: MEASUREMENT: TARGET:

Others (specific to Committee):

DIV 1 GOAL: o Simplify the code by eliminating content that is duplicated in various Code books.

MEASUREMENT:

o Completion of three ongoing consolidation activities in Subcomittee Design; records 10-1381 (Consolidation of Design-by-analysis); 13-932 (Consolidation of Design-by rule for vessels), and, a consolidation effort for tank rules has been initiated (Record 16-1911). In addition, consideration is being given to combining Subsections NC and ND.

TARGET:

o Publication in the 2017 Edition

of 50

NITSL Liaison Report to ASME NQA-1 Committee

Cincinnati, Ohio April 6, 2017

This report is from the liaison representative from the Nuclear Information Technology Strategic Leadership (NITSL) to ASME NQA-1 Committee. The purpose of this report is to communicate items of interest to be reviewed at the Main Committee meeting.

Mission NITSL establishes a forum to provide leadership and strategic guidance for information technology in the nuclear industry. NITSL has four standing committees that work toward meeting the mission: Software Quality Assurance, Digital Controls, Cyber Security, and Infrastructure and Applications. Committee Activities Software Quality Assurance (SQA) The SQA committee has been challenged to explore areas to support collaboration among utilities. South Texas, TVA and Exelon will be leading the overall information sharing initiative but individual tasks will be led by others. The following topics are being reviewed to identify deliverables for 2017:

• Information Sharing can make our jobs more efficient. One of the information sharing topics is the Classification Methodology / Matrix. The NITSL and INPO SQA guidance documents discuss software classification methodologies; however, utilities have developed their own classification schemas. The SQA standing committee sent out a survey to gather the information to be placed into an industry matrix and shared on the NITSL website.

• A master software list was started a few years ago, but has not been maintained. With this information, it would be possible to contact a utility regarding specific software in use.

• The SQA Standing Committee also found benefit in sharing SQA procedures and self-assessments. The NITSL website can be used as a host for sharing this information.

Digital Controls (DC) The Digital Controls Committee provides leadership to the nuclear power industry in the area of digital plant process monitoring & control equipment throughout its life cycle. This year the Digital Controls committee will be working to develop long-term roadmaps for data historians. They also want to develop a roadmap and standards for use of virtualization with process systems.

of 50

NITSL Liaison Report to ASME NQA-1 Committee • • •

The Nuclear Information Technology Strategic Leadership (NITSL) organization is a forum to provide leadership and strategic guidance for information technology in the nuclear industry.

2

Cyber Security Standing Committee (CSSC) The Cyber Security Standing Committee (CSSC) identified four initiatives for the next 12 months. The 2016-2017 initiatives are:

Standard Monitoring and Effectiveness Process – The goal of this initiative is to provide guidance on how to comply with the ongoing monitoring and assessment requirements of NEI 08-09 section 4.3. The team has been engaged with the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Cyber Security Task Force effort to resolve lessons learned from the ongoing monitoring and assessment workshop hosted in 2016.

Populating/Revising CDA Assessment Tool – The purpose of this initiative is to promote the use of the control information sharing and CDA assessment repository developed as part of last year’s initiative. The NITSL CSSC plans to conduct reviews and comparisons of different utility assessments and control implementation methods. This effort is intended to promote a consistent interpretation of cyber security requirements and assessment methodologies. Update: While some utilities have participated in the sharing of assessments, procedures and direct binning classifications, the industry is nearing the milestone 8 commitment date which has made it challenging to participate. The team will adjust the initiative scope to address the current and future needs to the committee. Communication for Cyber Security Program Implementation Costs - The team will identify the top 3-4 most costly controls and document alternate controls. The documentation will also include the regulatory basis why the alternate meets or exceeds the original requirements. The goal is to support Delivering the Nuclear Promise by providing alternate, cost effective solutions for compliance with cyber security program implementation. The team is consolidating various work in the industry to develop some consensus estimates of the major work activities. Standard Supply Chain Framework Document - The goal of this initiative is to provide guidance that a licensee could use for implementation of cyber security requirements associated with procurement of assets in the scope of 10 CFR 73.54. This initiative is being aligned with the NEI Cyber Security Task Force effort to resolve challenges identified during the supply chain workshop. Team members are working with the NRC to develop implementing guidance for the NEI 08-09 Revision 6 Appendix E11 security controls. We are hoping to get NRC endorsement.

of 50



3

Infrastructure & Applications Standing Committee The I&A standing committee has four initiatives for this coming year; (1) creating a standard design process, (2) developing predictive analytic strategies, (3) define common requirements and guidance for cloud services, and (4) leveraging plant wireless. Two guidance documents have been added to the NITSL site addressing mobility. These are a result of collaboration between NITSL and Idaho National Labs. Both contain valuable information around developing computer based procedures and defined requirements for implementing Electronic Work Package at nuclear facilities. Industry News

Delivering the Nuclear Promise

The US Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) has identified nearly $650 million of potential savings through its initiative to ensure nuclear energy’s long-term viability through improved efficient. At the institute’s annual briefing to Wall Street analysts on February 9, 2017, its CEO, Maria Korsnick, highlighted the Delivering the Nuclear Promise program’s achievements.

“Over a thousand staff across the industry has collaborated to develop 46 efficiency bulletins targeting improvements in all aspects of operations. To date, over 95% of these measures are being implemented, reflecting the commitment to continuous improvement,” she said. “We are just getting started.”

Forty-two of the efficiency bulletins were issued in 2016. Four have so far been published this year: Portable Supplemental Radiation Protection Technician Training and Qualification; Self-Protection for Radiological Work Activities; Value-Based Maintenance; and Embracing Cultural Shifts for Value-Based Maintenance.

Nuclear Energy supplies more than 19% of US electricity; Korsnick said the long operating periods of nuclear plants provided a “bridge to the future” as shorter-lived assets age and require replacement.

“The nuclear industry has the performance, the capability, and is making the investments necessary to sustain and expand the nuclear fleet. The presents our government and investors [with] the opportunity to ensure a sustainable energy infrastructure for the long-term future,” she said.

Source: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NP-US-nuclear-efficiency-initiative-identifies-savings-1302177.html

of 50



4

Future Energy Jobs Bill (SB 2814) was signed by Illinois governor Rauner.

This bill recognizes the importance of Nuclear Power and guarantees that both Clinton and Quad Cities will remain operating for at least another ten years.

Plant Vogtle could use new fuel when MOX is complete

Units 3 and 4 at Southern Nuclear Company's Plant Vogtle and Savannah River Site’s mixed-oxide fuel fabrication facility are separated by government and private land almost entirely inaccessible to the general public, with a couple of minor exceptions. While the designs and purposes of each are entirely different, the commercial Plant Vogtle and the Department of Energy-run MOX facility could have entangled ties in the future. The MOX project is a product of a now-suspended nuclear weapons nonproliferation agreement between the U.S. and Russia. The agreement was signed in 2000, and construction began in 2007. The facility is intended to process weapons-usable plutonium, 34 metric tons under the agreement, and turn it into fuel for commercial nuclear reactors like those at Vogtle.

Mixed-oxide fuel was meant to be lower than market costs for other forms of nuclear fuel to incentivize the destruction of former weapons-grade plutonium. Areva Nuclear Materials LLC, one of the companies involved in MOX design and construction, said the fuel is designed to perform the same as natural uranium in the reactors.

According to Georgia Power spokesman Jacob Hawkins, “In order to accommodate the potential use of MOX fuel, modifications would be required for the plant’s physical structure, as well as the processes and procedures used to operate the facility.” “Current fuel at Plant Vogtle uses Low Enriched Uranium rather than Highly Enriched Uranium. Cost of fuel is a factor, nuclear or otherwise, with any generation we use to serve our customers, and we consider those costs as part of our long-term planning process. All decisions we make regarding operations are driven by safety, compliance with regulations and our ability to provide our customers with reliable and affordable energy,” he said. Once the MOX facility is operational, purchase and transportation of the fuel would be subject to Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing and regulations. However, prospects look grim for MOX. The facility was scheduled for completion in 2014, but Energy Department outlooks say the facility won’t be finished until after 2045. The original expected cost was around $5 billion, but the unfinished project has already reached that level, and costs are climbing. If the funding were made available and contractors were able to complete the MOX plant, the fuel could find use right where it would be created. The local impact could benefit both defense

of 50



5

nuclear processes at SRS and commercial production at Vogtle, if the switch can ever be thrown at the MOX facility. Source: http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/2017-02-18/plant-vogtle-could-use-new-fuel-when-mox-complete.

2017 NITSL Workshop Information Theme: Bridging the Gap – Leveraging the Digital Plant to Fulfill the Nuclear Promise Location: San Francisco, California Hosted by PG&E Dates: July 17-20, 2017 The agenda will include presentations from each committee and is being finalized. Respectfully submitted: P. Lynne Valdez

Approved by the Executive Committee

Larry Cerier, Chair

of 50

NQA 4-2017 Agenda

Documents

Transcript of NQA 4-2017 Agenda