4
10 CFR 50.69 Stephen Dinsmore Senior Reliability and Risk Analyst Division of Risk Assessment Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1 50.69 Risk-Informed Categorization and Treatment of Structures, Systems and Components for Nuclear Power Reactors NESCC November 3, 2014

10 CFR 50.69

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

10 CFR 50.69. 50.69 Risk-Informed Categorization and Treatment of Structures, Systems and Components for Nuclear Power Reactors NESCC November 3, 2014. Stephen Dinsmore Senior Reliability and Risk Analyst Division of Risk Assessment Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: 10 CFR 50.69

10 CFR 50.69

Stephen Dinsmore

Senior Reliability and Risk Analyst

Division of Risk Assessment

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

1

50.69 Risk-Informed Categorization and Treatment of Structures, Systems and

Components for Nuclear Power Reactors

NESCCNovember 3, 2014

Page 2: 10 CFR 50.69

10 CFR 50.69 Overview

• Voluntary alternative rule• Determine safety significance of SSCs after defining the

population of safety-related components• Modify special treatment requirements on SSCs based

on their safety significance• Treatment of low-safety-significance SSCs being

addressed in draft new inspection manual procedure 37060

• Vogtle Submitted Pilot Application August 31, 2012• NRR SER in final review phase

2

Page 3: 10 CFR 50.69

10 CFR 50.69Four-Box Categorization

Page 4: 10 CFR 50.69

10 CFR 50.69Categorization Process

• Minimum of a Level 1, internal events PRA – External events and Shutdown using PRA or using conservative

evaluations– Non-PRA functions and defense-in-depth addressed with questions that

Integrated Decision-making Panel answers

• Active component significance based on – Risk increase caused if component failed (Risk Achievement Worth) and – Nominal contribution to current risk (Fussel-Vessly)– Quantitative sensitivity studies for key uncertainties

• Passive component pressure retaining (rupture) significance based on consequences of failure

• Performance monitoring linked to unreliability increases• Change-in-risk primarily verifies categorization and subsequent

monitoring guideline values

4