MTA-MA-019 - Revision history

Monica Hurley: Revision 0 Reviewed by Colton Smith

2026-03-26T17:27:16Z

Revision 0 Reviewed by Colton Smith

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:27, 26 March 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{DISPLAYTITLE:Extend Calibration Intervals Using Historical Calibration Data - MTA-MA-019}}		{{DISPLAYTITLE:Extend Calibration Intervals Using Historical Calibration Data - MTA-MA-019}}
			[[Modernization_Technology_Assessment\| Return to MTA Table]]
	{{MTATemplate\|\|		{{MTATemplate\|\|
	\| Date \|12/15/2020		\| Date \|12/15/2020
Line 6:		Line 7:
	Guidelines for Instrument Calibration Extension/Reduction - Revision 2: Statistical Analysis of Instrument Calibration Data (EPRI [https://www.epri.com/research/products/3002002556 3002002556])		Guidelines for Instrument Calibration Extension/Reduction - Revision 2: Statistical Analysis of Instrument Calibration Data (EPRI [https://www.epri.com/research/products/3002002556 3002002556])

	[https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/gen-comm/gen-letters/1991/ US NRC Generic Letter 91-04 Changes in Technical Specification Surveillance Intervals to Accommodate a 24-Month Fuel Cycle]		[https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/gen-comm/gen-letters/1991/gl91004 US NRC Generic Letter 91-04 Changes in Technical Specification Surveillance Intervals to Accommodate a 24-Month Fuel Cycle]

	[https://www.nrc.gov/~~docs~~/~~ML9935~~/~~ML993560062.pdf~~ Regulatory Guide 1.105 ~~Rev. 3~~ Setpoints for Safety-Related Instrumentation]		[https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/reg-guides/power-reactors/rg/division-1/division-1-101 Regulatory Guide 1.105 Setpoints for Safety-Related Instrumentation]

	[https://www.nrc.gov/~~docs~~/~~ML1601~~/~~ML16019A200.pdf~~ NUREG-0800, Branch Technical Position 7-12, ~~Rev. 6~~ Guidance on Establishing and Maintaining Instrument Setpoints]		[https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr0800/ch7/index NUREG-0800, Branch Technical Position 7-12, Guidance on Establishing and Maintaining Instrument Setpoints]

	[https://www.~~nrc~~.~~gov~~/~~docs~~/~~ML0713~~/~~ML071360456.pdf~~ NEI 04-10 Rev. 1 Risk-Informed Technical Specifications Initiative 5b, Risk-Informed Method for Control of Surveillance Frequencies]		[https://www.nei.org/master-document-folder/technical-reports/nei-04-10-risk-informed-technical-specifications NEI 04-10 Rev. 1 Risk-Informed Technical Specifications Initiative 5b] - Risk-Informed Method for Control of Surveillance Frequencies
	\| Industry SME \| EPRI – ~~Chris Kerr~~		\| Industry SME \| EPRI – OPI

	Contact: NuclearPlantMod@epri.com		Contact: NuclearPlantMod@epri.com
	\| Previous Implementation \| Please contact EPRI for implementation examples and contacts.		\| Previous Implementation \| Please contact EPRI for implementation examples and contacts.
	\| Implementation Enablers \| N/A		\| Implementation Enablers \| N/A
	~~\| SWEEP Score \|~~
	* Cost – Level 2 – Implementation cost is between $1 million and $5 million. Costs for additional units may be reduced if drift calculations can be leveraged for like component types
	* Savings – Level 1 – Savings are less than $1 million per year per unit. Extension of calibration intervals is a one-time implementation cost. Once the license is changed, plants can see significant savings over the lifetime of the facility.
	* Payback – Level 2 – The payback period for implementation is greater than one year but less than five years (inclusive). Extension of calibration intervals is a one-time implementation cost. Once the license is changed, plants can see significant savings over the lifetime of the facility.
	* Licensing Readiness – Level 3 – This methodology to extend calibration intervals has already been implemented at nuclear plants. For instruments with calibration and surveillance intervals identified in plant Technical Specifications, a license amendment request (LAR) is required to extend the calibration intervals. This methodology follows NRC’s Generic Letter 91-04 which provides guidance on completing a LAR.
	* Technology Readiness – Level 3 – The methodology to extend calibration intervals has already been implemented at commercial nuclear sites.
	* Implementation Proficiency – Level 3 – The implementation of this methodology to extend calibration intervals does not require knowledge in implementing digital technologies.
	\| Applicability \| All reactor types		\| Applicability \| All reactor types
	The available guidance for extending calibration intervals is based on the U.S. NRC regulations.		The available guidance for extending calibration intervals is based on the U.S. NRC regulations.
Line 32:		Line 26:

	==Description==		==Description==
	Calibration and surveillance of nuclear plant instrumentation requires substantial resources. Historical calibration data can be used to better characterize instrument drift, which in turn can be used to justify increased calibration intervals and refine instrument uncertainty inputs to setpoint calculations. Per EPRI report 3002002556, instrument drift is the difference between the current as‑found instrument setting and the previous as‑left instrument setting. Statistical analysis is applied to historical data from instrument calibration checks to quantify drift over time by groups of instruments with similar design and performance characteristics, such as a group of transmitters with the same manufacturer make and model used to monitor pressurizer level. Note that instrument calibration and surveillance intervals identified in plant Technical Specifications must be updated through a license amendment request (LAR) to extend calibration intervals. Previous implementations have shown that by applying statistical analysis to historical drift data, instrument calibration intervals can be extended across multiple outages before requiring a calibration check, reducing maintenance costs associated with calibration testing.		Calibration and surveillance of nuclear plant instrumentation requires substantial resources. Historical calibration data can be used to better characterize instrument drift, which in turn can be used to justify increased calibration intervals and refine instrument uncertainty inputs to setpoint calculations. Per EPRI report [https://www.epri.com/research/products/3002002556 3002002556], instrument drift is the difference between the current as‑found instrument setting and the previous as‑left instrument setting. Statistical analysis is applied to historical data from instrument calibration checks to quantify drift over time by groups of instruments with similar design and performance characteristics, such as a group of transmitters with the same manufacturer make and model used to monitor pressurizer level. Note that instrument calibration and surveillance intervals identified in plant Technical Specifications must be updated through a license amendment request (LAR) to extend calibration intervals. Previous implementations have shown that by applying statistical analysis to historical drift data, instrument calibration intervals can be extended across multiple outages before requiring a calibration check, reducing maintenance costs associated with calibration testing.

	==Benefits==		==Benefits==
Line 57:		Line 51:
	==Risks==		==Risks==
	No unique risks beyond standard project risks associated with implementing changes at nuclear power plants.		No unique risks beyond standard project risks associated with implementing changes at nuclear power plants.

			==SWEEP Score==
			{\| class="wikitable" style="vertical-align:bottom;"
			\|-
			! Category
			! style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle;" \| Level
			! Description
			\|-
			\| Cost
			\| style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle;" \| 2
			\| style="color:#242424;" \| Implementation cost is between $1 million and $5 million. Costs for additional units may be reduced if drift calculations can be leveraged for like component types
			\|-
			\| Savings
			\| style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle;" \| 1
			\| style="color:#242424;" \| Savings are less than $1 million per year per unit. Extension of calibration intervals is a one-time implementation cost. Once the license is changed, plants can see significant savings over the lifetime of the facility.
			\|-
			\| Payback
			\| style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle;" \| 2
			\| style="color:#242424;" \| The payback period for implementation is greater than one year but less than five years (inclusive). Extension of calibration intervals is a one-time implementation cost. Once the license is changed, plants can see significant savings over the lifetime of the facility.
			\|-
			\| Technical Readiness
			\| style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle;" \| 3
			\| style="color:#242424;" \| The methodology to extend calibration intervals has already been implemented at commercial nuclear sites.
			\|-
			\| Licensing Readiness
			\| style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle;" \| 3
			\| style="color:#242424;" \| This methodology to extend calibration intervals has already been implemented at nuclear plants. For instruments with calibration and surveillance intervals identified in plant Technical Specifications, a license amendment request (LAR) is required to extend the calibration intervals. This methodology follows US NRC’s [https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/gen-comm/gen-letters/1991/gl91004 Generic Letter 91-04] which provides guidance on completing a LAR.
			\|-
			\| Implementation Proficiency
			\| style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle;" \| 3
			\| style="color:#242424;" \| The implementation of this methodology to extend calibration intervals does not require knowledge in implementing digital technologies.
			\|}

Jacob Sommer: 1 revision imported

2026-03-05T01:37:55Z

1 revision imported

← Older revision	Revision as of 01:37, 5 March 2026
(No difference)

10.142.237.162 at 20:19, 3 March 2026

2026-03-03T20:19:16Z

New page

{{DISPLAYTITLE:Extend Calibration Intervals Using Historical Calibration Data - MTA-MA-019}}
{{MTATemplate||
| Date |12/15/2020
| Functional Area Where Benefits Will Be Realized | Maintenance
| Reference Implementation Guidance |
Guidelines for Instrument Calibration Extension/Reduction - Revision 2: Statistical Analysis of Instrument Calibration Data (EPRI [https://www.epri.com/research/products/3002002556 3002002556])

[https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/gen-comm/gen-letters/1991/ US NRC Generic Letter 91-04 Changes in Technical Specification Surveillance Intervals to Accommodate a 24-Month Fuel Cycle]

[https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML9935/ML993560062.pdf Regulatory Guide 1.105 Rev. 3 Setpoints for Safety-Related Instrumentation]

[https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1601/ML16019A200.pdf NUREG-0800, Branch Technical Position 7-12, Rev. 6 Guidance on Establishing and Maintaining Instrument Setpoints]

[https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0713/ML071360456.pdf NEI 04-10 Rev. 1 Risk-Informed Technical Specifications Initiative 5b, Risk-Informed Method for Control of Surveillance Frequencies]
| Industry SME | EPRI – Chris Kerr

Contact: NuclearPlantMod@epri.com
| Previous Implementation | Please contact EPRI for implementation examples and contacts.
| Implementation Enablers | N/A
| SWEEP Score |
* Cost – Level 2 – Implementation cost is between $1 million and $5 million. Costs for additional units may be reduced if drift calculations can be leveraged for like component types
* Savings – Level 1 – Savings are less than $1 million per year per unit. Extension of calibration intervals is a one-time implementation cost. Once the license is changed, plants can see significant savings over the lifetime of the facility.
* Payback – Level 2 – The payback period for implementation is greater than one year but less than five years (inclusive). Extension of calibration intervals is a one-time implementation cost. Once the license is changed, plants can see significant savings over the lifetime of the facility.
* Licensing Readiness – Level 3 – This methodology to extend calibration intervals has already been implemented at nuclear plants. For instruments with calibration and surveillance intervals identified in plant Technical Specifications, a license amendment request (LAR) is required to extend the calibration intervals. This methodology follows NRC’s Generic Letter 91-04 which provides guidance on completing a LAR.
* Technology Readiness – Level 3 – The methodology to extend calibration intervals has already been implemented at commercial nuclear sites.
* Implementation Proficiency – Level 3 – The implementation of this methodology to extend calibration intervals does not require knowledge in implementing digital technologies.
| Applicability | All reactor types
The available guidance for extending calibration intervals is based on the U.S. NRC regulations.
| Keywords | Extend calibration; calibration intervals; instrument drift; historical data; statistical analysis
| Business Case Analysis Cross-Reference | N/A
}}

==Description==
Calibration and surveillance of nuclear plant instrumentation requires substantial resources. Historical calibration data can be used to better characterize instrument drift, which in turn can be used to justify increased calibration intervals and refine instrument uncertainty inputs to setpoint calculations. Per EPRI report 3002002556, instrument drift is the difference between the current as‑found instrument setting and the previous as‑left instrument setting. Statistical analysis is applied to historical data from instrument calibration checks to quantify drift over time by groups of instruments with similar design and performance characteristics, such as a group of transmitters with the same manufacturer make and model used to monitor pressurizer level. Note that instrument calibration and surveillance intervals identified in plant Technical Specifications must be updated through a license amendment request (LAR) to extend calibration intervals. Previous implementations have shown that by applying statistical analysis to historical drift data, instrument calibration intervals can be extended across multiple outages before requiring a calibration check, reducing maintenance costs associated with calibration testing.

==Benefits==
===Benefits Estimate===
Level 1 – Savings are less than $1 million per year per unit.
===Benefits Description===
* Reduction in labor hours because components do not require as frequent calibration (estimated 2,000 man‑hours saved each year per unit).
* Reduction in personnel dose depending on the location of the instruments that receive extension of their calibration intervals.
* Increased equipment reliability because each calibration check carries a potential for equipment damage.

==Costs and Schedule==
===Cost===
Level 2 – Implementation cost is between $1 million and $5 million per unit. Costs for additional units may be reduced if drift adjustments can be leveraged for multiple component types.
===Schedule===
One to three years.
===Scope Context===
Per unit – cost and schedule estimates include labor associated with:
* Drift evaluations for numerous groups of instruments
* Calculation changes
* License changes
* Work mechanism updates
* Changes to outage schedules and management activities

==Risks==
No unique risks beyond standard project risks associated with implementing changes at nuclear power plants.