1. SALTO missions highlights and SALTO collaboration site
Robert Krivanek –
Project manager for LTO
Division of Nuclear Installation Safety

2. SALTO Highlights
SALTO Highlights was published in 2016.
>Analysed results of missions held until June 2015:
5 pilot SALTO missions,
13 SALTO missions (No.9-11, 13-22) and
2 OSART missions with LTO modules.
> Also analysed results of follow-up missions;
6 SALTO follow-up missions and
2 OSART follow-up missions with LTO modules.
SALTO Highlights is just prepared following the analysis method of SALTO Highlights

3. SALTO Highlights
SALTO Highlights 2018 analyses results of: > missions in the period of July 2015 – June 2018: 14 SALTO missions (No ) 9 OSART missions with LTO modules > follow-up missions in the period of July 2015 – June 2018: 4 SALTO follow-up missions 1 OSART follow-up mission with LTO module

4. SALTO missions analysed (2015/7 - 2016/12)
Country
Type
Date
Plant
China
Pre-SALTO
October 2015
Qinshan 1
South Africa
November 2015
Koeberg
Belgium
Expert mission
February 2016
Doel 1, 2
Sweden
SALTO follow-up
Ringhals 1, 2
Bulgaria
July 2016
Kozloduy 5
Argentina
September 2016
Atucha 1
November 2016
Forsmark 1
Czech Rep.
Dukovany 1-4
December 2016
Tihange 1
Armenia
Armenian 2

5. SALTO missions analysed (2017/1 - 2018/6)
Country
Type
Date
Plant
Mexico
SALTO follow-up
January 2017
Laguna Verde
Belgium
SALTO
February 2017
Doel 1, 2
China
June 2017
Qinshan 1
Sweden
Pre-SALTO
November 2017
Oskarshamn 3
February 2018
Ringhals 3
Ukraine
April 2018
South-Ukraine 3
Brazil
May 2018
Angra 1
Bulgaria
June 2018
Kozloduy 6

6. LTO modules of OSART missions analysed
Country
Type
Date
Plant
Canada
OSART
November 2015
Bruce B
September 2016
Pickerling
Sweden
February 2017
Olkiluoto 1, 2
Slovenia
May 2017
Krsko
OSART follow-up
USA
August 2017
Sequoyah
France
October 2017
Bugey UK
January 2018
Torness
Spain
February 2018
Almaraz
Finland
March 2018
Loviisa

7. Findings Overview (1) <SALTO Highlights 2015-2018>
Area A
(O&F, CLB, CM)
Area B
(S&S, PP)
Area C
(Mech.)
Area D
(E, I&C)
Area E
(Civil)
Area F
(HR, KM)
Total
Recommendations 16 31 20 24 22 17
130
Suggestions 26 7 8 91
Good Practices 2 5 3 1
Missions
14+9 12 -
<SALTO Highlights >
Area A
(O&F, CLB, CM)
Area B
(S&S, PP)
Area C
(Mech.)
Area D
(E, I&C)
Area E
(Civil)
Area F
(HR, KM)
Total
Recommendations 16 25 18 21 4
120
Suggestions 22 13 28 11 88
Good Practices 1 6 3 17
Missions
13+2 5 -

8. Findings Overview (2)
Trends observed based on Highlights and Highlights :
More SALTO missions in than in – 14+9* vs. 13+2*
More issues from missions than from missions – 221 vs. 208
Trend: This shows intensive activity in this area with high demand from Member States.
- Number of issues per mission per area is decreasing ( vs ):
Area A: total 42 > 38, per mission 1.83 < 2.53
Area B: total 48 > 38, per mission 2.09 < 2.53
Area C: total 37 < 53, per mission 1.61 < 3.53
Area D: total 40 > 29, per mission 1.74 < 1.93
Area E: total 29 < 32, per mission 1.26 < 2.13
Area F: total 25 > 8, per mission > 1.6
Trend: This shows better understanding of IAEA Safety Standards and better preparedness for SALTO missions (with exception of area F).
*SALTO + OSART with LTO module

9. Area A 2015-2018 results analysis
Organization and functions, current licensing basis, configuration/modification management
Title
Rec.
Sug. GP
Total
1.1
Related regulatory requirements, codes and standards 4 8
1.2
Organizational structure for LTO 3 7 10
1.3
Plant policy for LTO 2 1
1.4
LTO implementation programme
1.5
Current SAR and other CLB documents 5
1.6
Configuration/ modification management including design basis documentation 9 16 26 44
In some plants (4-10 out of 23 plants):
- Exiting organization is not adequate for supporting LTO. (7/23)
- The content of the LTO implementation programme is not complete. (6/23)
- Design basis documentation is not adequately managed to ensure its availability for the plant. (6/23)
- Periodic Safety Review is not comprehensive. (5/23)
- Documents developed to provide requirements and guidance for LTO do not cover all aspects. (4/23)
In a few plants (1-3 out of 23 plants):
- Regulatory expectations for safe LTO are not clear for the plant. (3/23)
- Organization for support LTO is not fully established. (3/23) etc.

10. Area B 2015-2018 results analysis
Scoping and screening, plant programmes relevant to LTO
Title
Rec.
Sug. GP
Total
2.1
Methodology and criteria for scoping and screening of SSCs for LTO 18 9 27
2.2
Plant programmes relevant to LTO 13 8 5 26 31 17 53
In many plants (11-20 out of 23 plants):
- Insufficient coordination of existing plant programmes with ageing management (11/23)
In some plants (4-10 out of 23 plants):
- Insufficient evaluation of effectiveness of existing plant programmes (7/23)
- Incomplete scope of SSCs for ageing management and LTO assessment (7/23)
- Incomplete documentation on process/ results on scope setting (4/23)
In a few plants (1-3 out of 23 plants):
- The methodology for scope setting is not established (3/23)
- The methodology for scope setting is not consistently used for LTO (3/23)
- Ageing of the active and short lived SCs is not properly managed (3/23)

11. Area C 2015-2018 results analysis
AMR, review of AMPs and revalidation of TLAAs for mechanical components
Title
Rec.
Sug. GP
Total
3.1
Area-specific scoping and screening 1 2
3.2
Ageing management review 8 4 13
3.3
Review of ageing management programmes 3 7
3.4
Obsolescence management programme
3.5
Existing TLAAs 5
3.6
Revalidation of TLAAs
3.7
Data collection and record keeping 20 17 40
In many plants (11-20 out of 23 plants):
- AMR of mechanical SCs for LTO is not adequately performed (e.g., gaps in condition assessment, identification of potential ageing effects, identification of relevant programmes to manage ageing, documentation). (12/23)
In some plants (4-10 out of 23 plants):
- Revalidation of TLAAs for mechanical SCs is not complete or adequate. (7/23)
- AMPs for mechanical SCs are not adequately developed or implemented (e.g., gaps in identification of managed ageing effects, trending, acceptance criteria, corrective actions, documentation). (6/23)
- Identification of TLAAs for mechanical SCs is not complete or systematic. (5/23)

12. Area D 2015-2018 results analysis
AMR, review of AMPs and revalidation of TLAAs for electrical and I&C components
Title
Rec.
Sug. GP
Total
4.1
Area-specific scoping and screening 4 1 5
4.2
Ageing management review 2 6
4.3
Review of ageing management programmes 11 16
4.4
Obsolescence management programme 8
4.5
Existing TLAAs 3
4.6
Revalidation of TLAAs
4.7
Data collection and record keeping 24 43
In some plants (4-10 out of 23 plants):
- The EQ (particularly environmental qualification) programme is not comprehensive. (9/23)
- A proactive programme for managing technological obsolescence is not developed/ fully established. (7/23)
- The scope of electrical and I&C SSCs for LTO components is not properly implemented. (5/23)
- AMR for electrical and I&C SCs for LTO is not adequately performed (e.g., gaps in condition assessment, identification of potential ageing effects, identification of relevant programmes to manage ageing, documentation). (6/23)
- AMPs for electrical and I&C SCs are not adequately developed or implemented (e.g., gaps in identification of managed ageing effects, trending, acceptance criteria, corrective actions, documentation). (4/23) etc.

13. Area E 2015-2018 results analysis
AMR, review of AMPs and revalidation of TLAAs for civil structures
Title
Rec.
Sug. GP
Total
5.1
Area-specific scoping and screening 1
5.2
Ageing management review 8 5 13
5.3
Review of ageing management programmes 2 10
5.4
Obsolescence management programme
5.5
Existing TLAAs 3
5.6
Revalidation of TLAAs
5.7
Data collection and record keeping 22 7 30
In many plants (11-20 out of 23 plants):
- AMR for civil SCs for LTO is not adequately performed (e.g., gaps in condition assessment, identification of potential ageing effects, identification of relevant programmes to manage ageing, documentation). (13/23)
In some plants (4-10 out of 23 plants):
- AMPs for civil SCs are not adequately developed or implemented (e.g., gaps in identification of managed ageing effects, trending, acceptance criteria, corrective actions, documentation). (10/23)
- Identification and revalidation of TLAAs for civil SCs is not complete or adequate. (5/23)

14. Area F 2015-2018 results analysis
Human resources, competence and knowledge management for LTO
Title
Rec.
Sug. GP
Total
6.1
Human resources policy and strategy to support LTO 9 1 11
6.2
Competence management for LTO and recruitment, training, and qualification processes for personnel involved in LTO activities 2 4 6
6.3
Knowledge management and knowledge transfer for LTO 3 10 17 8 27
In many plants (6-10 out of 12 plants):
- Human resources policy and strategy to support LTO is not adequate or not fully developed. (10/12)
- Knowledge management or knowledge transfer processes for LTO are not adequate or fully implemented. (9/12)
- Competence management is not adequate or fully implemented. (6/12)

15. Original Area in SALMIR
Cross-cutting issues
In order to grasp trends easily, classification by broader categories reviewed in more than one review area was conducted:
Categories
Original Area in SALMIR
No. of issues
Share
   1. Existing plant programme
[2.2, 3.4, 3.7, 4.4, 4.7, 4.8, 5.4, 5.7] 38
17.2%
   2. Ageing Management Programme (AMP) 
[1.4, 3.3, 4.3, 5.3] 37
16.7%
   3. Scope setting 
[2.1, 3.1, 4.1, 5.1] 34
15.4%
   4. Ageing Management Review (AMR) 
[3.2, 4.2, 5.2] 31
14.0%
   5. Human resources and knowledge/competence mngt
[ ] 25
11.3%
   6. Time Limited Ageing Analysis (TLAA) 
[3.5, 3.6, 4.5, 4.6, 5.5, 5.6] 20
9.0%
   7. Overall Management
[1.1, 1.2, 1.3] 21
9.5%
   8. Design and Safety analysis 
[1.5, 1.6] 15
6.8%
Trends:
Number of issues belonging to Top 4 categories is almost same (app. 15%).
A least one issue is raised for every core topic (scope setting, AMR, AMP and TLAA) during every SALTO mission.
Issues on SALTO missions core topics (scope setting, AMR, AMP and TLAA - categories 2,3,4,6) account for app. 55%.

16. Most frequent topics of issues
The tables below show the results of analysis of other than core topic issues:
Area A - E : 14 SALTO missions
Keyword
Missions the issue was raised
No. of issues
Occurrence
a. equipment qualification
23, 24,26-35 12
85.7%
b. data management
24,25,27,28,30,32-35 9
64.3%
c. obsolescence management
23,24,26-29,31,34,36
d. organization  
24,25,27,28,30,32,34-36
e. safety analysis (PSR, FSAR) 
27,29,30,31,34,35 6
42.9%
Area F: 12 SALTO missions
f. knowledge management 
23-25, 27-35 12
100.0%
g. human resources / staffing
23-25, 27, 28, 32,33,35 10
83.3%
h. competence management
23,24,28-33, 35 9
75.0%
Trend: These tables show common issues in other than core topics in many plants, some with frequency of more than 80%, such as:
Knowledge management;
Equipment / Environmental Qualification;
Human resources /staffing.

17. Resolution of issues at follow-up missions
SALTO Highlights : 4 SALTO FU and 1 OSART FU
Status of issues
issues %
Resolved 16
32.0%
Satisfactory progress 27
54.0%
Insufficient progress 7
14.0%
SALTO Highlights : 6 SALTO FU and 2 OSART FU
Status of issues
issues %
Resolved 37
48.1%
Satisfactory progress 35
45.5%
Insufficient progress 4
5.2%
Trend: Due to significant delays in implementation of LTO programmes in several NPPs, mostly due to political decisions in those countries and reorganization in utilities, share of:
‘Resolved’ has decreased from 48% to 32%;
‘Insufficient progress’ has increased from 5% to 14%. .

18. The SALTO collaboration site
In order to share information related to SALTO peer review,
Just now developed, mainly for:
- SALTO mission reviewers and observers, and
- Host peer and counterparts of missions.
Useful links are here
SALMIR DB is here.

19. Registration Process to access restricted information
The restricted information are stored on ‘SALTO collaboration site’, which can be accessed only by registered users. The registration is done in two steps.
1. GNSSN system registration [same as IGALL restricted area registration]
The user has to obtain an ID and password. This is done in the part of the Nucleus platform. The  registration system confirms online that an ID and password have been assigned and in addition sends a notification via .
2. SALTO collaboration site registration
In the second step the user requests a registration to the SALTO collaboration site on GNSSN website by sending an to designated administrator including following information:
Nucleus User Name, Mail address used to registration for Nucleus
The registration request is reviewed by the IAEA staff. (SALTO support officer)
The user receives a notification of the approval or the rejection of the registration via within a few days.
If you hope to access the SALTO collaboration site, please contact the officer below.
Gabor PETOFI (Operational Safety Section/IAEA)
Phone : +43(1)

20. 1. GNSSN system registration from https://www.iaea.org/
Click ‘RESOURCES’ and ‘NUCLEUS’

21. 1. GNSSN system registration (continued)
Click here

22. 1. GNSSN system registration (continued)
Register on ‘NUCLEUS’

23. Registration page on ‘NUCLEUS’
1. GNSSN system registration (continued)
Registration page on ‘NUCLEUS’

24. Registration will be completed immediately after sending registration form.

25. 2.Request the access to the SALTO site by e-mail
Add address
Write to subject
“Registration request to access to
SALTO collaboration site”
Provide necessary information
After receiving this , the administrator will begin the process of opening the access, and notify the user by once it’s completed.
Once registered, you can access to the SALTO site.

26. Thank you for the attention!