ML20137P180
| ML20137P180 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/04/1997 |
| From: | Ross E Committee To Review Generic Requirements |
| To: | Callan L NRC OFFICE FOR ANALYSIS & EVALUATION OF OPERATIONAL DATA (AEOD) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20007G048 | List: |
| References | |
| IEB-95-002, IEB-95-2, IEB-96-003, IEB-96-3, NUDOCS 9704090161 | |
| Download: ML20137P180 (3) | |
Text
g
- ** 00 r
- 3-p UNITED STATES g
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION X
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20066 0001 p$s April 4, 1997 MEMORANDUM TO:
L. Joseph Callan Executive Director for Operations
]
FROM:
Denwood F. Rogs, Jr.
Chairman Committee to Review Generic Requirements
SUBJECT:
MINUTES OF THE CRGR MEETING NUMBER 302 (Part II)
.The Committee to Review Generic Requirements (CRGR) met on Tuesday, February 25, 1997 from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. A list of attendees is provided in.
R. Jones, J. Kudrick, and R. Lobel (NRR) presented for the CRGR review and endorsement the proposed generic letter on " Potential for Degradation of Emergency Core Cooling System Recirculation Due to Construction Deficiercies and Foreign Material in the Containment Following a Loss-of-Coolant Accident."
Also, R. Elliott briefed the Committee on the status of the licensee responses to Bulletin's 95-02 and 96-03, and subsequent staff actions.
The CRGR commented that the 19 or so relevant NRC generic communications issued over the.past dozen years were not fully effective, as incidents involving debris and potential degradation of the ECCS continue to be reported. Therefore, the Committee recommended that the NRC needs to take a stronger stance on the subject. such as targeted inspections and escalated enforcement.
It was agreed that the staff will re-write the generic letter
%A (1) with a greater emphasis on the fact that the licensees are required to
!9 ensure the operability of the structures and components in order to comply O
withtheprovip:ionsoftheECCSRule(10CFR50.46)andtheMaintenanceRule 10 CFR 50.65)
(2) to make it clear that NRC regards these lapses serious y,
c(nd is willing to focus necessary inspection resources to ve a
p ompliance with the existing regulations: and (3) that escalated enforcement en actions may be taken when warranted. The staff had agreed to re-submit the LQ
' revised generic letter reflecting the CRGR recommendations. At the meeting Ce the Comittee agreed that the revised letter will be circulated to the CRGR members for endorsement. by negative consent.
I,7)t. t % 1 d
.5 A
99904 4 pp h I dote f '
- M
['.g & "jj w)voc yjpf n /%
^^
9704090161 97o404
$ T1b $ NRCC i
2The cognizant staff, after discussion with the other staff in NRR, added for CRGR presentation and the ensuing discussion on the proposed generic letter at.the CRGR meeting, the requirement for compliance with the Maintenance Rule, along with the compliance with the requirements of the ECCS Rule'as originally j
' drafted.
fg a
s L. Joseph Callan Subsequently, the CRGR staff was informed that the staff is re-drafting the generic letter by expanding the scope of the originally proposed generic letter to also include problems encounterad with the use of unqualified paints and coatings in the containment. Also, the revised generic letter has l
retained some 50.54(f) information request feature to enable the NRC staff to verify licensee compliance with existing regulations.
However, since the scope, contents and tone of the modified generic letter has apparently changed so much s1nce its original version, the staff has also requested a CRGR re-review at a future CRGR meeting. The CRGR has agreed to a re-review. contains the details.
Also at the CRGR Meeting No. 302, the Committee reviewed the general Regulatory Guide (DG-1061) and the associated Standard Review Plan for risk-informed regulation. With the CRGR Chairman's approval the CRGR staff has combined Part I of the minutes of Meeting No. 302 with those of Meeting No.
303: at the latter meeting on March 11, 1997, the Committee reviewed the application-specific regulatory guides and the associated Standard Review Plans.
These combined minutes were issued on April 3,1997.
In accordance wich the E00's July 18,1983, directive conceraing " Feedback and j
Closure of CRGR Review," a written response is required from the cognizant office to report agreement or disagreement with the CRGR recommendations in these minutes.
The response is to be forwarded to the CRGR Chairman and if there is disagreement with the CRGR recommendations, to the EDO for decision making.
Questions concerning these meeting minutes should be referred to Raji Tripathi (415-7584).
Attachments: As stated cc:
Comission (5)
SECY J. Lieberman, OE E. Halman. ADM H. Bell. OIG K. Cyr, OGC J. Larkins, ACRS Office Directors Regional Administrators, RI/RII/RIII/RIV CRGR Members G. Holahan. NRR B.-5 heron, NRR
. _ ~ _
L. Joseph Callan ' Subsequently, the CRGR staff was informed that the staff is re-drafting the generic letter by expanding the scope of the originally proposed generic letter to also include problems encountered with the use of unqualified paints and coatings in the containment. Also, the revised generic letter has retained some 50.54(f) information request feature to enable the NRC staff to verify licensee compliance with existing regulations.
However since the scope. contents and tone of the modified generic letter has apparently changed so much since its original version. the staff has also requested a CRGR re-review at a future CRGR meeting.
The CRGR has agreed to a re-review. contains the details.
Also at the CRGR meeting No. 302. the Committee reviewed the general Regulatory Guide (DG-1061) and the associated Standard Review Plan for risk-informed regulation.
With the CRGR Chairman's approval, the CRGR staff has combined Part I of the minutes of Meeting No.'302 with those of Meeting No.
303: at the latter meting on March 11, 1997, the Committee reviewed the application-specific regulatory guides and the associated Standard Review Plans.
These combined minutes were issued on April 3, 1997.
In accordance with the ED0's July 18, 1983 directive concerning " Feedback and 1
Closure of CRGR Review;" a written response is required from the cognizant office to report agreement or disagreement with the CRGR recommendations in these minutes. The response is to be forwarded to:the CRGR Chairman and if there is disagreement with the CRGR recommendations, to the EDO for decision making.
3 l
Questions concerning these meeting minutes should be referred to' Raji Tripathi (415-7584).
l Attachments: As stated I
cc:
Commission (5)
SECY J. Lieberman. OE E. Halman ADM H. Bel 1, 0IG K. Cyr, OGC J. Larkins, ACRS Office Directors t
Regional Administrators, RI/RII/RIII/RIV i
CRGR Members G. Holahan NRR B. Sheron NRR i
Distribution of CRGR Minutes 302 (Part II)
~
~ Centr $5FileW/att?
PDR (NRC/CRGR) w/o att.
CRGR SF
^
^CRGR CF S. Treby E. Jordan
-J. Mitchell C. Berlinger R. Tripathi A. Thadani R. Lobel J. Shapaker W. Burton J. Meadoff G. Lainas A. Serkiz J. Kudrick R. Elliott M. Marshall Document name: S:\\CRGR\\
PT2.302 mw rW m mua;wn 4/ 3 S97 h/97
-