ML20140H561
| ML20140H561 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/24/1995 |
| From: | Dudley N NRC |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20140H556 | List: |
| References | |
| ACRS-3042, GL-92-01, GL-92-1, GL-95-03, GL-95-3, NUDOCS 9705130184 | |
| Download: ML20140H561 (2) | |
Text
,
~
,tc 1
l May 24, 1995 l'
l MEMORANDUM TO:
ACRS Members j
FROM:
Noel Dudley, Senior Staff Engineer
SUBJECT:
CRGR MEETING ON STEAM GENERATOR TUBE CIRCUMFERENTIAL CRACKING AND REACTOR VESSEL INTEGRITY i
During its 273rd meeting on May 16, 1995, the Committee to Review Generic Requirements (CRGR) reviewed generic letter (GL) 95-03, "Circumferential Cracking of Steam Generator Tubes," and a proposed supplement to GL 92-01, revision 1, 1
" Reactor Vessel Structural Integrity."
These items were forwarded to the l
Commission as SECY-95-100 and SECY-95-118 respectively.
The forwarding memorandums from NRR to the CRGR that summarize these items are provided as 2
attachments.
The CRGR considered both generic letter to be requests for j
information and, as such, the staff did not need to provide backfit analyses.
Both items were reviewed on an expedited basis.
The CRGR discussed the relationship between immediately effective items and adequate protection issues.
The CRGR reviewed GL 95-03 as an immediately effective item, even though there was no immediate safety concern. The Committee determined that the CRGR charter should be revised to correspond with the Commission review process.
l The CRGR discussed GL 95-03 on April 11, 1995, as an immediately effective item but did not formally endorse the generic letter. Due to objections by the Office of General Counsel, the staff did not issue GL 95-03 until May 28, 1995. During l
the May 16, 1995 meeting, the CRGR suggested that the staff issue an information notice to provide additional technical details on the Maine Yankee tube inspections and to clarify possible mixed messages concerning safety assessments and plant shut downs.
i The Commission reviewed the proposed supplement to GL 92-01 and required the j
staff to brief the CRGR before issuing the supplement. The CRGR recommended that j
the staff position on the use of new values for weld copper content derived from i
ratio surveillance procedures be clarified.
The staff believes that the new 4-values represent new data' and that licensees should reevaluate reactor vessel l
integrity.
The CRGR accepted the staff position that the supplement was an i
immediately effective item, but warned the staff against abusing the expedited review process. The CRGR requested that the staff brief the CRGR after public comments are reconciles.
l l
3 i
9705130184 961206 i
=
~
.