ML20195K243
| ML20195K243 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/20/1998 |
| From: | Samson Lee NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Charemagne Grimes NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| References | |
| PROJECT-690 NUDOCS 9811250212 | |
| Download: ML20195K243 (2) | |
Text
.,
h November 20, 1998'
}
i NOTE TO:
Christopher 1. Grimes, Director _
License Renewal Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
[
-THRU:
P. T. Kuo, Chief c
Engineering Section I l
I icense Renewal Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM:
Sam Lee, Sr. Materials Engineer Qe,,
Engineering Section N
License Renewal Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF CONFERENCE CALL WITH NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE REGARDING STAFF REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON INDUSTRY'S EVALUATION OF METAL FATIGUE EFFECTS FOR LICENSE RENEWAL By letter dated November 2,- 1998, the staff issued a request for additional information (RAl) to i
the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) on the industry's evaluation of fatigue effects for license renewr.l. In the RAI, the staff redirected 5 questions origina!!y seat !c the Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (BGE) regarding the staff review of BGE's license renewal application to the NEl. These questions relate to the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) reports on the industry's evaluation of fatigue effects for license renewal.
On November 18.1998, at the request of NEl, the starf (Kamal Manoly, DE/EMEB; John Fair, DE/EMEB, and Sam Lee, DRPM/PDLR) had a conference call with NEl (Doug Waiters, NEl; l
John Carey, EPRl; and Har Mehta, GE) to clarify the staff RAl. NEl indicated that the questions were specific to the BGE license renewal application and NEl would not be able to answer
. specific BGE questions. The staff indicated that BGE referenced the industry's evaluation
[
described in the EPRI reports which were submitted by the industry and it would be appropriate L
for the industry to address them for the industry. NEl indicated they would address the questions as they relate to the generic EPRI studies which s x the industry's evaluation of fatigue effects for license renewal.
EPRI requested the staff to clarify question no. 4 of the staff RAl. The staff indicated that the
^y first part of the question was on whether the surge line evaluation was performed using the Y
integrated weighted average approach. The staff also indicated that the second part of the 9
i question was on the validity of the integrated weighted average approach used by EPRI in the 4
industry's evaluation. The Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) data were collected in constant amplitude tests and had a certain standard deviation for data scatter. ANL developed an adiustment factor to translate laboratory data to a design curve considering data scatter. The l
9811250212 981120 7*
N R N ER C
{fydD g.74 yyaqu y
a.
.. ED,:
,.(( ~
I 2
November 20, 1998 integrated weighted average approach was originally proposed by the Japanese based on limited test data. The staff requested the industry to discuss available test data to determine whether the integrated weighted average approach would result in an equivalent adjustment factor considering data scatter.
At the conclusion of the conference call, NEl indicated that they would provide the staff with a schedule for responding to the staff RAI at a later date.
' Project 690' DISTRIBUTION
. Central Files PUBLIC v
i PDLR R/F J. Fair, O-7E23 K. Manoly, O-7E23 R. Wessman, O-7E23 J. Strosnider, O-7D26 9002 %M
.0 DOCUMENT NAME:G:\\ WORKING \\ LEE \\CONFEREN. CAL ~
.)
OFFICE PDLR DE:EMEB:SC PDLR:SC PDLR:D g
j g
Slee'7[ KManoly& PTKuo((~CGrimes%
NAME-OATE Mi[M 118/g8 11& #98' j$fA:798 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY lr l
t 7
?
l 4
4 y
..-m.
..