ML20196F800
| ML20196F800 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/14/1977 |
| From: | Shao L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Bagchi G, Gamble R, Hofmayer C NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20196F442 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-87-854 NUDOCS 8803040191 | |
| Download: ML20196F800 (1) | |
Text
'
C .
Co A ,,
l JUL 14 B77 l t '
l 1
NOTE T0: G. Bagchi R. Gamble C. Hofmayer V. Noonan FROM: L. C. Shao, Chief Engineering Branch, D0R
SUBJECT:
SYSTENATIC EVALUATION PROGRAM (SEP) .
The enclosed memoranden requests that the Engineering Branch prepare arguments pro and con for retaining specific topics in the SEP on the basis of safety significance. Copies of the definitions of these topics are also enclosed.
Responsibility for preparing these arguments and for coordination of any other ED activity related to the SEP is assigned as follows:
G. Bagchi - Seismic R. Gamble - Materials C. Hofmayer - Structures
. V. Noonan - Mechanical The above personnel should meet with R. Klecker to discuss the assign-E ment of specific topics. Your pro and con arguments should be concurred I in by W. Hazelton, R. Stuart and myself. Note that the due date is July 22. .
In addition, those topics that we conclude should be retained in the SEP will require an action plan for eventual submission to management for approval. Further guidance in this respect will be provided later, however, the plan should specify what we propose to do, how we propose to do it, acceptance criteria, etc. The subject of the pro and con arguments should be the proposed program and not necessarily the SRP approach.
L. C. Shao, Chief
\
Engineering Branch Division of Operating Reactors dl I