ML20202H541
| ML20202H541 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/09/1998 |
| From: | Collins T NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Sheron B NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20202H544 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-M96729, NUDOCS 9802200410 | |
| Download: ML20202H541 (2) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
February 9, 1998 MEMORANDUM To: Brian W. Sheron, Acting Associate Director for Technical Review Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation THRU: Gary M. Holahan, Director Original Signed By:
Division of Systems Safety and Analysis FROM: Timothy E. Collins, Chief Gary M. Holahan for/.
Reactor Systems Branch Division of Systems Safety and Analysis
SUBJECT:
WAtVER OF CRGR REVIEW OF EMF 45 74(P), REVISION 0 SUPPLEMENTS 1 AND 2 SAFETY EVALUATION (TAC NO. M98729)
REFERENCE:
Memorandum, E. L Jordan to T. E. Murley, "CRGR Consideration of Topical Reports," September 29,1989.
Attached is the safety evaluation report prepared by the Office of Nuclear Reactor
' Regulation (NRR), in which the staff accepts the Topical Report EMF 45-74(P), Revision 0, Supplements 1 and 2 of Siemens Power Corporation (SPC) for referencing in license applicationa. The staff proposes that the Committee To Review Generic Requirements (CRGR) review be waived in accordance with the procedures in the memorandum referenced above. ,
i i EMF 45 74(P), Revision 0, Suppletaents 1 and 2, describes an improved fuel performance code, RODEX2A, and the associated methodology for boiling water reactor (BWR) fuel designs. The improved code end methodology are very similar to the currently approved
. RODEX2A code and methodology. The subject report does not present any new methodology nor does it require any new staff technical position; it merely presents -
another appIlcation of an existing and approved methodology.
According to the CRGR charter, CRGR should review all of the staff's approvals of topical reports. However, we believe that CRGR review is not necessary because the staff approval of the SPC Topical Report EMF 45-74(P), Revision 0, Supplements 1 and 2, does not represent a new position by the staff, if you agree that a CRGR review is not necessary, please so indicate by signing below. Otherwise, we will prepare an appropriate CRGR package.
Attachment:
As stated 9802200410 990209 i PDR TOPRPEMVEg _
gh g Approved: CMGR review is not necessary. '
Contact:
S. L Wu, SRXB/DSSA,415-3284 DlSTRIBUTION:c Central File . GHolahan MRodrigueq SWu 01g,}C$[Q PDR . TCollins - JConan SWu R/F SRXB R/F KBohrer ,p1 DOCUMENT NAME: G:lCRGRLETR.SER *See previous concurrences 8, jy LPhillips OFFICE: SRXB:DSSA NAME: SWU*
SRXB:DSSA LPHILLIPS*
SRXB:DSSA D: DSS Y N, h o i TECOLLINS* GMHOLAHAN*
DATE: 1/29/98 1/29/98 1/29/98 2/5/98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY h!!
' ' ' '^' '
. af _ w NRCHlfCE E E
[ k. UNITED STATES s* NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINoToN. D.C. 30006eeM u... February 9. 1098 MEMORANDUM TO: Brian W. Sauron, Acting Associate Director for Tecumcal Review Offloe of Nuclear Reactor Regulatlog ,
THRU: Gary M. Holahan, Director d ,
Division of Systems Safety and Ablysis !
FROM: Timothy E. Collins, Chief 74) M f& ,
\
Reactor Systems Branch Division of Systems Safety and Analysis 4
SUBJECT:
WAIVER OF CRGR REVIEW OF EMF 45-74(P), REVISION .
SUPPLEMENTS 1 AND 2 SAFETY EVALUATION (TACi- 9)
REFERENCE:
Memorandum, E. L Jordan to T. E. Murley, "CRGR Consideration
- of Topical Reports," September 29,1989. l
{
1 Attached is the safety evaluation report prepared by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), in which the staff accepts the Topical Report EMF-85-74(P), Revision 0,
- Supplements 1 and 2 of Siemens Power Corporation (SPC) for referencing in license 4
applications. The staff proposes that the Committee To Review Generic Requirements 4
(CRGR) review be waived in accordance with the procedures in the memorandum L
referenced above.
EMF-85-74(P), Revision 0, Supplements 1 and 2, describes an improved fuel performance
['
code, RODEX2A, and the associated methodology for boiling-water reactor (BWR) fuel designs. The Improved code and methodology are very similar to the currently approved i RODEX2A code and methodology. The subject report does not present any new methodology nor does it require any new staff technical position; it merely presents another application of an existing and approved methodology.
.I According to the CRGR charter, CRGR should review all of the staff's approvals of topl::al reports. However, we believe that CRGR review is not necessary because the staff approval of the SPC Topical Report EMF-85-74(P), Revision 0, Supplements 1 and 2, does
- not represent a new position by the staff. If you agree that a CRGR review is not 4
m necessary, please so Indicate by signing below. Otherwise, we will prepare an appropriate CRGR package.
-A ent* As stat d I das kuk A6be~
- e
_ /Approv' CRGR/ review is not necessary.
d:
Contact:
S. L Wu, SRXB/DSSA t
l
-, . . . .-- . . . . --