ML20236Y346
| ML20236Y346 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/28/1998 |
| From: | Lainas G NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Sheron B NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236Y348 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-MA1226, NUDOCS 9808120118 | |
| Download: ML20236Y346 (4) | |
Text
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
July 28,1998 MEMORANDUM TO: Brian W. Sheron, Acting Associate Director for Technical Review Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM:
Gus C. Lainas, Acting Director k Division of Engineering qp6# Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
EVALUATION OF THE NEED FOR CRGR REVIEW OF STAFF RESPONSE TO "BWR VESSEL AND INTERNALS PROJECT, INSTRUMENT PENETRATION INSPECTION AND FLAW EVALUATION GUIDELINES (BWRVIP-49)" (TAC NO. MA1226)
The Boiling Water Reactor Vessel and Internals Project (BWRVIP) submitted the "BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Instrument Penetration Inspection and Flaw Evaluation Guidelines (BWRVIP-49)," on March 13,1998. The BWRVIP-49 report proposed guidelines for inspection and evaluation procedures to ensure the long term integrity of BWR instrument penetrations.
The subject components are covered within the scope of 10 CFR 50.55a and the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI. The guidelines have utilized inspection and evaluation procedures that are consistent with Section XI.
The NRC staff has reviewed this report and finds it provides adequate guidance which, if followed, should preclude the need for NRC review of plant-specliic submittals, thereby minimizing the impact on industry and NRC resources. The use of this guidance by the various BWR licensees is purely voluntary, and does not involve an imposition of a new staff position nor any backfit because it is consistent with previous staff positions. Therefore, review by the CRGR is not necessary.
If you agree that CRGR review is not necessary, please indicate by signature on the line below.
Otherwise, we shall proceed with the preparation of an appropriate CRGR package.
Attachment:
As stated 1
Approved: CRGR review is not necessary CONTACT: C. E. Carpenter, NRR N
l 4
415-2169
- \\
+
- u._
.m u
\\
DISTRIBUTION:
I EMCB R/F PUBLIC File Center 4
- Previously Concurred p DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\BWRVIP\\BWRVIP49.LTR lNDICATE IN BOX: "C"= COPY W/O ATT ACHMENT/ ENCLOSURE, "E*= COPY W/ATT/ ENCL, *N"mNO COPY EMCB: LPM E
EMCB:DE E
BC:EMCB E
(A)BC:EMEB:DE lE i
CECarpenter*
RAHerman*
KRWichma@E for EJSullivan f
05/21/98 05/21/98 05/21/98 06/08/98 Y
Ll}'
M?WYM m
c JRStrosnider $)
GClainas'/V BWSherok h9'O
(, T 1 / 20/98
/I 7 R S /98 h Y/98 h O OFFICIAL RECOFID COPY l'f C045 8@A 2
1 P
L. -,
1! Y!
m ^ a.
9eos12011e 98o72e e
i PDR TOPRP EXIEPRI C
pm
}
t
l MEMORANDUM TO: Brian W. Sheron, Acting Associate Director for Technical Review Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM:
Gus C. Lainas, Acting Director Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
EVALUATION OF THE NEED FOR CRGR REVIEW OF STAFF RESPONSE TO "BWR VESSEL AND INTERNALS PROJECT, INSTRUMENT PENETRATION INSPECTION AND FLAW EVALUATION GUIDELINES (BWRVIP-49)" (TAC NO. MA1226)
The Boiling Water Reactor Vessel and Internals Project (BWRVIP) submitted the "BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Instrument Penetration Inspection and Flaw Evaluation Guidelines (BWRVIP-49)," on March 13,1998. The BWRVIP-49 report proposed guidelines for inspection and evaluation procedures to ensure the long term integrity of BWR instrument penetrations.
The subject components are covered within the scope of 10 CFR 50.55a and the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI. The guidelines have utilized inspection and evaluation procedures that are consistent with Section XI.
The NRC staff has reviewed this report and finds it provides adequate guidance which, if followed, should preclude the need for NRC review of plant-specific submittals, thereby I
minimizing the impact on industry and NRC resources. The use of this guidance by the various j
BWR licensees is purely voluntary, and does not involve an imposition of a new staff position nor j
any backfit because it is consistent with previous staff positions. Therefore, review by the CRGR 1
is not necessary.
{
)
CONTACT: C. E. Carpenter, NRR 415-2169 DISTRIBUTION:
EMCB R/F PUBLIC File Center DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\BWRVIP\\BWRVIP49.LTR
- Previously Concurred l
INDIC ATE IN BOX: "C"= COPY W/O ATTACHMENT /ENCLO$URE, *E"= COPY W/ATT/ ENCL, "N"mNO COPY j
EMCB: LPM lE EMCB:DE E
BC:EMCB lE (A)BC:EMEB:DE lE CECarpenter*
RAHerman*
KRWichrnan*BJE for EJSullivan T 05/21/98 05/21/98 05/21/98 06/08/98 (A)DD:DE (A)D:DE (A)ADT:NRR JRStrosnider GClainas BWSheron
/
M8
/
S8
/ M8 1
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY l
$yY4
\\o l
MEMORANDUM TO: Brian W. Sheron, Acting Associate Director for Technical Review Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM:
Gus C. Lainas, Acting Director Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
EVALUATION OF THE NEED FOR CRGR REVIEW OF STAFF RESPONSE TO "BWR VESSEL AND INTERNALS PROJECT, INSTRUMENT PENETRATION INSPECTION AND FLAW EVALUATION GUIDELINES (BWRVIP-49)" (TAC NO. MA1226)
The Boiling Water Reactor Vessel and Internals Project (BWRVIP) submitted the "BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Instrument Penetration inspection and Flaw Evaluation Guidelines (BWRVIP-49)," on March 13,1998. The BWRVIP-49 report proposed guidelines for inspection and eva:Jation procedures to ensure the long term integrity of BWR instrument penetrations.
The subject components are covered within the scope of 10 CFR 50.55a and are implemented through the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI. The guidelines have utilized inspection and evaluation procedures that are consistent with Section XI.
The NRC staff has reviewed this report and finds it provides adequate guidance which, if i
followed, should expedite NRC review, thereby minimizing the impact on industry and NRC f
resources. The use of this guidance by the various BWR licensees is purely voluntary, and does l
not involve an imposition of a new staff position nor any backfit because it is consistent with previous staff positions. Therefore, review by the CRGR is not necessary.
I CONTACT: C. E. Carpenter, NRR 415-2169 DISTRIBUTION:
. EMCB R/F PUBLIC File Center DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\BWRVIP\\BWRVIP49.LTR
- Previously Concurred INDIC ATE IN BOK: "C"= COPY WO ATTACHMENTENCLOSURE, "E" SCOPY W/ATTENCL, "N=NO COPY l
EMCB: LPM lE EMCB:DE lE BC:EMCB lE (A)BC:EMEB:DE lE CECarpenter*,g RAHerman*
KRWichman'BJE for EJSullivan Q 05/21/98
.f 05/21/98 (A)DD:DE (A)D:DE E
(A)ADT:NRR E'
l JRStrosnider GClainas BWSheron
/
/98
/
S8
/
/98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY i
I
l WE%
1 UNITED STATES e
(o j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. Saama =1 i
July 28,1998 i
MEMORANDUM TO: Brian W. Sheron, Acting Associate Director for Technical Review Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM:
Gus C. Lainas, Acting Director Division of Engineering d ld Office f Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1
SUBJECT:
EVALUATION OF THE NEED FOR CRGR REVIEW OF STAFF RESPONSE TO "BWR VESSEL AND INTERNALS PROJECT, INSTRUMENT PENETRATION INSPECTION AND FLAW EVALUATION GUIDELINES (BWRVIP-49)" (TAC NO. MA1226)
The Boiling Water Reactor Vessel and Intemals Project (BWRVIP) submitted the "BWR Vessel and internals Project, instrument Penetration inspection and Flaw Evaluation Guidelines (BWRVIP-49)," on March 13,1998. The BWRVIP-49 report proposed guidelines for inspection and evaluation procedures to ensure the long term integrity of BWR instrument penetrations.
The subject components are covered within the scope of 10 CFR 50.55a and the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI. The guidelines have utilized inspection and evaluation procedures that are consistent with Section XI.
The NRC staff has reviewed this report and finds it provides adequate guidance which,if followed, should preclude the need for NRC review of plant-specific submittals, thereby minimizing the impact on industry and NRC resources. The use of this guidance by the various BWR licensees is purely voluntary, and does not involve an imposition of a new staff position nor I
any backfit because it is consistent with previous staff positions. Therefore, review by the CRGR l
Is not necessary, if you agree that CRGR review is not necessary, please indicate by signature on the line bebw.
Otherwise, we shall proceed with the preparation of an appropriate CRGR package.
Attachment:
As stated f 9 f
NUCwA) kk
'YW Ap)foved: CRGR review is not necessary i
CONTACT: C. E. Carpenter, NRR 415-2169 I
i