ML20245B368

Forwards Proposed Course of Action & Projected Schedule for Handling Info Received in Response to Facility Pipe Rupture Bulletin,Per J Sniezek 870507 request.SECY-86-97 Also Encl to Provide Reporting Format That Will Be Followed

ML20245B368
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	05/14/1987
From:	Mccracken C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Shao L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20244D762	List: ML20244D758 ML20245A495 ML20245A584 ML20245B365 ML20245B368 ML20246F056 NUREG-0313, Draft Commission Paper Requesting Approval for Implementation of Long Range Plans for Dealing W/Igscc in BWR Piping,By Issuing Generic Ltr & Technical Basis document,NUREG-0313,Rev 2
References
NUDOCS 8706120185
Download: ML20245B368 (4)

Text

4 f ).,, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y ; ;y'( [s g E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20S55

%+.c,h.

... MAY 141987.

NOTE T0: Larry Shao, Director, DEST THRU: James Richardson, Assistant Director, EAD/ DEST l FROM: Conrad McCracken, Acting Chief, ECEB/ DEST

SUBJECT:

PROGRAM FOR RESOLUTION OF THE SURRY PIPE RUPTURE ISSUE l

1 In the May 7, 1987 CRGR meeting James Sniezek stated that he wanted to she car plan.for handling the information received in response to the Surry pipe rupture bulletin. Attachment 1 is our proposed course of action.

Attachment 2 provides a projected schedule.

It is our intent that the information obtained from the licensees will be processed and reported in a manner similar to that used for processing of information and resolution of the steam generator generic issues. Basically, reviewers will be assigned from CEB and MTB. Each reviewer will review ALL responses.for a given subject. This ensures uniformity of interpretation, plus it accelerates the review process. . Attachment 3 is a copy of SECY-86-97, which reported the infomation on steam generators, and provides the reporting format which we intend to follow, l Conrad McCracken, Acting Chief ECEB/ DEST

Enclosures:

As stated j

cc: C. Y. Cheng P. Wu f0 Y X&

k Attachment 1 PLAN FOR RESOLUTION OF REGULATORY ISSUES ASSOCI ATED WITH THE SURRY PIPE RUPTURE L"RNT GOAL i

At the completion of our review process the final report will find that; either the industry practices to address balance of plant (B0P) pipe wall thinning are adequate or propose new requirements, consistent with the Commission's backfit rule, for plants that do not have acceptable programs.

- Basis Approximately)200 of plant (BOP systems. erosion / corrosion events have occurred in various balanceThe Su systems interactions which can challenge safety systems and plant operators.

The information requested'will provide a basis for determining if industry actions are adequate to demonstrate that plants continue to meet their licensing basis.

~

Review Plan The overall plan for addressing the pipe thinning issue consists of multiple phases:

Phase 1 - Industry proposes guidelines to address single phase piping.

(June,1987) Staff finds these guidelines adequate or defines others as a review basis for determining if individual plant programs are acceptable. Bulletin is issued.

Phase 2 - Individual plant data received. . Staff prepares a Secy paper (Late,1987) discussing industry practices and identifying specific plants which do not meet the guidelines for single phase piping. This report will also address the status of industry efforts and staff review in establishing guidelines for two phase piping and will report current industry practices, based on a compilation of the information received from each licensee. j i

Phase 3 - Results from initial single phase piping system inspections are 1 (Spring,1988) compiled and presented by industry. Industry reports on their proposed resolution for two phase piping. Staff prepares a Secy paper addressing success in implementation of the single phase inspection program. This paper will also determine acceptability of industry proposed resolution of the two phase industry program.

If industry programs are found acceptable for single and two phase systems active staff participation will be terminated.

Industry will continue to compile and report data on the results of plant specific inspections. The final industry effort is expected to be a long range program for surveillance based on the results from the plant specific inspections.

_ _ _ ___ _____ _ ______ _ m

r.  !

l' o ~2-If industry programs are found unacceptable in any area the i staff will prepart; a recommendation for backfitting requirements, as necessary on a plant spccific basis.

l

Attachment 2 PROJECTED SCHEDULE FOR 1 l RESOLUTION OF PIPE WALL THINNING ISSUES l

Phase 1:

May 28, 1987 - Meet with NUMARC to discuss industry guidelines for addressing wall thinning in single phase piping June 5, 1987 - Provide comments to NUMARC on tb industry single phase i' program acceptability This approved program will constitute the review guidelines for determining adequacy of plant specific responses for ,

single phase piping June 15, 1987 - Issue bulletin requesting information

- NUMARC issues program to industry ,

- Begin working with NUMARC on guidelines for addressing l wall thinning in two phase systems Phase 2:

August 15, 1987 - Individual plant information received October 16, 1987 - Secy paper summarizing data prepared. Plants l requesting extensions will be identified (i.e., report will not be delayed until all plants have responded)

November 13, 1987 - Concurrence completed, Secy paper issued Phase 3:

January, 1988 - Industry proposes guidelines for two phase piping systems February,1988 - Staff completes review of industry program for two phase piping systems ,

March, 1988 - Industry provides resu M s from initial piping inspections  !

l April, 1988 - Staff prepares Secy paper addressing the acceptability of industry programs ,

May, 1988 - Concurrence completed, Secy paper issued j l

i l