ML20202C108

From kanterella
Revision as of 19:55, 7 December 2021 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Informs That NRR Request Approval to Initiate Revised Rulemaking Effort That Suppl Rulemaking Previously Authorized by Memo
ML20202C108
Person / Time
Issue date: 02/13/1995
From: Beckjord E
NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES)
To: Taylor J
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
Shared Package
ML20202C086 List:
References
FRN-62FR63892, RULE-PR-50 AE26-1-002, AE26-1-2, NUDOCS 9802120166
Download: ML20202C108 (22)
v • d • e


Text

g - -

.Te'

%.A Fk o- puso UNITED STATES y t g .j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION wasHINotoN, o.C. M66-0001 Pg gL g f s, -*****/ February 13, 1995 P'HORANDUM 10: James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations s' , s \

Eric S. Beckjord, Director W<' A n W--

FROM:

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research j

SUBJECT:

INITIATION OF RES SPONSORED RULEMAKING - CODES AND STANDARDS (SUPPLEMENTARY SCOPE CHANGES)

REFERENCES:

(1) Memorandum from William T. Russell to Eric S. Beckjord,

" Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR 50.55a, Codes and Standards Rule," dated November 17, 1994.

(2) Memorandum from Eric S. ackjord to William ' Russell,

" Proposed Amendment to is CFR 50.55a, Codes 6..d Standards Ru~le," dated September 2, 1994.

The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) requests your approval to initiate a revised rulemaking effort that supplements the rulemaking previously authorized by your memorandum of February 25, 1992. The rulemaking authorized in 1992 was intended to amend 10 CFR 50.55a to (1) incorporate by reference the 1989,1990, and 1991 Addenda, and the 1992 Edition, of the Division 1 Rules of Section III, " Rules for Construction of Nuclear Power Plant Components," and the Division 1 Rules of Section XI, "Reles for the Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Plant Components," of tiie American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boller and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME BPV Code), and the 1990 Edition of the ASME Code for Operations and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants (ASME OM Code), (2) include safety-related and ASME Code Class snubbers in the inservice +csting requirements Mandatory of 10 Appendix Vill,CFR 50.55a(f), and

'Performar.ce (3) iont forexpedite Demonstr implementation Ultrasonic Examination Systems," of Section XI of the ASME BPV Code.

The on-going rulemaking has been modified by several requests from the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) such that a supplemental initiation request was deemed appropriate (see References 1 and 2). This supplemental rulemaking request changes the scope of the original initiation request and is the result of cost-benelicial licensing action (CBLA) evaluations. NRR determined that costs savings could ie realized by licensees without adversely affecting safety by establishing a baseline edition of the ASME Codes and eliminating the 120-month periodic update requirement for ISI and IST programs. The staff will continue to endorse the use of requirements in later editions and addenda of the ASME Codes for licensees to use voluntarily and would backfit only Code changes that are cost effective safety enhancements CONTACT: Frank Cherny, RES:EMMEB 415-6786 9902120166 900206 PDR PR fm,.JO6,2{R63892 PDR g

, v, ,.

! A 6 76-/  !

@ l J. Taylor '

pursuant to the provisions in 10 CFR 50.109, "Backfitting." The result is a request to amend i 50.55a as follows:

(1) Eliminate the 120-month update requirements for 151 and IST programs.

(2) Establish baseline requirements for 131 and IST programs: maintain the 1989 Edition of the ASME BPV Code for 151 and incorporate the 1990 Edition or ,

the ASME OM Code for IST which contains t'1e same requirements as the 1989 Edition of the ASME BPV Code for IST, whic5 would (a) *equire licensees that -

have not yet updated to the 1989 Edition of the ASME BPV Code to update their and the scope of 6 50.55a to 151 and IST programs to the 1989 Edition, include inservice testing and examinations of sa (b) exp;aty-related snubbers to allow licensees an aption to delete existing technical specification snubber test  :

requirements and use tfie ASME OM Code for IST of snubbers, and (c) delete the '

existing supplementary requirements for IST of containment isolation valves to be consisten' *.*ith the current and recently preposed performram based requirements t' 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, 'Pr mary Reactor nita ~ut Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors."

(3) Allow alttrnatives to the ASME Codes. which would permit licensees to use later editions or addenda of the ASME Codes as alternatives or to use alternatives that the staff has determined are acceptable (e.g., guidance for ,

performing temporary corrective measures for service-induced degradation of ASME Code Class 3 piping), through the process discussed in iten 5 below, and clarify the ISI and IST requirements for nuclear plant components not required to be constructed in accordance with ASME Section !!!, Class 1, 2, or 3.

(4) Identify safety-significant Code changes that the staff has determined are necessary for imposition, specifically Mandatory Appendix Vi!!, " Performance Demonstration for Ultrasonic Examination Systems," of Section XI of the ASME BPV Code.

(5) Establish a r,aw regulatory guide that would endorse alternatives to the baseline ASME Code rules, including the use of later editions and addenda of '

the ASME Code, listing any exceptions which the staff determines are necessary.

(6) Establish a new regulatory guide which would document NRC revi6w and acceptance of OM Code cases, similar to the regulatory guide for the BPV Code.

Attachment 1, " Regulatory Agenda Entry for Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR 50.55a," gives an abstract of the proposed changes. The details of each of these changes are discussed in Attachment 2, " Support Statement for Recommendation to 51'.iate Rulemaking to Amend 10 CFR 50.55a."

In summary, the proposed amendment would change the implementation' structure currently in i 50.55a by eliminating the 120-month update requirements, give >

alternatives described in the proposed regulatory guides to be implemented by licensees on a voluntary basis, and identify safety-significant ASME Code changes that must be implemented by licensees on a schedule given in the regulations. These actions will result in substantial reductions-in the

. cs 8

A E ? te l q\4 J. Taylor .

current regulatory burden on licensees. Therefore, RES requests authorization to initiate the proposed rulemaking.

Attachments: (1) Regulatory Agenda Entry for Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR !0.55a (2) Support Statement for Recommendation to Initiate Rulemaking to Amend 10 CFR 50.55a l-I t

I t

s

-. =-

- J

s o ..

.. 0 [ )h -l J. Taylor 4 -i

current regulatory burden on licensees. Therefore, RES requests authorization ,

j to initiate the proposed rulemaking.

Attachments': (1) Regulatory Agenda Entry for ,

i' Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR 50.55a

[ (2) Support Statement for Recommendation to  :

i Initiate Rulemaking to Amend 10 CFR 50.55a i

j  :

s i

i  !

3 t j .-

.i j Disirihytigni e T. Speis R. Baer K. Wicipan J.-Craig- J. Strosnider T. Chan i C. Serpan R. Wessman J. Musetra. .i G. Millman R. Hermann J. Vora E.'Sullivan I

! DOCUMENT NAME ' G:\EMEB\INITHEMB.F09

  • See previous concurrence. -

!- to rec 2ive a e w of trie-ve nt. Insteete - in the be c.cw w/o attache.nt/enetuure - e.c w with O ettechnent/encle ture ti e ty__cep?

0FFICE RES:EMEB E 'NRR:EMEB E RES:EMEB - E RES:EMEB ~- E- d.St0FMD / f NAME WLIU* PCAMPBELL* FCHERNY* MAYFIELO* "LSHh l[

'01/13/95 01/13/95 02/06/95**- 2-// ,/95 - i DATE 01/13/95

sf. recelw = a copy of thle document,- Indicate - in the bom cecow w/o attachment / enclosure ' t. Cow with attachment /enctemure u o to copy- E uf 0FFICE- NRR
DE:D 'E NRR:D E AE00:0 E RYS:Dl7 -

5 NAME BSHERON* WRUSSELL* EJORDAN* EBECKJORD r 4

DATE" 01/19/95 01/31/95 02/03/95 ' /s /95- /- /95

"*Editoria l changes made 2/b/95.

l t

I,

%,, ,,.m..., ..-.4_. _..,.,,m.,, , ..m. . , , _ . , , , . , _ . . _ _ _ . , _ , , - , , . . , _ _ . ~ ,m,,,,_,, . _ , . . - . . .-,.,v>

- - _ ~_ - -- - . - - - - _ - - _ - _ _ - - --.

G

  • h M ~/

Attachment 1 Regulatory Agenda Entry for Proposed Amendment to 20 CFR 50.55a TITLEt Codes and Standards for Nuclear Pcwer Plants CFR CITATIOjb ,

10 CFR 50 ABSTftACT:

The propos d rule would amend the Commissien's regulations to (1) eliminate the 120-month update requirements for licensees' inservice inspection (ISI) and inservice testing (IST) programs; (2) establish baseline regulatory requirements that would: incorporate by re'erence the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) .CV for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear power Plants (the OM Code), maintain the 1989 Edition of Section 111 and Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vestel Code (the BPV Code), require certain licensees to complete one final upda;e to their ISI and IST programs, expand the scope of i 50.55a to include safety-related snubbers so tt.at licensees may, as an option, delete existing technical specifications snubber test requirements and use the ASME OM Code for IST of snubbers, and delete the existing supplementary requirements for IST of containment isolation valves; (3) allow alt 6rnatives to the ASME Code rules, permitting licensees to use later editions or addenda of the ASME Codes br staff-developed alternatives to the Code requirements, and clarify the ISI and IST requirements for nuclear plant components not recuired to be constructed in accordance with ASME Code Class 1, 2, or 3; (4) i<entify safety-signifi: ant Code changes that would be required to be implemented by licensees; (5) establish a new regulatory guide that would address alternatives to the baseline ASME Code rules and endorse the voluntary use of later editions and adder.da of the ASME Codes, identifying any exceptinns that the staff has determined are necessary; and (6) establish a new regulatory guide that would document NRC review and acceptance of OM Code Cases.

Eliminating the 120-month update requirements from the existing regulations would permit licensees to continue using their existing ISI and IST programs; however, certain licensees that have not yet updated to the 1989 Edition of Section XI of the ASME BPV Code would be required to implement one final update of their ISI and IST programs when their current intervals expire. The proposed rule would, for the first time, incorporate by reference the ASME OM Code into the regulations, and would expand the scope of the regulations to include inservice testing and examination of safety-related snubbers so that licensees may, as an option, delete ext:; ting requirements in their technical specifications and use the ASME OM Code for IST of snubbers.

The proposed rule would allow alternatives ;c the ASME Code rules beyond the specified baseline Code editions, and permit later editions / addenda of the ASME Codes as stoluntary alternative rules. For example, the staff has

.-m- , --

f [ } {p oc 2

develo>ed an alternative to the requirements of Section XI of the ASME BPV Code ttat specifies guidance for performing temporary corrective measures for service-induced degradation of A5HE Code Class 3 piping, which will be included, with the other alternatives (i.e., later editions and addenda with any exceptions noted) in the regulatory guide that will address alternatives to the baseline Code rules. All safety-significant code changes that the staff deter' nines to be necessary pursuant to the provisions in 10 CFR 50.109, "Backfitting," will be specifically im)osed in the regulations. One such example in the current rulemaking is tie requirement that licensees implement Section XI, Appendix VI!!, ' Performance Demonstration for Ultrasonic Exaniination System," which provides rules for performance demonstration for ultrasonte examination proceduren, equipment, and personnel used to detect and size flaws in nuclear power plant components, which will be imposed on an expedited schedule to improve the quality of 151. The change in the regulations would permit licensees to tse, as they elect, the later edition or addenda, or portions thereof, of the A!ME Codus, which the Commission has endorsed in the new regulatory gud ::.s as alternatives to current Code editions / addenda. The later editiuns and addenda of the ASME Codes will update rules for the construction of light-water-cooled nuclear power plant components, and for the inservice inspection and inservice testing of those components, to incorporate new developments in technology and changes based on experience with the existing rules.

The proposed amendment contains changes to the implementation structure of I 50.55a, establishes alternative rules (to be contained in a regulatory guide) which may be implemented by licensees on a voluntary basis, and

identifies safety-significant code changes that should be implemented by licensees. These actions support substantial reductions in regulatory burden, without an adverse impact on safety, as determined by the staff during the review of a cost-beneficial licensing action request. The proposed rule will be issued for public comment. The priority of the rulemaking is considered '

HIGH. .

Months afte; TIMETABLE:

fEL83utt9_YAl.

Proposed Amendment to Divisions for Review 2 Proposed Amendment to Offices for Concurrence 3

- Proposed Amendment to ACRS for scheduling 4 Proposed Amendment to CRGR for scheduling 5 Proposed Amendment to EDO 6 Proposed Amendment published in Federal Register 7 Final Rule published 17 LEGAL ALITHORITY:

42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5846 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: None

8f,lb~I PD b 3

AGDICY CONTACT $t Frank C. Cherny Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nucitar Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 415-6786 Wan Cheng (Winston) Liu Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 415-5887 l Patricia Campbell Nuclea* Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, DC 20555 301 415-1311

I '

' 4

))E 7 4 yd Attachn.ent 2 Support Statement for Recommendation to initiate Rulemaking to Amend 10 CFR 50.55a The recomendation to initiate the supplement to on-going rulemaking is ,

supported by the response to the following seven review items which are identified in th6 Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) "Research Procedures Handbook for Control of Rulemaking, May 1988," and the additional nine factors addressed by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) initiating, plcnning and developing rulemaking (the nine NRR factors have been integrated with the seven RES review items listed below).

a. hsue to be addressed (NRR #11 The proposed amendment would modify the regulations in 10 CFR 50.55a,

" Codes and Standards," to reduce the regulatory burden of the current

..gulations while not affectine ti.e safe operatio" and testing of nuclear power plants constru:ted and licensed under 10 CFR 50. The rulemaking will incorporate the following:

l (1) eliminate the 120-month update requirements for licensees' inservice inspection (ISI) and inservice testing (IST) programs to later editions and addenda of the American Society of Mechanical

  • Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME BPV Code) and the ASME Code for Ooeration and Maintenance of Nuclear "gnt plants (ASME OM Code).

(2) establish baseline editions of the ASME Codes:

incorporate by reference the 1990 Edition of tne ASME OM Code, which contains rules that are the same as the IST rules in the 1989 Edition of the ASME BPV Code, as the baseline edition for 15T programs, establish the 1989 Edition of Section XI of the ASME BPV Code as the baseline edition for ISI programs,

- require licensees that have not updated to the 1989 Edition of the ASME BPV Code to complete one final update of their ISI and IST Programs to the baseline Code editions when the current interval expires,

- expand the scope of i 50.55a to include safety-related srubbers so that licensees may, as an option, delete. current tet.hnical specifications snubber test requirements and use the ASME OM Code as the requirements for IST of snubbers, and delete the existing modification for IST-of containment isolation valves to be consistent with the current and revised requirements in 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, " Primary i

7 7

.. a y&e o I

2 Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors."

(3) allow' alternatives to the ASME Code rules beyond those specified-in the baseline Code sditions, permit licensees to use later editicas and adder.da of the ^$NE Codes and staff-developed

-alternatives,- and clarify th ISI and IST requirements for-nuclear

, plant components not required to be constructed in accordance with ASME Code Class 1, 2, or 3, (4) identify safety-significant code changes that would be required to-be implemented by licensees (e.g., impose and expedite

implementation of Appendix Vi!!, " Performance Demonstration for Ultrasonic Examination Systtes," o the 1989 Addenda, with addenda l through the 1994 Addenda, of Sectlon XI of the ASME 8PV Code);

establishanewregulatory(e.idethatwouldgivt the alternatives

' (including endorsing the la r editions and addenda of the ASMC Code and isting exceptions that the staff has determined are necessary)-to the baseline ASME Code rules; and (6) establish a new regulatory guide that would document NRC review and acceptance of OM Code Cases similar to the regulatory guides that lists ASME BPV Code Cases,

b. Lh1 necessity and uroency for addressina_the issue (includes oreliminary messment of the ernected value to be schieved in-terms of risk redggt-1.g3_or other benefits as a result of the ru' e's enac+=nt. MAR #3)

(1) Elfeinste the 120-Month Update Requirements - A recent request from NRR (memorandum Russell-to Beckjord dated May included a proposal that certain changes to i 50.55a be inclu18, 1994) ded as an addition to the ongoing-rulemaking. These ch nges-relate to-policy issues that NRR has reviewed as a result of a cost-beneficial-licensing action (CBLA) request. Specifically, the CBLA requested that an alternative to the periodic update requirements of i 50.55a be considered as an acceptable level of quality and safety. The alternative to the existing regulations and its bases were-discussed in-depth among staff of HRR and RES.-

The staff is proposing that the 120-month update requirements of i 50.55a be eliminated. Currently a licensee begins the initial-120-month interval on the date of commercial operation and is required to update its,lSI.and IST programs each subsequent 120-month interval to later editions and addenda of the ASME BPV Code incorporated by reference in paragraph-(b) of 5 50.55a. The proposed amendment would support the Commission's commitment to reduce the regulatory burden imposed upon licensees while not adversely effecting the safe operation of- nuclear. power plants.

(2) Establish Esseline Regulatory Requireeents - As part of the elimination of :he 120-month update, the staff determined that the

g >F I QY 3

latest editions of the ASME Code requirements incorporated by reference in paragraph (b) of i 50.55a would be used as the baseline for operating nuclear power plants. 1:owever, because the IST requirements in tlte 1989 Edition of Section XI of the ASME BPV Code are the same as the requirements in ISTB and ISTC of the 1990 Edition of the ASME OM Code, and because the OM Code has superseded Section XI of the BPV Code for IST, the baseline for IST will be the 1990 Edition of the OM Code. The proposed code changes to establish the baseline regulatory requirements are as follows:

6 Incorporate by P.eference the ASME OM Code - The ASME published the OM Code in 1990, to provide rules for inservice-testing nf pumps, valves, ar.d snubbers. These rules for IST were essentially a part of Section XI rules prior to 1987; however, subsequent to 1987, the intent of the ASME was to transfer cesponsibility for developi.m rules for inservi testing from the Section XI Subcommittee for inservice Inspection to the OM Committee, and that the ASME OM Code replace the Section XI rules for IST. The Section XI rules for IST of pumps and valves, which were previously incorporated by reference into the regulations, will no longer be updated by the ASME Section XI Committee.

Therefore, it is necessary that the ASME OM Code replace the Section XI reference for IST of sumps and valves in i 50.55a to l

maintain continuity for future c1anges in the code.

e Maintain the 1989 Edition of section XI of the ASME BPV Code -

The 1989 Edition of the ASME BPV Code is currently incorporated by reference in i 50.55a. The 1989 Edition also incorporates by reference Part 6 (pumps) and Part 10 (valves) of the ASME OM Standards. By establishing the 1989 Edition of the ASME BPV Code as the last revision to which all licensees would be required to upa>te their ISI and IST programs, and the 1990 Edition of the

- ASME 0M Code which specifies the same requirements as OM Standards Part 6 and Part 10, each licensee would eventually be performing examination and testing using the same baseline edition of the ASME Codes. By establishing a baseline edition, the staff may endorse later editions and addenda of the ASME Codes against the baseline requirements without having to continually change the minimal requirements that ensure maintenance of an adequate level of quality and safety, e Require Certain Licensees to Complete One Final Update - As stated above, certain licensees would be required to cor.plete one final update of their ISI and IST programs to the baseline ASME Codes (i.e., the 1989 Edition of the ASME BPV Code and 1990 Edition of the ASME OM Code) when their current interval has expired. Because the update is currently required by the existing

- l 50.55a, it is not a backfit. The rules specified in the 1990 Edition of the ASME OM Code are the same as the rules for IST in the 1989 Edition of the ASME BPV Code.

l

_ ]

g W @I 1 p 4

  • Expand the scope of 5 50.55a to Include safety-Related . ,

Snubbers - Currently,Section XI Subsection IWF, " Component Supports", specifies the detailed rules for IST of snubbers through the referencing of Part 4 of ASME/ ANSI OH-1987. Section 50.55a does not currently include requirements for IST of snubbers (i.e., the current IST requirements of i 50.55a apply only to pumps and valves). Therefore, the snubber testing requirements specified in OM Part 4 are not incorporated by reference into the

' regulations. In aidition, requirements for the testing of snubbers have generally been governed by plant Technical Specifications. However, the new standare technical specifications only reference i 50.55a rather than specifying requirements for the testing of snubbers. In order to maintain appropriate quality standards, the proposed amendment would expand the scopo of i 50.55a to include snubber testing and would incorporate by reference the rules in the ASME ON Code for such esting. Licensees may, as in option, delete their technical specification requirements for IST of snubbe s a% use the requirements of the ASME OM Code, l.icensees updating to the revised standard technical specif'ications may continue to include specific technical specification requirements or may refer to

, 5 50.55a, which will reference the ON Code as an acceptable alternative for IST of snubbers, o Delete Requirements for IST of Containment Isolation Valves -

In rulemaking effective Se)tember 8, 1992, 5 50.55a(b)(2)(vii) has required that paragrapis 4.2.2.3(e) and 4.2.2.3(f) of Part 10 of ASME/Af!SI OM4-1988 be included in the IST leakage-rate testing l of containment isolation valves (CIV). In view of these requirements, the ASME OM Committee established a special task group to perform a comprehensive review of OM Part 10 CIV testing ,

requirements and acceptance standards. The OM Committee has presented the results of their review of the CIV testing and acceptance standards to the NRC staff. The staff has reviewed the results of the ON Committee review and the basis for their recommendation. The staff agrees with their recommendation to remove the requirements from i 50.55a. The change will ensure that the IST requirements do not result in inconsistencies with the current and revised requirements of 10 CFR-50, Appendix J,

" Primary Reactor Containment leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors."

(3) Allow Alternatives to the ASME Code Rules - The staff would identify alternatives to the ASME Code rules beyond the,specified baseline Code editions, permit licensees to use later editions and addenda of the ASME Codes and staff-developed alternatives, and

  • clarify the 151 and IST requirements for nuclear plant components not required to be constructed in accordance with ASME Code Class 1, 2, or 3. An-example of a staff-developed alternative is guidance for performing temporary corrective measures for service-induced degradation of ASME Code Class 3 piping.

. - . - - - -,_ . - - , - .- ,,,--p,, , - * ,w . --

, 1y- e

i. T 1 f{h"

! # l

! 5

i

{ (4) Identify Safety-Significarot Code Changes - To ensure safety L functions are not compromised, the staff would identify all ,

safety-significant Code changes that will be imposed on licensees i through justification of baccfit evaluation in accordance with-
i 50.109, "Backfitting." The proposed-rulemaking would include one item that will be imposed on Itcensees as follows: ,

, e Impose and Expedite Implementation of Appendix VIII -

Mandatory Appendix Vill, Performance Demonstration for Ultrasonic ,

i Examination Systems," was first published in the 1989 Addenda of i 4 Section XI of the ASME BPV Code. The staff and industry  :

representatives recognize that implementation of Appendix VI!!

i would greatly enhance the reliability of ultrasonic examinations 1 l' (UT) based on results generated from various research and study t programs that demonstrate that the exir: ting Section XI UT procedures are not always adequate in terms of detecting cracks in

nuclear power plant components. The purpose of Appendix VI!! is l- to ensure thai .he effectiveness of all procedures and the proficiency of all UT personnel be demonstrated on pressure vessel i and piping mock-ups that contain embedded cracks. The successful i implementation of Appendix-V!!! would help reduce the risk i associated with not detecting dsfects in components during inservice inspection activities. Appendix VIII can be a cost .
effective enhancement it, that with tie improved performance of UT
inspectors, insnection and examination methods that are not currently allowd by Section XI will be available to licensees. -

The various methods include options that result in savings, such 1 l as

' and(therefore, personnel exposure and critical-path outage time,1) allow i evaluation techniques that allow the UT examiners more

and flexibi (2)lity in the' methods for detecting.and sizing flaw

! indications. The costs in implementing Appendix VI!!-are one-time costs-that can be. offset by savings in future inspectionr.

[ .

(5) Establish Regulatory Guide for later ASME Codes and Staff.

Developed Alternatfres - The NRC staff would establish a new

regulatory guide that would-address later editions and addenda of t the ASME Codes.(i.e. BPV Code and OM Code) beyond the specified baseline Codes as alternatives for use by licensees on a voluntary

- basis, in addition, the regulatory guide would identify staff-developed alternatives to the ASME Code rules that have been

. accepted by the NRC staff for generic application. The NRC staff intends to routinely update.the rt.gulatory guide as later editions

,' and addenda of the ASME Codes are published, and as necessary to approve the use of staff-developed alternativas. As noted in item

, 3 above, an example of a staff-developed alternative is guidance-for performing temporary corrective measures for service-induced degradation of ASME Code Class 3 piping.

(6) Establish Regulatory Guide for QN Code Cases - A new regulatory guide would be established to review and approve the use of OM i

o<

g g)VI g6 6

Code C .. Footnote 6 to i 50.55a states that ASME Code Cases

-that haw been determined suitable for use by the Commission for

  • Section-XI will be listed in Regulatory Guide 1.147 and that the use of other code cases say be authorized by the Commission upon request pursuant to 5 60.55a(3). A similar regulatory guide will list the ON Code Casas that the staff has determined are l - acceptable for use ley licensees. As has been the staff's practice-for the regulatory guides currently referenced in Footnote 6, it is the staff's int'snt to routinely update all of the ASME Code Case regulatory guides to advise the industry on the acceptability of the use of new or revised Code Cases publishea ey the ASME.

The proposed amendment would change the implementation structure of i 50.55a resulting from eliminating the IN-month update requirements, allow alternatives described in the propused regulatory guides to bt used by licensees on a voluntary basis. and identify safety H gnificant code changes that must be implemeated by licensees. These av.lons support substantial red"ctions in regulatory burden, without adversely impacting the safe opecation of nuclear power plant, based on the review of a cost-beneficial licensing action request.

c. Alternative to rulemakine (NRR #5)

(1) Eliminate the 120-Month Uputate Requireeents - One alternative to eliminating the 120-month update requirements would be to take no action. The consequences of taking no action are that-(t) licensees would be required to continue to update their ISI and IST-programs every 120 months in accordance with the current regulations, and (ii) no reduction in the regulatory burden-imposed by the periodic updates would be realized. Such an approach would not be consistent with the staff's efforts to reduce the regulatory burden on licensees without reducing the safety of the plants. Later ecitions of the ASME Codes contain changes, some of which are safety significtat and some that are not, such as administrative and editorial changes. The NRC staff would evaluate such changes unc'er the rules for backfits for potential imposition on licensees, ensuring that the safety of the plants is maintained.

(2) -Estabitsh Baseline Regulatory Requireeents - Severa1 a1_ternatives were evaluated as-discussed in the following:

  • An alternative to incorporating by reference the ASME OM Code-

.into the regulations would be to'take no action and maintain the existing requirements for IST-in Section XI. The technical and administrative requirements and ensuing improvements of the ASME ON Code would not be incorporated into the regulations. The NRC position on the methods for IST contained in the ASME OM Code

-*would-have to be established on a case-by-case basisc Such an approach would not be desirable because it would limit both the NRC and licensees in the use of later editions and addenda to the

I p g, W@l l e l 7

current requirements. The responsibility for IST code rules has been transferred to the ON Committee. By not recognizing the transfer in i 50.55a, it would be difficult to rely on the OM Comittee to maintain the rules.

  • An alternative to ma;atnining the baseline code editions would be to take nn action. If the 120-month update is eliminated, but i no baseline edition is specified, licensees would not be required to update their ISI/IST programs to the baseline code editions and each licensee would have its own ISI/IST prograin implemented in accordance with various code editions / addenda. This alternative is not desirable because it would result in a significant increase in NRC resources to evaluate each licensee's ISI/IST program on a case-by-case basis and would not achieve ti.e same level of quality standards.
  • An alternative to requiring certain licensees to complete one final update would be to take no action. This coulti allow licensees that have not yet updated to the 1989 Edition of the ASME BPV Code to not update t1eir ISI and IST programs to the baseline code editions when their current interval'. are expired.

This alternative is not practical because it would neroase NRC resources to evaluate each licensee's ISI and IST programs on an

, individual basis, as well as necessitating a review of later editions and addenda to various earlier editions of the codes rather than to a baseline edition, e An alternative to expanding the scope of I 50.55a to include snubbers would be to maintain the status quo. This alternative is not desirable because it would not be consistent with the revised standard technical specifications which allow licensees an option to use the requirements of the ASME OM Code for IST of snubbers through i 50.55a and to use lator editions and addenda that the staff finds acceptable. The IST requirements contained in the current i 50.55a apply only to pumps and valves. Because the ASME OM Code is an industry consensus document, many licensees may want to optionally use the requirements for IST of snubbers in the OM Code as opposed to continuing to maintain specific technical specifications.

o An alternative to deleting requirements for IST leak-rate testing of containment isolation valves would be to maintain the status quo. This alternative is not reasonable because the NRC staff has agreed with the OM Committee's recommendation to remove the supplementary requirements for IST of CIVs from the regulations. The current and revised requirements in 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, adequately monitor the leakage of CIVs. To avoid inconsistencies between i 50.55a and Appendix J, the modification currently in i 50.55a should be deleted.

N p g, )b 8

(3) Allow Alternatives to the ASME Code Rules - An alternative to allowing alternatives to the ASME Code rules would be to permit licensees to use any ASME Code rules beyond the specified baseline code editions on a voluntary basis, or to prohibit licensees from using any of the later code editions or addenda, and would not afford a process for the staff to identify other alternatives that have been determined acceptable for implementation by licensees, such as the temporary repair mearures. Such an alternative is not desirable because (1) any later code changes could be implemented

, by certain licensees without the NRC identifying execptions and thus not controlling of the level of safety standards, or (2) licensees w9uld be )rahibited from implementing changes that the staff finds accepta A except through specific requests to the NRC on a case-by-case basis, increasing bot 1 licensee and NRC staff resources.

(H identiff Safety-Sig... U nt Code Changes - .,e alternative to

~

identifying safety-significant Code changes would be to take no action. This approach is not desirable because it would not address safety-significant code changes that should be implemented by licensees after completion of a backfit evaluation in accordance with i 50.109. An alternative to imposition of Appendix VIII of Section XI would be to permit implementation on a voluntary basis; however, such an alternative is not desirable because licensees might not implement the appendix in a timely manner, if at all, and could continue to use examination methods that have been shown to be inadequate on a long-term basis. It would mean that the recent advances in ultrasonic examination techniques as a result of extensive efforts made by the industry and the research institutes might not be incorporated into the ISI programs at all nuclear power plants.

(5) Estabitsh Regulatory Guide for later ASME Codes - An a1ternative to establishing a regulatory guide for addressing the later editions and addenda of the ASME Codes would be to incorporate the alternatives to the ASME Codes into i 50.55a. This alternative is not desirable because: (1) this would add a long list of alternative rules, which generally do not contain requirements that substantially impact safety, to the regulations, and (ii) updating alternative rules of later editions and addenda of the ASME Codes through normal rulemaking would not be completed in a timely manner. NRR has requested that a process be established to issue alternatives on an annual basis. A regulatory guide is an acceptable method of maintaining a listing of alternatives acceptable to the staff and may be issued on a regular basis, consistent with NRR's request.

(6) Establish Regulatory Guide for 0M Code Cases - An a1ternative to establishing a regulatory guide for OM Code cases would be to take no action. This alternative is not desirable because it is not-

. consistent with the NRC practice in that regulatory guides (e.g.,

i g$ M'

, fbW 9

i

! RG 1.84, RG 1.85, and RG 1.147) have been established for review .

1 of acceptability for ASME Section !!! and Section XI Code cases. )

! d. New wull the istun ha addressed thres. ru1Minn neludes descr'stian j af ru' Mine aet' v1< ties, a schedule. anil a deser' et en of t se de t' red 1 anal result me #1 ,1 the internetlen and ' no.orface;l ietween t se su e een  !

i ru' e and attar nu st' na or elannod activ' t' an . M t O71 aid at eva unt' en-  ;

i af tho noten< ;1 a' ito e " ' na and ' ni;earate rt' 4 na wit,1 etser ::r.:r e 6 i activ' t' es . ' ne' ud' na current er s' anned ind ustry initiatives. MR #8) 1 i (1) Eliminatethe120-NonthU>dateRequirements-Thecurrent i

regulationsrequirelicenseestoupdateISIandISTprogramsevery 12 months to incorporate later editions and addenda of the ASME i

8PV Code. Generally, the later editions and addenda do_ not l include requirements that substantially impact safety, yet the NRC j staff does not follow the backfit provisions of i 50.109 in - '

, imposing the mandatory l?0 ....anth update reonirements on licensees' i 151 and IST pro rams. .Therefore, this propvaed amendment wauld .

! modify i 50.55a f)(4) and (g)(4) to delete the 120-month update requirements. ,

l (2) Requirements - The proposed l Establish amendmentBaseline Regulater[y reference the ASME OM Code into would incorporate l 550.55a(b)(3 and would modify _l 50.55a(f) to include IST of .

snubbers:so t at licensees may use the requirements of the ASME OM  !

l Code as an option to maintaining specific technical: specifications- )'

for the testing of snubbers.

l The proposed amendment would establish the baseline code editions a that have been implemented by so m licensees and would ultimately be: implemented by all licensees. The baseline code editions are the 1989 Edition of the ASME BPV Code and the 1990 EM tion of the

ASME OM Code.

The proposed amendment would require certain licensees (i.e., i i

licensees that have not yet updated to the 1989 Edition of the 1- ASME BPV Code) to complete one more update of their ISI/IST programs to the baseline Code editions when their current interval  ;

has expired.

The proposed amendment would delete i 50.55a(b)(2)(vii) -

.i

modification for IST of containment isolation valves (CIVs) to '

p

_ preclude any inconsistencies between i 50.55a and 10 CFR 50, Appendit J, for leakage testing of CIVs.  :

(.1) : Allow' Alternatives to the ASNE Code Rules - The proposed amendment would, through the use of a new regulatory guide, idcntify  ;

alternatives to the ASMS Code rules beyond the specified baseline

Code editions =and permit licensees-to use later editions and -

i addenda of the ASME Codes as alternatives. The regulatory guide

will also include staff-developed alternatives that are acceptable  !

,w,,,~_-:___-.--------...-- ,-..-.--a.-= . . = - -

pf W I gb &

10 for implementation by licensees. The proposed rule also will clarify the ISI and IST requirements for nuclear plant components not required to be constructed in accordance with ASME Code Class 1, 2, or 3, and indicate what alternatives are available to licensees for components they optionally elect to classify as code class.

(4) Identify Safety-Significant Code Changes - The proposed amendment would identify safety-significant Code changes in the regulations subject to the backfit provisions in 5 50.109. One such example is the proposed amendment that would contain rules in a new ii)(B) for imposing and expediting Appendix Yll!

i 50.55a of Section(g)(6)(Appendix XI. Vill would be imposed and expedited for all licensed nuclear pnwer plants. The details of the expedited implementation will be estabilshed during the rule development.

The staff is presently monitoring industry efforts for the purpose of obtaining data for the r9ulatory analysis ie *upport of t.ie proposed amendment and for a uessing the practicality of the staff proposed implementation schedules.

(5) Estabitsh Regulatory Guide for later ASME Codes - The propossed amendment would establish a new regulatory guide that would address later editions and addenda of the ASME Codes beyond the specified baseline Code editions as alternatives for use by licensees on a voluntary basis. Additionally, the regulatory guide would identify staff-developed alternatives to ASME Code rules that are acceptable for implementation.

(6) Estabitsh Regulatory Guide for 0M Code Cases - The proposed amendment would include a new regulatory guide that would address the NRC review and acceptability of ASME OM Code Cases.

The propcsed amendment would be supported by a regulatory analysis that, among other things, evaluates the later editions and addende of the ASME I

BPV Code and the ASME OH Code with respect- to identifying the level of significance and net burden to licensees of each Code revision.

Licensees may use the information in determining their use nf later Code editions and addenda, in those cases where significant differences exist between tha baseline Code editions or NRC staff positions end either the ASME BPV Code addenda or edition or the ASME OH Code, exceptions to specific items in the Codes would be identified, or supplemental cri-teria would be specified, in the regulatory guide. Exceptions to either the ASME BPV Code and the ASME OM Code are minimized by NRC staff participation on those Code committees in accord with OMB Circular A-119, " Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Standards." Such participation as part of the consensus process may influence the development of the code rules to account for NRC concerns on specific issues.

The proposed amendment is expected to be routine and no interaction with other existing or planned NRC activities, including generic activities.

>=

l

. pf;)V}

I '

(VW 11 is. anticipated. The industry initiatives associated with implementation .

of Appendix-VIII are being monitored by the NRC staff. Any applicable 1 input from-the irdustry will be considered in the regulatory analyses. ]

-The-description of the rulemaking activities and the schedule are shown below:

Months after-11MEIABLE: EDO APPROVAL Proposed Amendment to Divisions fo.' review 2 Proposed Amendment to Offices for concurrence 3-Proposed Amendment to ACRS for scheduling -4 Proposed Amendment to CRGR for scheduling 5 Proposed Amendment to EDO 6 Propos:d Amendment published in Fe:! oral Register 7 Final Amendment published 17 e, tinw 6 nublic. ir dustry. and the MC will be affecte( .; a result of ruumakina fincluces oraliminary esc mate of the antjciuted costs to NRC off' ces and-industry of develonina. 9mnasina. and innlementatoon. NRR #4)

(1) Eliminate the 120-Nonth Update Requirements - The proposed amendment- i would give licensees an opportunity to continue using their existing ISI and-IST programs with the exception that licensees that have not-yet updated to the 1989. Edition of the ASME BPV Code will be ,

required to update their-ISI and IST programs to the specific-baseline code editions when their current interval has expired.-

This change in the regulations means that-licensees would no longer be required to update-their ISI and-!ST pc: grams to the later (beyond the baseline r. ode editions) editions and addenda'of the ASME Codes, except for the changes that the NRC imposes through_the backfit provisions-of i 50.109 Therefore, this amendment presents an opportunity for savings without-adversely impacting the safe operation of the nuclear power plants'and is considared a reduction in. regulatory burden based on the expected cost savings to the licensees. Because the later-editions of the ASME Codes do not-generally contain safety-significant Code ' changes,= and because the.

NRC would impose the Code changes that significantly impact safety and are cost-beneficial, the safety of the public would not be comprorised and-the cost savings realized by licensees would relate to cost savings to the-public.

(2)- Establish Baseline Regulatory Requirements - Incorporation by reference of the ASME OM Code would save licensees and-the-NRC staff both time and effort by providing uniform detailed criteria against which tne steff could review any single submittal. The 1989 Edition _

of Section XI of the ASME BPV Code is currently incorporated by reference in i 50.55a. Using this edition, as the baseline code

-and a one time effort by all licensees to update their ISI and IST programs in accordance with schedule in the current 1.50.55a, would be consistent with the existing regulatory requirements. A number of licensees have already updated their ISI and IST programs to the

.[

f$)kl e@

12 1989 Edition of Section XI of the ASME BPV Code, and would not need -

to complete an additional update. 1herefore, no cost changes would be-anticipated and safety to the public would not be affected.

Expanding the secse of i 50.55a to include snub >ers to allow licensees an option to delete plant specific Technical.'

Specifications snubber testing requirements is consistent with the=

efforts to revise technical specifications. Deleting supplementary requirments for IST leak-rate testing of containment isolation-valves (CIVs) would be considered a reduction in regulatory burden to all licensees without compromising safety to the public because it ensures-that there-will be no-inconsisteticles between 5 50.55a and 10 CFR 50, Appendix J for the leakage monitoring of CIVs.

(3) Allow Alternatives to the ASME Code Rules - The NRC staff would allow alterisatives to the ASME Code rules through the use of a new regulatory guide to be used by the licensees-on a voluntary basis

. a clarify the requirements 'or nuclear plant comoonents not constructed in accordance with ASME Code Clas: 1 , or 3. This action would be considered-a reduction in regulatory burden to the licensees and would not adversely impact the safety of the public.

-While it would increase NRC resources to evaluate those-alternatives, it will eliminate a more burdensome review by the NRC and-licensees on a case-by-case basis.

(4) Identify Safety-Significant Cods. Changes - Imposition of safety-significant code changes, such as Appendix VIII of.Section XI, would improve plant. safety and would be. determined in accordance with the provisions of i 50.109 backfit analysis. -

(S) Estabitsh Regulatory Guide for later ASME Codes - The NRC staff would establish a new regulatory guide to -identify later editions and addenda of the ASME Codes and the staff-developed alternatives that 'nay be used by the licensees on a voluntary basis. This-action would ensure that the level of- quality and safety of the ISI and IST programs =are maintained, while also resulting in a' reduction of regulatory burden to_the licensees with no adverse effect on the  !

safety of the public.

(6) Establish Regulatory Guide for DN Code Cases - The reguintory guide would be established to indicate NRC review-and approval of the use-of OM Code Cases.- This-action would result in a reduction of-regulatory burden to the licensees and would result in no adverse effects on the safety of the public.

f._ NRC resource, and scheduline weded for the rul_emakinc (includes ooints in the rul - kinq schedule at which NRR/RES formal-interaction and concurrence shou' d take niace. NRR #9)

The proposed amendment is considered to be routine. The portion of the proposed amendment associated with development of new regulatory guides and-implementation of Appendix VIII would increase NRC staff efforts in

+

s f }b" 13 et#

evaluating those alternatives to the ASME Code rules and for establishing .

details of implementing the appendix during the rule development. .On 1 these bases, the staff effort to develop and review the proposed _ rule, regulatory analysis, to resolve interoffice and public comments, and to generally move the proposed amendment through its various stages, is estimated to be four man-years.

The proposed rulemaking schedule is delineated in Paragraph "d" abov_e.

Formal interaction and concurrence will take place at divitrion-level review with submission to ACRS, CRGR, and EDO,

g. Priority of the rulemakina (NRR #2)

The priority of the rulemaking is :.onsidered "HIGH" because the .

rulemaking re) resents a regulatory burden reduction and imposes a safety-significant c1ange in the qualifications of axaminers and methods for ultra.'nic testing of welds in nuc~ ear power plants.

l

[p b rnic e 1 l.

    • cg

!  :. < h [y ' i I S UNITED STATES n l'  ! NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION h h }f0*

\.....,/ wash Notow, o c. rossaooi November 17, 1994 NEMORANDUM 70: Eric S. Beckjord, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research FROM: William T. Russell, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation [M .

SUBJECT:

PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO 10 CFR 50.55a, CODES AND STANDARDS RULE

References:

(1) Memorandum from E. S. Beckjord to W. T. Russell, re: proposed amendment to 10 CFR 50.55a, dated September 2, 1994 (2) Memorandum from W. T. Russell to E. S. Beckford,

. re: proposed amendn ant to 10 CFR 50.55a, dated May 1" 1994 (3) Memorandum from T. E. Murley to E. S. Beckjord, re: proposed amendment to 10 CFR 50.55a, dated February 22, 1994 Reference I provides the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) plan of action to proceed with rulemaking for 10 CFR 50.55a as requested in References 2 and 3. Reference 2 included a request to eliminate the currently required 120-month update to a later edition incorporated by reference in Paragraph (b) of 10 CFR 50.55a. Reference 3 included a request to incorporate specific guidance on temporary repairs of certain components. Generally, the approach proposed in Reference I for implementing the rulemaking is acceptable with the few exceptions discussed below in the order presented in Enclosure 1 to your September 2, 1994, memorandum:

1. Scoce of Proposed Rule: Ine guidance in Generic Letter 90-05, " Guidance for Performing Temporary Non-Code Repairs of ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 Piping," should be included in the earliest rulemaking for 10 CFR 50.55a that incorporates a new regulatory guide that identifies acceptable alternatives to the requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (the Code), rather than in subsequent rulemaking.
2. Preparation of Future Rulemakina: Because the process for endorsing later editions of the Code, including the ASME Ooerations and

.M1 1ntenance Code (the O&M Code), will be significantly different from the current process, it should be developed according to the guidance of Office of Management and Budget Circular A-119, " Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Standards." With such a change, the coordination of NRC participation in ASME Code and O&M Code CONTACT: Patricia Campbell, NRR 504-1311

.; - . o

. p}

p@

Eric Beckjord 2 activities should be reviewed and improved, if needed. The use of a regulatory guide to specify acceptable alternatives will be efficient in that it will allow revision of the guide annually for both new editions and new addenda, rather than only when new editions are issued (once every three years).

3. -ASME Code Section XI and O&M Code Baselines: Using the 1989 Edition of the Code and the 1990 Edition of the O&M Code as the baseline edition-of the respective code is acceptable. Editions and addenda through the 1993 Addenda of the Code and the 1994 Addenda of the O&M Code should be reviewed and included in the initial issuance of the regulatory guide on acceptable alternatives. The changes to S?: tion XI, Appendix VIII,

" Performance Demonstration for Ultrasonic t amination System," through the 1993 Addenda should be incorporated into the backfit. analysis for imposition of these requiremen s as part of the rulemaking.

4. - Endorsement of ASME Section III: The recommendation to endorse later editions and addenda of Section III at the same time the later editions and addenda of Section XI of the ASME Code are endorsed in the regulatory guide is acceptable.

The changes noted above should be incorporated into the plan provided in Enclosure 2 of Reference 1. Our staffs have agreed to the approach outlined above and P. Campbell, NRR, and G. Millman, RES, are proceeding accordirgly in the joint effort. With support from the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, the rulemaking schedule should be expedited, with completion of the _ final rule scheduled for no later than September 1996.

k x

N 4

l R hr, m l

? , ,%. -

!*5I c'dj $! UNITED STATES gh NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g .....

., / WASHINoToN, D.C. 20555-0001 fh September 2,1994 MEMORANDUM T0: William T. Russell, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Eric S. Beckjord, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

SUBJECT:

PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO 10 CFR 50.55A, CODES AND STANDARDS RULE

Reference:

(1) Memorandum from W. T. Russell to E. S. Beckjord, re: Amendment to 10 UR 50.55a, dated May 18, 1994.

(2) Memorandum from T. E. Murley to E. S. Beckjord, re: Amendment to 10 F R 50.55a, dated February 22, 1994, e

This memorandum responds to your proposal (Reference 1) for RES to supplement the ongoing proposed rulemaking to 10 CFR 5 50.55a to include an amendment that would substantially modify the current process for adopting and implementing revisions to the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel (BPV) Code.

Specifically, your proposal would eliminate present updating requirements for licensees' inservice inspection (ISI) and inservice testing (IST) programs; make later editions / addenda of the ASME BPV Code available on a voluntary basis within six months of publication; incorporate a method to except unacceptable relaxations from the endorsement; and incorporate a method for imposing safety significant provisions of the Code that satisfy the backfit test of 5 50.109.

RES has considered the implementation aspects of your proposal. This memorandum (1) identifies-four issues (i.e., scope of proposed rule, prenaration of future rulemakings, baselines for ISI and IST programs, and fuiure endorsement of ASME BPV Code for construction) that require resolution priar to initiating the proposed rule, (2) proposes a resolution for each of the four issues, and (3) recommends an overall approach for implementing the Reference I request and the previous request in Reference 2 for additional t amendments to the regulation to deal with certain repair and replacement issues. A detailed explanation of each of the four issues and the proposed resolution is provided in Enclosure 1.

Recent discussions between the RES and NRR staffs regarding the overall approach addressed in item 3, above, have concluded that the revised i 50.55a process should include a new regulatory guide to be used in conjunction with the regulation. The concept is that i 50.55a would identify the requirements (e.g., the baseline ASME Codes, and the mandated safety-significant provisions of these Codes) and the regulatory guide would identify acceptable alternatives (e.g., later edition / addenda, as modified by identified exceptions) to those requirements. As noted above, References 1 and 2 both

<up,p 'l 3 l

F=

g W.' T. Russell f request specific: amendments to. 5 50.55a. Enclosure'2 summarizes how these. $

requests would be integrated into the proposed combined regulation / regulatory guide process for the next and subsequent issuances of the revised regulation

and the proposed new regulatory guide.- The approach outlinedLis considered to.

be practical because it separates the requirements from the alternatives,-and-avoids the situation of the regulation itself becoming a long list of alternatives and exceptions.

In order to revise i 50.55a as requested, the following actions are considered to be-necessary.

1) Establish the 1989 Edition of Section XI, Division 1, of the ASME BPV Code as the baseline for ISI programs.

, 2) Incorporate by reference the 1990 Edition of the OM Code, and establish .

it as-the baseline for IST p ograms.

3) Establish latest appropriate reference for Section III in regulation; see Enclosure 1,-Item 4.
4) Reference the following edition / addenda as acceptable alternatives to-the 1989 Edition of Section XI -. the 1990 Edition of the OM Code, and the applicable Section III construction code, as modified byLItems: 5 and 6,--

below:

-o Section III: 1989 Addenda, 1990 Addenda,.1991 Addenda,.1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda, and 1993-Addenda, o- Section XI: 1989 Addenda,1990 Addenda,1991Addebda,-1992 '

Edition, 1992 Addenda, and 1993 Addenda.

o ON Code: 1992 Addenda, 1994 Addenda

=5) Identify those portions of the Section!III/Section.XI edition / addenda-and OM addenda identifled in Item 4, above -that are not acceptable alternatives, respectively. to the applicable Section III construction code, and the baseline 1982 idition of Section XI and 1990 Edition of-  :

the OM Code.

6) Identify those portions of the Section III and Section XI edition / addenda and OM addenda identified in Item 4, above, that are safety significant and must be implemented as supported by a backfit analysis in accordance with 5 50.109.

-7)' Expand the scope of 5 50.55a to require-inservice testing and inservice examination-of safety-related snubbers.

8) On a periodic basis, address subsequent editions of-the ASME Codes and, as necessary and appropriate, on a case-by-case basis address individual addenda in a manner similar to the above.

. ~~.

$ etNP W. T, Russell .

If this basis, in conjunction with the further details in Enclosures 1 and 2, is acceptable to you, RES will initiate action to prepare, and move forward for approval, thr task initiation for the combined proposed rulemaking and e

regulatory guide development. RES understands the importance of this request which is being pursued in response to a Cost Beneficial Licensing Action (CBLA) request. We plan to take full advantage of your offer to utilize Ms. Patricia Campbell (NRR/EMEB) in all aspects of the development of the proposed and final rulemakings.

/s/ Eric S. Beckjord Eric S. Beckjord, Director Offic.e of Nuclear Regulatory Research

Enclosures:

As stated cc: J. L. Milhoan Distribution: [G:\MILLMAN\ESB_WTR.S5A)

Action: 940163 AC Thadani, NRR HE Mayfield, RES Signature File (LCS) BW Sheron, NRR PL Campbell, NRR Subject File (JWC) RH Wessman, NRR DC Fischer, NRR Branch Reading File J 5trosnider, NRR -WC Liu, RES C

EFC: RES- RM g /tES, M A ___ RE.), RE h ,

, NAME: GC mman I hs haeg dCh[ao ESBech}ord DATE: OM/M q[$ T ptfM [hjM #7 ///M ) /~gM copy:

$ No

~

Yes'. No Yes k (h ) No Yes . No Qs . No Utr%Uu. htGUHD GUFY Central Files: RES-1B-6 m

I

- e a

&l Enclosure 1.

Issues to be Addressed Prior to Rulemaking The Reference 1 proposal would require that i 50.55a be amended to eliminate the existing update requirement for ISI and IST programs based on a specific interval (i.e.,120-month update); make the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel (BPV) Code and the ASME Operation and Maintenance (0M) Code edition / addenda effective 6 months after date of publication;- permit, but not require, _

licensees to use later editions / addenda of the ASME BPV and OM Codes without further approval of.the NRC; provide a method for NRC not to: accept certain provisions in the later edition / addenda and instead to maintain certain existing requirements; and provide a method for NRC-to impose safety significant provisions of later edition / addenda of the ASME BPV and OM Codes in accordance with the backfit provisions of 10 CFR 50.109.

In r71uating the proposed new method f incorporating ASME Codes revisions

'into :he regulatory process, the RL5 staff has identi. ned four issues that require resolution prior to initiating rulemaking. These issues and their proposed-resolutions are detailed.below.

1) Scope of Proposed Rule: The.RES staff believes that to achieve the earliest effective final rule, the scope of the proposed rule should fccus primarily on the s: ope of the Reference-1 request. To-this end, RES recommends that the rulemaking actions-requested in Reference 2, which relate primarily to repair and replacement activities for Class 3' moderate energy piping, be deferred until the subsequent amendment to-

-5 50.55a. -One par _t of the Reference 2-_ request is that the provisions of.

revised Generic Letter 90-05, " Guidance for Performing Temporary Non-Code Repairs of ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 Piping" be incorporated-into the regulations:as.an alternative to existing Section XI rules.

Based upon discussions with; the-0GC staff, one potential way of accomplishing this would be to :cnvert the generic lett 2r into a regulatory guide and,- with- appropriate supplemental provisions that relate to license commitments in the regulation, reference the regulatory guide as an acceptable alternative to the. appropriate Section XI rules. Since the regulatory guide would itself _have-to be= issued for public comment, it is recommended that the guide be prepared and issued  ;

-for comment in an-expeditious manner,-and that the subsequent rulemaking take the necessary action to make the alternative provided by the guide

~

available to licensees. Reference 2 cites a number of other issues that must be dealt with (e.g., impact of ASME interpretations on NRC

-utilization of the Code), but if addressed in this rulemaking would take resources-away from the-Reference 1 issues, would likely result in additional comments'during-the public comment period that would require resolution, and would probably significantly lengthen the time required to m,ake the proposed rule effective.

A proposed exception to the above is IST of snubbers. Section 50.55a does not currently require IST of snubbers, but does require-ISI of snubbers for Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 components. It is the intent of the NRC to remove detailed requirements for-IST and ISI of snubbers

, A g

from individual plant technical specifications, and to replace those detailed requirements with a reference to i 50.55a, which would impose the testing and examination provisions of acceptable national standards (i.e., ASME BPV and OM Codes include rules for examination and testing of snubbers). Therefore, it is recommended that the proposed rulemaking include expanding the scope of i 50.55a to require IST and ISI of j safety-related snubbers. This proposed scope expansion is consistent l with the present scope of existing plant technical specifications.

2) Preparation of Future Rulemakinas: RES is concerned with the ability of the NRC staff to implement the program proposed in Reference 1 in a continuing and dependable manner. The primary concern is that since the Reference 1 request would tie NRC rulemaking to publication of the ASME BPV and ASME OM Codes which are revised on an annual basis', there would have to be a arogram and personnel dedicated to ensuring implementation of tie necessary Code reviews and document preparation, in accordance with a continuing tight schedule. In the context of the Reierence 1 request, NRC would, 'or each addenda, it we a Federal Reaister (B) notice within a time frame that would permit the rule to

)e issued for 75-day public comment and become effective (i.e., final) within 6 months after addenda publication. In its most efficient form, the single B notice would (1) identify the addenda being endorsed as an alternative to the specified baseline; (ii) identify provisions of the addenda that are unacceptable to the staff, and are, therefore, not part of the reference; and (iii) identify provisions that are safety significant, and are imposed on the basis of 5 50.109 backfit considerations, though these could be imposed on any schedule. Because addenda are issued annually, this resource intensivo process would start over in one year. With public comments on the prior action possible with regard to the alternative rules provided by the addenda, exceptions, and mandated requirements, it would be realistic to-expect frequent overlaps of rulemaking preparation and/or issuances with even more impact on the staff.

In crder for the staff to be able to issue a single B notice that would accomplish the above, it would have to establish staff positions on the many revisions in an addenda in an expeditious manner. This could mean coordinating a more formal staff review and evaluation of proposed Addenda are issued once a year (December 31) to the ASME BPV Code; a new edition is issued on July 1 every third year (the new edition equals the prior edition plus the last three addenda).

The ON Code, which would be incorporated by reference for the first time into i 50.55a by this proposed rulemaking, is theoretically issued at the same time and frequency, but in practice the schedule has slipped significantly. RES staff have spoken to ASME staff, and ASME will attempt to establish a firm schedule for OM issuances, but it will likely be offset from the BPV Code which receives priority within ASME.

El-2 i

, o .'

  • p/}kp revisions during the ongoing Code development process, and to more formally identify potential exceptions / requirements prior to issuance of an addenda. This would expedite development of any needed sup>orting regulatory analyses, including backfit provisions. If the bac(fit analysis could not be completed within a time frame consistent with issuing a notice within 6 months, it would have to be deferred to a separate rulemaking,-or combined with the next update 1-year hence.

RES believes this would impose a continuing strain on-existing staff resources. While this type of schedule might be achievable for an )

addenda where the NRC takes no exceptions and where no provisions are mandated, it is not likely to be achievable on a continuing basis where exceptions are taken and backfits are imposed.

RES recommends that the Reference 1 request be modified to accomplish NRC endorsement of only each edition of the ASME BPV and ASME OM Codes.

This time frame for rulemaking would have the following benefits:

(1) orovide adequate time for the NRC staff to eval mte the new ASME l

Core rules;-(2) eliminate the p asibility of simult. .cous rulemakings; (3) provide a 3-year perspective on which to evaluate the Codes, l_ including the need to identify related requirements'; and (4) deter the l already too familiar Code practice of rushing ill-conceived actions through the committee structure just so they can be published in the next addenda. A perceived downside is that more practical requirements (i.e., generally relaxations) would not- be immediately available to the =

licensees through a-Code change, but they would be available as they are now through Code Cases.

3) ASME Section XI and OM Code Baselines: Reference 1 does not specifically address a baseline for the ISI and IST programs, but does imply one on the basis that later addenda would be alternatives to the existing rules. Based on disc nsions between cognizant staff from RES and NRR, RES recommends that the ISI and IST baselines be-established to be, reepectively, the 1989 Editinn of Section XI and the 1990 Edition of the OM Code (Note: The 1989 Addenda of Section XI is the latest incorporated by reference into i 50.55a. The 1990 Edition of the OM Code, which has not yet been incorporated--by reference into the regulation, is essentially equivalent to Subsections IWP and IWV in the 1989 Edition of Section XI].
4) Endorsement of ASME Section Ill: Reference 1 refers only to rules for ISI and IST, and makes no mention of updating the rules for construction (i.e., Section Ill) that are presently incorporated by reference into i50.55a. RES recommends that Section III addenda be evaluated and be made available for use at the same frequency asSection XI and OH Code Related requirements are those requirements of the Codes that were incorporated on the basis that they would be implemented together, but-are not necessarily so identified (e.g., a hydrostatic test is eliminated on the basis that additional NDE would be performed).

El-3 i

s pp,7h'\

p&

addenda. RES does not believe that a specifically defined baseline for Section III is appropriate because the edition / addenda of Section III ^

applicable to construction of a component is required by i 50.55a to be consistent with Section III NCA-1340, which provides specific rules for selecting the applicable Section III edition / addenda and for voluntary updating. On this basis, the Section III " baseline" for each plant is as prescribed by NCA-Il40. Section 50.55a currently endorsesSection III edition / addenda up through the 1989 Edition. Subsequent Section III edition / addenda, which could serve as an alternative to the prescribed construction code, would be identified in the proposed regulatory guide.

In order to minimize "editoriald impact, it is recommended that the staff consider retaining the Section III edition / addenda reference up through the 1989 Edition in the regulation, without reference to a baseline, with an appropriate explanation in the Supplementary Information for the proposed rule, t

1 El-4 l

. ei -

gh gD h Enclosure 2 overview of Revised i 50.55a Development Program

1. Regulatory Documents o 5 50.55a, " Codes and Standards Rule" o Regulatory Guide 1.XYZ, " Alternatives to ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III and Section XI, and ASME Operation and Maintenance Code Requirements Specified in 10 CFR 50.55a."
2. I 50.55a Revisions 2.1 Next Amendment o (RI) Eliminate 120-month update (RI) o Define " baseline" for ASME BPV Section XI and OM Code Section XI: 1989 Edition OM Code: 1990 Edition o Establish latest appropria'.e reference in regulatio.) for Section III (1 J., 1989 Ed tion) .

o (RI) Address later editions / addenda of Section XI and OM Code as voluntary (RG 1.XYZ) o (RI) Impose safety significant provisions from later Section XI and OM Code edition / addenda o incorporate ASME OM Code o Expand scope to include safety-related snubbers (ISTD of OM Code) 2.2 Subsequent Amendment o (R2) Expand scope of rule to cover repair of leaks found in service o (R2) Address other alternatives (GL 90-05) to ASME Code (RG 1.XYZ) o (R2) Impose Section XI during all modes of operation o (R2) Except interpretations that make Code contrary to NRC criteria o (R2) Affirm that i 50.55a(a)(3) means alternative to Code, not regulations o (R2) Prohibit repair welding on components while in service

3. Regulatory Guide (1.XYZ) Provisions 3.1 Issued with Next Amendment o Reference later editions / addenda as acceptable alternatives SIII/SXI: 1989/1990/1991/1992/1993 Addenda, 1992 Edition-OM Code: 1992/1994 Addenda o Identify exceptions to later edition / addenda 3.2 issued with Subsequent Amendment o Reference later adienda of Section III/XI (including IWE/IWL), and OM Code as acceptable alternatives o Identify _ exceptions to later editions / addenda o incorporate provisions of revised GL 90-05 Note: RI. R2 refer, respectively, to References 1 and 2 of memorandum

.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20202C108&oldid=3334408"