ML20133H520

Summarizes Meeting 57 of Regulatory Requirements Review Committee on 770114.Rev 1 to Proposed Reg Guide 1.97 Reviewed & Recommended for Approval Subj to Footnote on Research & Const Experience

ML20133H520
Person / Time
Issue date:	02/02/1977
From:	Case E NRC - REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS REVIEW COMMITTEE
To:	Gossick L NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
Shared Package
ML20133H510	List: ML20133H509 ML20133H511 ML20133H514 ML20133H520 ML20133H526
References
FOIA-85-628, RTR-REGGD-01.097, RTR-REGGD-1.097 NUDOCS 8510170441
Download: ML20133H520 (2)

Text

_

/.

d) 0

(

i MD10RANDU}! FOR:

Lee V. Gossick, Executive Director for Operations t

i FROM:

E. G. Case, Chaiman, Regulatory Requirements Review Committee

SUBJECT:

SUFMARY OF REGUIATORY REQUIREMENTS REVIEW C0!NI'ITEE MEETING NO. 57, JANUARY 14, 1977 The Committee reviewed:

1.

PROPOSED REGULATORY GUIDE 1.99, REVISION 1, " EFFECTS OF RESIDUAL l

ELE!!EhTS ON PREDICTED RADIATION DAMAGE TO REAClDR VESSEL MATERIALS,"

and recomended approval subject to the following comments:1 a.

The footnote on research and construction experience on page 1 of the proposed revision should be expanded to include the wording concerning the limitations of the guide suggested by the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.

b.

The Committee characterized paragraphs C.1, C.2, and C.4 of

[

j -

the proposed Regulatory Position as Category 3 - backfit required; l

and paragraph C.3 as Category 1 - no backfit.

t 2.

PROPOSED REGULATORY GUIDE 1.XX, " ACCEPTABLE MODEL AND RELATED STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ANALYSIS OF FUEL DENSIFICATION," and found that the proposed Regulatory Guide represented an acceptable model and appropriate methods for analysis of fuel densification effects. Utilization of such models and methods in the licensing process should be implemented in accordance with 10 CFR 50.46 and the related Appendix K to 10 CFR S0.46.

[

Y 3.

DRAFT REGULATORY GUIDE 1.XXX, " INSPECTION OF WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES ASSOCIATED WI'lli NUCLEAR PLANT FACILITIES" (DRAFT "A",

DATED SEPTEMBER 17, 1976) and recommended approval subject to the following coments:2 ICommittee comments refer to the draft distributed at the meeting dated January 1977, rather than the draft distributed with the agenda dated

/

September 1976.

2The committee consnents refer to the draft guide distributed at the meeting dated December 16, 1976, ratherthanthedraftdistributpi with the agenda dated September 17, 1976.

lh 8510170441 851008 or ric '

• PDR FOIA DEANE85-628 PDR

'F pars >

?

Foren AEc,311 (Rev. 9 53) AZCM 0240 W u. a. oovannasant enentine orrecas son.eae. nee

%Z. ('h N

^

..A

.. a.

The Committee review of this proposed guide was limited to its applicability and acceptability with regard to water control l

structures which could affect radiological safety. The proposed f

guide should be c. mended throughout (including the title) to i

set forth this limitation.

b.

The Comittee leaves to the staff the development of appropriate

(

methods and procedures to be utilized for assuring that the inspection, surveillance, and/or test requirements set forth in the guide are met by licensees.,

The Comnittee characterized this guide as Category 3 - backfit required.

4.

PROPOSED REVISION 2 TO REGULATORY GUIDE 1.32, " CRITERIA FOR SAFETY f

RELATED ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS FOR NUCLEAR POWER PIANTS," and recomended approval, t'

~

The Committee characterized this guide as Category 1 - no backfit.

d t

S.

PROPOSED REGULNIVRY GUIDE 10.XX, " GUIDANCE ON IMPLEMEhTATION OF REGULATORY GUIDES TO STANDARDIZED NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS," and concluded the following:

a.

Guidance on the implementation of regulatory guides for standardized nuclear power plants should be included in a revision to WASH-1341, rather than in a regulatory guide, b.

The present system for Committee characterization of the backfit potential of proposed guides for operating plants can and should I

be applied to standardized plants; i.e., Category 1 - need not be applied to standardized plants; Category 2 - applicability to standardized plants must be decided by NRR on a case-by-case e

basis; Category 3 - must be applied to standardized plants, f'

The Executive Secretary should develop and circulate for Committee i'

coments within 2 weeks a proposed revision to the definitions of backfit categories previously established by the Committee in Meeting No. 31 (see memorandum to L. V. Gossick dated September 24, 197S) that includes these additions concerning-standardized plants, and clarifies, as necessary, the applicability of Committee-considered guides to custom plants with cps.

c.

NRR (DPM) should develop a program and procedures for implementing b

the Comittee's recomendations concerning backfit potential of l

changes in regulatory requirements to those specific plants not having an operating license which are affected.

[

l l

OdginalSigned Vi[

E.G C~e E. G. Case, Chairman Regulatory Requirements Review

(

Comi ttee

' rric o

lg EGC e su.... s,

/77 1/T /77 hrm AEC 318 (Rev. 9 53) AECM O240

1. u, e, oovannment ensurine orriers sera.sae.ses m e m ;,z-

- 3,..

qnq w.a -~,- -

- - - ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ '

s

-j