ML091540318

E-mail from T. O'Hara of USNRC to J. Richmond of USNRC, Regarding Oc Dan UT Data Analysis

ML091540318
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	09/08/2008
From:	O'Hara T NRC/RGN-I/DRS/PSB2
To:	Richmond J Engineering Region 1 Branch 1
References
FOIA/PA-2009-0070
Download: ML091540318 (2)

Text

SJohn Richmond From: Timothy OHara, Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 6:27 AM To: John Richmond Cc: John White; Richard Conte

Subject:

RE: OC D/W UT Data Analysis

John, During the 2006 outage, the NRC wanted to see and review Amergen's operability evaluation on the drywell BEFORE we would agree that it was ok for the plant to return to power after refueling. I would suspect that we would, at least, want to see the fully analyized UT results, and a conclusion that no further corrosion of the drywell has occurred before we would agree they can return to power.

This is all related to how well their aging management program is measuring the actual condition of the drywell. Someone should be checking the monitoring of the sand bed drains and the Jeakage from the refueling canal during the outage. This was a commitment also in 2006.

Tim OHara From: John Richmond Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 12:09 PM To: Timothy OHara; Michael Modes

Subject:

OC D/W UT Data Analysis I talked to Pete Tamburro, and got the following description of what he expects NDE and the site to do with the drywell shell UT data; during the outage.

Live Time, described as within a shift or 2,

1) compare individual UT readings to old values

2) for UT readings in an array, calculate a simple arithmetic average

3) compare the simple avg thickness for each array to old values After the outage is over, and plant back on-line, a more detailed data analysis will be performed, to account for data skewing and non-standard data deviations. Those values will be compared to previous values used in their design basis calculation minimum wall thickness values.

During the OC 2006 outage, did they do the more detailed data analysis before they started-up, of afterwards?

Any thoughts, questions, or recommendations?

1/S-

Received: from R1 CLSTR01 .nrc.gov ([148.184.99.7]) by R1 MS01 .nrc.gov

([148,184.99.10]) with mapi; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 06:27:12 -0400 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef; name="winmail.dat" Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary From: Timothy OHara <Timothy.OHara@nrc.gov>

To: John Richmond <John.Richmond@nrc.gov>

CC: John White <John.White@nrc.gov>, Richard Conte <Richard.Conte@nrc.gov>

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 06:27:11 -0400

Subject:

RE: OC D/W UT Data Analysis Thread-Topic: OC D/W UT Data Analysis Thread-Index: AckPcblYQ6Gtj8xOT6SAzb7TgA4NIgCKsl uw Message-ID: <2856BC46F6A308418F033D973BBOEE72841 EA210EO@R1 CLSTR01. nrc.gov>

References:

<2856BC46F6A308418F033D973BBOEE72841 EA20D78@Rl CLSTR01 .nrc.gov>

In-Reply-To: <2856BC46F6A308418F033D973BBOEE72841 EA20D78@R1 CLSTRO0 .nrc.gov>

Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach:

X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SCL: -1 X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:

<2856BC46F6A308418F033D973BBOEE72841 EA21 OEO@R1 CLSTRO1. nrc.gov>

MIME-Version: 1.0