ML102950214
| ML102950214 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 04/28/2010 |
| From: | NRC Region 1 |
| To: | NRC Region 1 |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2010-0334 | |
| Download: ML102950214 (5) | |
Text
4/28/10 Muring"te j iter"s were uist;u5suo at ummuma
%,vuTuTrrcnmn mcwting tside oT Scope SALEM ONE Weekend Coverage:
AL =(9X)>O.07 AL2=(2of3)>O. 11 AL3=(1X)>013.
Outside of Scope AFW follow-up issues Verify hydro/pressure test is code compliant - O'Hara, determined approach was acceptable, received test records but still needs to verify test results. PSEG will also provide the leak check procedure 4127 am.
Evaluate the 50.59 for AFW modifications - O'Hara, received 4/27 Smart samples o
Verify repairs to the control air system elbow that was replaced (how will PSEG certify the repair) - O'Hara, PSEG adding more detail to description of document, to provide by 4/27 PM o
Verify control air extent of condition - O'Hara o
Backfill procedure reviews to verify coating and backfill cure times - O'Hara, PSEG to provide by 4/27 pm o
Verify control air clamping material - O'Hara, PSEG to provide supporting document 4/27 am co AFW pipe weld records - O'Hara, PSEG to assess status of documents by 4/27 pm Outside of Scope ftnatn ttc Inr* reom was delleW n
in
......,-s M.
Dutside of Scope Unit 2AFW Testing -PSEG determined that they did not perform ASME code required pressure drop test for the buried sections of the 22 and 24 headers.
C0nfirm the PSEG'risk assessment to delay. AFW.test.ing for 1yearT is reasonable - Cahill; complete, no concerns Evaluate if performing a risk assessmentti t eet TechniclSpeciIficatiion4.0,5 is'appropriate if a test was never performed verses missed - Conte/Ennis, follow-up with T/S branch regarding TIA and precedent - discussions ongoing Operability - Initial assessment Unit 2 was that it is in better condition based on newer piping; 1994 inspection that identified intact coating; and ISI code gives more allowance to an operating unit (can take credit for up to 90% of the yield stress).
Evaluate the Unit 2 AFW extent of condition operability assessment - Schroeder/O'Hara operability determination received 4127 Confirm the finite element analysis for the Unit 1 as found condition is acceptable including the use of appropriate methodsand assumptions - Gray and O'Hara reviewed and did not identify any concerns; HQ review in pr~ogress j*
n I
Dutside of Scope AdditionallItems t Status Board Items:
Salem 1, AFW buried piping - modifications and testing Salem 2, (PRIORITY) - T/S risk assessment for AFW~testingý operability determination I
Outside of Scop.
Outside of Scope
[outsidae of Scope