ML062210137: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 3: Line 3:
| issue date = 01/27/2004
| issue date = 01/27/2004
| title = E-mail from Teator to Vito, Salem Sj Check Valve Issue
| title = E-mail from Teator to Vito, Salem Sj Check Valve Issue
| author name = Teator J A
| author name = Teator J
| author affiliation = NRC/OI
| author affiliation = NRC/OI
| addressee name = Barber G S, Vito D J
| addressee name = Barber G, Vito D
| addressee affiliation = NRC/RGN-I
| addressee affiliation = NRC/RGN-I
| docket = 05000272, 05000311, 05000354
| docket = 05000272, 05000311, 05000354

Revision as of 13:38, 13 July 2019

E-mail from Teator to Vito, Salem Sj Check Valve Issue
ML062210137
Person / Time
Site: Salem, Hope Creek  PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 01/27/2004
From: Teator J
NRC/OI
To: Barber G, Vito D
NRC Region 1
References
FOIA/PA-2005-0194
Download: ML062210137 (1)


Text

vaqe , IId Itu V -.OtL-CIVI ,OJ qnrlEr-\ VMLVr- l racie From: Jeffrey Teator / 0 i-To: David Vito; Scott Barber Date: 1127104 11:51AM

Subject:

SALEM SJ CHECK VALVE ISSUE Dave, Steve Pi le an I interviewe on 2 issues on 1/22/04. During the SCWE portion of the intervie aid that he believes the Sm SJ v as estion were declared operable (after leaking was-deteled) without a sound technical basisq oes not believe the conservative thing was done an, e do not believe that technical specification cTmpliance was met with how they handled the issuea, said that at artificial isla 0ertio made operabi *conclusions and ncessure/pushback on the J valve issue came fro SpecNii told 19ý ý ýhat they were not in tech spec compliance on i-s e an esponded that engineering hd done an evaluation

-and pushed back o im he believed it was inoperable.

Eil .heard a similar concern raised regarding these valves b .ýuring a 12/16/03 interview.

We have now heard this from 2 high level s I s -with indicatio at there may have been a violation of tech specs. I will not receive th Panscript for about 10 days -but wanted to get this info to you so that a formal determination can 6e made thru the.tc~~r on whether a violation occurred here. If it did, there are clear indications from! ,i'estimony t it is potential deliberate misconduct Jeff CC: Eileen Neff; Ernest Wilson I I in this record was deleted in accordance with the Freedom of Informption Act, exemptions "2c_.fOMIAk- Zý00-r l t