ML102950214: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:4/28/10 Muring"te j iter"s were uist;u5suo at ummuma %,vuTuTrrcnmn mcwting tside oT Scope SALEM ONE Weekend Coverage: | {{#Wiki_filter: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. | ||
AL =(9X)>O.07 AL2=(2of3)>O. | 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. | ||
11 AL3=(1X)>013. | * Evaluate the 50.59 for AFW modifications - O'Hara, received 4/27 | ||
Outside of Scope AFW follow-up issues Verify hydro/pressure test is code compliant | * 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 Inr*ttcreom was delleW in n | ||
-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 | . . . . . . ,-s M. | ||
-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 | 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. | ||
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 | * C0nfirm the PSEG'risk assessment to delay. AFW.test.ing for 1yearT is reasonable - Cahill; complete, no concerns | ||
-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 | * 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). | ||
-discussions ongoing Operability | " Evaluate the Unit 2 AFW extent of condition operability assessment - Schroeder/O'Hara operability determination received 4127 | ||
-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 | * 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* | ||
-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 | n I Dutside of Scope | ||
-Gray and O'Hara reviewed and did not identify any concerns; HQ review in pr~ogress n I Dutside of Scope: | : AdditionallItemst Status Board Items: | ||
-T/S risk assessment for AFW~testingý operability determination I | * 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 Scop. | ||
Outside of Scope | Outside of Scope | ||
[outsidae of Scope}} | [outsidae of Scope}} | ||
Latest revision as of 08:26, 13 November 2019
| 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 Inr*ttcreom was delleW in n
. . . . . . ,-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
- AdditionallItemst 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