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)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
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
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter: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  
{{#Wiki_filter: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:==
==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  
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.
-and pushed back o im he believed it was inoperable.
Eil .           heard a similar concern raised regarding these valves b           .
Eil .heard a similar concern raised regarding these valves b .ýuring a 12/16/03 interview.
                            ýuring a 12/16/03 interview. We have now heard this from 2 high levelI 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
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}}
            .     tc~~r p*cess on whether a violation occurred here. If it did, there are clear indications from
          !         .(.T,*,LLi ,i'estimony             t   it is potential deliberate misconduct Jeff CC:                   Eileen Neff; Ernest Wilson I
I a*'formation in this record was deleted in accordance with the Freedom of Informption Act, exemptions "2c_.
fOMIAk-               Zý00-r l t}}

Latest revision as of 16:19, 23 November 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)
v • d • e


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 levelI 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 p*cess on whether a violation occurred here. If it did, there are clear indications from

! .(.T,*,LLi ,i'estimony t it is potential deliberate misconduct Jeff CC: Eileen Neff; Ernest Wilson I

I a*'formation in this record was deleted in accordance with the Freedom of Informption Act, exemptions "2c_.

fOMIAk- Zý00-r l t

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML062210137&oldid=2187943"