ML062130064: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| number = ML062130064 | | number = ML062130064 | ||
| issue date = 07/05/2006 | | issue date = 07/05/2006 | ||
| title = | | title = Email: (PA) Quality Assurance for Aging Management of NSR Components | ||
| author name = | | author name = | ||
| author affiliation = - No Known Affiliation | | author affiliation = - No Known Affiliation | ||
| addressee name = Davis J | | addressee name = Davis J | ||
| addressee affiliation = NRC/NRR/DRIP | | addressee affiliation = NRC/NRR/DRIP | ||
| docket = 05000293 | | docket = 05000293 | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:J~ames Da~vis 7- Re: QuaYlity Assurance for, aqginma~nagement of NSR compponents Page -1 a From: <erachp@comcast.net> | {{#Wiki_filter:J~ames Da~vis 7-Re: QuaYlity Assurance for, aqginma~nagement of NSR compponents Page -1 a | ||
To: "James Davis" <JAD@nrc.gov> | From: <erachp@comcast.net> | ||
Date: 07/05/2006 5:33:05 PM | To: "James Davis" <JAD@nrc.gov> | ||
Date: 07/05/2006 5:33:05 PM | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Re: Quality Assurance for aging management of NSR components Jim, Is that all you want me to put in section 3.0.4. Just two lines?This is what will also go in the SER. The SRP write-up is pretty clear on what the reviewer should be looking for, specifically, is 10 CFR 50 App.B also used for non-safety related components? | Re: Quality Assurance for aging management of NSR components Jim, Is that all you want me to put in section 3.0.4. Just two lines? | ||
LRA B.0.3, Confrimation Process, and Administrative Controls, the applicant states that "the Entergy QA program applies to safety-related structures and components." They do not make a similarf statement in Corrective Actions.Please confirm and I will incorporate the two lines in the new section 3.0.4. Do you have any references that you reviewed?Erach--------------- | This is what will also go in the SER. The SRP write-up is pretty clear on what the reviewer should be looking for, specifically, is 10 CFR 50 App.B also used for non-safety related components? | ||
Original message------- | LRA B.0.3, Confrimation Process, and Administrative Controls, the applicant states that "the Entergy QA program applies to safety-related structures and components." They do not make a similarf statement in Corrective Actions. | ||
Please confirm and I will incorporate the two lines in the new section 3.0.4. Do you have any references that you reviewed? | |||
Erach | |||
--------------- Original message------- | |||
From: "James Davis" <JAD@nrc.gov> | From: "James Davis" <JAD@nrc.gov> | ||
> Erach,> Attached is the writeup for the corrective action plan.> Jim> >>> 07/05/2006 1:21 PM >>>> Hi,> In each of the AMR sections in the SRP, under AMR results for which further> evaluation is recommended, we need to address how the applicant has applied> their Corrective Action program to non-safety related components. | > Erach, | ||
This is> intended to address elements 7-9 in the AMPs.> These sections in the SRP are:> 3.1.2.2.18, 3.2.2.2.10, 3.3.2.2.15, 3.4.2.2.10, 3.5.2.2.3, and 3.6.2.2.4. | > Attached is the writeup for the corrective action plan. | ||
> Jim Davis and I discussed this today, and here is how we will address it.> In the Audit and review report, in the above listed sections, please make the> following statement: | > Jim | ||
> 3.1.2.2.15 (etc.) Quality Assurance for Aging Management of Non-> Safety Related Components | > >>> 07/05/2006 1:21 PM >>> | ||
> The applicant referenced LRA Section B.0.3. The project team's evaluation of> Section B.0.3 is provided in Section 3.0.4 of this audit and review report.> I will create a new Section 3.0.4 in the AMP part of the audit and review> report. Jim Davis reviewed the PNPS Corrective Action program and will provide> me the appropriate words to include in this section.> | > Hi, | ||
:21:14119) | > In each of the AMR sections in the SRP, under AMR results for which further | ||
> evaluation is recommended, we need to address how the applicant has applied | |||
> their Corrective Action program to non-safety related components. This is | |||
> intended to address elements 7-9 in the AMPs. | |||
> These sections in the SRP are: | |||
> 3.1.2.2.18, 3.2.2.2.10, 3.3.2.2.15, 3.4.2.2.10, 3.5.2.2.3, and 3.6.2.2.4. | |||
> Jim Davis and I discussed this today, and here is how we will address it. | |||
> In the Audit and review report, in the above listed sections, please make the | |||
> following statement: | |||
> 3.1.2.2.15 (etc.) Quality Assurance for Aging Management of Non- | |||
> Safety Related Components | |||
> The applicant referenced LRA Section B.0.3. The project team's evaluation of | |||
> Section B.0.3 is provided in Section 3.0.4 of this audit and review report. | |||
> I will create a new Section 3.0.4 in the AMP part of the audit and review | |||
> report. Jim Davis reviewed the PNPS Corrective Action program and will provide | |||
> me the appropriate words to include in this section. | |||
> Ifyou have any questions, please call me or e-mail me. | |||
> erach | |||
c:\temp\GWJ00002.TMP Pagle 1 1 Mail Envelope Properties (44AC3006.727 :21:14119) | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Re: Quality Assurance for aging management of NSR components Creation Date 07/05/2006 5:32:45 PM From: <erachp@comcast.net> | Re: Quality Assurance for aging management of NSR components Creation Date 07/05/2006 5:32:45 PM From: <erachp@comcast.net> | ||
Created By: erachp@comcast.net Recipients nrc.gov OWGWPOO3.HQGWDO01 JAD (James Davis)Post Office Route OWGWPO03.HQGWDO01 nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1974 07/05/2006 5:32:45 PM TEXT.htm 2491 Mail Mime.822 10012 Options Expiration Date: None Priority: | Created By: erachp@comcast.net Recipients nrc.gov OWGWPOO3.HQGWDO01 JAD (James Davis) | ||
Standard ReplyRequested: | Post Office Route OWGWPO03.HQGWDO01 nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1974 07/05/2006 5:32:45 PM TEXT.htm 2491 Mail Mime.822 10012 Options Expiration Date: None Priority: Standard ReplyRequested: No Return Notification: None Concealed | ||
No Return Notification: | |||
None Concealed | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
No Security: | No Security: Standard Junk Mail Handling Evaluation Results Message is eligible for Junk Mail handling This message was not classified as Junk Mail Junk Mail settings when this message was delivered Junk Mail handling disabled by User Junk Mail handling disabled by Administrator Junk List is not enabled Junk Mail using personal address books is not enabled Block List is not enabled | ||
Standard Junk Mail Handling Evaluation Results Message is eligible for Junk Mail handling This message was not classified as Junk Mail Junk Mail settings when this message was delivered Junk Mail handling disabled by User Junk Mail handling disabled by Administrator Junk List is not enabled Junk Mail using personal address books is not enabled Block List is not enabled James Davis -Re: Quality Asuac o gn aaeeto S omponents Pgi From: "James Davis" <JAD@nrc.gov> | |||
To: <erachp@comcast.net> | James Davis - Re: Quality Asuac o gn aaeeto S omponents Pgi From: "James Davis" <JAD@nrc.gov> | ||
Date: 07/05/2006 3:11:31 PM | To: <erachp@comcast.net> | ||
Date: 07/05/2006 3:11:31 PM | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Re: Quality Assurance for aging management of NSR components SJames Davis -project staff review -corrective action plan.wpd Page 1 "1 The project staff reviewed the applicant's corrective action procedure and found it to be acceptable. | Re: Quality Assurance for aging management of NSR components | ||
The corrective action procedure is reviewed on a routine basis by the regional inspection teams and has been found to be acceptable during past inspections.}} | |||
SJames Davis - project staff review - corrective action plan.wpd Page 1 "1 The project staff reviewed the applicant's corrective action procedure and found it to be acceptable. The corrective action procedure is reviewed on a routine basis by the regional inspection teams and has been found to be acceptable during past inspections.}} | |||
Latest revision as of 18:27, 7 December 2019
| ML062130064 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 07/05/2006 |
| From: | - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Jennifer Davis Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs |
| References | |
| %dam200612, TAC MC9669 | |
| Download: ML062130064 (4) | |
Text
J~ames Da~vis 7-Re: QuaYlity Assurance for, aqginma~nagement of NSR compponents Page -1 a
From: <erachp@comcast.net>
To: "James Davis" <JAD@nrc.gov>
Date: 07/05/2006 5:33:05 PM
Subject:
Re: Quality Assurance for aging management of NSR components Jim, Is that all you want me to put in section 3.0.4. Just two lines?
This is what will also go in the SER. The SRP write-up is pretty clear on what the reviewer should be looking for, specifically, is 10 CFR 50 App.B also used for non-safety related components?
LRA B.0.3, Confrimation Process, and Administrative Controls, the applicant states that "the Entergy QA program applies to safety-related structures and components." They do not make a similarf statement in Corrective Actions.
Please confirm and I will incorporate the two lines in the new section 3.0.4. Do you have any references that you reviewed?
Erach
Original message-------
From: "James Davis" <JAD@nrc.gov>
> Erach,
> Attached is the writeup for the corrective action plan.
> Jim
> >>> 07/05/2006 1:21 PM >>>
> Hi,
> In each of the AMR sections in the SRP, under AMR results for which further
> evaluation is recommended, we need to address how the applicant has applied
> their Corrective Action program to non-safety related components. This is
> intended to address elements 7-9 in the AMPs.
> These sections in the SRP are:
> 3.1.2.2.18, 3.2.2.2.10, 3.3.2.2.15, 3.4.2.2.10, 3.5.2.2.3, and 3.6.2.2.4.
> Jim Davis and I discussed this today, and here is how we will address it.
> In the Audit and review report, in the above listed sections, please make the
> following statement:
> 3.1.2.2.15 (etc.) Quality Assurance for Aging Management of Non-
> Safety Related Components
> The applicant referenced LRA Section B.0.3. The project team's evaluation of
> Section B.0.3 is provided in Section 3.0.4 of this audit and review report.
> I will create a new Section 3.0.4 in the AMP part of the audit and review
> report. Jim Davis reviewed the PNPS Corrective Action program and will provide
> me the appropriate words to include in this section.
> Ifyou have any questions, please call me or e-mail me.
> erach
c:\temp\GWJ00002.TMP Pagle 1 1 Mail Envelope Properties (44AC3006.727 :21:14119)
Subject:
Re: Quality Assurance for aging management of NSR components Creation Date 07/05/2006 5:32:45 PM From: <erachp@comcast.net>
Created By: erachp@comcast.net Recipients nrc.gov OWGWPOO3.HQGWDO01 JAD (James Davis)
Post Office Route OWGWPO03.HQGWDO01 nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1974 07/05/2006 5:32:45 PM TEXT.htm 2491 Mail Mime.822 10012 Options Expiration Date: None Priority: Standard ReplyRequested: No Return Notification: None Concealed
Subject:
No Security: Standard Junk Mail Handling Evaluation Results Message is eligible for Junk Mail handling This message was not classified as Junk Mail Junk Mail settings when this message was delivered Junk Mail handling disabled by User Junk Mail handling disabled by Administrator Junk List is not enabled Junk Mail using personal address books is not enabled Block List is not enabled
James Davis - Re: Quality Asuac o gn aaeeto S omponents Pgi From: "James Davis" <JAD@nrc.gov>
To: <erachp@comcast.net>
Date: 07/05/2006 3:11:31 PM
Subject:
Re: Quality Assurance for aging management of NSR components
SJames Davis - project staff review - corrective action plan.wpd Page 1 "1 The project staff reviewed the applicant's corrective action procedure and found it to be acceptable. The corrective action procedure is reviewed on a routine basis by the regional inspection teams and has been found to be acceptable during past inspections.