ML022900724

Letter to C. Lance Terry, Txu Energy Re Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Public Radiation Safety Cornerstone White Finding

ML022900724
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	10/16/2002
From:	Travers W NRC/EDO
To:	Terry C TXU Energy
Bonser B
References
IR-01-007
Download: ML022900724 (6)

Text

October 16, 2002 Mr. C. Lance Terry Sr. Vice President & Principal Nuclear Officer TXU Energy ATTN: Regulatory Affairs Department P.O. Box 1002 Glen Rose, TX 76043

Dear Mr. Terry:

I am responding to your letter of August 6, 2002, regarding the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Public Radiation Safety Cornerstone White finding that is described in NRC Inspection Report Nos. 50-445/01-07; 50-446/01-07. The issue specifically concerned 11 examples in which radioactive material was inadvertently released from the radiologically controlled area. In your letter you stated that you do not agree with the safety significance of these violations and requested that I reverse the decision of the NRC Significance Determination Process (SDP)

Appeal Panel that reviewed this finding. Additionally, you requested that the staff change the classification of this finding to very low safety significance (Green) and remove the current White input from future consideration when assessing Comanche Peak performance.

I have independently reviewed the facts associated with this issue, including the results of your initial appeal of the White finding, and considered the concerns you raised in your August 6 letter. You asserted in your letter that the Region IV appeal board disregarded the actual and potential safety significance of the events in question, and that the events had no credible safety significance.

In reviewing your appeal, I considered the following questions:

• Did the NRC staff follow the established SDP process in making its significance determination?

• Is the process appropriate?

• Was there an unintended consequence of the staffs determination that adversely affected your facility or other licensee facilities?

With respect to the first question, I found no information in your letter that had not already received due consideration in making the final significance determination. In addition, I determined that the NRC Region IV appeal board conducted a complete and thorough review of this issue and appropriately used the SDP in effect at the time to reach their final significance determination. Therefore, I have concluded that the staff appropriately adhered to the process established in determining the final significance of this issue, and addressed the concerns you raised within the framework of the SDP. I also have concluded that the Public Radiation Safety SDP was correctly applied by the staff, and that the staff reached the appropriate significance determination.

2 With respect to whether the current SDP process is appropriate, as you are aware, the staff has already undertaken a review of the Public Radiation Safety SDP, and public meetings have been held to discuss potential changes. Many of the issues discussed resulted from the dialogue we have had over the Comanche Peak issue. I understand there are questions as to how loss of control occurrences should be defined in the SDP. Specifically, the questions concern whether releases of licensed radioactive material from a radiation control area on-site, such as in your case, should be given the same significance as licensed radioactive material that was released from the facility. I have encouraged my staff to resolve these issues with the SDP expeditiously because other facilities could be affected in a similar manner.

Finally, with respect to the consequences of the staffs determination, in accordance with our assessment process, this finding will be removed from consideration of future agency actions at the end of the last quarter (i.e., September 30, 2002). As such, when the fourth quarter assessment information is posted on the NRC web site in January 2003, the White finding will no longer appear. Therefore, because a change in this findings significance would have no consequence on the assessment of your performance, and changes to the SDP are presently being reviewed to address the concerns you have raised over this issue, I do not believe that a decision to change the staffs position on this matter is warranted, and it is proper for the staffs decision to proceed.

I appreciate your bringing this concern to my attention. We have all profited from the discussion of this issue and the likelihood that the Public Radiation SDP will evolve in a way that enhances public radiation safety and strengthens public confidence.

Sincerely,

/RA/

William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations

2 With respect to whether the current SDP process is appropriate, as you are aware, the staff has already undertaken a review of the Public Radiation Safety SDP, and public meetings have been held to discuss potential changes. Many of the issues discussed resulted from the dialogue we have had over the Comanche Peak issue. I understand there are questions as to how loss of control occurrences should be defined in the SDP. Specifically, the questions concern whether releases of licensed radioactive material from a radiation control area on-site, such as in your case, should be given the same significance as licensed radioactive material that was released from the facility. I have encouraged my staff to resolve these issues with the SDP expeditiously because other facilities could be affected in a similar manner.

Finally, with respect to the consequences of the staffs determination, in accordance with our assessment process, this finding will be removed from consideration of future agency actions at the end of the last quarter (i.e., September 30, 2002). As such, when the fourth quarter assessment information is posted on the NRC web site in January 2003, the White finding will no longer appear. Therefore, because a change in this findings significance would have no consequence on the assessment of your performance, and changes to the SDP are presently being reviewed to address the concerns you have raised over this issue, I do not believe that a decision to change the staffs position on this matter is warranted, and it is proper for the staffs decision to proceed.

I appreciate your bringing this concern to my attention. We have all profited from the discussion of this issue and the likelihood that the Public Radiation SDP will evolve in a way that enhances public radiation safety and strengthens public confidence.

Sincerely,

/RA/

William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations DISTRIBUTION:

EDO r/f DEDR R/F ML022900724 DOCUMENT NAME: C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022900724.wpd To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy with enclosures "N" = No copy OFFICE ROPMS ROPMS EDO/AO EDO/DEDR EDO NAME BBonser JShea JCraig WKane WTravers DATE 10/ /02 10/ /02 10/ /02 10/ /02 10/ 16 /02 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

MEMORANDUM TO: Chairman Meserve Commissioner Dicus Commissioner Diaz Commissioner McGaffigan Commissioner Merrifield FROM: William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE TO COMANCHE PEAKS WHITE FINDING APPEAL Attached please find my response to Comanche Peaks appeal of the White finding concerning inadequate radiological surveys to detect radioactive material. I plan to issue the letter on October 16, 2002.

Attachment:

As stated cc: SECY OPA OCA OGC CONTACT: Scott Morris, OEDO 415-1730

MEMORANDUM TO: Chairman Meserve Commissioner Dicus Commissioner Diaz Commissioner McGaffigan Commissioner Merrifield FROM: William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE TO COMANCHE PEAKS WHITE FINDING APPEAL Attached please find my response to Comanche Peaks appeal of the White finding concerning inadequate radiological surveys to detect radioactive material. I plan to issue the letter on October 16, 2002.

Attachment:

As stated cc: SECY OPA OCA OGC CONTACT: Scott Morris, OEDO 415-1730 DISTRIBUTION:

EDO r/f DEDR R/F DOCUMENT NAME: C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022900724.wpd To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy with enclosures *See previous concurrences "N" = No copy OFFICE ROPMS ROPMS AO/EDO DEDR/EDO EDO NAME BBonser** JShea* JCraig* WKane* WTravers DATE 10/1/02 10/2/02 10/4/02 10/9/02 10/ /02 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY