|
---|
Category:Graphics incl Charts and Tables
MONTHYEARML23249A2662023-09-0606 September 2023 Attachment 2: Salem Pavan Input File ML23249A2632023-09-0606 September 2023 Attachment 1: PSEG Site Hourly Meteorological Data (2019 - 2021), Salem/Hope Creek Finalized Hourly Meteorological Data 2019 ML23249A2642023-09-0606 September 2023 Attachment 1: PSEG Site Hourly Meteorological Data (2019 - 2021), Salem/Hope Creek Finalized Hourly Meteorological Data 2020 ML23249A2652023-09-0606 September 2023 Attachment 1: PSEG Site Hourly Meteorological Data (2019 - 2021), Salem/Hope Creek Finalized Hourly Meteorological Data 2021 LR-N23-0050, Attachment 5: Hope Creek Pavan Output File2023-09-0606 September 2023 Attachment 5: Hope Creek Pavan Output File ML23249A2682023-09-0606 September 2023 Attachment 4: Hope Creek Pavan Input File ML23249A2672023-09-0606 September 2023 Attachment 3: Salem Pavan Output File ML17335A1182018-01-25025 January 2018 Documentation of the Completion of Required Actions Taken in Response to the Lessons Learned from the Fukushima Dai Ichi Accident LR-N17-0034, Salem Generating Station, Units 1 & 2, Revision 29 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Table 4.1-1 Through 4.1-32017-01-30030 January 2017 Salem Generating Station, Units 1 & 2, Revision 29 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Table 4.1-1 Through 4.1-3 ML17046A3072017-01-30030 January 2017 Revision 29 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Table 3A-1 (Deleted) LR-N17-0034, Salem Generating Station, Units 1 & 2, Revision 29 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Table 3.8-1 Through 3.8-112017-01-30030 January 2017 Salem Generating Station, Units 1 & 2, Revision 29 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Table 3.8-1 Through 3.8-11 LR-N17-0034, Salem Generating Station, Units 1 & 2, Revision 29 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Table 3A-1 (Deleted)2017-01-30030 January 2017 Salem Generating Station, Units 1 & 2, Revision 29 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Table 3A-1 (Deleted) ML17046A2962017-01-30030 January 2017 Revision 29 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Table 3.8-1 Through 3.8-11 ML17046A3112017-01-30030 January 2017 Revision 29 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Table 4.1-1 Through 4.1-3 LR-N16-0161, Flood Hazards Mitigating Strategies Assessment (MSA) Report Submittal2016-12-30030 December 2016 Flood Hazards Mitigating Strategies Assessment (MSA) Report Submittal LR-N16-0112, Flood Hazards Mitigating Strategies Assessment (MSA) Report Submittal2016-12-29029 December 2016 Flood Hazards Mitigating Strategies Assessment (MSA) Report Submittal ML16320A4842016-11-15015 November 2016 Public Telecon Regarding LAR to Upgrade Power Range Neutron Monitoring System (Meeting Handout) ML16231A1102016-08-16016 August 2016 Updated Issues List for 08/16/2016 Public Telecon Regarding LAR to Upgrade Power Range Neutron Monitoring System Meeting Handout ML16116A2352016-03-15015 March 2016 Meeting Summary for Public Teleconference Between PSEG LLC and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Hope Creek Generating Station - Power Range Neutron Monitoring System Digital Upgrade LAR HCGS Numac Upgrade - Open Item DOC-0006-2118 Ri ML16056A1392016-03-11011 March 2016 Correction to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Analysis of Licensees' Decommissioning Funding Status Reports ML16102A2772016-03-11011 March 2016 Submittal of Annual Incidental Take Report ML15238B7042015-09-10010 September 2015 Interim Staff Response to Reevaluated Flood Hazards Submitted in Response to 10 CFR 50.54 Information Request - Flood Causing Mechanism Reevaluation ML15243A4472015-09-10010 September 2015 Master Report - Tables 1 and 2 ML15243A5022015-09-10010 September 2015 Interim Letter Tables 1 and 2 ML15238B6552015-09-10010 September 2015 Interim Staff Response to Reevaluated Flood Hazards Submitted in Response to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Information Request - Flood-Causing Mechanism Reevaluation ML15030A2952014-09-22022 September 2014 Table 04, Groundwater Measurements and Elevations - First Quarter 2014 ML15030A2822014-09-22022 September 2014 Figure 16, Salem Unit 2 - Tritium Concentrations in Water Recovered Through Seismic Gap Drain Operation ML15030A2962014-09-22022 September 2014 Table 05, Groundwater Analytical Results (1.22.2003 Through 3.31.2014) ML15030A2982014-09-22022 September 2014 Table 06A, Groundwater Tritium Analytical Results for Well AC ML15030A2992014-09-22022 September 2014 Table 06B, Groundwater Analytical Results for Well AC ML15030A3002014-09-22022 September 2014 Table 07, Unit 1 Seismic Gap Drain Tritium Analytical Results ML15030A3012014-09-22022 September 2014 Table 08, Unit 2 Seismic Gap Drain Tritium Analytical Results ML15030A2832014-09-22022 September 2014 Table 01, Well Construction Details ML15030A2812014-09-22022 September 2014 Figure 15, Salem Unit 1 - Tritium Concentrations in Water Recovered Through Seismic Gap Drain Operation ML15030A2802014-09-22022 September 2014 Figure 14, Historic Tritium Recovered Through Well Field Operation ML15030A2762014-09-22022 September 2014 Figure 11, Station Wind Summary - Q1 2014 ML15030A2752014-09-22022 September 2014 Figure 10, Precipitation Measurements ML15030A2512014-09-22022 September 2014 Figure 9, Salem Generating Station Hydrogeologic Cross Section E-E' ML15030A2502014-09-22022 September 2014 Figure 8,Salem Generating Station Hydrogeologic Cross Section D-D' ML15030A2942014-09-22022 September 2014 Table 03, Effluent Data Tritium Activity ML15030A2842014-09-22022 September 2014 Table 02, Sample Collection Schedule - First & Second Quarter 2014 ML15030A2492014-09-22022 September 2014 Figure 7, Salem Generating Station Hydrogeologic Cross Section C-C' ML15030A2482014-09-22022 September 2014 Figure 6, Salem Generating Station Hydrogeologic Cross Section B-B' ML15030A2472014-09-22022 September 2014 Figure 5, Salem Generating Station Hydrogeologic Cross Section A-A' LR-N12-0366, Kld TR-499, Revision 0, Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Appendix K-76 Through K-1492012-11-28028 November 2012 Kld TR-499, Revision 0, Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Appendix K-76 Through K-149 ML13052A6822012-11-28028 November 2012 Kld TR-499, Revision 0, Development of Evacuation Time Estimates, Appendix K-76 Through K-149 ML12284A4272012-10-0404 October 2012 PSEG Early Site Permit Application, Calculation of Multiplier Effects for Er Section 10.4 LR-N12-0027, Submittal of RCS Dei Graphs Report2012-03-0202 March 2012 Submittal of RCS Dei Graphs Report ML11181A1872011-06-29029 June 2011 Attendance Sheet for 06/29/2011 Public Meeting to Discuss Observations and Lessons Learned of the Pilot Application of the Nuclear Energy Institute'S ML1030002022010-05-0303 May 2010 1R20 NRC Items of Interest Punchlist 2023-09-06
[Table view] |
Text
Open Branch 3 Allegation Status Summary
'I .7 .7
%9. No. Site Description Status/Actions 4 4 13 =I4-0026 HC 1. New procedure for Initiating Notifications Is restrictive In that it Initial ARB on 4/1/04. Enclosure 1 for referral letter requires notification of management before an Issue can be a,
submitted to the corrective action program. This Is forwarded to SAC on 4/17/04 for items 1 and 4. Ron Nimitz discouraging people to initiate concerns. NRC will likely see to provide an update for item 5.
':n1=rE a significant drop in the initiation of Notifications In the near
=u 5-CD°
= £; future. Alleger indicated that some have specifically been told not to write notifications or that they shouldn't have written a Notification because it could cause trouble for a co-worker.
I2n CDa
- 2. Contractors are not being interviewed as part of the NRC review of safety culture at site or of recent PSEG Internal.
fta review (IA of safety culture. ConsideJNn 12W =
ote: The fP ep ye a oontracto Ir Note: These are ~P Vemployees and not contractors)).
- 3. Safety culture Is bad. Employees (especially older employees) are afraid to raise Issues for fear of reprsa Man aPerienced people are being fired (exampll
- 4. Training has fallen off for new people. Comers are being cut to save money for upcoming outages. Site specific training Is being shortened. Security background checks are being done, but qualification credentials are not being checked.
- 5. NRC should talk to the 'estuary folks" regarding tritium wells, as well as a seismic gap between the auxiliary building that Is being filled with wafer and the possibility of tritium In the water. Related work was curtailed for a month within the last two months. (3/6/04) 2004-0029 S/HC UCS made a work environment allegation: 1) PSEG Initial ARB on 3/11. Ack letter with closure of concerns 1 violated 50.9 because they did not Include the results of a and 2 in concurrence on 4/7. Concerns 3 & 4 will be Synergy survey in response to NRC's January 28, 2004 reviewed as part of NRC's ongoing review.
letter, 2) PSEG made overly positive statements about 3)
PSEG safety culture Is worse than Davis-Besse and elsewhere, 4) PSEG safety culture is inadequate by
._ __ ._ _ industry standards (3/9/04) l
/V-11:.1;z NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE August 10, 2004 (10:49AM)
. II Open Branch 3 Allegation Status Summary Alleg. No. I Site I Description I StatuslActions 2004-0036 Salem 1) Overpressurizing and damaging of the Salem steam First ARB conducted on April 1, 2004. ARB suggested generator blowdown process radiation monitors (Rl9s). Is referring concerns 1 & 2 to PSEG since alleger did not due to tagging process inadequacies and not system procedure problems. object. Concern 3 relates to H&M. However, the alleger is not making a formal complaint at this time. His/her DOL
- 2) On Feb ruay 27, 2004, control room operators incorrectly rights will be included with Ack. Ltr. The Ack letter was in entered an ODCM action statement for an inoperable plant concurrence on 417104.
vent process radiation monitor, 1R41. The action statement for an Inoperable vent stack flow rate monitor should have been entered. The alleger was approached by his/her supervisor to revise all l&C radiation monitor work procedures to Include specific technical specification and ODCM action statement references. The alleger disagreed with the supervisor's assertion that the changes would be editorial and nature and indicated that PSEG does not have the resources to Implement the corrective actions or procedure revisions in a timely manner. The alleger also mentioned that the supervisor asked another procedure writer that he perform a station qualified review for a particular procedure/equipment issue that he/she was not qualified to perform. The alleger intended to take his concerns on this Issue to ECP.
- 3) The alleger stated that he had less fear of retaliation compared to his coworkers because he Is a 2f 01. The alleger has been maintaininrga nordbo-ok for the last several years In defense of potential harassment and intimidation Issues. The alleger did NOT allege any current H&I. The alleger referenced a potential H&l issue from several months ago and stated that it was satisfactorily resolved through ECP. The alleger referenced a H&l Issue from 1994 in that he was excluded from becoming a qualified I&C technician because of his own high maintenance standards which would Interfer!i on.
The alleger was then assigned to the He did not pursue the H&l at the time. The al eger s9Dke highly of his Involvement with ECP but believed that !rlm
_____________ I ________
Lake, the ECP manager Isoverwhelme ;(3/23/04) J NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE August 10, 2004 (10:49AM)