ML052580070

Allegation Review Board Disposition Record, Allegation No. RI-2003-A-0018

ML052580070
Person / Time
Site:	Hope Creek
Issue date:	02/05/2003
From:	NRC/OI/RGN-I/FO
To:
References
FOIA/PA-2004-0314, RI-2003-A-0018
Download: ML052580070 (2)

Text

g:\alleg\panei\20030018ARB.WPD ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DISPOSITION RECORD Allegation No.: RI-2003-A-0018 Branch Chief (AOC): Meyer Site/Facility: Hope Creek Acknowledged: N/A ARB Date: 2/5/03 Confidentiality Granted: NIA Issue discussed: During a December 2002 SSDI, the NRC staff suspects that PSEG managers may have made statements that indicated that certain EDG surveillance testing had been completed, when in fact, it had not been completed in accordance with the Technical Inspection.

These statements would have constituted a violation of 10 CFR 50.9 which requires licensees to provide complete and accurate information to the NRC. This is information was material because it was needed by NRC to verify that certain EDG surveillance testing had been completed satisfactorily to prove EDG operability.

Alleger contacted prior to referral to licensee (if applicable)? NA ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DECISIONS Attendees: Chair - Rogge Branch Chief (AOC) - Meyer SAC - Vito 01 Rep. - Wilson. Teator RI Counsel - Fewell Others - Holody. Pindale. Barber, Crleniak DISPOSITION ACTIONS: (List actions for processing and closure. Note responsible person(s),

form of action closure document(s), and estimated completion dates.)

1) 01 open a case on potential wrongdoing (1-2003-014). DRPIDRS to provide technical assistance as needed.

Responsible Person: Wilson ECD: TBD Closure Documentation: Complleted:

2) DRP to provide draft NOV and provide to 01 and SAC.

Responsible Person: Meyer ECD: 217/03 Closure Documentation: Completed:

SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT: The risk significance of this concern appears low since the required testing has already been completed.

PRIORITY OF 01 INVESTIGATION: HIGH - upper management knowledge If potential discrimination or wrongdoing and 01 is not opening a case, provide rationale here (e.g., no prima facie, lack of specific indication of wrongdoing):

Rationale used to defer 01 discrimination case (DOL case in progress):

ENFORCEMENT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CONSIDERATION (only applies to wrongdoing matters (including discrimination issues) that are under investigation by 01, DOL. or DOJ):

What is the potential violation and regulatory requirement?_

When did the potential violation occur?_

(Assign action to determine date, if unknown)

Once date of potential violation is established, SAC will assign AMS action to have another ARB at four (4) years from that date, to discuss enforcement statute of limitations issues. \\0, ARB MINUTES ARE REVIEWED AND APPROVED AT THE ARB t

2 NOTES: (Include other pertinent comments. Also include considerations related to licensee referral, if appropriate. Identify any potential generic issues) 01 will initiate an investigation to determine whether the licensee's failure to shut down the facility (on 12/14/02) after not completing the required TS surveillance requirement within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, was a deliberate violation. The basis for suspecting that the failure to shutdown may have involved wrongdoing includes the fact the NRC clearly informed the licensee on 12/13/02 that they had to complete TS 4.8.1.1.2.h.14(a-c). and the licensee had not completed (c) vet continued to operate until 12/18-19/02.

Distribution: Panel Attendees, Regional Counsel, 01, Responsible Individuals (original to SAC)