ML18101A239
| ML18101A239 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 09/22/1994 |
| From: | Russell W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Jun Lee AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18101A240 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9409280089 | |
| Download: ML18101A239 (4) | |
Text
- --*
J UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Ms. Jane.Lee 183 Valley Road Etters, PA 17319
Dear Ms. Lee:
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555--0001 September 22, 1994 I am responding to the letter you sent to President Clinton, on May 18, 1994, expressing concern regarding your perception of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's reaction to maintenance problems at Salem Nuclear Generating Station, located in Salem County, New Jersey, and Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, located in Berwick, Pennsylvania.
I assure you that NRC has conducted a thorough review of the events at the Salem Nuclear Generating Station that-were reported in the Philadelphia Inquirer of May 2, 1994.
Before allowing the reactor to resume operation, the NRC staff reviewed the Public Service Electric and Gas Company's (PSE&G) corrective actions to ensure that resumed operation of the Salem station would be safe.
In response to that event, PSE&G has acted to restore, replace, redesign, or repair equipment that contributed to station performance and to*
correct operating practices that needed improvement.
PSE&G has reassigned or otherwise replaced supervisory and technical personnel in the Salem organization to improve the performance of the station.
PSE&G is also reviewing personnel effectiveness and is expected to make other personnel changes as necessary.
Recognizing the significance of the events at this plant, NRC sent an Augmented Inspection Team (AIT) of eight staff members to the Salem site to review in detail the circumstances surrounding the automatic reactor shutdown and two automatic actuations of the safety injection system that occurred at Unit 1 on April 7, 1994.
The inspection team concluded that these events did not affect the public health and safety.
However, NRC continues to hold PSE&G management accountable for correcting weaknesses in plant performance at the Salem station and has taken enforcement actions on several occasions to emphasize the importance NRC places on effective and safe operating practices, and proper adherence to regulatory requirements.
Recent occurrences at Salem station also prompted NRC to increase regulatory attention to PSE&G's management, operation, and maintenance of the Salem station.
On June 24, 1994, NRC issued the inspection report related to the April 7, 1994 event (Enclosure 1).
The NRC staff is assessing the apparent violations of the regulations related to this event.
When the assessment is completed, the NRC enforcement policy will be applied, as appropriate.
I assure you that the NRC staff will continue to closely monitor plant operations at the Salem station and will not hesitate to take further regulatory actions, if necessary.
---~
_,_ ---- 940c,280oa9 940922 PDR ADOCK 05000272 H
(~ T In response to the refueling incidents which occurred at the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station on October 6, 26, 27, and 28, 1993, which were discussed in the newspaper article enclosed with your letter, the Commission also established an AIT.
This group of five technical staff members with diverse expertise visited the site on October 29 through November 9, 1993.
Their report dated December 21, 1993 (Enclosure 2), stated a conclusion that operator error and a structural weakening of the refueling bridge were the direct causes of the refueling incidents. Subsequently, on May 10, 1994, the staff issued the Notice of Violation (NOV) (Enclosure 3), to Pennsylvania Power & Light Company (PP&L), the licensee, for failing to follow procedures and taking ineffective corrective actions.
In the NOV, the staff also discussed its evaluation process for determining the severity and nature of the Commission's enforcement action for these incidents.
Specifically, a civil penalty was considered for this enforcement action.
However, in addressing the imposition of monetary fines on a licensee, the agency enforcement policy permits the Commission to consider the nature, timeliness, and extent of corrective actions by a licensee to preclude the problems from recurring in the conduct of operation and to correct the deficiencies.
Such consideration can result in an increase or decrease in an imposed civil penalty.
In this case, as discussed in the May 10, 1994, NOV, the Commission determined that in accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy, no civil penalty was deemed necessary or appropriate for the reasons stated in the report.
Please bear in mind that NRC may respond to each safety significant event at a nuclear power plant in ways other than issuing a civil penalty.
Following an event, it is the prime responsibility of the licens~e to evaluate its safety significance and submit this information to NRC.
The resident inspectors, regional inspection staff, headquarters technical and management staff, and in some cases AIT staff participate in the reactive evaluation process to promptly evaluate the event's safety significance. After completing this evaluation, the Commission could take actions ranging from a simple exchange of information with the licensee for insignificant events, to strong enforcement action including large fines and even the permanent shutdown of a pl ant.
Regarding your comment about the Chernobyl event, please be assured that the safety and material aspects of the design of the Chernobyl reactor differ significantly from those for reactors operattng in the United States.
The types of incidents at Salem and Susquehanna are not comparable from a technical or practical perspective even fo~ the most severe hypothetical accident scenarios.
Most importantly, in its evaluation of the events at these_ plants, the Commission determined that they did not affect the health and safety of the public.
~m forwarding a copy of your letter, with your concerns about the NRC's
- :'< :q iug of the above events to our Office of the Inspector General.
~-l I hope this letter and the enclosed reports allay your concerns regarding the NRC's reponses to the events at the Salem and Susquehanna facilities.
Sincerely, Original Signed Byi 1TrLIAM T. RUSSELL William T. Russell, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
- 1.
AIT Inspection Report (Salem)
- 2.
AIT Inspection Report (Susquehanna)
- 3.
Notice of Violation (Susquehanna) bee w/encl and incoming:
Jennifer McCarthy DISTRIBUTION See attached list Document Name:
SU10432.GT
- Previously Concurred Director, Office of Agency Liaison Room 6, OEOB The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box:
"C" attachment/enclosure
E" = Copy with attachment/enclosure OFFICE TECH ED*
NAME JMain DATE OFFICE OGC*
NAME LChandler CMi l ler DATE D9/13/94 09/13/94
l I hope this letter and the enclosed reports allay your concerns regarding the NRC's reponses to the events at the Salem and Susquehanna facilities.
Sincerely, William T. Russell, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
- 1.
AIT Inspe~tion Report (Salem)
- 2.
AIT Inspection Report (Susquehanna)
- 3.
Notice of Violation (Susquehanna)