ML19331D108
| ML19331D108 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 07/30/1980 |
| From: | Mattimoe J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| To: | Engelken R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19331D107 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8008270293 | |
| Download: ML19331D108 (2) | |
Text
-
o SNUD SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT C 6201 S Street, Box 15830, Sacramento, California 95813; (916) 452-3211 July 30, 1980 Mr. R. H. Engelken, Director Region V Of fice of Inspection & Enforcement U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1990 North California Boulevard Walnut Creek Plaza, Suite 202 Walnut Creek, California 94396 Re:
NRC Inspection 80-20 Docket No. 50-312 License No. DPR-54
Dear Mr. Engelken:
In reply to your inspection conducted by Messrs. H. Canter and J. O'Brien between June 2 and 30, 1980, we offer the following explanation and corrective action which will assure full compliance with the NRC requ i remen ts.
Appendix A of your letter indicates the following deficiency:
Based on the results of the NRC inspection conducted between June 2 and 30, 1980, it appears that one of your activities was not in full canpliance with applicable NRC regulations and conditions of your license as indicated below.
Title 10, Chapter 1, Code of Federal Regulations Energy, Part 2.201 states in part, "The notice of violation will concisely state the alleged violation and will require that the licensee submit, within twenty (20) days of the date of the notice or other specified time, a written explanation or statement in reply...."
Contrary to the above requirement, the licensee received the notice of violation as part of IE Inspection Report 50-312/80-10 on April 23, 1980 but did not submit to the NRC a written explanation or statement in reply until June 2, 1980.
SMUD REPLY The NRC Inspection Report 80-10 was received by the Office of the General Manager on April 23, 1980.
Since the response to the audit was required in twenty (20) days of our receipt of this notice, a written statement or explanation was due on May 13, 1980. Concurrent with this time soosm 2 9 AN ELECTRIC SYSTEPt $ E RVIN G YORE THAN 600,000 fN THE HEART OF CA F0R'Ip OG f v
Mr. R. H. Engelken July 30, 1980 period, the NRC was audi ting the Rancho Seco operations with a five member Performance Analysis Branch Team.
Mr. Colombo- (Technical Assis tant) who was responsible for coordinating the NRC activities with the PAB team also had responsibility for replying to NRC audit 80-10.
The coordinating activities required considerable time on Mr. Colombo's part and the 80-10 report was in his "in basket" during this time.
On May 30, the Resident NRC Inspector during the "end of month" audit summary stated the reply was overdue.
The audit was retrieved and a written statement sent to NRC Region V the following working day, June 2, 1980.
The Technical Assistant's staff is being increased to the appro-priate level to facilitate the increased work load generated by the NRC and the Resident inspector. The increased staff will avoid further viola-tions of this type.
It is expected that the staff assignments will be completed prior to October 31, 1980.
Respectfully submitted.
.b Vtd A
,/"
J. J. Mattimoe Assistant General Manager and Chief Engineer JJM:RWC:j r 4
I f