ML20055F465

Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR55 Re Operators Licenses Mod for fitness-for-duty.Supports Principle of Accountability of fitness-for-duty for Employees But Questions Whether Proposed Rulemaking Needed in View of 10CFR55 Provisions

ML20055F465
Person / Time
Site:	Calvert Cliffs
Issue date:	06/29/1990
From:	Creel G BALTIMORE GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
FRN-55FR14288, FRN-56FR32066, RULE-PR-55 55FR14288-00036, 55FR14288-36, AD55-2-45, NUDOCS 9007170166
Download: ML20055F465 (2)

Text

_ . . . . .

[j?d.l DOCKET NUMBER

-' k( ~)L.N-4

.~

l/; 8 4' <

PROP -

' 80

i P;Q j4;2,yg) l BALTIMORE 4

' OAS AND' j g,gty,g; gg ELECTRIC USNRC s

y .

LCHARLES CENTER'

• P.O. BOX 1475

• BALTIMORE, MA@fR2$03A)}!Tg3 i,c -

' vf % M Si Chf 7M r 00CKiijHG 4 gig gT Oconotc,o vice pace oR t.NCH

!;c  : Nuctean E,.cao, o: ooo no ...*- June 29,1990 6

U. S.. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 ATTENTION: Document Control Desk 4

SUBJECT:

. Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant

, Unit'Nos. ! & 2; Docket Nos. 50-317 & 50-318 Prooosed Rule - Ooerators' Licenses 10 CFR Part 55 A Gentlemen:

Baltimore Gas and Electric - (BG&E) Company fully supports the setting of high standardst fora licensed --operators in - the area of fitness for - duty. We - are aware of

' concerns that ' the proposed rule would single out licensed operators and treat 'them differently from other ' nuclear power plant personnel 'We can also sympathize with the -

argument that the proposed rule is a challenge to = the. ' licensed operators' trustworthi-

-ness, in addition to that challenge posed 'to all . nuclear power plant personnel by 10 CFR Part 26.

- However; we strongly believe that different treatment' of ' the licensed operator can be adequately ' justified given the broad range of responsibilities BG&E places on them.-

Both ~ BG&E : and .the public depend on our - plant personnel in fact, all of our employees, to' make. timely,' informed judgments and take appropriate action. As a public-utility, L we fully un'derstand our obligations to the public. In our quest to - maintain their trust in our ' operations, we elected to require our employees to hold ; themselves to high :tandards prior ~ to the' promulgation of 4 any Federal Regulations regarding fitness for' duty.-

We - l support the principle of strict accountability 'of ' fitness for duty for til our

& Lemployees,. but' we question whether the proposed rulemaking 'is needed in view of the

~ specific , provisions currently contained in 10 CFR Part 55.

Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.

3 Very truly yours,

/

l t /

s '

", c GCC/JMO/ dim 9007170166 900629 l /  !

W PDR PR ,-

55 55FR14288 PDR gji ,g/O. '

r4 .

m ,

+

f ' s.l:9 ;.' 1

. Docketing andl Services Branch .,

June - 29, 1990

Page 2

.1 cc: D.- A. Brune, Esquire J.' E. Silberg, Esquire :

)

l R. ' A. Capra, NRC D. G. Mcdonald, Jr., NRC T. T. Martin, NRC L. E.- Nicholson, NRC R. I. McLean, DNR r

I 1

R kh l'

l.

/

(1-1 1- ,

I

,s

'i i

, b.

.r i

u, I..

s 4

l5

~

't