ML20091D163

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR2 Re Policy & Procedure for Enforcement Actions.Concerned That Policy Seems to Be Creating New Requirements Through Examples Given
ML20091D163
Person / Time
Site: Columbia Energy Northwest icon.png
Issue date: 04/03/1992
From: Sorensen G
WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
To: Chilk S
NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
FRN-57FR5791, RULE-PR-2 57FR5791-00004, 57FR5791-4, NUDOCS 9204080124
Download: ML20091D163 (2)


Text

[( 00CKEI MUMBE.,T* '

PROPOSEC F.ULE 3 7 h A

(57fAS7N WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM P.O. Dox 968

)h ,

4 Docket 50-397 DCCKETED 'h[,

Mr. Samuel J. Chilk, Secretary 2 id U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission N g .,cocnTmG h jou-) =

Attn: Docketmg and Service Branch gggyice gasca Washington, D.C. 20555 , A GECY MC f .

Ow A9 .

Dear Mr. Chilk:

' II' d $

7 n +p

Subject:

COMMENTS ON REVISED POLICY STATEMENT: POLICY AND 'C g<

PROCEDURE FOR ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS The Washington Public Power Supply System, a U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensee, has reviewed the revised policy statement on enforcement actions (57 ECderal Register 5791) and provides the following comments for your consideration.

We see the current revision as a significant improvement over the prior policy in terms of the gmdance provided to the NRC staff in determining severity levels and encouragement of licensee initiatives to identify and correct problems. We are particularly encouraged by the change which directs that the NRC may refrain from proposing a civil penalty for Severity Level II or HI violations involving old design issues which are licensee identified, documented, u.d timt y corrected.. We believe this is the proper message for the NRC to send to the industry.

However, we are concerned with the fact that the policy seems to be creating some new requirements through examples given. Additionally, we are troubled by the chmges 'vhich broaden the latitude given to the NRC staff to take escalated enforcement actions without a firm basis, but on the need to " send a message." The decision to take escalated enforcement should always be based on objective evidence and safety significance, not subjective feelings or a desire to send a message to the licensee or the industry.

The Supply System has participated in the preparation and review of comments being submitted by the Nuclear Management and Resources Council, Inc. (NUMARC) and support those comments as representing our own positions. We have also participated in the preparation of comments by the legal firm of Winston & Strawn and accept those comments as our own.

9204000124 9204c3 PDR PR 2 57FR5791 PDR

, .f

(

Mr. Samuel J. Chilk Page 2 q April 3,1992 c

COMMENTS ON REVISED POLICY STATEMENT: POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on this NRC policy and trust that our wmments will be of benefit in your process. Should you have any questions regarding our

] comments, please contact me at (509) 372-5238.

L y Very truly yours,

,G s: v,v"

, . ' G.C. Soknsen, Manager m~ Regulatory Programs (Mai! Drop 280)

GCS:sn ec: NS Reynolds, W&S Document Control Desk, NRC DL Williams, BPA (399)

NRC Site Inspector, (901 A)

^ - - - ~ ___. .