ML20147B836
| ML20147B836 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 01/27/1997 |
| From: | Racquel Powell NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Hollaway W, Oneill J SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20147B843 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-96-351, RTR-NUREG-0654, RTR-NUREG-654 NUDOCS 9702040011 | |
| Download: ML20147B836 (8) | |
Text
. -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NRC FOIA REQUEST NUMBEntS) i
^
FOIA 96-3s1
,,e RESPONSE TYPE p{\\h RESPONSE TO FREEDOM CF l FINAL l)( l PARTIAL 8th f
INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST g
DATE M 2 7 1997 DOCKET NUMBER (f.) Uf apptrable)
REQUESTE R Mr. J. H. O'Neilt
.. ATTN: W. R. Hollaway PART 1.--AGENCY RECORDS RELEASED OR NOT LOCATED (See checkedboAes)
N 2 agency records subject to the request have been located.
No additional agency records subject to the request have been located.
Requested records are available through another public distribution program. See Comments section, Ager cy records subject to the request that are identified in Appendix (es) are already available for public inspection and copying at the
)
NRL Public Document Room,2120 L Street, fJ.W, Washington. DC.
X Agency records subject to the request that are identified in Appendix (es) b are being made available for public inspection and copying st the NRC Public Document Room,2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC, in a folder under this FOI A number.
The nonproprietary version of the proposal (s) that you agreed to accept in a telephone conversation with a member of my staff is now being made available for public inspection and copying at the N RC Public Document Room,2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC, in a folder under this FOI A number.
Agency records subject to the request that are identified in Appendix (es) may be inspected and copied at the NRC Local Public Document Room identified in the Comments section.
Enclosed is information on how you may obtain access to and the charges for copying records located at the NRC Public Document Room,2120 L Street, N.t'!, Washington, DC.
X Agency records subject to the request are enclosed.
Records subject to the request have been referred to another Federal agency (ies) for review and direct response to you, Fees You will be billed by tht NRC for fees totaling $
You will receive a refund from the NRC in the amount of $
In view of N RC's response to this request, no further action is being taken on appeal letter dated
, No.
PART 11. A-INFORMATION WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCL OSURE Certain information in the rcauested records is being withheld from public disclosure pursuant to the exemptions described in and for the reasons stated X
in Part 11, B, C, and D. Any released portions of the documents for which only part of the record is being withheld are being made available for public inspection and copying in the NRC Public Document Room,2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC in a folder under this FOI A number, COMMENTS Some of the documents on Appendix T conta m drafts which are considered predecisional information.
The final versions of the drafts have already been made publicly available.
The review of additional records subject to your request is continuing.
pp1I r
stGNATyE DIRECT R.
IV' loN Of-REEDgf INFORMATION AND PUBLICATIONS SERVICES of
'[
- j. " ^ >.pp,
4 A.
- 7 NRt L
wwo a. fo u., m 9702040011 970127 PDR FOIA E'
3 g.:,.,0 'NEILL96-351 PDR
=
n,. -
h
==c mau um. n f m y /v.e m
RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOlA) REQUEST FOIA 96-351
- N 27In?
i (CONTINUATION) l l
PART 11.8-APPLICABLE EXEMPTIONS I
Records subject to the reouest that are described in the enclosed Appendix (es) are t eing withheld in their entirety or in part under the Exernption No.(s) and for the reason (s) given below pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(b) and 10 CF R 9.17(a) of N R C regulations.
- 1. The withheld mformation is properly classified pursuant to Executive Order. (Exemption 1)
- 2. The withheld mformation relates solely to the mternal personnel rules and procedures of NRC. (Exemption 2) l l 3. The withheld mformetion is specifically esempted from public disclosure by statute indicated. (Exemption 3)
Sections 141145 of the Atomic Energy Act, which prohibits the disclosure of Restricted Date or Formerly Restricted Data (42 U.S.C. 21612165).
Section 147 of the Atomic Energy Act, which prohibits the disclosure of Unclassified Safeguards information (42 U.S.C. 2167).
- 4. The withheld mformation is a trade secret ot commercial or financial anformation that is being withheld for the reason (s) iridicated. (Exemption 4)
The mformation is considered to be confidential business ipropnetary) enformation.
Th., mforrretion is considered to be propnetary information pursuant to 10 CFR 2 790 ldh 1).
The mformation was submitted and received m confidence pursuant to 10 CFR 2 790ldif 21
- 5. The mthheld mformanon consists of interagency or intrangency records that are not available through discovery durmg htigation (Exemption 5). Apphcable Privilege:
Dehberative Process. Disclosure of predecisional information would tend to inhibit the open and frank exchange of edeas essential to the deliberative process y
Where recordie are withheld m theer entarety, the f acts are inestrecably intertwined with the predecia.onal mformation There also are no reasonably segregable f actual portions because the release of the f acts would permit an mdirect inquiry into the predecisional process of the agency Attorney work product privilege (Documents prepared by an attornev en contemplation of ietegation i Attorney-chent pnvilege. (Confidential communications between an attorney and his/her chent )
6, The ethheid mformation is exempted from public disclosure because its disclosure would result m a clearly ur$ warranted invasion of personal privacy (Exoniption 6)
- 7. The withheld information consists of records compiler
- for law enforcement purposes and es being withheld for the reason (s) indicated. (Exemption 7)
Disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with an enforcement proceedmg because it could reveal the scope. direction, and focus of enforcement efforts, and thus could possibly allow recipients to take action to shield potential wron-tome or a violation of NRC requirements from mvestigators. IE memption 7 (AH l
Disclosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal p.ivacy. (Exemption 7(C))
The iriformation cons.sts of namen of individuals and other information the disclosure of vs h ch could reasonabi, be espected to reveal identrties of coM' mtial sources. (Exemption 7 (D))
OTHER l
PART 11. C-DENYING OFFICIALS Pursuent to 10 CFR 9 251b) and or 9 25(c) of the U.S Nuclear Regulatory Comm.svun regulations at has been determined that the information W5 held is taempt from pro-duction or disclosure, and that its production or d sciosure is contrary to the pubhc mterest. The persont responsible for the denial are those officials identified below as denying of ficials and the Director, D.wrsion of Freedom of Informat on and Pubhcat,ons Services. Office of Admmestration. for any demals tnat may be appeated to the E xecutive Director for Operations IEDO).
l DENYING OFFIC.AL l
TITLEUFFICE RECORDS DENIED APPELLATE OFFICIAL i
EDO jsECRETARY G
IJ.Lieberman Director, OE T/1 & T/2 X
H. L. Thompson, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for T/3 - T/7 x
Operations l
I l
l PART 11. D-APPEAL RIGHTS Tne den o,
cii denying offaciai soent,f.ed in es,t ii.C may be appesied to the Appellate Official identified there. Any such appea! must be made m writmg w thm 30 days of receipt of thb response. Appeals must be addressed, as appropriate, to the E hecutive Director for Operations, to the Secretary of the Commission, or to the inspector General, U.S. Nuclear regulattry Commission, washmaton, DC 20555. and should clearly state on the envelope and m tne letter that it is en " Appeal from en init,al FOI A Decision."
N!.C F RM 464 (Part 2) (191)
U S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
1 i
Re:
FOIA-96-351 APPENDIX S RECORDS BEING RELE'ASED IN THEIR ENTIRETY l
HQ2 DATE DESCRIPTION /(PAGE COUNT) 1.
Undated Memo to File from J. Taylor,
Subject:
Drop in Visit - Public Service Electric and Gas (PSE&G) Salem Units 1 & 2 (2 pages) 2.
11/25/86 Memo from James M.
Taylor to James G.
Keppler,
Subject:
Timeliness of Classifying Emergencies at Nuclear Power Plants (5 pgs) i l
3.
11/13/91 Prese Release dated 11/9/91 on "NRC staff sends Augmented Inspection Team to site of a turbine failure and electric generator fire at Salem Nuclear Power Plant near Salem, NJ".
(2 pages) l 4,
11/27/91 Press Release -- Note to Editors regarding l
NRC's Augmented Inspection Team.
(2 pages) l S.
05/13/92 Letter to Senator Joseph Biden, Jr.,
from I.
Selin responding to his letter dated April 2, l
1992, concerning the November 9,
- 1991, turbine generator failure at the Salem Generating Station with attached April 2, 1992 letter.
(12 pages) 6.
12/28/92 Memo from James Sniezek to T.
Martin, et al.,
Subject:
Declaration of alert for loss of annunciators-enforcement actions (2 pgs) l 7.
06/07/93 Press Release on "NRC staff sends Augmented l
Inspection Team to Salem Nuclear Plant to l
investigate causes of electrical problem in reactor controls.
(2 pages) 8.
06/17/93 Press Release dated 6/16/93 regarding NRC l
staff meeting on 6/18/93 with Public Service Electric and Gas Company.
(2 pages) 9.
07/02/93 Press Release --Note to Editors regarding NRC's Augmented Inspection Team sent to the site of Salem Units 1 and 2.
(2 pages) 10.
12/22/93 Memo from William Russell to T.
T. Martin,
Subject:
Generic implications of the Salem 2 loss of overhead annunciators (4 pgs) l
Re:
FOIA-96-351 APPENDIX S (continued)
RECORDS BEING RELEASED IN THEIR ENT.TRETY NO.
DATE DESCRIPTION /(PAGE COUNT) 11.
03/02/94 Press Release to Energy, Environment and Business Editors regarding NRC's Regional Administrator for the Northeastern United States holding special media briefing on March 16, 1994, to discuss status of nuclear power plants.
(2 pages) 12.
03/10/94 Press Release on "NRC Staff proposes to fine Public Service Electric and Gas $50,000 for alleged violations at Salem Nuclear Generating Station."
(2 pages) l 13.
04/08/94 Press Release on "NRC sends Augmented j
Inspection Team to Salem Nuclear Power Plant to examine Thursday's temporary loss of pressure control of Unit i reactor."
(3 pages) l 14.
04/25/94 Press Release dated 4/22/94 -- Note to Editors regarding NRC's Augmented Inspection Team to meet with Public Service and Gas Company on April 26, 1994.
(2 pages) 15.
05/06/94 Letter to Senator Joseph Biden from I.
Selin concerning Augmented Inspected Team dispatched to the Salem Nuclear Power Plant.
(1 page) 16.
05/14/94 Letter to Senator Joseph Biden from J. M.
Taylor responding to his May 11, 1994, letter regarding restart of the Salem Unit i nuclear facility with attachments.
(86 pages) 17.
05/18/94 Letter to Senator Joseph Biden, Jr.,
from I Selin concerning NRC staffs decision on the restart of the Salem Unit i nuclear facility.
(2 pages) 18.
07/06/94 Letter to Senator Bill Bradley from J. M.
Taylor responding to constituent concerning plant operation at the Salem Nuclear Power i
Plant with attachments including incoming j
letter. (91 pages)
... ~.. -
.. - ~ -
-.~
. ~ -.. - _.
i e
Re:
FOIA-96-351 l
APPENDIX S I
(continued) l RECORDS BEING RELEASED IN THEIR ENTIRETY l
l l
HOz DATE DESCRIPTION /(PAGE COUNT) 19.
07/21/94 Press Release on "NRC Staff schedules open i
l enforcement conference with Public Service Electric'and Gas Co. on shutdown of Salem Unit 1 in South Jersey last April 7."
(4 pages) 20.
08/19/94 Press Release -- Note to Editors that NRC saff will meet 8/24/94 with Public Service Electric and Gas officials.
(2 pages) 21.
08/24/94 Letter to Senator Bill Bradley from J. M.
Taylor responding to constituent regarding problems that have occurred at the Salem j
Nuclear Generating Station with incoming letter.
(8 pages) 22.
08/25/94 Memorandum to R.
Jones, from M.
- Chiramal,
Subject:
Review of WCAP-13864, Rod Control l
System Evaluation Program (9 pgs) 23.
09/06/94 Press Release -- Note to Editors that NRC staff will meet 9/9/94 with Public Service Electric and Gas officials.
(2 pages) 24.
09/28/94 Ltr from Steven A. Varga to Steven Miltenberger,
Subject:
NRC Performance Assessment of Salem (20 pgs) 25.
10/05/94 Press Release on "NRC staff proposes to fine PSE&G $500,000 for alleged violations at Salem Nuclear Power Plant" (4 pages) 26.
11/08/94 Letter to Senator Joseph Biden from J. M.
l Taylor responding to his letter of September 26, 1994,.equesting NRC to assist in a matter involving Amer Industrial Technologies, Inc., of Wilmington, Delaware with attached September 26, 1994 and attachment.
(5 pages) 1 l
i
_..-__m._..
Re:
FOIA-96-351 1
APPENDIX S (continued)
RECORDS BEING RELEASED IN THEIR ENTIRETY NO DATE DESCRIPTION /(PAGE COUNT) 2 27.
11/10/94 Letter to Senator William Roth, Jr.,
from J.
l M. Taylor responding to constituent concerning government oversight of Salem Nuclear Generating Station with incoming letter.
(6 pages) 28.
01/04/95 Press Release on "NRC staff issuies systematic assessment of licensee performance for the Salem Nuclear Generating Station near
- Salem, NJ".
(3 pages) 29.
01/17/95 Press Release dated 1/13/95 -- Note to Editors notifying that NRC staff will meet on 1/18/95 with Public Service Electric and Gas i
Co. officials.
(2 pages) l l
30.
04/12/95 Press Release on "NRC Staff to fine Public Service & Gas Company $80,000 for alleged violation at its Salem Nuclear Generating Station.
(3 pages) 31.
07/07/95 Letter to Senator Lautenberg from J. M.
Taylor responding to his letter dated May 5, 1995 on behalf of his constituent, Mr.
William Pettit with attachments and May 5, 1995 letter and attachment.
(90 pages) 32.
10/05/95 Press Release on "NRC to conduct special inspection of Salem Nuclear Power Plant following temporary loss of control room alarms at Unit 1."
(2 pages) 33.
10/17/95 Press Release on "NRC staff proposes to fine l
Public Service Electric & Gas $600,000 for l
six alleged violations of NRC requirements at Salem Nuclear Power Plant."
(4 pages) 34.
12/08/95 Press Release -- Note to Editors that NRC staff will meet with Public Service Electric l
and Gas officials on December 11, 1995.
(2 l
pages) j t
i l
l l
)
l
m._
.. - -. _ _ _ _... ~ _.. _. _.. _. _ _ _. _. _ _ _ - -... _ _..... _... _.
l
\\
L Re FOIA-96-351 i
APPENDIX S i
(continued)
RECORDS BEING RELEASED IN THEIR ENTIRETY N
DATE DESCRIPTION /(PAGE COUNT)
A 35.
02/12/96 Memorandum to Office Directors and Regional Administrators from James M. Taylor - Mtgs.
between NRC Staff and the Public - (2 pgs) 36.
11/12/96 Press Release -- Note to Editors that NRC staff will meet with Public Service and Gas l
Company officials on 11/18/96.
(2 pages) 37.
12/12/96 Press Release on " Nuclear Regulatory i
Commission staff proposes $180,000 in fines for alleged violations at Salem and Hope Creek Plants."
(3 pages) 1
)
i l
i i
i l
l
l=
1
]
I Re:
FOIA-96-351 s
APPENDIX T f
RECORDS BEING WITHHELD IN THEIR ENTIRETY j
NQ2 DATE DESCRIPTION /(PAGE COUNT)/ EXEMPTIONS i
I 1.
No date Draft memorandum from Thomas T. Martin to l
James Lieberman,
Subject:
Proposed l
l Enforcement Action - Public Service Electric
{
and Gas Company (PSE&G) (Salem) (3 pgs) EX. 5 2.
No date Draft memorandum from James M.
Taylor to The Commissioners,
Subject:
Proposed $500,000 Civil Penalty to PSE&G, and proposed letter i
of reprimand to a senior reactor operator, concerning violations at Salem Unit 1 (4 pgs) i EX. 5 3.
No date Salem (History) (4 pgs) EX. 5 1
j 4.
No date Salem rpt (7 pgs) EX. 5 5.
04/12/94 June 1994 Senior Management Meeting Salem l
Discussion for April 12, 1994 Pre-Brief (14 pgs) EX. 5 l
6.
04/12/94 June 1994 Senior Management Meeting Salem j
Discussion for Aprt] 12, 1994 Pre-Brief (13 i
pgs) EX. 5 i
]
7.
01/96 Salem Units 1 & 2 History (6 pgs) EX. 5 f
i
n e
SHAW, PirrMAN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE m.m....~.,- -... - _,m~.
23Od N STF4EET. N.W.
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20037-1128 (202) 663-8000 (202 8007 FOlNPA REQUEST
- * " ' " " ~
Case No.
91-MI JOHN H. O'NEILL. 8R. P.C.
w August 30,1996 Date Rec'd:
9-f- t 4 Action Off.
1.-
- Director, Division of Freedom of Related Case:
Information & Publications Services Office of Administration U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
Two White Flint North Building 11545 Rockville Pike L
Rockville,MD 20852 i
Re:
Freedom ofInformation Act Request Regarding the Salem Generating Station, Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311
Dear Sir or Madam:
This is a Freedom ofInformation Act request pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Q 552(a)(3) and 10 C.F.R. @ 9.23. We request that you make available to Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge the documents responsive to the attached Request for Production of Documents. These documents need to be made available as soon as possible to support depositions in an l
accelerated legal action. In order to expedite production of the documents, we have deliberately tailored this request to be narrow in scope and straightforward in the type of documents requested. We have already obtained copies of relevant documents presently available at the N.R.C. Public Documents Room and they need not be produced again in response to this request. Of course, we agree to bear the cost of this request as per 10 C.F.R.
{ 9.23(b)(4),9.33,9.39, and 9.40, and we authorize you to respond to this request piecemeal as documents become available. Please contact me at (202)663-8148, or William Hollaway i
at (202)663-8294, at your convenience if you have any questions regarding this request.
4 Please direct your response, pursuant to 10 C.F.R. { 9.27, to:
William R. Hollaway, Ph.D.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 2300 N Street; N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037-1128 (202)663-8294 Fax: (202)663-8007 1
.'_ - SHAW, PITTMAN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORAflONS Director, Division of Freedom ofInformation and Publications Services August 30,1996 Page 2 Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sin
- rely, A
Mr John. O'Neill, Jr.
Attachment e
34810748 / DOC $DCI A.
Lar
FOIA Request, Aug 30,1996 REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS I. DIRECTIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS 1.
The term "NRC" means the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, all offices and/or branches thereof specifically including, but not limited to, headquarters in Rockville, Maryland and the Region I office in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, and also in-cludes all employees, consultants, agents, and representatives to the maximum, extent per-mitted by 10 C.F.R. 9.3, unless otherwise indicated by the request.
2.
The term " Salem" means one or both units of the Salem Generating Station located in Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey and operated by the Public Service Electric and Gas Company.
3.
The term " SAP" means the Salem Assessment Panel that was developed in 1995 specifi-cally to review Salem Generating Station on an ongoing basis, including all me,mbers and
+
supervisors there.
4.
The term "PSE&G" refers the operator of Salem, Public Service Electric and Gas Company.
5.
The term "PECO Energy" refers to PECO Energy Company, formerly known as Philadel-phia Electric Company.
6.
The term "Delmarva" refers to Delmarva Power & Light Company.
7.
The term " Atlantic Electric" refers to Atlantic City Electric Company.
8.
The term "SALP" means the Strategic Assessment of Licensee Performance, a compre-hensive review of plant performance, performed for each plant on an 18-month cycle. The most recent S ALP review for Salem was issued on January 3,1995.
9.
The term " Enforcement Action" means a civil penalty levied by the NRC against the licen-sees of Salem pursuant to single or multiple violations at Salem. The most recent En-forcement Action regarding Salem was issued on October 16,1995.
w 10.
The term "AIT" means the Augmented Inspection Teams that performed investigations of Salem in 1992,1993, and 1994, including all members and supervisors thereof.
11.
The term " SIT" means the Special Inspection Team that performed an investigation of Sa-4 lem in 1995, including all members and supervisors thereof.
FOIA Request, Aug. 30,1996 i
12.
The term "PA" means the comprehensive Performance Assessment evaluation of Salem performed in July-August,1995 to, aid in focusing future NRC inspection resources at J
Sdem.
4 13.
The term " Confirmatory Action Letter" means the letter from the NRC'to PSE&G on June 9,1995 confirming PSE&G commitments to take specific actions prior to the restart of Salem and confirming that failure to take these actions may result in enforcement action.
1 i
4 H. DOCUMENTS REQUESTED l
1.
All documents concerning the NRC's Salem Assessment Panel (" SAP") established on August 2,1995, especially including but not limited to:
a.
All internal NRC discussions concerning the formation and purpose of the SAP; b.
Transcripts, meeting minutes, summacies, and handouts of all meetings of the uAP; c.
Lists of attendees at all meetings of the SAP;
}
d.
All materials presented to the SAP; I
All notes taken during presentations and meetings of the SAP; e.
l f.
All reports or memoranda of the SAP; j
s.
l g.
All reports or memoranda written by any members of the SAP concerning Salem.
i All documents concerning the NRC's Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance 2.
("SALP") reviews of Salem from 1990 through the present, especially including but not j
j limited to:
Transcripts, meeting minutes, summaries, and handouts of all NRC meetings on i
a.
j the Salem SALP reports; l
b.
Lists of attendees at all meetings on the Salem SALP reports; Variances, differences or changes between consecutive Salem SALP reports; c.
i d.
Internal NRC discussions about interim drafts of the Salem SALP reports; e.
Internal NRC discussions about final drafts of the Salem SALP reports; i
},
T m,_
FOIA Request, Aug. 30,1996 f.
Internal NRC discussions about variances, differences or changes between interim reports and the final Salem,SALP reports; g.
The basis for each of the findings in the Salem SALP reports; j
h.
Region I's knowledge ofissues raised in the Salem SALP reports; 1
I i.
Region I's knowledge of PSE&G's plans to address issues raised in the various Sa-lem SALP reports; j.
Internal Region I discussions concerning the findings and conclusions expressed in the Salem SALP reports; k.
Whether NRC or Region I ever expressed any concerns about poor or declining performance or the like to PSE&G related to the Salem SALP reports; 1.
Communications between NRC and Region I personnel concerning consistencies or inconsistencies between the various Salem SALP reports; All documents setting forth or discussing the deliberations and considerations of m.
the SALP boards reviewing Salem performance from 1990 to the present; To the extent not covered by previous requests, all other documents regarding the n.
Salem SALP reports.
3.
All documents concerning potential and actual NRC enforcement actions regarding Salem from 1990 to t& present, including but not limited to:
Transcripts, meeting minutes, summaries, and handouts from all Enforcement Con-a.
ferences concerning Salem between NRC and PSE&G, including but not limited to meetings on February 2,1992; April 9,1992; April 6,1993; February 1,1994; July 28,1994; February 10,1995; June 1,1995; June 23,1995; July 13,1995; and July 28,1995; b.
Lists of attendees at all Enforcement Conferences concerning Salem between NRC and PSE&G; w
Transcripts, meeting minutes, summaries, and handouts from all internal NRC c.
meetings concerning enforcement actions regarding Salem; d.
Lists of attendees at all internal NRC meetings concerning enforcement actions re-garding Salem; Communications with PSE&G concerning potential and actual NRC enforcement e.
actions regarding Salem;,
- _ - - = -. - -
~ _
^
FOIA Request, Aug. 30,1996 1
~
f.
Communications with others concerning potential and actual NRC enfofcement actions regarding Salem, especially including but not limited to PECO Energy, Delmarva, and Atlantic Electric; j
g.
Internal NRC discussions concerning potential NRC enforcement actions regarding Salem; h.
Internal NRC discussions concerning actual NRC enforcement actions regarding l
Salem, including but not limited to the $50,000 civil penalty issued March 9,1994; the $500,000 civil penalty issued October 5,1994; $80,000 civil penalty issued i
April.11,1995; and the $600,000 civil penalty issued October 16,199%.-
i.
The basis and rationale for taking each of the enforcement actions regarding i
Salem; i
j.
Internal NRC discussions about drafts of the enforcement actions regarding Salem; 4
k.
Internal NRC discussions concerning the findings and conclusions expressed in th.e enforcc
..t actions regarding Salen, 1.
Internal NRC discussions concerning PSE&G's responses to each of the enforce-ment actions regarding Salem; l
4.
All documents concerning meetings between the NRC and PSE&G management or Board of Directors concerning the performance of Salem from 1990 to the present, including but not limited to:
Transcripts, meeting minutes, summaries, and handouts from all meetings, includ-4 a.
i ing but not limited to meetings on June 25,1992; July 1,1992; October 10,1992; July 16,1993; July 18,1993; August 6,1993; May 7,1994; March 20,1995; i
I March 21,1995; April 3,1995; June 5,1995; and May 24,1996; b.
Lists of attendees at all such meetings;
)
i c.
Communications with PSE&G concerning such meetings; d.
Communications with others concerning such meetings, especially including but not limited to PECO Energy, Delmarva, and Atlantic Electric; Internal NRC discussions concerning such meetings.
e.
5.
All documents concerning the NRC Augmented Inspection Team ("AIT") investigations ofincidents at Salem from November Il-December 3,1991; December 14-23,1992; June 5-28,1993; and around April 1994, including but not limited to:
j 1 l
FOIA Request, Aug. 30,1996
)
a.
Transcripts, meeting minutes, summaries, and handouts from all AIT meetings re-garding Salem; l
b.
Lists of attendees at all AIT meetings regarding Salem; c.
Communications with PSE&G concerning the AIT investigations at Salem and AIT meetings regarding Salem; d.
Communications with others concerning the AIT investigations at Salem and AIT meetings regarding Salem, especially including but not limited to PECO Energy, Delmarva, and Atlantic Electric, e.
Internal NRC discussions concerning the AIT meetings regarding Salem; f.
The reasons why the NRC decided to do the AIT investigations at Salem.
g.
The basis for each of the findings in the AIT reports ofinvestigations at Salem;
.f h.
Notes taken by inspectors during and after the AIT investigations at Salem; i.
Internal NRC discussions about interim drafts of the AIT reports ofinvestigations at Salem; j.
Internal NRC discussions about ';.! drafts of the AIT reports ofinvestigations at Salem; k.
Internal'NRC discussions concerning the findings and conclusioru expressed in the AIT reports ofinvestigations at Salem.
6.
All documents concerning the NRC Special Inspection Team (" SIT") review of Salem per-formance from March 26-May 12,1995, including but not limited to:
a.
Transcripts, meeting minutes, summaries, and handouts from all SIT meetings re-garding Salem; b.
Lists of attendees at all SIT neetings regarding Salem; w
c.
Communications with PSE&G concerning the SIT investigation at Salem and SIT meetings regarding Salem; d.
Communica* ions with others concerning the SIT investigation at Salem and SIT meetings rei,arding Salem, especially including but not limited to PECO Energy, Delmarva, aad Atlantic Electric; Internal NRC discussions concerning the SIT meetings regarding Salem;
- e.
FOIA Request, Aug. 30,1996 f.
The reasons why the NRC decided to perform the SIT investigation at Salem; g.
The basis for each of the findings in the SIT report regarding Salem; h.
Notes taken by inspectors during the SIT investigation at Salem; i.
Internal NRC discussions about interim draRs of the SIT report regarding Salem; j.
Internal NRC discussions about final drafts of the SIT report regarding Salem; k.
Internal NRC discussions concerning the findings and conclusions exjiiTs" sed in the SIT report regarding Salem.
7.
All documents concerning the NRC's Performance Assessment ("PA") review of Salem from July Il-August 25,1994, including but not limited to:
Transcripts, meeting minutes, summaries, and handouts from all meetings concern-a.
ing the PA review regarding Salem; b.
Lists of attendees at all meetings concerning the PA review regarding Salem; Communications with PSE&G concerning the PA review and PA review meetings c.
regarding Salem; d.
Communications with others concerning the PA review and PA review meetings regarding Salem, especially including but not limited to PECO Energy, Delmarva, and Atlap. tic Electric; Internal NRC discussions concerning the PA review meeting regarding Salem; e.
f.
The reasons why the NRC decided to do a PA review regarding Salem; g.
The basis for each of the findings in the report regarding the PA review regarding Salem; h.
Notes taken during the PA review regarding Salem; i.
Internal NRC discussions about interim drafts of the PA review report rYgarding Salem; j.
Internal NRC discussions about final drafts of the PA review report regarding Salem; k.
Internal NRC discussions concerning the findings and conclusions expressed in the PA review report regarding Salem.
FOIA Requ:st, Aug. 30,1996 8.
All documents concerning the Confirmatory Action Letter of June 9,1995 (CAL No.
1-95-009), including but not limited to:
a.
Communications with PSE&G concerning the Confirmatory Action Letter; b.
Communications with others concerning the Confirmatory Action Letter, espe-cially including but not limited to PECO Energy, Delmarva, and Atlantic Electric; i
c.
Intemal NRC discussions concerning the Confirmatory Action Letter;.
j i
d.
Discussions with Region I concerning non-final drafts of the Confirmatory Action
- Letter, e.
Discussions with Region I concerning final drafts of the Confirmatory Action Letter; f.
Region I's knowledge of the issues raised in the Confirmatory Action Letter; g.
Region I's knowledge of PSE&G's plans to address issues raised in the Confirma-tory Action Letter.
348174411 DOC 5DCl s.
Ime
. ~ _ -.....---.- -_-- -.-- -._-.
- a~
!,A S'
'/,, u,\\
umTEp STATES j
/
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N t
{
t wAamuvotow.e.e. sense k
...e e
l NOV 3 61986 l
l MEMORANDUM FOR: James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator l
Region !!!
TAOM:
($ M M E?SifyloR 0irector j
Office of Inspection and Enforcement l
SUBJECT:
TIMELINESS OF CLASSIFYING EMERGENCIES AT NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS This is in response to your memorandum of August 14,1986, in which you express a concern that the regulations fail to specify a time Ifmit regarding how much time may elapse between the occurrence of an event and the time the licensee makes a classification.
You recomend that action be taken to amend the regu.
1stions to require a licensee to declare an emergency class as soon as events j
have occurred that can be identified as being classified as an emergency condi-l tion as described in the Itcensee's emergency action levels (EALs).
l i
The purpose of the emerpency classification and action level scheme is to ensure that licensees accurate y and promptly assess, classify and notify authorities of an emergency.
In its rationale for the final emergancy planning regulations, the Comission stated "In order to discharge effectively its statutory respon-sibilities, the Comission finnly believes that it must be in a position to know j
that proper means and procedures will be in place to assess the course of an accident and its potential severity, that NRC and other appropriate authorities and the public will be notified promptly, and that appropriate protective actions in response to actual or anticipated conditions can and will"be taken." The intent of the regutations is clear.-to provide for prompt assessment and noti-i fication. The wording in Appendix 1 to NUREG.0654 provides further emphasis on the aspect of. promptnets in notification of offsite authorities.
A plant specific EAL scheme is the mechanism that results in declaration of an f1i emergency class. 5 If, plent parameters indi $e,that. conditions
, reached an emergency threshold according to the;EALl vaidiclarati,og x
~ alled*fori" J]g
'!f ^a declaration is'notMade it (his't1 icensW'has' no plemestid or',
j followed its' emergency 11anP~!n your memorandum you cite three cases in which i
Fs timely classifications and notifications were not made. A review of enforcement
' history over the past three years shows that Region !!! has issued violations in i
the majority of the cases (7 of 11 reported cases) related directly or indirectly l
to timeliness in classification and notification.
In addition, based on discus-sions with each region, we find that licensees are gener 11y making timely notifications to offsite authorities and the NRC.
[
]
CONTACT:
Donald J. Perrotti, IE i
492-4865 1
- l 3
i L.
- $1 l
l l
l James G. Keppler ;
i 1
\\
1 I want to assure you that IE appreciates your concern and that we will continue to monitor the timeliness of licensees' responses to emergency events. While the regulations do not cite a specific allowa 1e. time, limit between_ event oc, cur-i rence and when an emer y must,be declared
~
tions, 2 " :
eg pM
~
f6Phoent%
f M**= $*o d a cumrying.>.eeci
'il ify16g7dp61'"EtthoritiesM i
a ast m n emergency,cond tion.' I i
e James M. Taylor. Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement O!STRIBUTION:
JMTaylor. IE CRVan Niel, IE RWStarostecki, IE
- FKantor. IE JGPartlow. IE DJPerrotti. IE BKGrimes. IE CDeliso. IE 86-481 q'
ELJordan, IE TEMurley. RI u
SA$chwartz, IE JNGrace. All P-DBMatthews, IE ROMartin, RIV KEPerkins. IE JBMartin, RV JAAxelrad, IE DC5.
O CENorelius, Rf!!
DEPER N'/F 0\\
EPB R/F EW8rach. ED0 SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE 5 M
1er e
1 W86
/
0 4
- EPB/IE
- EPB/IE
- EPB/IE DD/
ER/IE D PER/IE DD/IE ostecki RWStay/86 i
DJPerrotti:sc FKantor DBMatthews SAS Qwartz ELJerden 11/b i
11/20/86 11/20/86 11/20/86 11/M/8 11/;{ /86 i
m#
>:1 ^
FK.s, SSINS No.:
6835 IN 85-80 r
i UNITED STATES i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMNISSION l
0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT i
WASHINGTON, D.C.
20$55 October 15, 1985 i
IE INFORMATION OTICE N0. 85-80:. TIMELY DECLARATION 0F AN EMERGENCf CLASS, IMPLEMENTATION OF AN EMERGENCY PLAN, AND f
EMERGENCY NOTIFICATIONS f' Addressees:
l All nuclear power facilities holding an. operating license (0L) or a con.struction permit (CP).
i
Purpose:
This information notice is provided to describe an instance when an emergency.
I ctndition was not classified and declared in a timely manner and to clar'fy the requirement for licensees.to adequately notify the NRC Headquarters Operations.
i Officer.of emergencies The NRC expects that recipients niill review this
.otice for app 1'cability to their facilities.
Suggestions contained in this notice do not constitute NRC requirements; therefore, no specific action or written response is required.
s Description of Circumstances:
a Davis-Besse:
At.1:35 a.m. on June 9.1985, the Davis-Besse plant experienced a completa loss of cain 'and auxiliary feedwater for nearly 12 minutes.
This event is described in more detail in Information Notice.85-50, "Com lete Loss of Nain and Auxiliary Feedwater at a PWR Designed by Babcock & Wilcox,p' and NUREG-1154, " Loss of Nain i
and Auxiliary Feedwater Event at the Davis-Besse Plant on June 9,1985." The j
j emergency plan identified the loss of feedwater event as a Site Area Emergency.
However, it appears that all knowledgeable personnel in the control room were occupied with stabilizing the plant and, thus, were not able to classify the event as a site Area Emergency and activate the emergency plan.
It is possible i
that had the plant not been brought to a stable condition quickly and had plant safety further degraded, the efforts of all knowledgeable personnel in the control room would have been required for recovery efforts, further delaying i
initiation of appropriate onsite and offsite emergency response.
}
At 2:11 a.m., the shift technical ' advisor (STA) called the NRC Operations J
Center from the control room using the Emergency Notification System to report j
'the event pursuant to 10 CFR 50.72.
At the beginning of the event, the STA 5ad.been in his quarters in the administration building, which is outside the l
M " 6L
i IN 85-80 l
October 15, 1985 Page 2 of 3 protected area about a half ' mile frosi the plant.
Although the STA mentioned the trip of the main and auxiliary feedwater pumps, the STA did not describe the length of time that the plant was totally without feedwater or the difficulty the plant had in restoring auxiliary feedwater.
No Emergency Class was declared.
nor was the fact conveyed to the NRC that plant conditions which warranted the d:claration of a, Site Area Emergency had existed for nearly 12 minutes, j
i At 2:26,a.m., the $T informed the NRC that an unusual Event had been declared 5
at 2:25 a.m.
The STA als.o, informed the NRC that although the emergency plan j
identified the total. loss of feedwater' event as a Site Area Emergency, the plant was no longer in this emergency action level at this time.
At 2:29 a.m., t w licensee informed the county that an unusual Event had been declared. The licensee depended on a procedure that required the county to notify the State of Ohio.
However, because the county could not reach the local stat
..resentative, the St'te bf Ohio was not' notified of the Unusual Event declaration until after.the l
a event had been terminated, more than 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> after its declaration.
At Davis-Besse, the emergency plan is initially implemented by the shift supervisor, who also responsibility for ensuring that the plant is maintained'in a' safe, has primary'Because of the competing priorities of (1) condition.
)
diMeting attention to necessgry recovery actions to obtain a safe and stable 1
plant'and (2) review'ing the emergency plan and initiating its actions, there was a substantial delay in declaring an Emergency Class and implementing the I
If the June 9 event had progressed in severity, valuable time needed to initiate appropriate onsite and offsite response to the emergency would have been lost.
I Corrective actions being undertaken by the licensee as a result of thir event include a number of operational and procedural changes that include but are l
not limited to the following: The STA shift schedule will be changed from a l
i 24-hour duty day to rotating 12-hour shifts.
The STA will spend the entire and the STA office will be located within 1.to l
shift within the protected area,The STA will be trained as an Interim Emergency 2 minutes of the control room.
Duty' Officer to advise the shift supervisor in event classification and protective action.
The licensee will make emergency notifications directly to the State of Ohio.
Poinf Beach:
On' July 25, 1985, at 7:25 a.m. (eastern time), Point Beach Unit 1 experienced an e' vent' involving loss of offsite power.
Point Beach Unit 2 continued to operate normally during this event.
Because of the incomplete understanding of the event by those making the notification to the NRC Operations Center, the i
NRC Operations Center was not made aware of the details of the event.
At 7:37 a.m., a security guard called the NRC Operations Center to notify the NRC that Point Beach Unit I had declared an unusual Event.
The explan'ation for the Unusual Event was that the plant had a turbine runback.
When the NRC Headquarters Operations Officer asked questions, the security guard was unable to provide additional information because of his limited technical knowledge of the plant and because the call was made from a location outside the control room where the security guard could not obtain additional information from the operators
- involved,
= - -. _... - - _ _. _. - -.
I IN 85-80 October 15, 1985 Page 3 of 3 The NRC Headquarters Operations officer called the control room, and as a result of asking questions learned that a station transformer had been lost. However, 4
not until 2% hours later, when the plant notified the NRC Hea uarters Operations,
i Officer that the Unusual Event was terminated did the NRC Hea uarters Operations officer learn that there had actually been a loss of offsite power.
1 Discussion:
k Liseneeen should not delay the declaration of an Emergency Class when conditions j
warrant such a declaration.
Delaying the declaration can defeat the approsriate response to an emer It is the Itcensee's' responsibi-lity to ensure tMt adequate personnel,gency.
knowledgeable about plant conditions and energency plan implementing procedures are available on shift to assist the shift supervisor to classify an emergency, and activate the emergency plan, including making appropriate notifications, without interferina witi olant operation.
I When 10 CFR 50.72 was published in the Federal Reaister (48 ER 39039), the NRC made clear its intent that notifications on the Deergency NoUfication System to the NRC Operations Cariter should be made by those knowledgeable of the If the description of an emer event.
timely to meet the intent of the NRC'gency is to be sufficiently accurate and s regulations, the personnel responsible for notification must be properly trained and sufficiently knowledgeasle of the event to report it correctly.
The NRC'did not intend that notifications made pursuant tv10 CFR' 50.72 would'be made by those who"do not understand the event that they are reporting.
No written response to this information notice is required.
If you need additional information about this matter, please contact the Regional Admints-trator of the appropriate NRC regional office or the technical contact listed below.
t ard rda'n, 01 rector Divisio Emergency Preparedness and E neering Response Office o" Inspection and Enforcement Technical
Contact:
Eric W. Weiss, IE (301) 492-9005
Attachment:
List of Recently Issued IE Information Notices
.