ML20154G689

Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensee Announcements of Inspectors.Potential for Unintentional Violation,As Rule Is Written,Is Excessive & Unenforceable. Prohibition Against Employee Intercommunication Unrealistic

ML20154G689
Person / Time
Site:	Calvert Cliffs
Issue date:	04/18/1988
From:	Tiernan J BALTIMORE GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
References
FRN-53FR8924, RULE-PR-50 53FR8924-00017, 53FR8924-17, AC73-2-23, NUDOCS 8805250041
Download: ML20154G689 (2)

Text

__

+

QQh*M I "

m r1 A f*3%%vD B ALTIMORE c g, g ~.

GAS AND "t; :H; C ELECTRIC

'88 APR 22 A10:18 CHAPLES CENTER P. O.80X 1475 BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21203 0FF NE -

JOSEPH A.TIERN AN f Vect PatuotNY NwcLtan ENtmOY April 18, 1988 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 ATTENTION: Document Control Desk

SUBJECT:

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Unit Nos. 1 & 2; Docket Nos. 50-317 & 50-318 Comments on Proposed Rule, 10 CFR 50.70 Licensee Announcements of Inspectors Gentlemen:

The following comments concern the subject proposed rule which would grant NRC inspectors immediate and unannounced access to licensed facilities, thus avoiding advanced notification of the inspection to licensee personnel.

The intent of the rule is understandable, but the potential for unintentional violation, as the rule is written, is excessive and therefore probably unenforceable. Such a blanket prohibition against employee intercommunication is extremely unrealistic. It is impractical to "ensure" that such communications will not occur, thereby creating potential enforcement for circumstances completely outside a licensee's control. Security personnel are trained to take note of persons who enter the plant that are not employees or contractors, and to inform security supervision of each such occurrence. This rule will force them to act against an ingrained set of purposeful principles. Further, the burden of licensees having to maintain a code of silence for its employees does not lend itself easily to the safe and efficient operation of a nuclear power plant. It is easy to foresee instances where Control Room ef ficiency, for example, could be compromised by such a prohibition.

pgg5g 041 88041e 50 53pngq24 PDR VjMId

. Document Control Dask April 18, 1988 Page 2 We recommend against this type of regulatory initiative. If imposed, however, at least three changes are recommended:

1. The rule should only be in effect for a specified duration af ter arrival. This duration should be on the order of two hours.

2. If the inspector wants to conduct an inspection without people being aware of his presence, he should inform each licensee employee or contractor he contacts that the inspection is to be conducted confidentially in accordance with NRC regulations.

This way the normal inspection, which does not require any secrecy, can be done with normal processes, otherwise, efforts to accommodate and support inspectors will constantly be hindered by the confusion over whether or not the inspector has specifically requested to have his presence communicated.

3. The rule must clearly reflect that in no instance may the imposition of such a rule interfere with safe operations.

We appreciate the opportunity to comment. Should you have any questions regarding these comments, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.

Very truly yours, C

(124 M A -

JAT/DLS/dlm cc: D. A. Brune, Esquire J. E. Silberg, Esquire R. A. Capra, NRC S. A. McNeil, NRC W. T. Russell, NRC D. C. Trimble, NRC