ML20199E067

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests Enforcement Conference for Wk of 980123.Util Intends to Docket Written Response to Apparent Violations Prior to Conference,Reserving Bulk of Conference to Focus on Cover Ltr Characterizations
ML20199E067
Person / Time
Site: Maine Yankee
Issue date: 01/23/1998
From: Meisner M
Maine Yankee
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
MJM-98-03, MJM-98-3, MN-98-06, MN-98-6, NUDOCS 9802020085
Download: ML20199E067 (2)


Text

'

e MaineYankee P.0, BOX 408 + WISCASSET, MAINE 04578 + (207) 882-6321 January 23,1998 hiN-98-06 hiJhi-98-03 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COhihilSSION Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555

Reference:

(a) License No. DPR-36 (Docket No. 50-309)

Subject:

Request for Enforcement Conference Gentlemen:

We appreciate your consideration of our December 31,1997 request for copies of three Office of Investigation (01) reports relevant to your December 19,1997 notice of apparent violations. While

.)

we continue to believe that the OI reports would lead to a more fruitful pre-decisional enforcement conference, we respectfully request that the conference proceed for several important reasons.

Chief among them is our concern ebout the language in the cover letter to Maine Yankee outlining the apparent violations. While the actual statements of apparent violation are a sober review of technical matters and interpretations of regulatory requirements, the cover letter contains language for which we find no documentation. hiore specifically, v..e letter asserts that Maine Yankee exercised willfulness and careless disregard with respect to the apparent violations but provides no facts to support that conclusion.'

Maine Yankee has conducted extensive investigations into the details and proprieties associated with the events described as apparent violations. These investigations, which spanned several years and represent thousands of hours of review and interviews, were very useful in understanding what led up to and actually occurred in each instance. The investigations were also notable in confirming the absence of willfulness and careless disregard in any of the events discussed in your December 19 letter.

Althoagh it is tempting to waive an enforcement conference and begin to put these events behind us, it would be irresponsible on our part given the cover letter characterizations with which we disagree. We also believe it important that the regulatory record, and therefore the public record, reflect our objection. Consequently, we wish to renew our December 31 request for an enforcement conference. To facilitate the conference, we intend to docket a written response to the apparent violations prior to the conference, resersing the bulk of the enforcement conference to focus on the cover letter characterizations.

t

' {ul, mt V{D}1{*[-

. f ',,f

' ' R 9802020085 980123 O

PDR ADOCK 05000309 1

G PDR 8

lt was this lack of supporting information which prompted our request for the 01 reports on the essurnption that the reports provided the NRC's basis fe: "ie cover letter conclusions.

-U

MaineYankee

, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION MN-98-06

  • Attention: Document Control Desk Page Two In order to provide sufficient time to both develop the written response and prepare for the enforcement conference on fairly extensive subject matter, we propose a conference sometime during the week of March 23. Please feel free to give me a call should another schedule be more convenient.

Ve truly u

~-

Mich 1J. Meisner, Vice President Nuc at'ety & Regulatory Affairs c: Mr. Hubert J. Miller Mr. Ron Bellamy Mr. Richard J. Rasmussen Mr. Michael K. Webb Mr. P. J. Dostie Mr. Michael T. Masnik Mr. Uldis Vanags