ML20203G672
| ML20203G672 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear, Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 02/17/1999 |
| From: | Racquel Powell NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Gunter P NUCLEAR INFORMATION & RESOURCE SERVICE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20203G676 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-99-76 NUDOCS 9902220021 | |
| Download: ML20203G672 (5) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:53N,. Art i U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION RESPONSE NUMBER (6 1998) j>5 p0( 99-076 2 \\ RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF 3 INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) / PRIVACY k ACT (PA) REQUEST TYPE Q IAL RESPONSE --
- a.*
IREQuESTER DATE Mr. Paul Gunter III II I000 PART l. -INFORMATION RELEASED ] No additional agency records subject to the request have been located. ~ Requested records are available through another public distribution program. See Comments section. Z "APPE'NDicEs~ Agency records subject to the request that are identified in the listed appendices are already available for public inspection and copying at the NRC Public Document Room. Q [dPPENDICEsAgency records subject to the request that are identified in the listed appendices are being made available for 1 L D, E public inspection and copying at the NRC Public Document Room. ~ 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, NW, Washington, DC. ~ ~ APPENDIC $$ D, E Agency records subject to the request are enclosed. i - ~ Records subject to the request that contain information originated by or ofinterest to another Federal agency have been - ; eferred to that agency (see comments section) for a disclosure determination and direct response to you. I _.._ See Comments. We are continuing to process your request. PART l.A - FEES AMOUNT
- You wi!I be billed by NRC for the amount listed.
None. Minimum fee threshold not met. I ~ You will receive a refund for the amount listed. Fees waived. PART l.B -INFORMATION NOT LOCATED OR WITHHELD FROM DISCLOSURE ~ No agency records subject to the request have been located. g-~ - the reasons stated in Part 11.Certain information in the requested records is being withheld from disclosure pursuant to the g- - Washington, DC 20555-0001.This determination may be appealed within 30 days by writing to the FOIA/PA Officer Clearfy state on the envelope and in the letter that it is a "FOIA/PA Appeal." PART 4.C COMMENTS (Use attached Comments continuation page if required) \\f 7 9902220021 990217 PDR FOIA QUNTER99-76 PDR IRussell A. bONATURL-FHL Of IP VRMAll ACI ANCe P IVACY ALI UF FILE L / a well mA ( NRC FORM 464 Part 1 (61998) PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER This form was desgned usmg inf orms 990z22soz/
NRC FORM 464 Part 14 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION FOIA/PA DATE 7ESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF INFORMATION i I ACT (FOlA) / PRIVACY ACT (PA) REQUEST H II E PART ILA - APPLICABLE EXEMPTIONS _APPE tc $_ Records subject to the request that are desenbed in the enclosed Appendices are being withheld in their entirety or in part under _, the Exemption No.(s) of the PA and/or the FOIA as indicated below (5 U.S.C. 552a and/or 5 U.S.C. 552(b)). ~ Exemption 1: The withheld information is property classified pursuant to Executive Order 12958. 7 Exemption 2: The withheld information relates solely to the intemal personnel rules and procedures of NRC. Exemption 3: The withheld information is specifically exempted from public dtsclosure by statute indicated. Sections 141-145 of the Atomic Energy Act, which prohibits the disclosure of Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data (42 U S C. 2161-2165). ] Section 147 of the Atomic Energy Act, which prohibits the disclosure of Unclassified Safeguards information (42 U S.C. 2167). - 41 U.S C., Section 253(b), subsection (m)(1), prohibits the disclosure of contractor proposals in the possession and control of an - executive agency to any person under section 552 of Title 5, U.S C. (the FOIA), except when incorporated into the contract between the agency and the submitter of the proposal. R Exemption 4: The withheld information is a trade secret or commercial or financialinformation that is being withheld for the reason (s) indicated. ] The information is considered to be confidential business (proprietary) information.
- -] The information is considered to be proprietary because it concems a licensee's or apphcant's physical protection or material control and
- accounting program for special nuclear matenal pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)(1). ] The information was submitted by a foreign source and received in confidence pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)(2). y- ~ Exemption 5: The withheld information consists of interagency or intraagency records that are not available through discovery during litigation. Apphcable privileges: Deliberative process: Disclosure of predecisionalinformation would tend to inhibit the open and frank exchange of ideas essential to the dehberative process. Where records are withheld in their entirety, the facts are inextncably intertwined with the predecis,onal I information. There also are no reasonably se into the predecisional process of the agency. gregable factual portions because the release of the facts would permit an indirec ] Attomey work-product privilege. (Documents prepared by an attomey in contemplation of htigation) I Q Attomey-chent privilege. (Confidential communications between an attomey and his/her chent) J Exemption 6: The withheld information is exempted from pubhc disclosure because its disclosure would result in a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal povacy. v y Exemption 7: The withheld information consists of records compiled for law enforcement purposes and is being withheld for the reason (s) indicated. i ~ (A) Disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with an enforcement proceeding (e g, it would reveal the scope, direction, and j focus of enforcement efforts, and thus could possibly allow recipients to take action to shield potenttal wrongdoing or a violation of NRC requirements from investigstors). Q (C) Disclosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. ~ - (D) The information consists of names of individuals and other information the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to reveal identities of confidential sources. ~ ~ (E) Disclosure would reveal techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or guidehnes that could reasonsbly be expected to nsk circumvention of the law. ~ F) Disclosure could reasonably be expected to endanger the hfe or physical safety of an individual. ( 3THER (Specify) ~ PART ll.B - DENYING OFFICIALS Pursuant to 10 CFR 9.25(g),9.25(h), and/or 9.65(b) of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations, it has been determined thit the information withheld is exempt from production or disclosure, and that its production or disclosure is contrary to the public int: rest. The person responsible for the denial are those officials identified below as denying officials and the FOIA/PA Officer for any dinials that may be appealed to the Executive Director for Operations (EDO). DENYING OFICIAL ~ TITAE/ OFFICE ~RE' CORDS DENIED fscY ~ Eilis31erschoff Regional AdministratoriRegion IV ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E/1, T12, E/3 - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ Em~eHieberman ~ Director ~iOffice of Enforcement ~~~ -~- ~F/1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~- ~ Appeal must be made in writing within 30 days of receipt of this response. Appeals should be mailed to the FOIA/ Privacy Act Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, for action by the appropriate appellate official (s). You should ct:arly state on the envelope and letter that it is a "FOIA/PA Appeal." NRC FORM 464 Part 11 (6-1998) PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER This form was designed using informs
~ *' W LBSELM U3 Trig Q 4f! /$[.7[ { jJj[j i'-{ ['. 'Q
- ff
%1 } l l 1 Re: FOIA/PA-99-076 APPENDIX D RECORDS BEING RELEASED IN THEIR ENTIRETY NO. DATE DESCRIPTION /(PAGE COUNT) 1, 03/14/95 EA number request from for EA 95-043 (1) with proposed inspection report input (2 pages) 2. 03/15/95 Letter to J. W. Yelverton from A. Bill Beach,
Subject:
NRC inspection Report 50-313/95-02; 50-368/95-02 and Notice of Violation, EA 95-043 (6 pages) 3. 02/16/96 E-mail to TPG from G. M. Vasquez,
Subject:
W3 O1 Reports (1 page) 4. 06/02/97 Transcript of Predecisional Enforcement Conference with Limerick i g Generating Station (77 pages-portions of page 5 and pages 6 through 47 are outside of the scope of this request)
i p i Re: FOlA/PA-99-076 APPENDIX E RECORDS BEING WITHHELD IN PART NO. DATE DESCRIPTION!(PAGE COUNT)lEXEMPTIONS 1. 06/03/96 E-mail to A. Howell, et al., from G. Sanborn Re: ANO followup involving EA 96-178 (2 pages) EX. 6 & 7C 2. 08/28/96 E-mail to E. Collins, et al., from G. Sanbom,
Subject:
Draft letter to Entergy closing 014-95-004 - ANO (1 page) EX. 6 & 7C 3. Undated Office of Enforcement Task Information Sheet, Task Number 96094 (1 page) EX. 6 & 7C
tTLM 49 f Re: FOIA/PA-99-076 APPENDIX F RECORDS BEING WITHHELD IN THEIR ENTIRETY NO. DATE DESCRIPTION /(PAGE COUNT)/ EXEMPTIONS 1. 07/07/97 Note from Lisa Clark to Renee Pedersen providing comments on PECO Enforcement Package (36 pages-pages 10 through 33 are outside the scope of this request ) EX. 5 - Attorney-Client Privilege l
_______ ___,_ _ b___ CaeNo: ff-o t OdeRedd: /J - A AT y Acknot 6 d/ RehdedCase: -& d at-ws Nuclear Information and Resource Service ,,,. _. _ s _ oc _ December 21,1998 RusselPowell, Chief m ofInformation andPublication MN R F gF Office of Au:.:setion U.S. Nuclear Regulatory CoM, Washington,DC 20555
Dear Mr.Powell:
h ~ On behalf ofNuclearInformation and Re k Ji Office available copies of a!I documents in the U.S. Nuclear Regula of Investigation's (OI) possession, which desen~be or discuss:
- 1) [ Case Number 1-96-033] hid8%n I
- 2) [ Case Number 2-96-008] alleged continuing dis 2/19/97.
Stone & Webster ironworker for raising past concerns 11/20S6. watches at Browns Ferry Unit I and " unsubstantiated" by 0
- 3) [ Case Ntanber 2-96409] alleged 91489 tion of fir Sequoyah 2 and "uedead=*~I" by OI on 01/24/97.
- 4) [CaseNumber 4-97 003] failure to c
- 5) [CaseNumber4-97427]SM6cationof1benno-04/11/97.
records atComanche PeakUnitI and~e dt
- 6) [ Case Number I-95412] potential falsification Fitzpatrick and deemed " Higher Priority" by O
- 7) [CaseNumber 2-93-030]ic protection concerns at Brown foremanfor expressingfl
" unsubstantiated' by OI on 12/15/94. i t an
- 8) [ Case Number 3-93-001] alleged employment l Science,Inc..
employee for his refbsal to falsify records a f he 01 1
Eww wmmyr investigation is identified as "Other" and no referral was made to the Department of Justice by the 01 as dated 03/30/95.
- 9) (Case Number 3-94-059] a!!eged deliberate falsification of fire watch records at Cook Unit I and deemed " Higher Priority" by OI on 01/18/95.
10)[ Case Number 3-94460] alleged deliberate falsification offire watch round records at Quad Cities Unit i ard deemed " Higher Priority" by OI on 10/25/95. I1) [ Case Number 4-95-013] alleged deliberate falsification of fire watch records at A*an=== Nuclear One Unit I and "subsmnth'~I" by 01 on 05/25/95. 12)[ Case Number 3-96-032] falsification of fire watch logs at Cook Unit I and determined by a " lack ofregulatory requirement" by OI on 09/30/96.
- 13) [ Case Num'xr 4-95-004] alleged discrimination and termination for refusal to falsify work steps (fire protection seals) at Arkanm Nuclear One Unit I and determined as a " lack of regulatory requirement" by OI on 02/26/96.
14)(Case Number 4-95-032] alleged false statements by fire watches to NRC inspectors at Washington Nuclear Unit 2 and deemed " Higher Priority" by OIon 10/05/95. 15)[ Case Number 4-95-035] alleged deliberate falsification of fire watch records at Waterford Unit 3 and deemed " Higher Priority" by OI on 01/17/96. 16)[ Case Number 4-95-044] alleged dehkrate falsification of fire watch records at Waterford Unit 3 and " substantiated" by OI on 02/08/96.
- 17) [ Case Number 4-95-047] alleged discrimination for reporting fire watch concems to site management at Waterford 3 and " unsubstantiated" by OI on 01/31/96.
I 8)[ Case Number 4-95-070] alleged discrimination against fire watch for refusing to violate site security procedures at Waterford Unit 3 and " unsubstantiated" by OI on 04/03/96. 'Ihis request covers but is not limited to all draft and final reports, conspondence, memoranda, notes, records of telephone contacts, electronic communications including fax transmissions and Email, or other written records. whether in paper or computer . files. Pursuant to this request, please provide all documents and communications prepared or utilized by, in the possession of, or routed through the NRC related to items 1-18. For any portion of the request that you deem appropriate to deny, NIRS requests that you describe the information that is denied, identify the exception to the FOIA on which you rely, and explain how that exception applies to the withheld information. Pursuant to NRC regulations at 10 CFR 9.41, NIRS requests that any searching and copying fees incurred as a result of this search be waived, und p4ovides the following infomution in response to the eight criteria listed in Section 9.41(b): 2
1) Purpose of reques-The purpose of the request is > gather information on the long-term reliance of compensatory measures, spe 'Scally hourly roving fire watch personnel, for inoperable fire barriers currently deployed throughout the nuclear power indusuy. This information is currently not available in the N{tCs Public Document Room. 2) Extent to which NIRS will extract and analyze the substantive content of the records: NIRS is qualified to make use of the requested information. The staff has demonstrated the ability to accurately interpret information and communicate that information in a form comprehensible to the general public. Members of the NIRS staff have published articles in such nationaljournals as The Pse-ive. Nuclear Times. Newsday and Bulletin of Atomic SAantiate NIRS is quoted as a reliable source ofinformation on nuclear safety issues in newspapers across the countrf, including the New York Times, & W*eMnaton Post. and 'Ihe San Francisco Chmnicle. NIRS has a working relationship with attomeys, physicists, nuclear engineers, industry fire protection consultants, Congress and other respected pmfessionals who contribute to the full understanding of technical records, investigadons and the public health and safety impact. 3) Nature of the speci6c activity or research in which the records will be used and NIRS's quali5 cations to utilize the information for the intended use in such a way that it will contribute to public understanding: NIRS seeks the requested information solely to contribute to and help shape the public debate on adequate fire protection at nuclear power stations sud the public health and safety. NIRS intends to use the information in order to advance these concems for the public's understanding, health and safety. 4) Likely impact on the public's understanding of the snbject as compared to ' the level of un' erstanding of the subject prior to disclosure: d NIRS seeks to translate the requested information into the layperson's understanding of fire protection issues at nuclear power stations. The added attention will increase the public understandina and further a national debate on fire protection standards. 5) Size and nature of the public to whose understanding a contribution will be made: NIRS has an active suberibing membership ofover 1500 throughout the United States. Seveml thousand additional members periodically receive mailings from NIRS. 3
prvvg vwe r n. sm www wwm,\\ywnsmw awwuunew.vmn p\\pww m wour l' t l NIRS provides resource material to electronic and print media outlets with very broad outreach to a safety conscious audience. Additionally, NIRS has a web site (www.nirsnet.org) which receives on average of 250 300 visitors per day where postings on this issue will be made available. 6) Means of distribution of the requested information: NIRS will use its own newsletter publication The Nuclear Monitor and our media contacts in both the electronic and print media outlets to provide very broad outreach to the safety conscious public. Additionally, NIRS will post infbrmation on its web site (www.nirsnet.orv) which receives on average of 250-300 visitors per day. 7) Whether free access to information will be provided: NIRS will provide the information without charge to all members of the public. C Information prepared from the FOIA requested will be posted on the web site for downloading free of charge. NIRS will also provide information to traditional media outlets without charge. 8) No commercial interest by NIRS or any other party: NIRS has no commercial interest in obtaining the mquested information. This information is provided to all public requests without charge. The so!e interest of NIRS is to promote a poIIcy debate on appropriate and adequate fire protection at nuclear power stations for the sake of public health and safety. T v, J Paul Gunter, Director Reactor Watchdog Project Nuclear Information and Resource Senice Cc: Congressman Edward Markey Mr. David Walker, OAO 4
- USZEDIMATMTB i
3 March 15, 1995 EA No. 95-043 Entergy Operations, Inc. ATTN: J. W. Yelverton, Vice President Operations, Arkansas Nuclear One 1448 S.R. 333 Russellville, Arkansas 72801-0967
SUBJECT:
NRC INSPECTION REPORT 50-313/95-02; 50-368/95-02 AND NOTICE OF VIOLATION This refers to the inspection conducted by K. Kennedy and other inspectors of this office on January 8 through February 18, 1995. The inspection included a review of activities authorized for ve r Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 and 2, facility. At the conclusion of tN inspection, the findings were discussed with you and those members of vsor staff identified in the : enclosed report. Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observation of activities in progress. The purpose of the inspction was to determine whether activities authorized by the license were tenducted safely and in accordance with NRC requirements, fwad c.' tb< results of this inspection, certain licensed activities appeared to be in v% tion of NRC requirements, as specified in the enclosea Notice of Violation (Notice). The first violation is of concern because the licensed operators failed to properly control the draining of the reactor coolant system. This concern is heightened due to the increased risk associated with reduced inventory conditions. The second violation involved the failure of both test engineers and supervisors to follow a surveillance procedure for testing and adjusting main steam safety valves. This violation is of concern because four quality control inspectors failed to identify or document these deviations fr)m the test procedure. The inspection also identified one violation that is not being cited because it met the criteria in paragraph VII.B.2 of Appendix C to 10 CFR Part 2 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice." This violation involved your staff's identification that a roving fire watch had falsified fire barrier watch logs. You are commended for identifying the violation and implementing corrective actions to resolve this concern. You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your re:ponse. In your response, you should document the specific actions taken :.nd any additional actions you plan to prevent recurrence. Your response my reference or include previous docketed correspondence, if the corre<,pendence adequately addresses the required response. After reviewing your response to this Notice, including your proposed corrective actions and the results of future y MSDj5hhfz7y
1 Entergy' Operations, Inc. inspections,'the NRC will determine whether further NRC enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter,'its enclosure (s), and your response will be placed in.the NRC Public Document Room (PDR). To the extent possible, your response should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the PDR without reaction. However, if you find it necessary to include such information, you 'should clearly indicate the specific information that you desire not to be placed in the PDR, and provide the legal basis to support your request for withholding the information from the public. The responses directed by this letter and the enclosed Notice are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,.PL 96-511. Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you. Sincerely, J. E. Dyer, for A. Bill Beach,. Director Division.of Reactor Projects Dockets: 50-313 50-368 Licenses: DPR-51 NPF-6
Enclosures:
1. Notice of Violation. 2. NRC Inspection Report 50-313/95-02; 50-368/95-02 -cc w/ enclosures: Entergy Operations, Inc. ATTN: Harry.W. Keiser, Executive Vice President & Chief Operating Officer P.O. Box 31995 Jackson, Mississippi 39286-1995
Entergy Operations, Inc... Entergy. Operations, Inc. ATTN: Jerrold G. Dewease, Vice President Operations Support P.O. Box 31995 Jackson, Mississippi 39286 Wise,. Carter, Child & Caraway ATTN: Robert B. McGehee, Esq. P.O. Box 651 Jackson, Mississippi 39205 Honorable C. Doug'Luningham County Judge'of Pope County Pope County Courthouse Russellville, Arkansas.72801 Winston & Strawn' ' ATTN: Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq. 1400 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005-3502 Arkansas Department of Health ATTN: Ms. Greta Dieus, Director Division of Radiation Control ard Emergency Management 4815 West'Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas' 72201-3867 B&W Nuclear Technologies. ATTN: ' Robert 8. Borsum Licensing Representative 1700 Rockville Pike, Suite 525 Rockville, Maryland 20852 Admiral Kinnaird R. McKee, USN (Ret) 214 South Morris Street Oxford, Maryland 21654 i
T3 b[Nb Entergy Operations, Inc. E-Mail report to D. Sullivan (DJS) bec to DMB (IE01) bec distrib. by RIV: L. J. Callan Resident Inspector Branch Chief (DRP/D) Leah Tremper (OC/LFDCB, MS: TWFN 9E10) MIS System DRSS-FIPB RIV File Branch Chief (DRP\\TSS) Project Engineer (DRP/D) G. Sanborn (EO) Office of Enforcement DOCUMENT NAME: To receive copy of document, indicate in box: 'C" = Copy w thout enclosures *E" = Copy with enclosures *N" = No 5 copy RIV: SRI:DRP/Dl C C:DRP/D lC D:DRP l E RIV/E0 l l KMKennedy CAVanDenburgh ABBeach GFSanborn 03/13/95 03/13/95 03/15/95 03/15/95 0FFTCIAL RECORD COPY
l n. ENCLOSURE I NOTICE OF VIOLATION Entergy Operations, Inc. Dockets: 50-313 Arkansas Nuclear One 50-368 Licenses: DPR-51 NPF-6 During an NRC inspection conducted on January 8 through February 18, 1995, two violn; ens of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcer.at Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, the violations are listed below: A. Unit 2 Technical Specification 6.8.1 requires, in part, that written procedures shall be established, implemented, and maintained covering C the activities referenced in Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, Appendix A, February 1978. Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, Appendix A, February 1978, Section 3.a., states, in part, instructions should be prepared for g draining the reactor cooling system. Procedure 2103.011, Revision 19, " Draining the Reactor Coolant System," provides instructions for draining the reactor coolant system to various levels for component maintenance. Step 8.9 requires opening Reactor Vessel Head Vent Valves 2SV-4668-1 or 2SV-4668-2 when reactor coolant system level indication falls below 180 inches. Contrary to the above, on January 10, 1995, while draining the reactor coolant system to reduced inventory, the operators failed to open either Reactor Vessel Head Vent Valve 2SV-4668-1 or 2SV-4668-2 when reactor coolant system level fell below 180 inches. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I) (368/9502-01). B. Unit 1 Technical Specificati.m 6.8.1.c requires, in part, that written procedures shall be established, implemented, and maintained covering surveillance and test activities of safety-related equipment. Procedure 1306.017, Revision 11, " Unit 1 Main Steam Safety Valve Test," Step 8.2.16.B. states, in part, that if the setpoint of a main steam safety valve is not within the desired "as-found" range, wait a minimum of 10 minutes to alle the valve temperature to stabilize and then repeat Steps 8.2.9 through 8.2.17 (the testing sequence). Attachment 2, " Main Steam Safety Valve Testing Sequence," provides direction to wait 10 minutes between main steam safety valve lifts when adjustments are performed. A note prior to Step 8.2.10 states that if the test is a retest, ensure a min? mum of 10 minutes has elapsed between successive lifts to ensure that tr.e valve has stabilized in temperature. 9sO32005R
m vps mo ve xm ungww tgguump tua m wxt (*wPmW w Contrary to the above, on February 12, 1995, while performing tests of Main Steam Safety Valves PSV-2684 and -2698, the licensee performed successive lifts of each of these valves without waiting a minimum of 10 minutes between lifts. Procedure 1306.017, Revision 11, " Unit 1 Main Steam Safety Valve Test," Step 8.2.17.B, states, in part, that if the main steam safety valve "as-left" setpoint is not within the desired range for two consecutive lifts, then proceed to Attachment 6 to adjust the valve. Contrary to the above, on February 12 through 13, 1995, the licensee performed only one lift of Main Steam Safety Valves PSV-2685, -2688, and -2699 prior to making adjustments to the lift setpoints. These violations represent a Severity Level IV problem (Supplement I) (313/9502-02). Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Entergy Operations, Inc., is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region IV, 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas 76011, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the facility that is the subject of this Notice, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation (Notice). This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include fo each violation: (1) the reason for the violation, or, if contested, the basis for disputing the violation, (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, (3) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Your response may reference or include previous docketed correspondence, if the correspondence adequately addresses the required response. If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order or a Demand for Information may be issued as to why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked, or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time. Dated at Arlington, Texas this 15th day of March 1995 .}}