05000266/FIN-2005017-01: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| identified by = NRC | | identified by = NRC | ||
| Inspection procedure = IP 71114.06 | | Inspection procedure = IP 71114.06 | ||
| Inspector = A Boland, B Jones, C Evans, C Pederson, D Holody, D Merzke, F Bonnett, G Grant, K Fuller, K O | | Inspector = R Zimmerman, S West, A Boland, B Jones, C Evans, C Pederson, D Holody, D Merzke, F Bonnett, G Grant, K Fuller, K O'Brien, K Riemer, L Reyes, M Satorius, P Loudena, Bolandb Jones, C Evans, C Pederson, D Holody, D Merzke, F Bonnett, G Grant, K Fuller, K O'Brien, K Riemer, L Reyes, M Satorius, P Louden, R Zimmerman, S West | ||
| CCA = N/A for ROP | | CCA = N/A for ROP | ||
| INPO aspect = | | INPO aspect = | ||
| description = The NRC also identified an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.9, Completeness and Accuracy of Information, associated with incomplete and inaccurate information the licensee provided to the NRC in a falsified critique record associated with the August 2002 EP drill. The licensee provided the falsified critique record to NRC inspectors on November 20, 2002. Specifically, the falsified critique record for the August 2002 EP drill indicated that the licensee had self-identified the untimely declaration of an Alert emergency classification. However, the OI investigation determined that the EP Manager and the EP Coordinator deliberately altered the critique record to indicate that the untimely Alert classification declaration was self-identified by the licensee as a part of its formal critique process. The information is material to the NRC because, the NRC relies, in part, on the licensees conduct and self-critiquing of EP drills and exercises to ensure the licensee maintains an effective emergency preparedness and response capability. In a letter to the NRC, dated May 16, 2003, the licensee documented the corrective actions it had taken based upon its own internal investigation of the EP Manager and the EP Coordinators November 2002 deliberate falsification of the August 2002 EP drill and providing of the falsified record to the NRC. Based upon information developed during the NRC inspections and investigation and provided in your letter dated May 16, 2003, we believe that we have sufficient information to make a final significance determination for the preliminary White Finding and to determine the appropriate significance and enforcement actions for the apparent violations. However, before we make a final decision on these matters, we are providing you an opportunity to present to the NRC your perspectives on the facts used by the NRC to arrive at the finding and its significance, and the apparent violations and their significance at a combined regulatory and predecisional enforcement conference (conference) or through the submittal to the NRC of your position on the finding and the apparent violations in writing. If you choose to request a conference, it should be held within 30 days of the receipt of this letter and we encourage you to submit supporting documentation at least one week prior to the conference in an effort to make the conference more efficient and effective. If a conference is held, that portion of the conference associated with the White Finding and the associated apparent violation will be open for public observation. The portion of the conference associated with the 10 CFR 50.9 apparent violation will be closed for public observation because it involves an OI investigation. If you decide to submit only a written response, such submittal should be sent to the NRC within 30 days of the receipt of this letter. | | description = The NRC also identified an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.9, Completeness and Accuracy of Information, associated with incomplete and inaccurate information the licensee provided to the NRC in a falsified critique record associated with the August 2002 EP drill. The licensee provided the falsified critique record to NRC inspectors on November 20, 2002. Specifically, the falsified critique record for the August 2002 EP drill indicated that the licensee had self-identified the untimely declaration of an Alert emergency classification. However, the OI investigation determined that the EP Manager and the EP Coordinator deliberately altered the critique record to indicate that the untimely Alert classification declaration was self-identified by the licensee as a part of its formal critique process. The information is material to the NRC because, the NRC relies, in part, on the licensees conduct and self-critiquing of EP drills and exercises to ensure the licensee maintains an effective emergency preparedness and response capability. In a letter to the NRC, dated May 16, 2003, the licensee documented the corrective actions it had taken based upon its own internal investigation of the EP Manager and the EP Coordinators November 2002 deliberate falsification of the August 2002 EP drill and providing of the falsified record to the NRC. Based upon information developed during the NRC inspections and investigation and provided in your letter dated May 16, 2003, we believe that we have sufficient information to make a final significance determination for the preliminary White Finding and to determine the appropriate significance and enforcement actions for the apparent violations. However, before we make a final decision on these matters, we are providing you an opportunity to present to the NRC your perspectives on the facts used by the NRC to arrive at the finding and its significance, and the apparent violations and their significance at a combined regulatory and predecisional enforcement conference (conference) or through the submittal to the NRC of your position on the finding and the apparent violations in writing. If you choose to request a conference, it should be held within 30 days of the receipt of this letter and we encourage you to submit supporting documentation at least one week prior to the conference in an effort to make the conference more efficient and effective. If a conference is held, that portion of the conference associated with the White Finding and the associated apparent violation will be open for public observation. The portion of the conference associated with the 10 CFR 50.9 apparent violation will be closed for public observation because it involves an OI investigation. If you decide to submit only a written response, such submittal should be sent to the NRC within 30 days of the receipt of this letter. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 23:13, 21 February 2018
| Site: | Point Beach  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000266/2005017 Section 1EP6 |
| Date counted | Sep 30, 2005 (2005Q3) |
| Type: | TEV: Severity level III |
| cornerstone | Emergency Prep |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71114.06 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | R Zimmerman S West A Boland B Jones C Evans C Pederson D Holody D Merzke F Bonnett G Grant K Fuller K O'Brien K Riemer L Reyes M Satorius P Loudena Bolandb Jones C Evans C Pederson D Holody D Merzke F Bonnett G Grant K Fuller K O'Brien K Riemer L Reyes M Satorius P Louden R Zimmerman S West |
| INPO aspect | |
| ' | |