IR 05000315/2007502: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
Line 18: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:September 20, 2007Mr. Mano K. NazarSenior Vice President andChief Nuclear OfficerIndiana Michigan Power CompanyNuclear Generation GroupOne Cook PlaceBridgman, MI 49106SUBJECT:D. C. COOK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2BIENNIAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS EXERCISE BASELINEINSPECTION REPORT 05000315/2007502(DRS);05000316/2007502(DRS)
{{#Wiki_filter:ber 20, 2007
 
==SUBJECT:==
D. C. COOK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 BIENNIAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS EXERCISE BASELINE INSPECTION REPORT 05000315/2007502(DRS);
05000316/2007502(DRS)


==Dear Mr. Nazar:==
==Dear Mr. Nazar:==
On August 17, 2007, the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspectionat your D. C. Cook Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2. The enclosed report documents theinspection findings, which were discussed on August 17, 2007, with Mr. M. Peifer and othermembers of your staff.The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety andcompliance with the Commission's rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license. The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewedpersonnel. Specifically, this inspection focused on emergency preparedness, including yourstaff's determinations of performance indicators for the Emergency Preparedness Cornerstone.On the basis of the results of this inspection, no findings of significance were identified.
On August 17, 2007, the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your D. C. Cook Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2. The enclosed report documents the inspection findings, which were discussed on August 17, 2007, with Mr. M. Peifer and other members of your staff.
 
The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commissions rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license.
 
The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel. Specifically, this inspection focused on emergency preparedness, including your staffs determinations of performance indicators for the Emergency Preparedness Cornerstone.
 
On the basis of the results of this inspection, no findings of significance were identified.


In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter andits enclosure will be available electronically for pub lic inspection in t he NRC Public DocumentRoom or from the Publicly Available Records System (PARS) component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC Web site athttp://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records System (PARS) component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).


Sincerely,
Sincerely,
/RA/Eric Duncan, ChiefPlant Support BranchDivision of Reactor SafetyDocket Nos. 50-315; 50-316License Nos. DPR-58; DPR-74Enclosure:Biennial Emergency Preparedness Exercise Baseline Inspection Report 05000315/2007502(DRS); 05000316/2007502(DRS); w/Attachment: Supplemental Informationcc w/encl:J. Jensen, Site Vice PresidentL. Weber, Plant ManagerG. White, Michigan Public Service CommissionL. Brandon, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality - Waste and Hazardous Materials DivisionEmergency Management Division MI Department of State PoliceState Liaison Officer, State of MichiganW. King, FEMA, Region V
/RA/
Eric Duncan, Chief Plant Support Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket Nos. 50-315; 50-316 License Nos. DPR-58; DPR-74 Enclosure: Biennial Emergency Preparedness Exercise Baseline Inspection Report 05000315/2007502(DRS); 05000316/2007502(DRS);
w/Attachment: Supplemental Information cc w/encl: J. Jensen, Site Vice President L. Weber, Plant Manager G. White, Michigan Public Service Commission L. Brandon, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality -
Waste and Hazardous Materials Division Emergency Management Division MI Department of State Police State Liaison Officer, State of Michigan W. King, FEMA, Region V


=SUMMARY OF FINDINGS=
=SUMMARY OF FINDINGS=
IR 05000315/2007502; 05000316/2007502; on 08/13/2007-08/17/2007; D. C. Cook NuclearPower Plant, Units 1 and 2, Biennial Emergency Preparedness Exercise Baseline Inspection.The report covers a 1 week baseline inspection by one regional emergency preparednessinspector, a resident inspector, and a reactor engineer. The inspection focused on theEmergency Preparedness Cornerstone in the Reactor Safety strategic performance area duringthe biennial emergency preparedness exercise. This inspection also included a review ofrecords related to the three emergency preparedness performance indicators for the periodApril 1, 2006 through June 30, 2007.The NRC's program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors isdescribed in NUREG-1649, "Reactor Oversight Process," Revision 4, dated December 2006.A.Inspector-Identified and Self-Revealed Findings
IR 05000315/2007502; 05000316/2007502; on 08/13/2007-08/17/2007; D. C. Cook Nuclear
 
Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, Biennial Emergency Preparedness Exercise Baseline Inspection.
 
The report covers a 1 week baseline inspection by one regional emergency preparedness inspector, a resident inspector, and a reactor engineer. The inspection focused on the Emergency Preparedness Cornerstone in the Reactor Safety strategic performance area during the biennial emergency preparedness exercise. This inspection also included a review of records related to the three emergency preparedness performance indicators for the period April 1, 2006 through June 30, 2007.
 
The NRCs program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 4, dated December 2006.


None.
A.      Inspector-Identified and Self-Revealed Findings None.


===B.Licensee-Identified Violations===
===Licensee-Identified Violations===


None.
None.
2


=REPORT DETAILS=
=REPORT DETAILS=
Line 43: Line 60:
==REACTOR SAFETY==
==REACTOR SAFETY==


===Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness1EP1Exercise Evaluation (71114.01)
===Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness===
{{a|1EP1}}
==1EP1 Exercise Evaluation==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71114.01}}


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed the August 14, 2007, biennial emergency preparednessexercise's objectives and scenario to ensure that the exercise would acceptablytest major elements of the licensee's emergency plan and to verify that theexercise's simulated problems provided an acceptable framework to supportdemonstration of the licensee's capability to implement its plan. The inspectorsalso reviewed records of other drills and exercises conduc===
The inspectors reviewed the August 14, 2007, biennial emergency preparedness exercises objectives and scenario to ensure that the exercise would acceptably test major elements of the licensees emergency plan and to verify that the exercises simulated problems provided an acceptable framework to support demonstration of the licensees capability to implement its plan. The inspectors also reviewed records of other drills and exercises conducted in 2005, 2006, and 2007, to verify that those drills scenarios were sufficiently different from the scenario used in the August 14, 2007 exercise.
 
The inspectors evaluated the licensees exercise performance, focusing on the risk-significant activities of emergency classification, notification, and protective action decision making, as well as implementation of accident mitigation strategies in the following emergency response facilities:
C        Control Room Simulator (CRS);
C        Technical Support Center (TSC); and C        Emergency Operations Facility (EOF).
 
The inspectors also assessed the licensees recognition of abnormal plant conditions, transfer of responsibilities between facilities, internal communications, interfaces with offsite officials, readiness of emergency facilities and related equipment, and overall implementation of the licensees emergency plan.
 
The inspectors attended post-exercise critiques in the CRS, TSC, and EOF to evaluate the licensees initial self-assessment of its exercise performance. The inspectors later met with the licensees lead exercise evaluators and managers to obtain the licensees findings and assessments of its exercise participants performances. These self-assessments were then compared with the inspectors independent observations and assessments to assess the licensees ability to adequately critique its exercise performance.


ted in 2005, 2006, and2007, to verify that those drills' scenarios were sufficiently different from the scenarioused in the August 14, 2007 exercise.The inspectors evaluated the licensee's exercise performance, focusing on the risk-significant activities of emergency classification, notification, and protective actiondecision making, as well as implementation of accident mitigation strategies in thefollowing emergency response facilities:Control Room Simulator (CRS);Technical Support Center (TSC); andEmergency Operations Facility (EOF).The inspectors also assessed the licensee's recognition of abnormal plant conditions,transfer of responsibilities between facilities, internal co mmunications, interfaces withoffsite officials, readiness of emergency facilities and related equipment, and overallimplementation of the licensee's emergency plan.The inspectors attended post-exercise critiques in the CRS, TSC, and EOFto evaluate the licensee's initial self-assessment of its exercise performance. Theinspectors later met with the licensee's lead exercise evaluators and managers toobtain the licensee's findings and assessments of its exercise participants'performances. These self-assessments were then compared with the inspectors'independent observa tions and assessments to assess the licensee's ability toadequately critique its exercise performance.These activities completed one of one inspection sample.
These activities completed one of one inspection sample.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
Line 57: Line 85:
==4OA1 Performance Indicator (PI) Verification==
==4OA1 Performance Indicator (PI) Verification==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71151}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71151}}
Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness.1Reactor Safety Strategic Area
===Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness===
 
===.1 Reactor Safety Strategic Area===


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed the licensee's records associated with each of the threeemergency preparedness PIs to verify that the licensee's program was implementedconsistent with the industry guidelines in the applicable revision of Nuclear EnergyInstitute Publication No. 99-02, "Regulatory Assessment Performance IndicatorGuideline," and related licensee procedures. Specifically, licensee records related tothe performance of the Alert and Notification System (ANS), key EmergencyResponse Organization (ERO)members' drill par ticipation, and Drill and ExercisePerformance (DEP) were reviewed to verify the accuracy and completeness of the PIdata submitted to NRC for the period from April 1, 2006, through June 30, 2007. Thefollowing three PIs were reviewed:
The inspectors reviewed the licensees records associated with each of the three emergency preparedness PIs to verify that the licensees program was implemented consistent with the industry guidelines in the applicable revision of Nuclear Energy Institute Publication No. 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, and related licensee procedures. Specifically, licensee records related to the performance of the Alert and Notification System (ANS), key Emergency Response Organization (ERO) members drill participation, and Drill and Exercise Performance (DEP) were reviewed to verify the accuracy and completeness of the PI data submitted to NRC for the period from April 1, 2006, through June 30, 2007. The following three PIs were reviewed:
Common*ANS;*ERO Drill Participation; and*DEP.These activities completed three of three PI samples.b. FindingsNo findings of significance were identified.
Common
* ANS;
* ERO Drill Participation; and
* DEP.
 
These activities completed three of three PI samples.


The inspectors noted that the licensee's submittal for the Alert and Notification SystemReliability Performance Indicator was in error because the fourth quarter 2007 datasubmittal indicated 141 sirens of 210 sirens were tested successfully instead of 140 of209 sirens tested successfully. The regularly scheduled test for May 5, 2007, had only69 sirens tested because one siren was not tested because of a local parade. Thesiren taken out-of-service for the regularly scheduled monthly siren test was tested onMay 4, 2007, however, this siren test has to be counted for the NRC's ANSPerformance Indicator as a non-opportunity per the guidance in NEI 99-02, Revision 5,"Regularly scheduled tests missed for reasons other than siren unavailability (e.g.,out-of-service for planned maintenance or repair) should be considerednon-opportunities."  This error was entered into the licensee's corrective action systemas AR-00817132, "PI Data Submitted Late to the NRC."
====b. Findings====
No findings of significance were identified.


44OA5Other.1(Closed) Severity Lev el III Violat ion 05000315/
The inspectors noted that the licensees submittal for the Alert and Notification System Reliability Performance Indicator was in error because the fourth quarter 2007 data submittal indicated 141 sirens of 210 sirens were tested successfully instead of 140 of 209 sirens tested successfully. The regularly scheduled test for May 5, 2007, had only 69 sirens tested because one siren was not tested because of a local parade. The siren taken out-of-service for the regularly scheduled monthly siren test was tested on May 4, 2007, however, this siren test has to be counted for the NRCs ANS Performance Indicator as a non-opportunity per the guidance in NEI 99-02, Revision 5, Regularly scheduled tests missed for reasons other than siren unavailability (e.g.,
316/2006502-01: A Severity Level IIIViolation was identified for the licensee's failure to maintain a standard emergencyaction level scheme.The inspectors reviewed the licensee's action request 00801675 which includedcauses, extent of condition, and corrective actions. No concerns or issues wereidentified and appropriate corrective actions have been implemented. This violation isclosed.4OA6Meetings.1Exit MeetingOn August 17, 2007, at the conclusion of the on-site inspection activities, theinspectors presented preliminary inspection results to Mr. M. Peifer and othermembers of licensee management. The inspectors asked the licensee whether anymaterials examined during the inspection should be considered proprietary. Noproprietary information was identified.ATTACHMENT:
out-of-service for planned maintenance or repair) should be considered non-opportunities. This error was entered into the licensees corrective action system as AR-00817132, PI Data Submitted Late to the NRC.
 
{{a|4OA5}}
==4OA5 Other==
 
===.1 (Closed) Severity Level III Violation 05000315/316/2006502-01: A Severity Level III===
 
Violation was identified for the licensees failure to maintain a standard emergency action level scheme.
 
The inspectors reviewed the licensees action request 00801675 which included causes, extent of condition, and corrective actions. No concerns or issues were identified and appropriate corrective actions have been implemented. This violation is closed.
 
{{a|4OA6}}
==4OA6 Meetings==
 
===.1 Exit Meeting===
 
On August 17, 2007, at the conclusion of the on-site inspection activities, the inspectors presented preliminary inspection results to Mr. M. Peifer and other members of licensee management. The inspectors asked the licensee whether any materials examined during the inspection should be considered proprietary. No proprietary information was identified.
 
ATTACHMENT:  


=SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION=
=SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION=


==KEY POINTS OF CONTACT==
==KEY POINTS OF CONTACT==
Licensee
Licensee
: [[contact::M. Peifer]], Vice President Site Support Services
: [[contact::M. Peifer]], Vice President Site Support Services
Line 83: Line 138:
: [[contact::C. Springman]], Principal Nuclear Specialist
: [[contact::C. Springman]], Principal Nuclear Specialist
: [[contact::R. Sieber]], Chemistry Manager
: [[contact::R. Sieber]], Chemistry Manager
: [[contact::J. Zwolinski]], Performance Assurance ManagerNuclear Regulatory Commission
: [[contact::J. Zwolinski]], Performance Assurance Manager
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
: [[contact::B. Kemker]], Senior Resident Inspector
: [[contact::B. Kemker]], Senior Resident Inspector
: [[contact::J. Lennartz]], Resident Inspector
: [[contact::J. Lennartz]], Resident Inspector
==LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED==
==LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED==


===Opened===
===Opened===
None
None
ClosedNOV
 
: 05000315/316/2006-502-01Failure to Maintain a Standard EAL Scheme.
===Closed===
 
NOV
: 05000315/316/2006-502-01                Failure to Maintain a Standard EAL Scheme.


===Discussed===
===Discussed===
None


2
None Attachment
 
==LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED==
==LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED==
The following is a list of documents reviewed during the inspection.
 
: Inclusion on this list doesnot imply that the NRC inspectors reviewed the documents in their entirety but rather thatselected sections of portions of the documents were evaluated as part of the overallinspection effort.
: Inclusion of a document on this list does not imply NRC acceptance of thedocument or any part of it, unless this is stated in the body of the inspection report.
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 02:29, 23 November 2019

IR 05000315-07-502 and IR 05000316-07-502; on 08/13/2007 - 08/17/2007, D. C. Cook Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, Biennial Emergency Preparedness Exercise Baseline Inspection
ML072640440
Person / Time
Site: Cook  American Electric Power icon.png
Issue date: 09/20/2007
From: Eric Duncan
Plant Support Branch II
To: Nazar M
Indiana Michigan Power Co
References
IR-07-502
Download: ML072640440 (12)


Text

ber 20, 2007

SUBJECT:

D. C. COOK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 BIENNIAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS EXERCISE BASELINE INSPECTION REPORT 05000315/2007502(DRS);

05000316/2007502(DRS)

Dear Mr. Nazar:

On August 17, 2007, the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your D. C. Cook Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2. The enclosed report documents the inspection findings, which were discussed on August 17, 2007, with Mr. M. Peifer and other members of your staff.

The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commissions rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license.

The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel. Specifically, this inspection focused on emergency preparedness, including your staffs determinations of performance indicators for the Emergency Preparedness Cornerstone.

On the basis of the results of this inspection, no findings of significance were identified.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records System (PARS) component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Sincerely,

/RA/

Eric Duncan, Chief Plant Support Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket Nos. 50-315; 50-316 License Nos. DPR-58; DPR-74 Enclosure: Biennial Emergency Preparedness Exercise Baseline Inspection Report 05000315/2007502(DRS); 05000316/2007502(DRS);

w/Attachment: Supplemental Information cc w/encl: J. Jensen, Site Vice President L. Weber, Plant Manager G. White, Michigan Public Service Commission L. Brandon, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality -

Waste and Hazardous Materials Division Emergency Management Division MI Department of State Police State Liaison Officer, State of Michigan W. King, FEMA, Region V

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

IR 05000315/2007502; 05000316/2007502; on 08/13/2007-08/17/2007; D. C. Cook Nuclear

Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, Biennial Emergency Preparedness Exercise Baseline Inspection.

The report covers a 1 week baseline inspection by one regional emergency preparedness inspector, a resident inspector, and a reactor engineer. The inspection focused on the Emergency Preparedness Cornerstone in the Reactor Safety strategic performance area during the biennial emergency preparedness exercise. This inspection also included a review of records related to the three emergency preparedness performance indicators for the period April 1, 2006 through June 30, 2007.

The NRCs program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 4, dated December 2006.

A. Inspector-Identified and Self-Revealed Findings None.

Licensee-Identified Violations

None.

REPORT DETAILS

REACTOR SAFETY

Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness

1EP1 Exercise Evaluation

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed the August 14, 2007, biennial emergency preparedness exercises objectives and scenario to ensure that the exercise would acceptably test major elements of the licensees emergency plan and to verify that the exercises simulated problems provided an acceptable framework to support demonstration of the licensees capability to implement its plan. The inspectors also reviewed records of other drills and exercises conducted in 2005, 2006, and 2007, to verify that those drills scenarios were sufficiently different from the scenario used in the August 14, 2007 exercise.

The inspectors evaluated the licensees exercise performance, focusing on the risk-significant activities of emergency classification, notification, and protective action decision making, as well as implementation of accident mitigation strategies in the following emergency response facilities:

C Control Room Simulator (CRS);

C Technical Support Center (TSC); and C Emergency Operations Facility (EOF).

The inspectors also assessed the licensees recognition of abnormal plant conditions, transfer of responsibilities between facilities, internal communications, interfaces with offsite officials, readiness of emergency facilities and related equipment, and overall implementation of the licensees emergency plan.

The inspectors attended post-exercise critiques in the CRS, TSC, and EOF to evaluate the licensees initial self-assessment of its exercise performance. The inspectors later met with the licensees lead exercise evaluators and managers to obtain the licensees findings and assessments of its exercise participants performances. These self-assessments were then compared with the inspectors independent observations and assessments to assess the licensees ability to adequately critique its exercise performance.

These activities completed one of one inspection sample.

b. Findings

No findings of significance were identified.

OTHER ACTIVITIES

4OA1 Performance Indicator (PI) Verification

Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness

.1 Reactor Safety Strategic Area

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed the licensees records associated with each of the three emergency preparedness PIs to verify that the licensees program was implemented consistent with the industry guidelines in the applicable revision of Nuclear Energy Institute Publication No. 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, and related licensee procedures. Specifically, licensee records related to the performance of the Alert and Notification System (ANS), key Emergency Response Organization (ERO) members drill participation, and Drill and Exercise Performance (DEP) were reviewed to verify the accuracy and completeness of the PI data submitted to NRC for the period from April 1, 2006, through June 30, 2007. The following three PIs were reviewed:

Common

  • ERO Drill Participation; and

These activities completed three of three PI samples.

b. Findings

No findings of significance were identified.

The inspectors noted that the licensees submittal for the Alert and Notification System Reliability Performance Indicator was in error because the fourth quarter 2007 data submittal indicated 141 sirens of 210 sirens were tested successfully instead of 140 of 209 sirens tested successfully. The regularly scheduled test for May 5, 2007, had only 69 sirens tested because one siren was not tested because of a local parade. The siren taken out-of-service for the regularly scheduled monthly siren test was tested on May 4, 2007, however, this siren test has to be counted for the NRCs ANS Performance Indicator as a non-opportunity per the guidance in NEI 99-02, Revision 5, Regularly scheduled tests missed for reasons other than siren unavailability (e.g.,

out-of-service for planned maintenance or repair) should be considered non-opportunities. This error was entered into the licensees corrective action system as AR-00817132, PI Data Submitted Late to the NRC.

4OA5 Other

.1 (Closed) Severity Level III Violation 05000315/316/2006502-01: A Severity Level III

Violation was identified for the licensees failure to maintain a standard emergency action level scheme.

The inspectors reviewed the licensees action request 00801675 which included causes, extent of condition, and corrective actions. No concerns or issues were identified and appropriate corrective actions have been implemented. This violation is closed.

4OA6 Meetings

.1 Exit Meeting

On August 17, 2007, at the conclusion of the on-site inspection activities, the inspectors presented preliminary inspection results to Mr. M. Peifer and other members of licensee management. The inspectors asked the licensee whether any materials examined during the inspection should be considered proprietary. No proprietary information was identified.

ATTACHMENT:

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

KEY POINTS OF CONTACT

Licensee

M. Peifer, Vice President Site Support Services
R. Crane, Compliance Supervisor
H. Etheridge, Regulatory Affairs Specialist
J. Gebbie, Plant Engineering Director
C. Graffenius, Emergency Preparedness Coordinator
Q. Lies, Acting Plant Manager
J. Newmiller, Regulatory Affairs Specialist
A. Rodriguez, Emergency Preparedness Manager
D. Schroeder, Emergency Preparedness Coordinator
C. Springman, Principal Nuclear Specialist
R. Sieber, Chemistry Manager
J. Zwolinski, Performance Assurance Manager

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

B. Kemker, Senior Resident Inspector
J. Lennartz, Resident Inspector

LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED

Opened

None

Closed

NOV

05000315/316/2006-502-01 Failure to Maintain a Standard EAL Scheme.

Discussed

None Attachment

LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED