|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARLR-N980595, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments.Pse&G Supports Comments Submitted by NEI in Their Ltr1998-12-21021 December 1998 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments.Pse&G Supports Comments Submitted by NEI in Their Ltr LR-N980588, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50.65 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Npps.Util Agrees with General Principle Behind Proposed Rulemaking,But However,Concerned That Proposed Rule Contain Language Open to Interpretation1998-12-14014 December 1998 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50.65 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Npps.Util Agrees with General Principle Behind Proposed Rulemaking,But However,Concerned That Proposed Rule Contain Language Open to Interpretation ML18106A8811998-09-15015 September 1998 Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1633, Assessment of Use of Potassium Iodide as Protective Action During Severe Reactor Accidents. Believes That Discussion Contained in SECY-98-061 Should Be Included in Draft NUREG ML18106A8731998-09-15015 September 1998 Comment on Draft NUREG-1633 Re Assessment of Use of Potassium Iodide (Ki) as Protetive Action During Severe Reactor Accidents. Believes That NUREG Should Provide Balanced Discussion on Benefits & Risks of Use of Ki LR-N980284, Comment on PR-50 Re IEEE Std 603-1991 for Salem & Hope Creek Generating Stations.Lack of Adverse Comments to Draft RG Should Not Have Been Construed as Endorsement to IEEE 603-19911998-06-12012 June 1998 Comment on PR-50 Re IEEE Std 603-1991 for Salem & Hope Creek Generating Stations.Lack of Adverse Comments to Draft RG Should Not Have Been Construed as Endorsement to IEEE 603-1991 LR-N980149, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Stds. Comments Address Use of Engineering Judgment,Limitations on Use of Later ASME III Code Editions for Weld Leg Dimensions & Seismic Analysis1998-03-30030 March 1998 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Stds. Comments Address Use of Engineering Judgment,Limitations on Use of Later ASME III Code Editions for Weld Leg Dimensions & Seismic Analysis ML18102B4361997-07-0707 July 1997 Comment Opposing NUREG-1606, Proposed Regulatory Guidance Re Implementation of 10CFR50.59 (Changes,Tests or Experiments). Util Endorses Comments Submitted by Nuclear Energy Inst ML20132A8961996-12-0606 December 1996 Comment Supporting Pr 10CFR50, NRC Draft Ps on Restructuring & Economic Deregulation of Electric Utility Industry ML20084H9251995-06-0202 June 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed Change in State Cooperative Agreements Program Concerning NRC Intention to Reduce Scope of Work.Believes That NRC Should Maintain Environ Monitoring Program & Find Other Ways to Reduce Duplicative Svcs ML20134K5021995-02-24024 February 1995 Transcript of 950224 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re C Vondra.Pp 1-136 ML20134K4511995-02-0808 February 1995 Transcript of 950208 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re Plant.Pp 1-93 ML20134K4791995-02-0808 February 1995 Transcript of 950208 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re V Polizzi.Pp 1-115 ML20134K4971995-02-0808 February 1995 Transcript of 950208 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re L Reiter.Pp 1-64 ML20080G8321995-02-0606 February 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Shutdown & low-power Operations for Npp.Encourages NRC to Reevaluate Regulatory Analyses in Light of Higher Costs.Concludes That Addl Rules on Shutdown & Low Power Operations Not Necessary ML20077L8631995-01-0303 January 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2,51 & 54 Re NPP License Renewal.Util of Belief That Proposed Rev Reflect Positive Effort Towards Establishing Regulatory Process Requirements for Continued Operation of Nuclear Facilities ML20132B2281994-08-0202 August 1994 Transcript of 940802 Enforcement Conference in Salem,Nj W/Salem Senior Nuclear Shift Supervisor Involved in 940407 Event ML20067C1591994-02-17017 February 1994 Comments on NUREG/CR-5884 Re Analyses of Decommissioning for Ref PWR Power Station ML20056G4121993-08-31031 August 1993 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR2 Re Review of 2.206 Process ML18100A5591993-08-26026 August 1993 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule Re Whistleblower Protection ML20126F2721992-12-21021 December 1992 Comment Endorsing Positions & Comments of NUMARC & BWROG Re Draft GL, Augmented Inservice Insp Requirments for Mark I & Mark II Steel Containments,Refueling Cavities & Associated Drainage Sys ML20095B2411992-04-10010 April 1992 Comment on Draft NUREG-1449, Shutdown & Low-Power Operation at Commercial Nuclear Power Plants in Us ML20091Q8661992-01-31031 January 1992 Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1022,Rev 1, Event Reporting Sys,10CFR50.72 & 50.73,Clarification of NRC Sys & Guidelines for Reporting ML20072T2421991-04-11011 April 1991 Comment Re Proposed Change to 10CFR50.55A Re Inservice Testing of Containment Isolation Valves.Proposed Rule Should Be Revised to Allow Plants within Last 12 Months of Current Interval to Substitute Deferred Rv Shell Exams ML20011E4861990-02-0707 February 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 900209 ML20248D2831989-09-28028 September 1989 Notice of Appearance.* Advises That Author Will Enter Appearance in Proceeding on Behalf of Nrc.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247Q2661989-09-26026 September 1989 Establishment of Aslb.* Board Will Comprise of Mb Margulies, Chairman & Oh Paris & Fj Shon,Members.W/Certificate of Svc. Served on 890926 B13367, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements1989-09-20020 September 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements ML20248C8751989-09-13013 September 1989 Response to Order Modifying Licenses & Order to Show Cause Why Licenses Should Not Be Revoked.* Requests Hearing on Issues,Including Funds for Equipment.Supporting Info Encl ML20246C7141989-08-18018 August 1989 Order to Show Cause Why CPs CPEP-1 & CPEP-2 Should Not Be Revoked & Requiring Licensee to Notify Commission at Least 30 Days Before Taking Possession of Any Classified Equipment ML20245G0721989-08-0303 August 1989 Comment on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. Recommends That NRC Recommendation on Trust Agreement Wording Be Deleted or NRC Should Grandfather Existing Trusts Such as for Plants ML20248B6201989-08-0202 August 1989 Comments on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. NRC Should Permit Use of Potential Tax Refund as Source of Decommissioning Funds ELV-00674, Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement1989-07-0707 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement ML20246H8141989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ELV-00679, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 8906261989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 890626 ML20246K4801989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ML20246D8811989-06-30030 June 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ML20245D2481989-06-16016 June 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. NRC Must Consider Provision in Rule to Permit Indiscriminate Storage of Spent Fuel at Reactors ML20246Q2971989-05-15015 May 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20245J0191989-04-14014 April 1989 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20244B3241989-04-10010 April 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20247A2971989-04-0404 April 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20246M2771989-03-20020 March 1989 Decision.* Affirms Board Decision LBP-89-05 Granting CP & OL to Licensee.Certificate of Svc Encl.Served on 890321 B13113, Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units.... Util Recommends Rule Be Revised to Incorporate Addl Flexibility in Considering Age of Diesel1989-03-0808 March 1989 Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units.... Util Recommends Rule Be Revised to Incorporate Addl Flexibility in Considering Age of Diesel ML20246N9471989-03-0808 March 1989 Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9 Re Selection Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants ML20236B4641989-03-0808 March 1989 Comments on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants. Reg Guide Does Not Provide Flexibility JPN-89-008, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants1989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants B13136, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rule on Maint Will Not Improve Maint in Plants Nor Improve Safety or Reliability of Plants.Proposed Rule Much Too Vague1989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rule on Maint Will Not Improve Maint in Plants Nor Improve Safety or Reliability of Plants.Proposed Rule Much Too Vague ML20235T3581989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Util Endorses Comments Filed by NUMARC & Nuclear Util Backfitting & Reform Group.Rule Fails to Provide Basis for Determining Effective Maint Program ML20235V8541989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Committed to Goal of Achieving Improved Reliability & Safety Through Better Maint ML20235T1861989-02-24024 February 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants, Extension of NRC Authority to BOP Portion of Plant & Misapplication of Adequate Protection Std of Backfit Rule 1998-09-15
[Table view] Category:PUBLIC COMMENTS ON PROPOSED RULES & PETITIONS FOR
MONTHYEARLR-N980595, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments.Pse&G Supports Comments Submitted by NEI in Their Ltr1998-12-21021 December 1998 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments.Pse&G Supports Comments Submitted by NEI in Their Ltr LR-N980588, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50.65 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Npps.Util Agrees with General Principle Behind Proposed Rulemaking,But However,Concerned That Proposed Rule Contain Language Open to Interpretation1998-12-14014 December 1998 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50.65 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Npps.Util Agrees with General Principle Behind Proposed Rulemaking,But However,Concerned That Proposed Rule Contain Language Open to Interpretation ML18106A8731998-09-15015 September 1998 Comment on Draft NUREG-1633 Re Assessment of Use of Potassium Iodide (Ki) as Protetive Action During Severe Reactor Accidents. Believes That NUREG Should Provide Balanced Discussion on Benefits & Risks of Use of Ki ML18106A8811998-09-15015 September 1998 Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1633, Assessment of Use of Potassium Iodide as Protective Action During Severe Reactor Accidents. Believes That Discussion Contained in SECY-98-061 Should Be Included in Draft NUREG LR-N980284, Comment on PR-50 Re IEEE Std 603-1991 for Salem & Hope Creek Generating Stations.Lack of Adverse Comments to Draft RG Should Not Have Been Construed as Endorsement to IEEE 603-19911998-06-12012 June 1998 Comment on PR-50 Re IEEE Std 603-1991 for Salem & Hope Creek Generating Stations.Lack of Adverse Comments to Draft RG Should Not Have Been Construed as Endorsement to IEEE 603-1991 LR-N980149, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Stds. Comments Address Use of Engineering Judgment,Limitations on Use of Later ASME III Code Editions for Weld Leg Dimensions & Seismic Analysis1998-03-30030 March 1998 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Stds. Comments Address Use of Engineering Judgment,Limitations on Use of Later ASME III Code Editions for Weld Leg Dimensions & Seismic Analysis ML18102B4361997-07-0707 July 1997 Comment Opposing NUREG-1606, Proposed Regulatory Guidance Re Implementation of 10CFR50.59 (Changes,Tests or Experiments). Util Endorses Comments Submitted by Nuclear Energy Inst ML20132A8961996-12-0606 December 1996 Comment Supporting Pr 10CFR50, NRC Draft Ps on Restructuring & Economic Deregulation of Electric Utility Industry ML20084H9251995-06-0202 June 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed Change in State Cooperative Agreements Program Concerning NRC Intention to Reduce Scope of Work.Believes That NRC Should Maintain Environ Monitoring Program & Find Other Ways to Reduce Duplicative Svcs ML20080G8321995-02-0606 February 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Shutdown & low-power Operations for Npp.Encourages NRC to Reevaluate Regulatory Analyses in Light of Higher Costs.Concludes That Addl Rules on Shutdown & Low Power Operations Not Necessary ML20077L8631995-01-0303 January 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2,51 & 54 Re NPP License Renewal.Util of Belief That Proposed Rev Reflect Positive Effort Towards Establishing Regulatory Process Requirements for Continued Operation of Nuclear Facilities ML20067C1591994-02-17017 February 1994 Comments on NUREG/CR-5884 Re Analyses of Decommissioning for Ref PWR Power Station ML20056G4121993-08-31031 August 1993 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR2 Re Review of 2.206 Process ML18100A5591993-08-26026 August 1993 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule Re Whistleblower Protection ML20126F2721992-12-21021 December 1992 Comment Endorsing Positions & Comments of NUMARC & BWROG Re Draft GL, Augmented Inservice Insp Requirments for Mark I & Mark II Steel Containments,Refueling Cavities & Associated Drainage Sys ML20095B2411992-04-10010 April 1992 Comment on Draft NUREG-1449, Shutdown & Low-Power Operation at Commercial Nuclear Power Plants in Us ML20091Q8661992-01-31031 January 1992 Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1022,Rev 1, Event Reporting Sys,10CFR50.72 & 50.73,Clarification of NRC Sys & Guidelines for Reporting ML20072T2421991-04-11011 April 1991 Comment Re Proposed Change to 10CFR50.55A Re Inservice Testing of Containment Isolation Valves.Proposed Rule Should Be Revised to Allow Plants within Last 12 Months of Current Interval to Substitute Deferred Rv Shell Exams ML20011E4861990-02-0707 February 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 900209 B13367, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements1989-09-20020 September 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements ML20245G0721989-08-0303 August 1989 Comment on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. Recommends That NRC Recommendation on Trust Agreement Wording Be Deleted or NRC Should Grandfather Existing Trusts Such as for Plants ML20248B6201989-08-0202 August 1989 Comments on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. NRC Should Permit Use of Potential Tax Refund as Source of Decommissioning Funds ELV-00674, Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement1989-07-0707 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement ELV-00679, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 8906261989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 890626 ML20246H8141989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ML20246K4801989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ML20246D8811989-06-30030 June 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ML20245D2481989-06-16016 June 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. NRC Must Consider Provision in Rule to Permit Indiscriminate Storage of Spent Fuel at Reactors ML20246Q2971989-05-15015 May 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20245J0191989-04-14014 April 1989 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20244B3241989-04-10010 April 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20247A2971989-04-0404 April 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants B13113, Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units.... Util Recommends Rule Be Revised to Incorporate Addl Flexibility in Considering Age of Diesel1989-03-0808 March 1989 Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units.... Util Recommends Rule Be Revised to Incorporate Addl Flexibility in Considering Age of Diesel ML20236B4641989-03-0808 March 1989 Comments on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants. Reg Guide Does Not Provide Flexibility ML20246N9471989-03-0808 March 1989 Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9 Re Selection Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants JPN-89-008, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants1989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants B13136, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rule on Maint Will Not Improve Maint in Plants Nor Improve Safety or Reliability of Plants.Proposed Rule Much Too Vague1989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rule on Maint Will Not Improve Maint in Plants Nor Improve Safety or Reliability of Plants.Proposed Rule Much Too Vague ML20235T3581989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Util Endorses Comments Filed by NUMARC & Nuclear Util Backfitting & Reform Group.Rule Fails to Provide Basis for Determining Effective Maint Program ML20235V8541989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Committed to Goal of Achieving Improved Reliability & Safety Through Better Maint ML20235T1861989-02-24024 February 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants, Extension of NRC Authority to BOP Portion of Plant & Misapplication of Adequate Protection Std of Backfit Rule ML20235T7391989-02-23023 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants ML20235N8531989-02-14014 February 1989 Comment Supporting Chapter 1 Re Policy Statement on Exemptions Below Regulatory Concern.Policy Development for Criteria for Release of Radioactive Matl Needed for Development of Consistent Waste Mgt Practices ML20235L5921989-02-0606 February 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule on Chapter 1 Re Proposed Policy Statement Exemptions from Regulatory Control.Extreme Care Will Be Needed in Establishing State Role Both in Developing Rule & in Subsequent Implementation ML20195H0331988-11-21021 November 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program Which Includes Random Drug Testing.Util Strongly Favors 180- Day Period for Implementation of Rule & 360-day Implementation Period for Random Drug Testing ML20206M5321988-11-21021 November 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re fitness-for-duty Program JPN-88-063, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Util Has Constitutional Concerns Re Proposed Random Testing Which Should Be Fully Addressed Prior to Rule Being Promulgated.Endorses NUMARC & EEI Comments1988-11-18018 November 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Util Has Constitutional Concerns Re Proposed Random Testing Which Should Be Fully Addressed Prior to Rule Being Promulgated.Endorses NUMARC & EEI Comments ML20195H0111988-11-18018 November 1988 Comment Supporting NUMARC Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re NRC Fitness for Duty Program Which Includes Random Drug Testing ML20205Q1501988-10-28028 October 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NUREG-1317, Regulatory Options for Nuclear Plant License Renewal. Safety Sys Functional Insps & Configuration Mgt Programs Support Renewal Basis as Opposed to Relicensing Process ML20205Q2061988-10-28028 October 1988 Comment Opposing Petition for Rulemaking PRM 50-52 Re Exemption of Financial Qualifications of Applicants from Review of OL Applications.Petition Presents No Compelling Reason to Amend Current Rules ML20205Q6661988-10-27027 October 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NUREG-1317, Regulatory Options for Nuclear Plant License Renewal. Endorses NUMARC Nuplex Working Group Comments,Including Use of Licensing Basis at Facility When Renewal Application Submitted 1998-09-15
[Table view] |
Text
i c Eg6Ei)'s [i fdill E U @ -
I Sytem Council U-2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . (. 5D3 F .......c ......
NL Ki i,C
%. s
$ }& hil0 WDN &
Office: 7 Centre Drive - Suite No. 4 - Jamesburg, N.J. 08831 OHicers Jurisdictbn PL/SLIC SitVICI ELECTalC ., , . w, 3 cgAttgg p, wo(rg . p,,s;w ANo cAs COMPANY, N. J. Phone: (609) 395 878grfg,q g..g j wy,r.t W
~'
A N'. M Representatives als JOSEPH L. JA5MINE, Ditt, 853 1134 1320 CHARLES W. Ht$$t, Gen.
1329 1330 1335 1334 1350 1355 1368 1576 1673 206o . 217s April 20, 1988 Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Re: 53FR5734 Nuclear Power Plant Access Authorization Program Commissioners:
I.B.E.W. Local Union #1576 is the authorized bargaining representative for certain employees at Salem 1 and Salem 2 and Hope Creek Nuclear Generating Stations. These facilities are operated by Public Service Electric and Gas Company of New Jersey.
In the last few years Public Service Electric and Gas Company and System Council U-2 I.B.E.W. have met and established an agreed upon Drug and Alcohol Program. This policy in-corporates fair testing procedures, checking of behavioral patterns, rehabilitation programs and methods that satisfy requirements to regain vital access. Included, also, is a review committee that keeps on top of all needs and changes.
This Drug and Alcohol Policy has been very successful and has the absolute support of Local Union #1576. We must note that there is no provision for random testing and we feel that with a proper program random testing is not neces-sary.
We request that the N.R.C. not propose rules that include random drug and alcohol testing, but instead, uses solid programs like those agreed upon by PSE&G Co. end the I.B.E.W.
8805240253 0e0420 PDR PR PDR 50 S3FR7034
- e. g/d
Thank you for your consideration and we are enclosing a copy of our present Policy.
Very truly yours, id John Gerrity President L.U. #1576 97 David Drive Mullica Hill, NJ 08062 Charles D. Wolfe President System Council U-2 I.B.E.W.
7 Centre Drive Suite-#4 Jamesburg, NJ 08831 JG/CDW/kwj Enclosure
O PSEGEa 30 Parx i>a23 Newarx NJ 07'01/ 201430 7000 V AvNG AC0 CESS DO Sci 570 Newar* NJ 07101 September 16, 1987 System Council U-2, IBEW 7 Centre Drive, Suite 14 Jamesburg, New Jersey 08831 Gentlemen:
GRIEVANCE 2986 (1986-22)
SYSTEMWIDE CCRPORATE DRUG POLICY This reply supersedes the previous reply dated May 1, 1986.
Union Submission "The Company violated Article II, Section A of the Collective Bargaining Agreement by unilaterally introducing a Drug Program on Public Service property that constitutes an unreasonable intrusion into the privacy of the employee. Negotiate standards i for a fair and equitable drug program."
Company Reply 1
The parties fully recognize the nature of our industry and i support the concept that all Company employees must be prepared to perform their duties with the highest level of integrity, both physically and mentally. Associated with this recognition is the mutual desire of the company and the Union to have an effective Drug Program which will provide a safe and drug free work envi-ronment for the protection of- all employees, the public and Company equipment. In the pur' suit of this objective, the parties have ' agreed to a program for the detection of drug use and for dealing with employees who engage in this activity. The follow-ing i's a- general outline, of this program and is not intended to be all inclusive.
- 1. The use, sale, or possession of controlled substances during working hours or on Company property will result in dis-charge.
The Energy People
- corporoto Drug Policy 9/16/87 j I
- 2. Employees will be subject to a fitness for duty exam which-may include drug urinalysis under the following circumstanc-est
- a. When required to take-annual physical examinations.
}
- b. When reliable information, such as a report of an arrest or indictment, gives the company reason to believe an employee may be illegally involved with drugs.
- c. When aberrant behavior is evidenced.
- d. When there is reason to believe an employee is being af fected by drugs because of patterns of unsatisfactory availability, misconduct or deteriorating job perfor-mance.
- e. A serious accident where the employee appears to be at fault.
- 3. Employees undergoing a drug urinalysis will be given a letter to that effect which will also spell out the consequences of positive results. In addition, this letter will inform them that they are subject to a return-to-work physical examina-tion, which includes a drug urinalysis, following any period of suspension for drug use. Finally, it will inform them that they are subject to testing at any time during the next three years. Any positive drug test during this three-year period, or on the return-to-work exam, will result in the employee's discharge.
- 4. Employees found to have illegal drugs in their system will be suspended and subjected to ratesting as follows:
Marijuana - Testing for marijuana will incorporate an enzyme imunoassay (EIA) and radioinenunoassay (RIA) screen with a 50 ng/ml cut off level and a confirming gas chromatography / mass spectrometry (GC/MS) with a 10 ng/ml cut off level. Retest-ing may be done any time at an employee's option but no later than 14 days af ter the initial test. A final test will be taken no later than 21 days af ter the initial test in those cases when the employee continues to test positive. If this final test is positive, the employee will be discharged unless the confirming (GC/MS) analysis reveals a continuing decline of metabolite such that in the opinion of the Medical Director there has been no reuse; if so, the employee will continue on suspension and continue weekly tests as long as the metabolite is declining and until the results of the EIA/RIA are negative (less than 50 ng/ml). If at any time during the testing period the results of the GC/MS show an increased level of metabolite, indicating drug reuse, the employee will be discharged.,
l
Gr. 2986 (1986-22)
Corporato Drug Policy 9/16/87 other Drugs - If the initial urinalysis indicates the pres-ence of drugs other than marijuana, the employee will be suspended and given a second test four days after the suspen-sion, or earlier at the employee's option. If the results of the second urinalysis are positive, the employee will be discharged.
- 5. Employees who refuse to submit to a drug urinalysis when so ordered, or who submit a false specimen, will be considered insubordinate and subject to discharge.
- 6. The established Personal Guidance Program is available to any employee who needs help with a drug program. Employees who voluntarily consult with PGP before the Company acts to determine whether a drug problem exists, will be dealt with in strict confidence. Other employees who test positive for drugs will be encouraged to go to PGP, but under these circumstances will not be treated confidentially.
- 7. The Company and the Union have negotiated a Reemployment Program, effective September 9, 1985, for employees dis-charged for drug use.
- 8. The Drug Testing Procedure was previously spelled out in the Company'P letter of September 13, 1985.
- 9. A copy of the test results of those employees who test positive will be given to the Union provided an appropriate release is signed by the employee.
- 10. A Company-Union Comittee, consisting of three members each, will meet three times a year, or more of ten if necessary, to discuss matters pertaining to the Drug Policy.
- 11. Tnis letter represents the guidelines to be used for drug testing. Any subsequent planned changes in the Drug Policy or drug testing guidelines will be reviewed by the above Committee prior to implementation. Unresolved changes, not required by law or other governmental requirements, that the Union feels are unreasonable will be subject to the grievance procedure.
i f truly yours,
, M Peter A. Cistaro Manager - Industrial Relations Accepted: d b ho/
' President-System C p ncil U-2, IBEW
'O PSEGisE1 80 Park Pta:a Newa'k. NJ 07101/ 201430 7000 M AUNG ADDAESS / PO ki s70. Newark. NJ 07101 September 9, 1985 System Council U-2,I.B.E.W.
60 Park Place - Room 1115 Newark, New Jersey 07102 Gentlemen:
REEMPLOYMENT PROGRAM FOR EMPLOYEES DISCHARGED FOR DRUG AND/OR ALCOHOL ABUSE The following "Reemployment Program" has been agreed to by the Company and the IBEW:
- 1. A permanent employee who has completed the probationary period and who is discharged for drug and/or alcohol abuse will be given consideration for reemployment following successful demonstration to the satisfaction of the com-pany that the substance abuse has been eliminated and that he/she is otherwise qualified for employment.
- 2. If deemed eligible to participate, the employee will be so informed at the time of discharge or within one week thereafter by means of a letter outlining the program requirements and providing for signatures by the company, the Union and the employee. The employee may then have up to one week, if necesrary, to advise the Company of his/her l decision to participate. Employees discharged for reasons other than the substance abuse problem will not be elig- (
ible to participate in the program.
- 3. If the eligible employee elects to participate in the progren, no grievance may be submitted relative to the CASO.
- 4. The first phase of the Reemployment Program includes a specified program of rehabilitation determined by the Medical Department and accepted by the employee. It will consist of six months off the payroll. If, during this period, it is determined by the Medical Department i that the employee has failed to adhere to the rehabilita- i tion requirements, the employee will not be eligible for I reemployment. It is further agreed that such determination I will not be subject to the grievance procedure.
The Energy People mx, ax , o
.. . = - _ - _
1 system council U-2, IBEW -2 9/9/85 '
r
- 5. If the individual satisfactorily completes the firrt phase of the program and is approved by the Medical Department,
- he/she will be reemployed at an entry level job at the
, starting wage rate. The company will normally reemploy an individual at the same location, except in very unusual !
i circumstances. The individual may be placed in the occupa- !
! tional group from which discharged, or any other group for :
! which qualified. i l
l
- 6. The second phase of the program will continue for one year ,
from the date of reemployment. Wage progression will be in !'
) accordance with the Agreement, but the employee will not be eligible for promotion or transfer during this year.- l I
j
- 7. An employee who successfully completes this second phase of !
the program will be returned to the classification, wage :
rate, and seniority held at the time of discharge. It is !
recognized that in some cases, restoring the employee to his/her former classification may result in creating a sur- ,
plus. The surplus employee will be returned to his/her l j former classification and rate of pay effective immediately. }
j 8. It is understood that an employee, both during the six months l off the payroll and following reemployment for a period of ;
) three years, is subject to report, at any time, for any {
4 medical examination deemed appropriate by the Medical Depart- l ment. t
(
. 9. If it is determined within three years after reemployment :
that the provisions of the drug and alcohol program have !
I again been violated, the employee will be discharged and will not be eligible for further consideration under the Reemployment Program. Discharges under these circumstances l may be subject to the grievance procedure.
- 10. This program will become effective upon the date of. signing j by the Union. .
Very truly yours,
%A l Malcolm c. Sawhill 1 Manager - Industrial Relations
{ Electric Operations I
t 1 Accepted for the Union l D) -
T 9 GC j Charles D. Wolfe, Prpident Date System council U-2, TBEW l
l !
l i
L _
(SAMPLE LETTER TO EMPLOYEE AT TIME OF DISCHARGE)
Dear ,
i On you were discharged for violating the Company's Alcohol and Drug Policy.
However, it has been determined that you are eligible for re-employment under the provisions of the Company's Alcohol and l Drug Program following successful completion of a six-month rehabilitation period, the specific requirements of which will be established by the Medical Department. As a condition of your participation, you automatically waive recourse to the grievance procedure. Participation in this Reemployment Program is ;
voluntary.
If you fail to adhere to the rehabilitation requirements during this six months, you will no longer be considered for reemploy-ment and no grievance may be filed in your behalf. ,
Upon successful completion of the above rehabilitation phase '
and approval by the Medical Department, you will be reemployed in an entry level job at the starting wage rate. You will remain in the entry level job for one year during which time you will ;
not be eligible for promotion or transfer. After completing one year of satisfactory employment and continuing adherence to the ;
rehabilitation requirements, you will be returned to your former j classification and wage rate with seniority as of the time of l discharge.
If you violate any provision of the Company's Alcohol and Drug Program within three years or reemployment, you will be discharged without further recourse to the Reemployment Program. , l (Location Manager) l Accepted by the Union Date Accepted by the Employee Date l
l l
O PSEG BE7?-
80 Park Paza Newark. NJ 07101/ 2014347000 MA!UNG ADPESS/ PO Bei $70. NeA3'k N)07101 September 13, 1985 System Council U-2, I.B.E.W.
60 Park Place - Room 1115 Newark, New Jersey 07102 Gentlemen:
DRUG TESTING PROCEDURE In response to your recent letter, this is to confirm the Company's modification to its drug testing procedure.
Implementation of all these procedures will be effective on or before November 1, 1985.
- 1. Containers used for collecting specimens will be laboratory clean.
- 2. Specimens will be separated into two parts. One will be sent immediately for drug testing while the other will be frozen and retained by the Com-pany. If the first specimen tests positive, the employee will be suspended and the second will be sent for a confirming test.
- 3. Employees undergoing drug screening will be per-mitted to witness the sealing and labeling of the specimen containers.
- 4. Negative test results will be communicated to suspended employees within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> of shipment to the testing company.
Changes in the above prt :cdure will Le discussed with the Union before implementation.
Very truly yours,
+ _- 4 / . JE
- 1 Malcolm C. Sawhill Manager - Industrial Relations Electric Operations The Energy People n .w e . , .
DRUG TESTING CUT-OFF LEVELS (NG/ML)
SUBSTANCE SCREEN Amphetamine 1000 Barbiturates 200 Benzodiazepine 300 Cannabinoid (Marijuana) 50 Cocaine 300 opitate 300 Pnencyclidine 25 Methadone 300
,