While Salem 1 and 2 ended the year in the "Green" matrix, this letter alsao contains several concerns about on going human error, communication, and follow up problems.  A similar letter was written about Hope Creek.

Human error problems were supposed to be addressed by PSEG by the use of a special task force. UNPLUG salem asked to be part of that task force, and, no surprise, were denied that chance. Looking at the negative human error results so far, our help couldn't have hurt and might hav improved matters.

These are aging nuke plants, one with a leaking spent ful pool, one with plugged up steam generators. PSEG cannot afford to compromise safety by not taking effective actions on these continuing problems of human error..


 I've highlighted ares of interest.



There will be a "public" (meaning you can watch, not speak) meeting on the assessment letter in a few weeks, at Salem.

norm

March 3, 2003
Mr. Harold W. Keiser
Chief Nuclear Officer and President
PSEG Nuclear LLC - N09
P. O. Box 236
Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038
SUBJECT: ANNUAL ASSESSMENT LETTER - SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION
(Report 50-272/2003-001, 50-311/2003-001)
Dear Mr. Keiser:
On February 6, 2003, the NRC staff completed its end-of-cycle plant performance assessment of
Salem Unit 1 & 2. The end-of-cycle review for Salem Unit 1 & 2 involved the participation of all
technical divisions in evaluating performance indicators (PIs) for the most recent quarter and
inspection results for the period from January 1 through December 31, 2002. The purpose of this
letter is to inform you of our assessment of your safety performance during this period and our
plans for future inspections at your facility so that you will have an opportunity to prepare for these
inspections and to inform us of any planned inspections that may conflict with your plant activities.
Overall, Salem Unit 1 & 2 operated in a manner that preserved public health and safety and fully
met all cornerstone objectives. Plant performance for the most recent two quarters was within the
Licensee Response Column of the NRC’s Action Matrix, based on all inspection findings being
classified as having very low safety significance (Green) and all PIs indicating performance at a
level requiring no additional NRC oversight (Green). Therefore, we plan to conduct only baseline
inspections at your facility through March 31, 2004.
While plant performance for the two most recent quarters was within the Licensee Response
Column, there were safety significant performance indicators during the first two quarters of the
assessment cycle. At Salem Unit 1, plant performance for the first and second quarters of 2002
was within the Regulatory Response Column of the NRC’s Action Matrix based on a White PI for
unplanned power changes, which indicated a level of performance requiring additional NRC
oversight. A supplemental inspection was performed to review your evaluations of these
unplanned power changes and we found that your corrective actions appeared appropriate.
Additionally, the staff has identified a substantive cross-cutting issue in the area of problem
identification and resolution (PI&R), particularly regarding ineffective problem evaluations and
untimely, ineffective corrective actions. Numerous inspection findings documented shortcomings
within the problem identification and resolution area, and these shortcomings enabled problems to
recur and longstanding problems to go uncorrected. The most noteworthy examples included
repetitive emergency diesel generator (EDG) problems involving fuel oil leaks and the fatigueinduced
failure of an EDG turbocharger, the failure of a charging pump by a known problem due to
inadequate preventive maintenance, an inadvertent carbon dioxide actuation in an EDG room due to a degraded EDG cylinder isolation valve, and the June 2002 failure of an air-operated service water valve following corrective actions for a similar January 2001 failure.

We also note that the same overall corrective action program is concurrently implemented at both
Salem and Hope Creek, and that both stations have experienced an adverse PI&R trend. This
appears to indicate that program improvements to address these trends will need to be broadly
based and site-wide to improve PI&R performance at Salem Units 1 and 2, as well as at Hope
Creek. We plan to closely monitor your performance in the PI&R area.
The enclosed inspection plan details the inspections scheduled through March 31, 2004. The
inspection plan is provided to minimize the resource impact on your staff and to allow for
scheduling conflicts and personnel availability to be resolved in advance of inspector arrival
onsite. Routine resident inspections are not listed due to their ongoing and continuous nature.
The inspections in the last six months of the inspection plan are tentative and may be revised at
the mid-cycle review meeting.
As you are aware, since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the NRC has issued several
Orders and threat advisories to enhance security capabilities and improve guard force readiness.
We have conducted inspections to review your implementation of these requirements and have
monitored your actions in response to changing threat conditions. For calendar year 2003, we
plan to continue these inspections, conduct portions of the security baseline inspection program,
as well as perform additional inspections to evaluate your compliance with new requirements that
may be ordered. Based on our final determinations in this regard, we will notify you of any
inspection plan changes.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC’s “Rules of Practice,” a copy of this letter and its
enclosure will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document
Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document system
(ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/
adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
If circumstances arise which cause us to change this inspection plan, we will contact you to
discuss the change as soon as possible. Please contact Glenn Meyer at 610-337-5211 with any
questions you may have regarding this letter or the inspection plan.
Sincerely,
/RA/
A. Randolph Blough, Director
Division of Reactor Projects
Docket No. 50-272; 50-311
License No. DPR-70; DPR-75
Enclosure: Salem Unit 1 & 2 Inspection/Activity Plan
Mr. Harold W. Keiser 3
cc w/encl:
M. Friedlander, Director - Business Support
J. Carlin, Vice President - Engineering
D. Garchow, Vice President - Projects and Licensing
G. Salamon, Manager - Licensing
T. O'Connor, Vice President - Operations
R. Kankus, Joint Owner Affairs
J. J. Keenan, Esquire
Consumer Advocate, Office of Consumer Advocate
F. Pompper, Chief of Police and Emergency Management Coordinator
M. Wetterhahn, Esquire
State of New Jersey
State of Delaware
N. Cohen, Coordinator - Unplug Salem Campaign
E. Gbur, Coordinator - Jersey Shore Nuclear Watch
E. Zobian, Coordinator - Jersey Shore Anti Nuclear Alliance
Mr. Harold W. Keiser