United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19401

Phone: 610/337-5330 Fax: 610/337-5241

Internet: dps@nrc.gov or nas@nrc.gov

I-96-70 October 24, 1996

Contact: Diane Screnci FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil Sheehan

NRC PROPOSES TO FINE PSE&G $150,000 FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS

AT ITS HOPE CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed to fine

Public Service Electric & Gas Company (PSE&G) $150,000 for five

alleged violations of NRC requirements at its Hope Creek Nuclear

Generating Station in Lower Alloways Creek, N.J. PSE&G was

cited, but not fined, for a sixth violation.

All the violations were identified during two NRC

inspections conducted between February 1 and August 3 and involve

lack of planning, corrective action and safety evaluations.

Specifically, the inspectors found:

ˇ Before plant start-ups in February 1991 and April 1994

and during a shutdown for refueling between November

1995 and March of this year, the utility failed to plan

appropriate surveillance testing following maintenance

work on control rod drives and their associated

hydraulic operating systems (two violations).

ˇ When informed by a contractor in 1992 that 15 pairs of

reactor building backdraft isolation dampers were

installed backwards, PSE&G officials failed to correct

these non-conforming conditions until February 1996.

The dampers seal the ventilation system to prevent the

spread of steam in the event of a steam line break.

ˇ After learning in May 1992 that control rod drive

speeds were excessive, the utility did not correct that

situation until October of that year, and did not

address the root cause of the condition until this

year.

ˇ In February of this year, PSE&G implemented a design

change affecting valves that are part of the service

water system, which provides cooling water to the

plant's auxiliary equipment. The utility failed to

obtain NRC review and approval because this change

resulted in an unreviewed safety question.

In a letter to PSE&G, NRC Region I Administrator Hubert

Miller said: "These violations represent a significant regulatory

concern because they indicate that management did not

aggressively assure (1) appropriate planning for the testing of

equipment following maintenance, (2) timely identification and

correction of problems identified concerning safety related

equipment, and (3) appropriate evaluation prior to making changes

to the facility."

"While these issues were ultimately corrected in a manner to

avoid significant safety consequences," Mr. Miller said, "these

actions were completed in response to the NRC's identification of

the problems. For these issues that are the subject of these

violations, your independent review was neither sufficient nor

timely."

The utility was cited for a sixth violation, which involved

inappropriate service water throttle valve settings. This

violation was found by PSE&G as part of an extensive review of

the Service water system in response to the fifth violation. In

light of PSE&G's identification and corrective actions, a civil

penalty is not proposed for this violation.

PSE&G has 30 days either to pay the proposed fine or to

request in writing that part or all of it be withdrawn.

***