ML16342B098
| ML16342B098 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 07/13/1984 |
| From: | Bishop T, Kirsch D, Shollenberger NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8502150535 | |
| Download: ML16342B098 (6) | |
Text
~go RE0(((
Wp
)f*p~4 UNITED STATES CLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIO REGION V 1450 MARIALANE,SUITE 210 WALNUTCREEK, CALIFORNIA94595 JUL 13 >N lE FlLE COPy MEMORANDUM FOR:
File DESIGNATED ORIGINAL FROM:
SUBJECT:
Diablo Canyon Allegation-Review ZKZ
'Certitie(I W
DOCUMENTATION OF ALLEGATION REVIEW PANEL ACTIVITIES A Diablo Canyon allegation review panel meeting was conducted on Sunday, July 8,
1984, to consider allegations and propose future staff actions necessary to address the concerns identified in the documents listed in Paragraph B,
below.
A.
The panel was composed of the following individuals:
T.
W. Bishop, RV D. F. Kirsch, RV H. Schierling, NRR R. Meeks, OI L. Shollenberger, RV T. Crowley, RV R. Stark, NRR B.
Documents Examined l.
GAP Submittals a.
GAP document dated June 21, 1984 with Attachments 2
through 14, 16, 17 and 18.
Attachments 1 and 15 were not provided by GAP.
The staff determined that certain Attachments were duplicates of attachments provided with other submittals.
These are:
'Attachment 2:
This is the same document as that provided as Exhibit 8 of the June 11, 1984 Joint Intervenor (Jl) submittal
'Attachment 3:
This is the same document as that provided as Attachment 1 of the May 31, 1984 GAP letter to H. Schierling, NRR.
'Attachment 4:
This is the same document as that provided as Exhibit 6 of the June ll, 1984 JI submittal.
'Attachment 5:
This is the same document as that provided as Exhibit 10 of the June ll, 1984 JI submittal.
'Attachment 6:
This is the same document as that provided as Exhibit 5 of the June ll, 1984 JI submittal.
'Attachment 8:
This is the same document as that provided as Attachment 2 of the May 31, 1984 GAP letter to H. Schierling, NRR.
'Attachment 13 and 14:
These are the same documents as those provided as Exhibits 1 and 2, respectively, of the June ll, 1984 JI submittal.
8502150535 8407l3 PDR ADQCK 05000275 6
f) h
2 ~
Joint Internevor submittal dated June ll, 1984.
a.
Exhibits 3, 4, 7 and 9 were not included in the copy provided to Region V and thus, not reviewed by the panel.
b.
The June ll, 1984 JI submittal was reviewed by a panel previously, as documented in the June 26,( 1984 memo to file.
The staff examined the allegations contained in the Joint Intervenors motions, Exhibits 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 10 and the June 12, 1984 erratta.
The review conducted on July 8, 1984 constituted a much more detailed examination of each allegation to finally (1) establish resolution responsibilities, (2) determine whether any were duplicates of previous allegations, and (3) determine whether any of the allegations assigned to Region V
required resolution prior to exceeding 5X power.
3.
GAP letter to H. Schierling, dated May 31, 1984, with Enclosures 1,
2 and 3.
(Enclosures 1 and 2 were provided as attachments 3 and 8, respectively, to the June 21, 1984 submittal).
The allegations contained in this letter/enclosures (Nos.
1120-1129, inclusive) were considered previously and submitted for NRR resolution responsibility by memo dated July 3, 1984.
This panel (7/8/84) reaffirmed that this action was appropriate.
4.
NRR has reviewed a transcript of a meeting on May 22, 1984 between NRR and various allegers and determined that it contained 33 allegations which most appropriately require NRR resolution.
The panel concurs with this assignment.
5.
Allegation list No.
1092 (ATS No. RV-84-A-072).
This allegation was assigned to NRR for resolution responsibility.
The panel evaluated the above documents containing allegations in accordance with the criteria presented in SSER-22, pages E5 through E7, examined the allegation listing, and assigned resolution responsibility for each allegation.
In addition, the panel examined those allegations identified as duplicates to provide additional assurance that duplication assignments were properly identified.
Region V has assessed those allegations assigned to Region V and OI for closeout responsibility and determined that none of these require resolution prior to full power licensing.
NRR is separately evaluating their allegations to assess whether any represent topics which require resolution prior to full power licensing.
C.
The panel reviewed the following:
Office of Investigation Reports of Inquiry.
1.
Report Q5-82-006, dated 1/5/84 (Allegation List No. 2) 2.
Report Q5-83-011, dated 6/28/84 (Allegation List No.
18)
ATS No. RV-83-A-018.
3.
Letter dated 4/28/83 (Allegation List No.
- 19) This case is still open and investigations are continuing.
b P
4.
Report Q5-83-018, dated 12/15/83 (Allegation List No. 53)
ATS No. RV-83-A-53.
-5.
Report Q5-83-022, dated 12/12/83 (Allegation List No. 66)
ATS No. RV-83-A-052.
~/ills<
Date zj~uPV D te
~~- f-g<'II<
Date 7P d4 gled'.
gi@Sj' ly 7~lbt uH~
~F.~d m~ ~~ W C,~eggs.
f~~cr g.
Date P as~ +
~
Q~/gal/
Date T.
W. Bishop, RV D. F. Kirsch, RV L. Shollenberger, RV T. Crowley, RV R. Meeks, OI R. Stark, NRR H. Schierling, NRR The panel determined that no further Region V action is necessary and that, with the exception of C.3, above, the allegations are closed.
h