ML19206B230
| ML19206B230 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/26/1978 |
| From: | Mctierran T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTOR & AUDITOR (OIA) |
| To: | Gilinsky V, Hendrie J, Kennedy R NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19206B227 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7905080113 | |
| Download: ML19206B230 (5) | |
Text
j e a4%,
f-
'*g UNITE 0 STATES
[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCT.t!.1E f %_.4',s, ',
_ r.' ~ J '!
W ASHit4GTON, O. C. 20555
. It s nu~.a.> / 5
\\
1 June 26,1973
{
\\
P.EMORANDUM FCR:
Chairman Hendrie Commissioner Gilinsky Commissioner Kennedy Commissioner Bradford ND Fd:
Thomas J. McTiernan, Director N
Office of Inspectar anu Auditor y,
SUBJECT:
INQUIRY INTO AN ALLEGATION JF EFFLCYEE MISCCNCUCT BY RESTRICTING THE IN'/ESTIGAiIGN TO CETER?ilN?
THE RELIABILITY OF THE FLCRIDA FCNER GRID S', LING I
ST. LUCIE r
This is in rescense to the Ccmmissicn's order dated November 8,1977, which directed CIA to conduct an investigation into the subject allega-tion. On October 28, 1977, the Atcmic Safety and Licensi,ng Acceal Scard (ASLAB) entered an order noting that the NRC staff had filed with it allegations that ecolcyees of AEC in 1974 failed to provide the Atcmic Safety and Licensing Scard (ASLS) with information concerning Florida Pcwer and Light Comcany's (FFSL) Pcwer grid disturtances in the St. Lucie Nuclear Pcwer Piant licensing proceedings.
This summary is precared solely fcr the curpose of giving the Ccmmission and readers an overview. 'de strongly urge that the readers review the attached recort and the succor:ing interviews and documents to acpuire full knowledge of the facts and circumstances of this inquiry.
SUM"Y BACXGROUND By letter dated Cctober 13,1977 (Attachmen: A), to the Attorney General j
of the United States, Mr. Rcber: D. ?cIlard, Union of Cancerned Scientists (USC), stated that the AEC action with rescect to Ncrth Anna was part of a more widescread pattern of miscenduct anc that such abuses centinue under the NRC.
Mr. Pollard reccmmended :nat the Department of Justice investigate AEC/NRC conduct in the licensing cf other acv.er plants.
Contact:
D. Ccn van, CIA M. Auerbach, OIA nm O '. j 49-27C51 4L
/
O 7905080// 3 b
i
~
t Commission '
To support his ::ntentien, "r. Follard gave licensing of the 50. Lucie nuclear facility as an examale. He furniched a copy of an AEC memorandum dated August la,1972 ( Attacrment S), anicn indicated that there mign:
i be a problem with the stability of the ??LL pcwer grid.
He furnished a copy of the St. Lucie Safety Evaluation Reccr: (Attacrment C) made public in Novem:er 1974 and indicated that it cid not mention the grid stability Orc:len. He also furnished a letter from the Florida ?cwer and Light Cem:any dated June 16,1977 (Attacr. ment D), which indicated that the St. Lucie plant did experience a loss of offsite pcwer on May 16, 19 "
ALLEGATI'NS Although Mr. Pcilard made broad allegations concerning the integrity of the AEC/NRC licensing prccess, the allegaticn dealt with in this re:crt, which relates specifically to the St. Lucie power plant, is that:
AEC employees engaged in misconduct by not including the St. Lucie plants in their review to determine the reijability of offsite power en the Florida pcwer grid.
Mr. Pollard claimed in his letter to the Attorney Generai tha: wnile initial AEC investigations indicated that instability en the Florica power grid might reach as far north as the St. Lucie site, the staff concerns that the investigation might affect the St. Lucie licensing proceedings apparently caused the sc0ce of the investigation :: be limited to the instability's effect en ??&L's Turkey ?cint nuclear plants.
Mr. Fallard also aileged that by not including :ne St. Lucie plants in the pcwer grid investigation, relevant informaticn was wi hneid frca the St. Lucie hearing boa ds.
Mr. ?cilard infers that had this information been presentec to the hearing bcards, they might not have issued an cperating license to St. Lucie Unit 1.
Sceae of Incuirv We reviewed relevant correspondence, dccuments, reccrds, and rescr:s pertaining :: ne 50. Lucie matter in both '.lasnington anc the Atlanta regional effice. These included the NRC central files for Turkey ?cin:
Unit 3 (Occke: ' o. 50-250), St. Lucie Unit I (Eccket.*lo.
50-335), anc regional records concerning these facilities.
In addition, we in:erviewed approximately 23 ;ersens (Attachment G).
These persons inclucec Mr. ? llarej I
employees in the NRC's Office of "uclear Reac::r Regulati:n (NRR) (formerly the Divisien of React:r Licensing), Office of Inspection and Inforcemen l
(IE), the At mic Safety and Licensing Scard Panel (ASLSP), Regicn II inscec crs ' 3 signed :0 the Turkey Point and St. Lucie plants, a Vice Pres]ctqt o. FP&L, and cther FP&L emolcyees.
A 0*
R l
f Us -
s gm U"
e 43 -
w %w
e Cc=missicn.
,g,,,,
m-
- L, 3 C u C J.",,.,.11
.T--,..,,,c.,.,
Kwv1"a
'T
.1 13 v w.
- L. v. 21
, 7 b i.. id
- ~ -
,,.c
- c..
.. s 7 -.. i b.m
... t s 'w
. C ; ; N :.7.u -
Kt3'K.
i
~ _; : : s_..,., _: _ :. i 2:
..a. :_.: n.' -
2, u:.:....."
t in
..r S ERV '. 4G ST L.CIE In order to determir.e the valicity of Mr. Pollard's allegations, cur inquiry consicered the following:
The history cf grid disturbances relating to Turkey Point Units 3 and 4; Whether the Director cf Regulation, 4EC, in 1974 ecuested L censing to look into the grid problems teing experiencea in Florida; Whether the Electrical '.trumenta:icn and Centro Systems E anch (EICSS) conducted a re'. :ew of the grid pecblem as stated in :he August 14, 1974 memorandum, and whether the., review was restrictec-.
to include only Turkey ?cint Units 3 and 4e The intent of the Parr August 14, 1974 memorandum; Whether the AEC staff adecuately determined that the applicant met the regulatory requirements for offsite pcwer; Whether the issue of offsite cower was presented to the ASL3 curing the St. Lucie I hearings; Whether the issue of offsite pcwer was raised before the ACRS; and
~
Whether the reliability of the offsite pcwer for St. Lucie is a current problem.
Incuiry Results Based upcn the matters we were able to verify with interviews cr docu-ments, we determined that:
The Florida cwer grid did ex:erience numerous disturbances during the pericd of April 1973 thr ugn June 1974 As a result of the april 3-4, 1973 grid disturbances, officials of the Directorate of Regulat:ry C;erttiens (new II) met with FF&L re resentatives and c:ncluded that F:LL had imcie. rented acor:priate ccrrective ac:icn.
Subsequently, FF&L issued re:cres on :nese distur:ances and a subsequent June 25, 1974 distur:ance; ::cies of these re crts were furnished to One AEC. Curing the gric disturbances, the Turkey
- Point nuclear units c erated as designed.
O O
LL L
e
m Commission Mr. Munt:ing, the then Director of.egulat cn, ex ressed cancern i
over the grid disturcance arcblen and asked tn'.: Licensing taxe apprcpriate action such that tne loss of one unit on the gric.~cula not cause collapse of the entire grid.
This a:carently is wnat Mr. Parr refers c as an "investiga:icn in his August la,1974 memorandum.
The EICSB did concuct a review of the grid prcblem, but this was a brief and li.,;ited review of the entire FPSL grid system to reaf#irm the grid's adequacy. A meeting, newever, aas also held on Sep;emner 15, 1974 with FPSL officials :: discuss the grid disturbances and plar.ned corrective acticns.
Mr. Parr udvised that the Curpose of his August la,1974 memorandum a
was to (1) infor" his su ervisors of a situation that mignt affec St. Lucie licensing actions, (2) to advise as to planned acdi:icnal review of the grid system by the technical review staff; and (5) :a reccmmend exclusien of St. Lucie frcm the.<eview until infor aticn showed that the problems ex erienced at Tut-key ?cin did, in fac:,
affect St. Lucie.
Mr. ?arr said that he did not intend :: restric:
any review in a su Oressive manner, but rather to Maid involvinc the license proceecing of St. Lucie until there was assurance there was a problem involving St. Lucie.
The Licensing staff did review the grid recuirements under the applicable regulatory recuirements for offsite pcwer, as imolied by the :nclusions contained in the St. Lucie L' nit 1 SER.
A c:p~v of the sER was routinely furnished to ne ASL3.
The Licensing staff at that time did not consider crid stabilit~y to be a major review issue and, therefore, did not brinc the matter to the attentien of the ASL3. The Licensing staff censidered the crid disturbances to be one of the issues for the staff and I.:clicant to resolve. Althcugn the McGuire decision recuired the Licensin-staff to inform the hearing bcard cf all new informa-icn wnic.! is relevant and material to the ma::ers being adjudica:ec, due to :ne lack of specific procecures and guidelines imolementing :he McGuire decisicn, the Licensing staff either was unaware of or cid not ccnsider the "cGuire cecisien to :e a;:plicable during the St. Lucie 1 licensing prcceedings.
The decket files shcwed that the ACRS was informed of the crid disturtances affecting Turkey Point. ' A review of the e.= aries of the muctings of the ACRS on St. Lucie i showed that tne su:jec s of grid stability anc less of offsite cwer were discussed only in :ne context of a severs hurricane. The ACRS did have tne St. Lucie 1
' SER, wnich ccntained a discussicn of offsite pcwer, for :neir review.
4 v-
~.
4 s
Ccmmission _
The issues of grid stability and Icss of offsite pcwer are currently being addressed as
- generic" issues by "RC.
CCNCLUSICNS Cur inquiry did not discicse the existence of documents which clearly resolved the allega:icn of misconduct by the Licensing staf#
Interviews with key perscnnel v.ere also inconclusive because they aere unable :c recall certain'avents. Actions anc conversations wnich may nave taken place at the time of the St. Lucie a?olicaticn (1973-72) nere nec reduced to writing and, thereface,,se were not able to clearly reconstruct the history as 00 hcw the grid stability issue was handlec by the AE~.
Mcwever, as ncted above, the grid disturcance problem to scme degree was addressed with a brief and limited review of grids being performed by j
the staf#.
Our inquiry, based on the limited documentation available and the reccl-lection of the individuals involvec, did nc: discicse (1) any misconduct cn the cart of AEC emcloyees in their handling c~f grid stability issue during the licensing process for the St. Lucie olant, or (2) that tne grid disturbances excerienced in Ficrida affected the saf; coerations of the nuclear plants on the F?ll grid.
Except for Mr. Parr's cwn explanaticn of the meaning and intent of his August 14, 1974 memcrandum, li le additional informaticn was deveicped concerning it.
The McGuire decision a;carently was never sericusly considered by staf' as to whether it recuired advising -he Scard of the
_ id disturbances, and as a result inferration regarding the grid dis-turbances was not brought to the attention cf tne St. Lucie nearing board (s).
Attachmencs:
As stated cc: Lee V. Gossick, ECO d
t e
S e
Y k}
qR l\\
\\,
Lu 9