ML19260C538

Forwards Complaint for Damages & 791018 Summons for Chem Nuclear Sys,Inc Per Util Insurance Policies,In Response to NRC Ltr

ML19260C538
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	01/02/1980
From:	Alton C AMERICAN NUCLEAR INSURERS
To:	Dinitz I Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8001070376
Download: ML19260C538 (13)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:1 \\/ 9 C \\ ~ CF:cE C: TrE GE'.E aL :O J DEL n+ =u ...c v ,, : w :.,. 7: >-a N99 m BURT C.PROOM.CPCU ^" January 2, 1980 Mr. Ira Dinitz, Indemnity Specialist Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Dinitz:

Re: Jon Robert Hickey vs. Chem-Nuclear Systems, Inc., et al (under SMUD policies) D/L October 23, 1978 As you requested and supplementing my letter of December 4th to Mr. Saltzman, I enclose copies of the Summons and Complaint in the captioned action. Further, we have just filed to remove the suit to the U.S.D.C., Eastern District of California. Very truly yours, Chester G. Alton Associate Counsel CGA/jr Enclosures te'Y'q 8001070 3) b g v;c/ ; : ; . :.ene/ : u~ 2 e +: :f... ":5 m ?~ -::~"5

+-

c., :

• ..u AUtstEs$ OF ATToANEY Tisu.e reu,NE No

. CA COLAT LSE CNiv BONHAM & PETERSEN (916) 985-3480 309 Riley Street i Folsom, CA 95630 arroaN:v Foa mamos Plaintiff insert name of Couri, audicias d stroCt or OrancPi Court, if any and Posi ottice and sireet Accress SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO PL.AtNTiFF JON ROBERT HICKEY O C D 'P 'g n rR) n q e ul 3 O ~- oEFENoANT-l CHEM-NUCLEAR SYSTE".S, INC.; DOES I - XV, and I i ROE INCORPORATED I-V h h h',l l "' " ""'" bS4745 SUMMONS NOTICE! You have been sued. The court may decide , AVISO! Ustco na sido demancado. El tobunu puece against you without your being heard untess you respond decicar contra Ud. s;n aud.cracia a menos que Ud. re-within 30 days. Read the information below. sponda centro de 30 dias. Lea la informacion que sigue. If you wisn to seem the advice of an attorney in this S Us:ec cesea so ic.:ar el conse,o ce n a cgaco en matter you snousu do so promptly so tnal your written este asunto. cecer a racer:0 inmeciatamente. ce es:a response,if any, may be filed on time. marera su remesta escr.:a. s. ha/ a:guna puece ser registraca a t.empo

1. TO THE DEFENDANT-A cml compiaint nas ceen filen Dy :ne piamtit' aga.ns:,0u 't you w sr 'a ce' arc :nis.awsut.

you must, within 30 days af ter tnis summons is servec on you f.ie witn :n.s court a.v itten resacese :o tna come:aint ./0 _Unless you do so, your cef ault will be entered on appiicat.on of :ne piant.:t. and tn.s court may enter a.ucgment 33;*J _ egainst you for the relief demanced in tne compia.nt, wnicn couic resuit.n garnisnment ct wages !a.ung of money J. A. SimD5Cr., County Cla n UniedW9 "or property or other rehet requested in tne complaint. DATED: OCI IO .C: era.9y __, Depyty

2. NOTICE TO THE PERSCN SERVEO You are sersec (SE AL)

a.,,,,_; As an incmdual defencant t

b C As the person sued uncer 'ne f.c:.::cus name of O 1 w

c. ~_Z On benaif of ('jp

( l ac_Gu A+U.e, f v d Uncer-X CCP 41610 (Corporation) Z CCP4:6 60 U.imoO C CCP 416 :'O (Oefunct Corscrat:an; i CCP c 5 N (mcomoe:ent) Z CCP 416.40 ( Assec;at.on or Par:ne sn.p) Z CCP 4: 6 E t nc.vicuai) i Z Ctt'er a Z Sy personal ce ivery on (Date) A.r.t.en resconse must ce n tre form s<esce ovo :, w :..-:,,n.4 a,,es as a,- ' m.6: te ' s n n s c.vr.-r, me at we, ...ng . n: : :st of se<v co of a c:cv on eacn o.a.nw s anoree, r3 en eaca :.a nut me -craw vec c. in esme,

• e'-e.ren a 3 w ys s :ee ea se%ec on a party ma, ary acceaomg on ine waca of se<vice f or e ame e see CC2 a') o Prou;n 415 R
• e
• orc ::,m s..ni

.c cu.s c: 3s:..cc,.r sia.ca ' p ainli'f ' incivoes cross-ccmma.nant. ce'eecam.nctuCes cross Jf'*ncami ice s n;We #c:v0es I*e 0%ea. I$"" Form Adocie3 tv Av.e 982 gr a /' O [ Oh 002 a'? 2 > a:2 Oc a=m Juo'cias C ouncil of CaWorn.a q e p,j! }tll t 4 4D gjh / 41$ Q Revised Ettective January 1.19r9 w e i

1. N g

-{'courius.ony ( retspi.iost oo : NAue ANo Aconess or : Norn-DEAN L. PETERSEN. BONHAM & PETERSEN (916) 985-3480 309 Riley Street Folsom, CA 95630 lagert pace of Court Jud'Caal drsir'Cf of brancri Cow 1. 't any and Post Office and siseen Adsress r SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO 720 Ninth St., Sacramento, CA 95814 , PLAINTIFF JON RODERT HICKEY 4 oEFENoANT CHEM-NUCLEAR SYSTEMS, INC.; DOES I - XV, and ROE INCORPORATED I-V NfM/MiNOTICE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT y. 284745 .t ~< -r u :?.te g g, y TO: CHEM-NUCLEAR. SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant: (inseri Pa*O Of ndiwadwa. Defg served) This summons and other document (s) indicated below are teing served pursuant to Section 415 30 of the Ca:iternia Code of Civil Procedure. Your failure to comp'ete this form and return.t to me within 20 days may suo;ect you (or the party on whose benalf you are ceing served) to h30>hty for tre paymeat of any expenses incurred in serving a summons on you in any other manner permitted by law if you are being served on cenalf of a corporation. unincorporated association (includmg a partnersh<o), or otner entity, this form must be signed by you in the name of such entity or Of a person authorized to receive service of process on behalf of such entity. In ali otner cases. tnis form must be s.gned by you ersona.'y or ci a cerson authorized by you to acknowledge receipt of summons. Section 415 30 provides that this summons and otr r document (s) are e deemed served on the date you sign the Acknowledgment of Receipt Oeiow. if you Yeturn Inis form to me. 'N // ' N j~b nib \\. / C / Dated: November.9.,.1979. 'M d dipatw e of se, ice') r ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT This acknowledges receipt of (To be completed by sender oefore man.ng)

1. EU A copy of tne summons and of the complaint.

2. C A Copy of the summons and of the Petition (Marriage) and.

Blank Confidential Cour'sehng Statement (Marriage) C Order to Show Cause (Marriage) 'O Q g9 r n t O Blank Responsive Ceciaration UU ,J' U UU C Blar k Financial Declaration

o O'Other: (Specify) r gr.o.ea-oi.i.4o r.cipi.no r

dji s cate of receipt:,. November 15, 1979 Y d Mt(/ A J+A W spaiora :: ecyn w/nn.... ;py re % m,ie' a ac.nc ecagme / s m A:e on teni. 3r. m twrrersan) Chem-Mu di ca/r 5 /s to:ns, Inc. Date tnis form is signed November 16, 1979 F,pe or :w,Iur v.! r ; a. c' e u r, t a r, on.c:se :eu ms wm s srom t o,- ., i,..

,.a n., a

.....c we s, c. e.,, NOTICE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECE!PT

c. o.. ne.,"

avere. o 1696 092

END0RSED: l BONHAM & PETERSEN l Attorneys at Law ., lod 2 l 309 Riley Street l Folsom, CA 95630 OCTI 81979 i 3 i i (916) 985-3480 J.A. sivpson C[ggg i By N. Din, DepalE 4 l' Attorneys for Plaintif f 5 i 6 I 7 l l 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 1 l 9 I IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO i ~484745 10 I 1i JON RODERT HICKEY, ) No. ) i Plaintiff, ) 12 I ) I 13 l vs. ) CO:!Puna. :02 DAMAGES ) i 14 CHEM-NUCLEAR SYSTEMS, INC.; ) l DOES I - XV, and ) 15 i ROE INCORPORATED I-V, ) ) i 16 Defendants. ) i ) 17 i 18 l AS A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION, Plaintiff conclains of Defen-l' 1 l I 19 dants, CHEM-NUCLEAR SYSTEMS, INC., and DOES I -V, and alleges. 20 I. 2] DOES I - V are tne fictitious names of defendants whose I 22 true names are not known to the Plaintif f; and, when the true 23 names of those defendants have ceen ascertained, the true names i i 24 i will be substituted in place of the fictitious names. l l I 25 a-- I 26 Each fictitiously-named defendant is liable as a principal, i i 27 agent, associate or in some other manner for the Intentional 23 aCO or negligence which proximately caused the injuries and i l i 16^6 093 l

( (; ~ I damages suf fered by Plaintif f !!ICKEY. 2 I

III, l

At all times herein mentioned, Defendant, CHEM-NUCLEAR 3 4 l SYSTEMS, INC., was a corporation existing under the laws of the l 5 State of California and doing business in the State of California 6 IV. 7 plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that 8 on or about October 23, 1978, SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILIT'.' 9 DISTRICT (hereinafter "SMUD") agreed to employ and did employ l 10 Defendant, CHEM-NUCLEAR SYSTEMS, INC., to serve SMUD as an { I 11 l independent contractor to advise, plan and supervise the replac-12 ing of the complete miscellaneous prefilter at SMUD's Rancho 13 Seco nuclear power plant in Sacramento County. Pursuant to the f instructedbyDefendanth 14 l replacement of said filter, Plaintiff was 15 l CHEM-NUCLEAR SYSTEMS, INC., to enter the filter room to remove t 16 three (3) lines (inlet, outlet, dra;n). 17 V. i In undertaking said replacement Job, Defendant, CHEM-NUCLEAR 18 l l

SYSTEMS, INC., could recognize such work as likely to create 19 l

20 during its progress a peculiar uareasonable risk of physical 21 l harm to the employees of SMUD unless special precautions were I i 22 taken, in that Defendant then knew radiation overexposure could I 23 occur. I VI. 24 j I 25 Defendant, CHEM-NUCLEAR SYSTEMS, INC., failed to take 26 l special precautions and failed to exercise reasonable care to 27 provide in some other manner for the tak;ng of such precautions 1 in order to avoid the peculiar unrcasonable ::sk of physical 28 1696 094 ! i

{ i I harm likely to be created during the progress of the work. 2 l

yrr,

-'} l s 3 On or about October 23, 1978, Plaintiff, in his capacity an j 6 N i /l employee of SMUD and a the course and scope of his employment, 4 L 5 l was engaged in the cutting of lines on the aforementioned filter. 6 l Then and there, as a proximate result of Defendant, CHEM-NUCLEAR t -1 7 SYSTEMS, INC.'s negligence as hereinabove alleged, a radiation I, 8 j leak occurred subjecting Plaintiff to an overexposure. i 9

yrII, I

l 10 As a proximate result of Defendant, CHEM-NUCLEAR SYSTE:IS, 11 l INC's negligence herein alleged, Plaintiff was seriously and 12 i permanently injured in his health, strength and activity and I 13 sustained injury to his body, and shock and injury to his ner-i 14 l vous system, all of which injuries have caused, and continue to l 15 cause, Plaintiff great mental, physical and nervous pain and 16 suffering. Plaintiff has been damaged thereby in a sum in 17 excess of the minimal jurisdictional amount of this Court. I 18 IX. As a further proximate result of Defendant, CHEM-NUCLEAR 19 i i l 20 l SYSTEMS, INC.'s negligence herein alleged, Plaintiff has been i 21 required to expend money and incur obligations, and will con-l tinue to expend money and incur obligations for medical services, 22 i x-rays, drugs, and sundries reasonably required in the treatment 22 I i 24 and relief of the injuries herein alleged. Plaintiff has been 25 damaged thereby in a sum in excess of the minimal urisdictional I 26 amount of this Court. 27 1 l 28 l I i l rnz nQ)~ uU U/ 1 l l i I X. i 2 I At the time of the injuries, Plaintiff was employed in his 3 usual occupation as a welder, and, as a further proximate result l 4 I of the negligence of Defendants, and each of them, and by reason I 5 j of the injuries suffered by him, Plaintiff was prevented from e 6 attending to such occupation and thereby lost earnings. The 7 full amount of the loss of earnings, past and future is unknown 8 to Plaintiff at this time, and Plaintiff will amend this 9 ! Complaint to state such amount when the same becomes known to 10 i him, or on proof thereof. i 11 l 12 AS A SECOND, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT CAUSE OF ACTION, i, 13 l Plaintiff complains of Defendants, CHEM-NGCLEAR SYSTEMS, INC., 14 i and DOES VI - X, and alleges: i 15 i I. i 16 l DOES VI - X are the fictitious names of defendants whose 1 l 17 true names are not known to the Plaintiff; and when the true i 18 l names of those defendants have been ascertained, the true names 1 19 I will be substituted in place of the fictitious names. i i 20 i II. } 21 ~l Plaintiff incorporates by reference Paragraphs : through 22 ^I X of the First Cause of Action. 23 III-24 I At all times herein mentioned, Defendents, COES V -X, i l 25 ^ were the agents and employees of their Co-Defendant, CHEM-LJCLEAR I 26 SYSTEMS, INC., and, in doing the things herein mentioned, were 27 l acting within the scope of their authority as such agents and 23 l employees, and with the permission and consent of their l 1 l i 1696 096 _4_ e

( (h I j Co-Defendant, CHEM-NUCLEAR SYSTEMS, INC. i l i I 2 IV. i 3 On or about October 23, 1978, Plaintiff was employed as 4 a welder by SMUD at its nuclear power plant in Sacramento County,l 5 California. Plaintiff was instructed by DOCS VI - X to enter l the filter room to cut off the inle /outle and drain lines with 6 l 7 an oxyacetylene cutting torch. 8 V. 9 Defendants, DOES VI - X, and Defendant, CHEM-NUCLEAR SYSTEMS, l 10 ! INC., were employed by SMUD for the purpose of planning and I 11 ! directing the replacement of the miscellaneous wastes prefilter l 12 l cannister, a part of the miscellaneous licuid radvaste sys tem. l l 13 l Plaintiff was dependant upon Defendants, and each of them, toi I l 14 l monitor and report to him radiation levels in the filter room. 4 I 15 I VI. I 16 At said time and place, Defendants, and each of them, so 17 negligently performed their duties as to cause Plaintiff to be is I subjected to a radiation overexposure. S 19 j Defendants, and each of them, were aware that conditions had i 20 changed in the filter room.from the preplanning meeting; speci-I 21 l fically, the housing did not drain and the prefilter aousing had f I I 22 fallen. Defendants negligently proceeded with the operation withq l 23 out a resurvey, in violation of 10 CFR 20. Further, Defendants, 24 and each of them, had in their pcssession and centrol at the job i 25 site a continuous-indicating dose rate instrument. The technical i l specification 6.13.la states that access control to a high 26 27 radiation area must assure that a worker be provided with a Con-f t 23 tinuous-indicating dose rate instrument. Despite Decencants' I I, i 7 ! l 1696 09i

I f I possession and control of said instrument and the fact that l 2 Plaintiff was being sent to a high radiation area, no such I 3 instrument was used. l 4 V-+. i l As a proximate result of the negligence of Defendants, and 5 i 6 ' each of them, Plaintiff was injured in his health, strength 7 and activity, sustaining bodily in3uries and shcck and injury 8 I to his nervous system, which have caused and will cause him t ) great mental and physical pain and suffering, all to his general 9 I l 10 damage in a sum in excess of the minima _ jurisdiction of this 11 i Court. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on such informa- ,I 12 I tion and belief alleges, that said in3u acs will result in some l 13 l permanent disability to him. I 14 VIII. I 15 As a further proximate result of the negligence of Ociendants, 16 and each of them, Plaintiff has incurred and wi]l continue to in-4 cur medical and related expenses. The full accunt of such 17 l 18 expense is not known to Plaintiff at this time, and Plaintiff 19 ! will amend this Complaint to state such amount when the same l l becomes known to him or on prcof thereof. i 20 I 21 IX. 22 At the time of the injuries, Plaintiff was employed in his i 23 usual occupation as a welder, and, as a further proximate result of the negligence of Defendants, and each of them, and by reason 24 I i 25 l of the injuries suffered by him, Plaint;ff was prevented frc= 26 attending to such occupation and thereby ics: earnings. The i w - tur3' U 27 l full amount of the loss of earnings, Pas; anC I to Plaintiff at this time, and Plaintiff w;11 amend this Caglaint 23 I l 1696 098

f ~ ( i i to state such amount when the same becomes known to him, or on i l' i 2 l proof thereof. l l 3 i AS A THIRD, SEPARATE, AND DISTINCT CAUSE OF ACTICN, Plaintiff 4 5 complains ot Defendants, ROE INCORPORATED I - V and DOES XI - XV, i i and alleges: l 6 l 7 I-8 DOES XI - XV are fictitious names of Defendants whose true .9 names are not known to the Plaintiff; and, when the true names of those defendants have been ascertained, the true names will 10 l 1 11 j be substituted in place of the fictitious names. l t II. 12 13 Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations of l i }4 Paragraphs I through X of the First Cause of Action. III. j 15 l ROE INCORPORATED I - V are the fictitious names of a bus - 16 j 17 ness or businesses whose true names are not known to the Plaintiff; i is ! and, when the true names of those Defendants have been'ascer-19 tained, the true names will be substituted in place of the ficti-20 tious names. IV. 21 22 i Defendants, ROE INCORPORATED I -V, are involved in the I 23 l design, manufacturing, distribution and sale of the miscel-I 24 laneous liquid radwaste system and the miscallaneous wastes pre-25 filter cannister. i i 26 V-27 l Defendants, ROE INCCRPORATED I -V, intended that said rad-f system would be purchased for use in a nuclear 7xer plar.:. 23 waste l l, 1696 099 I l 6 = emp

I I VI. i i 2 l The filter was unsafe ror its intended use by reason of a i 3 defect in its design, manufacture, and assemply'which allowed l it to malfunction and fall so that it could not drain. 4 I I 5

vII, 6

On or about October 23, 1978, Plaintiff was in and around 7 said radwaste system at the SMUD Rancho Seco nuclear power plant I 8 for the purpose of changing the filter. During the course of this! I 9 ! use and as a proximate result of the defect hereinabove described, f Plaintiff could not sever the drain lines and was sub;ccred to li 10 i 11 a radiation overexposure. s l 12 v..-i. l l 13 j As a proximate result of the defect and radiation over-f, 14 ! exposure, Plaintiff was injured in his health, strength and j l 15 activity, sustaining bodily injuries and shock and injury to i i 16 his nervous system, which have caused and will cause him great i 17

mental and physical pain and suffering, all to his general 18 l damage in a sum in excess of the minimal ;urisdiction of this i

l9 I Court. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on such informa-l f tion and belief alleges, that said in;uries will result in some 20 i 21 permanent disability to him. 72 IX. As a further proximate result of the defect, Plaintiff has 23 1 incurred and will continue to incur T.edical and related expenses. 24 25 The full amount of such expense is not known to Plaintiff at i 26 l this time, and Plaintiff will amend this Compla;nt to stanc such 27 amount when the same becomes known to him or on proof nereof. I I I 23 l I i l : 1696 100 1 I. 8 66@ .N

(- (: l I i X. I 2 At the time of the injuries, Plaintiff was employed in I .i 3 his usual occupation as a welder, and, as a further proximate l result of the defect and by reason of the injuries suffered 4 I 5 by him, Plaintiff was prevented from attending to such occupa-i 6 tion and thereby lost earnings. The full amount of the loss i I 7 of earnings, past and future, is unknown to Plaintiff at this l l' 8 tine, and Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to state such 9 amount when the same becomes known to him, or on proof thereof. 10 l I 11 NHEREFORE, Plaint 1:: prays Judgment as follows: l 12 1. For general damages in an amount in excess of the j 1 t ,! minimum Jurisdiction of this Court; 13 l 34 l 2. For special damages for medical and incidental expenses i .l 15 according to proof; "l 16 l 3. For loss of earnings according to proof; l 4. For costs of suit incurred herein; and 17 I l f 5. For such other and further reEef as the Court deems

3 i

19 l Pr0Per-20 l DATED: October. 1979. BONHAM & PETERSEN f, 21 I 22 i By: DEAN L. PETERSEN 23 l AttorneZs for Plaintiff f 24 i i 25 26 27 2S i i 1696 101 l ~ V. I.:11__T.F I C A_T._I_O N_ l ~ i 2 l 3 I am the Plaintiff in the above-entitled 4 action; I have read the foregoing pleading, and know the 5 contents thereof; and I certify that the same is true of my own knowledge, except as to the mattera which are therein stated 6 7 upon my information or belief, and as to those matters I I f I 8 believe it to be true. l 9 I dec1.are under penalty oc perjury that the foregoing l l 1 10 I is true and correct. il Executed on October 1970 at Folsom, I i 12 l Califernia. .{ 13 I i 14

• \\

4 e 4 1 16 i 17 i 18 i 19 l 20 l 21 22 j 23 l i 24 i 25 } 26 ] 1 27 i 28 i t 's i 1696 102 -}}