ML19323B534
| ML19323B534 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 05/06/1980 |
| From: | Carrier W AMERICAN NUCLEAR INSURERS |
| To: | Saltzman J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8005130449 | |
| Download: ML19323B534 (14) | |
Text
8005130 %
VE C
\\
\\mC_E R
\\ v,ILl c
t_
SURT C. PROOM,CPCU Pressdent May 6, 1980 Mr. Jerome Saltzman, Deputy Chief Office of Antitrust & Indemnity Directorate of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Subject:
Three Mile Island
Dear Mr. Saltzman:
Herewith copy of the most recent complaint filed in an action in the U.S.
District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania identified as The Oddfellows Home of Pennsylvania v. Me:ropolitan Edison, et al, Civil Action #80 6268. The matter is being defended on behalf of the insurers by Pe;'per, Hamilton & Scheetz of Philadelphia.
The magistrate has entered an order consolidating this case with the consolidated class action for pre-trial and trial purposes.
Yours very truly,
- .,,'tC(d-
- u<.
William C. Carrier Claim Counsel WCC/ls Enclosure i
I b "$0f..C^oec c/ Occ]2 / ZA S ~3C5 m E c.bct 2:3.'c7~ '7 5,/ TL<.'c :43-29
- C
,Fte
r THE ODD FELLOWS HOME OF PENNSYLVANIA Versus METROPOLITAN EDIS0N COMPANY, ET AL Filed: March 12, 1980 Civil Action Number: 80 6268 Attorney for Plaintiff Robert E. Yetter, Esq.
Metzger, Wickersham, Knauss & Erb 111 Market Street P. O. Box 93 Harrisburg, PA 17108 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Jury Trial Demanded Plaintiffs 1
The Odd Fellows Home of Pennsylvania at:
999 West Harrisburg Pike, Middletown, Pennsylvania.
Summary of Complaint Plaintiff is a non-profit corporation with its principal place of business in Middletown, Pennsylvania where it owns and operates a nursing home.
Defendents A.
Metropolitan Edison Company, Muhlenberg, PA 50% owner of TMI B.
Babcock & Wilcox Company, New York, NY Designer and constructor of Three Mile Island C.
J. Ray McDermott & Company, Inc., New Orleans, LA Parent and controlling owner of Babcock & Wilcox Company D.
General Public Utilities, Parsippany, NJ Parent corporation of Metropolitan Edison Company E.
Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Morristown, NJ 25% owner of TMI 1
F.
Catalytic, Inc., Philadelphia, PA Responsible for the maintenance of TMI facility G
Pennsylvania Electric Company, Johnstown, PA 25% owner of TMI
. #80 6268 H.
Dressler Industrial Valve and Instrument Division of Dressler Industries, Inc., Texas Designed, manufactured and supplied valves and other fittii.gs used in the construction of TMI Jurisdic' ion, Based on 42 U.S.C.A.
22.10 The following allegations as to negligence are set foi*th in the complaint:
- 1) The operation of the Three Mile Island 'uclear facility is an ultra-hazardous risk for the reason that a) Release of radioactive material b) Use of TMI is calculated to cause the release of huge amounts of nuclear energy with attendant risk of ex-plosion, fires and/or nuclear fallout It is alleged the defendents designed, constructed, maintained and operated TMI in a conscious disregard of the high-known degree of risk, of bodily harm and injury.
The following allegations of previous unplanned events at the TMI facility are as follows:
1)
In March of 1978 unplanned generation stoppage occurred.
- 2) On January 15, 1979 facility was closed because of mechanical malfunction.
The following specific allegations of negligence appear in Paragraph a)
Improper design b)
Inadequate design c)
Inadequate cooling system d)
Inadequate safety or backup system e)
Inadequate safety system to avoid the unreasonable risk of over-heating with attendant risk of radioactive contamination f) Failing to take proper measures to avoid overheating of the nuclear facility on March 28, 1979 l
g) Failing to provide proper and adequate training and testing of personnel cperati,19 TMI h)
Improper inspection l
l l
l l
. #80 6263
- 1) Faulty and/or defective component material in construction j) Failure to warn plaintiffs of defects Paragraph 9 alleges a cause of action based on Restatement of Torts, Section 402A and 402B.
Paragraph 10 alleges a miscarriage of an altra-hazardous activity.
Paragraph 11 alleges the following releases:
a) The release of radioactive steam into the atmosphere b) The release of radioactive water into the Susquehanna River c) Development of conditions within the reactor creating a threat of (1) Nuclear explosion from a hydrogen bubble (ii) Overheating of nuclear mater',1 leading to a meltdown.
(iii) Other miscarriages Paragraph 12 alleges violation of the terms of the U.S. Nuclear license.
Paragraph 13 alleges that the events occurring March 28, 1979 resulted in an extraordinary nuclear occurrence.
Paragraph 14 alltges incident of March 28 constituted a nuclear incident under U.S.C.A. Section 2014.
Paragraph 15 alleges exclusive control of the TMI utility at location designated above.
Paragraph 16 alleges evacuation by reason of recommendation of the Governor.
Paragraph 17 - Plaintiff incurred the following expenses:
a) The sum of $1,380.00 covering transportation costs of patients to Harrisburg State Hospital b) $42,790.44 covering the cost of the care provided to patients at the Harrisburg Hospital.
Plaintiff seeks damages in excess of $10,000.00 including witness fees and reasonable attorney fees.
WCC/ls 5/6/80 l
i
=
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Tl!E ODD FELLotiS HOME OF PENNSYLVANIA 999 liest Harrisburg Piko
!!iddletown, PA 17057
- CIVIL ACTION NO.
h(% h h
)$
v.
is 8'
METROPOLITAN EDISON CO.
,4.
2800 Pottsville Piko Mullenberg, PA 19605
.hh
'gg,7fft$, M*
BADCOCK & WILCOX COMPANY 161 East 42nd Street New York, NY 10017
. gg gr-19?,0 and 32 L wMY, J. RAY McDEPHOTT & COMPANY, INC. :
i/*h@iWM 1010 Conmon Street Now Orleans, LA 70112 and CENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES 260 Cherry Hill Road Parsippany, NJ 07054 and JERSEY CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT CO.
Madison and Punch Bowl Morrictown, NJ and CATALYTIC, INC.
1500 Market Street Cantor Square West Philadolphia, PA 19102 and
'PENNSYLVA'1IA ELECTRIC CO.
1001 Broad Street Johnstown, PA 15907 and DRESSLER INDUSTRIAL VALVE AND INSTRUMENT DIVISIOt! OF DRESSLER :
INDUSTRIES, INC.
- JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
CCHPLAINT.
1.
The plaintiff The Odd Follows Home of Pennsylvania, is a non-profit corporation duly organized and oxisting under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, having its principal place of business at 999 West Harrisburg Pike, Middletown, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, and at all times relevant heroto owned and operated a nursing home at the aforesaid location providing residential, intermediate, and skilled nursing care, within threo (3) miles of the Three Milo Island nuclear powered electrical generating facility.
2.
(a) The defendant, Metropolitan Edison Co., is a Pennsylvania corporation doing business within the Common-wealth of Pennsylvania with offices located at 2300 Pottsvillo Piko, Mullenberg, Pennsylvania, 19605. Metropolitan Edison Co. is engaged in the production and salo of electricity, is a subsidiary of General Public Utilities Corp., is a 50%
owner of the Three Mile Island nuclear powered clectrical generating facility. and is the operator of said facility.
(b) The defendant, Babcock & Wilcox Co., is a New York corporation with of fices located at 161 East 42nd j
Strcot, New York, New York, 10017. Dabcock & Wilcox Co. is l
l a subsidiary of J.
Ray McDormott & Company, Inc., and is engaged in the business, inter alia, of designing and con-l structing nuclear powered electrical generating facilities,,
and did so with respect to the Threc Milo Island facility.
(c) The dofondant, J. Ray McDormott & Company, Inc., is a Delawaro corporation with of fices located at 1010 l
Common Streut, New Orleans, Louisiana, 70112.
J. Ray McDornott & Company, Inc., is the parer.t and controlling j
company of Babcock & Wilcox Company.
1 I.
~
(d) The dofondant, General Public Utilitics. Corp.,
is a Pennsylvania corporation with officos located at 260 Cherry Hill Road, Parsippany, New Jersey, 07054. General Public Utilities Corp. is a public utility holding coopany, and it is the parent company of Metropolitan Edison Co.
(e) The defendant, Jersoy Central Power and Light Co., is a New Jersey corporation with of fices located at Madison and Punch Bowl, Morristown, Now Jersey. Jersey Contral Power and Light Co. is engaged in the business of producing and selling electricity, is a subsidiary of General Public Utilitics Corp., and is a 25% owner of th'e Three Mile Island facility.
(f) The defendant, Catalytic, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation with of fices located at 1500 Market Street, 1.
Contor Squaro West, Philadelphia, Punnsylvania, 19102.
Catalytic, Inc., is responsible for the maintenance of the Three Mile Island facility.
(g) The defendant, Pennsylvania Electric Co.,
is a Pennsylvania corporation having an offico located at 1001 i
Broad Street, Johnstown, Pennsylvania, 15907. Pennsylvania Electric Co. is engaged in the business of producing and selling electricity, is a subsidiary of General Public Utilities Corp., and is a 25% owner of the Three Mile Island facility.
(h) The defendant, Decssler Industrial Valvo and Instrument Division of Dressler Industrics, Inc., is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of busincss in Texas.
Drcssler Industrial Valvo and Instrument Division of Dresslor Industrics, Inc., is engagcd in the business, intcr 1
alia, of designing, nanufacturing ar.d supplying valvos and other fittings used in the construction, operation and
,.7_g
.m
-r.-
maintenanco of nuclear powered electrical generating facilities and did so with respect to the Throc Hile Island facility.
3.
Jurisdiction is based upon 42 U.S.C.A.
2210 et seg and the amount in controversy exceeds $10,000.
4.
Service of process upon the defendants herein has been made pursuant to F.R.C.P. 4(o)'and Title 42 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated - r' utes Annotated, Sections $32.-
and 5323.
5.
The operation of the Three Mile Island nuclear generating facility is an ultra-hazardous activity and that
~
necessarily involves a risk of grave and serious harm to surrounding persons, land and chattels for the following reasons:
(a) Radioactive materials are used in t o routins operation of the facility. If exposed to human beings, thoso radioactive materials will cause cancor, death, dis-figurament, genetic damago, burns, respiratory ailments, and other injury and diseases (b). The o'peration of the Three Mile Island nuclear generating facility involves the use of radioactive material in a mannor calculated to cause the releaso of huge amounts of nuclear energy with the attendant risk of. explosions, i
fires, or nuclear fallout, so huge in magnitude as to be potentially destructive to all human and animal life within at least a 60 mile radius of the Three Mile Island nuclear generating facility.
G.
Acting through its duly authorized agents, workmen, servants and employcos, defendants designed, constructed, l
maintained and operated the Thrce !!ile Island nuclear goncr-l-
ating f acility in conscious disregard of a known high degreo of risk of grievous bodily harm, and in3ury to the lan'd, t
chattels, business and proporty of thoso psrsons lo eted within at least a 60 mile radius of tho facility. Specifi-cally defendants continued operation of the Threo Mile Island nuclear generating facility, without altoration or modification of its design, construction or operational routine, after the following occurrencess (a) In March of 1978 an unplanned generation stoppage occurred; (b) On January 15, 1979, the facility was shut down for two weeks because of "mochanical malfunction."
7.
At all times relevant horeto, defendants knew or should have known that inasmuch as the Three Mils Island nuclear gonorating facility routinely required the process of nuclear fission to radioactivo materials, thero was a substantial and a reasonable z: t that a malfunction of the facility would cause explosion, fires, nuclear fallout, radioactive emissions and bodily harm, death and damage to persons, land and chattels within the vicinity of M.o Three Milo Island nuclear ganerating facility and a 60 milo radius therofrom.
8.
Defendants failed to exorcise reasonable caro for the protection of plaintiff from the risks of harm enumerated in the immediately proceding paragraph in that, among other things:
(a) The design of the Three Milo Island nucioar' I
l generating facility is not such as to pecclude the unroa-l sonabic risk of a major nuclear accident due to human errors (b) Tho design of the Three Milo Island facility is inadequato in that it fails to provida adequato safe-guards against the unreasonablo risk of nuclear catastropho caused by sabotag'o or terroristic acts:
m
O (c) The dofondants failed to provido a cooling system for the nuclear reactor at the Throo Milo Island nuclear generating facility which was adequate to prevent the unroasonable risk that the radioactivo materials in the core of the reactor would melt, destroying the roactor and oscaping into the atmosphere; (d). The defendants failed to provide adequate.
safety or backup systems to avoid the unroasonable risk that the reactor would malfunction in the manner which would lead to a meltdown of the radioactive core of the nuclear reactor, radioactive omissions, fires or explosions; (e) The defendants failed to provido an adequate safoty system to svoid the unreasonablo risk that the nuclear reactor at the Three Mile Island nuclear generating facility would overhoat with the attendant risk that the radioactivo matorial contained therein would melt, causing firo, explosion, and extremely dangerous radioactivo emissions; (f) On March 28, 1979, defendants' agents, workmen, servants and employoos, acting within the scope of their authority, failed to take proper measures to avoid overheat-ing the of nuclear reactor when a red warning light flashed in the computer control room of the Throo Milo Island nuclear generating facility. In particular, they turned off the cooling system for the nuclear reactor which caused tempe.a-ture insido.the reactor to riso to unreasonable high levels, failed to tako proper measures to detect and provent escaping radiation and failed to initiato appropriata safoty measures to provent the reactor from becoming overheated, catching on firo, or exploding; (g) Defendants failed to provido proper and adequata f
training and testing of personnel responsible for operating the Throc :lilo Island nuclear generating facility;
-c-
4 (h) Defondants failed to proporly inspect and test the Three Milo Island facility and its componont parts; (i) Defondants used faulty and dofoctive componont materials in the construction of the Three Milo Island' facility; (j) Defendants failed to' warn the plaintiff of the dofects in the Three Milo Island facility.
9.
There were defects in the manuf acture, design, or installation of the nuclear reactor at the Three Milo Island nuclear generating facility, in violation of Rostatement (Second) of. orts, Section 402A and 402B.
10.
There was a miscarriage of an ultra-hazardous activity, namaly, the activity of operating a nuclear f acility.
11.
On or about, and continuing after March 28, 1979, an accident occurred at the Three Mile Island nucloac genor-ating faility which resulted ins (a) The rolease of radioactivo stsam into the atmosphoto above said facility; (b) The reloaso of radioactive water into the Susquohanna River; (c) The development of conditions within the reactor creating a real and immediate throat of at leasta (1) A nuclear explosion resulting from the formation of a largo hydrogon bubblo in the reactor; (ii) The overhosting of the nuclear material to such a point that they would have burned or molted through the floor of the reactor building and down into the ground
("neltdown") resulting in a further massive dischargo of radioactivity into the atmosphere, the water and the ground surrounding the facility, and:.
(iii) Other miscarriages resulting in the further discharge of radioactivo matorial into the abuosphera, water and soil around said facility.
12.
Dofondants violated the terms and conditions of the license issued by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the Three Mile Island nuclear generating facility, which license (and the statute requiring its issuance) was intended to protect and benefit individuals and businesses within the vicinity of such facility, ircluding the plaintiff and its patients and residential guests.
13.
The events which occurred on March 28, 1979, and the resulting release of radioactive material constituto an
" extraordinary nuclear occurrence" within the meaning of the Atomic Energy Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 2014 et seg and rendered dofondants liable under such Act.
14.
Tho avents which occurred on March 28, 1979, and the resulting release of radioactive material constitute a
" nuclear incident" within the Atomic Energy Act, 42 U.S.C.
Section 2014 et seg and rendered defendants liable under such Act.
15.
The Three Mile Island facility and its component or compositional parts were under the sole and exclusive pos-session and control of the defendants, while it was being engineered, composed, designed, constructed and oporated.
16.
As a direct and proximato result of the situation at the Throo Mile Island facility, as heroinbefore set fo r th, the Governor of Pennsylvania advised all pregnant women and all children under five years of ago to evacuato tha area within fivo miles of the Three Mile Island nuclear generating facility and advised persons within ton miles of the Three Mile Island nuclear generating facility to remain e
.w
,-i -
k indoors. In addition, schools woru closed ia the surr.ounding area and numerous persons did not report for work throughout the aroa. Stato and local governmonts began developing plans for tho evacuation of *.wpau irom tho area within a radius of 20 miles surrounding the Three Mile Island nuclear generating facility. Although no such massivo evacuation was carried out, plaintiff believes and therefore avers that as a result of the above described nuc1 car accident, and its potential e causing a massive release of radioactivity throughout no area, it was compelled to evacuato its patients and resids rial guests to the Harrisburg State H6 spital, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on March 31, 1979. Said patients and guests remained at the Harrisburg State Hospital in Harrisburg,' Pennsylvania, until April 9, 1979, when they' woro returned to its nursing home.
17.
By reason of the aforesaid, plaintiff incurred the following expensos:
4 (a) The sum of $1,380.00 paid to River Rescue for transporting patients and residential guests to the Harrisburg State Hospital, Harrisburg, Pennsylvanias (b) Tho sum of $42,790.44, reprosenting the total cost for the care provided to its patients and residential guests by tho Conmonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Public Welfare, Harrisburg State Hospital, Marrisburg, Pennsylvania.
tiHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims damagos of the defendants, jointly and/or soverally, in an amount in excess of $10,000.00,
_o
i, m.
4 4
excitsive od interest and cost of this suit, including, witness foes and a reasonable attornoy's i*e.
METZGER, UICKERSHAM, KNAUSS & ERB By ObEf A W
Robert E.
et er
~
Attorneys Plaintiff 111 Market Street j
P. O. Box 93 Harrisburg, PA 17108 i
Phones (717) 238-8187 January 9, 1979 i
e 1
i r
a l
s t
o l
A i
t e
$h
- e 4
7
-oe-+r..
m-,,
-g,c
_o
--w-e g--
e tw e m+,
, e, w e-
- m-pw,--
wy
.w-
-en -
c
-**---r.*
-e s e e-e, e we-=--
ww,- w --w e w e e r-*
s
- w'-e+,1
-w,-
-- m
,-w*'er
--