ML19338C022
| ML19338C022 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 07/08/1974 |
| From: | Jenny Murray US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007310586 | |
| Download: ML19338C022 (9) | |
Text
_ _. _
, fy
./)
k UNITED STATES OF A'1 ERICA AT0ftIC ENERGY C0'NISSION e
-BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AMD LICENSINfi BOARD In the Matter of-
)
Construction Permit o
1 9 CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY Nos. 81 and 82 g
(Midland. Plant, Units-1and2)
)
64 5
N g 81974" F
,, v.:.n 1
rgl,,;#
+ u..:
g AEC REGULATORY STAFF TRIAL BRIEF 4
as G
In accordance with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's order of May 30, 1974 during the second prehearing conference (Tr.128), this trial brief is submitted on behalf of the Regulatory Staff.
The Staff plans to follow the order of proof indicated in this brief.
- However, scheduling uncertainties associated with the ' conduct of evidentiary hearings and other comitments of Staff witnesses could result in departures from the order of proof indicated.
I.
Issue No. 1:
"Whether the liceraee is implementing.its quality; assurance program in compliance with the Comissiori's regulations."
i-Witness.No'. 1:
Walter E. Vetter
. Qualifications:
fir. Vetter has been the Technical Assistant-8007810 gA O to the Diiector, Directorate of Regulatory
/
b
e
.2 -
Operations, Region III since April, 1973.
Prior to that~ time he was Chief, Reactor Construction Branch, Directora,te of Regulatory Operations, Region III. With respect to construction activities at the licensee's Midland facility, Mr. Vetter participated in five site inspections and four inspections at the licensee's co'rporate offices in Jackson, Michigan, all in addition to supervising-construction inspection de-briefing and~ reviewing inspection reports.
Summary 'of Testimony:
Mr. Vetter briefly describes the general nature of the Regulatory Operations con-struction inspection program as it relates, to the flidland facility. He then describes
'in some detail the circumstances surrounding i
the key inspections of flovember 6-8, 1973 Hovember 20-21 1973, December 6-7, 1973, and January 10-11, 1974. Mr. Vetter also
^
discusses in this context the ~various cor-rective actions deemed necessary.to achieve compliance with AEC's requirements and the l
responses of the. licensee to the needed j
J i:
!l
. 9 i
corrective actions. Mr. Vetter concludes on the basis of his review of the available inspection information that the licensee is currently implementing its Q/A program in full compliance with the Commission's re--
quirements.
Argument:
Mr. Vetter's testimony establishes that,-b.ased upon his review of the licensee's Q/A program, the licensee.is currently implementing that program in compliance with 10 CFR, Part 50, App. B.
Witness.No. 2:
Roger A. Rohrbacher Qualifications:
Mr. Rohrbacher is a Reactor Inspector in the Reactor Construction Branch, Directorate of
- Regulatory Operations, Region ~ III, and the principal inspector for the Midland facility
- since late 1972.
~
Summary of
. Testimony:
Mr._ Rohrbacher provides brief historical
- perspective on the licensee's quality assurance-activities at 'lidland and more detailed discus-sion of;the inspection' findings and licensee-
~
O.
m, 4
m m
D
_ response since' November 5, 1973. Mr.
Rohrbache'r, as a member of the' inspection
- team inmediately concerned with Q/A performance at Midland, concludes that current implementation of'the Q/A program
. it adequate.
Finally, Mr. Rohrbacher presents in some detail the licensee's commitments-for maintaining proper Q/A program implementation throughout the construction process.
Argument:
Mr. Rohrbacher's testimony supplements and supports Mr. Vetter's testimony concerning the adequacy of current Q/A program implementacion at Midland.
e Witness No.-3:
Cordell C. Williams Qualifications:
Mr. Williams 1is a Reactor Inspector in the
- Reactor. Construction. Branch,- Directorate of Regulatory Operations, Region III. Mr. Williams has a broad background in quality assurance work and participated in four inspections at the Midland. facility construction site.
p 1
g
.L.-
Jw e
D, a-
=
^
^
.-5
- ' Summary of
'(
Testimony:
Mr. Williams, as a colleague of Mr.
Rohrbacher, provides ' supplemental j
detailed descriptions of the cadwelding problems at the Midland plant site and
^
their eventual resolution.
In addition, Mr. Williams, as a co-author of the December 6-7, 1973 and the January 10-11, 1974 inspection reports, also provides additional details concerning the basis for the conclusions reached in those reports.
_ Argument:
Mr. Williams' testimony provides greater detail concerning the Regulatory Operations, Region III_ inspection efforts and the findings as a result thereof.
This testimony supports the conclusions stated by Mr. Vetter R
that the licensee is currently implementing i
its Q/A-program in compliance with Commission l
requirements.-
Witness No.T4:-
Dolphus E. Whitesell O
1 o
Qbal'ifications :
Mr. Whitesell is a Senior Reactor Inspector Specialist at the Regulatory Operations
-Headquartees in Washington.
Mr. Whitesell also participated in the December 6-7, 1973 and January 10-11, 1974 inspections of the licensee's Midland site, r
l-Sunmary of l
Testimony:
Mr. Whitesell briefly describes the " philosophy" of the Comtission's Q/A requirements as set forth in 10 CFR, Part 50, App. B.
He then states that based upon his inspections, the implementing actions of the licensee were found consistent with its approved Q/A program.
I L
L Argument:
Mr. Whitasell's testimony supports, from the i
point of view of a headquarters specialist, the testimony of Mr. Vetter as to the adequacy of current implementation of Q/A programs at Midland.
l II.
l l
Issue No. 2:-
"Whether there is reasonable assurance that such implementation [of the Midland Q/A program]will-continuethroughoutthe construction process."
F
4
~
Witness No. 1:
Wal'ter E. Vetter
- Qualifications:
[SeeI,above]
Summary of Testimony:
Mr. Vetter's testimony on this issue traces the proposed actions of the licensee to maintain proper Q/A implementation. He describes what is necessary to establish
" reasonable assurance" of continued future compliance.
fir. Vetter then concludes, on the basis of described actions and commit-ments of the licensee..that there exists reasonable assurance that the licensee will maintain compliance with Q/A requirements throughout the construction process.
Argument:~
Mr. Vetter's testimonyLestablishes that there
.is reasonable assurance that proper Q/A program. implementation will be maintained
~
throughout the remainder of the construction process.
Witness No. 2:
Roger A. Rohrbacher
_ Qualifications:
[See.I,above]
e 4
~
4 t
$ummary of Testimony:
Mr. Rohrbacher's testimon'y on this issue
.. consists of providing more depth and detai1'concerning the licensee's commit-ment to maintain proper Q/A program implementation.
Argument:
Mr.' Rohrbacher's testimony on this issue suppor s the conclusion of Mr. Vetter on the issue.
Respectfully submitted, f ' ' f James P. Murray, Jr.
/
/
Counsel for AEC Regulatory Staff
- Dated at Bethesda, liaryland Lthis -8th. day offJuly,11974.
s 4
e l
J r
m.+-
o
~
4 UNITED STATES CF AMERICA ATOMIC ENERGY C0f44ISSION' BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of CONSUMERS' POWER COMPANY honst ct n ermit (MidlandPla'nt, Units 1 and2).
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
'I hereby certify that copies of "AEC Regulatory Staff Trial Brief",
dated July ~8, 1974 in the captioned matter have been served on the following by hand delivery or by deposit in the United States mail, first class or air mail, this 8th day of July,1974:
Michael Glaser Esq., Chairman Michael.I. Miller, Esq.
Atomic Safety 8 Licensing Board Isham, Lincoln & Beale 1150~- 17th St., N.W.-
One First' National Plaza Washington,-0.C. 20036 Chicago,' Illinois 60670 Mr. Lester Kornblith, Jr.
Laurence M. Scoville, Jr.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Clark, Klein, Winter, Parsons &
Board Panel
'Prewitt 1
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission 1600 First Federal Building Washington,' D.C.
20545 1001 Woodward Avenue Detroit -Michigan 48226 Dr.' Emmeth A. Luebke 3
Atomic Safety-;and Licensing
.Myron M. Cherry, Esq.
Bo;rd Panel Jenner~and Block U.S. ~ Atcmic Energy Comission One-IBM P1aza
~ Washington, D.C.
20545 Chicago, Illinois 60603
- Secretary 1
- Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Atomic Energy. Commission Appeal Board'
~ATTH: Mr. Frank W. Karas
.U.S. Atomic Energy Comission Chief, Public Proceedings Staff Nashington, D.C.
20545 i
Washington, D.C.
20545
' James N.'0' Conner-
-The Dow Chemical:Co.
2030-Dow' Center Midland, Michigan 48640
[
ames P. ffu~rray, Jr.
/
Counsel for AEC Regulatory Staff l