ML19343D614
| ML19343D614 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 05/01/1981 |
| From: | Sholly S AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8105050556 | |
| Download: ML19343D614 (8) | |
Text
pQah,,'
s, 9'
m >. f
/
SHOLLY, 5/1/81
'/ 7, s
k'?
E' t,%Y 0 4 1981 > )-II l
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/,f c :.;,7,
(.
[k MNf c.;,...,,
C tT C0* '55 "
4 c
& EFO'tE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Id.1
- ]gyd
- C q,
.u.'t cy 9
&n Ch ;y., Ut: qt:r- '
,C N
~ D,E:rece e
f.
\\
In the Matter of
)
D, METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, ET AL.
Docket No. 50-289 l
~
)
(RESTART)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
Station, Unit No. 1)
)
INTERVENOR STEVEN C. SHOLLY MOTION TO THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD TO TAKE OFFICIAL NOTIE OF CERTAIN FACTS AND DOCUMENTS Pursuant to 10 CFR S2.743(i), Intervenor Steven C.
Sholly hereby requests the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to take Official Notice of the following facts and relevant portions of the following documents.
The relationship between each such fact and document is explained:
1.
On 20 December 1979, Victor Stello, Director of the NRC's Office of Inspection and Enforcement issued an Order Imposing Civil Monetary Penalty to R. C. Youngdahl of Consurers Power Company, imposing a civil penalty of $450,000 for 476 items of noncompliance related to locked open containment purge bypass line valve during power operation, thus defeating containment isolation (copy attached).
NRC Staff witness Peter C. Hearn testified (Tr. 7384) that it is possible to have the reactor building purge line locked open (on an operating or maintenance bypass) while the reactor is operating at power, and thereby have containment isolation fail even inDSM 810505oy" S9
~.
~_
1 e
i.
a the presence of a reactor trip isolation signal.
The Board should notice the' fact that through inadvertent human error, a nuclear power plant's Technical Specifications can be violated resulting in the defeat of containment isolation on the reactor j
building purge line, as the example of the civil monetary j
penalty agains Consumers Power Company clearly demonstrates.
4 3
l 2.
Pursuant to Freedom of Information Act request 1
FOIA-81-149, this Intervenor obtained from the NRC a copy of the draft report prepared by the In,strumentation and Controls l
Division of Oak Ridge National-Laboratory which reviewed the Babcock and Wilcox report "BAW-1564, Integrated Control System Reliability Analysis."
NRC Staff witness Dale F. Thatcher, from whom the draft ORNL report was ultimately obtained (see i
copy of letter from J. M. Felton to this Intervenor dated
[
4/24/81) could not, under cross-examination by Administrative
[
i Judge Little, explain whether changes made from the draft I
report to the final report were " editorial or substantive."
The witness stated, "What I really should to is go back and get
'the copy of the draft.
I would imagine that I have it somewhere l
around in my office.
Then I should be able to tell whether 3
they were editorial or substantive.
I tend to think that they may have been more along the editorial line."
The Staff has not produced the draft ORNL
[
report, nor has the Staff reported further on this matter.
l I
i
{
i I
t
-.,.,.,,.n
j s
. Upon reviewing the draft against the final ORNL report, this'Intervenor has discovered s'ome subtle but very crucial changes which were made from the draft to the final report (a copy of the draft ORNL report is attached to this motion).
These changes are elaborated below, and the Board is requested to take official notice of each change:
LANGUAGE IN THE DRAFT REPORT LANGUAGE IN THE FINAL REPORT Item 1, page 4.
Item 1, pago 4.
"In summary, the report "In summary, the report deals only with a very limited -
deals only with a very limited scope of failures, escentially scope of failures, essentially within the ICS cabinets, with within the ICS cabinets; the only che only significant measure of significant measure of response response being whether or not is whether a reactor trip would reactor trip occurred.
Because occur.
Because of this limited of this limited scope, the scope, the results are necessarily results are necessarily of very of limited value."
limited value." (Emphasis added)
EXPLANATION OF THE CHANGE:
The Board will note that the word very, which is underlined in the draft report, has been deleted from the final report.
The Board will also note that in the copy of the final report which was provided to the parties by the NRC Staff (a copy from Dale F. Thatcher's copy as indicated by the check preceding Mr. Thatcher's name on the cover letter distribution list) has the sentence with the word "very" deleted underlined.
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (1977) defines very in the adverb sense as "to a high degree" or
" exceedingly".
Although the words " limited value" clearly imply less value than if the ICS was defined more broadly, the words "very limited value" in the draft report imply a much greater degree of value than the language in the final report.
This subtle alteration permits the Staff to give a degree of importance to the results of the B&W reliability analysis which the draft report would not have permitted.
. This is clearly not an " editorial" change, but one which changes the substance of the draft.
LANGUAGE IN THE DRAFT REPORT LANGUAGE IN THE FINAL REPORT Item 2, page 12.
Item 2, page 9.
"The methodology selected "The methodology that was cannot evaluate the propensity selected cannot evaluate the of the ICS to participate in possible involvement of the ICS feedwater oscillations."
with FW oscillation."
EXPLANATION OF THE CHANGE:
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (1977) defines propensity as "an intense and often urgent natural inclination".
The language appearing in the draft clearly indicates a greater degree of involvement of the ICS with feedwater oscillations than does the language in the final report.
Again, this can hardly be construed as an " editorial" change.
The language in the draft clearly and unequivocally states that the ICS participates in FW transients, while the language in the final report implies that there is some doubt about whether this involvement occurs.
LANGUAGE IN THE DRAFT REPORT LANGUAGE IN THE FINAL REPORT Item 3, page 15.
Item 3, page 11.
"The B&W report asserts
'The B&W analysis asserts that that ICS actions have averted ICS actions have averted more trips more trips than it has caused.
than they have caused.
Although Although this assertion is not this assertion is not pertinent and pertinent and may be true, the is probably true, the data presented data presented does not sub-do not substantiate the assertion."
stantiate the assertion."
(emphasis added)
(emphasis added)
EXPLANATION OF THE CHANGE:
The underlined passages indicate a clear change from the draft report to the final.
The draft report language implies that there is some chance that the assertion by B&W is true.
The final report, on the i
l
other hand, implies something far more certain.
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (1977) defines something which is probable as " supported by evidence strong enough to establish presumption but not proof."
This is a contradiction in terms with the
~1ast part of the sentence in the draft which states that the data presented to not substantiate the assertion made by B&W.
Again, this is no mere editorial change, but rather a substantive change.
3 LANGUAGE IN THE DRAFT REPORT LANGUAGE IN THE FINAL REPORT l
Item 4, page 16.
Item 4, page 11.
"The evaluation of power "The evaluation of power supply failures was very supply failures was limited."
~
limited."
t EXPLANATION OF THE CEANGE:
i Again, this change reflects a change in the i
degree to which the evaluation of power supplies was limited.
Referring again to the definition of very as " exceedingly" or "to a high degree" as cited in Item 1, it is clear that this again is i
no editorial change.
4 i
l
]
I have this date filed another rOIA request with *he l
j NRC to have the NRC produce written copies of comments made by i
i the NRC Staff on the draft ORNL report.
I believe that these i
)
comments will shed more light on how the draft report came to i
}
be altered as demonstrated above.
There were other changes, i
3 I
as the Board will see if it compares the draft with the final report.
Most interesting and most important is the exclusion l
of Appendix B from the final report.
Appendix B in the draft report deals with the so-called " light bulb" incident at the Rancho Seco plant.
This appendix is relevant to the matter of
ICS/NNI power supply reliability.
It also indicates at page 36 of the draft that the capability exists to make the power supplies for the ICS fully redundant, and that the capability can be implemented without substantial cost.
The Board is regoested to take Official Notice of Appendix B to the draft report (pages 32-36).
3.
The Board is requested to take official notice of the document entitled "NRR Status Report on Feedwater Transients in B&W Plants", dated April 25, 1979.
This document was relied upon by the NRC Staff in its testimony (Ross and Capra, ff. Tr. 15,855, at 2).
Witness Capra served as editor of NUREG-0565 (Staff Report on the Generic Assessment of Feedwater Transients in Precsurized Water Reactors Designed by Babcock and Wilcox Company, May 1979) and NUREG-0667 (Transient Response of Babcock & Wilcox-Designed Reactors, May 1980) and authored the B&W section of the final report of the Bulletin and Orders Task Force (NUREG-0645) (Capra statement of professional qualifications, ff. Tr. 15,855).
The " Status Report" is also referenced in the August 9, 1979, Commission order which provided opportunity for a hearing in the matter of TMI-l Restart (10 NRC 143, 1979).
The " Status Report" contains much information relevant to the ICS and its relationship to, feedwater transients.
A copy of the full " Status Report" is enclosed.
.. 4.
The Board is requested by take Official Notice of a memorandum from Rodney P..
Satterfield to Paul S. Check dated 9 May 1980.
This memorandum was written by NRC Staff ICS witness Dale F. Thatcher (Tr. 7285-7285) and signed by Mr. Rodney M.
Satterfield, Mr. Thatcher's branch chief.
The memo was relied upon by Mr. Thatcher in his testimony (Tr. 7283-7285) and was distributed to the parties by the Staff, but never offered into evidence.
The memorandum was also relied upon by Witnesses Ross and Capra (Ross and Capra, ff. Tr. 15,855, at 3-4).
The memorandum has direct relevance to the ICS issue and should be officially noticed by the Board.
Again, a copy of the memorandum is enclosed.
On the basis of the facts set forth herein and in the attachments hereto, Intervenor Steven C. Sholly requests that the Board grant this motion.
DATED:
1 May 1981 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, a
5teven C. Sholly Union of Concerned ientists 1725 I Street, N.W.
Suite 601 Washington, D.C.
20006 b
o UNETED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION v
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, ET AL.
) Docket No. 50-289
-~
)
(RESTART)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
Station, Unit No. 1)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
~
I hereby certify that single copies of INTERVENOR STEVEN C. SHOLLY MOTION TO THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD TO TAKE OFFICIAL NOTICE OF CERTAIN FACTS AND DOCUMENTS were serbed on those persons on the service list below.
The attachments were served only on the members of the Board, the NRC Staff counsel, counsel for the Licensee, and counsel for the Commonwealth.
Those attachments will be provided to other parties upon request, but are not being provided now due to the expense of copying and mailing these extensive documents.
As noted above, the documents were served by placing them in the U.S mail, postage paid, first classs, this 1st of May 1981.
C.
Steven C.
Sholly Ivan W.
Smith, Esquire George F. Trowbridge, Esquire Administrative Jtidge Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 1800 M Street, N.W.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20036 Washington, D.C.
20555 Robert W. Adler, Esquire Dr. Walter H. Jordan Attorney for the Commonwealth Administrative Judge 505 Executive House Atomic Safety and Licensing Board P.O. Box 2357 881 West Outer Drive Harrisburg, PA 17120 Oak Ridge, TN 37830 Jordan D. Cunningham, Esquire Dr. Linda W.
Little 2320 North Second Street Administrative Judge Harrisburg, PA 17110 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 5000 Hermitage Drive Louise Bradford Raleigh, NC 27612 TMI Alert 315 Peffer Street Docketing and Service Section Harrisburg, PA 17102 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Gail Bradford ANGRY James R. Tourtellotte, Esquire 245 West Philadelphia Street Office of the Executive Legal York, PA 17404 Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Marjorie Aamodt Washington, D.C.
20555 R.D.
05 Coatesville, PA 19320 Marvin I. Lewis 6504 Bradford Terraca Dr. Judith Johnsr;3 Philadelphia, PA 19149 ECNP 433 Orlando Avenue Robert O. Pollard State College, PA 16801 609 Montpelier Street
- Ellyn R. Weiss, Esquire Baltimore, MD 21218 Harmon and Weiss 1725 I Street, N.W.
- Mr. George Jctt Suite 506 General Counsel Washington, D.C.
20006 Federal Energency Managem ent
- 12:DICATES HA;D DELIVERY Agency ( TE*'.A )
A~~"*: : Doc" t Clerk P00RDUNE
- - -