ML19344A108
| ML19344A108 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 04/22/1974 |
| From: | Cherry M Saginaw Intervenor |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19344A096 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007310612 | |
| Download: ML19344A108 (15) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ _. _ __ .___ - _ (') oc7u7 Jautn e N PROD. & UIlL, IAC.N.//,72,, W s April 22, 1974 4 80CE5i!S t
. ~ m3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 67 APR231974> -3 _
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -
- m. .. , : ...m
- t. n m '
g .. 1 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD % In.The Matter of )
, )
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY ) Construction Permits Nos. 81
) 82 (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2) )
FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES DIRECTED TO REGULTTORY STAFF Pui suant to 10 CFR 52.720 (2) (ii) , the presiding officer is requested to require AEC personnel with knowledge of the rele-
.vant facts to answer the following written interrogatories timely, separately, in writing and under oath. The answers to these inter-rogatories are necessary to a proper decision in this proceeding, l are necessary for the Saginau Group's proper preparation for this *
! proceeding and since the majority of these interrogatories seek I information as 'to the regulatory staffs ' views on relevant matters, as well as the disclosure of facts upon whi,ch it has relied or , will-rely from time to time as to such matters, the information re-
^
quested by these interrogatories is by definition not obtainable
'from'any other source.-
DEFINITIONS-
'l.
As.used in.these interrogatories the word document,
- documentary information,- or word of 'similar import is to be inter-8nOpgy9 '
s i prete'd ^ in ' the broadest possible manner and is' to include, with- , 1 4 out limitation, . documents, writings, reports, studies, analyses, - i memoranda,-communications', letters, summaries, reports of tele- l' i
- pnone conversation = or meetings and as to each of these categories, w'hether ~ draft or ' final, formal or- informal, accepted or rejected, L
l typed or mimeographed'or xeroxed, handwritten, and is also'to in ' clude. copies, however reproduced, of all such categories. 2., In connection with your answer to each category, and-unlessthefacts.~arestated-in'y'ouransNer, include within your' . o answer the facts upon'whi.ch you rely for your answer. This direc-tive is meant to . preclude answering any interrogatories with "yes" , or "no" and' requests that you set forth the facts upon which. you base any such answer. Unless otherwise stated, each answer calling - 1. for ~information concerning Consumers Power Company is intended to
-call for. information concerning each of its activities which are orfmay-be-subject to: regulation by the Atomid' Energy Commission. -
In the ~eventE.that you .obje'ct to providing information for other ~ t than - the . Midland power 2 facility, please supply' the . information
}
for the Midland'facilityLand state your reasons you believe infor-mationsas;to;BigfRock, Palisades, Fermi-l'and[Quanicassee are not-
. relevantjor appropriate to ther issues which =are subject to 'this -
proceeding. lIn. connection with .the answerito each of chose inter- : ss . ,}
' *- " ' N - y- - ,.& _ , , , . , , , ,,
~
l . rogatoric , identify the names and addresses of persons having knowledge of the facts set forth (if different) , the names and I addresses of persons.who participated in the preparations of or prepared' each of said answers. INTERROGATORIES
- 1. In AEC Document WASH-1250 at page 3-19, the Atomic Energy Commission concluded, among other things, that utility man-1 agement has been. slow to recognize distinctions concerning Quaiity .
Assurance and Quality Control (hereafter in these interrogatories 1 0.A.-Q.C.) controls and organizations necessary with respect to a l l nuclear power plant as opposed to a fossil fuel power plant, that
, there appears insufficient utility management participation in the day-to-day operations of nuclear facilities and that fully effec- !
! tive Q.A.-0.C. programs have not been sufficiently developed or ( i implemented. With respect to'those statements state the follow-
, .ing:
(a) What procedures and which utility personnel, if any, were. reviewed and interviewed in con-nection with the analysis or .. cudy leading
,to these conclusions; (b) Was zConsumers Power -Company one of the utilities l Lwhose programs- or personnel was reviewed or in- ,
'terviewed and, if noti. state why' not;- !
l (c) Is it your_ position that as of July 1973,
. Consumers Power Company had fully effective
' Q.A.-C.C. programs either from the develop-mental or implementation stage. If so, state why, and, if not, state why not. (d)- State each change which has been made to your L
.. ~ knowledge in Consumers Power Company's Q.A.-
Q.C. programs either~in the developmental or implementation stage since July,1973; (e) What steps did take place subsequent to July, 1973, to correct the fact that fully effee - tive Q.A.-Q.C. programs have'not been suffi-l ciently daveloped or implemented. Please de-scribe 'these generally and then in detail with l respect to Consumers Power Company; and L (f) What steps have you taken since July, 1973, to have utility management recognize the dis-tinction between organization and controls required to construct or operate a nuclear l power plant as opposed to a fossil fuel power l plant. Please describe your steps generally and then separately with respect to Consumers ! Power Plant. l
- 2. At a Q.A.-Q.C. seminar sponsored by the Atomic Energy l
Commission Regulatory Staff at the Hyatt House in Chicago, Illinois, in the- fall of 1973 '(either in October or November of 1973) , Com-I missioner. Doub, ~ Director Munt:ing and Director Keppler made refer-i ! ence.to a1 study or analysis or other document which disclosed that- ' 800 or more O.A.-Q.C.. violations had been discovered.during the ! 1 period January,-1972,.to June, 1973. Identify.and-attach a copy l of this document $r study together with-all related, underlying and communicativeidocuments. Also state:- , a ,
(a) The names of each utility .wnich committed each violation together with a summary de-scription of the violation and the action
- taken by the Atomic Energy Commission to remedy, correct or panish the violation; (b) Each-action or step you have taken subse-
' quent to your knowledge of such violations with respect to each utility, including but not limited to Consumers Power Company, to the end that no recurrence of each such vio-lation will take place and finally, what folloa-up investigation or surveys you have done, if any, to determine whether your cor-rective measures, if any, have been success-ful, and (c) What possible or probab'le safety consequences have you determined may or can result in con-nection with each such facility as the result of each such 0.A.-O.C. violation.
- 3. In your January, 1974, Ta'sk Force Report to the Dir-ector of Regulations entitled " Study of Quality Verification and Budget Impact" at page 23, you concluded.tha' the inspection effort by Regulation is performed on a sampling basis and encompasses only about 1-2% of the safety related activities that take place on the construction site. In conncction with this conclusion, state:
(a) How often you do a sampling 'and what portions of the safety.related activities are encom-passed within the 1-2%; and , (b)~ Do you rely;u'on p reporting of violations by.a utility to supplement your meager _l-2% inspec-
. tion. effort. If not, state why and if so, state .how successful your reliance has .bcen, particularly in light of recent disclosures that'somofutilities - do not properly . report vio-lations to the Atomic Energy Commission. .
4 .
C 4 . 4. : In the aforesaid January,1974, Task Force Report at
~
page 23 you conclude 1th'at the regulatory inspection philosophy has been focused:primarily upon obtaining assurance that the util-ity. is implementing ~an adequate' quality assurance program during construction and operation of a plant.- Please. state'your defini-i a tion of = " assurance" and give an example together with facts to
> support the example of' an instance where you have concluded that such assurance is available and then an instance where you have I
concluded that'such assurance is not available. This interroga-tory is an _ attempt to disclose ~ the factual basis for your conclu-sion of such assurance one way or the o.ther. J '5. With1respecc to each of the Consumers Power Comp &ny facilities identified in the> definition section above, state: (a) Did you ' ever conclude that -Consumers Power ' l
- Company was technically competent to con-
- struct cn operata such facility. If not state
- why not and, if so,- state when you made such a conclusion,: where it i's~ set ' forth and each fact upon which you have-relied in' support'of such ,
~
- a. conclusion, c Include within your answe'r _ as to_whether you? rely'upon directly or indirectly
'i m: connection with one' of ' Consumers Power Com-pany facilities'any_ facts;or experience in con-
. nection with any other of Consumers Power's
' facilities; and.
_ (b) Did you- ever conclude that ' Consumers Power Com-
'pany'has.provided reasonable _ assurance'of-im-i:
plementation of ca' quality assurance program for . conhtruction --(orn operation -if relevant) of such.
~
l facility. LIflnot, Estate why notiand, if'so, 4 h u . -
. . , . - . = . -
state when you.made such a conclusion, where it is set forth. In connection with your ans-wer, state whether you have relied upon direct-ly or indirectly in connection with one of
' Consumers Power Company facilities any facts or ' experience1 1n connection with any other of Consumers Power's facilities.
6 .- Describe the purpose for which you insist, if you do, that a _ utility must demonstrate reasonable assurance of an appre-priate. quality assurance program _for construction or operatior.. 7.: Define the words " reasonable assurance" as those words are employed and as you understand them in the Commissi.on's Show Cause order in~this proceeding. , Include with your answer each fact which~ you claim.must exist in order to conclude that
. reasonable assurance exists.
- 8. Define the words " compliance with quality assurance regulations" as those words are employed- and as you understand them in the Commission's Show'Cause order in this proceeding. In- >
- Eclude with your . answer each fact which you claim must exist in order -to conclude' that compliance with quality assurance regula-
~
tions exists.
~9. . Have you ' concluded. that - Consumers _ Power Company is 1 .
in' compliance ~ with 'qualityf assurance regulations concerning each iof its' facilities, LIf ;you have, please1 set forth .the regulations
~
with which ;you1 assert .:that" Consumers Power Company _is in compliance 1.
- .and stateJeach fact upon which you base yourL judgment.
e, n.
- 10. Have -you ever concluded that Consumers Power Compu ,
is not in compliance with Quality Assurance regulations in con-nection with any of its . facilities. If so, please set forth each fact upon which you base your judgment together with each relevant regulation.
- 11. Have you concluded that there is reasonable assurance that Consumers Powcr Company will be able to comply with quality assurance regulations.through the construction process in Midland.
If you have,. please state cach fact upon which you base your con-
- clusion. Include within your answer whether you have considered the activities of Consumers Power Company at any of its other facil-ities and if'not, . state why not. ,
t l 12. Have you ever concluded that there is no reasonable assurance that Consumers Power Company will comply with quality i l assurance regulations during the construction of the Midland facil-l
.ity. If so, please set forth each fact upon which you base your answer. In connection with your answer, state whether you have l-
- ever considered in. connection with your conclusion any activities i of Consumers Power Company-at'any other facility andfif not, state
~
'wh'yf not. ,
In -youre judgment, which of the 'following is respon-
- )
.13., _
.sible . for -assuring : reasonable assurance with Q.A.-Q.C. ' regulations l
at the; Midland. plant facility:
7, - g
'~
. 5 1.
L 1 i- (a) ' Consumers - Power Company; , 7
'(b) Certain named individuals at. consumers 4:,
~ Power Company; t- '
(c) ' Bechte'l' Corporation; , J. r ' e(d) Certain named individuals 'at Bechtel Corporation; (e) f Atomi'c Energy Commission or any _ part thereof;1and (f) Certain named individuals at.the Atomic Energy Commission o'r any part thereof. Please explain your answer in detail. ; l ," 14. Identify in connection with each of Consumers Power R R Company facilities as set forth in the definitional section each document ever received or reviewed, each meeting you have had (in- 1 1
- clude- da'tes and names of: attendees) and each physical structure
' you have reviewed in connection with your analysis of'first com-4
-pliance_ with quality assurance regulations 'and. second reasonable assurance cf continuation-with ' compliance with quality assurance
[ < regulations. ,
- 15. Dol you believe th'at- evidence 'of willful failure by Consumers Power Company _tolreport'any violation of any Atomic' .
' LEnergy Commission regulation isirelevant. evidence as to.whether 4 h there;isi ressonab1'e assurance l that' Consumers . Power' Company will
.i t comply ori.conti~nue-to complyfwith quality assurance' regulations
- ?
p _
, :concerning the Midland facility.. If f not,p state why not -
x X , Ij j M W 1
% n'
'lG. List each nuclear facility as to which Dechtel has been a' contractor or subcontractor and at which facility there has been one or more quality assurance violations. Identify the viola-
' tion, an4 in connection with each such violation at each such facil-ity state what steps, if any, you have taken to remedy the viola-tion and assure that it will not occur at the Midland facility.
- 17. Do you belicve the construction activities at Consum-ers' Power _ Company Palisades plant is relevant to the issues to be considered at this Show cause hearing. If not, state why not.
- 18. In your analysis of. the issues in connection with this proceeding (and the underlying facts upon which you rely) have you taken into account the historical patterns of _ Consumers in comply-ing with any and all Commission regulations at the Midland facility and at any of its other facilities. If not, please state why not.
If yes, please set forth in detail each of the matters which you have considered.
.19 . .Recently the Director of Regulation has had occasion-to reject for docketing the.Quanicassee application for failure, among other things, of not having described appropriately a :Q.A.-
LQ.C. plan. What is your judgment of a utility,with experience in
- three nuclear reac' tors. over a period'of several years:who cannot,
'n i light of that'_ experience, describe a quality assurance _ plan.
~
-e
_lo _ -
i Please explain your answer in detail end what relevance, if any, such' rejection of the application has to the issues in this pro- - c eding.
- 20. Have you concluded either formally or informally in connection with the Quanicassee facility that Consumers Power has appropriately described a quality assurance plan in connection with regulations and/or has demonstrated wi.th reasonable assurance that such plan can or will be implemente/. properly.
- 21. With respect to the Micland facility quality-assurance, state:
(a) Do you agree with the allegations Lab forth' in the Show Cause order and the , referenced documents? If not, state each allegation with which you do not agree and explain why; (b) As a result' of the Show Cause order, have you recommended or taken any action to change your role or consmners role at , the Midland-facility?- If not, state why not, and if yes, cxplain such changes in implementations ~and recommendations in detail. 22.- At the: pre-hearing conference your counsel indi- , cated : that- butJfor request by other persons - for a hearing, the
~
Regulatory Staff [does not.believe a . hearing is necessary. Please
; explain.this< statement.giving consideration.to.the following:
~
y L 6 d Y * * ~ -
~
(a) Do you.believe it is no longer your responsibility to support the Show cause order; (b) What. evidence do you intend to intro- . duce as part of your support or oppo-e sition to the Show Cause order;
.(c). What role will the Regulatory Staff take if the Saginaw Group withdraws from or remains inactive in the pro-ceeding?
, 23. Please list the name and address of each witness i
whose testimony you intend to offer at the proceeding.--Include with your answer a summary of the scope of each witness's tes-timony. In the event that you do net presently know who your witnesses will be, please list the areas' of evidence or testi-mony which you presently believe you will introduce. If you cannot answer this Interrogatory, please explain in detail why you cannot.
- 24. Please list all of the documentary evidence which you presently plan to introduce at the.' proceeding. If you are not in,a position'to presently state what documentary
-evidence you'will introduce,lplease state what categories of ,
documentary evidence you will introduce.- If youLare not in a position'to-answer this--Interrogatory, please explain why not. O
. . . 12.-
s l
~
- 25. In'11ght of the experience at the Midland
- fac311'ty and of other Consumers Power facilitics, and in light of Consumers' and Bochtel's economic interest in the prococaing,. and finally in light of the Regulatory Staff's limited capability to inspect the facility, do you believe it_would be' appropriate in this proceeding to have L third party, findependent of Consumers, Bechtel and the Regulatory ,
,- StLff, monitor.the Q.A.-Q.C. activities at Consumers Power 4 Company so as to reasonably assuro. an inderendent judgment to . as/the primary line of defense against serious nuclear acci-dent. Please' c:: plain your answer in detail whether your answer is affirmative or negative.
- 26. What role, if any, did the Appeal Board's mem'o randum to the Director of Regulation play in the issuance of the original 'Show Cause order? Explain in detail your answer
' including a listing and identification of:any documents or meetings which were made 'or held after receipt of the Appeal Board's memorandum and prior'to the issuance of the Show Cause order.; ' Include within your answer what stops you would have taken- had you not received the Appeal- Board's memorandum.
Finally,.in connection with this answer, state.whether you a
-~13 -
4
~
agrce 'or'disagroo in substance with th'e Appeal Board's memorandum as of the dato it was roccived by you, and with respect to each matter with'which you disagree state the matter and give the, underly$ng reasons why_you disagree. 4
- 27. Identify and describo each violation of any regulation which has bocn committed by Consumers Powcr Company i
with respect' to each of its facilitics.
~
- 28. Identify oach incident by Consumers Power Com-pany at eacF :f its facilities which was investigated as a possible violation but as to which you concluded no violation existed. .
- 29. Identify each violation at each of Consumers Power Company's facilitics which you have cited them for but as to which no reporting of such violation at the time of its occurrence' was made by Consumers Power Company.
- 30. Identify each document,'whether internal to the Atomic Energy Commission or not, of which, you have knowledge which~rolates.tofor discusses any violation or' suspected viola-tion of1any Commission regulation for each of Consumers Power' Company's facilities including the Quanicassee proposed facility.
Stis interrogatory.is intendod to solicit identification of docu-
. ments"which relate to or.discussos.an acknowled;ed violation,.an
?
4
. incident which you now (but earlier did not) believe was a violation an'd an incident which you may have concluded was not a violation but as to which consideration on that issue was had.
0 By: / / bd 7 f
)
MyronF[. , Cherry / Attorney for Saginaw Gro* Myrca M. Cherry . One I B M Plaza
~~iliicago, Illinois 60611
-{312 ) 222-9350 -
( l f
. l l
e l f e
'l
.j x
15 a - .
} * *}}