ML19347E342

Informs That Proprietary IE Insp Repts Had Been Received Through Oh Consumer Counsel.Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co Had Been Careless in Releasing Documents.Nrc Should Take Steps to Prevent Future Leaks

ML19347E342
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	03/10/1981
From:	Bridenbaugh D MHB TECHNICAL ASSOCIATES
To:	James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
Shared Package
ML19347E341	List: ML19347E342 ML19347E344
References
NUDOCS 8104270050
Download: ML19347E342 (3)

Text

. .

, AA * *' TECHNICAL ASSOCIATES ng W @ & TECHNICAL CONSUL TANTS ON ENERGY & THE ENWRONMENT Date G. Brudenbaugh 1723 Hams; ton Avenue-Surte K Richard B. Hubbard San Jose Caldornia 95125 Gregory C. M,nor March 10, 1981 news) 266-2716 Mr. James G. Keppler ,

Region III U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60131 S UB JE CT: Toledo Edison Davis-Besse-1 Docket 50-346

Dear Mr. Keppler:

This letter is to sdvise you of an apparent breakdown in the Davis-Besse security system. My firm is currently under contract to the Ohio Consumer's Counsel (OCC) providing technical advice on Davis-Besse operational problems in a rate hearing before the Public Utility Commission of Ohio.

In the course of our inve s tiga tion , OCC has provided us with copies'of numerous documents obtained through the discovery process.

I received a shipment via Federal Exp ress from the OCC of amoung other things, several TE Inspection Reports of Davis-Besse. This shipment was received by me on Feb rua ry 27, 1981, but I di'd not review some of the reports in detail until on a plane bound for Columbus, Ohio on March 3.

On that trip, I discovered that the copies provided to me con t ain e d th re e proprietary sections, identified by a cover sheet, copied, with a distinctive block marking.around the edges of the page and clear p rop rie tary notice language. Dates given on the th ree cover sheets referred to s e cu ri ty- re la te d inspections per-1 formed on Fe b rua ry 9, May 7, June 1, 1979 and I did not read the pages following the cover sheets, but only glanced at the subjects and dates to ascertain that they were what the cover sheets pur-ported them to be. Needles to say, I made no copies of these documents. I did mark each of the three cover sheets with the written word, " Return."

The following day, March 4, 1981, I personally handed all pages to my attorney contact at OCC, Timothy Jochim. I advised him of the sc.sitive nature of the documents and recommended they be 8104270050-Attachment 1 WR 17 1981

Mr. Kepp le r Page Two March 10, 1981 returned in total to the Toledo Edison Company with app rop ria te documentation of the return.

~

Discussions with the.0CC on their source of these documents indicated that they had most likely been received from the Cleve-land Electric Illuminating Company (CEI), a co-owner of Davis-Besse, via dis c ove ry in a previous rate case. OCC _had not requested information on security matters, but most likely received them as a result of a mass reproduction by CEI of IE reports on Davis-Besse.

Mr. Jochim was scheduled to cross-examine W.A. Johnson, the Toledo Edison Company President on Friday, March 6 or Monday, March 9 in Columbus, so it was decided to return the documents to him, personally, in the hearing. Such attempt was made during the he aring on March 9, 1981, but Mr. Johnson declined to accep,t them, atparently under advice of counsel. He did acknowledge their si.nsitivity and the fact that he is authorized to have access to such information.

It is my unde rs tandin g that the OCC will attempt to return all copies of these documen ts to the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, probably at PUC0 hearings currently underway in Columbus.

I hope they are successful in so doing. -~

l believe the NRC should be aware of this breakdown in the safeguarding of critica?.ly sensitive in f o rma ti on , and take steps to ensure such leaks do nc t occui in the future rt Davis-Besse or other licensees. I also want to make sure the record shows the route by which my firm had limited access to these documents, to document the fact that we did not revicw nor copy them, have promptly returned the=, and to document my recoc_mendations to,my client, and to convey my notification to you as may be required by the Code of Federal Re gulations .

I also wish to inquire as to the p roper procedure to be followed should such an event occur in the future. My firm con-sults with a number of s ta te and local government agencies, reviews much documentation of nuclear plant operation, and conceivably cotld encounter similar security lapses in the future.

Yours very truly, Dale C. B ridenbaugh DGB:ke cc: See attached sheet Attachmnt 1 ~

- _ .. . - - . . .. . . . _ . .- . . . ..- - --. ~. -

e. ,

CC: Mr. Jess-Crews-

U.S. NRC

- Region V I- - ~

,' Ms. Margaret Ann Samuels Ohio Consumer's Counsel

, Ifr. Timothy Jochim Ohio Consumer's Counsel i

i Paul Valentine, Esq.

j B lase , -Valen tine & Klein Mr. W.A.' Johnson, Pres.

7 Toledo Edison Co.

F .

?

i 1

l i

o i .

I.

t 1

Attachment 1 .

w-~,ew-we,-wr--s -- , --, ,- . , - - - , -,,, , - .%ym,e. .,--w-