ML20029C137
| ML20029C137 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 01/08/1990 |
| From: | Garde B GARDE, B.P., ROBINSON, ROBINSON, PETERSON, BERK, RUDOLPH, CROSS |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20029C132 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-90-361 NUDOCS 9103260241 | |
| Download: ML20029C137 (13) | |
Text
.
.. r t 7... g,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE COMM) SION IN THE MATTER OP:
)
-3
)
Docket Nos. 50-4o8 HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY )
50-41/)
(South Texas Nuclear Power Plant)-
)
JOHN' CORDER'S BESPONSE TO NRC STAPP's MOTION TO MODIPY SUBPOENA AND
. MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE-ORDER Billie.Pirner Garde
- ROBINSON, ROBINSON, PETERSON,. BERK, RUDOLPH, CROSS-& GARDE LAW-OPPICE 103 East. College Avenue Appleton, WI 549112 (414) 730-8533 Attorney for John Corder.
January 8, 1990 9103260241 910314 PDR FOIA-KOURY90-361 PDR
.. ~
7;,. -
y_
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
BEFORE Tile COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
Docket Hos 50-448-HO9STON L7GHTING AND POWER COMPANY )
50-4Q
-(Gouth-Texas Nuclear Power Plant)
)
' JOHN = CORDER'S RESPONSE TO NR?. STAFF's MOTION TO MODIFY SUBPOENA AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER Billie Pirner Garde ROBINSON,. ROBINSON, PETERSON, BERK, RUDOLPH,
' CROSS & GARDE LAW OFFICE 103-East Collega Avenue Appleton, WI-54911-
-(414) 730-8533 Attorney for, John Corder i
January 8,-1990 1
?
UNITED STATES OP AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE COMMISSION s.
IN THE MATTER OP:
)
}
Docket Nos. 50-448 HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY )
50-449 (South Texas Nuclear Power Plant)
)
JOHN CORDER'S RESPONSE TO-NRC STAPf's MOTION TC MODIPY SUSPOENA AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER COMES NOW John Corder and requests that the Commission
. modify the December 11, 1989, subpoena issued to him by the NRC.
Staff.
Mr. Corder requests that as--a-condition precedent to the taking'of his-deposition before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff he -be provided access to the information-- that details the
- allegations that-Mr. Corder.has previously provided-to the.~ NRC Staf f, ' either by responding to the Freedom of Information Act Request pending - before the Commission sincer September,1989, or-by otherwise making-the requested docume.ntation available to Mr.
. Corder.
Mr. Corder agrees with the Staff that the issue of logistics appears to be resolved and' withd raws. that issue from l
1 s
t consideration upon the understanding that Staff counsel h a t, agreed-to take Mr.
Corder's deposition at a place and tinue convenient to all. parties, with a recognition that Mr. Corder is not able to pay for the costs of an attorney or representative.
I.
BACKCROUND AND ARCUMENT.
John ' Corder was employed as a nuclear engineer for the Bechtel Corporation for over twenty-seven years.
In 1986 Mr.
Corder was laid off from his employment with Bechtel at the South Texas nuclear power plant.
As a result of his belief thst his termination was accomplished in violation of 42 U.S.C.
5351 he filed a complaint pursuant to that regulation.
(IN Tile MATTER OP JOHN A.
CORDER VS. BECHTEL ENERGY CORPORATION, 88-ERA-9.)
That matter was resolved between the parties by virtue of a RELEASC AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, 'and an AGREED ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITil PREJUDICE, signed on October 28,
- 1988, by counsel and the Honorable James W.
- Kerr, Jr.,
a U.S.
Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge.
On.May 25, 1989, the parties were ordered by the-Honorable Elizabeth Dole, Secretary of Labor, to submit the agreesuent for
~
approval.
The parties have submitted the Settlement and are awaiting a ruling by Secretary Dole on dismissal pursuant to the position' set forth on this matter in POLT22I VS, CIBBS AND HILL, 87-ERA-38, July.18, 1989.
In Septerf ar, 1989, after the Secretary of Labor requested 2
l s.
t the settlement and the Bechtel Corporation identified Mr.
Corder's settlement as potentially having restrictive language in it, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff contacted Mr. Corder, by letter through his former attorney advising Mr. Corder that if Mr.
Corder had safety concerns about the South Texas plant
"...which have not been brought to the attention of the NRC..."
that a mutually agreeable time and place would be arranged for
- identificatton of those concerns.
(See, September 5,
- 1989, letter from Dennis Crutchfield, Associate Director for Special Projects, to Robert Rice, Esquire, attached as Exhibit 1.)
In responding to that letter Mr. Corder indicated that ha still had safety concerns about the South Texas plant which'he believed the NRC had not evaluated.
He proposed that the NHC Staff make available to him the materials developed by.the 49ency in response to the various concerns he had raised with the agency since 1986 in order to determine what issues had been reviewed by the-NRC Staff, what issued had been resolved, the basis for the resolution of those
- issues, and what issues had never been pursued.
In. order to facilitate that information Mr. Corder eluo filed a Freedom of Information Act request.
To date the POlh request has not been answered.
This requesc is.particularly important to. insure that all of Mr. Corder'sissuesthat-haveapotentia$;effectonpublichealt.h
- and safety are resolved for several reasons.
First,.Hr. Corder has had a long history of contacts with the NRC in -which he has 3
m
raised numerous concerns.
He was originally interviewed by the NRC's Office of Investigations regarding concerns he had about STP.
He was never provided a copy of that transcript, no investigation was ever conducted into his concerns and allegations to the best of his knowledge, and there has been no resolution of any of the issues tnat he raised to 01.
Second, he provided numerous detailed allegations to the Government Accountability Project (GAP) in connection with the 1987-88 CAP investigation of STP as a confidential alleger.
Since the NRC Staff did not perform-a total review of all of the information provided by allegers to CAP it-is impossible to know what allegations of Mr. Corder's the NRC Staff ~ looked a,t, aside-from the information contained in SSAT, NUREG 1306, March, 1988.1
- Third, although Mr.
Corder had a personal interview with the HRC's Safety Assessment Team regarding some of the allegations and concerns that he had about-STP in connection with their r eview -' of two of ~ his allegations, those issues are not fully addressed in the SAT report.
-Pinally, Mr. Corder raised the issues of violations of 10 CFR 50.7 tnat have never been addressed.
In short, Mr. Corder has no way of-knowing without reviewing documents in the possession of the tiRC staff what
-issues were. recorded -by the NRC.for inspection or investigation and what became of those issues.
- See, in general, the background of United States v.
1 Garde, 673 P. Supp. 604 (D.D.C 1987), and the agency 4:tions in connection with the allegations of STP allegers.
4 o
e
--,v.
-c-----.e
_ ~. _ _... _
4 e
e Additionally, since-Mr. Corder ended his employment at STP he has been involved as an intervenor in the rate hearings before the Public Utility Commission of Texas.
In that capacity he nad the opportunity to again visit the STP site where he observed additional proof of his original concerns as. 211 as observed additional issues of concern to him.
Finally, the passage or
- time, literally years, makes reviewing the materials prepared contemporaneous 1y by the NRC staff regarding Mr.
Corder's comments and concerns critical in refreshing his recollection on those issues and allowing him to reference the supporting details and information he provided to the NRC.
No other single source for these issues exist.
In short,- the NRC staf f probably has most of the raw data regarding Mr.
Corder's concerns,- however, since they never comprehensively responded to _ him on the evaluation of his concerns he ~has no way of. knowing whether-they were misunderstood, ignored, or just fell through the cracks of the last minute licensing efforts.of-the Staff.
He has. offered to invest.the time necessary to sort through the-documentation and reach a determination on the issues-and the resolutions in order to answer the question posed by the Staff, however, he cannot be expected-to appear at a deposition and l
recount from years of -employment at STP specific details _that a
have been previously. provided to the 'Staf f, with any degree of
~
accuracy or reliability.
Further, Mr.. Corder is not= satisfied 5
\\
a
that the issues he raised which have been evaluated by the Statt and apparently closed were ever even understood because no interview was ever conducted, and Mr. Corder wasn't permitted to show the NRC his concerns at the plant.
Therefore, Mr.
- Corder, requests the assistance of the
_ Commission in directing the Staf f to provide him the information necessary to determine what issues he has regarding the safety of STP that have not yet been resolved and the bans for those that have.
This could have already been accomplished hhd the NHC i
cooperated in responding to the POIA request submitted in i
September, 1989.
As demonstrated below the Staff has affirmatively neglected its duties with respect to processing the POIA request, and left Mr. Corder in this predicament.
At this juncture, relief is sought from the Commission.
II.
PREEDOM OF INPORMATION REQUEST On September 28,
- 1989, this' firm submitted a Freedom of Information Act (POIA)
Request which was acknowledged by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on October 4,
1989, and assigned l
the NRC POIA number 89-431.
The request sought, inter alia, all information generated in connection with John Corder's concerns and allegations about the South Texas Project- (STP) from June 1986 to the present.
This request i n c1'ud es, but is not limited to all inspection reports, document reviews".
On October _4,
- 1989, the NRC acknowledged the request.
The acknowledgment 6
required the payment of costs for search for records responsive to the request that exceeded two hours and -for duplication of disclosed records which exceed 100 pages.
The s ta f f conuul t t ed t o provide an estimate of the fees and time to process the complaint.
On November 3,
- 1989, (received November 9,
1989) the NRC sent a Statement of Estimated fees for FOIA 89-431 for a total of u304.29 and requested that fees be paid in advance.
On December 11,
- 1989, this office submitted a FOIA fee waiver which is currently under review according to a recent telephone inquiry to Ms. Linda Robinson.
Because of Mr.
Corder's inability to pay the fees and expenses, a second FOIA was submitted on Decernber 11, 1989, on behalf of Mr. Corder by this firm as an extension of the work Ms.
Garde had done with the Government Accountability Project, a
public interest organization regularly exempt from FOIA fees.
This request was assigned NRC POIA number 89-532_and a Statement of Pees has not been received by this office _ yet.
No information has been received under either request, l
i CONCLUSION As a result of the situation presented by Mr.
Corder's subpoena and his lack of access of HRC' information Mr. Corder
'[
respectfully requests the Commission to issue a protective order on behalf. of - Mr.
- Corder, until the Staff makes docuanen t s 7
n.
~
available to him (either through the l'OIA or directly) t h.a t contain the issues presented by Mr.
Corder to the NRC, the resolution of those
- issues, if any, and the basis of the resolution.
Upon receipt Mr.
Corder will timely review the information and prepare for his deposition.
Respectfully submitted, w
Billie Pirner Garde Robinson, Robinson,-Peterson, Berk, Rudolph, Cross &_ Garde Law Office 103 East College Avenue Appleton, WI S4911 (414) 730-8533 Attorney for John Corder Enc. a/s cc: Certificate of Service 5
=
)
l J
8 w
~ - -
a
4 Ex hi bi t.
I' g tiery
'"" W I ' I NUCl. All RE UL.
1 cohWIS$lOfV -
e Q
s manm c iptv, p. c. uw.
i q
s,N *',e Sopccinbeg 5,1989 Richard T. R1ce. Esq.
Stevens & Rice REDIIVED 5.' ; i 0a 100 North Velasco. Suite 200 P. 0. Box 1326 Angelton. Texas 77515
Dear Mr. Rice:
On April 27, 1909 theNRCsentlettsrqto 1 ptili engineers, nuciver strain supply syligm yvndprs, fus1' tics. me.ior archtivet-cyclefactljtics,vn4 mo;jor materials licensees concgrnIng proy[lsicos 1p sv tlpuent pr ptliyr agreements which could by insgrprgire 50hyNHC.jGE ustf hd potentially restrict.iye langwegg In}an}40rsynsntlf}an org 2611pn 1dunilflod from comunicating safety concerns' p
. It waQ to insuyd19tyly nu
- the affected party to ignore any.rystrigf194 lhei would prcygns &llgt p from comunicating freely-With thy Wilp c9npyrpjpg pW)plii])] ip{yJ{ JHppb l
Almost all'of the organfrations responding-to this lytter indicqvd they believed that they had no agreements which G9n14jned poirettelly rystrifCivs 1.nguage.-However,enuniberofrsspondentswerycautiousgodcyonihuuuhthey
- stated that they felt there were no restr1c}perflus jr@rm1 they sent letters to curialn ingly1(gels or 1yv proyisions.in thvir eurysm freely comunicate with the h8C concerning p9tyn 1sl safvty issuci. W
-has writtep 'o you concerntno an In41ylilwel your}fj 1;; a.is~1etter. Bechtti-ityi$4 i at Whlic.they dQ 095 John 6.
Corder.
settlet*nt agrepment for Mr. Gorogr cQlj}M.lCor u p rssirlft19ns on cunpunicgtlog freely with the NRC on thfety concerns.
can comunicate witli thy 489 on iqigr{ gf pyp]4cr sitoulq kg poplijyg } perygfyty. In order to determine whether Mr. Corder has jnforinatjon concprning potent 1.al safety issues which have not bagn pro -Hr. corder to contact Mr. Tyd Quay ()y1ded to the hllC. We requeqi you nu 800-368-566 cays of the~ recstpt of this lettrr. If therg erg s. ext. 00?p5) within thirty afety foncuras yhich hov not been brought to' int at}ent10p of the NRC 4 nt4 Whily 69 place w111 be arranged f9r Idgn}jflpyj90 9[,}llsig}F9pcprp{NpklF }Jmy 4 Uncert173, Pff IF FC5 r-prrier $r nuc1rer Ennor srplain r ~i f. L 1 -. +.- - _.~,..m,. --r.,.,,.,-- ..m.. ,.-+.mmm.,-,.,.e +,.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ^ r NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE COMMISSION IN' THE L MATTER OP: ) ) Docket Nos. 50-448 HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY ) 50-449 (South Texas Nuclear Power Plant) ) CERTIFICATE OP SERVICE I-~hereby certify that copies of " John Corder's Response to NRC's-Staf f Motion to Modif y Subpoena and Motion For Protectiva Order" in.the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following-by deposit in the United-States mail, first class, or as indicated by an asterisk, through deposic in the mail system, this 8th day of January,-1990. Samuel J. Ch' ilk Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Samuel J..Chilk* By Federal Exprcas Office of the Secretary 111555' Rockville Pike Rockville, MD= 20852 -Docketing and. Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Richard - X. Hoefling Cour4el for NRC.Staf f U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC - ~20555 h bO. '. \\& wP EIllie Pirner Carde Attorney'for John Corder 9 .}}