ML20029E585
| ML20029E585 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck, Millstone File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/24/1994 |
| From: | Goldberg J NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| To: | Russell W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20029E566 | List: |
| References | |
| 2.206, NUDOCS 9405190129 | |
| Download: ML20029E585 (7) | |
Text
YT Vq J'
.t ',,d fM UNITED STATES
[.;,14(
}
3 lld NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- '.C f
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 j
,o f
'%, [. #
MAR 2 4 6$L MEMORANDUM FOR:
William T.
Russell, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
]
FROM:
Jack R. Goldberg Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Enforcement
SUBJECT:
2.206 PETITION SUBMITTED BY RONALD GAVENSKY RE RECEIPT INSPECTION AT NORTHEAST UTILITIES On March 3,
1994, Mr. Ronald Gavensky (Petitioner) submitted a Petition pursuant to 10 C.F.R.
S 2.206 to the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The Petition is being forwarded to your Office for the preparation of a response.
In the Petition, Petitioner, a Quality Control Specialist, raises numerous concerns regarding receipt inspection activities by Northeast Utilities at both the Connecticut Yankee and Millstone facilities.
Petitioner alleges violations of 10 C.F.R. Part 50 Appendix B by Northeast Utilities in the receipt inspection area.
Petitioner alleges that parts represented as having been inspected and accepted for use were in fact deficient.
Petitioner alleges that adequate training, skilled personnel and necessary tools were not available to perform adequate receipt inspections.
Petitioner alleges that he observed unethical and incorrect methods of receipt inspection, and that he sought to identify quality problems within his own department, along with recommendations and solutions, but was not permitted to do so.
Finally, Petitioner accuses Northeast Utilities of " white washing" his concerns in the receipt inspection area.
On two occasions, Petitioner alleges that Northeast Utilities' management hired investigators to pursue concerns raised by Petitioner only to conclude that there were no problems.
On one of the occasions of alleged " white washing", Petitioner claims that he came to the NRC with his complaint and he represents in the Petition that the NRC substantiated his complaint.
As the NRC apparently has already done some work on the issues raised by Petitioner, you should consider providing a summary of the NRC's efforts to date in the acknowledgement letter.
Petitioner requests that the licenses of Northeast Utilities be temporarily revoked until after such time that an investigation is made by the NRC into Petitioner's allegations. This request should Cont::ct :
Richard K.
Hoefling (301) 504-1690 9405190129 940509 PDR ADOCK 05000213 O
=........
\\
, be considered to be a request for immediate action pending resolution of Petitioner's concerns.
Accordingly, the aknowledgement letter should provide a discussion as to why
{
immediate action is or is not warranted.
I have enclosed the original Petition for your use.
I have also-enclosed a draft of a letter of acknowledgement to the Petitioner and a draft of a Notice for publication in the Federal Register.
If you wish to have Northeast Utilities respond to the Petition, we will assist your staff in preparing a letter pursuant to 10 C.F.R.
S 50.54 (f).
Please insure that I am provided copies of all correspondence related to the Petition and that I am asked to neur on all staff correspondence.
[ g7 ack R.
Go berg-eputy Assis ant General Counsel for Enforcement
Enclosures:
1.
Copy of Petition 2.
Draft Letter of Acknowledgement 3.
Draft Federal Register Notice cc w/ enclosures
- K.
Olmstead, OGC L.
Chandler, OGC B.
Hayes, OI 1
J.
Lieberman, OE T.
Martin, RI j
K.
Smith, RI i
.~
.. _. - - _ = _
Docket No. 50-1 Mr. Ronald Gavensky 113c Wood Duck Circle Daytona Beach, FL 32119
Dear Mr. Gavensky:
This letter is to acknowledge receipt of a Petition dated March 3, 1994 submitted by you (Petitioner) to U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) pursuant to 10 CgF R. J 2.206.
The Petition has 4
been referred to my Office for the prep'aYation of a response.
In the Petition, you raise numerous concerns regarding receipt inspection activities by Northeast Utilities at both the Connecticut Yankee and Millstone facilities. Your Petition alleges violations of 10 CyF Rg Part 50 Appendix B by Northeast Utilities 4
i in the receipt inspection area.
The Petition alleges that parts represented as having been inspected and accepted for use were in fact deficient.
The Petition alleges that adequate training, skilled personnel and necessary tools were not available to perform adequate receipt inspections.
The Petition alleges that you observed unethical and incorrect methods of receipt inspection, and that you sought to identify quality problems within your own department, along with recommendations and solutions, but you were not permitted to do so.
Finally, the Petition accuses Northeast Utilities of
" white washing" your concerns in the receipt inspection area.
On two occasions, the Petition alleges that Northeast Utilities' management hired investigators to pursue j
concerns raised by you only to conclude that there were no i
problems.
On one of the occasions of alleged " white washing", you claim that you came to the NRC with your complaint and you represent in the Petition that the NRC substantiated your complaint.g fNRR-TO
~
CONSIDER ~BTSCDY51'NGT wai In your Petition, you request that the licenses of Northeast Utilities be temporarily revoked until after such time that an investigation is made by the NRC into Petitioner's allegations.
The NRC considers this a request for immediate action until such time as the concerns you raise are evaluated.
-(tfRR TO-PROVIDE OISCUSSION-AS TO-WHETHER-IMMEDIATE-ACTION ~IS~0R IS NOT-WARRANTED) wsEP
INSERTS FOR LETTER TO GAVENSKY
/, INSERT IN THIRD PARAGRAPH:
q:
This review was documented in Inspection Report 50-423/92-16 and was provided to you by letter dated March 30, 1993.
The inspection report indicated that the Nuclear Safety Concerns Program initial review of your complaint regarding the bolting procurement problem was cursory in' nature.
i
!,1 lNSERT IN FOURTH PARAGRAPH:
j The issues that you have identified do not appear to be significant concerns that warrants immediate shutdown of the plants at the Millstone station.
4 4
<b 6b =
e
.we r,e s
--v-w n--
r y
y
..=.. - _ _ -.- --
h us w i. g In accordance with 10 C F @.
2.206, the NRC will take action with 4
regard to the specific issues raised in your Petition within a reasonable time.
For your information, I have enclosed a copy of the Notice that is being filed with the Office of the Federal Register for publication.
Sincerely, William T. Russell, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
Federal Register Notice cc:
Northeast--Uti-1-itiesr
-ur u-
'Q. L L.
' fb i Y, 7('
R l
l
)
l
d U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Docket No. 50-NORTHEAST UTILITIES Connecticut Yankee and Millstone Nuclear Stations RECEIPT OF PETITION UNDER 10 C,sFsR,s,SECTION 2.206
- e Notice is hereby given that, on March 3, 1994, Mr. Ronald Gavensky (Petitioner) submitted a Petition to the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) pursuant to 10 C Ff Rg 2.206 regarding t
the Connecticut Yankee and Millstone Nuclear Stations of Northeast Utilities (Licensee).
The Petition has been referred to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation for preparation of a response.
In the
- Petition, Petitioner, a
Quality Control 4
Specialist, raises numerous concerns regarding receipt inspection activities by Northeast Utilities at both the Connecticut Yankee and Millstone facilities.
Petitioner alleges violations of 10 C.F.R. Part 50 Appendix B by Northeast Utilities in the receipt inspection area.
Petitioner alleges that parts represented as I
having been inspected and accepted for use were in fact deficient.
Petitioner alleges that adequate training, skilled personnel and necessary tools were not available to perform adequate receipt inspections.
Petitioner alleges that he observed unethical and incorrect methods of receipt inspection, and that he sought to identify quality problems within his own department, along with recommendations and solutions, but was not permitted to do so.
Finally, Petitioner accuses Northeast Utilities of " white' washing" l
his concerns in the receipt inspection area.
On two occasions,
+
, Petitioner alleges that Northeast Utilities' management hired investigators to pursue concerns raised by Petitioner only to conclude that there were no problems.
Petitioner requests that the licenses of Northeast Utilitics be temporarily revoked until after such time that an 4
investigation is made by the NRC into Petitioner's allegations.
As provided by 2.206, appropriate action with regard to the specific issues raised in the Petition will be taken within a reasonable time.
l A copy of the Petition is available for inspection at the l
Commission's Public Document Room at 2120 L
- Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20555 and at the Local Public Document Rooms for the Connecticut Yankee and Millstone Nuclear Stations located I
at FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
William T. Russell, Director l
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Dated at Rockville, Maryland this day of 1994.
4 F p*,-,-, TN-mm.
M'-
^- gbnpf'_
g r -
- **V T Wi4W i-
'iF %"'fhM lJT .
'l'lY.*"*t,-_
p'p;
_