ML20042A765
| ML20042A765 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 02/09/1982 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20042A764 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8203240004 | |
| Download: ML20042A765 (45) | |
Text
._._ _ _
E.
NUc.zAR RIG m TORY COMMISSICN g
COMMISSION MEETING In the Mtit::n cf:
CLOSED MEETING - EXEMPTION 5 DISCUSSION OF PHASE II OF THE DIABLO CANYON REPORT 4
DAS.
February 9, 1982 pgggg:
1 - 43 A;;
Washington, D.
C.
l 1
l
- f. (UM.Tdi
.M ENN
.(
400 Virginia Ave., 5m4. ~4ascin g==,
D.
C.
20024 Talaphc=a : (202) 554L2343
'8203240004 820315 PDR 10CFR l
PT9.7 PDR
2-
<a :.
af
>^
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
+
3
(
4 '2 DISCUSSION OF PHASE II 0F THE DI ABLO CANYON REPORT 5
l /
6 CLOSED MEETING - EXEMPTION 5
)
7 8
Nuclear Regula tory Commission Room 1130 9
1717 H Street, N.
W.
-,,/
Washington, D. C.
10
/
Tuesday, February 9, 1982 e :
33 The Commission met in closed session, pursuant
/
12 to no tice, at 2400 p.m.
f 13 i
14 BEFORE:
i 15 NUNZIO PALLADINO, Chairman of the Commission VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner l
16 PETER BRADFORD, CCamissioner JOHN AHEARNE, Commissioner l
17 THOMAS ROBERTS, Commissioner l
l 18 l
STAFF MEMBERS GIVING PRESENTATIONS AT MEETING:
19 S. CHILK
' 20 L. BICKWIT J.
MURRAY l
21 D. DeYOUNG W. DIRCKS 22 H. DENTON
,/
F. REMICK
(
23 J. FAIR J. FOUCHARD s
s-24 E. CASE i
K. CORNELL 25 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2 z
'9 1
TELEPHONE CONFERENCE REGION.V STAFF PARTICIPANTSs 2
B. FAULKENBERRY a
3 J. CREWS
[
P. MORRILL 4
R.
ENGELKEN 5
.6 7
-8 9
10 11 l
12 l
13 f
(
14 15 i
16 17 18 19 20 i
21 22 23 24 s
25 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
3 1
EE9GEEDIESE 2
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO Will the meeting please 3 come to order 4
The purpose of this meeting is to receive from 5 the staff its report on Phase II of the special 6 investigation on Diablo Canyon.
7 As you will recall, we had a meeting on Friday 8 on the Phase I report.
It was not clear at that time 9 whether every Commissioner had had a chance to 10 deliberate on the Phase II aspects.
So we left on the 11 agenda receipt of the report to give Commissioners an 12 opportunity to ask questions on Phase II.
13 I do believe that when we are through with the 14 report and the questions we have to decide on releasing 15 the Phase II part of the report and whether or not we 16 find any ineligibility on the part of Cloud at this time 17 based on Phase II.
18 Now we have to vote as to whether or not this 19 is to be a closed meeting, Exemption 5, proposed 20 enf orcement action.
21 It is my understanding, and you can clarify 22 this, Len, if we take no proposed enforcement action, 23 would then we release the tran sc rip t ?
24 MR. BICKWIT:
No.
1 25 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
No, that is not necessary?
e ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 l
4
't 1
MR. BICKWITs No, that is not necessary.
2 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Why don't I take a vote 3 to see whether or not you agree to vote to close.
4 (Chorus of unanimous Ayes by Chairman 5 Palladino and Commissioners Gilinsky, Ahearne and 6 Roberts. )
7 CHAIRMAN PALLADINOs All right.
8 HR. BICKWITs I think you should have a 9 short-notice vote as well because a decision with 10 respect to this aspect of the notice is being taken 11 within a week of the meeting.
12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINOs All right.
May I vote 13 for a short-notice meeting.
i 14 (Chorus of unanimous Ayes by Chairman 15 Palladino and Commissioners Gilinsky, Ahearne and 16 Roc erts. )
17 CHAIRMAN PALLADINOs Well, unless any 18 Commissioner has some introductory remarks, I suggest we 19 proceed with the presentation.
20 I understand we are in telephone communication 21 with Robert Faulkenberry, Chief, Reactor Construction 22 Projects Branc ; Jesse Crews, Director, Division of 23 Resident, Reactor Projects and Enginering Inspection; 24 Phillip Morrill, Reactor Inspector; and Robert Engelken,
\\-
25 Director f rom Region V.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W. WASH:NGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
o*
5 1
Are you on?
Can you hear us?
2 MR. ENGELKENs Yes, we are on and we hear you 3 very well.
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
All right, good.
5 I guess then we ought to proceed with the 6 presentation.
7 Are you going to make introductory remarks, 8 Bill?
9 MR. DIRCKS:
Bob, we received your slides.
10 Would you want to go through those for us, or how would 11 you like to handle this?
i 12 MR. ENGELKEN We would like to proceed now 13 with our presentation.
Our presentation including the i
14 showing of the viewgraphs will take 10 or 15 minutes 15 without questions.
So it is a rather brief presentation.
16 I would like to mention that in addition to 17 those identified previously by the Chairman, John Fair 1
18 who participated rather heavily in this investigation is 19 present in the audience with you at "H" Street.
John is 20 the senior mechanical engineer in ICE headquarters.
21 I would also like to recognize the Schierhy 22 considerable contribution made by Hans hm lin,s ";, NPR
.Schie.cb n3 Mr. Ch;; lins 1
23 Projects Manager of the Diablo Project.
24 is not present.
He had a death in the family and is in 25 Europe I understand for that purpose.
ALDERSoM REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
6 1
Our discussion today relates to Phase II of 2 the investigation.
Phase II of the investigation 3 consisted of determining whether the comments that PGr.E 4 provided to R. L. Cloud on the results of the Cloud 5 verification study resulted in any unjustified changes 6 in the findings r.s contained in the Cloud report i
l 7 submitted to the NRC on November 18, 1981.
8 The presentation this afteroon will be made by 9 Bobby Faulkenberry, who was delegated by me to conduct 10 the special investigation and who is the principal 11 author of both Phase I and Phase II of the Region V 12 investiga tion report.
13 I believe you all have been provided with f
14 copies of the vievgraphs that will be used by Mr.
l l
15 Faulkenberry during his presentation.
l l
16 I will now turn the discussion over to Mr.
17 Faulkenberry.
18 MR. FAULKENBERRY:
I am giving thiL briefing 19 with the assumption that everyone has read our Phase II 20 report and has a good idea of what is contained within 0
g.n. A that's a rea.senable a.tsuut 06 21 the repor g,
ymn,m:
M" #"" " # "#0 this presentation I will use a series of 22 23 slides.
I will pause at the end of my discussion on 24 each slide and ask for any questions relating to the l
25 material on the slide.
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
O e 7
99 1
(Slide presentation.)
2 MR. FAULKENBERRY:
May I have the first slide, 3 pleasef (N ut 5,Mde 4
This slide identifies the basic documents we 5 used in the Phase II review.
The Cloud submittal is 6 contained in our Phase II report as Appendix D.
7 The PGCE submittal is contained in the report 8 as Appendix E.
9 Now these documents were sent to the NRC as a 10 result of the request Mr. Engelken sent to the PGCE on 11 December the 30th, 1981.
12 Are there any questions on this first slide?
13 (No response.)
14 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I gather there are none.
i 15 MR. FAULKENBERRY:
May I have the second 16 slide, please.
17 Our Phase II review was performed in three 18 separate par ts or stages.
19 This slide provides a summary of stage one of 20 the review.
The purpose of this stage of the review was l
21 to assure we had a complete listing of all comments and 22 a correct identification of which comments resulted in 23 revisions.
24 As showrton this slide, the Cloud submittal was l
25 not complete and was not completely accurate in that ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
8 1 nine comments were not identified and three comments 2 were incorrectly classified.
WecorrectedtheCloudsubmitt%ktoinclude 3
7 4 these nine additional comments and the revised 5 classifications and continued on with the second s ta ge 6 of our review.
7 Are there any questions on this slide?
8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Bobby, can you make any 9 sts *ement as to the significance of the comments that 10 w e r e. ' t identified?
11 MR. FAULKENBERRY:
No.
We really did not 12 consider it to be all that significant.
We questioned 13 Cloud with regard to why they were not included, and in I
14 each case he stated it was just an oversight and he just 15 f ailed to pick up on them for one reason or the other.
16 As f ar as our review was concerned, it really 17 was not that significant since we have picked them up 18 and assured ourselves that we did have a complete list.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Can I ask you a question, 7
20 Bobby, on the second finding.
"Three comments 1
21 classified in error as resulting in no revision."
Does 22 this mean that they had resulted in revisions?
23 MR. FAULKENBERRY:
That is correct.
24 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Were the revisions 25 significant?
I ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 4345
e 9
1 MR. FAULKENBERRY:
Yes, we would say that they mean 2 were, but that doesn'tfit was.
There was a large 3 rewrite of a section, but it was certainly word changes 4 or an appreciable rewrite.
5 CH AIR M AN PALLADINOs What I meant by 6 significant is did they result in a change in the 7 observation or implied conclusion?
8 MR. FAULKENBERRYs I would have to go back and, 4kesc 9 look at my data to see exactly whichoffthreecomments 10 a re involved.
To the best of my recollection, at least 11 two of the comments that were involved were not 12 identified as significant enough for a follow-up review 13 on cur part.
I am not sure what the third one was.
14 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Maybe you could check s
7 15 that while we go on, or someone could check it.
16 MR. FAULKENBERRY:
Okay, fine.
17 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I guess we are ready to 18 go to slide 3.
19 MR. FAULKENBERRYs That is correct.
20 May I have,the third slide, please.
(nts+ slMs) l 21 Now in the second stage of our review we took 22 the 339 comments that Cloud identified and we added the 23 nine comments he had f ailed to identify giving us a 24 total of 348 comments.
25 Of these we determined that 202 had resulted ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
10 I.,
1 in subsequent revisions.
We looked at each of these 202 2 comments and the revisions associated with these 3 comments and identified those comments that appeared to 4 us to have resulted in a change in the substance of the 5 material that was commented on.
6 We identified 98 comments that fell into this 7 category and we, in turn, conducted a f ollow-up review 8 on each of these 98 comments.
9 Of the 104 remaining comments that resulted in 10 revisions that we did not follow up on, 87 were PGEE 11 comments and 17 were Cloud comments.
12 Now the slide that you have in front of you j
an l
13 con tainsderror in that it iden tifies 77, and that 77 14 number should be corrected to 87.
15 Now these 87 PGEE comments were considered by 16 us to be of minor significance in that they involved 17 f ac tual corrections, minor word changes, provided more 18 inf ormation, et cetera.
1 19 Are there any questions.on this slide?
20 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Any questions?
21 (No response.)
22 CHAIRMAN PALLADINC:
There appears to be no 23 questions.
24 MR. FAULKENBERRY:
May I have the fourth (Nut side \\.)
25 slide, please.
A.DERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
11 1
In the third stage of our review we took the 2 98 comments we had identified in stage 2 and went to the 3 Cloud offices in Berkeley.
At the Cloud offices we took 4 each of the 98 comments and the associated revisions and 5 by a process of reviewing the documents contained in the 6 Cloud files and asking questions of the Cloud employees 7 we made a determination regarding each of the 98 8 comments.
9 Our determinations or findings as related to 10 each comment are contained in Appendices B and C of our 11 Phase II report.
12 Our findings as summarized on this slide show 13 that all of the revisions that were made as a result of 14 the 98 comments we reviewed could be justified, with the 15 possible exception of four comments.
i 16 Now three of these four comments were made by CW=
17 M r. Cic'?> of PGCE on a section of the report, the draft 18 report, that discussed the containment polar crane.
Two 19 of his comments were contained in the first draft report 1
20 and one was contained in the second draf t report.
Moln oS A k-I 21 The fourth comment was made by Mr. 'nutich'?)
22 of PGCE and it dealt with a section of the report tha+
23 discussed the dome service crane.
This comment was made l
24 on the first draf t report.
l 25 Now these unjustified revisions resulting from ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGif CA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
i 12 1 these four comments are discussed in the summary of our 2 Phase II report as Exception 1 and Exception 2.
3 I will ask Bill Morrill to discuss these 4 exceptions and their significance.
5 However, before I do, to avoid possible 6 confusion, I will explain the difference between items 7 and comments.
8 An item, as used in our report, defines a work 9 package or a work unit, and this work unit can contain 10 more than one comment.
In certain cases it may address 11 as high as three or four comments.
Therefore, there is 12 no one-to-one relationship between items and comments.
13 With that explanation I will ask Bill Morrill 14 to discuss the two exceptions and their significance.
15 Bill.
16 MR. MORRILLs Thank you, Bobby.
17 May I have the slide for Exception No.
1, 1E please.
(pg 3l;g,h 19 Exception 1 relates to the revisions made to 20 Section 3.3.5.1.1 dealing with the seismic 21 qualification of the polar cranes.
22 In the October 21st draf t Cloud referenced a
{
23 July 1979 Blume seismic analysis report on the polar 24 cranes which was deleted from the November 12th report 25 submitted to the NBC.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
13 I
i 1
This change is based on documents in Cloud 's 2 files.
Cloud personnel concluded that the polar cranes' 3 qualifications were based on the Hosgri report, and 4 since the July '79 Blume report is not contained or 5 referenced in the Hosg ri re port, Cloud personnel deleted 6 it from their November 12th, '81 report.
7 We believe that Cloud should have retained 8 ref erence to this July '79 Blume report as an open item 9 and not made such a conclusionary statement on the to correctness of the qualification of the containment i
11 polar crane until the purpose and technical relevance of 12 this July '79 report had been evaluated.
13 In essence, there was sufficient documentation 14 in the Cloud files to justify all of the revisions, with 15 the one exception of the deletion of this July '79 Blume 16 report.
17 A closer examination of the situa tion, such as 18 that performed by the NRC, would have logically have led 19 Cloud to reconsider this deletion.
20 Does anyone have any questions on this?
21 CHAIRMAN PALLADINOs Do you think that this 22 f ault you f ound under Exception 1 was made to 23 accommodate the PGCE comment, or do you think it was an l
24 error on the part of R. L. Clond?
l 25 I think I asked you that ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345 j
i
14 1 question last week, but I would like to make sure that I 2 get the same answer.
3 MR. MORRILL I believe this was an error made 4 by Cloud 's people.
Had they looked a little deeper into 5 the situation and come to a more complete understanding 6 of it, especially looking a t the technial aspects of it, 7 they would I think, come to the same conclusion we 8 had.
9 I personally didn't see any indication that 10 Cloud people were trying to cover up anything on this 11 issue.
I think they simply overlooked it.
OmeRNan TAttMmos 411f% M,4 4 %3ou.
12 MR. FAIRS This is John Fair.
I might add 13 something to this.
14 When I discussed this deletion on this 15 ref erence with the. Cloud personnel, they stated tha t the 16 reason they deleted the reference was basically because 17 the other analysis was the record in the Hoscri report 18 and based on that and they were using the Hosgri report 19 as sort of their guideline for their review.
20 I agree with Phil, that it is an oversight, in 21 m y opinion, on the Cloud personnel for not at least 22 keeping reference to this particular report and 23 following up the reason why Blume did a later report and 24 whether there was any significance to it.
25 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Thank you.
ALOFRSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., s.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 55-e 2345
15 I
1 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
John, did the later 2 report that Blume did supersede for purposes of the 3 analysis this report?
g 4
MR. FAIR:
It is not clear at this time 5 exactly what the point of the later report was.
The 6 later report is a more sophisticated analysis of this
)
7 polar crane.
It is a 3-D, non-linea r analysis, first, 8 of the original 2-D.
J 9
In some preliminary discussions with PGEE 10 personnel they indicate that there are some things in 11 this analysis that would not be required.
However, we i
12 have not gone over the technical details of the '79 13 report and verified 14 MR. ENGELKEN4 If I may interrupt.
We are l
15 unable to hear Mr. Fair 's discussion.
He is apparently 16 too f ar away f rom the microphone.
We have not been able 17 to follow his discussion.
18 (Mr. Fair goes to the Commissioners's table.)
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Ask him if he can hear 20 you.
21 MR. FAIR:
Can you hear me now?
22 MR. ENGELKEN:
Yes, we certainly can.
23 MR. FAULKENBERRY:
The question that was asked 24 of me$$bbe the significance of this la ter Blume report, l
25 the July '79 report that was deleted.
As of the time we l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
16 1 had done the inspection, one of the personnel had 2 discussed it with the PGCE people and they had indicated 3 that there some things in the '79 report which would not s
4 be required to be performed in this Hosgri analysis, but 5 we have not gone through the details of the report and 6 verified whether or not this is true and whether the '79 7 report should supersede the original report.
8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What was the comment 9 Cloud used?
This was in response you mentioned to 10 someone out at PGEE making a comment.
11 MR. FAIR:
Yes, it was.
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
In fact, three 13 comments; is that correct?
14 MR. FAIRa Yes.
l 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
All focused on this 16 same point?
17 HR. FAIR:
All focused on the same point.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNEa Was the comment to 19 remove reference to that report?
20 MR. FAIRS Yes.
One of the comments 21 specifically said remove this and the other comment said 22 the analysis of record is the December '78 analysis.
23 When the Cloud people verified'that the '78 reference 24 was indeed wha t was used in the Hosgri report, they took 25 this deletion recommendation by PGEE.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
17 J
1 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Any other questions?
2 (No response.)
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
All right.
Do you want 4 to go on to the next slide?
I presume there is a next 5 one.
6 MR. MORRILLs Yes.
Could we please have the 7 slide that deals wit Exception No. 2$
(At.$t *.Nhe 8
Exception
- o. 2 relates to the revisions to 9 Section 3.3.b.1.2 dealing with the seismic qualification 10 o f the dome service crane.
The dome service crane is 11 attached near the top of the containment polar crane.
12 Cloud's personnel correctly verified that PGCE 13 had qualified the dome ' service crane and subsequently 14 concluded that the service crane was adequately 1
15 qualified.
16 They did not discover, however, that the 17 seismic spectra used in this qualification were based on 18 the undocketed July '79 B_ tme report, but rather assumed oNL 19 that since only6 set of spe
'.ra had been prepared that i
20 these were based on the H( gri report.
21 The actual situation is that one analysis, the 22 Blume December '78 report with some revisions, was 23 docketed in the Hoscri for the polar crane while a 24 different undocketed July '79 analysis was used in the 25 qualification of the service crane.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINTA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
18 1
This Exception No. 2 is very similar to 2 Exception No. 1 in that Cloud has documentation to back 3 up the November 12 th, 1981 report.
4 However, if Cloud personnel had looked a 5 little deeper, as we had, they would have found the 1
6 inconsistency and could logically have treated it as an 7 open item.
8 MR. FAULKENBERRY4 Now that concludes our 9 presenta tion.
However, I do have the information 10 requested with regard to the three revisions that were 11 incorrectly classified by Cloud.
12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
All right.
13 MR. FAULKENBERRY:
They are identified as 14 items 60, 61 and 63 in Appendix B of the Phase II report.
15 If you'do desire, I could read the findings 16 tha t we made on each of these revisions.
17 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0s Is it brief?
18 (Laughter.)
19 MR. FAULKENBERRYs Yes, it is f airly brief, 20 each one is.
Would you care for me to read the findings?
21 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO Well, I just wanted to 22 clear up in my own mind which three you were referring t<4; cod >on 23 t o.
Maybe if you could just give a brieffof finding 24 tha t would help.
25 MR. FAULKENBERRY:
Okay.
With regard to the i
ALDERSoN REPr. TING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINTA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
19 J
a 1 first revision) 1( Cloud employee ageed that the section 2 had been revised in the second draft and that the 3 revision had been overlooked.
4 The revision was a factual clarification that 5 more accurately described the d fferences of weight wNe$
6 resolved.
This revision was justified by the new 7 inf ormation Cloud received f rom PGCE.
8 The second comment.
Again a Cloud employee 9 agreed that it had been revised in the second draft and 10 the revision had been overlooked.
This revision was a 11 f actual clarification that the finite element model was 12 based on a vertical response only.
13 The basis for this factual information is 14 contained in a document transmitted on April the 26th,
% '77 f rom Blume to PGCE entitled " Control Room Floor 16 Vertical Spectra For The Auxiliary Building."
These 17 documents were contained in the R. L. Cloud log 2.4.2.
18 The third revision is item 63.
The revision 19 tha t was actually made was not what was requested by 20 PGCE in their commen t.
The PGCE comment indicated the 21 sentence should reads "The qualification of turbine 22 building crane was performed by U.R.S.
Blume.
The 23 actual revision made by Cloud was that in the fourth 24 draf t it stated "PGCE qualified the turbine' crane 25 building."
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
20 1
Cloud sta ted tha t the PGCE comment was 2 incorrect and that the actual revision that was made 3 clarified that U.R.S. Blume performed all of the 4 analyses and evaluations and that PGCE perf ormed the 5 qualifications.
6 That is the extent of the findings.
7 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN04 Thank you very much.
8 Any other questions?
9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
I had a question 10 with regard to Exception 2.
Is it correct that what 11 Exception 2 says is that the licensee actually used the 12 July '79 spectra developed by Blume and you found that 13 out when you vent f urther than Cloud had gone, but that i
14 Cloud said that it just corresponded to this spectra in 15 the Hoscri report?
16 MR. MORRILL Yes, sir.
Basically, as we 17 understand it, what happened was the July '79 Blume 18 report, which is a three-dimensional non-linear analysis 19 of the polar crane, was used te develop spectra.
Those 20 spectra were in turn used in the qualification 21 calculation of the dome service crane.
22 To the best of our knowledge, and based on our 23 inspection efforts, there were no other spectra i
24 developed for the containment polar crane.
25 MR. FAIR 4 I migh t add to that that in ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
21 J
1 discussing this situation with the Cloud people, their 2 basis for accepting that the improper input was used was 3 based on two things:
one, the date of transmittal of 4 the spectra was after the '78 report had been completeds 5 and the second thing they used was the fact that Blume 6 had told them they only generated one spectra for use 7 and therefore they assumed it was the correct spectra.
8 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0s Any other questions?
9 (No response.)
10 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN04 Well, I guess we have two 11 questions before us.
12 One, in view of the Phase II report do we wish 13 to make any statement with regard to R.
L.
Cloud's i
14 eligibilty as an independent consultant just based on 15 Phase II?
16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I don't.
17 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I gather not.
18 Then I guess the next question.is what do we 19 do with the report?
By that I mean do we release the 20 report and what mechanism do we use?
21 It is my belief that we should release the it en #4.-
22 report, send Ato the parties ja service list and obtain l
l 23 appropriate comments.
I presume those comments then 24 would be f actored in decision that we make on an 25 independent auditor.
l l
e i
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
22 1
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD4 Let me just ask, and 2 if you covered it earlier, don't repeat it, but is there a staff rec omm enda tion that goes with this phase of the 3
4 investigation?
5 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO Well, we had specifically 6 told them not to make a recommendation.
7 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I know.
Last time I 8 had the sense they kind of had at least a few 9 preferences in their hip pocket on Phase I, and I am 10 wondering if I can get to that pocket again here.
11 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
As a matter of fact, if 12 you will recall, I was quite anxious to get their 13 recommendations, but that is not the way the Commission 14 voted.
15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, let's see, I 16 thought we voted not to ask for recommendations in 17 connection with the investigation, but I didn't think 18 that in any way precluded getting recommendations from 19 the senior people.
20 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
We are dealing with the 21 investigation now and not with the question of whether 22 or not the particular individual or group of individuals 23 should be admitted as an independent auditor.
That will 24 come later.
25 MR. DIRCKS4 We are dealing with the question ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
l 23 e,,
1 of the November 3rd meeting and the actions you want to 2 take.
l 3
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Does it bear on 4 whether or not Cloud is eligible to continue?
I thought 5 we were going to hear from the senior people on that.
l l
6 MR. DIRCKSa I think what we were told, and 7 may be I am wrong, you were going to make some decisions
" on this November 3rd matter and you could either 9 eliminate Cloud or not eliminate Cloud based on.the l
10 November 3rd issue.
11 In the meantime we were going to continue to 12 evaluate Cloud by looking at his qualifications and his 13 program plan and then come up with a recommendation on 14 that issue.
15 If you voted to eliminate Cloud a.s a result of 16 the November 3rd matter, we would just discon tin ue the 17 work that we are doing on this other track.
But as a 18 result of the meeting the other day I think the 19 Commission indicated that you were going to, at least as 20 f ar as this issue was concerned, keep Cloud in the d eld.
l 21 eligibility race and we would continue to scz'a en this.
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Well, the Commission 23 did n ' t act on Cloud.
24 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
We did on Phase I, and I 25 was asking now does Phase II change our conclusion?
ALDEP. SON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
24 1
COMMISSIONER GILINSKYs I don't think you can 2 separate Phase I and Phase II.
The reason we are 3 pouring over every one of these little details is s
4 precisely because we were not informed that there were 5 drafts.
Had we been informed that there were drafts we 6 wouldn't be going through all this.
7 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0s I am not debating wh e the r 8 one ought to take Phase I or Phase II separately or 9 together.
As a matter of fact, I was hoping last time 10 we could take them both together, but I did not get the 11 signals that we were all prepared.
So we continued with l
12 Phase I and Phase II.
Since we had made a conclusion on 13 Phase I, although you may have all been thinking of
(
14 Phase II as well, I just asked is there any change as a 15 asult of Phase, and I gathered not.
16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa I thought we simply l
17 hadn't acted last time.
18 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO Oh, yes, we acted.
We 19 have a draf t order.
20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa Well, I don't remember 21 a n y vote on this aspect of it.
I thought we simply 22 decided not to take it up.
23 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I think you are each 24 saying different things.
Joe, you mean we acted on a 25 set of conclusions and propositions in the context of ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
25 1 Phase I.
2 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Yes.
l l
3 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD4 I think all Victor 4 means is that we didn't specifically weigh Phase II in 5 that balance.
i 6
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO That is why I am asking l
7 the question now, does Phase II change anything.
8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa I think we simply 9 didn' t act because there was a sentiment not to do 10 a ny thing about Cloud.
11 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO No.
We first went saying 12 ve will keep Cloud on the eligibility list.
Then I 13 believe it was you who said, well, do we really need to i
14 tak e any action?
If we don't take any action, then he 15 is on the eligibility list.
That is the wa y I recall oeuM 16 it.
I n4tht have to check the transcript.
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa Right.
That is what I
(
18 tho ught, that we didn't take any action.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0s All rig h t.
Now I am 20 asking do you now wish to take any action?
j 21 (Laughter.)
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I guess I would have 23 taken action before.
24 (Laughter.)
25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I don't think anything ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
~
26 1 tha t has happened today changes the situation, but I 2 think there is a problem.
I gathered the staff was, and 3 I don't know that this got discussed, but I thought you i
4 at least started out along these lines talking about 5 treating the report more or less as if it had been done 6 by PGCE, which doesn't invalidate the report from a 7 technical point of view.
It is there and it can be 8 checked and it may deal with most of the questions one 9 wants to deal with.
But it seemed to me in dealing 10 with some of the circumstances of November 3rd it isn't 11 eligible to stand in the category of independent 12 reports.
13 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN01 It is my understanding we 14 still have to address the question on who the idependent i
15 auditors should be and how they meet the criteria and 16 consideration of the reverification program.
On that j
17 you will have input and tha t will come iater.
18 MR. DENTON:
Mr. Chairman, we met with the 19 company last week on those questions of independence and 20 the program plan and we plan to meet with the 21 representatives of the Governor and the joint 22 intervenors next week to go over their comments.
Then 23 ve would return to the Commission with our l
24 recommendations on the company's proposal regarding the 25 company 's program plan in comparison against the ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
28 1 of the financial points the company wasn't prepared to 2 put it on the record that day.
3 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
Excuse me, what sort of s
4 financial points?
What do you mean?
MR. DENTONs)he criteria that were identified 5
3 in the letter back to Congress as f actors that we would 7 consider.
With respect to Cloud, for example, we did 8 find that he had worked for PGEE in three previous 9 instances.
We went into some detail in the meeting as 10 to what were those op*cd#-
11 COMMISSIONER ROBERTSs Dollar magnitudes.
12 MR. DENTON:
Yes, and how much money had 13 actually been transferred as a result of those i
14 activities.
15 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Harold, when will we be 16 getting this report or considering this report?
17 MR. DENTONs I would think the week of the 18 25th would be the time.
That would allow us time to l
19 incorporate the comments we expect to receive next week 20 in the meeting with the Governor's representatives and 21 t he joint intervenors.
Tha t meeting would be held in 22 San Francisco.
23 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I would like to ask Len a 24 question.
25 It is my impression, and correct me if I am ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
@ VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
27 1 independence criteria.
2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Now in that, Harold, 3 you will be addressing and exploring some of these 4 issues that I gather came out in that meeting which are 5 then included in a letter we got from Mr. Feishacker, 6 the questions of Cloud's working for Westinghouse for so 7 long and whether he in his Westinghouse role had 8 any thing to do with developing or managing or 9 controlling the designs which he would now be 1,n the 10 position of going back to see whether the Westinghouse 11 program was adequate and the size of the contractual 12 support with respect to the whole business base of his 13 com pany and is he essentially a captive contractor.
DENT 0$**
14 MR. De9eMe4 'We went through the factors that 15 the Commission had identified with each of the companies Wet 16 proposed by PGEE.
We Aete reached a conclusion on that 17 pending our meeting with the other parties.
Then there 18 would be a regrouping on everything we have heard and we 19 would get back to the Commission with a recommendation.
20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE4 But you believe you 21 have explored those points wel'. enough so that at least 22 you have a f actual basis to reach your decision?
l 23 MR DENTON:
That is correct.
I would think l
l 24 some of the points, we may still get additional l
25 inf ormation f rom the company to clarify, because in some i
t ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
y 29
, ' f,,
/
I wrong, that we now distribute Phase II of the report.
2 We had indicated we were going to allow Governor Brown 3 and joint intervenore seven days to comment.
So it 4 would ha incumbent upon us to release it soon so we can 5 get those comments, and in whatever way we want to l
6 reflect them in our decision, have them to reflect in 1
7 our,,tecisig
,,,r' 4. n e,
,, pg,past y
8 MA.DfsN7CN'*I wonder if we might go to release this
(
9 report, the Phase II report, release it in the same l
10 manner as we released Phase I for appropriate comment?
c 11 May I have a vote on that question?
l 12 (Chorus of unanimous Ayes.)
i.
l i
13 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO Is there any other action 14 we should take at this time on this question?
i i
L 15 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD I never did get an 16 answer to my question as to whether there was feeling in 17 the staff, although at this point it would take a brave l
18 staff, but feeling in the staff that we in fact should 19 consider striking Cloud from the list based on Phase II?
20 MR. DENTON:
My own opinion was that Phase II 21 of this report does not provide a basis for concluding 22 Cloud was ineligible.
23 MR. DIRCKS:
Any actions you have taken thus 24 f ar, I don't think this affects it.
l I.. t J
25 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
If you can swallow 1
\\
1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
30
.s 1 Phase I, you can swallow Phase II.
2 (Laughter.)
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
It is a choice of words.
i 4
(Laughter.)
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY I guess we never did 6 ask how they felt about Phase I.
7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Dick?
8 M R. D eYOUNG:
We agree.
9 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Okay, any more that to should be discussed on this question today?
11 (Chairman Palladino and Commissioner Ahearne 12 confer off the record.)
13 MR. DIRCKS:
Do we wait now for another week 14 before we take any action that the Commission directed, 15 pointed in the direction of last week?
16 MR. BICKWIT4 With respect to the earlier 17 statement?
18 MR. DeYOUNG:
The notice of viola tion.
19 MR. BICKWIT:
I see.
I hadn't interpreted 20 this reaction, no.
I hadn't interpreted the Commission 21 to be saying that.
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYJ I assume you are 23 preparing whatever it is you need to prepare.
24 MR. DeYOUNGs We may sign it out unless you 25 tell us not to, like sometime today or tomorrow morning.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
31 s
1 MR. BICKWIT The purposa of the comment 2 period was not to help the Commission in its decisions 3 involving enf orcement actions.
4 MR. DeYOUNG:
I see.
5 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Did you have a comment?
6 MR. FOUCHARD:
I have a question.
The 7 Commission has not as yet issued its statement which 8 directs the staf f to issue a notice of violation.
9 (Laughter.)
10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You are suggesting that 11 it should come bef ore it gets issued.
12 (Laughter.)
13 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I think we now have a 14 three to two vote on that.
15 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
We do?
16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
He means the actual 17 piece of paper.
18
( Laugh te r. )
19 MR. FOUCHARD:
I was just saying whoa just a 20 little bit here on the staff.
In addition, one of the 21 comments, and I believe it is Mr. Ahearne's, refers to 22 the Phase II report.
It would be nice if both of those 23 could go out simultaneously, but I don 't know the timing 24 as to when the Commission's statement will be ready.
(
25 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO.
Well, do we need another ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
32 t,
1 statement on Phase II?
2 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYs I don't think so.
3 MR. FOUCHARD:
This looks all-inclusive to 4 me.
But what I would like to do is do it simultaneously 5 is what I am saying.
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Release Phase I and Phase 7 II together?
8 MR. FOUCHARD:
No.
What I would to do is 9 release the Phase II investigation report and this to statement at the same time.
11 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Is there some reason why 12 w e ca n ' t ?
13 MR. FOUCHARD:
Not as far as I am concerned.
14
( La ug h te r. )
15 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
All I think is that we 16 need confirmation through the Secretary as what the 17 voting stands at the moment on that.
18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
There is a piece of 19 paper frca the General Counsel which got circulated.
I 20 suggested dropping one sentence, but that is something 21 we can resolve in two minutes.
22 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Yes, I think it is 23 resolved now.
24 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
I would like to know 25 how.
I mean, I would like to know the resolution.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
33 1
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO The resolution was that 2 we keep it in.
3 COMMISSIONER ROBERTF:
Thank you.
Okay.
4 (Laughter.)
5 MR. FOUCHARD:
I would suggest that since we 6 have some paperwork to do that we just plan to release 7 this statement and the Phase II report about noontime 8 tomorrow which will be 9 o' clock San Francisco time so 9 that we will have a chance to get PGCE at least a copy 10 of Phast. II of the report and also do the necessary 11 external notifications.
12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Do you see any problem in 13 doing it by noon tomorrow?
14 MR. FOUCHARD:
No.
15 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Hate we now seen all 16 the statements and Tom's and John's are the only 17 separate statements?
~
l 18 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
No, I.was proposing a I
19 statement of my own that I just got out of the 20 typewriter and I think it is almost ready to go.
l i
21 (Laughter.)
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
It looks mercifully
~
23 short.
24 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
It is mercifully short.
25
( La ugh te r. )
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (2G2) 554-2345
34 1
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I would circulate it 2 except I only one one copy and all I did wa s cross out a 3 phrase.
4 MR. FOUCHARD:
Well, it is all right to aim 5 for release of both documents tomorrow?
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Yes, I think we should 7 aim f or release ---
8 (Laughter.)
9 MR. FOUCHARD:
Thank you, sir.
10 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Now before we adjourn, 11 Commissioner Ahearne handed me a letter that I haven't 12 read.
He says it raises a question with regard to this 13 report that I probably ought to raise with the 14 Commissioners and see, while we are together, whether we
'15 vant to take any action in this direction.
I 16 I think the pertinent paragraph is:
"I 17 believe, therefore, in order to forestall a repeat of 18 pas t experience, the NRC inspector and auditor should be 19 directed to conduct a review of NUREG 0862 for the 20 purpose of determining whether sppropriate questions 21 were asked during the interviews conducted by the NRC 22 sta f f, whether these questions were appropriately 23 followed up, whether an adequate search was made for 24 relevant documents and whether the summary sections of l
25 NUREG 0862 are an accura te reflection of th e ma terials l
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, l
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
e.
35 1 on which they are based.
Since the quality of NRC 2 investigations is a matter I intend to monitor, the 3 report of the inspector and auditor mayIIhe subject of a 4 f uture oversight hearing."
5 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS 4 That makes the 6 assumption we are going to have such a report.
This is 7 a suggestion that we do so.
The second paragra ph that 8 you read said "the report of the inspector and auditor."
9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Or the absence 10 the reof, I think you can read into that.
11 (Laughter.)
12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINUs However, now, we did have 13 a special task force to go try monitor, I believe, these 14 same questions.
15 MR. DeYOUNG:
Yes.
16 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I don't know whether the 17 Commission wishes to have another investigation done by 18 the inspector and auditor.
19 I think John 's purpose in bringing it up nov 20 gives us the opportunity to answer that question.
21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
We.'1, it just came in.
22 It was handed to me while we were sitting here.
Since 23 everybody who is involved was here, I thought it' might 24 be an appropriate time to raise the question to get i
25 reactions.
ALDERSON REFoRTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
36 1
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Well, I haven't seen 2 the letter.
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I was reading it and 4
4 absorbing it at the same time.
I believe while the 5 separate review has not been by the inspector and 6 auditor, I think we undertook to conduct the spirit of 7 that review in the team that we sent out to San 8 Francisco.
Now if there is a difference of opinion, I 9 am willing to listen.
10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE4 Dick?
11 MR. DeYOUNG:
Let me ask one of the panel 12 members.
You were on the panel.
Ed, do you think you 13 did wha t was proposed to be done?
14 MR. CASE 4 I wasn 't paying that much 15 a ttention.
Certainly some of the things.
16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYs Have you see the 17 letter?
18 MR. CASES Certainly those aspects, yes, 19 singly and. jointly.
20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD4 Was OI A on that l
21 panel?
It wasn't, was it?
22 MR. DeYOUNGs No.
23 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I wonder if we could 24 take this up af ter we have had a chance to look at the 25 letter and think about it.
'LDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
37
~
e 1
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE Well, I think the 2 question that is raised is a very straightf orward 3 question.
Mr. Udall is requesting the Commission to 4 have OIA do a review of the report.
I think we as a 5 Commission on a previous day voted with regard to an 6 enforcement hetion based on part of the report, and 7 today we have just essentially agreed not to take any 8 further action to eliminate Cloud from this review based 9 upon the second stage of the report.
10 So in theory we have just spent time on a 44 11 Commission reviewing the report.
The question that is 12 being raised is are we satisfied with the adequacy of 13 tha t report.
If not, we might turn OIA onto it to 14 review the adequacy.
There is always the resource 15 question of people in the agency, and this is another 16 question of resource allocation.
17 MR. ENGELKEN I would like to just make one 18 comment.
It was my sensitivity to the criticism that 19 has been raised about some of our previous 20 investigations that caused me to request th e 21 participation of a peer group.
I had nothing to do with 22 the selection of that group, of course, and I must say 23 t ha t their participation was quite vigorous.
24 On their first visit out here they identified
(
25 quite a few areas that they felt we should pursue ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
38 1 further than we had, and we did so.
Their participation 2 was vigorous to the point where I was almost sorry that 3 I had asked for their involvement.
It was a rather 4 critical scrutiny that they did, and I personally feel 5 that it was a very worthwhile effort.
6 I am pleased, now that the whole matter has 7 been completed, that I did so, and I think it improved 8 the quality of the investigation considerably.
9 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Do we have a report of 10 tha t review?
l 11 MR. DeYOUNG:
No, we do not.
12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
We do not.
So there is 13 lacking documentary confirmation of what was done.
I 14 MR. DeYOUNG:
Tha t is true.
15 CGMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Can you document or 16 justify the changes made in reponse 17 (Laughter.)
18 MR. DeYOUNG:, There is no documentation.
19 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
I wonder if we knew 20 there were draf ts being made?
21 (Laughter.)
I 22 CHAIRMAN PALLADIIOs There may be value in 23 documenting what was done.
Otherwise, it would be 24 dif ficult to explain to others or have a common base of 25 understanding of what was done.
1 I
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
39 1
MR. DeYOUNG:
I presume that we can do this.
1 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I think that would be 3 appropriate regardless of what we do with this question.
4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORDs It is probably a good 5 idea given the sensitivity of this issue.
The conflict 6 problem isn ' t the same as between Cloud and PGCE, but it 7 probably would be a good idea to have such material 8 handy, especially if we turn out not to be requesting an 9 OI A report, 10 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO I think we
...ould have a 11 document reflecting what was done in that review, what 12 conclusions were drawn and what actions were taken.
13 MR. DeYOUNG:
We will do that.
14 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
How quickly can you do 15 that?
16 MR. CORNELL:
We can do that in 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
17 Just off the top of my head, it is going to be a 18 one page description of essentially what happened 19 because we don't have any documents left over from our 20 review.
21 Also, I will have to point out that the panel 22 members did not review the final document tha t you have 23 bef ore you.
We saw it in various drafts and commented 24 on them and most of the comments were verbal.
There 25 were various pieces of paper which I certainly don' t ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGIN!A AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
40 o.
1 have any left over.
2 When the final report came in we did not have 3 a chance to review it before it was sent to the 4 Commission.
We were not involved in Phase II at all.
5 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO Except that you did cause 6 Phase II to come about.
7 MR. CORNELLs Tha t is correct, yes.
We can 8 put together a description of what the panel did and who 9 they were.
10 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
By asking that question I 11 didn' t mean that it should be a superficial report.
It 12 should be a report of what was done.
13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Can I make a suggestion?
14 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
That probably ought to be 15 done in the order of about a week,ba no5 d**5 an w u Ns peston.
16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I would suggest, Joe, 17 tha t we have OCA check with Mr. Udall's staff on two 18 things.
19 First, do they know the peer review, the
?
20 background that has already gone through.
21 Second, did they have some other additional 22 cause f or concern that underlies this, because initially 23 m y reaction is that this was an effort that was done 24 with extensive care, that there was this special peer
\\
25 review group to review it and that a lot of material was ALDERSON REPORTING CCMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
4 41 0
1 generated.
To then turn for an additional review of 2 tha t review, I would like to get some sence of why Mr.
3 Udall believes that should be done.
l l
4 In the final analysis, if the senior chairman 5 of one of our oversight and authorizing committees ends 6 up saying that I believe that your in-house audit group l
l 7 ought to look at something that you have done, I suspect 4M 8 that we probablyAend up having that done.
9 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I was having difficulty l
10 with answering this because I just wrote last nicht and l
11 finished this morning what I thought came out of a whole l
l 12 d a y workshop.
[
13 (Laughter.)
14 CHAIRMAN PALLADINOa One of the things I did 15 Write, or one item that I am giving consideration to is 16 tha t when we make these improvements for a while th a t we 17 ought to have a check on them to see that the 18 improvements area being effective.
So I am havinq 19 dif ficulty in saying no to this because that is within 20 the spirit of what I have written, but I want to review l
21 it before I send it out.
22 Well, I think it is a good suggestion.
Why 23 don 't I have OCA check to see if they knew of the i
24 in-house review that we made and what was accomplished l
l 25 by it, and ask them if they have any further reason for 1
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
[
42 1 wan ting to have an CIA review.
2 MR. DIRCKS:
Can I ask, this whole thing is 3 subject to review and comment by the Governor's office; 4 is that right?
We have sent this out for comment, too, 5 haven 't we?
6 MR. BICKWIT:
This meaning?
7 MR. DIRCKSa The investigation.
8 MR. BICKW'IT:
Yes.
9 MR. DIRCKS:
I think that may be another item.
10 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
What did you say?
11 MR. DIRCKS:
We have had the intervenors 12 review this and we have had the Governor of California's 13 office review it.
14 COMMISSIONE8 AHEARNE:
Phase I is out for l
15 comment and Phase II will go out for comment.
l 16 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO Why don 't we check on 17 these two and then get the answers back to the 18 Commissioners and we can get a notation vote or an I
19 af firmation vote if we need it.
l 20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Here is the man.
21 (Referring to Jim Cummings.)
22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Has he got a typewriter?
23 (Laughter.)
24 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Where is he?
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNEs Jim Cummings.
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
,o-43 o
1 COMMISSIONER ROBERTSs He doesn,'t know what he 2 has missed.
3 (Laughter.)
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Well, I think maybe this 5 is the appropriate to do it.
6 Any other items that should come before us on 7 this matter today?
8 (No response.)
9 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Thank you, folks, in 10 Calif ornia, and we vill see you again.
11 The meeting vill stand adjourned.
12 MR. ENGELKEN:
Thank you, sir.
13 (Whereupon, at 3:00 p.m.,
the closed meeting 14 adjourned.)
15 16 17 18 l
j 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 l
I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, j
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345 l
~.
sur--Tu REGU*M RT COMMISSICN
-. Tais is Oc certif7 that tha attached pecceedings before the COMMISSION MEETING in the ::: attar cf:. CLOSED MEETING - EXEMPTION 5 - DISCUSSION OF PHASE II OF THE DIABLO CANYON REPORT
(
Cate of Proceecing:
February 9, 1982 Uccket llumber:
Place cf Preceecing: Washington, D. C.
were held as herein appears, anc that this is the criginal :: ansc:-tp I
therecf fcr the-file cf the Cc=:::issica.
Mary C.
Simons Official ?.epercar (Typec)
A rri M Officizi ?.eperter (Signature) 1 1
4 a