|
---|
Category:INTERVENTION PETITIONS
MONTHYEARML20084K8771984-05-11011 May 1984 Intervenor B Stamiris Second Supplemental Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law Re QA & Mgt Attitude Issues. Determination of Whether 791206 Order of Mod Should Be Sustained Is Only Outstanding Issue to Be Decided ML20087G7921984-03-15015 March 1984 Addendum to Stamiris Contention on Transamerica Delaval,Inc Diesel Generators Addressing Late Filing Factors of 10CFR2.714 ML20081C5091984-03-0404 March 1984 Contention on Transamerica Delaval Diesel Generators Re Model Dsrv 12.Model Cannot Be Relied Upon to Perform Requisite Safety Function ML20081F8711983-10-28028 October 1983 Motion to Reopen & Suppl Record on Sinclair Contention 14,to Submit DA Sommers,Jp Bradley & CR Nefe Affidavits.Affidavits Provide Results of Postulated Evergreen Fog Sweep or Planted Barrier Analysis ML20081C9361983-10-26026 October 1983 Motion to Stay ASLB 830831 & 1006 Orders Denying Deponent Motion for Reconsideration of Motion to Quash Subpoenas Pending Aslab Decision on Deponent 831021 Appeal.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20023A8241982-10-15015 October 1982 Reply to NRC & Applicant Responses to M Sinclair Revised Contentions 6,34,37,43,56 & 57.Contention 6,bases (A),(B) & (d)(4),Contention 43 & Contention 56,Basis 3,withdrawn. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20065M7161982-10-15015 October 1982 Response to Util 820923 & NRC 820928 Response to B Stamiris New Contention Based on Fes.Gross Misrepresentation of Overall Costs & Benefits to Public Represented by Cost/ Benefit Analysis Demands Redress ML20063N7541982-10-0404 October 1982 Responses to Applicant & NRC 820903 & NRC 820910 Responses to M Sinclair Revised Contentions.Limiting Contention 31 to Litigation of Util Compliance W/Existing Requirements.Contention 32 Amended ML20065J7501982-09-30030 September 1982 Response Opposing M Sinclair Resubmitted Contention 56 on Station Blackout.Contention Lacks Requisite Basis & Specificity to Stand Alone.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20065H6691982-09-30030 September 1982 Response to M Sinclair 820920 Revised Contentions,Set Ii. Objects to Contentions 34(a),37 & 43 & Portions of Contentions 6 & 57.Util Nonconformance Rept & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20065H7201982-09-28028 September 1982 Responses Opposing B Stamiris 820913 Addendum to 820824 Cost Benefit Contention.Good Cause for Late Filing Not Demonstrated.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20065H6881982-09-28028 September 1982 Response to M Sinclair Resubmitted Contention on Table S-3. Contention Should Be Deferred Until Commission Issues Policy Statement.Certificates of Svc Encl ML20069F9451982-09-23023 September 1982 Response Opposing B Stamiris 820824 New Contention Challenging cost-benefit Analysis of Fes.Production Cost Estimates Unrepresentative,Inconsistent & Untimely & Provide Inadequate Basis for Contention.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20065C1221982-09-22022 September 1982 Revised Contentions (II) Based on Remainder of Discovery from NRC Per ASLB 820525 Order.Related Correspondence ML20065C1181982-09-20020 September 1982 Resubmission of Contention 56 on Station Blackout.Related Correspondence ML20027B2471982-09-13013 September 1982 Addendum to 820824 Cost/Benefit Contention on Dewatering Costs ML20027B2421982-09-0909 September 1982 Resubmitted Contention 1 Based on Encl Us Court of Appeals, DC Circuit,820816 Opinion That NRC Original,Interim & Final Table S-3 Rule Resulted from Inadequate Consideration of Environ Impacts ML20063E5381982-08-24024 August 1982 New Contention Based on Fes Re Cost Production & Cost Saving Analysis of Fes.Statement of Good Cause for Filing New Contention Encl ML20062L5491982-08-16016 August 1982 Page 36a of Util Further Answer to B Stamiris Petition to Intervene in OL Proceeding,Amended Contentions & Statement of Good Cause for Late Intervention,Inadvertently Omitted from Original Filing ML20062M9581982-08-13013 August 1982 Restated Contentions 6,8 & 16 Re QA Program.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20062M9801982-08-12012 August 1982 Revised Contentions Based on Discovery Per ASLB 820525 Order ML20062M8741982-08-12012 August 1982 Restated Contentions,Superseding Contentions Filed on 820718,23 & 0803 ML20062F7401982-08-0606 August 1982 New Contention 16 Adding Info That Should Be Covered as Part of Zack Co Nonconformance Rept Re Unverified Welder Qualifications for Fabrication Weld ML20062D5291982-08-0303 August 1982 New Contention 15 Re Documentation on Welds ML20058J7251982-08-0202 August 1982 Response Opposing MP Sinclair 820723 New Contention 14 & Request for Addl Time to Respond to New Contention 13 Until Prehearing Conference on 820812.Contention Has No Basis. Certificate of Svc & Related Documentation Encl ML20071K7901982-07-28028 July 1982 Further Answer Opposing B Stamiris Petition to Intervene as Supplemented by 820709 Amended Contentions.Petitioner Fails to Meet Requirements for Late Intervention ML20071K7831982-07-28028 July 1982 Response Opposing M Sinclair 820618 New Contentions. Contentions Untimely.Good Cause for Late Filing Not Shown. Contentions Lack Basis & Specificity &/Or Raise Issues Being Resolved in Another Forum ML20058D5591982-07-23023 July 1982 Addl New Contentions Based on Significant New Info ML20058B1501982-07-21021 July 1982 Response to M Sinclair 820618 Late Filed Contentions & Basis for Late Contentions.Contention 1 Should Be Deferred Pending Commission Guidance.Contentions 2-10 Opposed.Contentions 11 & 12 Unopposed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054N0241982-07-0909 July 1982 Amended OL Contentions ML20054N0101982-07-0909 July 1982 Statement of Good Cause for Late Intervention.Issues Raised Have Occurred Since Inception of 1978 OL Proceeding ML20054K4861982-07-0101 July 1982 Response to ASLB 820625 Order,Specifying Reasons for Late Filing of New Contentions ML20054H7571982-06-18018 June 1982 Contentions for OL Hearing ML20054H5941982-06-18018 June 1982 New Contentions for OL Hearing.Proof of Svc Encl ML19332B1141980-09-0909 September 1980 Suppl to Sk Warren Petition to Intervene & Amended Suppl to B Stamiris Petition to Intervene.Alleges Inadequacy of Permanent Dewatering Procedures & CPC Financial Pressures Adversely Affecting Resolution of Soil Settlement Issues ML19331D8821980-08-30030 August 1980 Response to Sk Warren 800814 Suppl & B Stamiris Amend to Petitions to Intervene.Opposes Warren Contentions 2 & Stamiris Contentions 1,2,3 & 5.Urges Rephrasing of Stamiris Contention 4 Re Qa.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19331E0721980-08-27027 August 1980 Contention Alleging That Class 9 Accident Will Cause Massive Flow of Radioactive Matls Into Saginaw Bay River Which Provides Drinking Water to Area.Urges Full Disclosure Per NEPA ML19331D3131980-08-25025 August 1980 Amended Petition to Intervene Alleging That Inability of Soil to Support Plant Structure W/O Compaction Procedures Violates Requirements.Claims That FSAR Statements Are False & Evasive ML19344A5251980-08-18018 August 1980 Amended Petition to Intervene Alleging Inability of Soil Conditions to Support Plant Structures.Alleges Falsification,Evasiveness & Reluctance in FSAR Statements Re Fill Soils & Seismic Characteristics ML19344A7581980-08-14014 August 1980 Suppl to Petition to Intervene Alleging Poor Quality of Fill Soil Composition & Inadequacy of Dewatering & Preloading Procedures ML19330B6421980-07-31031 July 1980 Response Stating No Opposition to Wh Marshall Present Intervention Re Interest & Standing.Reserves Right of Future Objection Depending on Substance of Contention.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19329G1211980-07-0808 July 1980 Response Stating No Present Opposition to Sk Warren,Sd Reist,Gc Wilson & Ma Race Petitions to Intervene Re License Mod.Reserves Right for Future Objection & Urges Representation by Single Spokesman.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19320B0121980-07-0101 July 1980 Response Stating No Present Opposition to Wa Thibodeau,Tr Miller,Pa Race,B Stamiris & C Gilbert Petitions to Intervene.Reserves Right to Oppose Participation in Future Development & Urges Consolidation.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19318D2041980-06-26026 June 1980 Petition to Intervene Re Order for CP Mod,Alleging That Unresolved Soil Settlement Issue Will Create Adverse Safety Problems & Will Result in Inefficient Exercise of Atomic Energy Use.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19318D0651980-06-25025 June 1980 Petition to Intervene in CP Mod Proceeding,Alleging That Unresolved Soil Settlement Problems Will Create Adverse Safety Problems.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19318D1871980-06-25025 June 1980 Petition to Intervene in CP Mod Proceeding,Alleging That Unresolved Soil Settlement Problems Will Adversely Affect Safety & Will Create Inefficient Exercise of Atomic Energy Use.Questions Integrity of Const.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19318D2031980-06-24024 June 1980 Petition to Intervene Re Order for CP Mod,Alleging That Mod Will Result in Unsafe & Inefficient Exercise of Atomic Energy Use & Will Create Adverse Environ Effects. Certificate of Svc Encl ML19338C1541980-06-18018 June 1980 Petition to Intervene in Hearings on Util Application for CP Re Concern Over Excessive Settlement & Soil Deficiencies of Diesel Generator Bldg Through Releases of Radiation.Requests Mod to Cp.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19318A5611980-06-16016 June 1980 Petition to Intervene Re Order for Mod of Cps.Alleges Inefficient Exercise of Atomic Energy Use Which Will Create Adverse Environ Effects on Cities of Midland,Saginaw & Bay City.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19331A7341978-10-31031 October 1978 Contentions of Intervenor,Mp Sinclair,Supplementing 780605 Petition to Intervene.Paragraphs 1 Through 8 Are Restated. Proof of Svc Encl 1984-05-11
[Table view] Category:RESPONSES & CONTENTIONS
MONTHYEARML20084K8771984-05-11011 May 1984 Intervenor B Stamiris Second Supplemental Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law Re QA & Mgt Attitude Issues. Determination of Whether 791206 Order of Mod Should Be Sustained Is Only Outstanding Issue to Be Decided ML20087G7921984-03-15015 March 1984 Addendum to Stamiris Contention on Transamerica Delaval,Inc Diesel Generators Addressing Late Filing Factors of 10CFR2.714 ML20081C5091984-03-0404 March 1984 Contention on Transamerica Delaval Diesel Generators Re Model Dsrv 12.Model Cannot Be Relied Upon to Perform Requisite Safety Function ML20081F8711983-10-28028 October 1983 Motion to Reopen & Suppl Record on Sinclair Contention 14,to Submit DA Sommers,Jp Bradley & CR Nefe Affidavits.Affidavits Provide Results of Postulated Evergreen Fog Sweep or Planted Barrier Analysis ML20081C9361983-10-26026 October 1983 Motion to Stay ASLB 830831 & 1006 Orders Denying Deponent Motion for Reconsideration of Motion to Quash Subpoenas Pending Aslab Decision on Deponent 831021 Appeal.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20023A8241982-10-15015 October 1982 Reply to NRC & Applicant Responses to M Sinclair Revised Contentions 6,34,37,43,56 & 57.Contention 6,bases (A),(B) & (d)(4),Contention 43 & Contention 56,Basis 3,withdrawn. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20065M7161982-10-15015 October 1982 Response to Util 820923 & NRC 820928 Response to B Stamiris New Contention Based on Fes.Gross Misrepresentation of Overall Costs & Benefits to Public Represented by Cost/ Benefit Analysis Demands Redress ML20063N7541982-10-0404 October 1982 Responses to Applicant & NRC 820903 & NRC 820910 Responses to M Sinclair Revised Contentions.Limiting Contention 31 to Litigation of Util Compliance W/Existing Requirements.Contention 32 Amended ML20065J7501982-09-30030 September 1982 Response Opposing M Sinclair Resubmitted Contention 56 on Station Blackout.Contention Lacks Requisite Basis & Specificity to Stand Alone.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20065H6691982-09-30030 September 1982 Response to M Sinclair 820920 Revised Contentions,Set Ii. Objects to Contentions 34(a),37 & 43 & Portions of Contentions 6 & 57.Util Nonconformance Rept & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20065H7201982-09-28028 September 1982 Responses Opposing B Stamiris 820913 Addendum to 820824 Cost Benefit Contention.Good Cause for Late Filing Not Demonstrated.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20065H6881982-09-28028 September 1982 Response to M Sinclair Resubmitted Contention on Table S-3. Contention Should Be Deferred Until Commission Issues Policy Statement.Certificates of Svc Encl ML20069F9451982-09-23023 September 1982 Response Opposing B Stamiris 820824 New Contention Challenging cost-benefit Analysis of Fes.Production Cost Estimates Unrepresentative,Inconsistent & Untimely & Provide Inadequate Basis for Contention.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20065C1221982-09-22022 September 1982 Revised Contentions (II) Based on Remainder of Discovery from NRC Per ASLB 820525 Order.Related Correspondence ML20065C1181982-09-20020 September 1982 Resubmission of Contention 56 on Station Blackout.Related Correspondence ML20027B2471982-09-13013 September 1982 Addendum to 820824 Cost/Benefit Contention on Dewatering Costs ML20027B2421982-09-0909 September 1982 Resubmitted Contention 1 Based on Encl Us Court of Appeals, DC Circuit,820816 Opinion That NRC Original,Interim & Final Table S-3 Rule Resulted from Inadequate Consideration of Environ Impacts ML20063E5381982-08-24024 August 1982 New Contention Based on Fes Re Cost Production & Cost Saving Analysis of Fes.Statement of Good Cause for Filing New Contention Encl ML20062L5491982-08-16016 August 1982 Page 36a of Util Further Answer to B Stamiris Petition to Intervene in OL Proceeding,Amended Contentions & Statement of Good Cause for Late Intervention,Inadvertently Omitted from Original Filing ML20062M9581982-08-13013 August 1982 Restated Contentions 6,8 & 16 Re QA Program.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20062M9801982-08-12012 August 1982 Revised Contentions Based on Discovery Per ASLB 820525 Order ML20062M8741982-08-12012 August 1982 Restated Contentions,Superseding Contentions Filed on 820718,23 & 0803 ML20062F7401982-08-0606 August 1982 New Contention 16 Adding Info That Should Be Covered as Part of Zack Co Nonconformance Rept Re Unverified Welder Qualifications for Fabrication Weld ML20062D5291982-08-0303 August 1982 New Contention 15 Re Documentation on Welds ML20058J7251982-08-0202 August 1982 Response Opposing MP Sinclair 820723 New Contention 14 & Request for Addl Time to Respond to New Contention 13 Until Prehearing Conference on 820812.Contention Has No Basis. Certificate of Svc & Related Documentation Encl ML20071K7901982-07-28028 July 1982 Further Answer Opposing B Stamiris Petition to Intervene as Supplemented by 820709 Amended Contentions.Petitioner Fails to Meet Requirements for Late Intervention ML20071K7831982-07-28028 July 1982 Response Opposing M Sinclair 820618 New Contentions. Contentions Untimely.Good Cause for Late Filing Not Shown. Contentions Lack Basis & Specificity &/Or Raise Issues Being Resolved in Another Forum ML20058D5591982-07-23023 July 1982 Addl New Contentions Based on Significant New Info ML20058B1501982-07-21021 July 1982 Response to M Sinclair 820618 Late Filed Contentions & Basis for Late Contentions.Contention 1 Should Be Deferred Pending Commission Guidance.Contentions 2-10 Opposed.Contentions 11 & 12 Unopposed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054N0241982-07-0909 July 1982 Amended OL Contentions ML20054N0101982-07-0909 July 1982 Statement of Good Cause for Late Intervention.Issues Raised Have Occurred Since Inception of 1978 OL Proceeding ML20054K4861982-07-0101 July 1982 Response to ASLB 820625 Order,Specifying Reasons for Late Filing of New Contentions ML20054H7571982-06-18018 June 1982 Contentions for OL Hearing ML20054H5941982-06-18018 June 1982 New Contentions for OL Hearing.Proof of Svc Encl ML19332B1141980-09-0909 September 1980 Suppl to Sk Warren Petition to Intervene & Amended Suppl to B Stamiris Petition to Intervene.Alleges Inadequacy of Permanent Dewatering Procedures & CPC Financial Pressures Adversely Affecting Resolution of Soil Settlement Issues ML19331D8821980-08-30030 August 1980 Response to Sk Warren 800814 Suppl & B Stamiris Amend to Petitions to Intervene.Opposes Warren Contentions 2 & Stamiris Contentions 1,2,3 & 5.Urges Rephrasing of Stamiris Contention 4 Re Qa.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19331E0721980-08-27027 August 1980 Contention Alleging That Class 9 Accident Will Cause Massive Flow of Radioactive Matls Into Saginaw Bay River Which Provides Drinking Water to Area.Urges Full Disclosure Per NEPA ML19331D3131980-08-25025 August 1980 Amended Petition to Intervene Alleging That Inability of Soil to Support Plant Structure W/O Compaction Procedures Violates Requirements.Claims That FSAR Statements Are False & Evasive ML19344A5251980-08-18018 August 1980 Amended Petition to Intervene Alleging Inability of Soil Conditions to Support Plant Structures.Alleges Falsification,Evasiveness & Reluctance in FSAR Statements Re Fill Soils & Seismic Characteristics ML19344A7581980-08-14014 August 1980 Suppl to Petition to Intervene Alleging Poor Quality of Fill Soil Composition & Inadequacy of Dewatering & Preloading Procedures ML19330B6421980-07-31031 July 1980 Response Stating No Opposition to Wh Marshall Present Intervention Re Interest & Standing.Reserves Right of Future Objection Depending on Substance of Contention.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19329G1211980-07-0808 July 1980 Response Stating No Present Opposition to Sk Warren,Sd Reist,Gc Wilson & Ma Race Petitions to Intervene Re License Mod.Reserves Right for Future Objection & Urges Representation by Single Spokesman.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19320B0121980-07-0101 July 1980 Response Stating No Present Opposition to Wa Thibodeau,Tr Miller,Pa Race,B Stamiris & C Gilbert Petitions to Intervene.Reserves Right to Oppose Participation in Future Development & Urges Consolidation.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19318D2041980-06-26026 June 1980 Petition to Intervene Re Order for CP Mod,Alleging That Unresolved Soil Settlement Issue Will Create Adverse Safety Problems & Will Result in Inefficient Exercise of Atomic Energy Use.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19318D0651980-06-25025 June 1980 Petition to Intervene in CP Mod Proceeding,Alleging That Unresolved Soil Settlement Problems Will Create Adverse Safety Problems.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19318D1871980-06-25025 June 1980 Petition to Intervene in CP Mod Proceeding,Alleging That Unresolved Soil Settlement Problems Will Adversely Affect Safety & Will Create Inefficient Exercise of Atomic Energy Use.Questions Integrity of Const.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19318D2031980-06-24024 June 1980 Petition to Intervene Re Order for CP Mod,Alleging That Mod Will Result in Unsafe & Inefficient Exercise of Atomic Energy Use & Will Create Adverse Environ Effects. Certificate of Svc Encl ML19338C1541980-06-18018 June 1980 Petition to Intervene in Hearings on Util Application for CP Re Concern Over Excessive Settlement & Soil Deficiencies of Diesel Generator Bldg Through Releases of Radiation.Requests Mod to Cp.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19318A5611980-06-16016 June 1980 Petition to Intervene Re Order for Mod of Cps.Alleges Inefficient Exercise of Atomic Energy Use Which Will Create Adverse Environ Effects on Cities of Midland,Saginaw & Bay City.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19331A7341978-10-31031 October 1978 Contentions of Intervenor,Mp Sinclair,Supplementing 780605 Petition to Intervene.Paragraphs 1 Through 8 Are Restated. Proof of Svc Encl 1984-05-11
[Table view] Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20070E4671991-02-26026 February 1991 Comment Opposing Petition for Rulemaking PRM-73-9 Re Upgrading Design Basis Threat for Radiological Sabotage of Nuclear Reactors.Recommends That NRC Deny Petition to Increase Design Basis Threat for Security ML20207C1331986-12-18018 December 1986 Order Terminating CPPR-81 & CPPR-82,per Util 860711 Motion to Withdraw Applications for OLs ML20215E7301986-12-17017 December 1986 Memorandum & Order Authorizing Withdrawal of OL Application & Dismissing OL Proceeding,Per Applicant 860711 Motion. Served on 861218 ML20215B2071986-12-11011 December 1986 Responds to Questions Posed in ASLBP 861203 Memorandum & Order Re Conversion to gas-fired Facility.Imposition of Conditions on Withdrawal of OL Application Unnecessary. Certificate of Svc & Svc List Encl ML20211L6391986-12-11011 December 1986 Affidavit of Gb Staley Re Preparation of Answers to Board 861203 Questions on Termination of OL Proceeding. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20211L6181986-12-11011 December 1986 Response to Board 861203 Questions Re Util Request to Terminate OL Proceeding ML20214Q4431986-12-0303 December 1986 Memorandum & Order Granting Motion to Expedite Completion of Withdrawal Proceedings & Posing Questions to Parties.Served on 861204 ML20214G7941986-11-24024 November 1986 Motion to Expedite Completion of Withdrawal of Licensee OL Application & Terminate Pending OL & CP Mod Proceedings. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20214T7361986-09-26026 September 1986 Memorandum & Order Dismissing OM Proceeding as Moot & Deferring Action on Applicant Motion for Authorization to Withdraw OL Application Pending NRC Preparation of Environ Assessment.Served on 860929 ML20212M7661986-08-25025 August 1986 Response to Util 860711 Motion for Authorization to Withdraw OL Application & for Dismissal of OL & Order of Mod Proceedings.Board Should Hold Motion in Abeyance Pending NRC Review of Stabilization Plan.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20206M8171986-08-15015 August 1986 Response to ASLB 860716 Order Requesting Responses Re Termination of OM Proceeding.Termination of OL Proceeding & Withdrawal of OL Application Requested.Om Proceeding Should Be Considered Moot.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20212B0311986-08-0101 August 1986 Memorandum & Order Withdrawing Retention of Jurisdiction Over Radon Issue Presented in Facility CP Proceeding & Vacating ASLB Partial Initial Decision on Remedial Soils in Consolidated CP Mod & OL Proceeding.Served on 860801 ML20212B0521986-07-31031 July 1986 Order Extending Time Until 860815 for Util & Other Parties to Respond to Questions Posed by 860716 ASLB Order.Time Extended Until 860825 for NRC Response to ASLB Questions & Util Motion.Served on 860801 ML20203F8791986-07-28028 July 1986 Response Supporting Util 860711 Motion for Termination of Appeal Board Jurisdiction Over Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20207H6871986-07-22022 July 1986 Motion for Extension Until 860815 to File Responses to Four Questions Re Util Motion to Dismiss OL & OM Proceedings. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20207E2851986-07-16016 July 1986 Order Presenting Questions in Response to Util 860711 Motion to Dismiss OL Proceeding & to Terminate Order of Mod Proceeding.Served on 860717 ML20202G1621986-07-11011 July 1986 Notice of Change of Address for Washington Ofc of Isham, Lincoln & Beale,Attys for Util.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20202G0121986-07-11011 July 1986 Motion for Authorization to Withdraw OL Application & Dismissal of OL & Order of Mod Proceedings ML20202G1201986-07-11011 July 1986 Motion for Termination of Aslab Jurisdiction to Facilitate Termination of Cps,Withdrawal of OL Application & Dismissal of Consolidated OM-OL Proceeding ML20202G0491986-07-10010 July 1986 Affidavit of JW Cook Re Conversion of Plant Into combined- cycle,gas-fired Power Plant.Plant Never Operable as Nuclear facility.Nuclear-related Equipment Will Be Sold ML20202G0281986-07-0808 July 1986 Affidavit of Ta Mcnish Re True & Correct Extracts of 860408 & 0618 Minutes of Meetings.Resolutions Recited Therein in Full Force & Effect ML20198J3861986-05-27027 May 1986 Notice of ASLB Reconstitution.C Bechoefer,Chairman & J Harbour & Ga Linenberger,Members.Served on 860529 ML20198J4651986-05-27027 May 1986 Notice of ASLB Reconstitution.C Bechhoefer,Chairman & J Harbour & Ga Linenberger,Members.Served on 860529 ML20137E0041985-11-21021 November 1985 Notice of Appearance in Proceeding ML20137D9651985-11-21021 November 1985 Notice of Withdrawal of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20133F6421985-10-0909 October 1985 Notice of Withdrawal of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20134N3771985-08-30030 August 1985 Notice of Withdrawal of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl DD-84-17, Order Affirming 840724 Director'S Decision DD-84-17 Denying Bp Garde 10CFR2.206 Petition for Action Against Util Re Plant Const.Const Abandoned on 840910.No Further Enforcement Action Required.Served on 8506241985-06-24024 June 1985 Order Affirming 840724 Director'S Decision DD-84-17 Denying Bp Garde 10CFR2.206 Petition for Action Against Util Re Plant Const.Const Abandoned on 840910.No Further Enforcement Action Required.Served on 850624 ML20127N7591985-06-20020 June 1985 Transcript of Commission 850620 Affirmation/Discussion & Vote in Washington,Dc Concerning Denial of 2.206 Petition for Midland plant,SECY-85-60 Concerning Pressurized Thermal Shock Rule & Shoreham Order.Pp 1-4 ML20133D9481985-05-13013 May 1985 Response to Aslab 850423 Order.Aslab Should Cancel OL Application & CPs Because Compliance W/Nrc Basic Requirements Not Met ML20116G5181985-04-29029 April 1985 Response to Memorandum of City & County of Midland,Mi Re ASLB 850405 & 0313 Orders on CP Mod Proceedings.Bechtel Should Not Be Granted Admission to Proceedings ML20115J5551985-04-19019 April 1985 City & County of Midland,State of Mi Response to Aslab 850313 Order to File Memoranda Re Whether Aslab Should Vacate ASLB Decision Re Certain Mods to CP Due to Mootness. Proof of Svc Encl ML20115J4751985-04-19019 April 1985 Memorandum in Response to Aslab 850405 Order Re Dismissal of OL Application.Application Neither Abandoned Nor Delayed in Dilutory Manner.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20115J5501985-04-19019 April 1985 Response Opposing Aslab 850405 Memorandum & Order Re Dismissal of OL Applications.Urges Board to Permit OL Applications to Continue in Suspension Until Applicant Affirmatively Resolves Disposition ML20116G5321985-04-19019 April 1985 Motion to Participate as Amicus Curiae in Resolution of Issue to Involuntary Dismissal of License Application,Per Aslab 850405 Memorandum & Order.Granted for Aslab on 850422. Served on 850429 ML20115J4351985-04-19019 April 1985 Motion for Leave to Participate as Amicus Curiae,Per Aslab 850313 & 0405 Memoranda & Orders Requesting Response to Questions Re Proceeding ML20115J5461985-04-19019 April 1985 Motion to Participate Amici Curiae in Resolution of Issue of Involuntary Dismissal of License Application as Identified in Aslab 850405 Memorandum & Order ML20115J5421985-04-19019 April 1985 City & County of Midland,State of Mi Motion for Leave to Participate as Amicus Curiae in Aslab Request for Responses to Questions Presented in 850313 & 0405 Memoranda Orders. Proof of Svc Encl ML20112J5281985-04-0101 April 1985 Memorandum in Response to Aslab 850313 Order LBP-85-2. Decision Should Not Be Vacated.Ol Should Be Dismissed.Based on Listed Changes,New OL Review Required ML20112J6301985-04-0101 April 1985 Memorandum Requesting Aslab Not Take Any Action to Vacate LBP-85-2 or Dismiss OL Applications,Per 850313 Order,Based on Current Intent to Hold CPs & Attempt to Sell Plant. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20112H0981985-03-27027 March 1985 Response to Aslab 840313 Order Re Whether ASLB Decision to Review Issues in Soils Hearing Appropriate Use of Public Resources.Concurs W/Decision to Remand OL W/Instructions to Dismiss OL Application for Failure to Pursue Soils Issue ML20106F6531985-02-0808 February 1985 Response Opposing Intervenor B Stamiris 841224 Motion for Evidentiary Hearings Re Litigation Between Applicant & Dow Chemical Co.Supporting Documentation & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20106D6631985-02-0808 February 1985 Response Opposing B Stamiris 841224 Pleading Requesting Evidentiary Hearing on Matter Raised in applicant-Dow Chemical Trial & Referral of Certain Matters to Ofc of Investigations.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20101S9111985-02-0101 February 1985 Motion for Extension of Time within Which to File Notice of Appeal of ASLB 850123 Partial Initial Decision.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20101S9421985-02-0101 February 1985 Motion for Extension Until 850306 to File Notice of Appeal of ASLB 850123 Partial Initial Decision.Granted by Aslab on 850201 ML20101F3191984-12-24024 December 1984 Request for Evidentiary Hearings on Matter Raised in CPC-Dow Trial & Referral of Certain Matters to Ofc of Investigations.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20107K8011984-11-0101 November 1984 Affidavit of Jd Selby Re Plans Concerning Facilities.Const Will Be Resumed Only If Proposed by Appropriate Governmental Agencies & Officials & If Funds from Some Other Source Become Available.Related Correspondence ML20106F5241984-10-24024 October 1984 Motion to Request ASLB to Cancel Const License & Application for OL ML20092J0241984-06-22022 June 1984 Reply to B Stamiris Second Supplemental Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law on QA & Mgt Attitude Issues. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20092J0361984-06-22022 June 1984 Reply to NRC Further Supplemental Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law Re QA 1991-02-26
[Table view] |
Text
v- -
00CKETED USNRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2 OCT -4 Ai0 d2 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD _ f0Cl EI G! SE ib ERANCH-In the Matter of )
) Docket Nos. 50-329-OM CONSUMEPS POWER COMPANY ) 50-330-CM
) 50-329-OL (Midland Plant, Units 1 ) 50-330-OL and 2) ) -
APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENOR SINCLAIR'S REVISED CONTENTIONS (SET II)
On September 20, 1982 Intervenor Mrs. Sinclair filed a second set of revised contentions. These contentions
-(except for Contention 6) had originally been conditionally accepted by the Licensing Board in its Special Prehearing Conference Order dated February 23, 1979, subject to the obligation to restate them with more specificity following discovery. Contention 6, which made general' assertions about the inadegnacy of Applicant's quality assurance program was rejected, but the Board allowed Intervenor to carry out discovery related to the issue and stated that it would
" entertain a suitably specific contention on the matter upon the' conclusion of discovery". Id. at 4. For the reasons-stated below, Applicant objects to portions of Contention 6, Contention 34(a), Contentions 37 and 43 and a portion-of-Contention 57.
Contention 6 Applicant objects to'the last clause in'the.first' 8210050215 820930 #
e4
'gDRADOCK05000 D
.x .
1 paragraph of Contention 6, which states that "an unknown number of-serious construction violations now remain in the facility -in areas where- they can neither be examined nor corrected." There is no basis anywhere in the contention for this assertion; i t is sheer speculation and conclusory
', argument. Moreover, admitting this part of the contention 4
would place an impossible evidentiary burden on Applicant, since it. requires proving a negative, r
Applicant also objects to the last two lines on page 1 of Mrs. Sinclair's pleading, which go beyond alleging that deception "has repeatedly been a part of the pattern of the Applicant's actions throughout the construction of Midland." This accusation, in addition to being scurrilous, does not meet the Commission's requirements of specificity and basis. Applicant has no objection to litigating whether the specific incident described in Dr. Landsman's August 24, 1982 memorandum constitutes a violation of this Board's April 30, 1982 Order and a deception.
Applicant objects to subpart b of proposed contention
~
6 in that it completely ignores the Applicant's resolution of -
the ITT' General altered radiograph problem. As. indicated in the affidavit of Chip' Wood enclosed with: Consumers-Power's-July 26, 1982~ Response to Mrs. Sinclair's July 12, 1982 document request, Consumers Power has reviewed all?ITT radiography and, asea result, questioned the film. associated with7four welds; all four of these welds were: re-radiographed and found e
to be' acceptable. In light of this information, there is in-sufficient basis for the assertions in the contention that "As a result of the' alterations, the quality of the welds is unknown. It ia doubtful that all of the - affected welds can be identified and corrected since some may no longer.be accessible for inspection." If Mrs. Sinclair wishes to litigate the adequacy of Applicant's resolution of the problem, she, of course, is free to do so, but she must provide some basis providing reason-
~
able notice to Applicant why its resolution is inadequate. She is not free, in proposing her contention, simply to ignore' Applicant's ,
resolution. Applicant also objects to the last sentence in sub-part b which argues, without providing any basis, that there are
" serious questions about the existence of deficiencies in all l vendor-supplied items." (emphasis added) i Applicant objects to subpart d.4 of Contention 6. The '
August 24, 1932 NCR referred to_(attached) shows quite clearly
[ that the radiograph mottlings were caused by x-ray diffraction
. and are non-relevant. Again, Mrs. Sinclair has. simply ignorep ! "
Applicant's resolution rather than providing any. basis indicating I
why such resolution is unsatisfactory.
t Contention 34 Applicant objects to Contention 34 (a) which repeats word for word Mrs. Sinclair's. original 1978 contention.
l Despite answers to her interrogatories by both Applicant and the NRC Staff (July 12, 1982, Interrogatory 13, Contention 34; NRC remainder of response to Sinclair interrogatories pages 3-5),
c A: ,
- I Mrs.'Sinclair-has not been able to offer any reason why there has been " inadequate examination" of the use of +
snubb'ers as' component supports'at Midland, or why there has _
been " inadequate consideration" of actual and potential >
snubber salfunctions. Such broad conclusory statements fail to meet the NRC's requirements of specificity and bans. We also note that the NRC does not characterize snubber operauility assurance as a Unresolved Safety Issue. See NUREG 0510 at
- p. 19:
The types of snubber problems that have been experienced do not represent a " major reduction in the degree of protection of the public health and safety" because the faults experienced only represent degraded conditions rather than conditions that prevented operation of the affected snubbers. In addition, as a result of the faulty snubber experience, augmented inservice surveillance-and operability tests were required at operating facilities.
These current requirements provide assurance that faulty snubbers will be detected should they occur and corrective actions (i.e., repair or replace-ment) will be implemented. Implementation of these requirements has-markedly increased the availability of snubbers. Based on the above considerations, this task does not involve an
" Unresolved Safety Issue."
Applicant objects to subpart (b) because it is outside of the scope of original Contention 34. Mrs. Sinclair's original contention 34 only addressed the issue of snubbers.-
Inspection Reports 50-329/82-07 and 50-330/82-071do not concern snubbers at all.
d i
. = .
= .- o,.
Contention 37 .
i
. Applicant objects to this contention on the grounds that it is not related to the original contention accepted by the Licensing Board in 1979, and therefore the contention is not . timely. Intervenor Sinclair has replaced a contention which deal with piping design with a contention which ;
relates to ECCS performance. The two issues do not even
-involve the same engineering disciplines.
Attached to this response are the original Sinclair contention conditionally accepted by the Licensing Board in-1979, the relevant portions of NUREG 0410 and the NRC Staff's Black Fox testimony. As can be seen most clearly from the.
. Staff's Task Action Plan for Task A-18, the issue raised by Intervenor in 1978 related to the proper mechanical design of piping and tdie need to protect equipment in the vicinity of high energy pipes from pipe whip and steam impingement.
In contrast, the new contention refers to a discussion of B&W analyses of ECCS performance during small break 4
LOCA's. See SSER Rev. 1, pp 6-1 to 6-2. This has nothing to do with the mechanical design of pipes or with protection of' equipment against pipe break effects. Indeed, - the need ,
.for such ECCS' analyses is derived from NUREG 0737 -(TMI Lessons ,
Learned) rather than from Task A-18 in NUREG 0410.
Considered as a new contention, Contention 37'is" not timely. Contentions based on new information in the.
F w , "i W ?
SSER were to have been submitted within 14 days of service of the SSER, under the Board's Memorandum and Order dated May 7, 1982. The SSER was served on July 13, 1962.
Intervenor Sinclair has not attempted to justify this late-filed contention in accordance with the four factors listed in 10 CFR S2.714. Therefore the contention should be dismissed.
Contention 43 This contention should be dismissed for lack of specificity and basis, and lack of nexus to this proceeding.
The contention contains no allegations specific to Midland or Consumers Power Company. The contention does not name any specific individuals whose civil liberties may be violated, or state specifically how such violations may occur. It is absurd, for example, for this Licensing Board to inquire in this proceeding whether Georgia Power engaged in unlawful spying in Atlanta, or whether the operation of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor will result in infrigement of civil liberties.
This contention migh't also be intrepreted to be an inpermissible challenge to the Commission regulations, specifically 10 CFR Part 73, if Mrs. Sinclair's point is that the mere existence of security programs at nuclecr power plants in compliance with Part 73 violates the Constitution.
But even if the contention is not interpreted as a challenge to the regulations, it is not reasonable to litigate such E
general issues in individual licensing proceedings. As the Appeal Board observed in Duke Power Company (William B. I McGuire Nuclear Station, Units l 'and 2) , ALAB 128, GAEC 399, 405 (1973), -
If facts pertaining to the licensing ;
of a particular power plant are at issue, an -
adjudicatory proceeding is the right forum. But if
~
someone vants to advance generalizations regarding .
his particular views of what applicable policies ,
ought to be, a role other than a party to a trial- '
type hearing should be chosen.
Finally, we note that the constitutional issue Mrs. Sinclair seeks to raise is different than the issue referred to in contention 43 as submitted by Mrs. Sinclair on October 31, 1978 and conditionally accepted in 1979.
Mrs. Sinclair's original contention related to plant design features for protection against sabotage, not civil rights.
Accordingly this is a new, untimely contention which Intervenor !
has failed to justify under 10 CFR S2.714. This provides additional ground for dismissal.
Contention 57 Applicant has _ no objection to the introductory sentence.
Applicant objects only to the words " accident or" -
i in the last line of'the first paragraph of this contention'.
The contention deals only with fire protection and provides !
no basis for_ litigating the performance of electrical cable in other unidentified accident scenarios, such as LOCAs or earth- <
quakes.
t
.y
+ ...
.. . Applicant objects - to that portion of the second -
paragraph which alleges that use of 6-stranded 16 guage wire "could result in a weaker signal than necessary through the wires, and . . . could disrupt service" . This has nothing to do with. fire protection, which was the subject of the contention conditionally admitted in 1979.
Applicant also objects to the second paragraph insofar as it may be interpreted as raising issues which i
may be in the affidavit (which is currently being withheld from Applicant by the NRC), other than the improper use of 6-stranded wire. So interpreted, the contention would lack specificity and basis with respect to any such other issues. In addition, acceptance of a contention based on i
information withheld from Applicant would violate Applicant's l
l right to due prccess of law.
Applicant does not object to that portion of the second paragraph which alleges that improper use of 6-stranded wire could pose a fire hazard.
l
( Respectfully submitted, ktb O, h bhe(Jkot, h4 Ati(O Philip P. Steptoe ~4 One of the Attorneys-for Consumers Power Company
.Isham,' Lincoln &.Beale
< 3 First National Plaza 60602
' Chicago, Illinois (312) 558 7500
~
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THS ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter:of ) .
) Docket Nos. 50-329-OM CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY ) 50-330-OM "
) 50-329-OL (Midland Plant, Units 1 ) 50-330-OL and 2) ) ,
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE-I, Philip P. Steptoe, one of the attorneys for Consumers Power Company, hereby certify that a copy of
" Applicant's Response to Intervenor Sinclair's Revised Contentions (Set-II)" was served upon~all persons shown in the attached service list by deposit in the United States mail, first' class, this 30th day of September, 1982.
9 kh k e.,Q h hkr.O'fbl, bu Ab Philip P. Steptoe A -
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me this 30th day of September, 1992. *
,y
/
hLud i L%Am Notary Public ,
Mg Commmma LAgsres Jar.uary 1.4, IVoa D
SERVICE LIST Frank J..Kelley, Esq. Steve Gadler, Esq.
Attorney General of the 2120 Carter Avenue State of Michigan '
St. Paul, Minnesota 55108 Carole Steinberg, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General Atomic Safety & Licensing Environmental Protection Div. Appeal Panel 720 Law Building U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
Lansing, Michigan 48913 Washington, D.-C. 20555 Myron M. Cherry, Esq. Mr. C. R. Stephens Cherry & Flynn Chicf, Dccketing & Services
' Suite 3700 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
Three First National Pla=a Office cf the Secretary Chicago, Illinois 60602 Washington, D. C. 20555 I Mr. Wendell H. Marshall Ms. Mary Sinclair 4625 S. Saginaw Road 5711 Summerset Street Midland, Michigan 48640 Midland, Michigan 48640-Charles Bechhoefer, Esq. William D. Paton, Esq.
Atomic Safety & Licensing Counsel for the NRC Staff Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm. Washington, D..C.- 20555 Washington, D. C. 20555 -
Atomic Safety & Licensing-Dr. Frederick P. Cowan Board Panel l
6152 N. Verde Trail U.S. Nuclear Regulatory-Comm.
Apt. B-125 Washington, D. C. 20555 Boca Raton, Florida 33433 Ms. Barbara Stamiris 5795 North River Road I Mr. D. F. Judd Route'3 l Babcock & Wilcox Freeland, Michigan 48623
! P. O. Box 1260 Lynchburg, Virginia 24505 Dr. Jerry Harbour l Atomic Safety & Licensing l James E. '3 runner, Esq. Board Panel Consumers Power Company U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
212' West flichigan Avenue Washington,.D. C. 20555 Jackson, Michigan 49201 Lee L. Bishop, Esq.
Harmon & Weiss 1725 "I" Street N.W. #506 Washington, D. C. 20006 1
l l
I l
l i
I k_ . . _ . - .J
l 4 .- .oritv: 6 Trend -3 Start Uo Svstem: 1/BNA , BNA AI: S-76%
PROJECTS. .GINEERING AND CoNSTRJCTION -
M OUAUTY ASSURANCE DEPARTMENT pesar \ ,
Campest I ' XK
.,, tam 1 cr 3 USN
- 6. in:xc sus: 7. -- -a rur m: 4. macurancio rut was. t.
gn,p,nal 'O31 Borated Water Midland 1 & 2 IT-60 and 2T-60 g gg a. ass gIM2%5 /
- 9. sum.maani u. em. case = m me: Lt. usa /we.er x 3. um cr rzv 4/23/81 j N/A Graver Energy Systems N/A 5 c 6:.2 -~ & 16. 3. 6;FFIC ~"
t Or s-
- 12. . u :s -,a caso= s vus u ama:w:r c: ssma wuz azrs: 5. msaurns .
h ,{ '
ASME,Section V Article T.233.2, states: All radiographs shall QQ be free frcm mechanical, chemical, or other blemishes to the
]NFO COPY: MJuister extent that they cannot mask or be confused with the image of any REWhitaker REMcCue disconcinuttles in the area of interest. ALAB (2)
RDJohnson A) Contrary to the above, the radiographs subattted by . .
MPeck JI, hoed !
Graver Energy Systems displayed mottlings in the URBird JARutgers i
vertical weld seams of the borated water storage tanks. '
JWCook DATaggart These radiographs include but are not limited to the
-TGGeekeG-)-XWendMW following: IT-60 Ring #1 vert #1, Radiographs Nos., MADietrich 6@iVGA6-1-2 (R-2), 2-3 (R-2), 3-4, 4-5 (R-1), 5-6, 6-7, 7-8, and -JFFidie---MPW 8-9. (continuedson page 3). ggg,,g,y _g,,,4,V
- u. a . rea un ca ',
. . J'wMHywhiteRAWells A. Review Radiographs on the vertical weld seams on tanks IT-60 and
' BWMarguglio TKsubrana-2T-60 to identify all areas that contain this condition.
(continued on page 3) JMisendin- ESmith >
DBMiller JAMooney l mux /rm.m: ss. :s=== -- 1 I== R JEErunner MLCurland tw m u .us or_=s ma, -e, . mi c, su as un.==
rn i I ml xI i
- 15. :s 1.- ca a m usas m, , m ; 3 ; a so, zr:sa .wnr=arza m:a i ACK 1-o ce ts. xzs x um; a-t:sr :=ws m l X l so l l 17. m x mammazz rua so.55(e): ml l mlx l i 1:. :s x zueo r.2 m rur21. ml l=lvi 19. 2 ris,nas s:n.cr:rcar m "m>
N/A 2o. a m , asom.s w .o ance at. 2 m, aus cr mac arrmw. o wnmi arm:xa. N/A az. x causasa 37: ( as. var = aurtr smaunso azi as. sasavnca s s:aatusias JRDecker
[ g,12 19,81 j [ g,g p_ g /
- 25. Put ca .- , mst:r=a=m a c:ar:ze:m us p
See Disposition on Page 3.
- CPCo retained responsibility for part corrective action. l Identification and evaluation of views exhibiting mottling. .and evaluation of RE-RT, were incorporated into vendor RT film review effort, contracted by CPCo to NDTE/ HOB. j i
l l
as. usuairwa:1 su. w:x. mr.: n. no su. m:x. mr.: ea. e.~-,rz m. a. . azo.: a ,. m. a m. a. aza s A !
SUA N/A N/A ?* !
3a. ru/ccm. su. u s. :xr. mr.: 3t. su. c, m =x., ,cze. 32 m ,. - n.:. mr. u. a w =. m . m 2 ,.o : m ,.:
CCEIrns: 313. Ag'zz. D:37.3 l N/A N/A N/A ! !
3.. 4--- or rurca .s:urzAz=s:
f I
Sett Disposition on Page 3 ;
i I l
- 35. SI3. cr caG. RE31. rea rART C/A 36 Sm. vn2T3G ruf C/A & EU TAG 37. xn C: EEL ST/CAs I 3 DG ::be:221:ss y CAss r & rROCESS CA CCMrIz3) l
NONCONFORMANCE REPORT QUAUTY ASSURANCE DEPA*;TMENT
&lT PMOJECT3. ENGINEEitMG ANO CONSTRUCTION =
f M .E. m w -o31 PROCISS CORRECTIVE. ACTION r.C. 2, 2
- 30. 4 Am.m.amensi CF 80GT CMEEL&):
N/A e
- 39. JCf.IAL 800T CAC5&t3). IF Dus-1 F5Cas AaQYE (:0 32 WJ23 E! CaG. JESPQRIN FCa m CA):
N/A 4
Iso. rma.n w CA 3347;333 F1g3(g 23 3 FA33: 6= CCM53tC=Cs Fanmuume'T N CN No
- L. 4 * ~ ' O FCI rmA.a.aa gas N/A M. a- CA *D EE 32EE ST CHG(3) -- 3 3:act 41 & a-lg er congggg:
N/A i
5 I
?
e i
- 43. A CD "X i- CA vraIrz:ATime i
N/A
- 3I~*. 2 N. HIE 3 FOR c'- - CA SI2IFT33 CCMFI2nz g, agg;;3caec,gggg.,g g g g g, N/A g/A ,
Page 3 of 3 NCR NO: M-01-9-1-031 Fils No. 16.3.4 & 16.3.6
- 12. Continued from page one.
A) IT-60 Ring #1 Vert #2, Radiograph Nos. 1-2 (R-2), 2-3 (R-2), 3-4, 4-5 (R-1), 5-6 (R-2), 6-7, and 7-8 (R-2).
B) The above discrepancy was previously documented on QCFM-7612, deviation from subcontract documents dated 3-30-80.
C) This NCR is issueo to track the resolution of this problem.
- 13. Continued from page one.
- 3) Re-radiograph all the areas that contain this condition using and alternative source of radiation in order to produce acceptable radiographs.
- 25. Continued frem page 1.
- 1. CPCo contracted NDT Engineeling to review all Q-listed vendor ,
radiographs, including RT for BWST IT-60, 2T-60. From viewstg exhibiting X-ray diffraction (termed mottling on NCR), 10 worst cases were identified for further evaluation.
- 2. The 10 worst case views were re-radiographed utilizitig an.ASME code-acceptable procedure and IR-192 source. The linear disposed diffraction patterns were non-existent in the IR-192 radiographs, '
proving that the diffraction patterns in the remaining vender radiographs are non-rwlevant;
Conclusion:
The cause of the linear indications has been proven to be X-ray diffraction. The prodf radiographs and closed copy of this NCR will be incorporated into vendor film set for Tank 1T-60.
.