ML20076L448

Motion to Reopen Record on Issue 3 Re Const Qa.Motion Based on Recently Received Documents Obtained Through FOIA Which Indicate QA Deficiencies Are Much Worse than Recent Hearing Revealed.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20076L448
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	07/13/1983
From:	Hiatt S OHIO CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE ENERGY
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8307190186
Download: ML20076L448 (24)

Text

-

...y -

i.

July 13, 1983, UNITED STATES OF A1 ERICA N

NUCLE /.R REGUlATCRY COMNISSICN

%w m

\\g Bef ore the Ator.ic Safety and Licensine Board JUr ;

33 a r rme In the Matter of

)

[#$.ff L. #yn;

)

e.

x

~--

..Tc

- LUyINATING

)

Docke; Nos. 50-440 W

even-

c. r,,r..r.,i n

, Q'41\\ C

_,.r..

g9~n, COMPANY, E: A1.

)

-\\

)

(Operating License)

-- -~

(Perry Nuclear Power Plant,

)

Units 1 and 2) t MOTION TO REOPEN THE RECORD ON ISSUE #3 Intervenor Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy ( " OC RE " )

hereby moves the Licensing Board to reopen the record on Issue #3, which concerns the quality assurance of construction at the Perry plant, for the purpose of taking further evidence, which is necessitated by the circumstances described below.

OCRE has recently received documents through the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") (see Attachment 1,.the NRC's FOIA response) which indicate that the QA deficiencies at Perry, and in particular CEI's control of Comstock, may be much worse than.the testimony-presented at the recent hearing woul6 lead one to believe.

OCRE therefore believes that these documents, which are described below, raise significant questions as to the credibility of Staff and Applicant om OtQ ava testimony.

No oo

$8 Attachmen't 2 is Item #35 of Appendix A to the NRC's FOIA o

4 m-x response.

This document is an engineering change notice

-o oo dated 5-10-82 concerning cable tray fill.

It apparently s

om no was cenerated in response to the NRC's finding in the 81-19 mao s.

investigation (81-19 report, p.

75, unresolved item No. 440/

... y

?

81-19-14; 441/81-19-l'4).

The problem identified was 'that 7503

=

L u :D L -.

' ~

.:.w.:. ~

-. - :- ~

. control and instrumentation cable trays were filled with cables above the side rails, contrary to the specification requirements (50% and 60% fill).

The NRC found that this situation could compromise separation requirements.

CEI agreed to address this concern in specifications and pro-cedures to preclude overfill in cable trays.

. x... 2-The. subject dochment, however, does not preclude cable tray overfill, but instead sanctions it.

The 50% and 60% fil1' limits have been totally r,emoved, It is apparent that CEI has " resolved" the NRC's unresolved finding, not by correcting the situation, but instead by rescinding the requirements 1/

~~

which were violated, in the name of a " design improvement." is Item #46 of the FOIA response.

This item is a letter, dated August 6, 1982, from the L.K. Comstock task force to Comstock's regional QA/QC manager.

Described therein are several concerns, including the certification of inspectors.

P.

2 of the letter contains the statement that 7-only 6.out of.22 people-signing inspection documents were certified to do so.

Applicants' testimony addressed only a difficulty in obtaining appropriate numbers of QA/QC personnel, and not a problem with their cualifications or certification.

They were 1/

OCRE believen that this represents a safety problem, that of heat dissipation, in addition to the separation criteria.

Article 318 of the National Electrical Code, although not applicable to Perry or to any facility under the control of an

' electric utility, provides useful guidance on this matter.

Article 318 places limitations on the number of cablet to be placed in cable trays according to the size of the cables and (continued next page)

, uq '+ =

~

n - i. : '

obviously aware of this August 6 document.

This suggests that they may have withheld information on the severity of the Comstock problem. is Item #78 of the TOIA response.

It appears to be a list of programmatic deficiencies in CEI's QA program, most probably prepared by a member of the NRC staff.

Although it is undated, the statement in item #1 suggests that it is quite recent.

OCRE asserts that the existence of this document demands that the record and discovery be reopened so that the important uncertainties raised by the document can be fully explained.

OCRE also notes that the project-wide implications of these management deficiendies, as well as the specific' mention of a contractor other than 'Comstock, make it appropriate to extend the scope of the reopened record 6to-include CEI's control of all contractors at Perry.

Legal Requirements for Reopening the Record OCRE realizes that certain requirements must be met before Q

~--

o

~

w;

g

~

the record-can be reopened.-Three standards must be met affir-?lhl'"

~

matively for the reopening of the record: - (1) -timeliness 'of sz

~

the motion; -(2) significance of the matter raised; (3) whether s

the~ newly proffered material might cause a different result' to be' reached.

Pacific Gas & Electric (Diablo Canyon Nuclear l d4-Power Plant,~ Units 1.and.2), ALAB-598, 11 NRC,876, 879)(1980).

,,.ve This motion meet's those-requirements.

_ " N.~.. [' ' d f '..

r~~

.. y.

s_

4

._jy/ f continued.-

-type of-tray, i.e.,

ventilate &roro unventilated..

There are also-limits on;the ampacityfof.

the.cablesfdependention-theirfspacing andzon whethe.rfthe"$ {,;g g.s,.:

m w..a 2 '

_u.

x.#

"d4L%__tbv d, c :"mtM.a9afL orlunventilated. m

~

~ ~,i D'(

.s N

. _..L _;

n= _.,,

_4_

The motion is timely, as OCRE just received the FOIA response, which is dated June 22, 1983.

This material could not have been available at the hearing.

That the documents proffered herein address a significant safety matter has been demonstrated above.

OCRE also believes that the attached documents so under-hT mine the' credibility of the t'estimony presented.at the hearing that it is likelp that a different result would be reached, especially if the Board would insist on the presentation of less: biased witnesses.

Reopening the record on this ground has been sanctioned by. Toledo Edison and Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. -(Davis-Besse Nuclear Eower Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, and Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2),

ALAB-430, 6 NRC 457 (1977).

OCRE'therefore concludes that, for the reasons above, the record on Issue #3 must be reopened.

v

.n.

Respectfully submitted,

_u.

l]px,.

. s; -

'^ L*sffL ~l' ' j7 Susan L. Hiatt ~ OCRE Representative 8275 Munson Rd. Mentor, OH 44060 s (216) 255-3158 0 t 0 g e .Ae ~ 6 a-m .d'"af^m. T

- c r = 3 -. u m..

__ m -

.m_w-mm- -_.m~ .. ;.. un_ _1 o, - UNITED STATES MI bNI / ff - M NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

• E- *h. b' ^n. L w.. y. E '

armt:cTur.. r. c. nscc %l%$/,5 ^ . o.. e M 2 2 1993 j A l .+. ,' -Docket No. 50-440/441 .x Ms. Susan l.. 'Hiatt. ~ OCRE Representative 8275 Munson Road IN RESPONSE REFER .T0 F01A-83-199 i. ;;-:ghntor, OH 44060,. j ....n SA earM. s. Hiatt:W M. + D .+ l' This is'.in response'to-your letter dated April 15, 1983, in which you ., ~ requested, pursuant. to..the Freedom of Information Act, four separate 7categorieslof documents which you described in your letter. h _ Tlie documents listed on Appendix A, which are enclosed, are being released " ~ in their entirety. The four documents listed on Appendix B are being ' withheld in part as explained herein. The segregable nonexempt' portions w.*; are. enclosed 'with:.this letter. Portions of these four documents are ' }Wbeing wif.hheld pursuarit to the ' exemptions cited in the Appendix. . tInformation being withheld pursuant to Exemption (6) consists.'of names

-%candn ther identifying information on persons, the disclosure of which o

would-constitute.a ' clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. ^ ", ' This.infonnation is being withheld from public disclosure pursuant to - "Y Exe3ption (6) of-the Freedoni of Infonnation Act (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(6)) and ' ' 10'CFR 9.5(a)(6) of the Commission's regulations. Rl ;Information$ being withhelh~ pursuant to Exemption 7(D) consists of the ~ N..d@nameiof;the; individual.and.his: personal identifier.M of.ithislinf,ormation Mo . Because disclosure + M - 4. source, it:is'being withheld from public disclosure ' pursuant to Exemption X i(7)(D) of t'ne Freedom'of-Information Act-(5 U.S.C. 552(b)(7)(D)) and ' 10 CFR'9.5(a)(7)(iv) of'the' Commission's regulations. ~ Pursuant to-10 CFR 9.9 of the Commission's regulations, it bas been s determined that the information withheld is exempt from production or ~ ^ ~ disclosure, and~ that its production or disclosure is contrary to the public: interest. .The.. persons' responsible for this-denial are the undersigned and Mr. Thomas E. Murley, Regional Administrator,,' Region I. - 4;,. - s r ~u e 4, ,3 ~ i.. 4 u N 4 g ~ ..q:,:v;, y 7., L - f + ?! 1 ( 4 b*. M* l

• h~

j d, ' ~ .... <.... g.,.,, .t +c s a. ~ \\* 7,. .. ~.. bf y,F- ~. ) y k g /-k- ,. gN._ ,q(. -[v =.. g g g.g.y.y .c ;g;. g j 4" fy y p.wgggw nggy ~. + L. .K: - ;w n-w. mgLMmun

.x-Ms. Susan L. Hiatt. This denial may be appealed to the Commission's Executive Director for Operations within 30 days from the receipt of this letter. As provided ' ', i 'in 10 CFR 9.11, any such appeal must 'be in writing, addressed to the Executive Director for Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, . aWashington, DC 20555 and should clearly state on the envelope and in the . or letter that it.is 'an " Appeal from an Initial F0IA' Decision." Charges for'the enclosed 790 pages total $11.98. You will be billed directly for this amount by our Division of Accounting. , ihe., ;;. :.. ....l..'..~..' ~ LThis completes N'RC's acti6n on your request. s'n - ? P:QjQ..,... Sincerely, ...s #,/y

• w -l -

s- .. [, k., I.. e ~ . ':.:i ; [ j j a, ~ [', g J. M. Felton, Director i - Division of Rules and Records Office of Administration- ~ 3:. - C'

Enclosures:

As stated e

e ( 2 } ,,,.y'.S. e >

• se

,,g. +3 : 7..* ' d* ," e a I e e ..i-d ',t '_ b,.'. ,-s b, gP'4, f, .[ . gj .j. *-- t -'

• w

->.3 a ;.;

; y *i 2 =%'19.N;, >;-

r .,* " Y ',- Jh.Y. !"%;,e' $, ~..

• ?. *r
• s.~)'. -ls.,, -.

f-r

• ~

s .y v .p;g ~~,^/. ^ ~. ; I, r' ~ ~ ^.,, f,n ' l ] $~ ? ' J' .c, l ; -y g e t g + t x;c i b e g ;; .,y - I-1 e a ,1 t, idf 13 ? - ^ j ~ h$ .L., .Y,h *h ? "; ' b'lw y' @ M f:~ri. % ? ,e_ ~ . 7*qp+ M.n .,.s _'_, L v ~

w i:~.L M w:..n!.u.R m u..u== n.< '. - -. : :.: + - 2. - > :.. 2G APPENDIX A F0IA REQUEST 83-199 Documents Submitted for Release j.l. 2/8/78 Immediate Action Letter Keppler to Davidson (5 pages) 2. 5/1/78 Letter Davidson to Keppler response to IAL (15 pages) t ; 3..8/7/78 Nuclear Quality Assurance Program 0200'- (5 pages) Excerpts 24. 2/16/79- -Management Assessment of QA Program (8 pages) Effectiveness i -?L 4. .~ t Gij5.('8/16/79^ . Memo.Hartline.to Walrath - 1980 Internal (4 pages) -Audit Schedule e

• l nc6; 1/13/80 Memo Leidich.to connelly et al - Unit PAR /

F:' ' Highlight Perf ormance (5 pages)

7. ;4/23/80 Pullman Power Products-Procedure for Handling-(26 pages)

'Nonconformances (Field)

8. '1/2/81 Memo Higaki to PQE - Schedule of _ Project (8 pages)

~ J Internal Audit-(3 pages) 9. 3/8/81' Memo QA Advisory Committee to Davidson Minutes of Meeting.

10.

4/6/81 Excerpt.fm QA Manual - 0200 (1 page) ~ Il.:16/19/81. ' Action Request prepared by Brown /Hollenbeck (4 pages)J 12,. ;8/4/81 1 . Letter Farrell to. Barker /Howard --Meeting (3 pages)' ~ .MNO. ;mquW[...f objectivesL cc ~ +q;.& ;m v.T ~;w v '. ~ v-m w "' ' -- a w Memo ~QA7 Advisory' Committee to Davidson. ~('19 page)~%, - W:. ' - . tw: . - ~ ' .. ef13;:;w; 8/6/81 ~ ~; f ^ Meeting [ Minutes . Jf4 "l 4 110/27/81 MemoJJ. Hayes to Farrell - 1982 Proj ect -(9 pages') Internal Audit Schedule .s 11 5. '11/2/81 ' Trend Analysis prepared by Brown (5.' pa ges) 41 6.

11/9/81-Puliman Power Products - Nonconformance (5 pages).

Report ~ d7. [10/30/81l, ,.PNNP-[NonconformanceReportReview/- '(5 pages): ] +' :g W 7,- '.Revisioni z < 118.,[12/4/81: . [AbtionRe'questpieparedbyBrown: (2'pages) -Y: n - + - 119 ' y 2/23/82... n.PNNP:- Nonconformance Report. Review /-. [(4'pages) [ 3. E,[. .W^' s t mRevision" f.i+Ek j'y=~,hj&[hEpw$$ h b hf I )

[~

x.., yQ. %.g. z.: n v w ;~ ? w-w&-

w.., g

g. 7 7

~ e n

p(~ :;:-::.

..y.._ s..-... s +.; w = a.., 2.. - ~:::

c..

.. : 2 2. z n s u APPENDIX A (' cont'd) - FOIA REQUEST 83-199 m m' Documents Submitted for Release

20. 2/25/82 Corrective Action Request 82-06 (2 pages)

21. 2/s/82.

PNNP - Nonconformance' Report Review / (3 pages) Revision aL ~ March 82L Task Force Report - QA Program (12 pages) 22. '23. March 82 Task Force Report - QA Program, Rev 1 (11 pages) . +Ld 3/5/82 ~ ' Action Request prepared by Brown /Bradshaw (3 pages) ^ L p-jfW. > ]Q . :25. 13/5/82 Action Request prepared by Brown /Bradshaw (2 pages) ,- j

26. 3/11/82 Memo stear to Riley/ Martin - Comstock 3

. CAR's #82-06 6 82-07 (2 pages) l' ' q g 227.' 3/18/82 Memo Farrell'to Barkley et al - Corrective Action Plan for Safety-Related 4.16kv a Switchgear (5 pages)

• 5 y~-n

{ ' 928713/19/82 G Memo Furness to Tulk - PNPP-SP-557 Class lE -s ~* Motor Control Centers (1 page) r .,l29?3/30/82 Stop Work Release - Tulk to Merlin (1 page) q;* ' t,130. 3/30/82 Corrective ~ Action Request 82-09, Rev 1 (10 pages) .q:.- .31.- 4/14/82 Stop Work Release - Tulk to Merlin (1 page) J32; 14/15/82' Corrective Action Request 82-07, Rev 1 -(8 pages) . ;. anW 3 fff.fl6/82) ff Letter Mayhew, schlegel & Gudikunst (Gilbert / h /@tj.:}.. ',2 Commonwealth) to Lastovka, CEI (3 pages) ~

Qbi; s

<

• 34'.>5/24/82 Letter stear to Comstock - Electrical Penetration (1 page)

.'35. 5/10/82 Engineering Change Notice - Cable Tray Fill, (2 pages) s. ' 36. 6/17/82 Memo Leidick to Farrell.& Riley-Comstock Status (12 pages). 5-

.w'

' $,, ' j \\I ' k. Wh,e. y 3 - ' ~ 1 an .A y> ^ 1- ';Jyf+j??,GQ Q :i ->+h;. &

,n- *. l

' %l .n.. -.; i-y,:-+. ' ):.. ?? b ' ~ ^ +- y,, m,. -m .o .E

= g- ._. E G. c a u ___ 2 _ C _. ~ _ _.

w__

._ ~ -...mm A_PPENDIX fn(Cont 'd) FOIA REQUEST 83-199 Documents Submitted for Release

37. 6/30/8h' Addit 5 Summary (5 pages) 38.'

6/22/82 Letter Ioannidi/Schlegel/Cudinkunst (Gilbert / Commonwealth) to Bellack, CEI - Flammable Paterials in Electrical Equipment (4 pages)

39. '7/7/82 Letter Frew to Seese - Comstacek & Co., Inc Reference concern #3 (2 pages)

_4 40,. __7 / 8 / 82 Excerpt QA Manual - Line 9 Proposed Disposition (1 page) K41.'.7/8/82 e. Action Requ,est Revision Sheet - AR 0397, Rev 1 (3 pages)

42. 7/8/82' Action Request prepared by Nicholas-XV Noncon, forming Materials, Parts, or Components (2 pages)

43. 7/8/82 Action. Request prepared by B'radshaw - I Organizatiot.

(2 pages)

44. 7/13/82 Memo Freu, Comstock & Co re Identification of Concerns as a Result of Unit #1 Electrical n

2 Penetration Documentation Review by the LKCE Task Force (40 pages)

45. 7/27/82 Memo Kilgore to Eichler, Comstock & Co - Review of Equipment Installation Packages (2 pages)

46. 8/6/82 Letter Eichler, Comstock to Ladochy, Comstock QA HQ, concerns as a result of the review of the equipment installation packages (4 pages) 57.;;8/13/82

~ Memo Eichler, Comstock re identification of (6 pages) 5.j{ijg,.w. c. concerns as a result of the. electrical equipment ~i., documentation review performed by the LKCE Task Force ~ ..48. 8/25/82-Telephone Conversation Record - Riley w/Peschel, RIII (1 page) Action Request Revision Sheet - AR 0403, Rev 1 (8 pages) -49. 9/2/82 s 50.'9/15/82 Excerpts fm QA program 0200 (11 pages)

51. 9/22/32 Lette'r David' son to Schwencer-Corporate QA Program (5 pages)

52. 10/11/82 Packy, Comstock.to, Bower - Task Force #40 (19 pages)

~,

• ^

. L 1 a. m y =f Wa[ - r~;- " y;--'-m m-

w- ~- ' un:s,. ;, 2 - - 1 :: ; :M .--a .__~w- ..;-.J ' ~ ' e. APPENDIX A (Cont'd) FOIA REQUEST 83-199 Documents Sub'mitted for Release 53. 11/22/82? Pullman Power Products-Excerpt fr QA Manual (4 pages) ~ 154..1/19/83 Letter. Bower, Comstock-to Walter, Pullman

Power Products-Electrical Penetration Weld Documentation (4 pages) i55. L2/3/82 NRC. Exit' Meeting - Attendance Roster (1 page)

= - -

56..2/8/83 PNNP Nonconformance Report - Electrical Penetrations-(2 pages)

_.k'.3 5].._2/20/83 PNNP Survei11ance/ Inspection Report-1363 -(18 pages) - 1E58..2/21/83 -PNNP, Surveillance /. Inspection Report-1393 (3 pages) ~ E59. : 2/24/83 - .PNNP Surveillance / Inspection Report-1383 (2 pages) 9 d 60. 2/24/83:' 2PNNP Surveillance / Inspection Report-1385 (2.pages) ...,m 161.'2/24/83 .PNNP Surveillance / Inspection Report-1386 (2 pages) s 62. 3/3/83. Letter Cimorelli & Kerr to Bower, Comstock Installation of Electrical Penetrations (8 pages) m-

.;

sm.

- ; ~q .' 63. - - 4 /4/83 Action Requests - Summary (32 pages) f 64 7-4/13/83 List of.50.55(e)'s - Perry Log (40 pages) , y. ';.65. '4/15/83- - Letter Edelman to Spessard - IE Rpt 83-06 (5 pages) 166. -5/3/83. Open Item List - RIII Tracking System (2 pages) - 3 _g ~ 67 Memo Barna to Shuster et al-QA Program-4 $y. 15/6/83 c'n 2. h Eyaluation.for 1982 (1 page) 7

37;

.822%Q; e mipw%;h 6v}m&,=Ut:N:.'&4;..~~.C Q

, m.

- ; w r:" N. ~ ~ ,. p.- ), g. ;, - e '

• i o, '>

x; z.,.- s s t

+

..rsn i k g eh

{;., $ ;;

Y p D . ~;..; ,3 p + - __; 4

• [ [n ]

s .u w .Mk H:" h., vn. ^ P,E%y.E ' - - 4 L -> - M-y Q,7 ef, p !. '- k Tr W 0 5 4 N ' 4Y* ' K.} f ' f y 3 ~ (_ W' JG.rf m & ^

7 -.z. : u. : wD~ ' i --. - > i G' -- --- ' - ~ Appendix A-Cont'd FOIA nequest 83-199 168. Undated Excerpt from NRC inspection report - used by 1 page licensee to'tr'a'ck corrective action w/ notes of. inspector added

69. Undated standard company Communication - flowchart 3 pages e

70.. Un d a't ed CEI PNPP Overview 6 pages, a:,

71. Undated Excerpys fm Perry reports to management 1 page

72. Undated Excerpts fm Perry reports to management 11 pages

• _. g_73.12nda ted Excerpts fm Perry re; ports to management 15'pages

~.t :

• lh. ;74[ Undated :?'8 [ Corporate Nuclear Quality Assurance Program i 3 pages

.y Appendix I - Evaluation & comparison to other Ji-1- relat'e'd documents q. ?-) ~ 75.f Undated -Excerpts from NRC inspection reports - used by 25 pages licensee to track corrective action' 3 - 76. Undated Audit TeamfInspection - plan 4 pages e .a ~;

77.. Unda t ed -

inspection' Chronology 9 pages y e ]

78. Unda ted.

Requirements & Commitment 3 pages }

79..Unda ted '

Action.Taken on Task Force-26 Concerns 7 pages

80. Undated -

Review of Electrical Penetration Documentation n Concerns 16 pages

81. Undated

.GE Manual - excerpt of 22A3888, Rev 3 1 page L.... h 82. /,Un,da ted yg - Pullmitn : Power Products - Visual Inspection. Rpts 2.pages: ~ f. Vf;O. :) M ^ '... + ' ^ ' ~~ '. 3 '83. unda ted '.. Audit Status Log 6 pages

f w

{ ~84. Undated , Surveillance Inspection Report Log 5 pages 85.s Undated Flow Chart - PNNP 1 page. n. 4 f L.g. s C#: ~ ,] ? I p.. .a. a .. -.:v., - i ,g,, -,m ,_L ~, Jy ' .,v,.q .*$,g*"* hy, , ;' ]., f I-1 s. . vam J la, m: .y s : 7 .[ I,Ir

hr: x =~ rr F,

'-,o u s ;. :y.; ,c _ 7 % ~ \\ Q. - ": M ^

maw a: m ' .u - - -.. - - = - - -

a. _ a.w.

- _ ~ - zli.<, .kw s...

=2

-APPENDIX A Documents Submitted for Release 85. 4/1/83 Meeting Attendance Roster re: NRC Exit (1 page) ~ 87. 4/12/83 Hierarchy of QA Program Documents (1 page) ( .- ~ Memo to R. B. Matthys from C. H. Wright re: Attachment 88.- 4/1/831 to NR JCI #0012 (2 pages) , ).w.g __=. 89. 3/31/83. Memo to Jerry Smith from S. C Young re: Review of P.O. and~ ~ I/F Packages (1 page')

.y.

F

90. c3/2'5/83 ~

Enclosure l' re: Procedura Number, Revision, Date and Title' 4.,. (3 pages) u,,

91../1/83 Organization Chart No. 3 - Quality Assurance Organization 3

Q~ -f for PNPP (1 page)

92. 3/110/83 Perry Nuclear Power Plant - Action Request - Initiated by:

W. G. Morris and K. J. Cimorelli (2 pages.) v.

f-93

.w 1/11/83 Perry Project Organization (1 page) tpj e j

94. '2/22/.83 Inspection of Items in Storage (1 page) k w:

7/ j 95. 5/4/81; Perry Nuclear' Power Plant - Nonconformance Report Review / 1 vJi; , Revision (1.page) .q N 96. 5/15/81' Letter to Jim Jones from R. J. ' Zimmer re: Code Edition Change - ~~~ .P.O 's 64491 and 64492 (1 page)

• W w

$h 197.* Undated. 'DraYt Report r'e: Qualification and Certification of Quality %w.:wu?.h,:ngM@Ngg Contiol Personnel- (3 pages) 3gd Q;bb[h. 98. x10/31/81, Qualification and Certification:of Quality Control Personnel n : :..., s. g

1. m

(18 pages)

Q. 7- ~ b 99. 8/15/80 Housekeeping and Storage. of-Items and Materials- (16 pages) s h _ [; 100. 1 2/17/80 Applicable Codes and Standards (1 page) qd ~ W 101. : Undated PNPP' Organization Chart (1 page) m kP1 J102.~ [10/22/82 Construction Quality'Section and Construction Quality kg _, u~ Auditing' Organization. Chart (1 page), o u !s;h

f. &

103. 4/18/83 Letter'to'SteveLYoung from R. B..Matthys=re: Storage Maintenance {0 2

1. 1 -

of Site Supplied 'small Bore Valves. (l page) ~ %~. g ~ T .a + ;,y %) 1.^l } j f _ _.q +. _., > y ?,wy.gN. .9.; W .d p -.i* .'w gm?if:lW' XM w .y C.T ' ~ ~ ' ^ i. .,. __ _1

< -. x.y _. - -.... _ ~. _.._. s Re: FOIA-83-tn ~ i'A \\ APPENDIX A ... cw,'d,. - - Documents Submitted for Release =. WM i 'I 7'f) -.. 3 M' 104. Undated . Receiving Inspection (1 page) ..h 105. Undated Purchase Order Deficiency List (6 pages) ~ ~ k. Letter to James G. Keppler from Dalwyn R. Davidson re:

em, wd -

106. 2/18/82 Inspection of Work being Performed by the L. K. Comstock Corporation at the Perry Plant Construction Site (2 pages) _ _3; - >J;;

6%

_^

' ggfy, 107.-'5/5/82 Letter to James G. Kepp er from Dalwyn R. Davison re: l Actions of The Cleveland Electric Illuminattag Company j5bi$[ .9 (3.pages)' wnew~ W.g.:'W j.:.tyW 108. 10/27/83 Letter to James G. Keppler from Dalwyn R. Davidson re:

• Wid%W Response to Enforcement Item (17 pages) e

-cn., ~ V-w 109. -11/10/82 Letter to James G. Keppler from Dalwyn R. Davidson re: .[ y'. v . Q$'? Responding to I.E. Report 50-440/81-19; 50-441/81-19 'Mgh (2 pages) xin. ~ y 110. 1/21/83 Letter to James G. Keppler from Murry R. Edelman re: J Responding to I.E. Report 50-440/81-19; 50-441/81-19 (2 pages) . o.- .h. 1 nah - 111. 2/14/83 Letter-to Murray R. Edelman from C. E. Norelius re:. Steps f.p.lg htif Taken to Correct Noncompliances 50-441/81-19-03 and 50-441/81m g 7_

2.; 6 (1 page)

. a ggy, 112. 1981 Board Notification Index (6 pages) &M y %.+ N j .113. 2/18/83 Memo for Chairman Palladino et. al. from Darrell G. Eisenhut c $1@N I _ d g.;,,L Board Notification 83-17 Allegations Relative to Unresolved -W fSafetyJIssue:A-17._-(39pages) 3y v sd & w.# . Memo for Richard W. Krimm from Edward L. Jordan're: Working MMed 114. 4/20/83 ~ " E.i- -&E-- Group to Reeva} uate NUREG-0654, FEMA-REP-1, :Rev. l ' (2 pages) % Q:l ~ 115. 3/23/83 . Source Term Development - Post WAS'H-1400 (22 pages) @j..f W t, pwrw Division of Licensing Board Notification Tracking System (11 y ' "T 'yi 116. 12/31/82 cQQ ~ ^

n. y,

s ma '. N N j .c Mi M ~q m.%5 W. @U/QX .* Item 1 & 2 documents -56 pages 0 $0,05 per page = $2.80 4 s ' l? '

• • Item -3 & 4 documents"- 75% fees waived - 734 pages = $9.18

,; L. :h k' 1

~

x M .ee20;u~ p 'n.w,s. :,. xy 3w_. "QA + t ? 2--T+b,.% ~%^s 9,M">"'fl? ? +:s~~" r fl80.e ' 3 ,; fAL: Uf. f: $g ^ nil..~ ' ' ~ ..,N Kp h5 5 6 r .*Iff 'bf Q ]. =

x- .. ~. m,;. ~ , - _ ~ a. a N, ' FOI A-83-199. ~ APPENDIX B r Exemption 5, ~ Written Proficiency Test Questions (2 pages) 6

n, rl.

October '~18, :1978 '~

• fa

.n< :.y.. Written Proficiency Test Questions (2 pages). 6 + -9.. ' '2. October 24, 1978 m. -: Certificate of Qualification (1 page) 6. _hJfh3i_ April [24,;1981 c a. m M y.3-h h. ,.: c...-f; Q ;;p j ( ;. h .ww dt Handwritten Note to Dee Hayes from Jim Kinklin,' -y.14.s Undated 7 '. ~

Subject:

"CEI Control of Newport News," 7(D) . ;;4;R . - ;;c - 2 pa9es a...a..g, ,.2,.e,. n. - o..... . ;,.- s,,.,n:q$) .. f ; c w. I-*dMy. .,.6 , } = F eiue 4 'd Qhf-j%; ,,,dm [ %~ g p. .weg:. ..,. w.y ' L '; '- t '. *hy.. s. ~g,,. t j= -Q- ',,m..s'~.~.,~ & K "#} 6' {.{.] * .+I @ Q Q) p., gy J

m. n).* ' ~ -

• K. -

,: e h t * ~ e s w.. N '. ay. ., s s y_.,. _ < }.W xQ4;f ' = ~ - f. m. m.,;;;... ~ :., !,,., NM-v s '. 1. e, < ~..y.. n;- ' t*fN !,'.Y h '

• ' ^-

S

• b

-(T 4 e MQ s%%% %$i WS V W ~~, ~ wn&m. c ?,u,. 3. ;.. ~: .~ -v -.,f pGD.. I5' R. +y :' e ~+ ' -p 9.. ;,., u.- .fr.-=* -a s .,e-4 ,%#^ e _ q ct.it -.; r =, 4 ' I I 9 ). t 9 e 1 _j . b

1. ' f..'

~ u s s F .(h. % Lh. h - 4+ y --: g y'. .5-~ -( a,.*;-{.,., g,,a. + n ,gQif.f ,._'w.+.'-M 4. @w -la t (, pg1 g A: i. _ e.. .1< j.7 9-e

1. L c,

g#

• g E

gf Ti$ p, i'!-ol, US* ..s.'. L' W

p @ygytfy)?

e.

(

+ e, w -g,.g q.gpc y p a -tv t f3f'.c*]-- N c m / m,..; 4-7 t ._5 rA.e k,y er.7, .s - .t f. t - w- , x.y _g

r +w .:r = r m la mul'lu.- A (l) . ENGINEERING CHANGE NDT!CL PERRY NUCLEAR POViER PLANT D S? ECW O oc.. i & yygggy cam e na~s : d1

b ECH wm DOM &$M ~

S jf l - $ ?I" O : I '- l 8 2 ORIGINATOR Eng neYr N - IlectricY1 l.EPARTwENT. K 'r: A FFECTS ". 22-!-S'C-00 I m

f. r

-." L. Gl DETAl(S AND BACKGF.0UNO.0F REQ'D. DESIGh CHANGE: ma .,a DOCUMENTS TO BE REVISED f ?,y'.' The? purpose cf this.'ECN is to clarify SP-33 =r ~ c. sy 7sig gcx m. rec.uirements when cable' fill reaches the

op-of :he side.

c..[ :;:. g, fy' SP-3 3-4549 Rsv. m-I[ J...~ S. lly. 5,. ;; ~- W.-f {~ %,;a a w : e; Q; p.;.[.h $ b. M.:(1 ML Jb 19 *. ra9. 9. b W.r ycip vg.., .-n. - t,,, i.w,. r3 h.j j&:, f c;;f&<*df

. c.

'2 c ,a. :, 'a .,. y-. f. q , e e n i.rp a.,.'v3 407 9y yy. %,, c,,1 2 ;y. g SAR CHANGE REQ'D?

• C NO O YES K,-',

. ^ ~ 1. ~ dWL Y. O SYSTEM AFFECTED O. n u ,n o N/A -L (:. ; RE ASON, FOR;CH ANGE: v-R'" '1",. 't'i.:f.D UNSATISFACTORY' TEST'RESU dS ~ Fy M ATERI AL TO BE PURCH ASED 3 +,. y G NO O YES

O'lHTERFACEPRCS'EWSDURINGCONSTRUCT10N g DESIGN REYlEWER APPROVAL

71.. N O FAILURE TO MEET FUNCT10NAL REQUIREMENTS, ND ip..

,/36 0 DISPOSITION OF...NON-CONFORMI"NG ITEM BY-DATE 8' /S * *~- ',m z... ~ c.i N O CHANGES IN, REGULATORY OR OTHER REQUIREMENTS f ~ otsssu a t sllt s t a n.' > M"Tc ...c O OPERATIONAL 1 EXPERIENCE- @ N A APPROVAL (IF REQ'D) - n I 6 %q. - - O DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS... ~ BY: -f". () u*d>* w DATE: 6 -/ ?.-? O OTHER, g ni u nctkrus i ,.1.,

• q~,

i,.,.,~,. d.. - m e;, @ Mig. p 9'~.. a.. ~ n c.- /p PROJECT MANAGEMENT APPROVAL; d. -, we.. m wq '$ dd.\\.Y.1; M <,Jff M [y N ??q/.)ntpi.n g:p,u._.-kbY ' ..:. a,..g.N ' w' .w U a 'UfW NN. ATTACHMENTS d... 6 M..' M,?.7.ki,7 B ~ ~i. W-DME: s ..,Jf. ,"-'J

• yr.y

y- ;

,,g-T.= .,. : f ", PADJtti WANAt!WtNI. i. u,,.. ' Revise.SP-33; ice:n 5:08.13 sub-ite:n 6 I n @ CEI ACCEPTAMCE i s BY: DATE: attr0Ws18Lt stwl0R tNEluttt ,1 Q/A REVIEW REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED 0 l "2 @ ORGAN!ZATIONS OR GROUPS, INTERFACING DEPARTMENTS / REVIEWED BY: __.Cee_ T^~ DATE: N= ,i ~ O CIVlt - ~~ O STRIJCTURAL o.A. strustryAtlM ~.Jy 1 - g;,'O ELECTRICAL' D QUALITY. ASSURANCE (SEE h) ,l [ l 'i - , O BLDG.,,SERYlCE 10 NSSS l1 sitt or utta At neverness assuto . O l & C.

• 10 OTHER * ~

I' O HECH. / NUCLEAR !i SPEC.NO. AND CONT. /P0 NO. P-l ~ { '. c ' $ PROJECT ENGINEER APPROYAL : \\ ;i,,... @ DESIGN CHINGE INCOR'PORATED I ,m

p. f6V.. r.

.....w. m. ;.y y,,f.-u c. .; Q

B,Y i fx] _

W 'fiA s((J)LGhSU. ~DATE: odd *0L

BY

-

~ +.... ,s..,,. A '0 ATE: Q%- .},.!. 2.:ll rn:s t:1 tus s utte. WW-:' a A ^' aw rnestti tutsmits

_n. c.r j a Edi 0 5701 o D gg3 9 4 l! Attachment #1 Spec. No. SP-33-4549-00 r 2. w 5:05.13' Subitem 6. ' Low voltage paver, control and instrument cables shall be t' installed in tray without caintained spacing. The cables shall be placed in the trays so that they are straight and lie flat with a minimum of crossovers, except as specified .c y t.u...--.r -in Item 5.:05.17.1 subit ems. h through k. The cable fill may exceed the 'i:op of _ the tray side rail due to field. , l '. - ' ~ - installation conditions. When the cable fill reaches.within ~ O 1/2" below the top of the side rail, the contractor shall . ?.. ~ infor= the PROJECT ORGANIZATION of locations where cable fill ' M' 7. A .y. will exceed and/or is within the prescribed 1/2" criteria via k- ~ the Q/C inspection report or co= parable document. \\ g . = * ' 4 s y 4.. S g' g r ..r-g. ... g e_ _ . m - g 'I 7'. i 'M N N grid T.. '. tr % 7 W A.P C1%j D. 1 ~ l [ .j, ? f."2 I r w. ;q::..... m. ? fg%2 wr+-' .7 Q1 i ;.- 2 238'.)c"M.< w'..O'J7;f;,%.;..' " 'l[,,, ' * '.. - vt. - 3. ,b <[. rd]p \\'. 2 ~~ w

. n e

7 ahN ..b 2 { 4 s = - y. ^ a e = O e semp .e 9 4 N g. o -. ~. = e r Q hp

• y 9,.

8

1. .a"..."

J* 6 I. t g T y...-.... a. .[ 4 ".FA" wh. 4R .,..a e

..: a.-...

m....

((s.ywf TFq J 1 Ash 1 Perry Nuclear Power Plant comsTocx _. P tWP:.. &T "4 A {f g-pfct/ntf7A./~f 3

• y:

_m n" 1.K. Comstoc< Engineering Company. inc. A CoMSTock GAouP coupANY -m. August 6, 1982 .A ! - W y :. - Willia = G..Ladochy u !Q%:@ k - Eastern Regional Manager, QA/QC Services J L. K.;Co= stock Engineering Co., Inc. w ~r 920 Fort Duquesne 31vd. W i Pittsburgh, PA 15222 T@Yjh + Subj ect: Concerns as a Result of the Review of the Equip =ent ~ ' m.. Installation Packages .y, i

Bill, t.

y The following are =ajor concerns as a result of a partial review of N: Equipment Installation Packages perfor=ed by the Task, Force. .,.,z., . - 4.e OM%c Concern ~ ' 1A. -L. Kt Co= stock Inspectors have been perfor=ing and signing for acceptance of inspections outside of their areas of cert- --: a ~ification. As a result of these findings all personnel and YN ' h inspections perfor=ed prior to January 1, 1982, =ust be held

m. s in suspect.

'.:. N S: ~

3dbj 1

~ This is to include Switchgear, Ter=1 nation Cabinets, Rotating

• %:f I g g g f y _y.;y., g Equipment and Penetrations #1R72-S001 thru 1R72-S029. A par-

~

.%B.

,';6 M+ etal list of exa=ples is as fellows: . y w - f ;J O..e.e y A_ -a.. Brian Palmer has made inspections on the Class 1E Switch- ~ ? MjQ 1.Y. - gear and Te,r=ination Cabinet Installation Checklist (For 2 - 'f N "

1. 32). He was never certified to perform Equip =ent Instal-j lation Inspecticas.

Example: 1H13-P706, P710, P711, P712

. ?!.$;%

P713, P714, and P715. [ '.

b. ' G. Young has verified inspections on the Class lE Switch-

w.,

gear and Ter=ination Cabinet Insta11at, ion Checklist (For=

1. 32) before his certification date of 4-7-81.

Material Receiving Report indicate verification of Material Receive , s a.- I g q /fj ',,before he was e= ployed..Exa=ple: 1H13-P706,' P707, T710, Egd&d;! Mj ( P711, P712, P713,.P714, and P715. ~ 4 G.)Hagler has not been certified to perfor= Equipment Inse i GJs .p. .c. .lation.but has perfor=ed inspections and documenta.d such o ?"T,~ 1[ For= #32. Example: lH13-P710, P711,,,P712, P713, and P71!. f.- .-d. L.-Sa=osky has docu=ented stud welding on For= #100 but ha n hg $h =.' i e @g's@dd'@gMnever been certified to Stud Nelding. l Example:-- " I lH13-P70@ a#-7:_ W/x ~ :s pr

_1

7. h P710', P711, P712, and P713.'

-4 ~

g,$h, .n

... r.

O - c. Concern lA. e Centinued 2/14/80. There is no co-signature. ~ ' Exa=ple: 1H13-P707, and P715. f. ~H. Hanson was only a Level I and has signed Ihspection Repor (Form #118) without a Level II co-signature. - s Exa=ple: 1H13-P711, P712, P713, and P715. Phil Ro=ano inspected Class lE Switchgear on 2/11/81 (For= # yrw Tt g. He was not certified until 4/13/81 and only as a Level I. ^ Exa:ple: Package OR24-S023. ad h. Lucille Cleary received =aterial since 8/13/80 (For= #39A). She was not certified until 2/23/81 and then as a Level I. Exa=ple: Package IH22-P030. 4, 1. Brian Pal =er signed off For= #32 Class lE Switchgear and Ter O N: -W e Cabinec Installation Checklist on 1/8/80. He was not certif Equip =ent Installatioil. Clarence Hart co-signed this foru. pn y Additional exa=plis available. j. R. L. Coff=an co-signed Inspection Report #356 for Phil Ro=3 Edv ' .who was not certified on 2/11/81. He was not certified hi=s

u.,

~2 until 4/7/81. ~+- Approxi=ately six (6) people were certified out of 22 people were signing of f various Inspection functions and were not

m%

certified to do so at that particular ti=e. ~ w;;.. e it.~ y .. 6 Vf. 9This partial list of uncertified individuals was taken fro = the p +J{f Q g(ro,w -g_ "17M ~ 3": _ files and based on the infor=ation-available. The necessary Sitt g.g approval letter for certification was not noted in most individua $1 ~ personnel files at'the time of review for specific activity cert: ,i-IGj w Ys P 13. The IR24 packages are in 4the process of being turned over to Site 2 were reviewed f or Validity of Inspections prior to trans=ittal f: y;' N g.2; the Task Force. The results of this review also indicated inspe: ? perforced by individuals not certified to specific activities. f docu=entation in question consists of Nonconfor:ance Reports, In. Reports, Material Receiving Reports and Checklists for docu=entii electrical equip =ent installation. m, e;Gi $ $u IC. In reference to electrical penetrations, 1R72-S00.1 - S029, all {M"d , inspections perfarned and docu=ented on for: #39A, Material Rece Reports; and,Ecr= dll6 A:& 3, Installation Checklists have been rn generated by inspectors who were not certified on the date the f':f4 inspections were perfor:ed, s .;c . -. c. 4 ). f w^*, Page 2 of 4 T.

-z _ ~5 1KLt_2 J 1 " U_ e~.. 4['h C oas t u a h

Concerna, 2A..

There appears to be no standardized method to fil-ling out Forr #21, Insulation Resistance / Continuity Test Report. The fot=s have been altered by the craft to suit their own interpretation. Often, the results are indecipherable.

m. -

.t$ SP 709-4549-00 Section 1:05.10 control of Inspections and Tests Paragraph I states: 4 -$ 34--

1.. A program of inspections and tests shall be prepared for all n 24 activities affecting quality, and shall identify those fNE inspection and tests points to be verified for confor=ance to O. ---:

yp.C l docu=ents such as instructions, procedures, drawings, - [' specifications, etc., that are used to perform the activity. ,g;j, h - ,The inspection and tests shall be perfor=ed by individuals a ": other than those who performed the activity being inspected or tested and who do not report to the supervisor who cirected the ' N.m original WORK. There shall be an adequate nu=ber of inspections and tests performed to assure that all operations + 3 of the activity fulfill the predetermined quality ' dj$ N require =ents. The CONTRACTOR shall' describe the. system which he vill utilize to identify, implement and verify EOLD POINTS, d%[l ~* or WITNESS POINTS which will assure that inspections and tests 4

• 4' are performed as required.

M.... %~h" p. Pars.;;raph 1:05.10 3.C states: 3. c. What written instrue:1on the person perfor=ing the ~, e -- inspections and tests will be working to, including the specific acceptance criteria, tolerances, etc., which must 2 ~; :- ' j@.. g q f, be verified. Gy,-:,. - o a- . M $ M b',y Q @M & -:-; Procedure states thatQh23.y Graf t:has been-.using the infinity " gips;;9 j the reading should be iniohms, megohms, etc. 'fy"... D..., ; . Procedure 4.3.18, Meggering and Continuity Testing, paragraph 3.1.9 2fhe . states :- "A record shall be made and kept for all tests governed by this procedure. The record must indicate the folleving: (Use w-s. Form #21, Attached)" m i .'~

3.1.9 states

" Test Measurements obtained, with units identified l-(i.e. oh=s, megoh=s, etc. )." l 3.2.1, under acceptance criteria states: Unless otherwise specified by the-Project Organiza- ,y ' tion Engineer, values :in Figure:15 (Page 12): shall _ , p._ - be used." ~ 'g. -j ~-It isia requirement of Spec 33-4549-00 that 100% of all Class 1E-and 'Non Class 1E cables have a Megger/ Continuity TesFand the results .;be documented. This activity is performed solely:by the constructios .f~~ O y g 3. $ n M_,e: department.Gd(Testing and Documenting). m The Quality Control; Dept.. 4 74 W M dhas' accepted these test results'in accordance'with.procedurei423.18 ac T _ .g.e - .m

w. .... ~.... --,_.m.~w. .T-r..s.~..... .., M. 3g o, um. P P*, a r:.... > q t.*- / g.. 4 h Installations and as a result of these findings, all inspections perfor=a - prior to 1/1/82 should be considered invalid and the lack of certifi, cation cf. ~ individuals perfor=ing these ' inspections should be addressed i==edtataly..idd; all Megger/ Continuity Tests should also be considered invalid, as a result cf ; acceptance of test results without an approved procedure. ~ Also, all inspections presently being perfor=ed and all personnel certific should be reviewed at this ti=e because of the fact that so=e of the inspecten as being not certified in specific activities are currently e= ployed by L. 7 C > - E..- at the Perry Site.,, ,, '..f.,.l .Cordi " y,' .e,n. a.... " f'. s ,3 'P V. A. Eichler = ~ Leader, Task Force n. -t -p #!.g.. cc:.. R.:E. Marino " - ff.;.u; ; ' N.y, g, S,,,, D. Friend R. L. Bower MLc; E.

.ce~J. 211ka, ECI

.a.... -~: .n. 4 . - :.L.w s .?-.;. ~-,, ,,.';; - 1, ' m .1, a,, $.,. '? * ". ' 4,s % *.\\. a. ~...t kfh.h!.. . t.* lA .~ 4 '" tr" g 4 4 s + 9 4 s e 1-U: ~ - a 'I 9 .d t. _ l e a ~... k ~- w

• a,p e.

-~n a... 4 't.. i ffN*VWMW Y wa g.1 i s. ya orRRY w ..4,. , i: ,. ',.,,L 4: ~ ~.. ~ . :n .: y.. '- .c..g. ~. 11'. ,The:QAAC which was' formed as a result of the 1978 problems was not function-ing-(e.g., meeting frequency) as reouired by the QA program as. late as 1982. '/ .The ; licensee changed tne QA program relating to the QAAC to be less 4

restrictive.

Even when the QAAC met, it was not doing meaningful reviews. - m , 2/ IThe. format of the periodic report on various QA-identified deficiencies from the CE! QA Manager to the VP Construction was changed in 1982. The p ,-q:.6. - gchance resulted in a loss of ability to tell from the report the status andConsequen f v. g.A. M :nosposition of: pre-for. mat. change deficienciss. i ) n. .idittserve..its intended purpose of keeping top management abreast of QA QO?. M..y.w.. de.fi ci en ci es,'N.h WM TJt: ~ . a., a,

n m

,a, : v..,. p.., e m . m. c p. .,5 6.g3 i Findings.of CEI' audit of Pullman and Comstock were not being processed in 7.c/g g dlu:la timely manner.: 3 Delays were identified both in getting contractor

. f

,.7 responses to the' audit findings and in contractor implementatio'n.of corrective actions.

Sot"e fincings were not resolved.for 2 years. -.J.m:/;w:. .:n. f.%, Audits','.surveillances, andL NRs by Comstock of the Comstock organization e 7..kg,i t b i g p oce,ssed in a timely manner. Delays..were identified both .c mMlOsil@N.g'were no - e n y r7..inEgetting res.ponses to the. findings and in ifnplementation of sf. a st. Gh.:.

- r

.-actions. .~. .~..+ q. z : 2,. m.*g, : .e ~ k.fsR5 3CEIj:)1as not.done;any significant trending of findings of CEI audits of M E W:w:W 19.icontractorsasince.1980. s' ..7; y - ...., r. m. :.. n,. w . m n- .r , 'nMrM' 6M Pullman'.does > not".do trending of findings of Pullman audits, surveillances,- 1N -c.and.NRs; 4 ..'s 'n,.. 3 . W;. .m n : s:. ,, W% 7. ' Pullman? verifies completion of NR corrective actions without doing field ~ Y!$5in'.'

• che'c ks'.

' - - -?:. : -e;h hh+~h'edN,;$..h,4,,...,h,*f..N,glr.,h,.[i' - ~ K

• l e '.

a.- h,_' g g e. p, , y,.e. '8', *.(q ,,o s, 3.,. p.., 4., M.y*yf. W .3-* z j. a s g.g - ,,..p* q ;,c4.g ' n :e.e-*, &.* y,...*. ,e. ,o;* .*, s. K ' ty: ed s. ,a Y .s - '., . 6 's.f' 7;*p'*. ' *, - .' *g; a *- e . y _ :_ s - ' * ~. s r .y s 'di ji, ~ V. . ) 4 t .._W,

• 'c.$

)tb U M. *~ 2.. N. 2 ' C$Z 's ; *. :.', g .' M R-q, ; *, - y $'; ', p,., c I

4 _

- fi..'.p - g<

• t -_(.

f ' ' '[ },,y,( g, [9,, ^;^ y." ..j,,, h ,8 p ,.:.3 2 4 /

• ... t.

.a.. -- t ' .e n. cf..Y 1', l'

• 'f,.. g 'ir #

.C* ' ~ ' 1 o ,.,.s ,'s r (- ,r. C ~ fs 3, 'g 8 . - (, [.4. D*/,,. q '..'*,:)ll *w., l g [.7. f .c s f s ? i. r " 14 3 n g . Il

• 5 **.

T u,. h.. /. 4: p. g, r.as. -

gf-m,v,aw' 'h.2 *;744 / Y. e&. e5 h;,pp'* ! g7..' q g i

s. g g,' q' u, g

. JhA' d '2, . [$-. % /,;.f i., ,' L s ., mung.-~ q; . j.:py ;m.; . g ..* p,. jpg.c,4 3;:3 . r.: e ;g;q~. 2*%.r.-

r :,

w.:n : m.7.- - jg.p j- ;*- J da en;:i,y- _, . 1 "~':x., u

f.-. ~ 4 7 0 Cl,, $$f N$ 5, / / d[f(. Jr A"/ / / Cd$,

• f f

E,C..a/hded scs.s) ,e .4 .w 4...h+ .e....i.g. g... .s. e.. ze %,hsJac.g.w a_&q L.. _. _... .. s p e ns.a B,rm .. ~.. ~.. .. - ~.. L sciftd. 1/ Al* !is

1. 0%

(NL .Wo!Yt1** Cd..l' f*PN % ? *

:. =w... Qu a},.1q /rw-e, F M. & weh 4.msc 2

f ~ P Y d ([ C DNd

c..M

,.i.-..... C BA-~. prra ~.. o [VlA u 2,Gau S w. r s-r-W ..me-6 .u_ e .M-e.. M m e, & abk Ein Gb.c[ 1.W.9,@. ( : b &...7.L. e' m / &. l a b. ~ ) v.= n c.e; - y g a _.:+ <cpA g, 9. , Jg,ya 27 ~ {i" Y4 t S Y W. 4Li l,Lt / $$1Cs b o lW N

• Q; N.

. di 1 4 l y 6lEf' .. 3, ksoI dd9 n=r p,7 9 y 7 : 94 a tu4-m f o. 4 [ d bd, b /Ce/ # ( C'L 4,. e [= - Q...,g-jf;,,3Q3 ~ ~

, J., e ... Al[.s,. e...._..._._.. .. _ f f j 8ei.,.as,ITT .. hs r-: _i, y .. msa .Qh M./ B+/=' .ce d h J s_ / 0 .,.y ' /. rest - c s 0... - l s" J'I$"S 0 i l. . - ^ L" N JCe ! $M Cs* J s.--.- ... -....-. Jca& L..ze t M 2, F/7f. E' 7 ~ ._ = . p &ym i, y sy w. ;., p /L-i y iy7 _ s, B.e (<k - e waC. .., :.w ~ ....'... it w4s. rf. d . ff. (z, pg

• '..fC, jb

.gf pb; fj) - a, .. is feU1 cvd. c7-*.. jw We aw. r (- \\ C..lus C. h N k 6 Clu. f lt7, ~ :, n...L $ f_ .......t-^ Cov . l' -s' 7 4 l c. inree..'. qdM f/yf'.'s Ge kj .e...m. e d.9 .e..> G t e r t f l f t ..a>.. .e si. 4i .+ I e e e.- g w v '. e 4

g Y.

s*). i s.'*- ,1 .,.-r ..~r - +. 9-

_m _.. _ _. = - - ....... ~. -s CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that copies of the foregoing MOTION TO REOPEN THE RECORD ON ISSUE #3 were served by deposit in the U.S. Mail, forst class, postage prepaid,,this / -t

• day of July 1983 to those on the service list below.

f Susan L. Hiatt / , - f, 2. , /\\ f. '\\ aq.,f s, + .~n.. j 'ih. w d[//, ~I' Yg ' O :,ggy.,,--,h 7 .:. u =, .,. 2 u ~ , ' (-;. SERVICE LIST. b Nk?[-[se n l A 3 '/ 2-t y of tl l @ .-c .d Peter _B..Bloch, Chairman Terry ~ Lodge...Esq. 'sph"f Atomic Safety & Licensing Board ', McCormack, Pommeranz, U.'S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.' Lodge ~ ' ' ' + ' ~ 824 National Bank, Bldg. Washington,'D.C. 20555 3,';, Toledo,.OH 43604 ~ '. _., e- 'i W Q '. Dr.. Jerry R..Kline 'l^ Atomic Safety & Licensing Board. dQ% ;_ U.S., Nuclear. Regulatory Commission ~ Washington, D.C. 20555 . [r, ' Mr..Glenn O. Bright ~ 17g ~ , Atomic. Safety & Licensing Board ~ l R l' t Commission ~ ,.A?eggf.. '..;U.S..Nuc ea,r' egu a ory OMysl: cWashington, D,C. 20555 v9 1 '.~ ii... 7.l.i Jame's.M..Cutchin,. IV, Esq. Office of the Executive..Lega.L Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Washington,.'D C.,. 20555 i Jay Silberg, Esq. Shaw, Pittman, Potts, &'Trowbridge - 1800 M Street, NW f'- . Washington, D.C.

20036,

~ I 'O

Docketing & Service Branch E

f Office of'the Secretary l -U.S. Nuclear Regulatory. Commission Washing, ton, D.C. 20555 l ~ l- -Atomic Safety..& Licensing. Appeal Board Panel L,' ~ p g U.S. Nuclear Regulatory. Commission Washington,_D.C. 20555 ~ ~' y

• }}