ML20078G009
| ML20078G009 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 01/12/1995 |
| From: | AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | |
| References | |
| OLA-3-I-049, OLA-3-I-49, NUDOCS 9502020367 | |
| Download: ML20078G009 (12) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:'1 f s 4 r e L DOC,ETED 1 ,,. e 9 7 +
- USHRC ~
) N Q UNITED STATES OF AMERICA E y I l
'd
> y7 {-
gj
~
BEFORE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
% JAN 30 P3 :15 @ Sr$gu E3 D -
)
t.r e r c' 3- p*;p y 3 b( U N N5-In the Matter of, ) Seii~
~
$h Dohh}4cs:!: k GEORGIA POWER CO.,
)
) g'yjg~ Mjj y 5o 9 4 Q
) $Eh -
NY? 1 REQUEST FOR PROCEEDINGS AND IMPOSITION OF 71VIL"' 6 g un PENALTI:?S FOR IMPROPERLY TRANSFERRING ry CONTROL GEORGIA POWER COMPANY'S LICENSES TO THE SONGPCO Ji g _3y$s e M y g; PROJECT AND FOR THE UNSAFE AND IMPROPER OPERATION $ _g
;, 'j y y y f g, g:
OF GEORGIA POWER COMPANY LICENSED FACILITIES To: Kenneth Carr, Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission I. Relief Sought _ Petitioners Marvin B. Hobby and Allen L. Mosbaugh, hereby request that the Commission, sue sponte, pursuant to , 10 CFR 2.104(C) institute licensing proceedings to determine n -{) whether Georgia Power Company ("GPC"):
- 1) Illegally transferred control of its licenses to SONOPCO Project (hereinafter SONOPCO) and the Southern 50.80(C);
Company System in violation of 10 C.F.R. ii) Can reasonably assure that SONOPCO or other entities operating GPC's licensed nuclear facilities are complying with NRC regulations; il1) Can reasonably assure that SONOPCO's or other entities' operation of GPC's licensed nuclear facilities is not endangering the health and safety of . the public; I iv) Has the character, competence, fundamental trustworthiness and commitment to safety to operate a Im\ nuclear facilitye V Exhibit N page l Of _b2 9502020367 950112 : PDR ADOCK 05000424 4 g PDR
"i' The need for immediate and swift action by the
( ( ,) Commission, in light of the seriousness of the allegations contained herein, cannot be overstated. l
- II. Background of Petitioner a) Marvin B. Hobby.
Petitioner Marvin B. Hobby, has devoted the last 22 years to promoting the safe and reliable use of nuclear power. In 1980, the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations ("INPO") was created and Admiral Dennis Wilkinson was named as its , first President. In April of 1980, Admiral Wilkinson selected Mr. Hobby to serve as INPO's Communications In Manager. He later became Assistant to the President. 1983 Mr. Hobby became INPO's corporate Secretary as well as continuing in his role as Assistant to the President. In 1984, Mr. Hobby accepted a position with the Nuclear Utilities Management and Resources Committee ("NUMARC") and served as the Project Manager, Congressional Education. In June of 1985, Mr. Hobby accepted an offer of employment from GPC's then President Mr. J.H. Miller, Jr., In 1986, in addition to being to serve as his assistant. Assistant to the President, Mr. Hobby was also named as In 1987 Assistant to GPC's Senior Executive Vice President. Mr. Hobby was named GPC's Manager of Nuclear Support. The following year he served as GPC's Manager of Nuclear Suppcet Services. In December of 1988 he was then named as GPC's General Manager of Nuclear Operations Contract Administration and Assistant to the Sc;ior Vice President. 2 Exhibit I ,pageA of _/A
. b 4
() Mr. Hobby served as General Manager of Nuclear Operations Contract Administration until April of 1990, at which time he was forced from the compcny after attempting i to bring to GPC management's cttention that it had f improperly transfered control of its nuclear licenses to ; SONOPCO and the Southern Company. In this regard, on April i 27, 1989, Mr. Hobby wrote a highly confidential memorandum (co-signed by GPC's then Senior Vice President George F. f Head). A redacted copy of this memo is attached as Exhibit A. This memo alerted GPC management to the fact that it appeared that GPC "as violating its licenses by improperly transferring control t its nuclear facilities. On that day, and the following day, April 28, 1989, a GPC vice president, Fred R. Williams, instructed Mr. Hobby to destroy i all copies of his April 27, 1989 memo. Mr Hobby, concerned () about his potential liability, sought outside advice. On , June 8, 1989, Mr. Hobby wrote to Admiral Wilkinson to explain the concern he had regriding his perception that GPC improperly transferred control of its nuclear facilities to the Southern Company and SONOPCO as well as GPC's reaction to his raising the concern to management. A redacted copy of Mr. Hobby's letter to Admiral Wilkinson is Before Mr. Hobby could get attached hereto as Exhibit "B". GPC to resolve his concern over the improper transfer of GPC's license to Southern Company and SONOPCO, he was forced from GPC. Inusmuch as Mr. Hobby was unable to resolve his concern internally, as he faithfully tried to do. he is now l forced to petition the Commission directly. i O 3
%hibit _Y ,pagg 3 ogfry i
1
l
~ - ._
-b) Allen L. Mosbauch.
Petitioner Allen L. Mosbaugh has devoted the last.16 years to the safe start up, operations, and testing of commercial nuclear power reactors. Mr. Mosbaugh has been l trained and certified as a Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) and ;
.?hift Technical Advisor (STA), and holds undergraduate and craduato degrees in Nuclear Engineering.
Between 1986 and May of 1990, Mr. Mosbaugh served as He GPC's Vogtle project Assistant Plant Support Manager. was in charge of a staff of over 400 people in the areas of l technical support, engineering support, security, administration, training, and quality concerns. Mr. , Mosbaugh, until May of 1990, was the Vice-Chairman of the Plant Review Board ("PRB"), one of four Plant Duty Managers, as well as a Vogtle project Emergency Director. Mr. O Mosbaugh was removed from the PRB by Plant General Manager George Bockhold after he attempted to resolve safety issues r with the PRB. Between 1984 and 1986, Mr. Mosbaugh served as GPC's Pre-operational Superintendent and Superintendent of Engineering Services for the Vogtle project. In this capacity he was responsible for start up and pre-operational testing of Unit 1. He assembled and managed 150 engineers and additional support and clerical staff. h April of 1990, Mr. Mosbaugh came to the conclusion " that tue highest levels of the SONOPCO project, including R. Patrick Mcdonald and Joseph M. Farley, were in control of Mr. Mosbaugh the operation of GPC's Vogtle project. concluded that SONOPCO was needlessly endangering the 4 Exhibit b ,page 4 of _lol , -. ,-. -. . . c - . - , -- -,nn,-.
4 public's health and safety by: refusing to adhere to [) technical specifications in the interest of schedule; carelessly disregarding for reactor criticality safety; operating radioactive waste systems as to be in gross violation of NRC requirements; refusing to report adverse events and conditions to the NRC as required by regulations; submitting false information to the NRC; repeatedly allowing the Vogtle project to enter Technical Specification 3.0.3
" motherhood" conditions without notifying the NRC or correcting the adverse condition within the required time span; advpting a policy of intentionally "taking" Licensee Event Reports ("LER's") to keep the Vogtle plant on line and on schedul3 during planned shut downs; and rewarding managers for engaging in non-conservative and questionable
') compliance practices.
Facts III. Petitioners submit the following information in support of their request for proceedings.
- 1. I11egal Transfer of Licenses to SONOPCO.
GPC improperly transferred control of its nuclear operating licenses to The Southern Company and to SONOPCO without first obtaining permission from the Commission to do so pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80 ("No license...shall be transferred, assigned, on in any manner disposed of, either voluntarily or individually, directly or indirectly, through transfer of control of the license to any person, unless the commission shall give its consent in writing"). Evidence 5 Exhibit 5 ,page S Of .! 1 l i
7s that GPC transferred control of its licenses to SONOPCO was obtained as a result of Petitioners' witnessing the day-to-day operation of GPC's nuclear facilities both at the site (by Mr. Mosbaugh) and at GPC's corporate offices (by Mr. Hobby). Although Mr. Farley asserts under oath that he is not a Corporate Officer of GPC (rather he is an officer of Southern Company Services and The Southern Company), he is Indeed, GPC's the SONOPCO Chief Executive Officer ("CEO"). H. Senior Executive Vice President through May of 1990, Grady Baker, Jr., acknowledges that Mr. Farley is.SONOPCO's "The appropriate oversight of SONOPCO exists, _d_e facto CEO: in that the Chief Operating Officer, Pat Mcdonald and tje CEO or not the CEO because its not a corporation -- but Farley and Mcdonald are officers of Georgia Power Company, See, Baker reporting to the president, Bill Dahlberg." Deposition Transcript at pp. 16-17 (excerpt attached as Exhibit "C"). As the above quotation also demonstrates, Mr. Baker was also led to believe that Mr. Farley was an officer of GPC reporting to GPC's President. Id. Yet Mr. Farley See Farley Deposition denies that he is an officer of GPC. at p. 10 (excerpt attached as Exhibit D). A thorough review of SONOPCO's operation will demonstrate that SONOPCO's CEO is Mr. Farley, not Mr. 1
~Dahlberg. The actual chain of command is General Plant '
Manager George Bockhold to SONOPCO Vice President McCoy; McCoy to SONOPCO's Senior Vice President, George Hairston, Hairston to SONOPCO's Executive Vice President and Chief i operations officer, R. Patrick Mcdonald; Mcdonald to 6 Exhibit ,page b of M
i SONOPCO's Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Farley. , O In an April 27, 1989 memo, Mr. Hobby advised GPC Vice President Fred Williams in writing that in the course of attempting to perform his function as General Manager, Nuclear Contract Administration, he observed that Messrs. Farley and Mcdonald -- not Mr. Dahlberg -- were in control of and were operating GPC's nuclear facilitier,. Mr. Hobby : was instructed to destroy all copies of the memorandum, i Thus, since April of 1989, GPC was advised in a confidential memorandum that in the opinion of its contract Administration Group, GPC had illegally transferre'd control of its nuclear licenses to SONOPCO; and SONOPCO's CEO, Mr. Farley, and Chief Operating officer, Mr. Mcdonald, were in control of GPC's nuclear licenses in violation of NRC regulations. ,
- 2. GPC misled the Commission about the chain of command from the Vogtle proiect's Plant j Manager to its CEO. ,
GPC's Executive Vice President of Nuclear Operations, R. Patrick Mcdonald, knowingly made false statements to the NRC commissioners in the presence of GPC's President, A.W. Dahlberg; Vice President for Nuclear Generation, C. Ken ; McCoy; and General Manager of the Vogtle Project, George Bockhold. Yet no one from GPC attending the meeting with , the Commission corrected the false statement made by Mr. Mcdonald to the Commission. On March 30, 1989, during the course of a transcribed ; proceeding held before the Commission, Mr. Mcdonald was i asked by then Commissioner (now Chairman) Carr to state the 7 Exhibit N,page7 dM
.. . - -- - - . _ -- ~ - - - . - . _ _ . - _ - = - - . -
s
'n i
() " hierarchy between the CEO and the plant manager" of the Vogtle project so Mr. Carr could evaluate his " management concern" he had that the plant manager, Mr. Bockhold, being "a long way from the CEO." Mr. Mcdonald misled Commissioner carr when he eliminated one entire level of management r between the plant manager and the CEO. The transcript of l the proceeding demonstrates that Mr. Mcdonald stated that' l the reporting chair. was General Manager, George Bockhold, to Vice President for Nuclear Generation, Ken McCoy; who reported to Executive Vice President of Nuclear Operations, f R. Patrick Mcdonald, who in turn reported directly the the A copy of the CEO, GPC's President, A. William Dahlberg. l relevant transcript pages is attached hereto as Exhibit E. l In reality, Mr. McCoy did not report to Mr. Mcdonald but () rather to SONOPCO's Senior Vice President, Mr. George Hairston, who then reported to Mr. Mcdonald. While it may be conceivable that Mr. Mcdonald may have suffered from a L that Messrs. Dahlberg, lapse of memory, it is inconceivable McCoy and Bockhold suffered the same lapse of memory at the ; exact same time. Messrs. Dahlberg, McCoy and Bockhold should have known that Mr. Mcdonald's statements were false and should have brought this to the immediate attention of the Commission and otherwise corrected the record before the-Commission acted on the Vogtle full power license request. Although GPC eventually corrected a portion of the false statement, it was not corrected until after the full power license was granted. Moreover, the correction did not address the fact that Mr. Mcdonald was and continued to O , Exhibit N,page E of ./d
r: ,
- s uncorrected by the licensee;
()- 1); SONOPCO. retaliated against Allen Mosbaugh by removing him from the PRB after submitting memorandum to George Bockhold demonstrating that his personal presentation to the NRC contained incorrect information and that the LER and COAR letters contained false information. Thus, the diesel was not as reliable as the COAR and LER conveyed to the NRC. As such, SONOPCO provided false and misleading information to the NRC about the actual reliability of the diesel generator and the actual failure rate of the generator. Thereafter,'a cover-up of the reliability of the diesel followed,and Mr. Mosbaugh's attempts to correct the false statements contained in the () LER and COAR resulted in his removal form the PRB. By misleading the NRC about the safe operating condition of the diesel generator, SONOPCO demonstated a complete lack of concern for the safe. operation of the Vogtle facility.
- 4. GPC's Executive Vice President submitted periured testimony during the Course of a proceeding commenced under Section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act.
GPC's Executive Vice President, R. Patrick Mcdonald, knowingly submitted false testimony during proceedings commenced pursuant to Section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act. In the Fuchko & Yunker v. Georgia Power Company Section 210 proceedings, Mr. Mcdonald stated under oath at the hearing and in a previous deposition that () ' the staff of the newly formed SONOPCO project was chosen 13 Exhibit ,page of g 1
O k/ "frcm the top down" (i.e. management picked the Vice Presidents, the Vice Presidents picked the General Managers, then the General Managers picked their own Managers, then the Managers picked their Supervisors, etc.). See Deposition transcript at pp. 50, 62, and January 4, 1989 Hearing Testimony at p. 429 (both of which are attached hereto as Exhibit F). Moreover, GPC's counst_ was advised that Mr. Mcdonald's testimony was false prior to that counsel's calling Mr. Mcdonald as a witness at the Yunker/Fuchko hearings on January 4, 1989. In this regard, on Jriuary 2, 1989 (two days before Mr. Mcdonald was to testify), a meeting of GPC's witnesses was scheduled by GPC's counsel, the Troutman, Sanders, Lockerman and Ashmore law firm. As Mr. Hobby was k_) one of the witnesses GPC planned to call at the hearing, he was asked to attend and did, in fact, attend this meeting. At this meeting, Mr. Mcdonald addressed the group and stated how the SONOPCO staff was selected. Mr. Mcdonald stated that the " top down" approach was used to staff the SONOPCO project. Nuar the end of the meeting, Mr. Hobby informed GPC's counsel that Mr. Mcdonald's statement regarding how the SONOPCO staff was chosen "from the top down" was false. Mr. Hobby also advised GPC's counsel that other statements made by Mr. Mcdonald were also false. GPC's counsel responded to Mr. Hobby's statement that he believed Mr.. Mcdonald's statements to be false by advising Mr. Hobby that . he would have to change his testimony. When Mr. Hobby was instructed to change his testimony, he refused to do so and 14 Exhioit ,page/O of.L2 1
,n.
advised GPC counsel that he would not cooperate in their (u. -) attempt to submit perjurious testimony during the course of the Yunker and Fuchko proceedings. The following day, on January 3, 1989, Mr. Hobby advised Mr. Thomas McHenry of the false statements Mr. 1989 meeting. Mr. McHenry Mcdonald made at the January 2, confirmed that if the statement about the " top down" approach of filling SONOPCO staff positions was made by Mr.
~
Mcdonald, then Mr. Mcdonald would not be telling the truth. Mr. McHenry advised Mr. Hobby that he had 1st hand knowledge Mr. Hobby further advised Mr. that the assertion was false. i McHenry that he was instructed to change his testimony to See coincide with Mr. Mcdonald's but he refused to do so. Affidavit of Thomas McHenry, attached as Exhibit "G". i f~'\ Indeed, the false " top down" statement was made by Mr. () Mcdonald under oath on December 23, 1986 and January 4, See 1989, during the course of the section 210 proceedings. More troubling is the fact that prior to v Exhibit "H". allowing Mr. Mcdonald to take the witness stand at the l l Yunker/Fuchko proceedings, GPC's counsel had arranged, during confidential settlement discussions, that Mr. Yunker's and Fuchko's counsel would not subject Mr. Mcdonald to vigorous cross-examination when he testified thereby l j assuring that 1) his perjurous testimony would not be challenged and, 2) it could be used in subsequent . proceedings before the NRC. The false testimony Mr. Mcdonald gave prior to and during the Yunker and Fuchko hearing was of a critical Messrs. Fuchko and Yunker alleged that they were (h nature. V ! 15 Exhibit W age,p // of.12 l
I
. j e'
[s-]/ prohibited from transferring out of GPC's nuclear security department and into SONOPCO's organization because they had l raised valid safety concerns about GPC's improper handling ! of safeguards materials. In an attempt te demonstrate that 1 1 Messrs. Yunker and Fuchko were not improperly kept out of SONOPCO, GPC alleged, through the testimony of Mr. Mcdonald, that SONOPCO positions could not be filled until a manager of' the security department was chosen because of the " top l down" method routinely employed to fill all positions at SONOPCO. See December 23, 1988 Deposition Transcript of R. l Patrick Mcdonald at p. 50, 62 (attached as Exhibit I).
- 5. SONOPCO routinely threatens tbe safe operation of GPC's nuclear facilities by allowing them to enter " motherhood."
SONOPCO repeatedly' allowed the Vogtle Plant to violate ( Technical Specification 3.0.3 and enter " motherhood" without correcting the situation or notifying the NRC. Technical . Specification 3.0.3 is the "last eschelon of defense" in assuring that sufficient redundancy and margins of safety ; are maintained for safe plant operation. To wit, under l Technical Specification 3.0.3, a plant shut down and NRC notification are required within one (1) hour. The f following are some examples where Plant Vogtle entered
" motherhood" without management appropriately correcting the situation or notifying the NRC; ~
a) Both Unit l's and Unit 2's A and D train safety l related load sequencers have been inoperable due to failure, downpowering and other conditions rendering them inoperable on numerous occasions. ( 16 Exhibit ,page M Of A
.}}