ML20091H477
| ML20091H477 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 07/06/1995 |
| From: | Mosbaugh A AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | |
| References | |
| OLA-3-S-094, OLA-3-S-94, NUDOCS 9508110086 | |
| Download: ML20091H477 (11) | |
Text
_ _
>L Q C. E -8%
. jff 32-.
7 00CKETED
~
o USNRC ei i
~95 JUL 27 P2 :59 NAY 2 REC *O The United States Nuclea,0Keyu"fitorTEoM11sion fwwi 0.E To:
(attn. Bruno Uric A11egafttois',CobhMator')
F MC g*,
From: Allen L. Mosbaugh l
GEORGIA POWER /SONOPCO 2.206 PETITION RESPONSE IS FILLED WITH LIES i
i Among the most serious of the allegations made in i
the 2.206 Petition filed by myself and Marvin Hobby is the i
allegation that GPC thru SONOPCO submitted known, false statements to the NRC intended to mislead the NRC about the I
reliability of the Diesel generators specifically in an LER 90-006 dated 4-19-90. Perhaps the most significant charge is that the Senior Vice President SONOPCO, George Hairston, who signed the LER knowingly submitted false l
information to the NRC.
4 l
Now SONOPCO has answered the 2.206 petition in a sworn statement response signed by Executive Vice l
President Pat Mcdonald. The key facts of the response rebutting the above charge provided by SONOPCO to the NRC i
are blatantly false.
1 FAtRE STATEMENT NUMaER 1 j
j Specifically SONOPCO's response titled " Response to Hobby /Mosbaugh 2.206 Petition"Section II.b" page 3, last paragraph, footnote 3, the first fact presented is j
l blatantly false.
Footnote 3--
"The wording was revised by corporate and site representatives in a telephone conference call late on April 19, 1990. Although Mg. Hairatan 333 ggt,3 narticinant b 1
i Abat, SE11, he had every reason to believe the final draft LER presented to him after the call was accurate and i
complete."
Originals of tape recordings are in the possession of the l
NRC made of the telephone conference call referenced in footnote 3. Participants whose voices are clearly identifiable on that tape are:
4 George Hairston, Ken McCoy, Bill Shipman, Jack Stringfellow, George Bockhold, i
John Aufdenkkape, Allen Mosbaugh l
So it is proven by the tapes that Mr. Hairston actively i
participated in the conference call late on April 19, 1990.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION hN
"' l g g g g ' ' ' '
Docket No. 50-424/425 OLA 3 EXHIBITNOh f h
~,~;
i t
in the matter of Geornia Power Co et al, Voatie Units 1 & 2 Pg 2 0F58 PMS).
O Staff E Applicant O intervenor o other i
w
~
O identified 19 Received O Rejected Reporter CT{
d I
MosbsD(
9508110086 950706 cate 9 *R45 witnes.
i PDR ADOCK 05000424 i
G PDR,;
ii-l d' l,
4 Indeed Mr. Hairston's involvement in the detailed l
development and wording in the LER was extensive to the j
point of personally interviewing plant operators, a fact SONOPCO apparently does not want the NRC to know.
1 Now Pat Mcdonald sworn statement is another lie.
j FALSE STATEMENT NUMBER 2 i
Specifically the second fact presented in footnote 3 l
1s falso as well as the statements in section IIS, page 5 last paragraph.
j Footnote 3--
"The wording was revised by corporate and site l
representatives in a telephone conference call late on April Ig, 1990. Although Mr. Mairston was not a participant in that call, he had 3xaEX IAnaGD 1e halieve the f.inal AcafA j
LER prananted in his aflac Abe gall gas accurata angl l
conciata.
AND i
g9am E---
- the nuammation that GPc afficara er their enanar 1aval staffa. who wara aware of thman affarta. would knowinalv aravide falam information in ludiernum. The ennvaram in the truth?*---
AND 1
pasa E-- "The allaantion that GPc afficers would att-mt ta mialand the MRC with incorraet information in. in a werd.
absursL
- Mr. Hairston, The Senior Vice President Nuclear, had l
enumerable indicators and apparently direct knowledge that the information presented to him was suspect if not outright falso before he signed the LER. Bill Shipman is an upper i
level manager,' in f act a General manager, who reports to the Vice President Vogtle Project, Ken McCoy.
l The following is a segment as stated on recordings of the conference call referenced in footnote 3.
j i
I Shipman ----- Lets see, what other questions have we got.
We got the start thing straightened out.
I Stringfellow -- The other question we had Bill was---
Hairston ---- We got the starta-- So we didn',t have no, we didn't have no trips?
Shipman --
No, not not Lat mm. I'll tantify to that.
Weeav l
nhir-n ----- Just disavaw.
Shipman ----- What else did we have Jack.
At this point the conversation shifts rapidly t t$lein J2 -
l PA g !.5 0F 5 8 P/S S(S) 1 l
l
- N O
subjects of the LER which Hairston continues to participate i
in.
1 Immediately it is apparent that Hairston was well aware of the diesel trips by his question "So we didn't have no, we I
didn't have no trips?" and therefore the falsehood in the LER.
J Nort we haar the "1MoKfMG GUN" avidanes_
i McCoy states to Mr. Hairston the strategy that he intends to use to deny the falso statement they are about to make.
McCoy will " testify" that he did not know it was falso since 1
Allen Mosbaugh had not talked to him. Shipman will l
" disavow". Sill Shipman, McCoy's General Manager over licensing, was just put on notice by Allen Mosbaugh (see i
below transcript), just 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> before, of the of numerous i
details of the diesel trips and he acknowledged the falsehood of both the LER and COAR statements. Realizing the i
liability of the brief exchange that has just occurred Bill Shipman rapidly shifts the conversation to other topics.
i Pat Mcdonald statements in the Petition response j
underlined above are outright lies to cover the I
criminal conduct of Hairston, McCoy, and Shipman.
L
[
Near the end of the conference call:
l' Aufdenkampe-- May 5111.
Shipman----- Yea j
i Aufdenkampe-- This is John. Are these all the changes we're going to make because l
I don't think there is anything substantial that needs a PRS?
l Shipman----
I won't make that guarantee, John.
i Aufdenkampe-- But OK, So I need to keep someone on j
standby to do that?
j Shipman----- Yes air you sure do.
Aufdenkampe-- OK, I'll have whoever is going to be on 4
standby give Jack a call, in case this thing i
drags on till 7:00 or 8:00 at night or something like that.
Shipman----
It's not going to be that long.
McCoy------
We'll be done with. this in about 30 minutes k
with the changes and we'll call you back and let you know and you can make a judgment i
on whether we have to go back to the PRS.
I This sets the. time frame for the call as just prior to i
the final signing by Hariston and indeed the one referenced from Footnote 3 of GPC's response.
4 M
PAGE _4 0F SB Pf32(S)
-.+m--.
6 4
.e.
a,a_m-E em
.a.&
Mw. soe4 a
--w..---
-v.-
+
As further evidence of Hairston's and SONOPCO's prior knowledge of the Diesel trips and failures that made the LER statements falso is the following segment of another tape recording, originals of which are in the NRC's possession. This call contains documentation of part of the actions of the "LER coordinator" described in SONOPCO's petition response on page 3 middle paragraph.
Allen Mosbaugh places this call to Bill Shipman on 4-19-90 approximately.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> before the above call with Mr.
Hairston and puts senior SONOPCO personnel on notice of the falso information in the LER. Known participants on this call are Shipman, Mosbaugh, and Stringfellow.
Shipman --- Hello Mosbaugh--- Yeah This is Allen Mosbaugh.
Shipman --- Hey Allen. This is till Shipman.
Mosbaugh--- Say Bill.
Shipman---- Are you where you can talk for a minute.
Mosbaugh--- I am.
Shipman --- Great. I-Helpt Mosbaugh--- OK Shi pman--- The, uh, LER, uh, we ' re, we ' re, you know,
we're trying to get, you know, all Mr.
Hairston's questions answered.
j Mosbaugh--- Right Shipman --- Uh, there are 2 things, uh, I guess, uh George has ask us to, you know, to find out and I guess you, you were probably at the 4
time talking to Jack----
4 A discussion proceeds discussing the first Hairston question which regards operator responses when they first l
arrived at the Diesel generator room.
~
Below Hairston shows awareness of the start information l
controversy in that he has ask for assurances on the start data.
Shipman---
OK and of course the other question we have i
been trying to get an answer to is to reassure George that we had more than 20 valid starts since, you know, since March 20, like we say in the LER.
j Mosbaugh--- Yeah, You realize I think there's a problem i
with the way that's' stated because you know the machine -- we can-,you know, we've cot one of.the guys trying to find what the total number of valid starts is, but there were failures.
s l
Shipman---
Yeah. The problem that we got, Allen, is that the data that's in the LER is what George wrote and took and told to g g i
PAGE_ f F 76 PNRS) 0 L
V
4 i
i Ebnetter last Monday in Atlanta.
1 Mosbaugh--- Well, you know, if anybody said that there J
weren't any. f ailures, then, you know, that's just not true.
I Shipman--- Well if you look at George's outline that he made to take to Atlanta with him, he says at that time it was like 18 or 19.
1 Mosbaugh--- Yes.
i i
Shipman---- And without a failure.
l Mosbaugh--- Mm.
Shipman---- So you know somebody had given George that i
infc mation.
i Mosbaugh--- On the B--
Shipman---- Have we had a failure since George l
went to---
?
l Mosbaugh -- No.
j Mosbaugh -- On the 8---Let me tell you what I know.
On the 8 machine, on the 8 machine on 3-22 at 12:43 the machine tripped on h1 lube oil f
temperature.
Shipman --- Caused by what?
Mosbaugh--- Caused by the switch that gives you high lube oil temperature probably.
j Shipman--- No. I understand that, but did we not have i
a---
l Mosbaugh--- I don't believe that a high temperature physical condition existed. I believe---
Shipman---- Was that a valid-- considered a valid failure?
Mosbaugh--- I haven't assessed these for being valid or i
not.
Shipman---- You see, because I could, we could solve the problem created by that information by saying "no valid failures".
Mosbaugh---Let me find I think we've got one other one. It is on 3-23 at 17:31, Machine tripped on low-- this is B machine again--
on low Jacket water pressure slash low turbo t
i lube oil pressure low.
Shipman --- OK, the first one was on what date did you say?
Mosbau gh---
1-22 Shipman---- OK, How you know with that data?--- I think this thing has already been thru the PRS a couple of times-- Mow the world did it get thru the PRS t-Mosbaugh -- What's that?
Shipman---- The statement.
Mosbaugh--- The LER or--?
Shipman---- Yea the LER.
Mosbaugh--- Well I mean--
i Shipman---- Did that data-- was that not available in the PRB7 Mosbaugh--- The previous time that this LER went thru SOEF R 6 0FSC P.'.EIR l
the PRS, I'm not sure those statements were in there.
Shipman---- Yes, Jack says yes they were.
Mosbaugh--- They were?
Shipman---- Yes.
'Stringfellow-In fact, the last PRS added the parenthetical phrase "more than 20 times each". I say the last, not, today but the previous PRB.
Clearly Shipman has been put on notice by Allen Mosbaugh of very specific information that the diesel tripped and that the LER information is false.
Clearly Shigman realizes.the COAR was falso by his comments about the presentation to "Ebnetter".
Clearly Shipman recognizes that the LER is falso by his comment, "How the world did it get thru the PRS"?
Clearly Shipman is contriving a way to use " valid failures" 4
j to " solve the problem created by that information".
Further discussion ensues with Shipman and Stringfellow continuing to blame the PRS.
g I
Later on the same ca11:
Shipman---
So, you know, if there's anything you need i
to do to check to make sure the data you
]
have from Paul is correct and valid I would ask that you do that or if you feel very confident that it's correct now I just need i
to see what I need to do to about striking this statement.
Mosbaugh--- OK. I feel that this is the best, the best data there is and I believe it is accurate.
i I will verify that with Kochery though and I will pursue trying to get a conversation j
with the operator.
Shipman---- OK. Jack and I are going to leave here and walk down to Mr. Hairston's office to go over his comments and what we've been able to do with those and try to finish beating out what he wants to do with this thing.
The call ends shortly thereafter.
\\
Clearly Shipman and Stringfellow proceed to inform Hairston of what they have been told by Allen Mosbaugh. Thus, this j
additional evidence further shows that Hairston knew that the LER was falso hours before he signed it.
PQ 7 0F RPt/S(S) 4
-- ~
t i
A i
FALRE STATEMEAT NUMBER 3 i
l Specifically 50NOPCO's response makes great efforts to blame Allen Moscaugh for the errors and states on page 4 of their j
'j section IIS:
f
_ _ _ "Not until Anril 10 1990 dama it annaar that Mr Mambauah articulated for the hanafit of him mana-^- 7t that the a
i dianal aneine start enunt data contained in the IFR was j
inneeurata" i
i Clearly the transcript from FALSE STATEMENT NUMBER 2 1
above with Bill Shipman proves that Allen Moebaugh articulated for the benefit of his SONOPCO management detailed information on the diesel failures and therefore in 4
i the diesel count data statements and that his SONOPCO 4
management recognized the errors contained in the LER before j
it was signed on 4-19-90.
j As such GPC/SONOPCO's underlined statement is blatantly false.
FAlaf RTATEMENT NLBeaER a Specifically Georgia Power SONOPCO states on page 4 l
of iib of their response:
1 "To the autant Mr. Maahauch had cancarna abaut the auhat anea of the dec'= ant he had direct and 1---diata ability to chanaa the information enntained in it. Mia awn l
actions relative to the tFR estahliah thin fact. Indeed an j
reflected in PRa er--
7t review ahaut for ita ---tina No.90-l St. held an Anr11 1s. 1990 Mr. Maahmuah directed thraa GARDgga ta the draf t i FR. two of which ha directed na
" M 9Pv" werd chanaan. Ma. thereform. had an annertunity to ranuire any other carrection. Steilarly an Anril it 1990 in a talenhana ennvarmation hatwaan the mita ranemaantativaa j
and carnarata Offica ranramantativan. he had tha'eaaartunity to munaast carrective laneunaa but. annarantiv failed to de C
j And i
Fram naam E---
"ff an he naw allamaa. Mr. Maahauah truly had cancarna related to the eriainal I FR. him insetion l
gg Anr11 1a fat the PRa1. in the Anril it talenhana ennference. and his Anr11 20 ammian= ant from him Canaral ggggggG, aravida revised i FR 1aneumaa aravidad him nn=areum annartunitian to direct ravinian er to raviam the i
allenad "falaa statsmanta." This he failed to da.
i l
Again SONOPCO goes to great lengths to accuse Mr. Mosbsugh of insincere motives and to blame him for the errors.
j Clearly from the transcript from FALSE STATEMENT 3 above it can be seen that on a telephone conversation between i-site and corporate representatives Mosbaugh, Shipman, and Stringfellow, Allen Mosbaugh caused Mr. Shi met B 0FSB Pt.$S) i i
l-l l
1 conclude that corrective language (ie. complete deletion of the falso statement) was in order. Mr. Mosbaugh left with the understanding that the falso statement would be struck. He obviously did not have direct and immediate j
ability to change information in the LER since all corrections had to go thru SONOPCO personnel and only l
Mr. Hairston wouVd sign the final version.
/
4 i
Another example clearly showing the attempts of Allen Mosbaugh and other site personnel to put SONOPCO on
)
notice of the fa19e statement in the LER and to try to
" direct revisier. to" correct it is contained below from a conversation ' etween site and corporate personnel that o
l occurred ear'fier on 4-19-90.
Known participants are :
1 Jack St.ringfellow, John Aufdenkampe, Allen Mosbaugh I
Stringfellow-- But now you know it just dawned on me about what Allen was saying a minute ago, in other words, "And ne failures or problems have occurred on any pf these starts" Your saying that's not trea.
i Aufdenkampe-- Yes. I'm saying that's not true.
jl Stringfellow-- Oh Wonderful. OK Aufdenkampe -- Which is also be telling you that--
It's telling you something else I imagine.
Because you know this has been written to the NRC once already.
[
Stringfellow-- Yes I know. That's exactly what I was i
thinking.
t Here again SONOPCO personnel clearly recognize that both the LER and the Confirmation of Action Response letter signed by i
Hairston on 4-9-90 are false.
Below in a earlier segment of the same conversation on 4-19-90 with the same participants, John Aufdenkampe (who worked under Allen Mosbaugh) is conveying to SONOPCO 1
licensing the comments from the latest meeting of the Plant i
Review Board.
Allen Mosbaugh arrived late for the 4-19-90 PRB and missed the discussion of LER 90-006 and as such did not vote on it.
If Mosbaugh did indeed have the " direct and immediate ability
- to make changes to the LER on behalf of his organization or the PRS. he clearly did so as evidenced by the above reference conversations, and from the additional excerpt contained below.
Aufdenkampe -- The next page. On the 20 starts.
Stringfellow-- Yea Yea Yea Aufdenkamoe--- I'm struggling with that one.
Stringfellow---You struggle with that one, g
2_
pg 9 0F8 PlF(S)
i i
i j
Aufdenkamos--- I'm struggling with that one.
4 I'm trying to verify that still.
j stringfellow-- Oh, OK, Alright j
Aufdenkampe--- We think that's basically a Material falso i
statement.
j Stringfellow-- Really!
j Aufdenkampe--- Yea, well we know for a fact that the 8 diesel tripped at least once, after March 20 j
Mosbaugh------ Actually it tripped twice after March 20 or it had at least 2 separate problems.
Stringfellow-- Well do we need to take this more than 20 times each out?
J Aufdenkampe--
That's what we're thinking-----
Again in direct contrast to Georgia Power /SONOPCO statements throughout the underlined paragraph of page 4 and 5 of section IIB of the GPC response it is clearly seen that j
Allen Mosbaugh personally and using his staff tried l
(ultimately in vain) to get SONOPCO to correct the false statements in the LER before Mr. Mariston signed it.
Again the Site personnel recommend that the false statement l
should be "taken out" as evidenced by Aufdenkampe's last statement.
SONOPCO ignored these attempts so as not to expose the false l
statement already made to the NRC in the COAR on 4-3-90 by r
j Mr. Hairston and Mr. Hairston knowingly signed out a LER to j
the NRC containing false statements.
t GPC's reference to the " assignment from his General Manager" occurred only after Allen Mosbaugh provided to Mr. Sockhold a memo in writing exposing the falso statements in both the COAR and LER.
Again contrary to the GPC response, Mr. Mosbaugh performed his task of providing a revised LER promptly and accurately l
and by 5-15-90 a revised LER correcting the false information was PRS approved and in SONOPCO's hands but l
SONOPCO would never ' submit it.
j A revision with different wording of SONOPCO's choosing I
which changed the whole basis to " valid starts" would not be submitted until 6 weeks later.
To complete his assignment of " revising the alleged falso statements" Mr. Mosbaugh also issued an action item on 5-10-90 to George Sockhold to determine how to correct the i
COAR. Bockhold closed the action item on 5-24-90 but failed I
to correct the errors in the COAR until 4-30-90 and then only under pressure from the NRC.
i Again as exhaustively detailed above, the sworn statements l
in the underlined paragraph above signed by Pat Mcdonald are l
falso by both omission and commission.
l l
FALaE STATEMENT NLBdRER E Specifically GPC/SONOPCO response III.3,IID., page y
P4(E # OFRPAES) l
L t
)
i i
first paragraph (referring to the draft transmittal letter dated 6-29-90 07:55 and 6-29-90 11:42).
"In both i n s tanean. the draft transmittal lattar ownlaina that if the canart had stated "auhamauant to the avant" 1
i rather than "muhmanuant to the tant nraaram." the iso would have baan canaistant with the Aar11 e PMAa and the "ta" i
and " 1 s
- numha ra included in the trapanarancima nrevidad hv I
GPC to the NRc on Anril 9.
Thia is a carraet stat----t.
j This statement is falso by omission and/or commission.
First as is proven from the draft transmittal letters i
themselves, the text explains a lot more than "11 the report j
had stated subsequent to the event" the text states "The LER dated April 19 inadvertantiv stated " Subsequent to this j
test program, DGI A and DG18 have been started at least 18 times each and no failures or problems have occurred on any i
i of these starts" and "The report should have stated j
" Subsequent to the event... "IA1hAE 1hAD " Subsequent to the a
test program..."."
i GPC uses this omission to avoid explaining their falso i
claim of an " inadvertent error" in the transmittal letter.
1 i
Selow is a portion of the transcript from the telephone conference call late in the afternoon of 4-19-90:
I i
Bockhold---- From my numbers that I presented at the l
at the conference. They were verified correct by Jimmy Paul cash who went thru the operator logs.
l McCoy------- We ought, you ought to use those numbers.
l Bockhold---- OK so we'll c*y greater than those numbers i
that were used in the conference.
McCoy------- OK and those nunoers you used were used in the conference were af ter they had completed l
the comprehensive test of the control system on each diesel.
Bockhold---- That is correct. Those numbers were not before that time.
l Stringfellow-OK I just want to make sure I'm clear. You r
want to say that between 3-20 and now DGI A and DGIS have been subjected to a i
comprehensive test program.
Do we want to say that kind of stuff?
i
{
Or do you want to say--?
i Bockhold---- Yes. You can say that.
l A moment later:
l l
Shipman----- 18 and 19. What did you have in your presentation George? 17 and 18 or 18 and 19 Bockhold---- 18 and 19 l'
Shipman ---- So if we say greater than 18 we - W y-I p g // OF 78 PA33%
i
t
+
8tringfellow-! thought we had more than is times.
Bockhold---- Greater than 18 would be good.
McCoy------- It wouldn't be more than 18 on one of them it would be 18-----
As shown by the transcript from the above telephone conference call (referenced by GPC's Footnote 3) the final wording " subsequent to the test program" was act inadvertant, was discussed specifically and in detail as being consistent with April 9, 1990 presentation. Despite the fact that Shipman and Stringfellow had been put on notice by Allen Mosbaugh that the April 9 presentation was falso and they had acknowledged that it was false, they and Bockhold and McCoy proceeded to usher in words to the LER that are as falso as the April 9 presentation.
t FALSE STATEMENT MUMBER 8 Specifically GPC response III.3 page 4, first full paragraph.
At that time. he was manianad_ in writina. to corraet the NRC daa - 7tation (Fwhibit 71. Ha. therafare. was tankad with carrectine the inaccuraev which his Techniem1 Runnart aroun had created by aunaline " mere than 20" timma" wordina to the careerata Offica.
This statement is false. Allen Mosbaugh was not task with correcting any inaccuracy associated with the "more I
than 20" words because the "more than 20" words were not l
used in the LER and they were not the basis of the actual i
"at least 18" statement contained in the LER. As can clearly be seen from the transcript f rom FALSE STATEMENT NUMBER 5 I
the basis of the words in the LER was the decision and i
desire of McCoy, Shipman, Bockhold and Stringfellow as a minimum to use the same false start count as was in the l
April 9 presentation. The GPC response continuously tries to distract attention from the facts, the truth, and themselves j
by attempting to focus on and blame Allen Mosbaugh for y
j SONOPCO's lies.
g COMCLUSION This is but a sampling of the falso statements contained in u
GPC/SONOPCO's response to the Mosbaugh/ Hobby 2.208 petition, C
but from these examples alone (the lies of Pat Mcdonald and p
the actions of the responsible Officers and senior s
management of GPC/SONOPCO) the cerduct is so dishonest and i
fundamentally untrustworthy, that shey should be removed
{
from authority over any NRC Licensed Nuclear Power activities in GPC/APC/SONOPCO in the interest of public safety.
l f-ff-fl i
l 1
. - -