ML20092H944
| ML20092H944 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/25/1984 |
| From: | Doroshow J THREE MILE ISLAND ALERT |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| ALAB-738, ALAB-772, NUDOCS 8406260313 | |
| Download: ML20092H944 (6) | |
Text
$bjh UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE COMMISSION QH E i,E' o mPu In the Matter of
)
)
'84 J0! 25 P2 :49 METROPOLITAN EDISION COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289
)
(Management)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
Station, Unit 1)
)
i TMIA MOTION TO LIFT STAY ON REOPENED HEARINGS AND RESPONSE TO LICENSEE REQUEST FOR STAY On October 7, 1984, the Commission indefinetely stayed ALAB-738, 18 NRC 177 (1983) which reopened the management record in this proceeding on allegations of pre-accident f alsification of leak rate data at TMI-2.
On November 7,1983, Metropolitan Edison Company was indicted by the United States Department of Justice on eleven counts of pre-accident f alsification of leak rate data and destruction of documents at Unit 2.
On February 29, 1984, Licensee pled guilty to one count and no contest to six counts of that indictment.
On May 2 4, 1984, the Appeal Board reopened the management record in this proceeding on, inter alia, allegations of leak rate f alsification at Unit 1.
ALAB-772.
On June 13, 1984, Licensee filed with the Commission a request for stay of ALAB-772.
A prehearing conference has been scheduled on the reopened proceedings for June 28.
TMIA opposes Licensee's request for stay and hereby moves that the stay on ALAB-738 be immediately lifted.
As to the stay on ALAB-738, there is no reason to continue denying the parties an opportunity to develop a record on this issue.
First, there are no longer criminal proceedings on-going or threatened on this issue.
1
((~) ?
0406260313 040625 PDR ADOCK 05000289 O
-)
Whereas on October 7 there were legitimate questions as to whether j
cperators would or could cooperate in NRC proceedings because of the then on-going grand jury investigation, these questions no longer
[
exist.
Second, as to the basis orginially asserted by the Staff and the Commission that the hearings should not proceed until OI's investigation was complete on the issue, it is TMIA's understanding that OI has now substantially completed its investigation on Unit 2 leak rate falsification.
It is also TMIA's understanding that the company has already commissioned a new investigation of these incidents.
Thus, while both the Staff and the Licensee have proceeded to investigate this issue, the very parties who obtained reopening of the record have so f ar been denied any opportunity to do so.
This is grossly unfair.
Third, the Licensing Board has scheduled a pre-hearing conference for June 28 on the issues reopened by ALAB-772.
At that time, hearing issues will likel-2e discussed and a discovery process may be determined.
Included in those discussion will be the Unit 1 leak rate issue.
It would be a foolish waste of resounces for the Board and the parties not to be allowed to additionally discuss the Unit 2 leak rate issue at that time.
Finally, the Appeal Board has already determined that it will be I
unable to "make any final judgement on appeal as to licensee's management competence and integrity without an adequate record [on the Unit 2 leak rate issue].
18 NRC at 190.
This ruling was not appealed, the Commission has not reversed it, and thus it remains legally binding.
Yet by its October 7 Order, a directive issued
purely on its own initiatve, the Commission has effectively reversed the effectiveness of the Appeal Board decision.
Unless the order is lif ted and hearings held in a timely f ashion, its actions can be considered of a least questionable legality.
The Commission must come to grips with the f act that the ALAB-738 ruling remains in effect despite what the Commission decides to so with ALAB-772.
Whatever legitimate grounds may have at one time existed to stay the "Hartman" hearings, there is no reason to continue denying the Licensing Board an opportunity to develop a record on this issue.
TMIA opposes Licensee's June 13, 1984 request for stay for the reasons outlined in UCS's opposition to be filed June 25,19C4.
In t
addition, TMIA simply notes that a remanded hearing on training is clearly called for.
The Appeal Board was entirely correct in finding serious deficiencies in the hearing record relied upon by the Licensing Board, such that there can be no assurance Licensee's training program is now reliable.
Second, the Licensing Board's conclusion regarding the "Dieckamp mailgram" was, by its own i
admission deficient.
The Board never questioned Dieckamp himself on j
the issue, despite earl'ier on the record observations regarding the necessity for doing so, and other observation such as that the I&E investigators leave the issue " dangling".
Further, the Board did no objective evaluation of the evidence whatsoever.
Third, there are significant conflicts in testimony throughout OI's Unit 1 leak rate investigation by people in important, safety related positions at TMI-1 today.
These conflicts go to the heart of the leak rate falisification issue.
The possibility that certain
t individuals in control of TMI-l's operation may have falsified data in the past, for whatever reason, and are now misrepresenting these material facts to NRC investigators, is a extremely serious issue which can only be resolved in the hearing process.
I Respectfully submitted, Three Mile Island Alert, Inc.
/
i foanne Doroshow June 25,1984 JLouise Bradford f
w l
t
~
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289
)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
Station, Unit No. 1)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the attached TMIA MOTION TO LIFT STAY ON REOPENED HEARINGS AND RESPONSE TO LICENSEE REQUEST FOR STAY dated June 25, 1984, were served this 25th day of June 1984, by deposit in the U.S. Mail, first i
class, postage prepaid, or, hand delivered where possible on June 25th to those on the attac ed service ist.
M OANNE DOROSHOW
(
i f
a 6
i h
i
, - - - ~ - -
-n,--,-,m,
-n-a,,-
- - -, -,,,. -, - -. - - _, ~ -
SERVICE LIST Chairman Palladino Commissioner Gilinsky U.S. N.R.C.
U.S. N.R.C.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Commissioner Bernthal Commissioner Roberts U.S. N.R.C.
U.S. N.R.C.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Commissioner Asselstine U.S. N.R.C.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Judge Gary Edles, ASLAB U.S. N.R.C.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Judge John H. Buck, ASLAB Judge Christine Kohl, ASLAB U.S. N.R.C.
U.S. N.R.C.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Ivan W. Smith, Esq., ASLB Sheldon Wolfe, Esq.
U.S. N.R.C.
U.S. N.R.C.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20515 Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr.
U.S. N.R.C.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Michael McBride Jack Goldberg LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae Office of Executive Legal Director 1333 New Hamshire Ave. N.W.
U.S. N.R.C.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Washington, D.C.i 20555 George F. Trowbridge, Esq.
Ms. Marjorie Aamodt Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge R.D.
5 1800 M St.
N.W.
Coatesville, PA 19320 Washington, D.C.
20036 Docketing and Service U.S. N.R.C.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Gail Phelphs Maxine Woefling PIRC De part. of Environ. Resources 1037 Maclay St.
514 Executive House, P.O. Box 2 357 Harrisburg, PA 17102 Harrisburg, PA 17120 Bob Pollard Dupont Circle Building Connecticut Ave.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Ellyn Weiss, Esq.
Harmon & Weiss 1725 Eye St.
N.W., Suite 506 Washington, D.C.
20006