ML20099H754
| ML20099H754 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 01/18/1985 |
| From: | Stokes C GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20099H479 | List: |
| References | |
| 2.206, NUDOCS 8503190481 | |
| Download: ML20099H754 (2) | |
Text
..,
Exhibit 11
,, u+.. - m w a
..w. m a,.,aaa:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the matter of
)
)
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC
)
Docket Nos. 50-275 t
COMPANY
)
50-323
)
(Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power
)
Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
)
AFFIDAVIT OF CHARLES C. STOKES Stote of ALA6AM A
)
0 ss county of Mousrou
)
City of doTHAV
)
Tho above being duly sworn deposes and says:
My name is Charles Stokes.
I am submitting this statement frcely and voluntarily without any threats, inducements and coer-cien to Mr.
Thomas Devine.
This affidavit raises additional ccncerns about the NRC staff's failure to honor the rules of its own j
Allegation Management Program, and about material false state-l Ccnts by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PGandE) in response to l
provious allegations I had submitted.
1.
PGandE f alsely stated that the American Institute of Steel Ccnstruction (AISC) has endorsed the analysis of Australian papers thot appear to support the use of structural steel " angles",
cince according to an AISC representative the Institute merely i
presented the papers and the AISC Specifications Committee has l
not met, discussed nor approved the use of the Australian papers.
hhg31
[5 DO l
0 1
t
= -
2.
PGandE falsely stated that the analysis in the Australian pcpers on structural steel angles is applicable for conditions at Dicbio Canyon; since the Australian analysis is based on " pure bending", which significantly underestimated the loads on the ottel, compared to the compression.and tension combined with b:nding at Diablo Canyon.
3.
I have never received any written confirmation of the ollegations I raiced to Region V, as required by their Allegation Menagement Program, although In October that region did provide written summaries of two a21egations I had made earlier to RCgion III and which were forwarded to Region V.
4.
Contrary to the thorough practices at Region III, Region V did not note in its report the corrections I made to the staff cnolysis in a June followup interview for my allegations on welding docign at Diablo Canyon, nor did Region V even note my rebuttal in its published findings, which led me to believe that my cccments were not considered and my time had been wasted through o ceaningless public relations gesture.
I have read the above two page affidavit and it is true, cccurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.
b _lA Charles C.
Stokes Sworn to and Subscribed before me is 18e day of Jan ary, 1985.
JAdAt Y
tary Puglic~
My commission expires: 6/10/86 2