Text

Requests NRC Take Action on Outlined Problems & Provide Status of Investigations Into Previous Complaints.Encls Partially Deleted
	ML20115F978
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	02/13/1989
From:	; AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	Habinghorst P; NRC
Shared Package
ML20115F670	List: ML20115F882; ML20115F978; ML20115G532;
References
	FOIA-91-162 GL-82-12, NUDOCS 9210230293
	Download: ML20115F978 (15)
	v • d • e

. - _

. \

f February 13, 1989 Mr. Peter Habinghorst Resident Inspector !

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Millstone Unit 17 Waterford, CT As promised in my le'.ter of December 30, 19083 I am continuing to supply you instances of non-compliance on the part of Northeast Utilities.

In addition I am requesting the N.R.C. take action on the below outlined problems and request a status of .

investigations into previoua complaints V.tich culminated in my December 30, 19 88 letter'.,

I.R. 87-29 Section 7.5 page 13 titled License Amendment No.

106 - Control of Overtime states the following:

"1f 7 days are worked, then the following weekend would be scheduled as of f for the individual." l Such a statement is attributed to the Unit Superintendent socaking on behalf of N.U. on December 3, 1987.

The basis for such a statement is apparently license ame-dnent 106 to T.S. 6.2.29 and Generic Letter 82-12.

Thi; coupled with the NRC natoty evaluation supporting such an amendment suggents that NEO 1.09 " acceptably implements Generic Letter 02-12.'

Even a cursory-review of Unit II Electrical Maintenance personnel work schedule (as well .sa other departments such as Operations and I&C) will quickly relegate such

" revolutionary" and " dangerous" promises to the museum of irrelevant activity.

As is obvious. from the attached schedule any particula:

indivicual will work a 7 day schedule every other week and-will only be allowed one day off the following weekend. So much for the significance of stated policies and procedural compliance.

In addition-the 72 hour8.333333e-4 days 0.02 hours 1.190476e-4 weeks 2.7396e-5 months per week requirement of N.E.O.

1.09, A.C.P.-l.19 and Generic Letter 82-12 is routinely violated as was the case in.my work schedule.for the period February 5 through February 11, 1989 having worked 75 hours8.680556e-4 days 0.0208 hours 1.240079e-4 weeks 2.85375e-5 months .

92102302tJ 92032S PDR -FOIA PDR' QUILD91-162 j$

. _. __. . __ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

Such routine violations' placer the statement contained in IR 87-29 p 13 " failure to control and approve ertime in accordance with N.E.O. 1.09 violates TS 6.2.29, on the ash heap of silly ideas and must clearly be a product of the enain store mind.

I am sure you will agree that past problems which I have addressed to the NRC have received a loth 4.c and ism commonly indifferent treatmen* and ooze of the en* . sered at all, associated with passionate celebacy. If they contain the depressing aime t obligatory statement "that no safety violations existed" even when safety violations are not the issue.

The many complaints culminating in my Decembar 30 letter have added to my belief that their is no overwhelming enthusiasm on the part of the NRC to take the lead in the investigation of employee complaints or in the regulation and enforcement of Nuclear Satety issues.

The NRC continues to articulate ambigut.us and equivocal solutions which contribute to the exacerbation of difference. Their quasi-acceptance of company positions convinces me that in the politically sensitive off-white arena of Nuclear Power the NRC does not represent the i crimson and gold of aggressive enforcement and insistence on procedural compliance.

Thie verbalizing of insignificant speech with no pedigree and no accountability not only antails loss of clarity but adds s;as. 4 antly to the intellectual disorder of our times, This lack of inver,tigation, enforcement and follow-up action as requiced by IR 87-29 has convinced me that the NHC is unwilling to represent public safety'and public interest, and solutions may have to be sought elsewhere.

I will of course continue to keep you advised of any future problems, i

z w .

e kb-lces ,9& ll} )//c,, A4, Stere. L cc- .x.AsAe2) t r-n s 0o yo lst-k-oool s,

bm H~wL~p ( e/1 )I v

i

..E. Men.'y<< . ; ..,,, ;.,;3 g, g [g .

s 5h/tz, ea. ,

l .' .f.;u' La.e b w ep Q .r ey ;

S. ('e / A f ~

y n, i

' S. br y, AllA C4 e

b. SArapsI,'et,

b.Lef/s, OE

..b. H/,f, 1 ceic~

...-.......-.= . . . . .

k

2) -

0( y

9) lllejus vi ll /e ebd! a we %'y, h//$ win; /b rer/mse A ch-~., &

\

. }

1

11RC MILLST0ffE OFFICE P02 /

AUG 24 '89 15:16 . . - . . . . . , . .. .... . . . . . . - . . . .

. 6 6 6. s . w.. ., e. . ,

,' R1 1210.1/0 g{

i ALLEGATION RECE1PT REPORT

/' Date/ Time Received: LIGDST 2h(489 4'@pM Allegation No.

3 (Itave blank)

Wrie: ,

Address: _ _

Phone. Ci ty/5t' ate / Zip:,_,

Confidentiality Requec',ed: Yes NoX Implied ~~

$ O/Nf65Y-int thes .

Position m tie ma6nce ._.

Glechtcta n Facility: IkorlP,1 Docket No.: 90-33(, _

( Allegation Sum: nary (brief description of concern (s): (7) A C

'ad-had ' Iwk med haahu J& ktke.

Qf LQ__bl VH L29/Zl D IV11 J)icko (1)6Vmaktb1 -

u N.mber of Concerns: h E ployee Receiving Allegation: ? 7 hAbf4 fl0/

i (first two in'itials and last name)

! Type of Regulated Activity (a) [ Reactor (d) _ Safeguards

! (b) Vendor (e) ,_,Other:

(c) _ Materials (specif y.)

l _

Materials License No. (if applicable):

Functional Area (s): [(a) Operations e) Emergency Preparedness b) Construction _((f) Onsite Health and Safety (c)~5afeguards [(g} Off site Health and Safety

[((d) Transportation _(h)Other:

I

(.i' -

(NRC Region 1 Form 207 7 ,

Revised 6/84) r1

/ /

A3-2 .

g wrm 9 g i. l .Q l

~ * =

J l l l l l -

l l l l l g i

s.

!s: f i ; _

i h

_ __ _ _ _ .._ ~f O

_ & ~-_--

l if it i I!

a _r IE e

Q j g g, -

r2 g

g, _,

$ j -~~-~ g y g =,.l ~ a mles i s

n -

= :

- E s # =

h. :

~ y ~ yb n ~

. 1 3 e es a

8 ;; J 5 1 5 e e .s .S 1 = g ,:

5 5. k j hI g 5 g -i

$ -5 E e os

~

j E 4 a s i= 1 w& i '.3 0 g 5 ;

i

~

ig-Eg e s -

t o o E : 7 l k ND 5 M N h O W $

h-EE ~

30 h # $ 4

[s' h 5

5 0

!a o *

> -~

r_

r0 o_o No I

s

=

~

=

5 O

-Eg -

8 G Y $ [ B %

J 4 4. g g i E l-

__ : 5e G E I

1 : 1e!

8: t^& s R

a s

= e E5 a s.

i ! -

% %e

.b s - : as!= x EE-

.. 7 , s = = -

.h ll V Vf N g : :

E r

,h

1 i d d % N L h_

! = 3,

_ - - 3- _

F0d 331330 3H0!STilW 3'dH 21:91 68, #3 0(10

E689 Ekk 203

.. 265~m5^40w ilfG p4 *89 15218 HRC MILLSTONE-0FFICE.

. P05 ;

3

.......... ...... D N M AI N T E... N.A.N . .C E - _M A N. A G E.M E.N. . . . . .

1 AGG twc. vts u n 0: K 5ffev>ot< COMn.FTION DATE: 2. ' U AllUAL WR6! AliMA81C-/ PARTS USED: b. A.kl_ . R. . .L. y5_ p_g_ _P_ b_. .c.A, _. ._ _h_ _..s. _r_4_/_</

i Mh4..ccmn.. aa._.4. -/ 4. fp_A/A.. .C_pi.t. 4_. /. .. _. %_ . _ _i_ _.D. . A_s. A__J_ _.;l>. _

_6_T_ar I_f.%_ .~#n_

_#lY.. &_ .'." W.fi_*.Y._ _il q' % _=yI' k _.%

^

.D G 'id gd .. pryuty,...B'_' -_t_J_i._.) _ . _ _ .. .

Ce2_(v. .. . *. . . . ~.< t.<. .

CAUSE OV UPOlfi E M: _ D.._.._ _ 4_ _ _ ._ 4. . d.if0..T.._O f. b_ __. N _ M____ _ _ __.

_ _ _ _ . . . . . _ _ _ _ . ..._........ .._.. __.. .. .__ _ .._ .~.. __ FAILURE 00DE: _.

DCLMG . COMhT.NT S : /5A.o. .a_..b. _ Cb_ _) v* _ . W- .C.L.a. . .v} . . g'. 3.'.'b.

i<_%_ E_' _'i_'s_ _.S. _w_ _f.d_ .$

tJc.m. (.ef.I

/..M. .. N7_; . '- <)_ su. .fb.Cf.. . .. 9E _..n. 17%w- _l. p.. . 3. _. (%. *, **l.'.

./r;;'Gr4..

_ DEL Av' CCDh PERFORMFD _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . . _ . . . ,

IW : ....... __,. .__ _ _ . . . - . . . . . , , . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .

SPECI AL E9UIPMENT ,,,,_1,_.,_____.,__,,__,_,,,_,_,,__,,_,____,,_______,__.

I SCRI Al. NUMf4CP: _____.__.._____..__m.... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . .

CAL DUE DATE: / /

/ /

WORF/1NEPECTTON COMPLETE JOP-SUPV: D -

_ , , , _ DATE: s_ . / *

. . . * * *

n . . . s . u . . . . . *

n a a w e n a * * *e * * *

e + + e a . + e . + e a + * * * + e * *

u * *

n . . . a . . -

RETEST /FUNCT IDNAL VERIF1C ATION MCIHOD - F ROC ET URE : FUNCTIONAL i -PREREO/INIT COND . OEI

! INSPECTIGN PLAN: _ _ , , SM NCR'S CLEARED: _ _ , ,

i L 1 PERS. QUALIFIED: , , _ , ,

i N l 1 EQUIPMENT CAL: _ _ , , f _ _ _ ,, ,

i NOTIFY ISI: 1-f PRECAUTIONS: i GTHER: _____________ 1_ _ , . , , _

ACCEPT LETTER!A: INUFCR OPERATION t !

! I TESI' PERFORMED CYt _ __ _ _ ,,,,,_ ,,,,,,_ ,,.,,,,_ ,,_ _ __,,_ _ ,_ _ _ _ D E P T : , _ ,,, ,, _ _ _ D AT E : __ / .

RETAGGED FOR WORK COMPLETION: _ , _ _ _ _ , . , _ _ , , , , , _ _ _ _ DATE: __./ _

a , e , * * . * * * * * + , * * * * * * * * *

e * * *

n . .. . . . . u u u e a e . .

a * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * , * , .. + .

TAGS CLEARED: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . , _ , , , , _ , . _ W.U. TA6 REMOVED: ,___ ____ TIME:

! If PDCR: ENGR RELEASE FOR OPERATION: , _ _ _ , , , , , , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , , , _ DATE: _<

(PLANT ENGINEER)

ACCEPTED RY OPS: .. ,, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,_ _ _ _ _ ,__,_ _ _ _ _ DATE: __ _

PMM5 PLANNER: , _ _ _ , _ _ _ . , , _ , _ _ , _ , , _ _ , _ _ , , _ _ , . , _ _ _ _ _ , , DATE: _ . _ ,

v m_

a._. . .-

(1 Q? 7:

$l Ma /c, x./A L. z. . Lz ..r i. a - ea r , ,f y _

/Efr9 : _

s. c./S,s J~ bee r b*llcrerbs f

5. Bu.-

~

A . .%,J. , e

/. Ses/ n ac ho whdye- J /e //e.- -b de a l/ejee e r, 4, ., .:. WJ ',

me Ls dese e n c e. ,,., , Lr ,c{c- ) d.- s A c ,ce, e , l ~ : // f,- .. J /de /,euscar k./ys (e c 6 p/2/rr),

iv.h : 7te Afe, w:# fe// de aJa,.,- A use Me /, c .-re .,

[ a n. If Md syrfa., is < # a dey J a, a //a, u a cak.s ysfe s .4 we r,rr, , s 1 e. o ,

m

/~, n in J y Je.

L l 1 fr.a.de de /,zf f ~ fe y s ene n.,s 6 da dwrae l $ h, ewc- dd ay ha - < Me /. .,f A./ .mec Ls . h ;C /4 ,o n. & ,in r ~. f' ,-, A- M u A A '/, s . 4byr.

3.. I+ is de ;o1% pcdA e,f de Ait c ni- ~/ dAyk-(orn) y a def ' s /7 A .*n I MJ desa /s .rv .,

are oJ ~/pa%s, as de ac/ 17 de A' J ed.,,/m L

N _ 4, e Cm et w,' f F-ec cmve*,e, Cr 5 /l e c e r.C , b resofm tl<'s cas e .

7/

u

//'))h I' - _ _ _ _ . - _ _ . _ . _ _ _ - _ _ __. ____.- _ _ - __ _ ---_-__-___ _ . _ _ . .

yf *rm

~~

.-r;. 9; - . NQ . .. .

'.,f, . . .. *: ' V2,dgig,@zfy.

QLKWJEe Cts.LQ c;. .

w ,

NI,k $ <? . 4. NFi E.', h ,

4 .-

. . . - W e p- Q g.

"

2 M 8 d h h N $ $ h N A ,0. % i.7U

.2 ilkfk. alt'1 EL NG 4 ,. .. . . c ,,

YJd,Ar.h. ALLEGATION, PAN

.. .-g- * .3 e -

1 +J . . ..# x . '. . ,

HILLSTONE UNIT *2' k1MYhew *2 $$*'k*Ch v .a, .. n * '

^ *

+ "

c -

7/12/89 CSAS NA 7/19/89 ,_EXCORE/.INCORE 11A .,., . .

,,.,1 ',,,,,

8/18/89 HETRASCOPE NA -GieW8 , ifpg8h-.j,. -

i'. .

8/21/89 NA ,,, e.m"

~

8/22/89 Nr' a .

S 35ElsML'U(A79T-4

~

' R%'A RPS GROUNDING IS ADDRESSED IN THE REPORT' ; j,y e ..

8/4/89

- NA 8/14/89 1. EHT AND SP-EE076 ARE ADDRESSED IN THE REPORT',,1-',-

2. NA

3. SP-EE076 IS ADDRESSED;IN THE REPORT, NOT'NECR'IM Y THESE SPECIFIC ISSUES BUT" THE GENERAL APPLTCAM ~

s TO HILLSTONE UNIT. 2_agg ~t, ..

4LTHRU .10 ARE THE SAME"Ast3. i: ff- -

'Y A ~ ',

11. - ADD,,.R.ES.S. ED ' IN. TH.E; m . . . . -

. ny,1%.f. AY;A.IR. o . COMPRES v d_ r. .,gn SOR. .G.ROUND . Q*f~ , -*- :

7t' pg,9

13. THRU'15 ARE THE SAME AS'43..

~

' s ,'

16 .,m: _ u ,7. .

M% - . . . *g,y,1hL ,.TERUl9;ARE'ADDR.Eb

- . g20.hJlA j

ar 6

(. yOR ,,

4. A h..

m..., ,

- g. a - ? - r 5 .e a -i g " k$s*

W4. . . . < , p.m:

. -:yu '. . , :. r . '

+. ~ a. g .

,^

.. i -

~

v.s:N.Tk

. s. : s ..

44

' U. n -as-

- 5].ksq ' _.

6 h

.-Y ,,5

& ', 4 . e y

.4 ,

g ,; 3 - , - , si ,, . , ..*'. ; N.. 4 7,5 , ,

LL28?%287:231iis Y.

b* $

. . . . . _ _ . . - , . . . .._ m N

,,,,,,,,,,, _v CHAIRMAN KENNETH CARR- m, US NUCLEAR REGULATORT COMM!$$!ON OFFICE OF THE COMM!ll!0NERS MAIL STOP He1149 WASHINGTON DC 20555 s

NORTHE AST W'ILITIES COMP ANY AT TWEIR > ATERFORD, CONNECTICUT.

. MILT lTONE UNIT 4 PCutR PL ANT,

AT THE COMPLET!ON OF THE TEST! MONY WE WERE ALLURED BY MR JACQUE P.

p0RR LE ADER of THE !NVEST!GAf!ON TEAW AND CHIEF 0F EN6!NEERING SRANCH-Oty!$10N OF REACTOR SAFETY, AND l!NCE TMA1 TIME AGAIN SY MR CHESTER l WHITE OF THE OFFICE OF INVESTIG ATION THAT INDEPENDENT REY!EWS WOULD OCCUR HEG ARDING ALLEGAf!ONI OF WAR AllWENT, INT!v!D AT!ON AND DIS 0mjm! NATION, 1M18 REVIER Rat 10 FOLLOA A LOM8LETE 310DY OF Y-MR DURR TO MR WHITE TE&T! PONY TRAN6CRIPTSJUD70lEDLY FCR=ARDED f *!I ACT!ON Wil 14MEDI ATELY FOLL0n!No M CONF!RM&D TC H AVE T AgEN PL ACE ON AT LEAlf 0-0CCAll!0NS DURING CONVERI Ai!ONS n!TM MR DURR AND !N AT LEalf DNE CONVERS ATION u!TH MR WM!TE, Al OF 160C HOURS ON AVGVli 16, 1989 NO $VCN REY!EW HAS TAKEN -

PL ACE AND ND 8JCM ODCUMENT4 H AVE BEEN RECE!VED BY PR WHITEft 0F!CE.

TME REN ATING ON SUCM PROM!lEl BY MIGW PUBLIC 0FF!CI ALS' 18 NOT ONLY LNa0RTHY OF THE NRC BUT BRINGS IN10 SER10US QUESTION-S0TH THE-INTEGRITY CF YOUR AGENCY AND THE!R COMMIf WENT TO THE PR0f tCT!0N OF THE. PUBLIC AND COMPL! ANCE W!ik FEDER ALL,Y W AND ATED L AWS. .

WE REI'llIFVhbY PlGWCit THAT Y9V hEND THE MEST!st GF YQUM SFFitt AND mRECI A!ON At C OMMI5 A!cNER to A00Rtas tW!l (ACK OF ACTION ON THE PART ChTHENRCe RESPECIFULLY 20:07.EST HGHCOMP 1

~

1CO---004688- )

h , lb ; L /C

, f [ +/Y99 1,

ENCI4SURE (1)

1. August 4, 1989

a. for relocation of an A Plant Design auxiliary Change building Evaluation space (PDCE)ied the incorrect power heater identif supply breaker and did not reflect the as-built configuration.

Licensee maintenance supervision was notified of this concern by theresidentinspector}

b. A blue worker control tag was used intead of a red danger tag to control wor) on a heating and ventilation fan in the fuel handling building. J to be hung on the breaker,

c. Four hoses were found not connected when the top hat and anti-rotation device were removed from the space main coolant pump motor. The alleger raised concerns regarding quality control, receipt inspection, and non-compliance with plans and specification. Licensee was notified of the concerns.

2. August 14, 1989 Concerns were raised regarding compliance with utility specification SP-EE-076, lubrication program ommiss ons, and inaccurate preventive <

maintenance requirements in general.

We note that utility specification SP-EE-076, National Electric Code, is not applicable to those facilities necessary for the generation of electrical power by utilities. Also, the specification at applies only to Millstone Unit 3 at present.

3. August 23, 1989 A ligatipq panel breaker which was red (danger) tagged OPEN was found closed, i

4. September 5, 1989 The power supply for a wall outlet in the Radiological Waste Storage Facility (MRRF) was incorrectly identified in a plant design change evaluation (PDCE) and a piping and instrumentation diagram (P&ID) .

I

~~

j _

/)

1. MILLSTONE 2 ALLEGATION FOLLOWUP INSPECTION RESULTS On October 11, 1989, the NRC issued inspection report 50-336/89 3 con-cerning aUnit Millstone series of allegations 2 employees. made over the past two years by 7' These allegations concerned a number of safety and regulatory issues as perceived by the allegers which had not been properly resolved by the Northeast Utilities management. The allegers were interviewed by the NRC over a three day period in June 1989 to further define and clarify the allegations and these interviews were transcribed. A seven person team performed an inspection at Millstone nit 2 July 10-21, 1989 to resolve technical issues raised by the allegers.

)

.- J There were 130 separate allegations of which 18 were beyond the scope of the inspection. Since some allegations were duplicate, 77 separate issues were inspected. The inspection substantiated 34, and partially substan-tiated 24 allegations. Fourteen allegations were unsubstantiated and three were indeterminate.

Some of the substantiated issues resulted in five violations which deal with 1) multiple examples of failure to follow procedures 2) lack of seismic documentation for an electrical conduit run 3) technicians using outdated drawirp 4) failure to functionally test a radiation monitor alarm and 5) improper control of overtime. None of the violations, either singularly or collectively, represented a major safety issue. The licen-see was criticized for failure to take a pro-active stand concerning the allegations, and the allegers were criticized for failing to make use of the licensee's corrective action systems. The team concluded that future allegations of this nature should be referred to the licensee for disposi-tion, and the NRC should do periodic followup of the adequacy of licensee actions.

Since the allegers had gone to the news media with their allegations earlier in 1989, there was considerable interest by the news media regar-

. ding the NRC inspection results, Articles appeared in the Hartford Courant, the New Haven Register, and the New London Day with quotes from the alleger, the licensee, and the NRC. The licensee expressed satisfa-ction with the report stating they would take corrective actions. The allegers expressed some dissatisfaction with the outcome in that they thought the NRC should have taken more forceful actions with the licensee.

.. ~ ,

SEP 07 '89 09:00 NRC MILLSTONE OFFICE P06

. . . . . . . . ~ s s a s .~a.. s .o er $....-....................

4 '

RI 1210.1/0 -

J , / k .____

ALLEGATION RECE1PT REPORT f.' q

,4 u cent

/, , j $

gz.

Date/T1nt 0 Received: JEprtusse 5 / N '.00a.M. Allegation No. 8 -

(Jeave blank)

Name: Address:

i Phone: _

City / State / Zip:_

Confidentiality Requested: Yes Nol Irp1ted A11eger's Erployer: .h6M4pg Orit the 5 j"

_ Position /Titie: ,

NE( 4Aut r A L __ ~

Ei,eutscraV Facility: iubicut 7 Docket No.: 50-3 % *

(Allegation Sumary (brief description of concern (s): O WR000 _ _ _ _

Tower $0% y iCEAmrieATio+) ie "THE 'PDcE uP2 - B1-ou piRRF futDigs) uooipicut,o,3 4% MW h biV6_isA Rector

'hAb WoTE 6TG O%E FAc t t t rw . S EE KtHo ArrM MED Fo e.

Fue.Tu EE INFoc MTic.J _

Nsmber of Concerns: i Employee Receiving Allegation: PJ.bicM5r (first two initials and last name)

Type of Regulated Activity (a) 1 Reactor (d) _ $afeguards (b) Vendor (e) ~ Other:

, (c) ~ Materials (Specify)

Materials License No. (if applicable):

Functional Area (s): 1(a) Operations _ (e) Emergency Preparedness

(b) Construction ~ (f) Onsite Health and Safety (c) 'Sa feguards _ (g) Offsite Health and Safety

_ (d) Transportation _(h) Other:

. (NRC Region 1 form 207 Revised 6/84) y A3-2 l .3

~NOV 0T';S9 T3T5T t4RC t11LLSTOt4E UFF1CE P05 . . _

. . . . - . .. .. . . Q- ~.;

mumum uu wnrwm - utacm . '

.RI-1210.1/0' '

Q' L ALLEGATION RECEIPT REPORT

' ., , e g-M,M ee hN46 3 / 9.'4'04 m, Allegation No,~ *

, (leave blank)

Name: Address:

Phone: City /5t' ate / Zip: -

Confidentiality Requested: Yes Nol Implied _ "~

ye of MS-f- hk fl /86- ' Position /

Title:

' _b!ff /ICl4/l (Medwcd) ,

Facility: N7Iff5b/lO Docket No.: Id'N 0 (Allegation Sumary (brief description of concern (s): bd W O.

Nsmber of Concerns: [

Employee Receiving Allegation: ?J hbi4 ldf5 I ~

-(first two' initials and last name)_

Reactor (d) Safeguards Type of Regulated Activity (b)

(a) [ Vender -(e) _ Other:

(Specify)-

(c) [ Materials Materials License No. (if applicable): _

Functional Area (s): ((a). Operations ,__,_ e) Emergency Preparedness (b) Construction ) Onsite Health and Safety c)'5afeguards ) Offsite Health and Safety

~((d) Transportation _( ), 0ther: ,_ , , ,,

jij (NRC Region 1 Form 207 Revised 6/84)

A3-2 r/[ .))

k

, RECORD OF ALLEGATION PANEL DECISIONS

' SITE: [1:2 <ra r '] e - 1 PANEL ATTENDEES:

ALLEGAT10'i. NO,: D ' f- / - C00 3 7

Chairman - T \ -ef.m a, DATE: 1 ? /C /5 7 (Mtg.@2345) Branch Chief - C' ' J <- -c PRIORITY:- High ow ,1 Medium ( si. m Section Chief (AOC) - .? HA/ee m p SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE: Yes ('Nol Unknown Others - N . Da o t t .'

CONCURRENCE TO CLOSE00T: 00 BC h A dr..r CONFIDENTIALITY GRANTED: Yes c R f2 MMOOD (See Allegation Receipt Report)'T ~

IS THEIR A 00L FINDING: Yes (

IS CHILLING EFFECT LETTER WARRANTED: Yes No HAS CHILLING EFFECT LETTER BEEN SENT: Yes No HAS LICENSEE RESPONDED TO CHILLING EFFECT LETTER: Yes No ACTIOM:

s-6

1) A %Cm Sw"~ h L:M - -

th c L et win l:

U L M . - - _sh

2) Pde M4 4.v.- ' 4 w a _c

.w e

3) %Lv ei n ~ ~ ~~x- <~~-.a- . ._ . : m ,., _

c . .G 4) 5)

NOTES: IG " > 9f n Li a a v a.' n't :. i-m #? V M&yp

At. LEGATION RECEIPT REPORT d kJ V /k h S IWll Allegation N ' A~ OO ~ 0N (leave blank)

Name: ) Address:

~

Phone: City / State / Zip Confidentiality:

Was it requested?

Was it initially granted?

Yes No 1 Was it finally granted by the allegathn panel Yes Yes No

- No 1

Does a confidentiality agreement need so be sent to alleger? _

Yes No k Has a confidentiality agreement been signed? Yes No 4 Memo cocumenting why it was granted is attached? Ye:; No f Alleger's Employer: //mvrar$bct.tAtt Position /

Title:

' fl f(7/JC/Ad/

Entsv- (c'.

Facility: bf40 $ 76/'/ f f/IT Docket No.: 80- 33 [

(Allegation Summary (brief description of concern (s):

Cns a n sFiro w77H NC iR 50-1%/ 97-13 n LD SP-EEDR (L Ct.1 A'1ch. COW {.) tl $ C of M Ih (Lfst/IC4 WT4 T WdnC~

h h K ll CR At1 716i'iif TC lid 15[ loiv C(dd's ,?

Number of Concerns: 2 Empicyee Receiving Allegation: [ J //AdJ 6 #ff5I (first two-initials and last name) l Type of Regulated Activity (a) [ Reactor (d) _ Other: Safeguards I

(b) Vendor (e) ~

( , (c) __ Materials (Specify)

Materials License No. (if applicable):

1 Functional Area (s): a) Operations (e) Emergency Preparedness l

X(b) ( Construction (c) Safeguards f) Onsite Health and Safety-g) Offsite' Health and Safety l (d). Transportation (h) Other:

(NRC Region I Form 207 .

Revised 10/89) fn

v-L3

_-_ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - . -

ML20115F978

Text

Title:

Title:

Navigation menu

Search