ML20115G532

Partially Withheld Response to NRC Forwarding Insp Rept 50-336/89-13 Re Receipt & Handling of Allegations Involving Nuclear Safety Issues or Nuclear Concerns

ML20115G532
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	01/21/1990
From:	AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	Wenzinger E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20115F670	List: ML20115F882 ML20115F978 ML20115G532
References
FOIA-91-162 NUDOCS 9210260204
Download: ML20115G532 (11)

Text

_ . _ .

s January 21, 1990 Mr. Edward C. Wenzinger Chief Project Branch No. 4 Division of Reactor Projects Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406

Dear Mr . - Wenzinger :

In Ierponse to your letter of January ll, 199f with enclosed inspection report No. 50-330/89-13 we feel compelled to respoi.d to your suggestions and stated -f utur e policies of the-N.R.C.

regarding the receipt and handling of allegations involving nuclear saf ety issues and/or nuclear concerns. .-

Your stated intention to turn over to Northeast Utilities certain allegations, presents for us an unacceptable approach for the following reasons.

Such actions on. yo' r part not only violate the confidentiality protection which the NRC should provide persons reporting allegations, but further exposes such individuals to the possibility of intolerable harassment and character assassination by company of ficials.

In our opinion this position has the effect of denying the whistle-blower even the basic assurances of due process which otherwise would be afforded them in a courtroom. It further presents them virtually no-means of escape which would allew reputation and conscience to remain untouched.

It appears certain based on the Durr investigation, various NRC Inspection Reports,.our meeting with Mr. Haverkamp and more particularly sour January lith letter, that the NRC has relegated to the museum-of irrelevant activity tha tactics used by Northeast Utility officials against us.

i

= l 4

m... ..w.sw ~ * " *

• Continued .....

'~

9210260204 920325 PDR FOIA GUILD 91-162 PDR

~

Page Two January 21, li90 .

Even though our heritage of respect for civil liberties is deep and determined, to those of us who have been exposed to the taw-boned experiences stated above, the reality has been much different.

C . .s 4

c. .

. / ~,;

g .e. . .

... .*  ?. ? .. ,

^

on

~-

. .. - the harsh reality has .een an.

remains a sel ..eclare , set -generated and indeed self-righteous mystique of infallibility on the part of the company. This has .

been actbu.pented by an unwillingness to Accept.even the smallest responsibtilty for what at time was tteir i outrageous behavior.

The NRS3a position that we as whistle-blowers should utilize existing f ormal programs (presumed to be the Nuclear Concerns C Prograel $$ totally and irrevocably Onacceptable to us.

Even though a new manager has been appointed with direct reporting responsibilities to the Senior Vice-President of Nuclear Operat!ons we see no dif f erence between 'ihe new and the old programs. The history of such a program is that of _ a morally bankrupt, evidence $athering, whistle-blower harassment company vehicle dedicated to 4he pr ottetion of company profit margins and company public image.

Your awareness of th-c fallart of such past programs, coupled with your suggestion and f utur e intentions r egard1ng complaints, at ,

least f or us hints that all parties should operate from inside a-cocoon of seclusion if indeed not secrecy f ree from public view and scrutiny.

We remal'n as one in nur position involving public safety, potent ial publi.c sa f ety issues or nuclear concerns. We believe:

that such'19 sues do not and should not enjoy the seclusion of a ~

confidential contessional provided by either Northeast Utilit!es ,

or the NRC.

Your underlying tone of diminished value -of complaints provided by us is, in our opinion, not only incorrect but attempts to sei.

up a tension between individual conscience and public

• responsibility on the one hand and what appears to be your perception of loyalty towards-company programs on the other. I t-obviously (if successful) would also render NRC business more manageable and less demanding. 1 Furthermore we believe that companies and regulatory agencies who do not respond to, or attempt to diminish concerns involving Continued .....

l l

l - . . _ . . _

~ . - . . . - . . -. . - . ~ -

4

• 4 Page Three January 21, 1990 P

public or nuclear saf ety issues as well as employee harassment, intimidation and discrimination. nust be held accountable, forced to face up to their actions (ot in this case inactions) and indeed pay the price prescribed by the average citizen of thel community. .

It is our f ur ther contention that your stated intention of '

providing company of ficials with our written complaints violates not only our First Amendment rights but our Fif th Amendment -

rights as well because ruch evidence is being used against us.

We subrni t that the NRC does not possess such authority at the -

expense of individual rights. We certainly have not and do not intend to grant-your agency such rights of providing company of ficials with written complaints provided by us. While we recognize the need f or thorough discussion of complaints such recognition does not extend to a Carte Blanche provision of f urnishing our written material .

Legit imat e saf ety concerns - of any individual should be and must be protected from corporate interference and Government Agency manipulation. Such individual concerns r.ust not be allowed to become tools or corporate harassment or government agency kickball if for no-other reason than the fact that the human being is not a commodity of commerce.

At the risk of exposing our amateur standing as writers we have chosen the least acceptable but probably most effective method to clearly s tate our position--namely, that of underlining.

L We do not intend _to use the Corporate Nuclear Concerns L pr.og r am u.nt i l we_ a r e a bs o l u t e l v c e r _t aj n _ t h a t such a DLqq.r am

! is tptally free and will remain free of the mentality'that l gover ned its oper at ion.Jn the _ cast .

We wi 11_ contin u e t o ma k e all o u r c o n c e r n s a_ n_d c cJn_plaj n t s - t o

. IAe NFC. If the NRC choous not to act, that'_s their problem 1 We would tJen feel fre_e u _to_ seek relief from persons, a g e nc i ejt, political b_odies and c.edia resources who may be _la -

a popition to of [gr helo, advice and legal assistance.

Sincerely, . . . .

- - .m e-i ,

- wowA* w

a. .

[

Page Four January 21, 1990 cc: Senators Breaux, Metzenbaum, Dodd, Lieberman Representatives Kostmayer, Kennelly, Gejdenson State of Connecticut, Governor William A. O'Nelli Representative Joyce Robert Gamus, Executive office of President OMB I

L 1

I' l

L () L

}

Referenega 1 - Wall thickness from the Appendix R report 2 -> Seal design Go001 using grout 3 - Seal design Gooo2 using grout Ralph, The conduit penetration which passes between the 25'-6" Cable Vault and the Unit 1 Instrument and control storage area is sealed properly. The penetration was filled with grout from the Cable Vault side. The wall is a concrete block wall which is 12 inches thick (reference 1). All that you can see from the I&c storage area in damming material which is recessed 2 to 2-1/2 inches into the wall (scal depth is 10 to 10-1/2 inches).

The seal used requires 8 inches of grout and 1 inch of damming material (reference 2 and 3). Therefore, the total ceal design is approximately 9 inches long. The inctalled seal is 10 to 10-1/2 inches long which exceeds the requirements of the seal design.

D

- Prepared By 'Date j D

9 e f

c

[ Q g! & ( g_ 11 y _

. 2

^ Mill. STONE tskE AREA ADANY SDfttANY iSci~ Not e 2 avid hghende n f)

. .e.

~ ~ ~ ~

.~ ~'~~ ' ~

BANRIER IDENTIFICATION CONSlROCTION

, MET _ HOD /_ _M_.A._T.F_ ft l A,I.. - . . . _ ..' 11t i th ES. S_ .. . M.._W1M t.. T, S _ _ _, ._ _ _

NO. (NOTE 1) -

A-4/T-1 Wall between Cable Vault a n.1 Turbine Itall areas f rom El. 25'6" to 36'6".

a. along column line 16 Concrete Block 12 in. Thss wall is resnforced concrete in lower rottion, between column E.5 and a point 7' east of with isrepsoofed steel column B.-

bene in cer.ter and con-secte bloc k an upper portinn.

' b. around I&C Storage Area romr*te li t ut k. Il su.

c. c onnec t ing wi tla s t a s t we ll Cr.m ret e filoc k 12 en ,

area.

Floor at' El . 36*6" between Reinforced Concrete 24 s ei .

Cable Vault sad flain Steam Pipeway AT7./T-2 Floor at El. 36*6" between Pennforced Concretc 24 sn.

Cable Vault and West 480 V Switchgear Room.

A-4/T-3 Barrier between vertical No physic I barrier

' Cable Vault.(T-3) and exists at present.

Cable Vault (A-4) at Water curt ain to El. 36*6" be-installef.

A-4/T-4 Ba r r s e r t>ct ween ve r t s ra l No phys i c a l La r s's e r Cable Vault-(T-4) and exists at present.

Cable Vault (A-4) at Water rurtain to El. 36'6". be installed.

~ '- ~ ~ - ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

s A-4/ Wall between Cable Vault Concrete ~ itis <T ~ '

Itni t 1 Area- and 16C Shop Areas from T-9 El. 25'6" to 36'6" along column line'l5 between column C and point'12' west of column B. .

Wall between 2-1 and 2-2 Resnfosted Con t te 24 an, A-5/A-6 DC Equip. Rooms from El. 14'6" to 25'6" along.

column line J.7 between columos 17 and 35.

A-5/A-12 Floor at El. 14'6" between Hennforced Concrete 2 4 .sud Thu floor as supported "A" DC Equipment and Battery 39 in. by unprotetted steel Rooms and Boric Acid Recovery beams in Fire Area A-12.

Area.

f~ ? A tw

e CONCRETE WALL OR

. ,e - T OP OF F LOOR

,( #

1' CAReDRUNDuv FIBERFRAX \

'w D t.VVl% OC APPROVED f OU AL , ( .USED A5 FORvlNG '

~

^ " :w 2 7 -CABLES BDARD ONLY . NOT REDulRED

, - P'W'i nf4 iC APPROVED iIRE SE AL . ) ,

_ f I\ \ \ \lu ,/

,_' ~ ~_ r .t v x y_f r LW

~

8" M]N. M ASTER FLOW #713 c rry c D4D'JM - ~ OR EMBECO # 636 , FOR 7,#rn. m f, , . ,,7w /i > '

R ADI ATION R ATING FILL FULL DEPTH OF B ARRIER ,

NOTES :

p 4 vm e"- ~~ ~

FOR CAST , CORE BORED OR SLEEVED OPENING. '

i s. s.

l v, c~c " ~

2, F DF FOX . CUARE . 0V AL OR RECT ANGUL AR OPENING.

>- - _.J_. .

3. D AMvlN G E 0 A R D M A Y OR MAY NOT BE LEFT IN PLACE .

--4 FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES SEE NUSCO DWG. -* 23203-24091 SHEETS A0001- A0003.

os m - - nH ' L . . _ _.- 5. SEE NOTE 12 DN SHEET 40003 FOR APPROVED EQUAL S A GROUTING MATERI ALS ,

T A T T .. .

A CmES _

II D r i C. A.D.-------Il g NOTE:

I M ANUAL REVISIONS TO THIS AS-BUILT g l DOCUVENT ARE PROHIB11ED. REFERI TO R cto 2.02 ron Revision ouaiNc

((ggpg 8 L * * *

• CONSTRUCTION MANUAL REVISIONS. J D '

~

}

O~

• NORTHEAST NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY UTILITIES CO. SER t ' TUd V}LLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER ST ATION UNlI *i m FIRE , PRESSURE , WATER AND RADI ATION GROUT SEAL FOR CONDUIT M . St: ett 4.cott 1TE =  ? WATERFORD CONNCCTICUT

<D W c F. S'. . i .D A N EL ; una AEM/ab ar% JWN A* r. RAA

, { v2 s-w e e3 _

gaa p3pg au p3psa

' n014 g ii .;-r ;n pf-e

, ali'ELO 45 yg. .g l__{;,.. .m me.c.

;m-g s m ., t , ,.

i

. 12 g . J' GROUT 25203-24091 SH.0000'

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

'w -

• -s

,. .i. e ,. .;.

CONC. W ALL OR  :,,,. c S1 EEL , FLEX OR ALUM. #

10P OF FL00R- ...N f P AIN1ED CONDU)1 m

/

b- -

"-ST EEL ~ . COPPER OR 6

\ .F

__ ___Q '

e

-MONEL TUBE c-

\N\

i x x 1.L._......__

e TUBE BUNDLE.

r STEEL CABLE TRAY- c-i x x i 1

' ' ' E._M . e ,

- ==,

4 lX N N <I _ s ,-1HRE ADED ROD MAY OR MAY 4

- - - NOT BE USED TO SUPPORT TUBE TRACK -

\\\ i- p DAMMING BOARD DURING-GROUl INST ALL ATION .

4xxx.

, ~.~=: ROD MAY OR M AY- NOT BE- .

y q ,.

~

PEMOVED _ AF1ER-- GROUT . ,

j INST ALL ATION 1, IF REMOVED l

8" MlN, MASTER FLOW " -

FlLL_ OPENING WITH SAME'

- _j2 GROUl:AS SEAL .: ,

1. 713 OR EMBECO # 636 s FOR RADI ATlON P ATING i N -1" C ARBORUNDUM ~ FIBERFRAK

'; F]LL FULL DEPTH Or DAMMING OR APPROVED EQUAL BARRIER , ( USED FOR FORMING BOARD" ONLY , NOT REQUIRED FOR D APPPOVED FIRE-.SE AL ^.-) -

M.O.S. SEE NOTE *!

~

= NOTES- :

lAm.Acc. 1. max, OPENING SIZE 16 SC. F_T. M AX. ANNULUS SIZE 10.5 S0, FT. -

i 3 e

- l 7,p, g,

^

2. FOR C AST 'OR SLEEVED OPEN]NG.

-. 3. FOR ROLIND , SQUARE . OV AL OR RECT ANGUL AR OPENING.

. , , d. PAINT- ALUVINUM CONDUIT PER SPEC. SP-CE-246.

" MVMT.IIN.)L 5. DAMMING BOARD MAY OF MAY NOT .BE LEFT ]N PLACE . l S. '~-

'6. FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES SEE NUSCO DWG. # 25203-24091L SHEET S

^

I A0001- A0003.

1 ATTN. 7. FOR CORE BORED OPENINGS SEE NOTE 11 ON' SHEET A0003.-

[!

OTHER 8. SEE - NOTE 12. ON - SHEET A0003 FOR APPROVED EDUAL-GROUTING MATERIALS .

D e---

i -C.A.D. ':

l-

A~

lNOTEi-

. MANUAL REV]S]DNS TO THIS AS BUILT

- q '-

l DOCUMENT ARE' PROHIBITED. REFER TO g -

F.P!Q.A..-

l CED 3.01 FOR REVISION DUR]NG CONSTRUCTION MANUAL- REVI5]ONS. ] [g/rt c4 ' .s NORTHEAST UTILITIES SERVICE CO.1 '

• NORTHEAST' NUCLEAR' ENERGY CD.

3 MILL 510NE NUCLLAR POWLH $1 AllON UNil-

• C mu FIRE , PRESSURE , WATER ' AND RAD] ATION l

4 _ .

GROUT SEAL: FOR S]NGLE OR MULT1 ELEMENTS "DNO "C ' E -9 4 NON'SElSMIC. 200* F OR LESS WATERFORD . CC'J 93 v 2 % S@ $e f l;,

stJ. T. DANIEL L 02. REwuki- R -JWN A HAA<

."r"' OCR-V2 5 -E68-8$'

. , , ,_ *"3""

[ h idN * [ # "3"8' [,,[ 3" "

(( D#i[ik'nO[sN$

hee " * ^ '". u'  : 5.[ GROUT 25203-24091 SH.GOOC :

- _ . . . _ _ _ . _ w

~

((]l d ;E412 2181 =E Ul 41 d'E (, jj J g- e art 4ccArica~

T, ~- I 4

I Cd -

MD E8 M

$ c a + e-1~a ns 21sh:

EEEE EE

% pJrnhk re.d s% w yuu ad~<du.d y w % y.s cad W W % k /'"P' Q g gavesrc) i vi'# sed desy.

p jynu)q4 64 hJ Yb'd -

0,-

OfEDINATOACO sect wm?t BELOW TH18 UNE $30h10 REPLY O

[?

)l 4

$ WAOCATO SIGNED DATE gaps e os W Ny bn E-d C 187 MOpff,}J/11 fl[s[;lil;Ie] 3Q fdeig D;l b W.'1l E 4 ;] 4 il 4fI);lll 3 e)))liJil.3g

k

~/36/95 Allegation Meeting E. Wen-inger. D. Haverkamp. B, Raymond. S. Stewart. P. Hatighorst

1. A.39.01 and A.41.01 FFD IR 90 14 No allegation /no compliance issue with CFR 26 ueakness in handling privacy of controls in pockets was addressed by licensee -1 program adequate to assure proving - mo f/u required. Close in Ir and due in

• C/o 1tr _

2. A.40.1 IR 90-11 Not an alleratien minute during was id'd and faced using system - same as previous issues cited in Dun report. Item 6 and 7 - +/0 to Sept team for f/u of 89-13-XX on drug contl- Items 1 - 5 not on alleg and disp ok item 8 speculative - no concrete evidence to tatulate. Item 1 a.nd 2 - -

closecut on basis of IR 90-16 and corrod. Item 3/4 SPCR forcs filed in CR/ Nc allegation No closecut/ No issue

3. A.39.02 c/o ltr only No IR

. heck st8tus of form S!'. and dis;osition cf NCR We understand concern why handled *.his NCU and feel it we ap;rcpriately handled using

'.icensee acticn items and NU adequacy cf No copy acticn in response to 39-13-XX will be exsmined in future. We plan ne further action in r es;cnse to specific ecncern.

4. 52.1 - panel 52.2 - no action - close 52.3 - no f/u action - close- statement of facts 52.4 - not an alleg - no action - accept response 52.5 - panel - agree

5. 50.1 Not at alleg- c/o with to further action - routine f /u -

type of problem expert te be found in routine activities. No action unless you find pro;er response was not taken to your problem documented in PDI a- 50.2 Iatters - Panel and O!

50.3 Panel - insp f/u of the review devs for adequacy of conf control and down entrls.

50.4 closeout letter

6. 6/4/ heat stress - inspected - panel - RI input needed f IR and pane 1 1

,o 7 .* - panel

-tous 1. FWCI sSFI 1-86-99

2. INCI SSFI 1-85-83

3. SPDS - inor because data not valid because EOPs revised

4. tfP2 SG cracks

8. A.49.01 - WRNIs no panel close out based on IR 90-11 f/u u alleg on disp of NCR Item # 4

-panel it Split 49.01 into subparts 1-3 and 4

9. A.48.01 - question onl/ #2 ding incorrect - combine w/ A.50.3 for panel and review of drug program for adeg.

10. A.47.01 - not an allegation - changes were not intent - exhaust for skill of towle tack c/o on basis of letter and No IR. WJR cover in IR - SI receive of proc change

12. A.45.01 - IR 90-06 no alleg - c/o on IR A.4E.02 - 00L A.45.03 - Panel Conf

13. A.44.01 Not an alleg - all handled properly internally A.44.02 No alleg- generally no action - address our current understaffir.g change process - reduce # if changes not needed to better assure PORC ef fectiveness

14. A 42.01 DOL - sick time confirm iCL case corresponds to this

,iesue If . B.21.01 - sanel - conf contrl drugs t/o tons

16. B.22,01 Mwas panelled c/o based on Ir ltr to alleger 4 tagouts - alleg - phne'l - review as potential tagging errors -

89-13-XX tie tu issues id'd in 23.01 - Durr item 0 flag as item to refer to NU - review 0 determine significance - f/u review in rpt -

transmit via letter - penel - inform OI mte shop hazards - panel - to NSC issue 1tr region

17. B.23,01 all id*d to supr tagging - Ic - elec fan - proc inade

= drugs H2 anal config enti panel with other issues - consider with previous bend issues collect in 1 issue on tagging config entla

18. B.24.01 m-worker work habits - no alleg - no issue worthy of NRC f/u - previous c/o ltr no further NRC action i

T

--