ML20128P927
| ML20128P927 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 05/15/1985 |
| From: | Felton J NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Garde B GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20128P933 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-85-214 NUDOCS 8507130340 | |
| Download: ML20128P927 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000483/1984045
Text
,
.
g an.
o
UNITED STATES
8
g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
o
r,
-l
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
(@
s., ...../
E 1 ? ISS5
Ms. Billie Pirner Garde
Citizens Clinic Director
Government Accountability Proiect
1555 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 202
IN RESPONSE REFER
Washington, DC 20036
TO F01A-85-714
Dear Ms. Garde:
This is in response to your letter of March 25, 1985, in which you requested,
pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), records regarding NRC Inspection
Report No. 50-483/84-45 on the Callaway nuclear power plant.
We are placing copies of the ten documents listed in Appendix A in the NRC
Public Document Room (PDR), 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555, for your
inspection and copying. You may obtain access to these records by presenting
a copy of this letter to the PDR staff or by requesting PDR folder F01A-85-214
under your name.
In addition, as noted in Appendix A, four other documents pertinent to your
request have previously been filed in the PDR.
Their accession numbers are
listed in Appendix A.
As listed in Appendix B, one other document, a draft of Inspection Report
50-483/84-45, has also been placed in the PDR in folder F01A-85-214. Some of
the marginal notes on this document contain information which constitutes
advice, opinions, and recomendations of the staff. These are being withheld
from public disclosure pursuant to Exemption (5) of the FOIA (5 U.S.C. 552(b)
(5)) and 10 CFR 9.5(a)(5) of the Commission's regulations.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 9.9 of the Comnission's regulations, it has been determined
that the information withheld is exempt from production or disclosure and that
its production or disclosure is contrary to the public interest. The persons
responsible for this denial are the undersigned and Mr. James G. Keppler,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
.
fgj71lgo850515
QARDE85-ag4
pop
u-
.
O
.
This denial may be appealed to the Commission's Executive Director for
Operations within 30 days from the receipt of this letter. As provided in 10 CFR 9.11, any such appeal ~must be in writing, addressed to the Executive
Director for Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555, and should clearly state on the envelope and in the letter that it is an
" Appeal from an Initial FOIA Decision."
Sinc
.ly,
as[
"
.,
. M. Felton, Director
Division of Rules and Records
Office of Administration
Enclosures: As stated
't
-
-
-
-
r
~
,o
.
%
APPENDIX A
FOIA 85-214
IN THE PDR:
4
1.
3/4/85
Letter to Garde from Rehm
Accession 8503120219
2.
2/5/85
Inspection Report 84-45
Accession 8502280155
!
3.
3/15/85
Letter from Keppler to Garde
Accession 8503200460
4.
1/11/85
Letter to Garde from Keppler
Accession 8501240086
'
I
I'1 PDR FOLDER FOIA-85-214:
,
1.10/2/84
Allegation Data Form on Callaway (1 page)
'2. 12/3/84
Allegation Tracking Systen on Callavay (1 page)
3.1/3/S5
Allegation Tracking Systen on Callaway (1 page)
4.1/30/65
Letter to Keppler from Garde on Petition 2.206 (7 paces)
5. 2/4/06
Allegation Tracking System on Callway (1 page)
6. 2/25/E5
Memorandum for Rehm from Keppler on Transnittal of A11ecation
followup Infornation for GAP (3 pages)
7. 3/1/SC
Her.orandur for Pavilit fron lleil on GAP A11enations at Callaway (1 nare)
E..i 10/s.
Alleget> Trad ine hster on Calhay (1 papc)
9. Unde ted
Chronology of Rlll Actions related to Negotiations with GAP for
Inforoution on Allegations at Callaway (3 pages)
10. Undated
Newspaper article from St. Louis Post-Dispatch on Safety A11ecations
(1 page)
r
.
%
APPENDIX B
FOIA 85-214
1.
12/20/84
Annotated copy of the draft Inspection Report 50-483/84-45 (DRP).
(44 pages)
,
k
_
}
Pjl&
a
.
.
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABluTY PROJECT
1555 Connecncut Awnue, N.W., Suite 202
Washington, D.C. 20006
(202)2024550
January 30, 1985
F"H" #
[.
'iY
Docket No. STN 50-483
fy,
_
s
. _ _ .
.
James G.
Keppler
b
b
Regional Administrator
Ql,!-H
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
E g gy
Region III
799 Roosevelt Road
Glen Ellyn, Illinois
60137
RE:
NRC Region III Investigation of Concerned Citizens
About Callaway 2.206 Petition
Dear Mr. Keppler:
Recently we received your letter of January 11, 1985,
stating that Region III planned to issue an inspection report
concerning the allegations provided in the September 28, 1984
2.206 petition. 1/
Your letter indicated that NRC Region III
would not pursue the additional available information regard-
ing the serious safety allegations in the petition.
GAP,
Concerned citizens About Callaway, former and present workers
at the Callaway Plant and the general public who are concerned
for their own health and safety find this decision not to pur-
sue safety allegation information disappointing, to say the
least.
Clearly, GAP's most rece.it meeting with the NRC repre-
sentatives concerning this additional information must have
been part of a bureaucratic game with rules designed by the NRC.
1/
This petition was submitted by the Concerned Citizens About
callaway and not, as you state in your letter, the Concerned
Citizens Against Callaway.
Concerned Citizens About Callaway is
a group of individuals who reside in the vicinity of the Calla-
way Nuclear Power Plant and sock to ensure the health and safe-
ty of their community.
They have sought GAP's assistance con-
cerning the safe construction and operation of the Callaway
Plant.
In theory, the goals of the Nuclear Regulatory Commis-
sion and Concerned Citizens About Callaway are congruous with
each other.
However, the most recent decision, issued from
your office, raises serious doubt as to the agency's commitment
to the health and safety of the public.
9ff
4gge47/
res s e
A/Y
'
o
.
James G. Keppler
-
January 30, 1985
Page Two
4
NRC Region III made several requests of GAP for addi-
tional information ever since the 2.206 petition was filed on
September 28, 1984. 2/
Obtaining more information, according
to Region III, was critical to any further investigation.
NRC
representatives admitted that the agency was unable to proceed
without additional information. 3/
This need was also expres-
sed in correspondences to GAP from both Frank Miraglia, Deputy
Director of the Division of Licensing, cnd
Harold R. Denton,
Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 4/
Finally, on November 30, 1984, GAP and the NRC met to discuss
this matter.
At this meeting, the NRC was informed that addi-
tional pertinent information did exist and was available.
2/
a) As documented in Enclosure 3 of an October 16, 1984 memor-
andum from Region III Administrator, James Keppler to liarold
Denton, Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation,
the NRC Staff has had personal discussion or telephone conver-
sation with representatives of GAP on October 4,5 and 8,
11, 12,
and 15, 1984, for purpose of obtaining additional information
-
which GAP relied upon to prepare the allegations.
b) November 7, 1984 letter form Harold Denton, Director of
the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and a November 21, 1984
letter from Frank Miraglia, Deputy Director of the Division of
Licensing, to Billie Garde, GAP, requests additional information
regarding the allegations.
3/
At the Meeting of the Commission on October 4,
1984, C.
Norelius, Director of Projects, Region III stated that the NRC
must meet with GAP so that the NRC "might more specifically
understand what the allegations are, because many of them are
so general that they're difficult to deal with in the form pre-
sented."
(pg. 50, meeting transcript)
4/
The November 7, 1984 letter from H. Denton to GAP states:
7.."in the absence of more specific information supporting the
petition, it is difficult to assess the need for further action."
Furthermore, he states, "that the (NRC) staff is prepared to
meet with allegers to ensure that all avenues of information are
explored.
By permitting the NRC to discuss the concerns direct-
ly with the allegers, GAP will be assured that a thorough re-
view of the allegations has been performed."
Also Frank Miraglia in his November 21, 1984 letter'to GAP
states.that "the staff will find it difficult to assess the need
for further action without additional information."
o
.
James G.
Keppler
January 30, 1985
Page Three
.
Since that meeting, however, the NRC has changed its posi-
tion regarding its commitment to safety concerns.
The recent
decision expressed in your letter indicates that the NRC Region
III is no longer interested in the information which six weeks
ago was vital to any inspection.
It appears that the November
30, 1984 meeting was useless.
After six weeks of non-decision
we are :ar short of the status quo.
Moreover it demonstrates
the agency's eagerness to follow empty procedure at the expense
of those who attempt to work with the agency.
What astonishes GAP about the Region's decision was the
obvious ineffective and inefficient investigative process that
the agency has chosen to take.
The Region has expended consid-
erable inspection resources, after admitting that the lack of sub-
stantial additional information would affect the depth and out-
come of the investigation.
Now the Region has decided to final-
ize its efforts with the issuance of an inspection report with-
out having utilized all available information.
This inspection
report without a doubt will be the culmination of the bureau-
cratic gamesmenship.
However astonishing, such Region III techniques are not
new to GAP.
The NRC, in its approach to whistleblowers, uses
inadequate inspection efforts.
For examples
The NRC mischaracterized allegations.
Inspection Report
50-483/64-30 contains summaries of 25 allegations provided dur-
ing the summer of 1984 to the NRC in an interview with the al-
legers.
Many of the allegations, as presented by the NRC, are
misinterpretations of the whistleblowers' allegations.
The sum-
maries are incomplete sentences pulled from various parts of the
interview transcript.
The NRC left plenty of room for interpre-
tation of each allegation.
These summaries are as clear as they
are concise.
The NRC made no re-contact with the allegers to clear up
mischaracterized allegations.
Instead, the NRC proceeded to
investigate the allegations as they saw fit, even if it was sub-
stantially unrelated to the meaning of the whistleblowers' al-
legations.
As a result of the haste and poor investigative procedures,
the allegations within Inspection Report 50-483/84-30 were con-
trary to the information brought to the NRC by the allegers;
The NRC inspection report 50-483/84-30 reflected a paperwork
review' relying on the utilitly's self-serving explanations.
The paperwork review is based on the assumption that the paper-
work is thorough and accurate.
Furthermore, the NRC has not dis-
closed the supporting data and calculations for evaluation of
the whistleblowers' allegations;
.
.
'
.
James G. Keppler
'
January 30, 1985
Page Four
.
The NRC has narrowly defined issues raised by the Whistle-
'
blowers and failed to inspect beyond hardware examples the wit-
nesses were able to identify specifically;
The NRC has swept away the safety significance of the alle-
gations from any realistic role in the investigation or the full
power licensing of the Callaway plant;
The results of the investigation were published in an in-
spection report almost six months after the interviews and one
week before the Callaway plant went critical.
The NRC has attempted to discredit whistleblowers, citizens
groups, or simply interested individuals by questioning their
motives, integrity, and technical competence to raise questions
about public health and safety.
The NRC has failed to utilize all available information per-
taining to the 2.206 safety allegations.
James Keppler's October 16, 1984 letter to Harold Denton
recommending Callaway for full power licensing, categorized the
forty-eight allegations submitted by GAP and contained conclusions
drawn from less than the
. information available to Region
III.
In sum, the
statements above represent the NRC Region III's
failure to investigate in good faith and to protect the public
and those who dare to come forward with safety allegations.
None-
theless, this is buciness as usual for Region III.
Again the NRC Region III has decided to continue with its
.
paper chase when, admittedly, it is not worthwhile.
The inspec-
-
tion report issued on the 2.206 petition can only be a thoroughly
,
blurred interpretation of the September 28, 1984 allegations.
'qGAC's view is that the inspection report need not be issued at all
sinc ~e the inspection has been conducted only as a part of the
agency's insincercity.
Indeed, it is a colossal waste of tax-
payer's money.
More important, it is evidence of the agency's
confusion as to its own responsibilities and duties.
The alle-
gations potentially effect the public health and safety, not the
NRC's credibility.
Your agency, authorized by Congress, is re-
sponsible for the health and safety of the public and also has a
duty to competently investigate in good faith the safety allega-
tions brought to your agency by nuclear workers.
It is clear from a review of the record of this case, that
your primary, if not your only, objective was to the the Calla-
way Nuclear Power Plant licensed.
You stated as much to a GAP
representative in mid-October, "the NRC is.not going to wait
around for GAP to give us information, we want to get this plant
(Callaway) licensed!"
Mr. Foppler, ultimate 1; your reputation
'
JCCOs G. KOpplor
January 30, 1985
Page Five
may have grown in the eyes of your superiors due to your new
tough line approach to allegations, but at the same time it
has equally diminished in the eyes of those who are concerned
about the safety and health of the public and thought you were
also.
Sincerely,
OcL bd
2
Billie Garde
Directo: of Citizens Clinic
M
Michele Varricchio
Staff Associate
.
cc
Callaway Service List
.
S
S
8
e
_ _ _
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
'
..
CALLAWAY SERV!CE LIST
D. F. Schnell
Mayor Howard Steffen
Vice President - Nuclear
Chamois, Missouri 65024
Union Electric Company
Post Office Box 149
Professor William H. Miller
St. Louis, Missouri 63166
Missouri Kansas Section, American
Nuclear Society
Nicholas A. Petrick
Department of Nuclear Engineering
Executive Director - SNUPPS
1026 Engineering Building
5 Choke Cherry Road
University of Missouri
Rockville, Maryland 20850
Columbia, Missouri 65211
Gerald Charnoff, Esquire
Robert G. Wright
Thomas A. Baxter, Esquire
Associate Judge, Eastern District
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge
County Court, Callaway County,
1800 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036
Route #1
Fulton, Missouri 65251
J. E. Birk
Assistant to the General Counsel
Lewis C. Green. Esquire
Union Electric Company
Green. Hennings & Henry
Post Office Box 149
Attorney for Joint Intervenors
St. Louis, Missouri 63166
314 North Broadway, Suite 1830
St. Louis, Missouri
63102
John Neisler
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Earl Brown
Resident Inspectors Office
School District Superintendent
RR#1
Post Office Box 9
Steedman, Missouri
65077
Kingdom City, Missouri 65262
Donald W. Capone, Manager
Harold Lottman
Nuclear Engineering
Presiding Judge, Dasconade County
Union Electric Company
Route 1
Post Office Box 149
Owensville, Missouri
65066
St. Louis, Missouri
63166
Eric A. Eisen, Esquire
A. Scott Cauger, Esquire
Birch Horton, Bittner and Moore
Assistant General Counsel for the
Suite 1100
Missouri Public Service Commission
1140 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Post Office Box 360
Washington, D.C.
10036
Jefferson City, Missouri
65101
John G. Reed
Ms. Marjorie Reilly
Route #1
Energy Chairman of the League of Women
Kingdom City, Missouri
65262
Voters of University City, Missouri
7065 Pershing Avenue
Dan I. Bolef, President
University City, Missouri
63130
Kay Drey, Representative
Board of Directors Coalition for
Donald Bollinger, Member
the Environment
Missourians for Safe Energy
St. Louis Region
6267 Delmar Boulevard
6267 Delmar Boulevard
University City, Missouri 63130
University City, Missouri
63130
'
..
. .
CALLAWAY SERVICE LIST
2
.
James G. Keppler
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Region III
799 Roosevelt Road
Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137
Ronald A. Kucera, Deputy Director
Department of Natural Resources
Post Office Box 176
Jefferson City, Missouri 65102
Glenn L. Koester
Vice President - Nuclear
Kansas Gas and Electric Company
201 North Market Street
Post Office Box 208
Wichita, Kansas 67201
,
-
-
_
. - .
.
..
_
-
-
i
!
f
w-1246110
wun DATE: 02/06/e5
A ta t i, a i ION
TRACK INb
SY STEW
%
1
l
UATA eA5L REVIEm/UPDATL SnEt t
DATA AS OF THE END UF
]
Jaw;Any tves
!
'
4
Siprus
0\\osek
aLLtbaTIum mentws
w!Il-se-A-Olle
1
taCILiter/uututta
CALLamAv 1
05000483
1
4
tuNCTIOMat autAI
UMS{SE HEALTH AND SAFETY
I
CONStwuCTION
S AF t bO art 35
l
l
utsCw1Pituur
en ALLEGATIONS: wfL0tNG8 wELUtw QUALSI SITE
'
SCwtENING8 TLD MONEIUw!Nh8 CONCHtTE NEPA!RSI
tLtCrulCAL.
unsect s
owu - s.ovENNatNT ALCouNtaettgTV PROJECT
f
paTt WECttvtts:
10/et/e=
FtwSON 6t E C L i v l kt. 3
kw PtLMF
1
!
tir t~ ICt wt Lt I W 1r.s.:
as 3
acT!oN OFritt CsavaCI: et townty
j
FIS F7909% Mu*tst**B
JeM*S59W
t
t
l
STATust
uFtm
i
I
l
f
uATE Clusto
con n a x D ,n .)' %r zuun aosy c
!
j
wtwawns:
wt v a twun IN wtPowt no-45.
wtP0Hi Its Ow AF T.
LStawarEn CowettriuN parti n/3tes5.
!
!
l
1
1
!
l
,
t
1
' -
j
-
i
l