ML20129B126
| ML20129B126 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 07/05/1984 |
| From: | Shollenberger NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Devine T GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20129A429 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-84-745 NUDOCS 8506050123 | |
| Download: ML20129B126 (12) | |
Text
-..
N.
UNITED s1 ATEs.
. ' ' *' " '* *f
'o,'
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMM!SSION
[Ti,;
REGION V movania Lant.sunt zw
- p. <
:J.
C
-. ?+ 'r; WALNUT CREEK. calif ORNIA 94WC,
%,,.'..[.f' 6
a b 144 Juu Mr. Thomas Devine Legal Director Government Accountability Project Institute for Policy Studies 1901 Que Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
20009
Dear Mr. Devine:
We are prepared now, as we have 27, 1984.
I Thank you for your note of June been for some time, to get ' started on a site visit at Diablo Canyon.
desired.
trust we will hear from you shortly whether such a visit is still Sincerely,
.AJ Lewis W. Shollenberger Regional Counsel
(
l 8506050123 841211 DEVDE84-745 PDR y.
R9:
FOIA-84-745-APPENDIX A ITEM MO.
NO.
DATE DESCRIPTION PAGES 1.
1/16/84 Memo from Shackleton to Bishop. Sub Diablo Canyon Power Plant.
-.1 -
Information Concerning 2.
3/2/84 ~
Ltr from GAP to Bishop re Diablo Canyen 1
3.
7/5/84 Ler from shellenberger to T. Devine 1
4.
4/12/84 Page 5 &'6 OF GAP Letter 2
5.
3/15/84 Western Union Message 1
6.
Undated Transcript 4
7.
3/19/84 Transcript' 1
A11eastLon No. 344 8.
Undated Enclosure to PG&E let: DCL-84-170 1
9.
5/2/64 PCR lte to J. Martin 1
10.
2/11/84
" Problem Description" - Original copy not-legible - A11eger No. 2 1
11.
2/11/84
" Problem Description" - A11eger No. 2 1
l 12.
Undated' Problem statement - Allegation No. 344 1
13.
PG&E Response - Platform As-builte. Unit L 1
Allegati en No. 345 14, 2/11/84 Problem Description (Original copy not legible) 1 15.
2/11/84 Problem Description 1
I 16.
3/16/84 Problem Statement 1
17.
Undated Enclosure to PG&E ler DCL*84-170 2
i 18.
5/2/84 PG6E ltr to J. Martin i
19.
Undated PG&E Response 1
20.
4/25/84 GAP ltr to Palladino, etal 2
l 21.
Undeted PG6E Response 1
l 22.
4/27/84 Bechtel Memorandum No.. 049370 1
23.
4/27/34 i
r u
s._.
.m,
R9:
FOIA-84-745 APPENDIX A (CONTINUED).
.ITEN NO.
,E.
DATE DESCRIPTION PAGES 24.
8-12-83 Certificate of Qualification (R. J. Keith) 2 25.
4-12-44 PG&E Memorandum from R. Keith 1
26.
Undated Notification cf Hydrotest 1
27.
3-15-75 Pield Process Sheet 2
28.
4-10-75 Liquid Penetrant Examinateon Record 1
29.
6-5-74 Radiographic Inspection Report 1
- I" I
$klegationN Y6 31.
Uddated PG&E Response 1
32.
Undated Item Documets (Received 4/12/84) 2 33.
5/2/84 PG&E ltr to J. Martin 1
34.
6/5/84 Problem Statement 1
35.
2/11/84 Problem Description 1
36, 2/11/84 Problem Description 1
Allegati m No. 347 37.
'Jadated PG&E Response 1
38.
Undated Items with response 1
39.
5/2/84 PG&E lte to J. Martin 1
40.
2/12/84 Problem Description 1
lj 41.
2/12/84 Problem Description 1
l 42.
4/16/84 Problem Statement i
A11esati m No. 348 I
43.
Undated Items with Response 1
44.
5/2/04 PGE ltr to J. Martin 1
45.
4/16/84 Problem Statement 1
46.
Undated Problem Description 1
47.
4/12/84 Problem Descritpion 1
48.
Undated PG&E Response (Rec'd 4/12/84)'
1
Re: 'FOIA-84-745-t s
APPENDIX A NO.
e ITEN NO.-
DATE DESCRIPTION PAGES A11eastii m No. 349 49.
Undated Items with responsee 2
50.
5/2/84 PG6E ltr to J. Martin 1
5 j
51.
4/16/84' Problem Statement 1
i 52.
4/12/84 Problem Description 1
53.
4/12/84 Problem Description 1~
t i
54.
Undated PG&E Response 2
L A11esati< m No. 350 55.
Undated Items with responses 3
)
56.
5/2/84 Ltr from PG&E to J. Martin 1
57.
4/16/84 Problem 8tatement 1
58.
Undated Problem Description
).
r 59.
4/12/84 Problem Description 1
60.
Undeted:
PG&E Response (Rec'd 4/12/84) 2 4
61 6/22/84 Ma11 gram to Region V 1
L 62.
6/12/84 NRC Inspection of Diablo Canyon Units 1.6 2 10 ii 63.
4/13/84 Transcript of April 1984 4
ll 64.
5/3/84 GAP Petition of May 3, 1984 1
65.
Undated Exhibit 5 of Richard D. Parks 8
66.
3/19/84 Transcript from March 19, 1984 11 67.
CAP 2.206 Petition Supplement of March 23, 1984^
1 68.
Undated Transcript of March 19, 1984 8
69.
4/11/84 PGE letter to J. Martin 1
70.
Undated Response to Notice of Violation in NRC Insp Report 50-275/83-37 7
Re:
FOIA-84-745 APPENDIX A (CONTINUED)-
ITEM NO.
NO.
DATE DESCRIPTION PAGES 71.
4/11/84 PGE letter to J. Martin (84-141) 1 72.
Ur. dated Enclosure to PG&E letter DCL-84-141 7
73.
6/18/84 PG&E letter to J. Martin (DCL 84-231) 1 74.
Undated Enclosure to PG&E letter DCL-84-231 7
75.
Undated Transcript of March 27, 1984 2
1 76.
Undated Transcript of March 19. 1984 1
77.
Undated Transcript of March 26, 1984 6
78.
Undated Attachment #2 (Affidavit) from GAP 2.206 Petition of 2/2/84 32 79.
3/9/84 Table of A11egatione Statue (Diablo Canyon) 4 I
80.
Undated Transcript of March 27. 1984 2
81.
Undated Transcript of March 27. 1984 2
82.
3/15/84 Western Union Message to 8ho11enberger.' Region V 1
83.
Undated Attachment No. 2 (Affidavit) from GAP 2.206 Petition of 2/2/84 33 l
84.
Undated CAP Letter (Pages 5 c 6) 2 I
i 85.
4/12/84 GAP Letter to NRC 2
86.
Undated Transcript of March 19. 1984 2
ll 87.
Undated Transcript of March 26. 1984 6
i i
t 9
I
~.
1
- x
- /-
q ^.
g-Nuclear Regulatory Comission April 12, 1984
~
v Page 5 until after the March '19,1984 Comiss' ion meeting:
inaccurate Operation Valve Identification Diagrams (OVID) for use by.
the reactor operators, which include such serious discrepancies as valves on the wrong side of other components.
(March I petition,
- p. 42). This problem is particularly significant, since there is no
~
dissent within +ta Comission that reactor operators should "know the plant cold." (March 27 transcript at 213, statement of Chairman Palladino).
' a generic breakdown in design control through the quick fix program, in which major design changes were approved on-the-spot to accommodate construction plans, without normal engineering review and supportino analysis.
(March I petition, pp. 19-21).
pressure by the Bechtel Corporation that employees who resigned should sign a statement that they were not aware of any design, pro-fessional code, or quality assurance violations -- despite common knowledge to the contrary. This left honest employees in an illegal
" Catch-22" at a critical period: either they could lie to. the Govern-ment or risk industry blacklisting.
(March 1 petition, p. 41).
knowingly false statements in licensee responses to previous employee allegations, Illustrated by PG&E's February 7 assertion to the NRC that the lack of consistent weld symbols to guide personnel had no safety significance.
(March I petition, p. 28).
Instead of investiga-ting this new " wrinkle," the staff accepted at face value the licensee's alleged false statement as a basis. to " resolve" the original weld symbols issue.
- December 28, 1983 procedural changes that denied inspectors the ability to reject welding on pipe supports, even when a weld that was required by.the design did not even exist.
(March 1 petition, p, 6).
The March 23 disclosure also contained more than mere " wrinkles." Fo r.
example, one affidavit revealed a continuing " mirror image" problem with electrical installations by the Foley Corporation.
In January 1983, super -
visors called an employees meeting to try to resolve the issue. Unfortunately, the meeting broke up when the supervisors could not agree among themselves what was forward and what was backward.
(March 23 disclosure, Attachment 12, p. 4).
4.
Follow-up interviews.
The staff has made a mockery of its ritteYpolicy and verbal comitments that allegations would not be closed out without follow-up interviews to insure accurate resolution of the issues.
The staff also misled the Comission on this issue. To illustrate, on March 27 Mr. Martin said that it was "just not a true statement" that Region V had failed to schedule follow-up interviews. He referred to Region V's comunications with Mr. Hudson, Pullman's former internal auditor:
4
a 4
'o j'
Nuclear Regulatory Comission April 12, 1984' Page 6 "we had talked with him for at least nine hours involving several people at several' different times."
(March 27 transcript, p. 271).
Mr. Martin neglected to inform the Commission that these were all initial interviews, not follow-up meetings to check the accuracy of PG&E's answers 'or the staff's resolution. As Mr. Hudson stated in a March 22, 1984 affidavit:
I also want to emphasize that the NRC staff never had any followup meetings with me to clarify the issues I raised, or to test whether PG&E's defenses were bluffs. That is odd, since I disclosed over 80 pages of my own single-spaced reports and affidavits to summarize over a thousand pages of documentation.
I only learned of some of PG&E's answers, because GAP xeroxed them and gave me copies. The NRC staff complimerited highly the analysis in my reports, but they never got back to me.
I disclosed approx (imately] 80 allegations to the NRC, out of the 170 in a January 31 tsic. Reference is to February 2 petition]
legal petition.
Any statement that the NRC staff followed up with me personally after I first raised my charges would be to-tally false.
I have no idea what the NRC staff did to resolve my allegations, other than to have PG&E respond to somein letters.
(March 23 disclosure Attachment 2, pp. 2-3).
~
In some cases the inaccuracies may weil be due to ignorance, rather than to bad faith.
Unfortunately, the record is equally inaccurate on important matters -- whether due to sloppiness or deception.
For example, the reliabi-lity of hydrostatic test results is highly significant to determine Diablo Canyon is ready for low-power testing. On March 26, Mr. Bishop reported that Region V had not yet received documentation on that issue, to his knowledge.
(March 26 transcript, p. 13).
In fact, the documentation to which Mr. Bishop referred was sent via Express Mail to Mr. Bishop himself, on March 2,1984.
A copy of the cover letter to GAP's submission of documents on this issue is enclosed as attachment 3 (the specific materials referred to by Mr. Bishop are identified in attachment 3 as " Exhibit 4 to Attachment 2" (to the February 2 petition]). To date Region V has not discu'ssed' this evidence with the alleger, Mr. Hudson.
Even if Mr. Bishop's statement were accurate, it would not constitute an excuse to ignore the issue.. Region Y took no initiative whatsoever to obtain the relevant records either from the alleger or froni counsel.
B.
EVIDENCE OF QUA1.ITY ASSURANCE VIOLATIONS 1.
Disclosure of Yin inscection findinos Prior to Mr. Yin's March 26 Commission statement the staff did not provide the Comission with an adequate record foi an, imminent licensing decision.
The staff's briefings contrasted sharply with, and failed to disclose from, Mr. Yin's draft inspection report on issues material to the decision.
^ " ' ' "
- m;stg(n bnt:.b #n.uLi 10.", VA. 22 C4 5
=
C I SAM -
p 4i;"
4-043595 S375002 03/15/84 ICS IPMHfd CtiP MICC
["}
l 4159470747 TDRf; WALf;UT CHEEK CA 03-15 0145P PST
=
3 e.
~.
". - S.
ii
?
L SHOLLEI;3ER GER, tJUCLEAR R EGULATORY COMMISSION, hEGI ON V
'l 450 :1ARI A LN SUI TE 210 VALNUT CREEK CA 94596 THIS -I S A. CO NFIRMA TION CCPY OF THE FOLLOWI f;G MESSA GE:
4159470747 TDRi; WAlf;UT CREEK C A 140 03-15 0145P PST
.PMS JOHi! CLEWETT, ESQ UI RE, GOVERNMENT ACCOUt;TA3ILITY PROJEC T, DLR
'19 01 Q UE S T !;3RTHk'EST-WASHI NG TO N DC 20009 3Y YOUR TELEPHONE REQUEST OF 3-12-84 YOU ASKED THA T ARRANGEMENTS 3E MADE FOR YOU tlD. ;ESSRS HUDSON ANDMIO EET WITH HEGI Of; V STAFF TO ALLOW A FOLLOW-UP ON '1HE ALLEGA TIONS AND CONCEHNS THEY HAD EARLIER
- EXPRESSED. 3Y OUR TELEPHO NE CONVERS ATION OF 3-14-84 I S TA TED TH AT WE JUOULD 3 E HAPPY TO MEET. I SUGGESTED SUCH A EETING COULD TAKE PLACE 3EGI t:f ING AT 4PM THURSDAY MARCH 15 1984 AT HEGION V.
YOU II;DICATED THAT YOU WOULD GET 3ACK TO ME AS EARLY AS 730AM TODAY (3-15-54).
SI NCE I HAVE !:0T HEARD FROM YOU AND IT IS NOJ WILL AFTER N00h I HAVE
- ADVISED 1HE STAFF PERSONNEL INVOLVED THA T THEY MAY MAKE OTHER ARRANGEMENTS -FOR THE lEETING TI ME WE HA D DISC USSED. PEHHAPS SUCH A MEEII !!G C AN 3 E SCHEDULE D FOR A 1.A TER Di TE. PLEASE LET ME Kr.0W A T YOUR EARLI EST OPPORTUNI TY.-
SI NCER ELY, L SHDLLEN3ERGER, NUCLEAR REGULA TORY COMMI SSION, R ESION V 1701 EST.
MGMCO:P MG:1 wu sies tit-72) j g.
~
(
?
TAG Mo.
I
)) u ccre r No.
UNir do.
l
.hnrs : W/'njsW
_91I 77nne :
19 i"M G4eV.
BuruiN6 & 4 bon k W Genea.nc thees pescRaprionl:
C4yu>dh u & SGr1'l h
Y n/A"ffd e/m A am0 bed lA f
f iw ajAeay.b u mp,.ss.
6*
nd n A.> w.stL cLowiy M % &
ressum.>esaanaa II '
a
.J m
4 J
.a
..LJ m
-.a.-%,a h-saa.,a 9
+
I s
l j.
bars :
/
t' n/ W
- ' l'.;MRQ,,
riswa :
ls PER f
4 em
- 6.'
4 9
,Cs r.
7-g Q[fg',0 l
1 - -
, - 4 9
l 7 -y
[
-r
/>9.htsCA s P776,d o'
/
...' s - I'-l:)$
- $A*rfejs.;yAbsn-a.
p i. n w &,,< <.!n:i 6a nsa ex i
b f. l /f p
/
p=
l l
l l
TNDB.LBN).hssCRiM7wh.
k
}
k cost ca to whnt th;y're ccying, but basically they cover the 2
gam cort of orcas that have been the focus up to now.
. t 3-COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Are these from the same peoplethathaveprovideduswithpreviousibformation,or 5
are they from new people or is it a mix?
- 6 MR. MARTIN:
It's a mix.
7 MR. BISHOP:
It's a nix.
Ne're meeting tonight, 8
for example, with GAP and three or four other people who 9
provided us earlier information down in the Diablo Canyon 10 area where they intend to give us another set of allegations 11 including allegations about information which we received 12 to close these allegations which they view as misleading or 13 complete.
14 And I notice you made mention that in your 15 letter you received --
16 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINZ:
That's right.
~
17 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Tom, if I can go back 18 just a minute to get a better procedure here again, and I 19 guess anchor bolts is maybe the best case to select.
I'm 20 curious to know when you get a situation where you have 21 gone through -- and you went through quite a list here for 22 us today -- allegation by allegation and apparently in many 23 cases said no, it isn't that way, that isn't correct, 24 you said that several times one way or the other here --
25 what do you do with that?
1
~-
~
PGandE Letter No.: DCL-84-170 ENCLOSURE RESOLUTION OF ITEMS IDENTIFIED ON PLANT TOUR -
BY ANONYMOUS ALLEGERS ON APRIL 11, 1984 BACKGROUND
~
On' April 11, 1984, representatives of NRC Region V toured the plant with
- certain anonymous allegers and a Governnent Accountability Project (GAP) attorney. This tour was perfomed to allow the allegers to identify to Region V those plant conditions and installations they considered defective.
Following the tour with the allegers, Region Y conducted a tour with PGandE personnel to point out those items identified by the allegers.
PGandE provided a preliminary assessment of these alleged deficiencies to the NRC on April 12,1984 The following provides a listing of the items identified during the tour end PGandE's resolution of these items.
ITEM No.1 Platform As-builts, Unit 1 It is alleged that certain members in Platfom #77G, Elevation 163', located 10-3/4" adjacent to Steam Generator I-4, are not shown correctly on as-built drawings.
b
RESPONSE
Field observation verifies that this support is installed as shown on the associated as-built drawing. -(Ref. Dwg. 6181 C1 13380, Rev. 5 Detail 380A dated 11/5/83). Therefore, the allegation is not valid.
- p iTEMNo.2 Accumulator Injection Line, Unit 1
- W l
W.h it is alleged that the accumulator injection line, (PGandE Designation f
1956-254-10) adjacent to field weld 157, has two areas of undercut or unacceptable. grinding, and an unacceptable grinding " gouge".
5
RESPONSE
This weld has been inspected by two welding engineers who are certified welding inspectors. The inspectors did not identify the alleged undercuts.
The alleger apparently thought that a slight difference in thicEness between i
{. 0897d/0012K w#t-p
-