ML20137D353
| ML20137D353 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/27/1984 |
| From: | Fitti C Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | Wiggins E NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137D333 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-84-853 NUDOCS 8508220460 | |
| Download: ML20137D353 (6) | |
Text
a . n ,x f#, l'* ..
'~
' NITE D sT AT Es ( um L
,! [.' '[ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- . ]!,i' j ATOMIC sAF ETY AND LICENslNG SCARD PANE L j "'ASHIN GT ON. D C 20%5 September 27, 1984 MEMORANDUM FOR
- Elois Wiggins Contracting Officer, CON FROM: Elva W. Leins f
[
Assistant Executive Secretary, ASLBPb s THRU: Charles J. Fitti '.
Executive Secretary, ASLBP
SUBJECT:
COMMENTS ON FREE STATE REPORTING, INC.'S RESPONSE TO NRC'S CURE NOTICE DATED 09/14/84 Pat Sullivan, Project Officer, requested that we coment specifically on Work Orders 115 and 122.
Work Order No.115, the August 8,1984, Shoreham Emergency Planning hearing transcript was returned by Pat Sullivan upon receipt as the pagination was incorrect and the cover page had an incorrect location for the site of the hearing.
Work Order No.122, the August 16, 1984, Shoreham Low Power hearing transcripts (both in-camera and open sessions) were rejected. The Board (Judges Miller, Bright and Johnson) as well as the parties stated that both transcripts had too many errors and the text was not comprehensible.
Both transcripts were returned to Mrs. Sullivan on August 31 with corrections noted on the open session transcript. The parties and the Board made some corrections to the in-camera transcript but in many instances it was impossible to reconstruct the testimony from the transcript submitted by FSRI. FSRI made an attempt to correct the in-camera transcript but it remains incomprehensible. The Board, therefore, does not have the necessary record of the in-camera portion of the proceeding. .
cc: B. P. Cotter, Jr.
P. Sullivan P. Wilder D. Moran 8508220460 850008 PDR FOIA DIRD84-853 PDR
f * %,
ff '
\* UNITED sT ATEs
! ,, k.4[, . .j' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Atomic SAFETY AND LICENslNG SCARD PANEL
, gjgiyjj 5..
.usmscion.o c rosss Ssptember 27, 1984 MEMORANDUM FOR: Elois Wiggins Contracting Officer, CON ,
FROM: Elva W. Leins U
Assistant Executive Secretary, ASLBP e Charles J. Fitti THRU: - L Executive Secretary, ASLBP
SUBJECT:
COMMENTS ON FREE STATE REPORTING, INC.'S RESPONSE g TO NRC'S CURE NOTICE DATED 09/14/84 Pat Sullivan, Project Officer, requested that we coment specifically on Work Orders 115 and 122.
Work Order No. 115, the August 8, 1984, Shoreham Emergency Planning hearing transcript was returned by Pat Sullivan upon receipt as the pagination was incorrect and the cover page had an incorrect location for the site of the hearing.
Work Order No.122, the August 16, 1984, Shoreham Low Power hearing transcripts (both in-camera and open sessions) were rejected. The Board (Judges Miller, Bright and Johnson) as well as the parties stated that both transcripts had too many errors and the text was not comprehensible.
Both transcripts were returned to Mrs. Sullivan on August 31 with corrections noted on the open session transcript. The parties and the Board made some corrections to the in-camera transcript but in many instances it was impossible to reconstruct the testimony from the transcript submitted by FSRI. FSRI made an attempt to correct the <
in-camera transcript but it remains incomprehensible. The Board, therefore, does not have the necessary record of the in-camera portion of the proceeding. .
cc: B. P. Cotter, Jr.
P. Sullivan P. Wilder Fo i/* -H - 8 s3 C./2
- . v a
c
('.
(.
}. W
\
g 77 l<s.uracF Ecur of On work orderc referred to in the Free State letter are Cocis-sion nwtirig trarecriptst .
Older 101 m I statovnt: "W ttRC person */.y> returned the trenseript for jrb liil egGo317;xt to W.T, Fr2ntiotted tltst the ptrr.<mdino. vs. of esp--
r3a1 irportance to NC nrd thus re.r.drei parDrtica ard rg.nste.d tint ISRI .wike cprifiul revinicms.'
i fa/ ctxtr: erst: J. H&/l e talked to tir. Tu/mr pw.mily drxt this tranGTpt of a reeting on the Diablo Carn /on prooecding held on August
- 10. W trans.:ript wT.s renters.d for retinion brause grcr.1 estaly 3 minutas of the electrcnic tape of the ruoting had not baan transcr.ib-4.
rnis gr.p ccearred 114 the mid:lle of the trcure.:ript at:d nr. c very scrity.:s erzur renoiring i:::mMate r:orrection. Tne rest of the transcript es rather good a:d Hoyle told Pac.t.er that the transcript had th tm censid-erdrie inyrcwwnt. Mcwxr, t% Sect t%t Dre rcst of AM tsps w.c sd dort, nat. witigate tM ecticunnens of FSPJ.'n failure to provide NPC a ccuplete transcript in the fire.t instance. Tnis is cicar evi& nce of the 3ack of a qtnlity control prtyyran. _-
Order 119 FSR1 stater.ont: Orders 119 and 122 occurred on successivo days, August IS and 16, and causa! a surge of ficppy disk work. 'Ihe euroe was nhanced try the fact that the m2etitw3 for Order 119 went for rsix hmrs inr,tced of tM plannf. twa how.s. "FSRI's p'.rformuu:e was tr.asoluble urder the ciretrc. stances. Furthem3re, FSRI found that the Order 119 tr.r. script ir virtually e.ma- fue for 170 psges ard the b21tinte is ew.ntially the single recun-iwJ error of miside.ntification of a speak-er."
inrY coment: Refonnw to floppf disk work a;:Fars to te irrele-vant. tac has nudo no ecmplaint with respect to late delivery or the accurney of the ficppy disk work.
Misidentitication of speahm in t.he centext: of a ccmission metirig urtally is a uuy mricus errra. In Oract 119, tM r.isidenti- ,
fication focused prinvtrJ1y on Harold Dcnten and Herzel Plaine during an (in-tM-record pasentation by the prties in the 'DG-1 Restart pecu.ud-ing. To have clavulatM this transcript to the 'mI-1 restart pirtins and to the Itblic Documnt rom withcut correctiers wuld hr.ve prcduced i rajor confusicn as to the ycsition of the tGC ti.<hnical. ntaff. ,
l hWn such agretaker minickntifications km cu...e..pla:n, as they havo in lym ISRI tranTripts, bHN nust sp*nd a substantial tacunt o' tire revindr.g PSRI.'s verk prodetc (2 gainst the ciectrede tap?s. Gach re. views are extiumly cuatly toth in terr.s crf SECY ttaff ti* c hr:M arr3 in the ruertscary shifting of otMr peinri.ty utade. Sert has no choice but to reviru coch tranwrin t;u3ckly sqen delivery to FK b<r.u.<c other FoM- t + - 953 c./3
f, .
4 .. (- r.
c.spanizatianni ele.'.unts within TEC, parties to terc prom. 5Ltv3s 3 W.n a;Tagriote, aM the pblic 4.re. ea:pcting ccpins to be n,s_*c avai1xhle to thcm os soon as rossible. There are rc instances in which timeliness is tw?. a fu-tor for Ccumission mrtirvj transcripts.
Ot6ar 137
_PSRI statmemtt Order 137 c1carly rrcets the accura::f stc;4ard in -
the contract O ertur ter 100 words, etc) .
SFO* coment: Order 137 resulted in a 4 page transcript of an AffitEtion Sessintt h21d on Sepbsthar 6. It was sent 142 for oxrec-tion bmuse it had coveral inaudibles and I;ecause Mr. CnilA's n; rte we rot listed to thy cover page althccyh he wa. the pri:urf sp2Scr of Ge ItutirvJ. L\>en the corruttui trant.cript, when returned Irf ISRI, still contained two inaudibles on the first page; ap;nrently, the contreetor vado no attcw,A to listen to his luckup tapas ard resolve thrce ir.audi-bier. Instehd, he limited itis corrections" to tiene cpv:ific insuares in khich SEr'Y had written in the right worrlh.urds a-d the place. cat of R .Chilk's ran cn the ccNer page.
<, n.
g ':S? +p of corrc<.tions r<. quired in this trr.nscript are irdicative of tJre which pc. int to a very Iax or .wwxictont q.tality centrol program.
4.- Order 138
} SRI statm ent:_ PSRI did not cxmnant on Order 138 in its Septmber 24 letter tocause it woc I.imtei erroneously as Order 136 in sc's Septc=kr 14 letter (Order 136, as TSRI correctly points out, was not retstrned ror corrxticed .
SFrY - st Order 138 resulted in an 11 page tran cript of an Affin ation session f. eld on Septxrbor 7. It was returned for correction for t.r> reacems it certairwd the wretrg acte ice the rt?cting and Ccrinissinrer Zech's sms was act listed on the ccr.'er page although he was a rieaker durirv; tiv.=. omrra of the traving, tbth ocrcre 17slicate a 1sck of quality control. In fact, the error in the date of the neoting occurrod in spite of itRI's claim that its
<ptlity control dxvi list,devisoi on August 11, in ctvidence of an effective cx:rrectivo mtosure.
y, . .- - .', _ . .. - - - - . . _
.-.-( -- - - . - - -
FSRI TIMELINESS At the August 6, 19C4 meeting held with FSRI and NRC rep-rosentativos, Pat Sullivan did not toll David Becker that NRC Cor.sidered PSRI tranr.criptn delivered af ter 8:15 a m.
but brzfore 9:00 a.m. to be time?y deliveries. FSRI should review their contract Article VII, paragraph A. " Late or Defective Delivery". There have been several occasions when Uct Sullivan wec nct available becauce of other assign. ents for receipt of transcripts. However, if the courfor was delayed on trar.ncripts recuiring an B:15 a.m. 6elivery time, on thosn occasions all receipts were acknowledged as being received at 8:15 a.m. Trenscripts that were expected for delivery at 8:15 a.m., but were left with the 10th floor quard's desk as lato as 1:00 p.m. were clearly in a late de)$very status and PSRI was compensated inaccordance with 7 Article VI, paragraph A. of y:nc centract. *
,h,qM r 4**
COndECTIVE MEASUPIS A letter dated August 13, 19E4 was sent to Tct Sullivan from FSR1 vith a Quality Centrol check List form as an att,3ch-ment. She was asked to review and add anything that she deemed necessarv. Comments were furnished on her behalf to PSRI by Penea Bailey, Proiect Of ficer. P.s. Lailey informed F5RI that disc 1c3mers are only to be incorporated in Commis-sion meetings only. She further requested that the floppy dich requirement be added to the Quality Control form. FSRI stated that the form would minimi=e the occurrence of errors in the assenbly of transcripts. But, on September 10,1?St.
Pat Sulliv an ' received NRC Wort. Order No. 1.'.B for the tran-script indicated that the meeting was held on September 9, 1984.
TIMELINESS (CONTI,NUED)
The importance of receiving meeting transcripts from the contractor at the time specified in the work order can not be overstated. Rarely is a transcript requested by NRC simply for placcmont in the files. Invariably, transcripts are ordered because they are uneful not only to those who attended the meeting, but also to those who may not have beon able to attend but must be guided by statements made and actione taken a t the mooting. They are also frequently required for uso by NRC in a follow-on meeting taking place on the d3y the transcript 1s eluo.
. m ueswes w m x C. qt:ild ( , , , ,g g, ,
D' 9-72 ._ <-/7%a "litz.em heLanun os :
. L m e. , .x 7 .f, c.A p_ --l+' . ,x g , esa m-e4-ow % b<wa aa x4..w .
D/ v.--
@for /w. ;,.!-nr.s. po-cs , wsu mmA.>.s. a w.
.ra 7 b - pov'c& . 14 Sc .->J l e.t .A a c~.~ , ed, i: D - b ~ A- - K 7%-c -hr / b s-- A J L 92 ha %w.4/ . .d:x / d ~7o#~;u.=,.p!, evt !<<
.v ~ d 4 a :. 5 % , P 4 sr / . / m -v L.,- yc~ .un-d4 inwA .aS up.
a - noy.ia r A N 96 - Y rpcA a,-u
/> <4: *9- 4 %
fn u&y. l~~YdA /M M c -2.o a. e 4 ,c.- Ard e4
-fL N ii d c+ w fu +
-4. /w r rL iw,,4.,gdie , s-f"sw~f oJ m.% (>v'A+W>
. W p& :-r.-he<, b4 h J /=:-v f W N e J A:. ~$
W A 7a 7/J &
- f 41r. 8 '.O &$
WJrbi , 2/.1 'r f Jh Su.A.ytw # M i; m <ia n) . # /2 r ,1-b k r . c m e n ,. k 1 . 4. , k of $a n ', 9 - kie 4, + .-4 5 -e f- % a o% &
e & & /- 0 07 m el- O W" AL- -
/ O Me .
, a, n ~ s w L e a en 9.a n ~1r~t,*"'a& & - 74 1~~s #
cos<- 5 fvtA n- -ty-.d.153/ aC/y. w asd ./+ w., /- ,